Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1194

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Hello I am curious to get some insight on if I can write an article on a specific topic (which doesn't currently exist in Wiki). As a side point, I am working on a project loosely related to the topic called Logos.

The article is on "Network State" or "Crypto States"

I am hoping the notability is good enough and I am far enough removed to write it. I have these references:

Virtual States by Jerry Everard: https://books.google.com.ec/books?id=Z8fiVs6ITaQC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/05/could-new-countries-be-founded-on-the-internet

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexandramccarroll/2023/05/26/crypto-social-experiments-a-beginners-guide-to-network-states-and-vitalik-buterins-initiative-in-montenegro/

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/network-states%3A-what-is-a-country-but-a-collection-of-minds

Original book on the subject:

http://www.thenetworkstate.com

Let me know what you guys think and if I am able to write it, or someone else will have to do the writing! `

Thanks! Sklujan (talk) 16:32, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Sklujan, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer to this question, every time, is "can you find the sources, each of which meets all three criteria in the golden rule?

I have only glanced at your sources . What I notice is that the Everard book appears to be from a reputable publisher, and so is probably a reliable source - the question of course is the depth of coverage it gives yo your subject. The Guardian piece is in their "Comment is free" section, and so probably counts as an opinion piece. Forbes publishes both reliable articles and opinion pieces - I don't know which that is. See WP:FORBES. And the Balaji book does not appear to acknowledge a publisher, and our article Balaji Srinivasan describes it as self-published.

So, it looks as if you're heading in the right direction, but I'm not sure you've so far found adequate sources. Please read RS carefully. ColinFine (talk) 17:12, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Sklujan!

Looking over the articles, my biggest concern is WP:PRIMARY as it does look like they are interviewing some people that might have a connection to a crypto state. At the very least, The Gaurdian, Forbes, and NASDAQ I have heard of before unlike some other attempted crypto articles I have seen. ✶Mitch199811✶ 17:20, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Sklujan, content written by a Forbes contributor is not a reliable source. The consensus is Most content on Forbes.com is written by contributors with minimal editorial oversight, and is generally unreliable. As for the book The Network State, it is a self-published e-book, and I cannot find an ISBN number for it. I see no evidence that this book is a reliable source. Cullen328 (talk) 09:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I would like to submit a biography of my father. Is there a quick guide on how to do this? Mormoironier (talk) 09:47, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Mormoironier Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would suggest using the new user tutorial and reading Your First Article. Writing a new article is the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia, and it's even harder with a conflict of interest(please read). You will need to limit yourself to summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about your father, showing how he meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 09:53, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Mormoironier.

Writing an article about a (presumably living?) person is quite a difficult undertaken. It's made even more difficult due to your Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.

Here's a couple of guides to get you started:

- Help:Your first article

- Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons

- Wikipedia:Original research

Let us know if you have any more specific questions! Qcne (talk) 09:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Help with photos? Does anyone have a guide on adding photos to articles? I have a few articles that I have created, all about visual artists, but I am not really sure how to add photographs that are clearance free. Chainsawpunk (talk) 01:39, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Chainsawpunk.

You can find images you need on the Wikimedia Commons! 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 03:39, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

@Chainsawpunk Did you take the pictures of the artists yourself? if so, you are free to upload them to Wikimedia Commons and then insert them into the articles you created. Unless images have either been explicitly released under a clearly-stated Creative Commons licence which permits commercial re-use, then you may not upload them. i.e. they will be copyright of the photographer.

If you know the photographer, we do have routes that they can email in an image plus an image release form, which a volunteer team will check and upload on their behalf.

If the images are very old, they may possibly be out of copyright and can be legitimately uploaded. Each country has different rules on that, however, though it's often around 70 years, I believe. You would need to investigate.

If they are dead, one image of them may be uploaded directly into English Wikipedia (not Wikimedia Commons!) under a 'fair use rationale. i.e. they've snuffed it, so we have no way of ever getting another picture of them, so we allow just one low res copyrighted version to be made available.

If you can confirm whether the images you want to make available fall within any of the allowed categories, we can advise further on inserting them into an article. But what you can't do is simply scrape images off the internet and upload them as if they were yours to release. That would be theft. Hope this helps and makes things clearer. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:15, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I did not take photographs of any of the artists. Though I do have photographs of some of their works that I have taken, but I have tried that in the past and I think if it is artwork even if you take the photograph you still do not have the rights to the image?

For the following drafts & articles the artists are dead: Madame Zo, Minoru Yoshida, Jusaburō Tsujimura, and Sara Penn. None of their images would be over 70 years old. Does the fair use rationale apply for them? Does this mean I can essentially use a lo res image from the internet? Also, how do I upload an image directly to English wikipedia instead of wikimedia commons? Chainsawpunk (talk) 15:03, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

@Chainsawpunk Photos of paintings and sculpture etc. are called derivative works and as that article explains the copyright position can be complicated. In most cases, even if you took the photo, you can't license it (e.g. via Wikimedia Commons) without the permission of the original creator, who retains the copyright of their artwork. The main exception is if their work is on permanant public display, when freedom of panorama can be invoked in some countries.

For en:Wikipedia articles about individuals who are dead, it is usually acceptable to upload low resolution published pictures (e.g. from websites) intended to be used solely in the article about that person. The details are at WP:NONFREE and you must follow them carefully. An example I uploaded recently is at File:Olga Kennard in 2015.jpg which you can use as an example of the sort of information you must provide when using the upload wizard at WP:FUW, taking the non-free option. Note that there is a bot that automatically lowers the resolution of your uploads to comply with Wiikipedia's policy, so you don't have to worry about that aspect. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:47, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

did something happen to the wikiproject image files on zoolander's talk page, or does my pc just not want to load those specific files? cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 12:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

They all look fine to me! Have you tried doing a Wikipedia:Purge? Qcne (talk) 12:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

it fixed the wikiproject film image and... broke the fashion one

i don't know what that's about, and i don't want to question it, so if percussive maintenance doesn't work, i'll just stay the h*ck away from that page cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 12:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

An error has occurred. User:General Ization "RV troll" even though I'm not a troll. 70.68.168.129 (talk) 03:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

There is no error. General Ization removed your previous post here because you claimed there was a software bug. However, your edits—such as duplicating the Daylight saving time article's text—have been reverted when they have proven to be disruptive. Your reports at WP:AIV have been declined because the conduct you reported is not vandalism.

With all due respect, there have been no errors committed in regard to your edits—at least, not by any editors other than you. —C.Fred (talk) 03:13, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@C.Fred Why were my other alterations reverted? 03:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.168.129 (talk)

Without reviewing the video, I'm guessing this one was for an unreliable source. This is a bad date format. The AIV reports, as stated, were declined as improper. —C.Fred (talk) 03:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@C.Fred I CAN'T HEAR YOU. 70.68.168.129 (talk) 04:26, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

If you cannot admit to hearing C.Fred, the fault is yours. Put in your metaphorical hearing aids. David notMD (talk) 12:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

For everyone else, IP 70.68.168.129 blocked for a year. David notMD (talk) 12:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I am a bit overwhelmed by all the tags in Wikipedia how do I learn this code?

regards

rami elias kremesti Kremesti (talk) 10:53, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Kremesti.

You might be referring to Maintenance Tags and Cleanup Tags?? Wikipedia:Template index/Maintenance and Wikipedia:Template index/Cleanup. Those are the tags that you can add to the tops of Wikipedia articles or sections in articles or in-line with text. Qcne (talk) 10:59, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Or are you perhaps referring to the Wikipedia markup language? Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I always find this very helpful: Help:Cheatsheet. Lectonar (talk) 12:57, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

1) I don't understand how to write books in the Bibliography appart and I can't find it anywhere. From the Visual editor only you can add cite

- I don't understand if references have to be put in the bibliography.

- I don't understand how to cite the same reference twice, changing pages

2) I would like to create footnotes, accompanied by references. Is this possible? How is it done?

Thank you Derivadeb (talk) 11:37, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Derivadeb, "in the Bibliography appart" from what? "I don't understand if references have to be put in the bibliography." I suspect that you lack an elementary understanding of references. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners and the links therefrom. "I don't understand how to cite the same reference twice, changing pages": in order to use a reference (or footnote) a second or subsequent time, see Help:Footnotes#Footnotes: using a source more than once (take "footnotes" to mean "footnotes or references"). In order to cite different pages of the same book or other printed item, don't specify the page(s) in the reference (or footnote); instead, combine each instance of the reference (or footnote) with Template:Rp. Yes, a footnote can call a reference, if you use Template:Efn (or one of its minor variants) for footnotes. -- Hoary (talk) 11:59, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks.

I mean: on the page there are References and Bibliography. Are they independent?

If I put a reference, does it have to appear in the Bibliography? Derivadeb (talk) 12:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

If not, What is the purpose of Blibliography? Derivadeb (talk) 12:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Derivadeb, there are (lesser-used but still common) citation systems for which references are to items in a bibliography. (I find these irritating both to edit and to read.) The citation system that I happen to prefer doesn't require any bibliography; and if there is a bibliography then it's independent of the references. So it might help understanding if you specify the particular article that now confuses you; then this can be explained. -- Hoary (talk) 12:32, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I realized that the two are independent. Thank you Derivadeb (talk) 13:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Black Table

Hi,

I have been asked to create five articles: book author page, three book pages, and a book series page.

I have been working on the first article only, to get the format for the source code correctly, so I can then continues with the rest of the articles.

My submission is always rejected due to references. I have read and watched the tutorials and I don't know what I'm doing wrong here. All the sources are reliable. The author and the series is new, so there is no existing wikipedia pages to back it up. The last rejection indicated the article draft will be deleted if not correctly done next time. So, I am afraid to try anything and re-submit.

Please advise.

Br, MickeyVonWiki MickeyVonWiki (talk) 18:29, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. When you say you have been asked to do this, I gather you have some sort of relationship with the topic, in the case of this book, perhaps you are employed by the publisher or author? Please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures you will need to make.

The main issue here, as discussed by reviewers on your draft, is that you have not demonstrated that your book meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable book. You should not provide urls for the reviews in the article text itself, only as a reference; you should summarize the reviews, not just copy them. The detailed information about aspects of the book(characters, etc.) should be removed. 331dot (talk) 18:40, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MickeyVonWiki. Reader reviews are of no value in establishing the notability of a book, and they should be removed. That is user generated blog-type content and is considered unreliable for use in this encyclopedia. Reviews by professional reviewers such as journalists or academics published by reliable sources with professional editorial control are the type of thing that helps establish the notability of a book. Cullen328 (talk) 18:57, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

On your Talk page you have been asked to clarify on your User page if you are being paid to create this article. Separately, self-published books (Amazon KDP) rarely qualify as Wikipedia notable. Same for the author. David notMD (talk) 20:01, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @Cullen328 and @331dot and @David notMD. From this book series, Book 1 was a finalist in the world largest International Indie book competition 2022, and the second book was a winner in 2023 in the same category. Is this enough for these books to be notable for Wikipedia? [1]https://www.indiebookawards.com

Otherwise, there are no reader reviews referenced. [2]Reader Views is a site, rating Indie books, without a guarantee of a good rating. [3]https://www.lovereading.co.uk/aboutus is UK's leading book recommendation site, also not guaranteeing a positive review.

I am not being paid to do create these pages. MickeyVonWiki (talk) 11:38, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@331dot@Cullen328@David notMD

It seems Next Generation Indie Book Awards is listed as a major books award. This series has two awards already. Could you please help me create the articles? MickeyVonWiki (talk) 11:57, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Please also read WP:BOSS. ColinFine (talk) 20:56, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

MickeyVonWiki - First, Teahouse hosts are here to advise, but not to co-author. Second, "I am not being paid..." is a limited denial. You led with "I have been asked to create five articles: book author page, three book pages, and a book series page." Are you in any way whatsoever connected to the author or publisher? ANY connection must be declared on your User page. That includes friend, unpaid intern, etc. P.S. I cut a lot of crap from the draft but this does not mean that I think the book (nor the author, nor subsequent books, nor the series) yet qualify as Wikipedia notable. David notMD (talk) 12:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@David notMD Thank you for your kind answer. Yes, I was asked by a friend who is a fan of the series and she does not have the skill set to make the articles. But it seems neither do I. Thanks for all the advices. Ps. The book is notable, as they do fulfil the Wikipedia requirement (major award winner). 62.165.169.136 (talk) 14:02, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps this would both be a suggestion as much as a query:

I am an old user recently motivated to return to small edits for grammar and other such. I find myself using Wikipedia mostly in passing unlike the past where I was wont to reference it frequently (when I created my account and), so I started taking on any obvious issues that I discovered while reading.... When I (today) attempted to add content (not my usual in the past), using my smartphone, the page (simply) refreshed but didn't seem as though it appreciated or properly evaluated my attempt to open the editing functionality. As such I'm wondering if this is a common mistake and I didn't yet find anything in this forum so perhaps I'm being redundant (as is also my tendency).

Any advice or commiserating is greatly appreciated. Cheers! P. Bunger :-) 23:02, 8 July 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aitrea (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse, @Aitrea:. As an older user myself, I can appreciate the annoyances of when a website doesn't function as you'd expect. I use an old iPhone 5S for mobile editing and for day-to-day social media use. By way of example, Twitter, since the weekend, has been a total disaster, and I'm locked out of my account on the mobile app, but not desktop computer. Tryinig to use it on mobile is now a nightmare. TBH: My phone's touchscreen-sensitivity is not as good as I'd like, and doing complex tasks (like editing Wikipedia) does sometimes result in lost data. So you have my commiserations. I wouldn't advise using the Wikipedia app for editing - just stick with the web browser version. (I use my browser on 'desktop' mode on my phone as it works a whole lot better than in 'mobile' mode. There's a teeny-tiny link to switch modes at the very bottom of each page. It annoys me how invisble this key link is)

All I can suggest is to stick with it, and try again. Best wishes, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick Moyes (talk • contribs) 00:08, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

hi @Aitrea and welcome to the teahouse! by the way, there's also a user script you may install so you don't have to always go flick the desktop switch everytime you create a new wikipedia tab, if desktop wikipedia on mobile is more your thing. try User:Þjarkur/NeverUseMobileVersion, instructions on how to install it for your account are present there. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:37, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

@Melecie I didn't know about that script - thank you for highlighting it. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:46, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I find the description of the problem oddly obscure, but perhaps it suggests that the page was protected. 27.134.39.209 (talk) 08:48, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

When does a nomination for a news item actually get put on the front page? If there is broad consensus it should be a news story, does an admin move it? I read the guidelines, but I am still confused. Bart Terpstra (talk) 12:38, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Have you read Wikipedia:In the news? Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:46, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

oh yeah, it says admin right there.

how much consensus is generally required? 65/35? 75/25? 90/10? 100? Bart Terpstra (talk) 12:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Bart Terpstra and welcome to the Teahouse.

It depends how notable the news is.

Technically, if a news nomination gets enough support from other users, it would be shown in the main page. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 12:58, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Well, I'm excited for the item i care about to make the main page, as it seems to have enough support :D Bart Terpstra (talk) 13:02, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates is where to go. First, read the instructions carefully. -- Hoary (talk) 13:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

very funny, but it lacks detail, like who is supposed to mark a topic as (Ready). anyone? nominator? contributor? admin? Bart Terpstra (talk) 14:10, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Bart Terpstra, the best place to ask for details of ITN procedure would be Wikipedia talk:In the news. Looks like anyone can mark as ready, but others may disagree, and when an admin goes to post it, they'll judge its readiness for themselves. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

If I purchase a media license for a particular photo or video on Getty Images, do I have the right to upload the image to Wikimedia Commons and put me as the copyright holder?

I haven't purchased anything as of now, but I am just wondering for the future.

Thanks,

BillClinternet (talk) 05:04, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

hi @BillClinternet and welcome to the Teahouse! if I'm correct, having the license to use the image from Getty does not mean you have the license to allow others to use the images, so you won't really have the right to upload them to commons this way. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 06:39, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the help.

BillClinternet (talk) 17:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Certainly not, BillClinternet. -- Hoary (talk) 06:47, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I have just published a biography of a deceased person. I use several references but they are old and difficult to verify online (from the 1960-92 period). I do have copies of my sources but it will be difficult for editors to verify without them. How can I facilitate a speedy editing/ approval process given this issue? Mormoironier (talk) 14:28, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Mormoironier. I don't think there's much you can do to speed it up. In principle, offline sources are acceptable, but as you suggest, it can make a draft less attractive for a reviewer if they have to go and find the sources.

You should not attempt to upload your sources anywhere, as that will probably be a copyright violation.

I don't see any reason why you should not put a note on the draft (or perhaps the Talk page of the draft) that you have scans of the sources which you will send to reviewers on request. But I've never heard of this being done, and I don't know how reviewers will react to it. ColinFine (talk) 14:39, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

[Moved below ColinFine's post, which became visible only after I published this one.]

Cited sources do not have to be online, that's just an additional convenience for users and reviewers if it's available. As long as your citation contains the appropriate bibliographical information such that someone could find the relevant passage in the publication, and find the publication in a library or archive, that is sufficient. Reviewers are good at tracking down cited material, and at assessing its likely veracity even if they can't. "Speedy" is not a consideration – Wikipedia has no deadlines.

However, if this refers to the material on your User page, please note that you have not published it as an article. Your User page is not intended for creating drafts and definitely not for hosting completed articles.

It would be a good idea to transfer what you have done to a Draft page or to a personal sandbox and, in due course, Submit it for a formal Review, so that experienced reviewers can assess it and either Accept it as an article or Decline it (for the moment) with suggestions for further improvements. (Their third option is to Reject it as inherently unsuitable, but in this case there is no danger of that – well done so far!) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 15:03, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Mormoironier I suspect quite a few of your sources could be found through online newspaper archives. For eample, The Wikipedia Library gives many users access to Newspapers.com where I found your first reference on page 21 (here). Perhaps, as you have the paper copies at home you could add to the quality of your draft by including the page numbers for all the reference that you can.

You could also expand it a little by adding a 'Early life' and 'Personal life' sections where you could mention his education or that he was twice married, with two children from his first marriage, etc. That won't impact on his notabilty, but it make the article more rounded and encyclopaedic. There is plenty of other information in his Obituary on p 19 of The Daily Telegraph on 29/7/1992. In fact he clearly meets our notability criteria, so I would be happy to move it directly into mainspace for you, or move it to a draft where you could continue to develop it. Which would you find most helpful? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Nick, what does move to mainspace mean? Yes please if it mives it forward. I do intend to develop it bit as my first wiki contribution I wanted to get something online and then improve it. Thanks Steve Mormoironier (talk) 16:20, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Mormoironier "Mainspace" is just our jargon for the main encyclopaedia where live articles are to be found by readers but, of course, can still be edited to improve them. There is a detailed account of other so-called namespaces at WP:NAMESPACE, if you are interested. @Nick Moyes offer to move your draft will make it accessible to the standard search box, which doesn't otherwise find drafts (unless you know where to look!). Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

P.S. The new article won't have "Sir" in the title and will need to be distinguished in some way from the other Richard Francis (see that link), which is another good reason to have an experienced editor do the move. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:33, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Mormoironier Sorry, I used Wikipedia jargon without thinking about it. 'Mainspace' is the place where all the live, encyclopaedia articles reside. We have Userspace (your user page, your talk page and your sandbox pages); then we have 'Draftspace' where all the developing articles can be prepared until they're ready of one of two things: either submitted for review by a helpful panel of expert editors who can give feedback on things such as Notability, or it can be moved directly into the main part of the encyclopaedia. I'd be happy to see the latter happen to this article. It needs to grow - but there's enough there for a Start. It looks well-sourced. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:30, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Update: I see you have now created and submitted Draft:Richard Francis (broadcaster) for review. This process can take a long time as we have a massive backlog. But, although we don't normally do this sort of thing from the Teahouse, I will take a look later on this evening and move it into mainspace for you if I have time. Meanwhile, please continue to work on this draft. My suggestions above still stand. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

will do. Many thanks. This entry on my father is well overdue! Mormoironier (talk) 17:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Mormoironier, please be aware that Wikipedia has rules about editing with a conflict of interest, such as editing about a family member. I recommend you review WP:COI. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:48, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I've been holding up the results of the Talk:1968 United States presidential election image vote. It's at 3 votes for color and 3 for black & white but there is some dispute because the 3rd black & white vote came in 6 days after and 5 days after the host of the vote declared it closed at 3-2. Was the host of the image vote, @Qutlooker, in the right to close this image vote and discard the late vote or should we keep it open for longer? There doesn't seem to be any obvious guideline on when it should close and who can close it. It'd seem obvious but I think it should be, well, more obvious. Thanks! ~ AlaskaGal~ ^_^ 21:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

@Qutlook, sorry. AlaskaGal~ ^_^ 21:08, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

@AlaskaGal: Most article talk page discussions don't really require a formal close; they just tend move in favor of one side or the other after a certain amount of time has passed. However, you can request a more formal close at Wikipedia:Closure requests. One thing you should try and remember though is that article talk page discussions aren't necessarily "votes" in which the side with the most votes always wins; this is why you'll occasionally see participants or closers making reference to WP:!VOTE in their comments. Most closes are made (or at least should be made) based on relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines in which the side making the stronger argument in terms of relevant policies and guidelines tend to be taken more seriously and generally win the day regardless of how many "votes" the other side may garner as touched on in the essay Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid on discussion pages. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:25, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

This is really useful. I'll read up on it and see if I can help deal with the problem. I'll hold off requesting a formal close because the vote is still ongoing and it may cause some issues. I'll try to discuss this with Qut and figure out what the best path forward is. AlaskaGal~ ^_^ 14:34, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

The Dicussion is closed, along with the vote. Not just by me but also Anachronist. Qutlooker (talk) 16:01, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Alright. We should get RfC involved so we can handle this appropriately, since I don't want to start a fight over the lack of consensus here. AlaskaGal~ ^_^ 17:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I know the answer to my question however, I would like you to humor me with your response. For your list of box office number one films 2023,July, you list all but one movie which, on the fourth of July beat the Indiana Jones movie and was shown in fewer theatres. Very impressive for a movie that was shelved by Disney for five years. The mainstream critics are calling this film a "Q - Anon Faith Based Thriller" It's a drama and, the word god is mentioned once so, one would have to assume by that type of criticism and/or the omission of it on a list, some people and some organizations are complicit with the movies content? 75.166.222.247 (talk) 18:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Sound of Freedom (film) - I assume, since no title was actually mentioned above 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:48, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

IP editor, if you're referring to List of 2023 box office number-one films in the United States, that is weekend numbers, not per-day numbers, and they are based on the source cited (Box Office Mojo). If you think a correction is necessary (and you have a source), you can either edit it yourself or start a discussion on the talk page, Talk:List of 2023 box office number-one films in the United States. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:58, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The opening sentence of List of 2023 box office number-one films in the United States says: "This is a list of films which ranked number one at the weekend box office for the year 2023". It's for weekends, meaning the total box office for Friday, Saturday and Sunday. These lists never show which film won individual days. Sound of Freedom won July 4 which was a Tuesday. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:59, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Im not sure if this logo is copyrighted or not because it contains the Disney logo, is it copyrighted because if not, i will transfer it to commons. Notrealname1234 (talk) 14:28, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Notrealname1234. It seems unlikely to me that that is below the Threshold of originality, but I am not an expert. I note that c:COM:Licensing#Simple design says Commons accepts images of text in a general typeface and of simple geometric shapes, even if it happens to be a recent trademarked logo, on the grounds that such an image is not sufficiently creative to attract copyright protection (my emphasis).

I suggest asking at C:COM:VPC. ColinFine (talk) 14:50, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

If we were talking about the US, it would be an open and shut case, but we're not. That logo is probably not American and so American Threshold of Originality (TOO) doesn't apply. Some of the places where it is used have very low TOO levels and so I would doubt if it would pass. Commons will probably steer clear of it. But ask them, they know more about it than most of us. - X201 (talk) 15:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure this would fall foul of copyright and/or trademark, and The Mouse has many lawyers prepared to contest edge cases. Best not risk going there. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 15:10, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I will. Notrealname1234 (talk) 15:52, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Notrealname1234 The file's page that you linked now has a tag saying that it has been reviewed by an experienced editor (Oinkers42) who says it is OK for Commons, so I think you can go ahead and copy it there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:39, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Are you sure? i wouldnt copy it since the Disney font is artistic. @Michael D. Turnbull Notrealname1234 (talk) 16:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

According to the documentation of File:Disney wordmark.svg, which is used on over 100 pages, the "Disney" part of that logo does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright protection, and is therefore in the public domain. Cullen328 (talk) 17:01, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

But the specific logo here is not American, that means that the local TOO of the country that the logo is from applies, not the US TOO. - X201 (talk) 19:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I want to know DuckyRC (talk) 18:53, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @DuckyRC, welcome to the Teahouse. I think you're asking how to turn a sandbox draft into an article - is that correct? Your user page is not the place to do that, and I'm afraid your sandbox draft is nowhere near ready to become a Wikipedia article. You have cited no reliable secondary sources with published in-depth coverage of this website. Please read WP:42 and Help:Your first article. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:02, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok, yes i do want to have the sandbox draft into an article i will need help with everything to be ready first time making an article DuckyRC (talk) 19:04, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@DuckyRC, have you read the links I gave you above? Have you found any independent, reliable, secondary sources with significant coverage of this website? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

i am looking there is so much there I am trying to find a link to start DuckyRC (talk) 19:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@DuckyRC, the first thing you should do is find sources that meet WP:42. Without those, no article is possible. Then you write a draft based on the sources, following the instructions at Help:Your first article. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:21, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok thanks DuckyRC (talk) 19:24, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I edited the page for "Dangerous Journeys" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dangerous_Journeys) to let people know that the product "City of Ascalon" had finally been published after almost 30 years. However, someone removed that edit without saying why (Special:MobileDiff/1164765646). How can I find out what the issue was and work to get it corrected? Thanks. Apotropaist (talk) 20:01, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Almost certainly because you didn't provide a reference to a reliable source. See Help:Referencing for beginners for info - X201 (talk) 20:07, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Got it, that makes sense. Thank you. Apotropaist (talk) 20:12, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Apotropaist, welcome to the Teahouse. They did say why - Uncited. Now it's not a very thoroughly cited article to begin with, so you were just continuing the trend, but since someone challenged your addition, it's now up to you to find a supporting source. There must, at the very least, be an announcement somewhere? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:10, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

There is an announcement, so I will hunt that down and add it. Thank you. Apotropaist (talk) 20:12, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I created some articles on medieval wars/battles but now I'm finding it increasingly hard to find topics to write about, does a list like this with obscure/unknown battles exist? Is there a link? Thanks! GeneralCraft65 (talk) 20:22, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@GeneralCraft65: Check out the Military History project at WP:MILHIST. There is an Open Task page there with lots of red links for various things including many battles. Note that if the battle is very obscure or unknown then it likely will not pass Notability requirement for an article. 20:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)RudolfRed (talk)

ip blocks aren't permanent, that much i know, but is there any actual limit to how long they can be blocked?

because i saw one instance of an ip being banned for just an hour short of 5 years cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 20:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san: The time you mention is an artefact of how future dates are calculated (something to do with leap year calculations was the most recent explanation I heard for these weird times). It's very likely the admin said "five years". They're not really uncommon. Blocks of ten years are sometimes seen for very static IP addresses, typically schools. That's really around the upper level of reasonable at this stage of Wikipedia's timeline. In ten years time we'll see some IP addresses who have been spewing vandalism from the same address for 30 years. I'll wager then that they'll be blocked for more than ten years. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:58, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Heya!

1. I'm editing the Clay Kids page, and I know the episodes for season 2, but I don't know which order the episodes aired in. Do I just put a list or should I just leave it blank? Thanks so much!

2. Could I please get some help on how to upload an image.

Thank you so much! I'm very new to Wikipedia - DaClayCrew (talk) 07:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

DaClayCrew Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Advice for uploading an image can be found at WP:UPIMAGE. The easiest way to upload an image is if you took it yourself. If you didn't take the image yourself, it becomes harder, as you must determine if they copyright of the image permits you to upload it to Wikipedia. The vast majority of images found on the internet can't easily be uploaded here. 331dot (talk) 08:00, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, DaClayCrew, and welcome to the Teahouse. Where have you found the list of episodes? If you have a reliable source, you can put them in (and preferably cite the source). If your reliable source gives the order, then you can put the order in. But any information which you know, but do not have a source for does not belong in an article, ever. ColinFine (talk) 14:31, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I found out from IMDb, but I read that I can't put IMDb as a source on Wikipedia. What do I do in that case? Should I try to look for another source? Thank you so much for responding by the way :D DaClayCrew (talk) 15:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I just found this website! https://watch.plex.tv/show/clay-kids/season/2

it has everything in order too. Could I use this one? Is it reliable? DaClayCrew (talk) 15:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Just realized it doesn't show the writers. I'll use it but should I keep the writers' section blank? Or should I write N/A? Sorry for asking so many questions. DaClayCrew (talk) 17:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi DaClayCrew Plex.tv does not "publish" the data directly, but reads it off of a number of sites including IMDb and thetvdb.com which I believe is also user-entered and thus not reliable for Wikipedia. Is the episode guide published in a book, perhaps? That could work as a source.Madam Fatal (talk) 19:36, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I have to remove that then. I found another website that has the episodes in order AND the director, but would it be reliable? Again, sorry for asking so many questions.

this is the site: https://tv24.co.uk/p/clay-kids-season-2-episode-30

- DaClayCrew (talk) 21:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I'm still rather new here. I undid an edit to Cargo cult (disambiguation) as an anonymous user had added a reference to a random podcast on it; my reasoning was that if the podcast is not notable enough to have its own Wikipedia page, nor for either of its creators to, it doesn't really belong on disambiguation.

They have now re-added the podcast to the disambiguation, but also made a new page for it, with no sources, not even primary ones (and also failed to successfully link from the disambiguation page from it, but anyway). What is the appropriate procedure here? I wonder if this is a case of self-promotion, in which case it would appear to be a candidate for speedy deletion, but I want to assume good faith in the first instance. Cheers. AntiDionysius (talk) 21:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, @General Ization! AntiDionysius (talk) 21:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

The IP did not actually create a new page, but hijacked the redirect Cargo Cult which has Cargo cult as its target. Since the "article", such as it was, was unsourced, and none of the podcasters appear to be notable, I reverted the redirect to its original content. General Ization ^Talk 21:26, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

That makes sense. If I'd realised it was a redirect hijack I'd have felt more confident just reverting it. Thanks! --AntiDionysius (talk) 21:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

We are working on obituary of Alex Kaufman and want to use his picture from here https://wiki.seg.org/wiki/Aleksander_Kaufman

Is this a violation of SEG Copyright? Thanks, Gregory Itskovich, PhD. 2600:1700:31B0:D50:6C13:1890:8E76:ED22 (talk) 12:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Content is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) unless otherwise noted. Bart Terpstra (talk) 13:00, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that's what we are told on this page. But NB The SEG Wiki and Wikipedia are unrelated. -- Hoary (talk) 13:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Here's the license in question: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 13:12, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Since Wikimedia commons contains items that have the same license as the image you linked, i assume it is fine.

example Bart Terpstra (talk) 13:07, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP 2600:1700:31B0:D50:6C13:1890:8E76:ED22. There doesn't seem to be any licensing information at all provided for that file on its SEG file page. The Creative Commons license mentioned above most likely only applies to original content add to that website; it almost certainly doesn't apply to images and other media files uploaded to that website. So, it's unlikely that the website SEG is the copyright holder of the image, much in the same way the Wikipedia is pretty much never the copyright holder of the images used in its articles. What you're going to need to try and do is figure out the image's provenance (i.e. where in originally came from) so that an assessment of its copyright status can be made. There's no information about the image on SEG other than who uploaded it and when they uploaded it, but perhaps by using TinEye or a reverse Google image search, you can find out some more information about the origin of the image. Finally, I'm not sure you mean by We are working on obituary of Alex Kaufman. Do you mean you're working on a Wikipedia article about "Alex Kaufman". Please note that Wikipedia articles aren't really intended to be obituaries like you might commonly find in a newspaper or on a news website. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:17, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Given the "unless otherwise noted" we have to presume that it applies. Of course it is possible that the person who uploaded it did not have the necessary rights. However, given that the uploader[4] worked/works at the same institution where Kaufman worked[5], i.e. the Colorado School of Mines, it is plausible that he did. Of course, if in doubt, there is always the option of contacting the person who uploaded it. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 13:34, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

No, we plan to publish in Petrophysics newsletter. 2600:1700:31B0:D50:6C13:1890:8E76:ED22 (talk) 13:44, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

The Teahouse is really a place for asking questions about Wikipedia. Moreover, the answers that tend to be given are usually in the context of relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Since your question seems to be about reusing media content found on some other website unrelated to Wikipedia in a way that is also unrelated to Wikipedia, you're better off either contacting the other website or perhaps an intellectual property attorney to see whether reusing said photo would be OK for you to reuse. Wikipedia pages aren't really the place to ask for "legal" advice, and any answers you might get aren't the responsibility of the Wikimedia Foundation. Teahouse hosts aren't "employees" of Wikipedia; basically, they're just people who try to help others with questions related to Wikipedia. There's no "Wikipedia test" that Teahouse hosts take to become a host; people can randomly show up and answer questions if they want. Therefore, the knowledge and experience they're basing their answers on can vary quite a bit, and you need to treat the answers you get as such. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:43, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

There are several people who go, professionally, by Barbara K. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Kooyman is one Barbara Kavovit is another. I'd just create it, but I don't want to screw something up. Ckeilah (talk) 21:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Created at Barbara K. WPscatter ^t/_c 00:53, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I just removed a small amount of copyright infringing text from a page—specifically a book on a page about an author was being described with text that comes from the publisher's description ([6]). The copyvio-revdel template states that it is for significant copyright violations. Is this a case that should still be copyvio flagged? Thanks! Dylnuge ^{(Talk • Edits)} 00:06, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Dylnuge, I don't think that's a problem. Just one sentence. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:00, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

I read POWO's article, and redirected Acacia aneura var. argentea to Acacia caesaneura. My question is: Does Wikipedia follow Plants of the World Online for plant varieties? I know that generally, Wikipedia follows POWO for the species-level and above, but I can't find any information about using POWO below the species-level.

A Random Plant Wikipedian (talk) 17:57, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, A Random Plant Wikipedian, and welcome to the Teahouse. I had no idea of the answer, so I went to WP:WikiProject Plants to see if it said anything, and in WP:WikiProject Plants/Resources#Pteridophyte classification I found Hence Plants of the World Online should not be used for lists of species, taxoboxes or article titles for ferns and lycophytes, although its position must, of course, be mentioned in the text, which suggests that it can be used for other classes. But I suggest you read that whole page, and maybe the talk page. ColinFine (talk) 20:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I should have clarified that I meant plants that are not ferns or lycophytes.

I had originally went to WP:WikiProject Plants and the talk page, but I found no mention of POWO for (non-fern and lycophyte) plant varieties A Random Plant Wikipedian (talk) 20:58, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, A Random Plant Wikipedian. Interesting question. Colin got in before me whilst I was drafting my reply. I rely on IPNI a lot when checking taxonomic names, but POWO is also deemed reliable. I'm not sure if there are ever actually discrepancies between them. As for varietal level: I'm honestly not sure - they're probably even more prone to change and variable taxonomic opinion than those at the species level. I suspect one would have to look at a number of academic sources to gain a consensus. And it may be that recently-published regional Floras relating to endemics could well have new thinking on synonymy than world databases. I think this is more of a question for WP:WikiProject Plants to answer than one lone botanist here.

What concerns me most about your question - and looking at what you've done - is that you have redirected a page that you have established is now a synonym and pointed it the currently accepted taxon (the target page), according to POWO. Yet you've made no change to the target page whatsoever to reflect that synonymy or to cite a source for that redirect. That, I feel, is not good practice at all, and you should always ensure you insert a synonym from a redirect page into the taxobox and cite the online or published resource upon which you based that move. Without that traceability of page moves and taxonomic opinion changes, we could end up in a right mess. If I go to a page by searching on an out of date name, and find myself redirected to a differently-maed article, I definitely expect to see spomething in that artricle which justifies why I have been redirected there. Edit summaries are not sufficient to explain those redirects, especially as they reside in the donor page, not the target page.

It doesn't look like either article ever had significantly more visits than the other (see here), but it's essential that whenever you make changes like this that you edit the target article to reflect what that source has suggested. If you think it could cause confusion or there could be a difference of opinion, or that other established databases haven't caught up with taxonomic changes published in a new monograph, then also include mention that 'source x now places taxon Y into taxon Z' in the body of the article.

I note that the page on Acacia aneura still lists A. aneura var. argentea as a recognised variety, so this may also need updating, and it would probably be appropriate there to add a sentence to the article to the effect that var. argentea is now regarded as a synonym of Acacia caesaneura. The alternative is simply to delete that line, but that would, once again, leave users confused as to why a taxon they may have heard of - and seen mentioned on that page before - has magically disappeared from the article. So, I repeat the need for ensuring clarity when names are changed and pages redirected. I hope you find this perspective helpful. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:17, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Nick Moyes

I have edited both articles that you mentioned. I will do my best to not make this mistake again.

I apologise if I made a mess.

A Random Plant Wikipedian (talk) 21:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@A Random Plant Wikipedian Thank you. I've just checked your contributions a short while ago and was rather alarmed by this WP:REDIRECT (see here). You've turned a page with valid content into a red linked page which doesn't exist! This is not the right way to do things, and is bordering on unintentional vandalism.

I can see that you're still working on different pages on this genus, so will say no more. But if you have established that Thelesperma pubescens is a synonym of Thelesperma subnudum subsp subnudum (and I've not checked) then, at the very least, it would merit a WP:MOVE to Thelesperma subnudum, not effectively a page blanking and redirect to a subspecies page which currently doesn't exists, followed by the creation of a new page on Thelesperma subnudum as you seem to be doing this evening. I believe I'm right in saying that we would never normally create articles for the nominate subspecies as you seem to be trying to do, so I am a litle concerned that your enthusiasm might be carrying you away a little bit. Forgive me if I ping @Plantdrew, but they are more experienced in botanical nomenclature on Wikipedia than I am and can probably guide you more effectively than I am able to do. Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 21:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes

I set the redirect to T. s. var. subnudum, because I was about to write the T. s. var. subnudum article. If I ever redirect again, I will do it after the page has been completed.

It seems I have made a larger mess then I thought - as such, I think that I will not do large-scale (Redirects, page creation, etc) edits anymore, atleast not for a while, because appartently I don't know enough about Wikipedia's standards. A Random Plant Wikipedian (talk) 22:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@A Random Plant Wikipedian Do you not see that if T.s.ssp subnudum (which is effectively T. subnudum) then you should not have wasted your time creating a new page, but simply either renamed it (via a WP:MOVE - and then edited per my advice above to show the synonymy) or posted on the talk page to address your concerns and see if there were alternative opinions to doing a MOVE? After a week or so of no reply you can WP:BEBOLD and make the changes, but always ensure with synonyms that there is a trail of citations to justify name changes and never create a second article about the same species. Think about it like this: some higher being knows what the plant is. There's only one of its type. But it's us mortals who like to give a plant a name (or names). Think of all the multiple accepted names for the British bluebell. Over the centuries it's been Hyacinthus non-scriptus, Scilla non-scripta, Endymion non-scriptus and a few more, besides. Whatever taxonomists might choose to name it today, it's still the same plant. Just the one species. So it only deserves one article. What we title that article is up to the human taxonomists to decide, and then for Wikipedians to follow. Duplicating pages is not the way to do it when a name is found to be out of date with currently accepted thinking.

All that said, I really don't want to put you off, and welcome your enthusiasm. We need more people with botanical interests here! So I welcome your input. I'm just advising to go a little more carefully when it comes to the taxonomic side of things - I find it a nightmare myself sometimes. If you're not sure - steer clear and raise the issue on a talk page. Thank you for taking my expressions of concerns so well. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I changed the redirect so that it redirects to Thelesperma subnudum, not the variety, and added "Thelesperma pubescens" in the synonyms list of that page. I also put a redirect from "Thelesperma subnudum var. subnudum" to "Thelesperma subnudum#Varieties"

Is this acceptable? A Random Plant Wikipedian (talk) 23:02, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

That's better. I have minimal internet access at the moment, and won't be able to keep up with this conversation very well. I've actually been aware that T. pubescens is treated as a synonym of T. subnudum var. subnudum by POWO. Probably the synonyms list in T. subnudum should list all the synonyms by vars. of T. subnudum. That's kind of pain to format (to be properly sourced, each var. of subnudum should cite the POWO page for that var.), and is why I hadn't personally done anything with T. pubescens (and there are other articles for full species that are now treated as synonyms of varieties).

In general, Wikipedia doesn't have articles on subspecies or varieties. That does make synonym lists more complicated in cases like T. pubescens, where a former species is a synonym of a different variety (rather than merely being demoted from a species to a variety with the same epithet). Wikipedia generally follows POWO for genera/species/subspecies/varieties of angiosperms, but may deviate from POWO after discussing exceptional cases. Wikipedia doesn't follow POWO for pteridophytes or bryophytes (POWO doesn't even list bryophytes). I guess we are mostly following POWO for gymnosperms, but there hasn't been any specific discussion about a source to follow for gymnosperms. Plantdrew (talk) 03:23, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello Everyone

I am new to Wikipedia Editing and I am still getting hang the guidelines of Wiki. Recently one Wikipedia page caught my eye Salaar, In the "Marketing" section of this page they mentioned how many views the "teaser" got and the record teaser created. Is this ok to mention in the Wikipedia page, but Wikipedia always tells that "Wikipedia is not be used as promotional platform". If I am wrong about this, please help me understand me this. Arctic Writer (talk) 06:02, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I don't see how that's promotional. It's simply stating the fact that The teaser broke all records, which is notable and properly referenced. See WP:PROMO. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:12, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

there are entries that exist in wikipedia, however in a different language than English, so I cannot add the wiki link. Can wiki links be added to entries that appear in wiki in other languages than English? Derivadeb (talk) 11:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Derivadeb. See Help:Interlanguage links and Template:Interlanguage link. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks :) Derivadeb (talk) 11:52, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Derivadeb. Just to clear up some possible misunderstanding: "Wikipedia" is not one thing that has articles ("entries") in various different languages. Each language's Wikipedia is a complete thing in its own right, and they each function independently of the others, and have their own, often differing, rules, standards and procedures.

Another common misconception is that the English-language Wikipedia we are both posting on here, because it is the largest and oldest, has some kind of authority over any of the others. This is not the case.

That said, they are all hosted by the same parent organisation, use the same software, share certain resources (like the image repository Wikimedia Commons) and, relevant to your query, can link items between themselves.

Happy editing! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 21:11, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, thank you.

the question refers to institutional places or museums or arts associations that yes have a tab in wikipedia, even if in another language. Let me give you some examples: MACBA: (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Museo_de_Arte_Contemporáneo_de_Barcelona); BJCEM (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjcem).

In such cases, how do you suggest that I do? Derivadeb (talk) 09:26, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi there,

I created an article in my sandbox and would like to know, even if some sources are still missing, would this be a topic accepted in English Wiki?

I modelled it on Zyzz.

Thank you for your support! MarvDj (talk) 17:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@MarvDj: It needs work, but it looks like a great start. I think he passes the threshold of notability give the sources you have found. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:46, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Can you give me a tip what would need most work that would keep it from being published? Appreciate it :-) MarvDj (talk) 09:44, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

To the, "Self defence" section of the above article, I want to add, "However, nowadays, a person who kills a rapist or potential rapist in self defence can be tried and convicted for murder.^[1][2][3]" but will it pass muster?-1Firang (talk) 01:33, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Is there some better text I can add to summarise those sources, so that they are acceptable?-1Firang (talk) 01:41, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

This is probably something better asked on the article's talk page since that's where you're going to likely find editors more familiar with the topic matter. If after a few days or so nobody responds, try adding a {{Please see}} template to the talk pages of any Wikiprojects whose scopes the article falls under. If you still get no response about a week after doing that, you can try being WP:BOLD and seeing what happens. As long as you speak in general terms, properly use the cited sources in WP:RSCONTEXT without adding your own interpretations, and (most importantly) don't start calling specific individuals "rapists", it should be OK to use the term in a WP:NPOV way. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:01, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

1Firang, on 26 June you got excellent advice: "The place to discuss such an addition would be the talk page, Talk:Rape in Islamic law." The advice remains valid. -- Hoary (talk) 08:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I would also state that in your suggested text, the word 'nowadays' is rather vague and colloquial in the context. Since when? What do the sources say? Turner Street (talk) 09:44, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, and thanks for reading.

I would like to print some of the amazing photos we have access to on this platform, and want to make sure that I cite them correctly. I was hoping that it would be ok to print the reference material on the back of the image, as to not distract from the image itself.

Thanks for your consideration and advice. JJGTCA JJGTCA (talk) 08:45, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @JJGTCA! I suppose you're referring to the images hosted on Wikimedia commons. Be aware that not all of them are distributed under the same licensing conditions; some are even non-free and used on Wikipedia through a fair use rationale. For every image that you want to use, make sure that you double-check its licensing requirements.

Regarding your suggestion for attribution, that depends on how you're intending to use the prints. Attribution needs to be visible; if you're putting up them up on a wall, the reference material on the back of the image does not appropriately attribute it, as nobody would be able to see it. Attribution needs to be in proximity to the image and clearly accessible to anyone who takes a closer look. What are your plans for these prints? Actualcpscm (talk) 09:08, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

A quick note, strictly speaking images hosted on Commons are required to be free. (c:COM:Licensing) and should otherwise be deleted. There are some images on our articles that are non-free under the WP:NFCC, but those are local to this project. Other projects may also have their own guidance on fair use Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:28, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

That's right, thanks for clarifying! Actualcpscm (talk) 10:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Reusing_Wikipedia_content#Images_and_other_media. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:09, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Right now, it takes me, (for example) to this link, but is there a way to bypass that? LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk 10:43, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

hi @LOOKSQUARE and welcome to the Teahouse! there's another purge gadget that I believe should purge in one click: Preferences > Gadgets >   Add a clock to the personal toolbar that displays the current time in UTC and provides a link to purge the current page. clicking the clock should purge the page (and you get a clock to instantly translate between your local time and UTC!) happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 10:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk 10:52, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, LOOKSQUARE. F5 should do a basic page reload, but I think ignores the actual cache. Ctrl-F5 is a more effective page purge, but Ctrl + Shift + Del takes you to a browser window to determine how much of your cached data you want to purge. The choice is yours! Nick Moyes (talk) 10:55, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh, and there's more browser-specific advice in this essay on the topic: Wikipedia:Bypass your cache. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:59, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

Can someone explain the function of portals to me? Someone added one of the articles I started to the LGBT portal... I started going through my other articles and adding them all to relevant portals but not sure if I'm overdoing it? Tried to keep it to two per article, but can someone explain to me the function of portals so I better understand how it operates? Chainsawpunk (talk) 15:18, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Chainsawpunk Portals are a sort of 'Window Shopping Display' of a given topic.They offer an alternative route in to Wikipedia content by providing a carefully selected mixture of content to users. (I think the modern term for that selection process is 'curated'.) So it's important not just to dump any old article or image into a Portal, but to ensure what's shown there reflects an overall picture of that topic. You can learn more at Wikipedia:Portal. Hope this helps to answer your question. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:53, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Is it helpful? Rather, do you find it leads more people to an article?

I guess I'm just not really understanding how it operates, or if it is a necessary addition to a page. Chainsawpunk (talk) 23:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

It is not a necessary addition to a page, Chainsawpunk. My uneducated impression, is that it rarely helps. It seems to have been a promising idea a decade or more ago, but for most subjects it didn't really take off. Editors who see value in portals continue to work on them, and (as moribund portals don't obviously do any harm) editors who don't see value in them just ignore them. There are sure to be other editors who'd hotly disagree with me about this, and they may be right. -- Hoary (talk) 06:03, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

This is kind of what I was thinking... Thanks for your feedback! Chainsawpunk (talk) 12:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

The google translate is not working. Instead a display saying "Machine translation not available st the moment" is showing. I'm using this on android and it was working fine in the morning Ashvin Kaitabhya (talk) 04:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the warning (if it is a warning); but short outages aren't so rare. -- Hoary (talk) 06:46, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Why would it be a warning. Is there any way i can fix this? Also, forgot to mention, its section translation tool. Ashvin Kaitabhya (talk) 07:22, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Why would you be posting that information here (a help desk for Wikipedia) if not to warn people? Otherwise this has nothing whatever to do with us. I don't see how you can fix this unless you work for Google? Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:16, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ashvin Kaitabhya: You said google translate. Google Translate is a service by Google at https://translate.google.com. Did you mean the machine translation component of the Wikipedia:Content translation tool at Special:ContentTranslation? If so, which language are you translating from and to? Machine translation to English has been deliberately disabled for years because it gave many poor translations. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:12, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, i was referring to Machine translation component of section translation which uses google translate. I was translating to Hindi. Now, its working fine again. Thanks for replying. Ashvin Kaitabhya (talk) 10:16, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ashvin Kaitabhya: Google Translate is one of seven possible services at mw:Help:Content translation/Translating/Initial machine translation#Machine translation availability. You still haven't said which language you were translating from but for English to Hindi I get three options: Google Translate, MinT and Yandex. You may have a "Use Google Translate" menu you can click to see other options if it happens again. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:04, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

yes, i was translating from english to hindi and out of the 3 options, only minT was showing up, that too , a very bad translation. Ashvin Kaitabhya (talk) 12:39, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

In early May I submitted two articles for review, one was previously denied and the other is completely new. I have made enough articles to be able to publish on my own, but since I'm relatively new to writing here (I started about a year ago) I'd still rather have someone experienced check my work. Now, however, I've waited quite long (2 months), while other submitted articles were approved within a week. I know there is a possible wait time of 4 months, but did I do anything to make it take so long? Did my article being denied influence this somehow? Or should I just wait? Many thanks! GeneralCraft65 (talk) 12:10, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@generalcraft65: please just wait. we have a backlog of over 4000 drafts to get through. lettherebedarklight晚安 12:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@GeneralCraft65 The only draft I can see in your contribution history is Draft:Battle at Vronen, which is not currently submitted for review. Please can you link the others you think are "stuck"? Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:58, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, the issue is fixed now luckily, thanks for asking GeneralCraft65 (talk) 13:00, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I've been reading about the 3RR rule. I think it's quite easy to break if you don't know that it exists. Has there ever been any movement to suggest that the site engine code be amended to stop or at least warn non-admins from reverting more than three edits in a day? Perhaps there could be a tick box to state that the editor is reverting vandalism, with penalties if it is abused. Admittedly this could be bypassed with sock puppet accounts, but it would make the process more arduous. Just an idea... Puffin123 (talk) 13:51, 12 July 2023 (UTC).

Hi, Puffin123!

You may want to check the Village Pump for that. Also, I would like to note that it is for a single page and I do think that I have seen instances where 3RR has been broken for good reasons. ✶Mitch199811✶ 14:45, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm editing Clay Kids, but episode 9 is outside of the table, when it should be below, if that makes any sense. I don't know how to move it. Thank you so much. DaClayCrew (talk) 08:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done

"|-" was missing above the 9. Anyways, I've fixed it! 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 08:35, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! DaClayCrew (talk) 15:16, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Does a mainspace edit include your own userpage edits? PotassiumLover72 talk 08:22, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

PotassiumLover72, user pages, including your own, are not in mainspace. So, no. Maproom (talk) 08:42, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

But a mainspace edit is when you are editing an article that includes: User talk:, Template:, Wikipedia:, and Help:? PotassiumLover72 talk 09:03, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@PotassiumLover72 No. "Mainspace" is jargon for the area of the Wikipedia reserved for live articles. See WP:Namespace for more details. If you want to see a breakdown of where you have edited, navigate to your contributions page and click on the link "Edit count" at the very bottom. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:22, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh okay. Thanks. PotassiumLover72 talk 12:43, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

wait, it means articles excluding the "Talk:", "Wikipedia:", "Help:" and "User:"? PotassiumLover72 talk 13:42, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

or.. does it mean all of your contributions? PotassiumLover72 talk 13:43, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@PotassiumLover72 Please read the link I have already given and also look at this breakdown of your edit history (the colourful pie-chart) and you should understand.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:32, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh okay, Thanks. PotassiumLover72 talk 15:36, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I have been on Wikipedia for several years, but did not submit an article until recently. The article, Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Association, was accepted, then un-accepted, then accepted. However, it's been accepted with an information box that says "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations." I asked the editor who posted the box for specific guidance and didn't get very much. I have added more content and more citations to the article, but need some help. How can I improve the article? How can I prove the organization is notable? There are 31 citations, all independent, acceptable news media and books. I obviously think the PMA is notable, but need to insure that others do as well. Thanks in advance for any help you can give me. Hamish barebones (talk) 15:22, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:SIRS applies to the NCORP guidelines here (and I wouldn't be surprised if other guidelines/WikiProjects/the wider WP community follow their lead). Article topics must receive significant coverage that is independent of the subject and comes from reliable, secondary sources. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 15:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

But they've all disappeared, when I look at the history page of the pages I edit, my contributions aren't there (but the edits I've made in the articles remain), and some user assumed I was "new" when I've been here for 5 years? 68.189.2.14 (talk) 14:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

IP editor: Your edits listed at Special:Contributions/68.189.2.14 show only those you've made since 9 July, so I assume that either 1) you have an account but are not currently logged in or 2) your IP address has changed. The latter is more likely, I guess, and happens regularly with some internet service providers. That's one reason why having an account is sensible. You say that your contributions to various articles are still present, which implies they will be in the history but under some earlier IP address. You should be able to work out which one(s) by searching for specific additions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:04, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

IP editor: You deleted this thread after I had replied to it. Please don't do that as other editors may find the discussion useful. I have reverted your deletion. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:45, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, an editor underscored words and phrases in several citation quotes, formatting which was not present in the sources, and I pointed out that it wasn't our place to add our own emphasis to metaphorically "underscore" our stance or to make a point. The best I could do was point out that the manual of style says: "Generally, do not underline text or it may be confused with links on a web page." Instead of removing the underscores, they replaced them with bold markup to draw attention to certain words and phrases in the quotes.

Are there any guidelines or policy statements that I could rely on, beyond shaking my head and saying "that seems wrong to me"? It seems to verge on MOS:EDITORIAL or WP:OR (?)

Context: The markup is not essential to understanding the quotations: it appears to do with emphasising citations that argue that the most common view of witchcraft is that it is malign.

Thanks a lot, Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 15:31, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Esowteric!

Firstly, if they want to do emphasis, they should either be using {{em}} or italics per MOS:EMPHASIS. MOS:QUOTE does say that emphasis can be used but should be used sparingly. You may also want to mention the user in question on the talk page. ✶Mitch199811✶ 15:58, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, *Mitch199811. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 16:03, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

The page Geographical centre of Earth is titled in British English (centre) but the page is in American English (center). IS this intentional? Apmh 16:01, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. The best place to ask this would be the article talk page, where the editors that follow that article might more know than we do. 331dot (talk) 16:04, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

This was the result of an edit by Kirsteny in February last year.[7] It was a minor piece of misguided gnoming. We are not supposed to change the pre-existing language variety of an article, and this article had been using "Centre" since its creation in 2012. Since the article has no particular national connection, there is no reason why it should be in one form of English or another, and I would have no personal preference. Failing to restore it to British English may encourage manic Americanisers to create faits-accomplis, but it might be less work to move the article so the title matches the current text. Elemimele (talk) 16:31, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi team, An article I contributrd to which is a notable topic ''Marcilinus Nlemigbo,'' which was directly written on the main space, it has been there for about two months, and it has not yet been reviewed. It has been patrolled and no negative tag was attached to it. Please what could have been the cause of this? Thanks Engrdrizzy (talk) 15:01, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello Engrdrizzy. I am also a new editor and I came to know about your problem. I understand that it could be little comfusing sometimes. But I think that it is yet to be reviewed. As Wikipedia Team says that it may take upto 4 monthes, so you may wait or resubmit your draft. I hope it will work. Thank you. And best of luck ! President Prince (talk) 15:20, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Prince, thanks for you kind concern, I appreciate. However, the article is on the main space and has never been moved to draft? Engrdrizzy (talk) 15:27, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

@Engrdrizzy I'm confused by your question. The mainspace article Marcelinus Nlemigbo exists since its creation by Ajifohils on 10 June. Your contribution history shows nothing related to the similar name Marcilinus Nlemigbo (with an "i", not an "e" in the forename). Are you also editing under the Username Ajifohils and if not, is the article with the "e" the one you mean? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:31, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I mean I contributed to the article and it is also on my watch. The article was created by an unknown editor Ajifohils Engrdrizzy (talk) 15:41, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I was trying to know why it hasn't been reviewed Engrdrizzy (talk) 15:41, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I have reviewed Marcelinus Nlemigbo but you have not edited that article? Theroadislong (talk) 15:44, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

@Engrdrizzy, are you working on articles together with Hilspress? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I am. Thank you for the review. Hillarys (talk) 19:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

@Engrdrizzy/@Hilspress, if one person is operating both of these accounts - which seems to be the case? - you should review WP:SOCKLEGIT to make sure you're not violating any of Wikipedia's rules about such things. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:51, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Alright. Thank you alot. Hillarys (talk) 21:53, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

FYI

Three accounts (Engrdrizzy, Hilspress and Ajifohils) have now been blocked as socks, which became obvious from this discussion. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:48, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi!

I need help... I started a draft for Matthew Kirk – who is an artist, when I input this draft it brought me to another article.. I assumed when I set a new disambiguation it would differentiate the two and create my own article but I was definitely wrong... Is there any way to restore their draft and keep my own? I feel really bad about this!!  Chainsawpunk (talk) 01:00, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I actually might have successfully fixed this myself? Chainsawpunk (talk) 01:15, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

A) Yes, you accidentally overwrote the existing draft with your own.

B) It's okay, everyone makes mistakes, and that was something I was able to easily fix. DS (talk) 18:34, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I am editing pages in different languages for a business that I work for. I have successfully changed 3 languages, but when publishing the German version, it got stuck saying that it needs to be sifted through and viewed by someone, which I suspect are the Wikipédia moderators, right? My question is, is there a timeframe given to this review? Or maybe the review notification of that page got stuck and not sent? It's this page here: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_Gamberaia Computerism (talk) 18:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Computerism, welcome to the Teahouse for English Wikipedia. Each language is a separate project with their own rules and processes - you will need to ask about German Wikipedia on German Wikipedia. Their equivalent of the Teahouse seems to be here. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:17, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Also, if you ever intend to edit the equivalent article on English Wikpedia (Villa Gamberaia?) you will need to review and follow our rules on paid editing - see WP:PAID. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:20, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I just added the contribution template tag to the pages I've edited in the Discussion/Talk page. Computerism (talk) 19:32, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

What would be an appropriate sort of short description for a subject primarily known as somebody else's spouse? The person I have in mind was somebody who neither sought nor attained any sort of professional or artistic achievements, whose life focused exclusively on family, but who nonetheless has ample secondary sources attesting to their intrinsic notability. As always, thank you for your help. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:23, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

To demonstrate someone's notability (in Wikipedia's sense of the word), a source (besides being independent, published, and reliable) must discuss them at some length. Ones that do so would surely mention what makes the person exceptional in their own right (charitable works, artistic productions, leadership of organisations, to name a few possibilities), which would naturally yield a suitable description, even if it's not what they are best known for. Just being the spouse of someone else who is notable, however, does not make that spouse notable, however important they were to members of their own family – "notability is not inherited."

If you are not seeking a separate article about this person, but merely wanting to describe them within one about their notable spouse, then it's difficult to give advice without knowing the specifics of who we are talking about. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 19:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. The subject I have in mind is discussed at great length in many reputable secondary sources which I have prepared for citation; they are also the subject of at least one book. They played an important role in the lives of their spouse, children, and indirectly in their spouse's second marriage. However, my subject's life ultimately revolved entirely around family. They had intellectual interests in their youth, but nothing that was ever pursued to the point of enrolling in higher education, much less becoming the object of professional pursuits. Later in life they developed an intense interest in religion, but to my knowledge was not deeply involved in affiliated charitable organizations and the like. That their interests were primarily domestic does not necessarily disqualify them from being considered notable and, again, I'm certain my sources will hold up on that account. My question, rather, is how to write a short description for such a subject. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:34, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Is there a reason for not naming the subject here? Having the name might help answering your question. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 20:03, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I was able to find an occupation for this subject that can be used for their article, so my question is no longer relevant. Thank you everyone for your help and interest! CurryTime7-24 (talk) 23:07, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Let's say I want to link to something like , that displays like [ this] (not a link).

Is there any way to do this? QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 20:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I don't mean like including the image itself, I know that's not possible, I'm just asking if it is possible to link to it. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 20:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, QuickQuokka. Help:URL#Fixing links with unsupported characters does not list data: as a supported scheme. ColinFine (talk) 20:48, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: The full list of supported schemes is at mw:Manual:$wgUrlProtocols but there is still no data:. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

at firstly, i will show that's char who's name son goku, i will explain how to goku got zenkai bush/level up/journey

Rainshen kofuku (talk) 03:27, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Rainshen kofuku,

Do you have a question about Goku? Because I do not understand what you are trying to ask.

Please note that Wikipedia is not a guide. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 03:38, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi guys,

I have been attempting to write a biography of a living person article about myself (I know this is strongly discouraged) however it is a project that i have to pursue as a requirement.

I have tried to focus only on material from sources i can reference and have cut down all of my personal extras that cannot be referenced. After cutting the article into its most basic parts i received feedback that the sources might not be reliable for verifying the information provided. I aimed to only use verified news sources (news24 etc) as sources but maybe im missing something?

You can find the article here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ruan_Scheepers

I have attempted to clean it up more so any advice would be appreciated! Ruan Scheepers (talk) 18:59, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

What is the requirment for you to create an article about yourself? RudolfRed (talk) 19:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ruan Scheepers Why do you say you have to do this "as a requirement". Are you being held hostage somewhere, and they won't let you go until you do? I'll take a quick look at your sources, but it would help if you could tell us the three best ones that talk about you in an independent manner, in detail and in depth, such that you meet these notability criteria? Nick Moyes (talk) 19:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Sorry about being vague, it is a prerequisite by my media agency to have a wikipedia page before being accepted into certain positions. I have no idea where to resource writers so I have taken it upon myself to write the page using some pages of my peers as reference. In my opinion the sources that capture the article in its whole would be:

https://headtopics.com/za/understanding-the-meaning-behind-south-africa-s-mister-global-costume-26266423

https://krugersdorpnews.co.za/488450/resident-to-appear-in-hit-reality-tv-series/

https://krugersdorpnews.co.za/495879/ruan-tops-on-tropical-island-of-treasure-or-krugersdorps-ruan-celeb-karlien-win-tropical-island-of-treasure-or-our-ruan-and-celeb-wins-tv-show-or-tropical-pleasure-for-our-ruan/

https://www.news24.com/life/arts-and-entertainment/tv/team-tropical-reigns-supreme-in-the-grand-finale-of-tropika-island-of-treasure-all-stars-20221202 Ruan Scheepers (talk) 19:33, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

1) - there no mention of you -just your photo.

2) - a mention in a local newspaper

3)- mentions you won something, nothing else

4) - briefest of mentions in a quote from you.

5) no mention - just a photo.

6) - brief mentions

7) brief mentions

8) - no mention

9) mentioned as a winner in a regional newspaper

10) some mentions - nothing detailed

11) brief mentions - no detail about you

It might be that the reality TV programme already has an article about it on Wikipedia, and your name could be added there as a season winner, but I'm afraid if these are your best sources, it is simply WP:TOOSOON in your career to be 'notable' in Wikipedia's eyes. That's not to denigrate what you have achieved - I have dozens and dozens of press cuttings mentioning me over the years - but none are sufficiently detailed/in depth for me to merit an article here, either. I would expect to see at least three in-depth articles (not interviews) written about you in serious MSM to warrant a WIKIPEDIA article sorry.

Hope they let you go soon! Nick Moyes (talk) 19:33, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you i guess i was over eager! Ruan Scheepers (talk) 19:37, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ruan Scheepers. Judging from what you have said above, your media agency either have no understanding of what Wikipedia is, or else they understand how dodgy it is to try and use Wikipedia for promotion, and are getting you to do the "dirty work" that they don't want to touch. Either way, why are you paying them? ColinFine (talk) 20:39, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ruan Scheepers I'm afraid your follow-up post crossed with my reply. That's a strange way for any media company to behave, but I'm afraid we still cannot help you, nor would paying someone to write an article about you using those references, either. It's worth me adding that we do not accept articles that are, in effect, just an interview, or based on press releases. But keep going, and one day I may find myself eating my words. After all, everyone was not famous before they became famous.(I'm still hoping - but I don't have your looks!) Nick Moyes (talk) 19:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate your time and effort sir! see you soon. Ruan Scheepers (talk) 19:44, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ruan Scheepers: I also suggest reviewing the essay Wikipedia:When your boss tells you to edit Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 04:02, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Given that Draft:Ruan Scheepers exists, all the article-like content on your User page should be deleted. See WP:UP for User page guidelines. David notMD (talk) 20:39, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I created a new article for publishing. It is about a painting from Rembrandt (other picture of simular object but not the same). Now the copy of the Pupil painting has already an article as the painting of Rembrandt which it now seems, that it isn’t (I feel a bit like Assange now). That article has relevent information of that particular painting and I do not want to discredit or alter that information. I only want to merge and add new information, meaning that some of the original information should be altered to make sense for the reader, but this is not allowed (attribution = this is a very complicated political issue). Is it not better to create my own page, and refer in the excisting article to my new article with the new information…!? A moderator is telling me to edit the original article and not to create a new, in which I agree…another moderator undid my contributions in the existing…..it is complicated. Please advise.. A Polish Nobleman# Draft:Wladyslaw IV Vasa in Elk skin painting by Rembrandt 1637 Pmnedus (talk) 17:11, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @Pmnedus, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, I would advise you to edit the original article and expand it with new information as needed. However, please take care not to replace the article with your version of the page, as no one owns articles or pages here on Wikipedia. If you have any other questions I am happy to help. Best, — Prodraxis {talk • contributions} (she/her) 17:15, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

I thought I did a good job updating, now a moderator ,as before, removed al my updates!? Pmnedus (talk) 09:18, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Please advice. Thanks Pmnedus (talk) 10:02, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

@Pmnedus The editor Kleuske who reverted your additions to the article is not an administrator (Wikipedia does not use the term "moderator") but she is an experienced contributor who is, judging by her edit summary, worried that you have added information which is original research, i.e. based on something you personally believe to be true but which is not backed up by published reliable sources. This is the sort of content dispute that has to be resolved via the Talk Page of the article, where I note you have already commented recently. I hope that Kleuske and you can, with others who have the article on their watchlists, come to a WP:CONSENSUS over the new content by discussion there. The process is usual on Wikipedia and is summarised in the essay WP:BRD, which you should read. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:07, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Talk to that one person until the two of you have reached an agreement.

But if you receive this:

Please stop your disruptive editing.

And the replies like the following:

This site will do!? https://artinpoland.weebly.com/en/forgotten-portraits-introduction-part-b Pmnedus (talk) 10:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A blog post on a Weebly website will most definitely NOT do, you are wasting everyone's time here. Theroadislong (talk) 10:53,

and

etc. I do not have the time, nor the stomach to go through all these "sources", but WP:SYNTH and WP:OR apply. NONE provide a direct attribution of this painting to that title. Kleuske (talk) 08:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My advice: STOP! Kleuske (talk) 08:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply] Pmnedus (talk) 20:11, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

It's not clear what you are asking here Pmnedus? Theroadislong (talk) 22:19, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

It was not a question, but examples how the communication replies are from 2 persons Pmnedus (talk) 06:50, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

The National gallery in Washington has a pdf ("Rembrandt van Rijn - A Polish Nobleman" National Gallery of Art) used in the "A Polish Nobleman" article, and are using with this Pdf their own research and opinions. They are the owner of the object. Is it not, that this is in conflict with the “No original research” rules !? And the content of “A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings All Volumes: Rembrandt's Paintings” and the RKD webpages, also have the same conflict!? Does did mean all the art articles have to be reviewed!? Awaiting for a constructive answer. Thanks.

The disclaimers FYI:

This is a publication of the Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project. The opinions expressed in this volume (VI), and the previously published volumes I-V in the Series A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, should be understood as “opinions” that are meant for academic use only. The opinions represent the Foundation’s best judgment based on available information at the time of publication. The opinions are not statements or representations of fact nor a warranty of authenticity of a work of art and are subject to change as scholarship and academic information about an individual work of art changes. Opinions have been changed in the past according to new insights and scholarship. It should be understood that forming an opinion as to the authenticity of a work of art purporting to be by Rembrandt is often very difficult and will in most cases depend upon subjective criteria which are not capable of proof or absolute certainty. Therefore, the conclusions expressed in the volumes are only opinions and not a warranty of any kind. Third parties cannot derive any rights from these opinions. Neither the Foundation, nor the members of its board, nor the authors, nor the cooperators, nor any other parties engaged in the Rembrandt Research Project accept any liability for any damages (schade), including any indirect or consequential damages or losses and costs. Anyone is free to disagree with the opinions expressed in these volumes. Disclaimer RKD All users with access to the RKD – Netherlands Institute for Art History website and who use this site for whatever purpose, agree to the following. The RKD has the right to refuse services to users of the RKD. The RKD devotes a lot of time and energy to ensuring the information on the website is accurate and up to date. Despite this, inaccuracies may be present on its website or those affiliated with the RKD. The RKD does not accept liability for any damages incurred as a result of these inaccuracies, or for problems arising from the use or transference of this information. The RKD furthermore does not accept liability for any losses, lost profits or any other kind of damage or loss which occur as a result of the use or circulation of the information, or for any technical shortcomings. Users who download data or information do so at their own risk. References or hyperlinks to other websites are only given as information for the users of the RKD website. The RKD offers no guarantee with regard to the content and reliability of these websites, nor does the RKD accept liability in any way for damages incurred either as a direct or indirect result of using the information on these websites. Any statements made by the RKD on art works are a result of art historical examination by the staff member(s) concerned and cannot be seen as expertise. The RKD and/or the staff members(s) who carried out the examination cannot be held liable for any inaccuracies or incomplete information in the given statements, nor for any consequences for third parties due to the results of the examination issued. Pmnedus (talk) 09:05, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

The pdf https://www.nga.gov/content/dam/ngaweb/collection/artobject/85/versions/1995-01-01_artobject_85.pdf is clearly NOT original research it has a LARGE number of citations. Your continuing attempts to promote your painting need to stop or you are likely to be blocked. Theroadislong (talk) 09:12, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Please, it's a question that I would like to understand, that's why there is the Teahouse not. Please, I would like you also to STOP using that I am promoting my painting!? Pmnedus (talk) 10:14, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

And because you started again about it. What is the 'objection' to update the article for ==Notable copies== as is done with other similar pages. I didn't get a reply until now. Maybe it´s forgotten in the amount of work pressure. (Please please, don't say it is not meant for promoting my Painting). Pmnedus (talk) 10:25, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

The no original research policy does not preclude us from using sources that are doing original research. We just can't do original research on our own. If there's a question here, it would be about the source's reliability, but that's separate (to me it looks like just any paper, and I would trust the national gallery of Washington, so I see zero reason it's unreliable). Skarmory (talk • contribs) 09:50, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, it helps understanding it a bit better. Pmnedus (talk) 10:16, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Greetings,

I am trying to add Template:Conspiracy theories to LGBT grooming conspiracy theory in such a way that the sub-navbox "Gender and sexuality" is automatically expanded. The template documentation is not helping with this.

Could someone please show me how to format it to produce such a result? Thanks. — Toast for Teddy (talk) 21:08, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Toast for Teddy. Welcome to the Teahouse. I have edited the page; is that what you wanted? The advice you needed was easily found at Template:LGBT sidebar. The trick is to find the template you're interested in modifying, using the source editor, then load up that template and work through its documentation. In this case, it was quite easy to follow. Hope this is what you wanted. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:12, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

The request was about Template:Conspiracy theories which is displayed at the bottom the article, not Template:LGBT sidebar. @Toast for Teddy: XTheBedrockX added documentation for the feature in [8] but didn't actually implement it. It's not an automatic feature but requires code in the template. I have implemented it now.[9] PrimeHunter (talk) 23:42, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. — Toast for Teddy (talk) 00:11, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

My apologies for misunderstanding your question. I'm glad someone is on the case! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:13, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Butbit always deleted. Help me make an article that will not be nominated for apeedy deletion 203.189.116.4 (talk) 06:27, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Have you checked that your proposed subject is notable (as "notability" is understood in Wikipedia)? -- Hoary (talk) 06:38, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Read and thoroughly understand these links: WP:BACKWARD and WP:Golden Rule. Follow the advice given in both of them and you will create a draft that cannot be speedy-deleted. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:54, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, how do I create this table for Sona app?

https://imgur.com/a/DAd672l

Shatadru121 (talk) 05:55, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Your image displays what's called an "infobox". Specifically, it's Template:Infobox software; and Template:Infobox software/doc tells you how to use it. -- Hoary (talk) 06:42, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

The fact that you talk about making a "post" suggests that you don't fully understand the purpose of Wikipedia. We have encyclopedia articles, not "posts". What are you planning to do? Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 18:24, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

When quoting word-for-word from say a restaurant/album/book review and putting the quote in quotation marks or a block quote (with correct attribution alongside) is there a limit to how much of the review can be included in an article? Rupples (talk) 00:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

To clarify, I'm talking about fairly short reviews amounting to say a paragraph of 100 words.Rupples (talk) 01:06, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@Rupples for that you'd do a blockquote. 100 words in a blockquote should be okay so long as it's not the majority of the article. Cheers! ‍ ‍ Relativity ‍ ‍ 03:34, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

That's the 'problem', if it is one. The block quote is in essence the entire review of the subject of the Wikipedia article, but the webpage in which it is published has a number of other reviews. As a proportion of the webpage or article as a whole it's probably not significant. However, the individual reviews are written by separate authors and it's a near full quote of one author's review. I don't want to draw it to someone's attention if this type of quote is OK and there are no copyright concerns. I'm being deliberately vague because it's a delicate matter. Rupples (talk) 04:45, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Would the article be that much worse by not including a 100-word block quote? Could essentially the same encyclopedic value be provided to the reader by simply summarizing the review with proper attribution and a supporting citation? If the answers to each are "yes" and "yes", then perhaps it's not such a good idea. Wikipedia's MOS does allow the use quoted text in articles per MOS:QUOTATION, but it also tells us to not go overboard and excessively use quotations. Whether a 100-word block quote is too many words probably depends on who you ask, but you do need to be cognizent of WP:NFC#Text because quoting too much of a cited source might actually make it "non-free content" and thus subject to Wikipedia's non-free content use policy if it's copyright protected content. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:11, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Rupples, the length of a direct quotation of a source must be proportionate to the length of the source itself in order to avoid copyright infringement. In other words, a three sentence quotation from a 350 book is probably OK. But a three sentence quotation from a four sentence source is probably a copyright violation. Use attributed direct quotations when they clearly add to the reader's understanding of the topic, but summarizing and loose paraphrasing of sources is the most commonplace and widely accepted practice. Cullen328 (talk) 05:16, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Cullen is, of course, completely right. But irrespective of copyright, it's very rare that you'd want to quote at length. We are here to summarise facts, so it is usually correct merely to extract the facts from the review. "XXX was received favourably by critics^[]" or "XXX is a rare example of a historical novel set in the late Neolithic period^[]". Sometimes you might want to assign an opinion where the opinion is a bit weird "According to YYY, XXX is a very unusual historical novel^[]". But we'd only need to quote exact words where the exact words matter. "According to YYY, XXX should viewed as a 'semi-authentic' historical novel^[]" (the exact words express an element of doubt about authenticity, and it would be very difficult for us to reflect the intended meaning accurately, without using the exact words). I can think of almost no situation in which it would be appropriate to quote more than the odd word from a book review. Maybe if the entirety of a review had caused a massive legal bust-up between the author and the critic, and a court had argued over the meaning of each line? Big block quotes are best reserved for historical texts which need to be appreciated in toto by our readers if they're to understand the remainder of the article.

If the problem is that you're writing an article about a musician and there is no source about the musician except what can be gleaned from an album cover, so you need to include the whole text, then I'd question whether we're in a position to write an article about the musician. Elemimele (talk) 13:37, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks to everyone who has replied. The reason I said the issue is "delicate" is because the article in question is at AfD, I've contributed a quite forceful opinion and I don't want to be accused of WP:CANVASSING. I believe it would be helpful if someone who hasn't contributed to the article/AfD discussion took a look and gave an opinion/advice on whether there are any copyright issues. To that end, would it be appropriate to raise the issue here i.e. by naming the article, or raise it on the article talk page, or in a copyright forum/noticeboard, if there is such an avenue. I suspect any copyright issue is borderline, but it would be very useful to have guidance based upon specific examples from the article. Rupples (talk) 14:46, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I think you'd be okay to disclose the article here, without fear of canvassing, because this is a neutral environment. Canvassing is at its most inappropriate when you choose a venue that would favour one "side" over the other. Here you merely raise profile, and may attract devoted keepers, rampant deletionists, and anyone in between. Elemimele (talk) 12:56, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Elemimele for following up. Understand it's your reasoned opinion and one can never be definite about these things. I've put in a sub-heading on the article talk page here [10]. Why I'm asking is that I've used quotations in my own work, though not to such an extent and wondered where the "cut-off" lies. I've identified two three specific instances which may be problematic. I'll go and set them out there. Don't think it has any bearing on the AfD since they could easily be edited out - may well be gone from the article before you see them, if you decide to take a look. Rupples (talk) 17:39, 13 July 2023 (UTC) Update. Now set out. Rupples (talk) 19:10, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I clicked photos and videos during my visit to some historical and archaeological sites, and I recently uploaded few of those to Wikimedia commons. I have some queries related to procedure of uploading videos- 1. What are the video types that are supported in Wikipedia? 2. Recently when I wanted to upload a video, I had to convert it from.mp4 to .ogv using a online converter. But The file size increased almost four times. Do you know application(s) which will be more convenient to use? Thanks.CharlesWain (talk) 18:21, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, CharlesWain, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see C:Commons:Media help. ColinFine (talk) 19:00, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@CharlesWain, uploading videos to Commons is unfortunately quite a pain. As you've seen, you normally start with MP4, which you then have to convert because Commons folks had licensing ideological objections to the format back in 2014. But if your videos are more than a minute or two long, you start to run into the size limits of the free online converters.

As a silver lining, though, I wouldn't really worry about the file size increasing. Preserving the quality is more important, and Commons has plenty of storage capacity. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:41, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@CharlesWain: If you know how to use a command line, I would suggest ffmpeg for file conversion. It has a bit of a learning curve but it is by far the best format converter out there. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:44, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Sdkb, yeah, that's exactly the issue. I wouldn't worry about the size either.

Elli, I'll try.😊

That'll help. Thank you all.CharlesWain (talk) 20:33, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

What specific guidelines exist for "jumping" a draft? Someone knowingly rendered a day's efforts on my part useless by creating a second userspace draft and pushing it to mainspace first instead of collaboratively working on the original draft. Is there anything that protects editors from this sort of behavior? 〜 Festucalex • talk 19:57, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@Festucalex: it's not against policy, but it is not a particularly nice thing to do either. In this case, though, given that it is about a current event, you can't really expect other editors to wait until you are ready to publish your writing. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:18, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@Elli: The difference was by one minute (19:14 vs 19:15), because the event began with an announcement. There wasn't much "waiting for me" involved. Not to mention that others have contributed to the draft. I suppose I'll just have to drop the stick on this one and be frustrated at this very not-nice behavior for a day. 〜 Festucalex • talk 20:23, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Festulex!

If you merge the mainspace article with the draftspace, I believe that would be the best of both world. ✶Mitch199811✶ 20:19, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@Mitch199811: Not much use for that, since the content is entirely reduplicated. Nothing to merge. 〜 Festucalex • talk 20:24, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@Festucalex: Are you 100% sure that the other person "jumped" your draft? Did they clearly copy-and-paste your content into theirs and then publish their draft first? Is this a pattern with this particular user? If you're able to demonstrate as much via WP:DIFFS or other things, then perhaps you could seek assistance at WP:ANI; however, you're going to have to demonstrate that it's a serious behavior problem for administrators to take action and not think you're just complaining about sour grapes. Is it possible that someone else decided to create an article about the same subject at roughly the same time as you? If the subject is a "current event" that's suddenly receiving lots of media attention, then it's possible that several Wikipedians thought that it would make a good article and started working on drafts. I know some editors may feel differently, but it's not really a race to see who can create an article first and it matters not who does so as long as it turns out to be a proper article. Moreover, if someone beats you to the punch and creates an article first, there's nothing stopping you from still trying to improve that article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:36, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: They've admitted to seeing the original draft first and deciding to start another one. In any case, I've WP:DROPpedTHESTICK on this issue. I have no interest whatsoever in ANI or any such time-wasting drama. 〜 Festucalex • talk 22:43, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

User talk:ElijahPepe/Archives/1#Draft conflict looks to support Festulex's views based on his mention on the same sources. However, I might be interpreting it wrong and there might just be few sources on the subject. ✶Mitch199811✶ 22:43, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

How do we report editors who are behaving badly- frequently assuming bad faith, behaving disingenuously, trying to drive away new contributors, etc? I have proof if you'll just tell me where to send it. 2601:249:9301:FF80:A107:1D80:84AC:9A1B (talk) 01:52, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:AIV, Regards Ariconte (talk) 01:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

If you are referring to User talk:Fred Zepelin I would suggest that you consider whether escalation is the right move to make and whether it is at all possible to work out your concerns. Try to see things from different points of view. However, if you feel this matter needs other eyes, WP:ANI is the proper forum for user conduct issues. You must inform anyone whom you discuss there of the discussions existence, and be aware it is not a one way street- your actions will be examined as well. 331dot (talk) 01:58, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

AIV is for clear cases of disruption only. 331dot (talk) 01:58, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I should have suggested WP:RAA, Cheers, Ariconte (talk) 02:06, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you to both of you for your quick replies.

Out of curiosity, how would you work out your concerns with someone who has demonstrated thorough contempt not just for you, but for others? This is a genuine question- how could you trust them to collaborate with them?

I don't contribute all that often, so this isn't something I need to resolve for myself, but more that this kind of behavior damages Wikipedia and keeps many people from getting involved. And it is a problem. So what do you think, since you seem to be familiar with the exchange?

I'll leave it up to your opinion if you think I should pursue it, for the benefit of the project. 2601:249:9301:FF80:A107:1D80:84AC:9A1B (talk) 02:37, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Actually, the best place to report truly problematic editors is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Please be aware that you are expected to provide persuasive evidence, and that your own conduct will also come under scrutiny. So be careful. Cullen328 (talk) 02:44, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I was just on your Talk page, starting to write a request (Skip the Drama and Contact an Admin). Would you be willing to look over the pages? I have nothing to hide and will take full accountability for my part. 2601:249:9301:FF80:A107:1D80:84AC:9A1B (talk) 03:09, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Alright, so upon reading over WP:ANI and dealing with incivility, it says that 'if the person is not damaging the project or being uncivil or unkind to other editors' then walk away or request a dispute resolution. This person is being unkind and there's proof.

Thank you again for your help. 2601:249:9301:FF80:A107:1D80:84AC:9A1B (talk) 03:06, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I have the Nicolas Dauphas article on my watch list and noticed that every so often 207.229.177.118 will remove bits from the article. I don't know enough about the article's subject to say whether these edits are good or not, but I'm commenting here so maybe someone else can take a look at the edits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nicolas_Dauphas&action=history CoderThomasB (talk) 09:15, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

If I see that popup in the description of an edit, but not see any clues in my last edit why it says that, is there a log page for it? I am a little confused after this edit why I got the message. Govvy (talk) 09:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@Govvy: Check the spelling of the "source" name in the {{sfn}} templates you added for Bobby Buckle#cite_note-FOOTNOTESour199511-4. You're using "Sour" in the Sfn templates, but the author's name is given as "Soar" in the "Bibliography" section. So, you're telling the software to look for a source whose author is "Sour", but the source can't find it because you've also told the software that the source is written by someone named "Soar". -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Ugg, that so obvious now you point that out, don't know why I did that unless autocorrect kicked in without me noticing it! Cheers. Govvy (talk) 10:15, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

My drat was rejected for publishing, according to the admin who rejected it, he said the article does not have enough external sources. I need help and suggestion on what i can do. Thanks anyone

Draft:LVP Group Papisean (talk) 10:11, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@Papisean Your draft was declined, not rejected, which means it possibly could reach the point of being acceptable but it has a long way to go! You have provided no citations to show how the company is notable as defined by Wikipedia. You do this by providing sources of information that meet these key criteria. At present, you have "sources" which are just links to the top level domains of the various subsidiaries of the company itself, so none help demonstrate notability. Please also read WP:REFB to learn how to format the sources correctly. Incidentally, the AfC reviewers are not necessarily admins and Alpha3031 is not. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Papisean (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. That's not exactly what was said- the reviewer(who is not necessarily an admin) said that you have not demonstrated with significant coverage in independent reliable sources that this company meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a company and what it does. You need to summarize what others choose on their own to say is significant/important/influential about the company as they see it(not as the company sees it). Please read Your First Article.

I gather that you may be associated with this company, if so, there are certain disclosures you are required to make, please read conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 10:45, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

There's this article List of Algerian football players in foreign leagues, all the other list articles I have seen are structured as mere lists, but this one isn't, should I delete all the irrelevant info on it, or should I leave it as it is? I'm asking here, because most of the info is completely useless to the purpose of the article, and I fear that deleting a large chunk of it will trigger an anti-vandalism bot. Bastewasket (talk) 00:36, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@Bastewasket The usual approach would be first to mention your concerns on the article's Talk Page, maybe pinging a few of the major recent contributors, particularly those who added what you consider to be the "irrelevant" information. Hence you can seek WP:CONSENSUS on what to do. Note also the advice at WP:SILENCE and WP:ONUS. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:12, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

what do I do to search a random lengthy topic on search 2607:FEA8:4C25:A400:9823:BB15:ECDE:EB5C (talk) 02:59, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

??? lettherebedarklight晚安 03:03, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

If you mean the Random Article selected by Special:Random, then there is no way to tell it not to select stubs or other short articles. RudolfRed (talk) 03:07, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

...but you can have it search for only featured articles: Go to a random page in Category:Featured articles

save this link: https://randomincategory.toolforge.org/Featured_articles?site=en.wikipedia.org which will automatically redirect you to a featured article. happy reading! 💜  melecie  talk - 03:21, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

If you make an account then you can use Wikipedia:Enhanced Random Article to omit articles which are marked as stubs. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:28, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I'm trying to publish a page but I keep getting an error message that says ⧼No stashed content found, what do I need to do? Grosse23 (talk) 07:36, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You would need to tell us which page you are trying to publish and why. Also take a look at Help:Your first article. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:59, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Grosse23 You submitted your sandbox for review, but it has no encyclopedic content in it. 331dot (talk) 09:05, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

This was a mistake. How can I delete it? Grosse23 (talk) 09:23, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@Grosse23 It's your sandbox, so just put something else there while removing the AfC template. Technically you could add a tag asking for an admin to wipe the page entirely but that's hardly worth their effort. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I have this problem (or at least a similar problem), usually when I've kept an editing tab open for too long. Are you in source mode, or can you access source mode? If so, you can easily copy-and-paste your wikitext into a new tab, and publish it fine. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 12:16, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I found a article Mullakkadu , this article does not cite any single reference and there is lot of Promotional content is there. Various private school , hospital and college names are written. Shall I remove these unsourced information. WikiAnchor10 (talk) 03:36, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@WikiAnchor10, feel free to remove the unsourced information and try to find sources for as much of the information as possible. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 03:44, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@WikiAnchor10, Judging by the state of the article, you may remove those promotional content on that village article as it violates WP:NOTPROMO. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 03:45, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:BURDEN states that The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports [...] the contribution. [...] Any material lacking an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports [...] the material may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 12:17, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Ideally hoping to find a Wikipolicy that would cover this. Does one require a direct quote from artist X stating, "I was influenced by artist Y", or can one use an RS that states "artist X cited artist Y as an influence"? Thanks. Paulie302 (talk) 15:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Paulie302, and welcome to the Teahouse. Reliable secondary sources are always preferred to primary sources. So the answer is No: if an independent RS says it, there is no need to quote the subject themselves. ColinFine (talk) 15:52, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

If I have Redwarn or Twinkle, does that mean that I already have the rollback feature? or do I still have to request? PotassiumLover72 talk 13:00, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@PotassiumLover72: You don't have the rollback right, and your account is too new for an administrator to seriously consider a request for that right. Rollback is granted to editors who have shown through their activity that they can be trusted with it. Keep at it, be productive, be constructive, and wait until you're at least extended confirmed (30 days and 500 edits). ~Anachronist (talk) 13:22, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh okay. Thanks!

Keep in mind that I'll request for rollback on December 31, 2023 12:05 AM EST. PotassiumLover72 talk 13:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm joking. I meant when I am extended confirmed. PotassiumLover72 talk 16:12, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I was editing the 1991 NFL Season page so that it the NFL pages would in some fashion, be uniform with the MLB pages, with a separate section to denote all of the passings. I was getting ready to finish editing the page when I noticed without warning, the entire page had been reverted. I checked my messages for an explanation, and there was none there. So, I'm a little confused and I look forward to finding out why the page was reverted. Sportsfan1976 I'm only here because I'm not currently somewhere else. (talk) 14:51, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Sportsfan1976. Your edits were reverted by another editor named Magnolia677 for the reason given here. You can either ask for further clarification by posting a message at Talk:1991 NFL season or at User talk:Magnolia677. If post on the article's talk page, you probably should WP:PING Magnolia677 so that they are aware of your post. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:58, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@Sportsfan1976: You'll probably be fine if you just add a source for the edits, e.g. Pro-Football-Reference.com links. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:15, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Not sure where the right place to ask this would be, but could an administrator please delete the redirect Jenise Spiteri so that I could move my draft of her there? Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:04, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@BeanieFan11: I moved it for you. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I have several drafts pending, there are a handful of users who will make small edits or tweaks (it seems like this happens one article at a time?). How/where/why do these drafts circulate? Is there a way for me to access the other drafts that are circulating? What does it mean when people are only making one or two small edits (usually to do with citation) and then not doing anything else? Chainsawpunk (talk) 14:53, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

There are some 4000 drafts in the review state, and there are too few reviewers. I note that your draft, Draft:Amy Brener, has not been submitted for review. If you are waiting for a review, you haven't pressed the button to request one. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:11, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Not waiting on review on that one yet.. still tweaking! The other three I am working on I am waiting for review. Chainsawpunk (talk) 15:27, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Chainsawpunk. Drafts don't circulate per se, but that could be a variety of reasons why someone might stumble upon a draft. Other users (at least more experienced ones) tend to leave a draft alone as a courtesy to its creator unless there's some serious problem that speedy needs attention, or there's some minor cleanup that can be done that doesn't change the draft in a major way. Major changes in formatting or content aren't using made unless the draft creator has specifically asked others to do so. You can find other drafts by looking at Category:Wikipedia drafts. -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:14, 14 July 2023 (UTC)r

My view of draft etiquette differs from Marchjuly's. I often edit drafts. I assume that the creator of a draft has put in in draft space because they welcome contributions from other editors; otherwise they could keep it as a user page. Advert.: I will welcome any improvement to Draft:Pentangle (puzzle supplier), particularly addition of a source that will help with notability. Maproom (talk) 17:23, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@Maproom I've just added a good reference for you, plus I found another one on Newspapers.com that you might like to look at. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:05, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes This is great! Many thanks. There's plenty of usable material in both articles. Maproom (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Wings Club Hi my boss edited The Wings Club page last night from his account. I edited our page after him from my account and saw all his edits. Last night, before I closed the page,I saw his edits and mine. Today, all the edits we made are gone. What went wrong or we did we do to loose all our edits??? HELP! We both spent alot of time editing and are so disappointed and frustrated. Looking forward to hearing from you.Thank you in advance. Marie Rosa, Director of Marketing for The Wings Club. MarieCRosa (talk) 15:33, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

MarieCRosa, you appear to have added copyright violations to the article. Those are not allowed and will be promptly removed from the page history.

Remember WP:COI and WP:PAID. You are advised to not edit the article directly and instead use the edit request system. Since you are being paid to edit the article (it is part of your job), you must declare a conflict of interest on your user page or be blocked from editing. Instructions are at the link. Wings Club is not your page, it is the Wikipedia article about you. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 15:38, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

One thing you can do right now, to improve the article, is to add a freely-licensed image. Take a picture of Wings Club (probably the entrance) and insert it into the article. Note - any image you add has to be freely licensed, so professional photography would not be allowed. By uploading an image, you release your copyright on the image. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 15:47, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

My apologies as I was not familiar with Wikipedia polices - or the "edit request" system. Thank you all for your quick responses, I appreciate your help and will rememdy the situation. You've all been very helpful! I will relay the info to my boss. Thanks so much! MarieCRosa (talk) 16:19, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Please also note that Wings Club is absolutely NOT your page it is Wikipedia's article about your club and shouldbe based entirely on what reliable independent sources say about it. Theroadislong (talk) 16:28, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Understood - thank you. MarieCRosa (talk) 16:52, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Reminder - before any proposed changes posted at the Talk page of the article you and your boss must declare PAID on your User pages. David notMD (talk) 22:02, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Greetings, All. I was reading through the page on actress Bek Nelson, and I noticed that "Note 4" has the wrong actor mentioned. (This is under the "Television 1957-1966" section of the article: end of the first paragraph, "[fn 4]".) The Note reads "The actual actor playing the villain was Lee Van Cleef." While it's true that Van Cleef was in that episode of the Lawman_(TV_series), the actor described in the article ("...tall, with strange eyes, and an unusual face...") is Jack Elam, who played the main villain Flynn Hawk. (Van Cleef's face does not match the above description, but Elam's does to a T.) I've tried to edit that note to reflect that Elam was the main villain, but when I click on the "Edit" link for the Notes, there is nothing to edit; there are only 2 lines which read:

"==Notes=="

"{{reflist|group=fn} }"

(I had to stick an extra space between the last set of brackets in order to get this to show. Otherwise that line shows blank right here. On the page in question the brackets are correct.)

I've never encountered this sort of thing when trying to make an edit to a Wikipedia article and was wondering if anyone could help me out with editing "Notes" when there are no notes showing in the editing field.

Thanks, 68.131.51.40 (talk) 17:41, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Dino. P. S. Sorry for not being properly logged in. I believe I have created a Wikipedia account, but I'm having trouble finding where I put my login info.

The detail of the note is in the text. The list of notes is just the grouping of all the notes in the article. You need to look at the section Bek Nelson#Television 1957-1966 which is where you will find the bit you want to edit. Nthep (talk) 17:46, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, 68. Nthep has answered about where to find the note to edit it. If you want to insert a template call such as the one above in text on a talk page, it's best to enclose it within <nowiki> and </nowiki>. So

<nowiki>{{reflist|group=fn}}</nowiki>

displays as

{{reflist|group=fn}} ColinFine (talk) 20:32, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you both for the help (with the editing and how to insert a template call on a talk page)! I made the edit, and hopefully improved that article.

Dino. 68.131.51.40 (talk) 05:49, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey people, I am fairly new to this. I have recently submitted my first page of my fav musical theatre artist.. and its been declined because of reliable sources and/or formatting of references.. I am confused as to what sources are not Reliable.. most are from direct websites that the person is involved with, industry pages, news articles, the BBC and the relevant show websites.... Can you help me figure this one out please. which references are not reliable? Granted, I did think that the YouTube connection I have on there might have been a little unreliable, however that is from his YouTube directly so again im not sure. I have given multiple references in some cases to double down on the information. Can you point out specifically which references are not reliable and/or explain what I am doing wrong when referencing? or at least point me in the direction to be able to get this approved. this is my draft page...Draft:Joseph Connor (actor) Moongirl12345678 (talk) 09:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Please read the comments left on your draft. It specifies which sources are not reliable, and the issues with the formatting of the citations. JML1148 ^{(talk | contribs)} 10:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

"direct websites that the person is involved with" are not particularly helpful as sources – we rely mostly on secondary sources, with the guidelines for primary sources being laid out at WP:PRIMARY. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 10:45, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Moongirl12345678 Moreover, and importantly, you have used some photographs which you have asserted on Wikimedia Commons are your own work but are clearly screenshots taken from elsewhere. This is in contravention of the copyright policy and you must immediately ask for these all to be deleted. With very few exceptions, Commons only allows the upload of pictures you have taken with your own camera or which are clearly licensed in their original source as CC BY. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:01, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I have self-published a novel and I would like to have a place where I can write just be informative and not have to do all the marketing and advertising just so people can see what I wrote. To me that place is obviously wikipedia.

Unfortunately, because it's brand new, there's no sources except me, the author.

Is there a way I can go about setting up and attaining verifiable information so when creating the page I have more than just "I'm the person that wrote the book" as citations? There is a goodreads page with a review, as well as an amazon page with all of the information about it, but both of them, I think, are not good to use as sources. JackClifton86 (talk) 21:53, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Read WP:NBOOK for guidance on how a book qualifies for an encyclopedia article. If there are no independent sources, then it will not qualify. RudolfRed (talk) 22:04, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@JackClifton86:. Wikipedia is not a publicity channel and must never be used that way. Attempting to do so always leads to a bad end. Wikipedia published articles about notable subjects. In other words, your book cannot be "new" or "up and coming", it must have already arrived. That is, it would need reviews in reliable sources by reliable reviewers, not user-generated content such as Amazon reviews that anyone can write; see WP:Golden rule for guidance about the kind of sources required. Wikipedia can publish an article about your book only after it has become notable on its own, without Wikipedia's help. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:17, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I shall leave it for now. Have a great day :) JackClifton86 (talk) 23:06, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I would add that it is rare for a self-published book to meet that notability criteria(though not impossible) as anyone can self-publish a book. For there to be any chance of doing so, though, there must be independent reviews of the book by professional reviewers(as noted by Anachronist). 331dot (talk) 08:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

JackClifton86 try Blogger (service), Weebly, WordPress.com, and/or Wix.com to make a website/blog to promote your book/books.

I've no idea which one is the best to create a blog/website...

...However I have 6 or 7 private Blogger blogs (all of which started in order, but are now a mess, as I don't bother to check which one is currently open when I save something), which I use to save information, which mainly consist of things like lists of films, TV shows, places, filming locations, actors, directors, rappers, singers, companies, websites etc, so I can just copy and paste them as a comment on social media posts/videos.

It works practically the same as Wikipedia, so I can copy and paste articles I've started to write on Wikipedia there if I want to, then copy and paste them back into Wikipedia when I want to carry on. So it's excellent imo.

One day, in the very distant future, when I've finished adding/updating 17,000+ specific films/TV shows/web-series/shorts/music videos on IMDb (and some Wikipedia articles), I will be making some of those Blogs public. Who knows how long it will take to check the 17,000+ which are already there, plus the 1,000s which are missing, as some can take less than hour, and some can take a week or more. But when/if I do eventually finish, that's when the blogs will be getting published.

However you could just start a public blog right now. Danstarr69 (talk) 18:36, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to write this out! I have copied and pasted it so I can take your advice properly, I think you're right, I should start a public blog.

Thank you again! 122.61.168.15 (talk) 19:22, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

JackClifton86 one slightly annoying thing with Blogger that I only noticed a year or two ago, is that articles are automatically set to paragraph, so every sentence has a gap between them.

However this can be fixed by changing Paragraph to Normal so that there won't be any gaps, unless you make the gap between paragraphs yourself. Danstarr69 (talk) 19:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I think if i do remember well, talking about Bella Hadid real middle name isnt Khairiah but Khair. She told herself on her instagram's biography and i search a little bit, Daily Sabbah is a turkish pro government magazine and i think isnt a good source... i found this website explain that yes she name after her grandmother name who was called Khairiah but Bella Hadid middle name is Khair like Gigi Hadid's daughter is Khai... here, other website like Grazia, Glamour or Elle... I think we should change the name because it isnt true. What y'all think? Datsofelija (talk) 12:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Datsofelija. I think you should start a discussion about this at Talk:Bella Hadid and explain why you feel a change is needed. The best place to discuss or propose changes be made to a particular article is generally the talk page of the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:38, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi thank you @Marchjuly. :) Datsofelija (talk) 12:39, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Adding on to this, you're correct on the matter that Daily Sabah is generally considered as an unreliable source. See this and WP:RSPSOURCES for more. NotAGenious (talk) 12:46, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Datsofelija her sort-of former brother-in-law, who grew up less than 2 miles from me, also had false information on his article for 10+ years until I corrected it. However as soon as false information is added to Wikipedia, it spreads like wildfire. Danstarr69 (talk) 18:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@NotAGenious Thank you! :)

@Danstarr69 Wow so thank you too and yes i needed to talk here for putting back the things... for me its very important to keep wikipedia (french or english) as clear as possible! :) Datsofelija (talk) 20:09, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Can Copyright Encyclopedia be used as a source?

Copyright Encyclopedia

I was searching Google for sources of another name for an old songwriter/singer/musician, who like most old artists from 50+ years ago, he's credited by multiple slightly different names, mainly by swapping their Given name with a Middle name, and I came across a link for the Copyright Encyclopedia.

It's the only decent link I can find for one variation of his full name (minus the Junior (suffix)). Danstarr69 (talk) 17:57, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Danstarr69 I find it difficult to answer your question because there's nothing on that site to explain how its content is put together, and you did not link to any specific entry. You might be best asking at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard for their opinion.

TBH: it's probably not a massive issue to simply say something David Frederick Alan Jone wrote under various arrangements of his birth name including FAD, DAF and AFD.{citation1,2,3} One source suggests he may also have published under the name of AFJ {citation4} You obviously shouldn't cite a homemade blog or database, but that encyclopaedia does have an air of credibility and detail about it, and an error would hardly be that significant. Maybe others here have a different view. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:30, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I've successfully added Lt General Paul Stein and Dennis Hill to the list of notable alumni. I have been unsuccessful in adding Jim Murray. Jim is a grammy award winning gospel singer, he sang backup to Elvis and was a friend of his. Jim is well known and anyone who wishes to check his bonafides can simply Google him.

Someone please help!

HeritageGolf (talk) 20:40, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Notable alumni sections are for listing people with Wikipedia articles. The persons you added don't seem to, or at least you didn't link them if they did. 331dot (talk) 20:46, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@HeritageGolf I will add to that by suggesting that if an article does not yet exist about that person, and you have good sources that suggest he is likely to, then your edit must include citations to support what you said. You could WP:REDLINK it so that, when the time comes that an article is created about that ostensibly notable person, it will then automatically turn into a functioning link to their page. But we always remove uncited links to 'notable alumni'. Prove he's notable, and I expect Cullen328 won't remove it a second time! Nick Moyes (talk) 20:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I added Stein and Hill to that list because both have Wikipedia artcles. Jim Murray may be notable, especially because he won several Grammys, but I am not sure. I explained this to HeritageGolf a few days ago. Cullen328 (talk) 21:01, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

They all basically say the same thing, I'm just wondering which is best out of

• GovInfo
• Justia
• FindLaw
• Casetext

Danstarr69 (talk) 20:16, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Danstarr69 Depending what it is you want to cite - and assuming it's referring to a specific American law, I would envisage that any government website would be the best primary source to use. But maybe other sites give better interpretations of those laws, so you might want to use those as secondary sources if it's an interpretation that you want to cite, and if you deem them reliable. But what would I know? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:40, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Nick Moyes it was just to use another source to confirm a name.

However now I've looked at them a bit closer, they are for 3 or 4 different cases, which all seem to be about tax and music rights so...

I've decided to simply add a brief sentence about those court cases, and use them all. If someone wants to expand on those cases by going into specifics, and maybe add a "court cases" header later down the line, they'll have all the information they need. Danstarr69 (talk) 21:08, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Danstarr69 That makes sense, providing you aren't unnecessarily repeating citations to the same thing. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:10, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Theoder innocent okechukwu page 2A02:3032:20A:A9F2:8985:D79D:A85:9B0B (talk) 21:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Can you link to it? 331dot (talk) 22:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

You're going to have to be more specific. You have not asked a question, you have not linked anything. If you want to publish an article go to WP:AFC and follow the instructions. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:01, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I assume they are referring to Draft:Theoder Innocent Okechukwu which was declined at 21.50 - 2 minutes before their post here - Arjayay (talk) 22:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Does anybody think that it would be OK to switch a page name from hub oil explosion to 1999 Calgary Oil Hub Explosion? Joshbanana (talk) 22:18, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Joshbanana, you should discuss this on the article's talk page. Maproom (talk) 22:46, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Joshbanana: If there is another "Hub Oil" explosion, then disambiguating it as "1999 Calgary Hub Oil explosion" would be appropriate, but otherwise it isn't necessary to add the "1999 Calgary" if there is only one such event. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I have just finished writing my drafted article on Wikipedia. Please let me know to confirm how to make it publicly live on Google search results as I appreciate your expert advice.

Yours faithfully

Shivay Chopra Shivaay02 (talk) 21:50, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Shivaay02: you don't. A draft isn't indexed by Google, and an article newly published also isn't indexed by Google until some lengthy amount of time lapses. This is Wikipedia, and we have no control over how Google does its thing.

Also you wrote the draft, presumably about yourself, on your user page. User pages aren't indexed by Google either, and your user page has been deleted for inappropriate use. See Wikipedia:User pages for guidance about what you use your user page for. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:58, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Shivaay02 On your Talk you state your attempt was about an actor and not yourself. See WP:YFA for how to create a draft. See WP:BACKWARD for advice on having valid references for all facts. After you submit a draft it gets reviewed. Because of a large amount of drafts waiting for reviewers, this could take months. If your draft is accepted, it can be up to 90 days before it can be seen via a Google search. David notMD (talk) 01:59, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, I noticed that site and quickly joined in with welcome. I’m very sure that anyone can edit Wikipedia. I also know that I can click on current events to see what is just happening in the news. However, can you please give me more information on what Wikipedia is all about for sure? I just wanted a complex explanation on how this site works. There is so much to view in terms of content. Another question is can you describe what is wiki software and why it can keep the edits forever after publishing it with words? Much obliged to this part. ~WikiCoverings11111 (message) 08:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello @WikiCoverings11111, and welcome to Wikipedia!

There are some articles and essays below that you might find helpful, such as WP:WIKIPEDIA, WP:PURPOSE, WP:PILLARS and WP:EDITING. For information about Wiki softwares, you can take a look at the article. Other than that, if you have more specific questions in mind, please ask.

Happy editing! NotAGenious (talk) 08:39, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@NotAGenious I just need a reason of why Wikipedia keeps a keeps an Akashic record? It means that all edits and contributions are kept by wiki software forever. ~WikiCoverings11111 (message) 08:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@WikiCoverings11111 Are you referring to the fact that all edits (even if cancelled or reverted) are kept in the edit history? NotAGenious (talk) 08:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@NotAGenious Yes it is. I know that edits are kept permanently after editing. How though? ~WikiCoverings11111 (message) 08:54, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I haven't gone into much depth on the technical side of Wikipedia on how the edits are stored on the database, but they are kept because of Wikipedia's licensing policy, which essentially means that "attribution [must] be given to all users involved in creating and altering the content of a page" as stated in WP:COPYWITHIN. If you want a more technical explanation, I would suggest visiting WP:TECHPUMP. NotAGenious (talk) 09:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Every revision (version) of a page is saved separately in the database. Having older revisions is essential for reverting, which is essential if you allow anyone to edit; if someone decides to remove all the content from a page (which they often do) you can just restore a previous version. In reality nothing ever gets deleted this way, which means the content can't be permanently trashed by vandals. Being able to track and compare revisions, and see what was added or removed when, has many other advantages. The specific software used is MediaWiki. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 09:12, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Not to mention Help:Your first article (currently on the verge of a retool), just in case. Greetings, newcomer! --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 10:22, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Slgrandson Alright, I would read articles on Wikipedia to calm from pressure and take a break until further notice. ~WikiCoverings11111 (message) 12:14, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

There is also a video on the topic, which you can find here. NotAGenious (talk) 08:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

UPDATE: User now blocked as a sockpuppet (as many suspected) Nick Moyes (talk) 23:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Right. Thank you! NotAGenious (talk) 07:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Can someone please tell me how may I add the Eureka Stockade (disambiguation) link to the top of the Eureka Stockade (fortification) article? Robbiegibbons (talk) 05:12, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Robbiegibbons,

You can use the {{other uses}}-template on the top of the page. Happy editing! NotAGenious (talk) 09:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I don’t edit that much on Wikipedia so just wanted to clear up something. I was going over some articles I edited before in this case Warren Farm and noticed some external links added (not by me). I just wanted to check if it allowed to have external links to website linked as one of them is a local campaign website against the development so wanted to check for neutrality purposes if it is fine. Encyloedit (talk) 23:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I removed the two links that were just added today. It isn't appropriate to promote campaigns or petitions. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Encyloedit (talk) 08:32, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Anachronist Thanks. One other thing I noticed was that one of the sources added (by other users) was a YouTube video. Is that acceptable or should I remove that content? Encyloedit (talk) 10:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Encyloedit. YouTube videos can be linked to and cited as sources per WP:YOUTUBE as long as they (1) qualify as a reliable source, (2) are used in proper context and (3) are not considered to be copyright violating content. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:57, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

How do you log in? 41.116.54.103 (talk) 11:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Please take a look at H:LOGIN. NotAGenious (talk) 11:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

My recent article submission to article for creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted.

Here is the link of article:- Draft:Devis Paganelli What should I do to get it publish.

Am Broly (talk) 11:10, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Am Broly,

Have you read the reasons provided to you on the draft? NotAGenious (talk) 11:23, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I am editing the Clay Kids page, and I don't know if the sources are reliable. I use some references to YouTube and Twitter but I don't know if I should be referencing news articles instead. I'm also editing it with a MAC user and they seem to have a lot of information, so I follow based on that too. DaClayCrew (talk) 11:41, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @DaClayCrew,

I don't have the time to go through your edit as of right now, but I might do so later. For now, you can for example take a look at WP:VIDEOLINK and WP:RSPTWITTER for information on using YouTube and Twitter as sources. NotAGenious (talk) 11:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much, I'll read this. DaClayCrew (talk) 12:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to know whether is it possible for me to request for a self block on Wikipedia for a definite period of time that is 4 months as I am currently trying to focus on something more important in personal life and I have tried limiting Wikipedia but I keep getting back to it again. Is there a way to request for global account block for certain period of time and get unblocked back again later? Any help is appreciated. Thank you. 456legend(talk) 05:18, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, 456legend! I very much doubt a steward would be willing to globally (i.e all Wikimedia sites) block your account as a self-requested action, but you may be able to ask one of the administrators in the category Wikipedia administrators willing to consider placing self-requested blocks for a block specific to the English Wikipedia. —Sirdog (talk) 05:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Or just use an enforced wikibreak, which will prevent logging in. See WP:BREAKENF Meters (talk) 06:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@456legend I've put an offer to block you on en-wiki on your talk page. If you really want to go ahead, please reply to me there and I will assist you. I can't help with other Wikipedia projects, though. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:28, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you all for your input.456legend(talk) 09:32, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:07, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

It's been a while since I've edited. Please remind me how to "sign/include my user name." Thanks NotHoratio (talk) 17:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @NotHoratio,

Use four tildes to get your signature on talk pages, like this: ~~~~. You can also see WP:SIG for more information. NotAGenious (talk) 17:31, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@NotHoratio: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1194. If you have the new Reply tool enabled, your signature will be automatically added to the end of your comments when you post them. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:05, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Should I start a draft about the Flat Fire? https://www.kdrv.com/news/top-stories/roughly-120-acre-flat-fire-burning-in-curry-county-near-agness/article_e0dff204-2385-11ee-a8b3-7f25df9fad9a.html https://kobi5.com/news/flat-fire-burning-at-about-120-acres-in-curry-county-211783/ https://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/news/2023/07/15/large-wildfire-reported-near-oak-flat-in-southwest-oregon-agness/70417528007/ 206.204.236.108 (talk) 17:23, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

It seems notable enough to me, and reliable sources can be found online. Have you taken a look at WP:FIRST, do you think it meets the criteria? NotAGenious (talk) 18:05, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

In the case of creating an article about a current event, I would also suggest taking a look at WP:NOTNEWS. NotAGenious (talk) 18:08, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

You can find guidance at about the notability of a widfire at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wildfire/Guidelines. If it is 2000 to 3000 acres, it may be notable. Cullen328 (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

It meets 1 and 4. It currently doesn't, and hopefully won't, meet 2 and 3. Is meeting two of the conditions enough? 206.204.236.108 (talk) 20:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

That is not a formal guideline but rather informal guidance by a WikiProject. This fire meets that guidance. Cullen328 (talk) 20:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello all,

I'm currently in the process of possibly creating a disambiguation page for Annalynn, as both Annallynn (video game) and Annalynn (band) have the same name. I have read all the policies, and I'm trying to figure out which of them is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, if neither. Could someone help me on this? According to the page views, the video game article has more views, so would it be more beneficial to use the For-template, or should I be bold and create the draft? Thanks in advance. NotAGenious (talk) 17:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, NotAGenious. If there are only two topics that need to be disambiguated, then there is no need for a separate disambiguation page. You can resolve the matter with hatnotes. You can use Template:For to accomplish that. Cullen328 (talk) 18:48, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I'm confused, because if neither of the articles are primary topics, then WP:NOPRIMARY states the following:

If there are multiple topics (even just two) to which a given title might refer, but there is no primary topic (per the criteria at § Is there a primary topic?), then the base name should lead the reader to the disambiguation page for the term.

I questioned the need for a disambiguation page too, but is the policy a bit unclear? NotAGenious (talk) 19:13, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

It means that instead of a disambiguation page being Dubuque (disambiguation) (where Dubuque is the town in Iowa, and therefore needs a parentheses denoter), it is simply Bee Branch. ✶Mitch199811✶ 19:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

NotAGenious, all signs point to the video game being the primary topic, but I could be wrong. Cullen328 (talk) 20:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I’m having quite a bit of trouble finding references and sources for a page I’m trying to create. Can anyone help me?

Click here for the page. Joshbanana (talk) 22:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Joshbanana: If you have "trouble finding references and sources for a page" then you certainly should not have started the page. A Wikipedia article must summarize what reliable sources say about the subject. No sources → no article. --CiaPan (talk) 22:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

If you were going to be irrelevant, why did you reply?

Also, keep in mind I’ve only been editing for about six months and that I don’t know everything about Wikipedia and the requirements.

I’m also 14 and I’m trying my hardest, so I’d appreciate if you would show some understanding. Joshbanana (talk) 22:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Joshbanana: Actually, CiaPan is not "being irrelevant". He's telling you basic things about Wikipedia editing. Your draft, in its current state, just won't do, regardless if you were 14 or 140. Wikipedia has guidelines everyone has to follow. If you want to contribute positively to Wikipedia (and believe me, that's a very nice and enjoyable thing to do), you have to know these basic things. Check the links he included. 〜 Festucalex • talk 05:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Joshbanana!

All of your citations appear to violate wp:primary. I did find some sources going to the news section of google, however, some of them might not be reliable. Also, a lot of the article seems to be puffery. For example, the entire final section is a generic, unsourced paragraph that is praising him. I could attach that to pretty much any other influencer. Citation 4 should be used in the paragraph, not the heading, and is also a primary source. The article is borderline at the point where I would start-over, or even, delete the draft.

Also, as I doubt that you are Benji Krol, you need to either get his permission for the images, or delete them. ✶Mitch199811✶ 22:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, I agree that the page should probably be restarted. Thank you for your feedback. I do have one question when I’m finished the revamped version, would you mind having a look at it? Joshbanana (talk) 22:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I will, please either ask me on my user talk page or ping me on the draft's talk page when you are finished. ✶Mitch199811✶ 22:58, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Mitch199811: I understand your doubt - and I keep a marginal bit of it, too - anyway I rather suppose the subject and the author are the same person. In other words, IMHO Joshbanana builds WP:AUTO. --CiaPan (talk) 23:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Joshbanana: If you would read WP:BACKWARD and WP:Golden Rule, you would get good guidance. Basically you need to find your sources first and then write your article based on what your sources say. And, your sources should be reliable, independent of the subject, and provide significant coverage of the subject. If you cannot find such sources, then CiaPan's reply to you is correct; you shouldn't have started the draft. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Joshbanana, what is currently on the draft as of this revision reads like advertising copy. It is very, very far removed from encyclopedic tone and is distinctly not WP:NEUTRAL. Even if reliable sources existed to support this prose, the entire draft would have to be completely rewritten before it could become an article. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:33, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Drafts about this person have been Declined ten times since first attempt in Nov 2022. Joshbanana has deleted the Declined notices. At no point have the drafts been referenced with independent refs. David notMD (talk) 02:13, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm wondering if https://www.encyclopedia.com/ is a notable and reliable source for article building. I want to create a new article for WP about composer Vincent Plush. This page at encyclopedia.com republishes an article about him from Baker’s Biographical Dictionary of Musicians. If I were to cite encyclopedia.com for the WP article, how would I also cite Baker’s Biographical Dictionary of Musicians from which is it sourced, as it is not itself published online? Walton22 (talk) 22:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Walton22: Other encyclopedias are considered WP:TERTIARY sources. You can use it, but secondary sources are preferable. I would cite Baker's instead. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:21, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Anachronist, thank you very much for quick reply. How would I directly cite Baker's without a hard copy in my hand, and given it is not published online? All I have is a secondary citation of it by encyclopedia.com Walton22 (talk) 22:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I would probably just use Encyclopedia.com then unless you can find a better source that agrees with it. ✶Mitch199811✶ 23:15, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Walton22, would one of these fit the bill? -- Hoary (talk) 23:17, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hoary, thanks very much for finding that. I should be able to source that way. Walton22 (talk) 23:23, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Is it okay to link to court decisions in a footnote, or must they be relegated to a separate reference heading? Court decisions are primary sources, but more authoritative and useful than a secondary source. I have linked to a recent Ninth Circuit court decision in the text of Rosemont Copper. But I have also used newspaper articles that refer to the court decision. Detrital (talk) 01:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I am working on Draft:Greg J. Marchand. I have discussed it with other reviewers like @Herpetogenesis:, who declined it but gave me some helpful feedback. He says that the draft "looks promising" and provided critical but overall positive comments. I have fully declared everything on my user page and the draft talk page.

What is the best way to continue improving this draft so that it would be ready for AfC or a review again? Do @Cullen328: and other users have suggestions on how I might be able to move forward? Thank you! Danthemedguy22 (talk) 21:47, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Danthemedguy22, there is a long and sordid history of unethical attempts to create an article about this person going back for years. The most recent discussion was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gregory Marchand about six months ago, and support for deletion was unanimous. I recommend that you abandon this effort. Cullen328 (talk) 22:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Danthemedguy22: I agree with Cullen. Apparently Greg Marchand refuses to accept that Wikipedia isn't a publicity medium, and must never be used that way. It seems he was paying shady undisclosed paid editors, and now he's paying an honest disclosed editor. The point is, he's paying for publicity on Wikipedia. I am skeptical that your efforts to draft an article would be accepted given the history. Maybe in a year. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

If you are honest about this, remove all refs to Marchand's sci journal co-authored articles and see if there are sufficient reliable source references ABOUT him. David notMD (talk) 22:28, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Thank you for your response to my Teahouse question.

I do not know who did all the work before me. I checked some random pages such as Kobi Arad, Cardano (cryptocurrency platform) and many others that were subjects of very intense Wikipedia discussions, and they have had long histories of repeated deletions due to unethical editing. They finally made it back up onto Wikipedia after all necessary protocols and declaration requirements were followed.

I have stated before that I would like a completely clean, new start. The most recent deletion actually happened due to an off-wiki encounter, which the community strongly opposed. Therefore, I suggest that we need have another objective, neutral review. Is there any possible way forward? Danthemedguy22 (talk) 22:48, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Danthemedguy22: If you must move forward with it, do so and submit it for review. Take David notMD's advice above, take the advice in WP:Golden Rule and WP:BACKWARD to heart, and start over. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:06, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

The previous versions of Greg J. Marchand were horribly written self-promotional pieces. These simply did not belong on Wikipedia, and the salting was done since we were all fed up with repeated unethical attempts. But to be fair, Danthemedguy22 does have a point here. It's not unreasonable to ask for a fresh start if we blow it up and start all over again (WP:TNT). The January 2023 AfD was nominated by Doc James exactly when the community asked him to resign since he deleted Marchand due to an off-wiki personal vendetta, after the article was on Wikipedia for nearly two full years from around 2021-2022. Also I do think that an article about Marchand could likely be useful for readers browsing through Wikipedia articles about laparoscopy, salpingectomy, and neonatology. Basic GNG and NBIO criteria seem to be met, as he's clearly someone who had made a notable impact in a few medical science subspecialties. There are over 50 PubMed hits, which would be quite an achievement at least in my field, which is evolutionary/taxonomic biology. There are also dozens of independent third-party media mentions. I believe it's reasonable to seriously reconsider this draft if it is properly rewritten. HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ (talk) 23:21, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

User:Danthemedguy22, the important question is not about “improving”, but deciding whether to topic meets the threshold for inclusion. Follow the advice at WP:THREE. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:31, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

"Articles" list included four conference presentations of abstracts, i.e., not peer-reviewed journal articles, so I deleted those. Also, if he is 'known' for laproscopic surgery, I recommend cuting all the neonatology stuff. David notMD (talk) 02:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

title explains all SwashbucklingSalamander (talk) 00:47, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, you may want to read WP:YFA. However, I would strongly recommend you get more experience working on existing articles before creating your own. When you feel confident, you can use the Article Wizard to assist in the creation of your article. JML1148 ^{(talk | contribs)} 00:54, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Swash subsequently indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 02:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I am writing today because I was researching into historical clowns who were specifically black people. This was surprisingly much harder than I thought it would be, with only 2 named individuals popping up and majority of the articles being unrelated to them and instead focusing on blackface and the social effects it has had. While blackface is definitely an important thing to remember and discuss, it has directly blocked individuals looking to discover historical black clowns, and may even be continuing to skew modern perceptions of clowning as a occupation. This may be directly harming modern day performers, and so I would like to create some articles or at least interlink articles that are relevant to each other. What little information I discovered was very interesting, but with no easily found relation to one and another making finding related or relevant information incredibly frustrating.

First and foremost: There does currently exist a wikipedia article for Rafael Padilla (aka Chocolat), who was a French clown during the late 1800s to early 1900s. However, it does not link to any main clowning articles nor even a specific "famous black clowns" category page. He was a very fascinating man, but is not even listed on the "List of Clowns" page the main clown page links to.

Further, there does not exist an article for the first black clown in Ringlings Circus, Reggie Montgomery, who died as recent as 2002 and was even an actor in several films and tv shows such as: Matlock, Law and Order, and even a Malcolm X movie. This man was historically very important in western clowning, and deserves official recognition for such. There is almost no recorded images I can find easily of this man, and majority of the articles appear to be related to his death in 2002. There is also the notable mention of the Indianapolis Clowns, a baseball team from the 1930s to the 1960s who were renown for playing baseball with gags such as oversized gloves or even pantomiming a game without a baseball or bat. While unpainted, they were unmistakably taking part in clowning as an art form, and deserve recognition and notability for such. It is also notable they were the first baseball team to include a woman, which also means they may be the first record of a famous black clownette.

There is also no categorical organization of non-white nor non-western clowning in relation to the general wester idea of clowns, despite there being articles such as on Heyoka from the Sioux. Though they may not be inherently related to one and another, clowning is even noted on the clown wikipedia page to have been around for at least thousands of years citing possibility to have originated in Egypt. The fact that non-western examples such as the Heyoka are completely isolated from the page, yet black face is directly up and front, appears to pushes a unsavory perception and further pushes non-white actors out of peoples perceptions of clowning.

Though it may not come off as important as some other educational articles, I am very passionate about this. There is a great disservice for Reggie Montgomery, who at the very least deserves a wiki page rather than just an IMDB page. There is also a distinct lack of recognition and accessibility for information on non-white clowns, which ends up creating a untrue perception of clownings history. Black clowns deserve to be recognized and represented appropriately, as well as all other forms of non-white clowning deserves to at least be acknowledged in the same genre to understand sociologically how we have developed this art form yet have had unique cultural distinctions over the years.

Please advise me however I can to at least get a basic article started so others may find what little information I have found, and so others may even take further strides in discovering historical people and maybe even representation for those who are interested in the art and occupation. Thank you for your time and consideration in this, this is my first time ever considering creating or editing wikipedia pages so I appreciate any assistance in the matter. ClownTownMayor (talk) 02:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

ClownTownMayor, you seem to think that this is a notable subject. But being a notable subject (as thinking people normally understand notability) and being a notable subject (as English-language-Wikipedia understands notability) are two different things. When contemplating the creation of a new draft or article, you have to assess the latter. So here (in this discussion thread) please (i) say what would be the subject of the draft/article you have in mind, and (ii) specify the three best reliable sources that you have found for this subject. -- Hoary (talk) 03:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@ClownTownMayor: It might be helpful to create a category like Category:African-American clowns and then go through List of clowns and add appropriate ones to the category. One in the list, Skeeter Reece, isn't explicitly identified as African-American in the article even though they have another African-American category. It is possible that there are other articles like that. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

This overnight, I was planning to do an AFC page on one Stephanie Calmenson, who has written dozens of children's books since 1982. (Her name ended up in the bibliography for Doug Cushman I set up last night [if only to de-orphan two of the Holiday Mice books he illustrated for Bethany Roberts]; I happened to own one of her titles, Hopscotch, the Tiny Bunny [1991], back in my homeland of Dominica.) Calmenson (b. 11/28/52 in Brooklyn) was once profiled in Gale's Something About the Author series, which is a great start--but from here, what I've approached across ProQuest/GBooks/GScholar/the newspaper outlets (as of this writing) hardly shows any promise. Tons of reviews on her works + scattershot library-shelf listings; almost nothing else on her career save for a 1987 "infobox" in Newsday. No major awards either, not to mention there's an interview on TeachingBooks you have to be an educator to view--which already doesn't count.

TL/DR: Firmly in WP:ONESOURCE territory for the most part--and in turn, clearly short of WP:NAUTHOR expectations. How disappointing...

Absent a Calmenson article, I think I may approach the subject from another angle: Through a page entitled "List of works by Stephanie Calmenson" or "Stephen Calmenson bibliography", as long as the site's community doesn't mind. If not, then we might as well launch a "Books by Stephanie Calmenson" category as a last resort--and only when at least three notable works of hers show up on WP. (Emphasis on "notable": She also did movie, TV, and Disney tie-ins that are better off mentioned on their parent works' pages.)

And if Hopscotch got reviewed (and I bet it already did), then so much the better once I launch its draft. In the meantime, I'll resume my own search after sending this filing to press. To the S.S. @Cunard: Are you up for some source-sleuthing soon? --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 13:52, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

It may be a stretch, but this 1995 New York Times story on the development of a non-fiction book of hers, Rosie: A Visiting Dog's Story, features a biographical tidbit almost midway through. Whether this + the SATA profile makes Calmenson qualify for notability, I have yet to be told. (Unless much better appears on the horizon...) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 14:09, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Even my hopes for Hopscotch—recommended for the kidvid-cottagecore crowd as long as you can find a copy anymore; helps that Barbara Lanza's illustrations are lush as they come—turned out to be overambitious. Nothing to show for that either, save for this clipping that mentions its sales of 113,827 by 1993 (ranked #130 in the "Paperback Backlist Bestsellers" section there). Looks like a bibliography/category for Calmenson is going to be our only way out.

P.S. Hopscotch the rabbit and Squeak the mouse make for one of the best friendships ever to grace a children's book. Draw your own conclusions, fellow furs.

• Roback, Diane (1994-03-07). "Hollywood and horror: in children's, movie tie-ins and scary series ring the registers". Publishers Weekly. Vol. 241, no. 10. pp. S14+. ISSN 0000-0019. Retrieved 2023-07-13 – via Gale General OneFile.

--Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 07:57, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Slgrandson (talk · contribs), thank you for your great work on articles related to children's literature! This book source you linked is a great find. I will look into sources for Stephanie Calmenson. I am confident that she passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria and will share my findings here within two to four days. Cunard (talk) 09:08, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Slgrandson (talk · contribs). Here are some sources about the children's book author Stephanie Calmenson that allow her to meet Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says "multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability":

1. This Gale search from the Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library returns a large number of book reviews of books written by Stephanie Calmenson.
2. The New York Times article and the book source you linked above.
3. Budge, Rose Mary (2008-11-11). "Harry, owner offer tips on petting animals". San Antonio Express-News. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "Calmenson, who has about 100 children's books on a variety of subjects to her credit, is in San Antonio today to speak at the Animal Defense League's fall "friendraiser." ... Growing up in Brooklyn, Calmenson longed for a pet - especially a puppy. But her mother was terrified of dogs. Eventually, the author prevailed and adopted a fuzzy darling named Rosie, who won over Mother. Soon, the dog and her owner were winning even more friends visiting the elderly at nursing homes. ... When Rosie died, Calmenson was heartbroken and doubted she would ever feel so close to an animal again. Then along came Harry."

4. Reid, Robert (1993-02-20). "Aesop's fables offer lasting relevance". Waterloo Region Record. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "The Children's Aesop (McClelland and Stewart, $15.99), selected and retold by Stephanie Calmenson and illustrated by Robert Byrd, is the latest offering. The collection, comprising 28 fables both familiar and not-so-familiar, has a couple of qualities to recommend. Calmenson was a former elementary school teacher, children's book editor and editorial director of Parents Magazine's Read-Aloud Book Club for Children before she turned to writing full time. Her retelling of the fables are written to appeal to young contemporary readers. Byrd's ink and watercolor illustrations capture both the humor and the action of the text."

5. Allport, Brandy Hilboldt (2001-08-20). "Youngest students can jump into school year". The Florida Times-Union. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "-- Title: The Frog Principal. -- Author and illustrator: Stephanie Calmenson/Denise Brunkus -- Publisher: Scholastic Press ... Calmenson is a teacher and editor who lives in New York. She adaptated another classic tale in her book, The Principal's New Clothes. That story featured the first appearance of Mr. Bundy. Readers who enjoyed meeting him in The Frog Principal might want to check this older title. Also, fans of Robert Munsch (Aaron's Hair, Alligator Baby, The Paper Bag Princess) will like Calmenson's work. Their wacky storytelling styles have similar appeal."

6. Rosenthal, Cathy M. (2008-12-21). "Lost pet's finder kept it; would you?". San Antonio Express-News. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "If you are looking for a last-minute gift for a young dog lover this holiday season, check out "May I Pet Your Dog?: The How-to Guide for Kids Meeting Dogs (and Dogs Meeting Kids)" by Stephanie Calmenson. While it is an advanced picture book intended for pre-school to second-grade readers, many elementary-school-age students and adults also would benefit from reading the step-by-step etiquette of meeting and greeting dogs, especially dogs you don't know."

7. Young, Rebecca (2007-05-01). "Books give children pet perspectives". The News Tribune. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "· "May I Pet Your Dog?" by Stephanie Calmenson is an important book for younger children. It effectively teaches the most important thing to remember when encountering a dog you don't know. ... Calmenson features her own long-haired dachshund Harry as narrator, winningly portrayed by veteran illustrator Jan Ormerod."

8. Meehan, Mary (2002-12-01). "Kid Tests, Mother Approves - Of 4 New Titles Picked by Mom, Preschooler Gives Ok to 3". Lexington Herald-Leader. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "At 64 pages, it's not designed for one sitting, but it has a table of contents so parents can choose the topic they want to explore. You can tell the author, Stephanie Calmenson, was once a teacher."

9. Glassman, Molly Dunham (1994-07-03). "Cold Noses, Warm Hearts Make For Tender Accounts". Orlando Sentinel. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "Some dogs are more loving and smarter than others. One example is the star of Rosie: A Visiting Dog's Story by Stephanie Calmenson, photographs by Justin Sutcliffe (Clarion, $15.95, 48 pages). Rosie is a Tibetan terrier, a middle-sized dog with long, silky hair that hangs in her eyes. Her owner, Stephanie Calmenson, tells how Rosie was trained to become a visiting dog - a Delta Society Pet Partner and a member of Therapy Dogs International."

10. MacPherson, Karen (2001-06-19). "Backseat Books Conjure Vacation Fun on the Road". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "Echoing Chapin, authors Joanna Cole (of "Magic School Bus" fame) and Stephanie Calmenson believe that "sometimes getting there is half the fun." Cole and Calmenson use clear language to give directions for a host of games, including "I Spy," "License Plate Counting," "States and Mottoes," etc. Some of the games are meant for older children, ages 10 and up, while others can be played even by preschoolers."

11. MacPherson, Karen (1998-05-07). "Rounding up Some Wagging Tales of Child's Best Friend". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "It's doggerel at its witty best. Playful rhymes and expressive photographs reveal the true characters of two dozen breeds of dogs in "Shaggy, Waggy Dogs and Others" (Clarion, $15). Author Stephanie Calmenson keeps a light touch as she captures the essence of each breed in four lines of verse. Even kids who think they don't like poetry will be swept away by this lyrical look at dogs. ... "Shaggy, Waggy Dogs" also includes a non-poetry discussion of choosing a dog, as well as Calmenson's personal note about having to live without a dog as a child because her parents refused to get one."

12. Young, Rebecca (2005-08-30). "Back-to-school stories can help children adjust - School days are upon us once more, and new books can ease the vacation-to-classroom transition". The News Tribune. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: ""Kindergarten Kids" is packed full of original rhymes by Stephanie Calmenson.From "Good Morning" to "See You Later Alligator," Calmenson pieces together a patchwork quilt of the kindergarten experience.Some of the poems are riddles, others are rebuses (puzzles using pictures in place of words). They celebrate classroom pets, holidays, show and tell, pizza parties and loose teeth."

13. Allport, Brandy (2017-11-05). "Read All About It: Dinos learn a lesson in charming 'No Honking Allowed'". The Florida Times-Union. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "From Page One, readers get the idea about this book. It’s fun and informational, and the rhyming text catches listeners’ attention right away. “No Honking Allowed” is a great choice for little automobile enthusiasts. The text covers all the fun auditory aspect of the car from the screech of the brakes to, of course, the sound of the horn. ... If you like “No Honking Allowed”, check out other fare by author Calmenson. Titles include “Ollie’s School Day: A Yes and No Book” and “Ollie’s Class Trip: A Yes and No Book.”"

14. Wergeland, Kari (2003-01-04). "Herald new year with books that celebrate babies - Young readers". The Seattle Times. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "Another treasure to read during those first two years is "Welcome, Baby! Baby Rhymes for Baby Times," by Stephanie Calmenson, illustrated by Melissa Sweet (HarperCollins, $16.99, ages birth-2). Calmenson has stuffed this anthology with her own verses, which are original and fun. A wonderful alternative to those same old nursery rhymes."

15. Leach, Pat (2000-08-06). "Road trip books fun, help pass the time". Lincoln Journal Star. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "Families who often pile into the car for a road trip will be interested in "Fun on the Run: Travel Games and Songs" by Joanna Cole and Stephanie Calmenson (Morrow, 1999). Cole and Calmenson provide instructions for all kinds of games to play in the car. While they don't solve the issue of how to provide a window for every passenger, they do supply enough variety in passing the time to make it less of an issue."

16. Butler, Dori Hillestad (1998-05-03). "Books keep kids busy on rainy days". The Gazette. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: ""Marbles 101 Ways to Play" (Morrow, 1998, 127 pages, $16) is by Joanna Cole and Stephanie Calmenson. Cole and Calmenson use simple instructions to explain the rules of various marble games, including Ringer, Black Snake, Gold and Old Bowler, which supposedly was Abraham Lincoln's favorite game."

17. Ross, David (1994-08-22). "Several Good Books for the Littlest Ones". Press-Telegram. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: ""Kinderkittens Show-and-Tell" by Stephanie Calmenson/illustrated by Diane deGroat (Scholastic, $2.50, paperback, second-grade level). ... Calmenson captures the mood of a kindergarten classroom and gives teachers a hand by providing an appendix that includes a shadow play song, traceable puppets and an activity."

18. Martin, Claire (2002-10-20). "Kids' Bookshelf". The Denver Post. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "Here's a book to warm increasingly nippy evenings: "Crazy Eights and other Card Games" (SeaStar, $14.95). Authors Joanna Cole and Stephanie Calmenson explain everything from the beginning - high and low cards, suits, how to hold cards in a fan, how to shuffle and cut a deck, and how to deal cards."

19. Wright, Sarah (1994-07-31). "Kids' Books". Boston Herald. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: ""Hotter Than a Hot Dog!" by Stephanie Calmenson, illustrated by Elivia Savadier; Ages 4-8 (Little, Brown)  Stories about children and their grandparents rarely offer the vitality and playful give-and-take with language found in "Hotter Than a Hot Dog!""

Cunard (talk) 09:57, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your service, Cunard! (I'll get to the task no later than mid-August. Wish me luck as always!) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 15:47, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Slgrandson (talk · contribs), and best wishes on the content work! Cunard (talk) 04:09, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

There is a line in a bio of a congressman (Eli Crane) that says "Crane allegedly served in the U.S. Navy from 2001 to 2014." There is no explanation as to why they said "allegedly". I wanted to simply raise that question on the 'talk' page, but I cannot. It is a bio page of a living person and I'm thinking that might be the problem. There is no offer to 'start a topic' on that page as there is on a 'standard' page. I am not looking to edit per se, I want to raise the question. Any help would be appreciated. Cuchulain9 (talk) 18:28, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Cuchulain9. I removed the word "allegedly" since there are several sources verifying his military service. You could have done this yourself. Neither Eli Crane nor Talk: Eli Crane are protected at this time, and the talk page seems to be functioning normally. Cullen328 (talk) 18:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, I knew I could remove it but I wondered why it was labeled 'alleged' and wanted to raise the question. I still don't know why I couldn't do it there but I can do that on other pages. Cheers. Cuchulain9 (talk) 00:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Cuchulain9: the "allegedly" was added yesterday by an unregistered user: [11]. It was not immediately spotted, thanks for notifying. MKFI (talk) 09:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

How can I find the cite web template via "Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page). though that's not a Wikimedia version of the bible, and only works for the OT. Maproom (talk) 16:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Additional information can be found at Template:Bibleverse. Cullen328 (talk) 17:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Can you get to do anything you want on your personal sandbox?

Thx Myrealnamm (talk) 20:11, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

No, not anything. See Wikipedia:Misuse_of_the_sandbox for some of the restrictions. RudolfRed (talk) 20:33, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

OK thank you! I just checked the Misuse of the sandbox page. Feel free to check my sandbox! Myrealnamm (talk) 21:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

At this writing, I am preparing a draft page on Marlene Fanta Shyer, one of whose books (1983's Stepdog) I did a Wikipedia article for on Sunday morning (thanks to the Judith Schermer connection--for which you can thank my rescue mission on Mouse in House). After following Google search's lead--Shyer was born in 1932--I have nothing else for this date of birth except for this 1940 U.S.-census snippet provided by Ancestry.com, which is about as reliable as it gets for the time being. Not even Gale's Contemporary Authors listing mentions it. As such, putting my efforts on hold until I receive advice on how to handle this case, or get lucky with a secondary source somewhere. (Perhaps Newspapers.com--owned by the same company--might lend us a hand here before long?) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 06:11, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@Slgrandson any chance it's on the copyright page of one of her books? -- asilvering (talk) 06:13, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Skimmed across the Open Library previews--highly doubtful. I'll keep looking. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 06:31, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@Asilvering: Sadly, I can officially confirm (a bit belatedly) that nothing else is around for the birth-date claim. Awaiting further feedback from another one or two users; draft still on hold until a response is received. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 20:19, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Bummer. It's not such a big deal to leave out, at least. -- asilvering (talk) 21:33, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._D._Vance I think it would be very relevant to include in your page that Senator JD Vance does not respond to his own constituents and his congressional website appears to be unmonitored, which would lead one to believe that he is not interested in his own state's views, beliefs or positions. Which would make it difficult for him to actually uphold his oath as a senator, not to meantion earn his taxpayer-funded paychecks. I have written to him time and time and time again. Might as well be hollering into a Holler.

Deb Genetin Dgenetin (talk) 16:51, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The place to propose this is on the talk page of the relevant article. We cannot take your word for it. You must also include a reliable source. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:59, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dgenetin. Content added to the biography of a living person must be verified by a reference to a a reliable, independent source. Also, Wikipedia articles must be written from the neutral point of view. Since you are an inexperienced editor, I recommend that you discuss this at Talk:J. D. Vance, bringing coverage in reliable sources with you. Cullen328 (talk) 17:03, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

You described your own experience on the Talk page and were advised that independent, published references about Vance's lack of responses to constituent communications are required if such a statement is to be added to the article about him. David notMD (talk) 21:41, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

please help regarding this , that how can I add two movies in one year , for eg when you open this page go to 2009 section where you see two films were added , 3 idiots and magadheera Sumancranebuddy21q00 (talk) 19:51, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Sumancranebuddy21q00. TO do this you use rowspan=2 on the "year" cell. See Help:Table. ColinFine (talk) 21:01, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

can you show me an example please respected sir. Sumancranebuddy21q00 (talk) 21:28, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

@Sumancranebuddy21q00: You gave an example yourself: The 2009 cell at List of highest-grossing Indian films#Highest-grossing films by year. You can look at the wikitext. Help:Table#Combined use of COLSPAN and ROWSPAN has an example in the A cell. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:45, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Long-time reader, short-time editor. I stumbled across this BLP of electronic musician Mike Dred recently while looking through some cleanup categories, and I think it ought to be removed or at best significantly reduced in scope. However, I can also tell that bringing a crummy AfD as one's eleventh edit and first nomination is unfortunately not a way to make good first impressions, so I'd like a second opinion:

• The article is in bad shape. I know that's not a deletion reason, but it seems like something that's important to keep in mind for BLPs. There are some outlandish claims, there's almost no sourcing, and the sources that are there aren't good. The Discogs link at the bottom checks out, unsurprisingly, but the link to [12] in the References section doesn't (checked via that site's search tool), and I can't find the article from The Rough Guide to Techno that was referenced inline.
  • Weirdly, the sentence that references The Rough Guide to Techno shows up verbatim in several (unreliable) places online if you search for the guy. I haven't dug into that but it smells fishy.
  • I'd also readily accept that the article does exist, given evidence, though I'm not sure it affects the overall calculus.
• I don't think the article's subject is likely to be notable according to GNG. I'm less sure of MUSICBIO because of 5. Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels; is Rephlex "one of the more important indie labels"? I doubt it, but I'm not a subject-matter expert in the slightest. The article also claims he is 7. [...] one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style; "this guy inspired Aphex Twin" sounds like it would be important, but I can't find anything to back it up.
• I'm also not sure there would be enough verifiable information left for "keep but shrink." I wasn't able to find anything from a reliable source about the subject other than "he existed and he made those albums." We do have a fair number of music-related stubs, though, and for all I know trimming it down to a discography might be acceptable if MUSICBIO does apply even though I'm not sure I'd agree with the decision.
• I do think AfD would be the correct venue. The page is almost eligible for BLPPROD, since the inline reference and the one in the References section don't verify, but I believe the external link to the Discogs page disqualifies it since it backs up the discography. It's possible PROD would be appropriate, but I'm not sure because of the MUSICBIO concerns – I can at least think of how controversy could arise. The only place I can think of to discuss the article first (other than here) would be WikiProject Electronic Music, since the article's own talk page is barren and the major contributors were an IP and a user who hasn't been active since 2007, but I'm not actually sure how to get their attention other than nominating this for AfD anyways.

Let me know what you guys think, or if I'm overthinking this and I should just bring it to AfD since the worst that'll happen is it gets bounced. Thanks!

Box of wolves (feed) 01:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

@Box of wolves: If such an article had ever been submitted for review via WP:AFC, it would never have passed. I think it's ripe for AFD also, but if you're uncomfortable with that, a BLPPROD would be fine. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:28, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Anachronist: Thanks for the confirmation! I'll probably AfD it — I think I've got a good sense of how to do that, just wanted to make sure I was right about the why. Box of wolves (feed) 01:37, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Box of wolves, this has been labelled as problematic since 2015, but even then the problems were a decade old. Simply, it's been junk for 18 years. (A quote from back then: "As well as global industry experience Mike Dred has established links to academia as a Distinction Alumini of The University of Edinburgh having gained an MSc with Distinction in Sound Design in 2005." A distinguished alumnus or a distinctive member of the "Illuminati"?) Does the subject area interest you; and if it does, is Dred notable? If yes it does and yes he is, consider editing the article, radically. If he seems to be notable but you have more pressing demands on your time than demonstrating this, the article could be "draftified" (turned into a draft). If he doesn't seem to be notable, then yes, you could send this off to AfD. Anyway, if we ignore the promotional flatus, the article does make claims for notability; PROD would therefore be inappropriate. Starting a discussion at WT:WikiProject Electronic music might work. -- Hoary (talk) 01:42, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Box of wolves - Just now I did a search for this biography and added one to the article. For about 2-months, I have been doing the "Proposed deletion" / AfD process for articles unable to de-orphan. So I also still have much to learn. One of the search engine tricks I've learned is, for example here: "Mike Dred" Lowestoft, England. Quotes around article, followed by city or town or birth date, etc. This is not always successful but sometimes is good. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 01:56, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh, interesting (and good to know in the future), but that page you cited appears to contain an exact copy of an older version of the article's lead section, so it's gonna either be copyvio or WP:CIRCULAR (I'd assume the latter). Box of wolves (feed) 02:07, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

(@JoeNMLC: forgot the mention, see above) Box of wolves (feed) 02:09, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Can another editor help me merge Global Pet Expo with American Pet Products Association? Both have limited sourcing/content. Thoughts? Ca1h4r (talk) 17:28, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Looking at the 2 articles i think a redirect from Global Pet Expo to American Pet Products Association would be better. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 02:15, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Sometimes using visual editor i see a little arrow icon that seems to indicate that spacing is off somehow. can someone tell me what this means? i see it in this article right before the line " Further areas EasyLogix is experienced in," for example. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:10, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello! The arrow icon means in that in source editing mode, there is a line break. Single line breaks are not rendered in published articles. Ca ^{talk to me!} 02:34, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Steps to Create Account and Page on Wikipedia Singh Pankaj7230 (talk) 06:44, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

@Singh Pankaj7230: as previously advised on the AfC help desk, you already have an account ('Singh Pankaj7230'), and you can create a user page compliant with the WP:UP guidelines. The easiest route to creating new articles is via WP:YFA, which also includes a wizard for submitting your creation for pre-publication review. Note that you are not allowed to create promotional material, or content which otherwise is not in line with Wikipedia's purpose and objectives. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:26, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Singh Pankaj7230, Wikipedia is not a place for people to try to promote themselves. As a matter of fact, that behavior is forbidden on Wikipedia. Use Facebook and Twitter and Instagram and LinkedIn and countless other social media sites to tell the world about yourself. Keep your self-promotional efforts off of Wikipedia, please. Cullen328 (talk) 07:56, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Which tag do you use for asking an article to be updated? James Kevin McMahon (talk) 06:46, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

The Template:Update page will help you with documentation on how to use the update template Waterard ^water?(talk | contribs) 06:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks James Kevin McMahon (talk) 09:52, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

But it is the {{update}} template Waterard ^water?(talk | contribs) 07:01, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, can anyone take a look at this and this page on the Farsi wikipedia? Please remove the references with text "SMM Panel," (social media marketing) as these are spam. Then, look at the user's global contributions list as I've found an account that spammed on multiple wikis and the same might be true here.

I don't know the language and the navigation is too different for me.

Also, I've been searching for `site:wikipedia.org "smm panel"` and the like on google, is this the best way to find similar vandalism?

Cheers Notlacanian (talk) 10:37, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

@Notlacanian, this is the English Wikipedia, and very few of our editors edit the Farsi Wikipedia, so consider requesting on the Farsi Wikipedia. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 10:41, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

@Notlacanian You can find articles which contain specific text in their source code using an insource search. A search for "SMM Panel" currently gives only legitimate hits here on en:Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:02, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, that's useful. Notlacanian (talk) 13:11, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Can somebody please correctly transclude this SPI page for me Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/SAMEBREED 202.164.131.11 (talk) 09:13, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, IP, this has been  Done for you NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 13:58, 21 July 2023 (UTC)