Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1252

Archive 1245

←

Archive 1250

Archive 1251

Archive 1252

Archive 1253

Moderation-process halted

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § Moderation-process halted

 – —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:51, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khaldoun_Sweis

I am editing this page, and I felt very confident about what I produced.

The page was cut in half, basically.

Dr. Sweis is a notable academic, and I don´t believe the error messages at present are fair.

There was an issue with "in-line links", which I fixed, and I think that ultimately opened the gates of hell, so to speak, because it branded me as some nobody, or, what should I say?

At any rate, the process has been halted, so I´m reaching out to get in touch with someone who is in the domain of notable academics.

Hope to hear from you Audun H. Nilsen AudunNilsenOslo (talk) 01:22, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

@AudunNilsenOslo: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1252. From what I can see, the article was very promotional (and some of it still lingers with the use of the word transformational in the lede). More independent sources might need to be used to make it sound less promotional. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:04, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

AudunNilsenOslo, I see that you've used Talk:Khaldoun Sweis. That's good: it's where you should ask. You asked Bbb23 a question there and haven't yet received a response. Wait a few days and if there's still no response then ask again, this time both (i) linking to Bbb23 and (ii) signing your message -- just as I am both linking to you and signing when I hit "Publish changes" for this message. (Incidentally, I'm puzzled by the way the article currently says its subject is a professor but fails to specify the institution.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:10, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, AudunNilsenOslo. You say that Sweis is notable but the article fails to make that case. I read the current version and I read the March 28 version which contained vast swathes of unreferenced content, which is a violation of the core content policy Verifiability. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes the significant coverage that reliable sources entirely independent of the topic (Sweis in this case) have devoted to the topic. I do not see any references that are independent of Sweis. The lead section of the article makes the overtly promotional claim His work centers on 'The Phoenix Effect,' a transformational coaching method that integrates philosophy, psychology, theology, mythology, and cognitive-behavioral therapy and astonishingly, that extraordinary claim is referenced to his own website that peddles his own coaching services. We have a special notability guideline for academics but there is no evidence in the article that Sweis complies with that guideline. In its March 28 form and in its current form, this article is a very long way from complying with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 02:34, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

AudunNilsenOslo, I see from your userpage that you are being paid to edit this article. Why would you accept a paying job when you clearly know nothing about writing Wikipedia articles properly? Isn't it incongrous for you to expect unpaid volunteers here at the Teahouse to assist you in earning money? Cullen328 (talk) 02:46, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

For a living person, references are required at the same time content is added. You added a lot of content that may be correct but it was deleted because it lacked references. See WP:42 for guidance on refs. David notMD (talk) 10:39, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

I see. Thanks. AudunNilsenOslo (talk) 09:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

This does not appear to be the first COI account to be involved with editing this subject. Not to say that COI means "bad editor", and I'm glad that AudunNilsenOslo appears to be trying to do the right thing regarding it, but there may indeed be a deeper and pre-existing problem here. DMacks (talk) 13:48, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

It´s "just" a three degrees professor who is doing coaching.. Nothing mysterious there, however unusual. AudunNilsenOslo (talk) 09:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Second chance for a draft that I can't resubmit

Hello! I recently made a draft about Adolf Hitler Uunona but it got rejected and I can't resubmit it back. With the reason being it's not notable enough per WP:NSUSTAINED since he's only notable for his name. With the evidence being these two discussions: this but it didn't have consensus, and this being the follow up for that. But that discussion too acknowledged that this is a very borderline case. So I want a second chance on this since it seems like the new article reviewer just saw the name being something having consensus to not have enough for wikipedia's standards and declined the submission. But I think I have added enough?i'm not adamant on putting this in the article-space, just want someone to give it a second chance. There's 18 citations (though it gives me a warning that I'm using a deprecated source, I don't have time to fish it out) and it doesn't give undue weight on just his name but his political career. Isn't just the simple English wikipedia's version copied but adds more information in a neutral tone than that. I think there's some hope for it. If I'm completely wrong about this, just let me know and I'll fully abandon it. Thanks! Yelps (: critique me 14:34, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately there's not much hope here -- this discussion concluded in the article being deleted. You created (I assume probably not knowing) the article again, but it's prohibited to recreate articles that have been deleted per consensus, so it was rejected. The only thing I think you can do now if you want to be able to write an article on him is to go to deletion review, but that's only permitted if substantial new information is available that wasn't available during the deletion discussion, or if the person who closed the discussion misinterpreted consensus. Mrfoogles (talk) 20:02, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

it's prohibited to recreate articles that have been deleted per consensus This is not generally true. WP:DRVPURPOSE says In general you don't need anyone's permission to recreate a deleted page, and if your new version does not qualify for deletion then it will not be deleted.

If an article is recreated in a state which is substantially identical to the deleted version it may be speedy-deleted (WP:G4), and if the issues which resulted in it being deleted at AfD the first time still apply it is likely to be deleted again, but there is no prohibition on creating an article where one has previously been deleted if you believe in good faith that the reasons for the previous deletion do not apply. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 12:09, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

The sourcing looks fine to me, but it seems like a discussion concluded that the person wasn't suitable for an article, so it'll be difficult to get there to be an article without starting another discussion in the appropriate place, is basically the concept. Mrfoogles (talk) 20:03, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

On citations

For websites with photo galleries, do I have to individually cite each url?

For example, I am hoping to use this source to show the equipment used by the Guizhou provincial police, do I have to individually cite each photo's URL(This, This and this getting given different citations), or can I just site the main link? Thehistorianisaac (talk) 13:29, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Thehistorianisaac: if I understand you correctly, you're wanting to make a statement like "the provincial police uses firearm X", and support that with a picture of a police officer carrying the said weapon? That seems to me to be original research, because it relies on you looking at a photo, recognising the weapon shown, and drawing a conclusion that isn't expressly provided by the source. Moreover, for anyone to be able to verify that statement, they would need to do the same... possibly, but not necessarily, coming up with the same conclusion. I think you really need to find a written source. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:51, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

I understand, but I have came across this in other contexts, where I have to use multiple photos in a photo gallery as sources, this is just simply an example. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 13:56, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

In that case, I would say that you should cite each URL individually, rather than just the URL at the start of the image sequence. The point being, the citation should take the reader to the information that verifies the statement made, not just to its approximate vicinity. (This is assuming each image is at a separate URL, of course.) That's my take on this at any rate; someone who actually knows stuff may come along later. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:22, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Oh ok thank you Thehistorianisaac (talk) 14:23, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

I would agree that best practice is always to be as precise as possible about what you are citing: when citing a book or journal article, that is to give page numbers; in this case it is to link to the specific image which is relevant. You can never give too much information about your source.

(I'd also agree that I'd be wary about using a photograph of a police officer holding a particular weapon to cite that the police force uses that weapon; aside from original research I'd also have concerns about due weight. If a force's use of particular equipment is important, it will surely be mentioned by reliable secondary sources; if reliable sources do not mention it then how important is it for us to include on Wikipedia?) Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 15:34, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

@Thehistorianisaac, it seems to me that it is extremely rare that a photo can be cited as a source for any information. Perhaps that X met Y on at least one occasion, and - depending on what is in the photo - that they met at specific event Z. But I don't see how a photo of a particular thing happening once can ever be used as a source for a claim that that thing happened often or regularly. ColinFine (talk) 17:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Using Wikidata in tables

Resolved

 – MediaKyle (talk) 17:36, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

I've struggled to figure out a usecase for Wikidata over the course of my editing here, but I think I finally came up with a reason to use it. I'm planning to turn Orders, decorations, and medals of the Canadian provinces into a "Good Topic", and as I've been working on the provincial order articles I noticed how outdated the numbers of inductees on the overview article are. Now I could just do it the easy way and update them individually on each article, but I had the idea to link the number of inductees to the Wikidata item for each award, that way I only ever have to change the Wikidata item and it updates automatically across each page that displays a number of inductees. Can this be done, and is there a guide for it somewhere? Thank you. MediaKyle (talk) 10:28, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Managed to figure it out on my own. Open to hearing some tips about more ways to use Wikidata though if anyone has any ideas. MediaKyle (talk) 17:36, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Request for edits

Hi! I recently added my contributions to expand on the subtab, Trainee System, under Industry on the K-pop page. I would love for feedback and any edits you had to improve the section. Thank you! Taylorsydney (talk) 18:36, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Review my article and give me tips

Greetings.

I am new to Wikipedia and I wrote this article. Have also disclosed as per COI policy. policy.

Draft:Matthew Lani#Social media presence

thank you Ashleyashville (talk) 19:18, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Difficulties with VisualEditor tables:

So I'm creating a table on Wikipedia and I have encountered some issues with copy-pasting parts of the table. When I try to copy the contents of one cell into another, nothing happens at all. When I select just the image - it freaks out and gives me this symbol ☢ (not the emoji, just the ASCII symbol). When I try to copy a template, it does paste but only the text, without the icons, also further editing of the cell becomes very difficult. I did not encounter those issues before. I use Firefox, and I have already disabled all of my browser extensions. I did not encounter this issue before.

It is absolutely driving me mad... Blitzkriegfree (talk) 19:53, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Sometimes when I'm copy/pasting formatted text in the visual editor I instead get ☁︎ (cloud). Also on Firefox. If there's something connecting these two problems, I'd like to know the solution. Cremastra _talk 19:57, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Copyrights applying to drawings? (Or something like that idk)

Something baffles me about the NFUA of File:German destroyer Z43.jpeg, but I cannot get my hand on what it is.

"any attempt to draw the ship would invariably have to rely upon copyrighted sources, making it a derivative work"

If I were to somehow find a public domain set of drawings of a ship, drew it up from scratch (i.e. as is the case for [1] and made said drawing free to use here despite owning the copyright to said drawing, would that be breaking any boundaries? Same if I decided to draw a ship that was preserved despite being old (i.e. the Pesse canoe) from pictures I took myself (and as such owning the copyright of these photos). And what if I decided to use photos that other people took for said drawing?

Sorry if this sounds incoherent, for I feel very tired quite easily, and I've been holding this in for a while now. e (talk) 19:59, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

The main topic here is creation of a derivative work. If something is public domain, such as a drawing or an object, anyone are free to make any sort of reproduction of if that you want, including photography, drawing, or any other type of exact or artistic creation, with no restrictions. If something is not public domain, the license might (or might not) allow to you make a derivative work of it...that's something the license-holder controls, subject to certain laws that vary widely. The derivative work might (or might not) have its own license. A public-domain copy of a public-domain thing is exactly public domain, just like the original. And if you have made an allowed derivative work, you can obviously do with it as you please, including using it to make a second-generation derivative.

The details that get confusing are what makes something public domain, what types of derivative works can have their own license even if the original is PD, and what types of derivative works are allowed even if the original is non-PD. For example, it sometimes depends on whether you are talking about 2D vs 3D, the level of creativity (vs slavish exact duplication, or how artistic vs utilitarian), and if/where the creation has been displayed or distributed. DMacks (talk) 00:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Help on Article

Hi everyone! I am a part of an online communities class, and we have been tasked to create a new Wikipedia page or add onto an existing page. Any help, guidance, or suggestions are welcome as I work to perfect my article. Thank you :) Bubblegum111 (talk) 16:25, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

@Bubblegum111 Welcome to the Teahouse. As you will see if you read some of the other threads on this page, writing articles from scratch is quite difficult for newcomers. Some of that is discussed in this essay. So, my advice would be to spend your time initially adding to existing articles on topics which interest you or where you have some expertise and can recognise gaps and new reliable sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:46, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @[[User:Bubblegum111|Bubblegum111], and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. I'll say it more strongly than Mike: My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 10:35, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Bubblegum111 Your instructor should review the Wikipedia Education Program materials; requiring the creation of a Wikipedia article is not the best assignment, as much of the process is outside of the control of those undertaking it. Adding to an article is better. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

You appear to have succeeded in creating PopUp Bagels. Congrats. Still needs work, as has been tagged as having promotional content. David notMD (talk) 14:50, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

By the way they actually have an extremely experienced and proficient instructor, if you look at their contributions. Yeshivish613 (talk) 01:40, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Basically the most crucial part is to have 3-ish reliable, independent sources with significant coverage (many, many articles at Articles for Creation fail this, unfortunately). You've got that, as well as mostly citing what the article says, so you're basically good on the fundamentals. Went and voted at the AfD as the sources seem good. Mrfoogles (talk) 05:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

draft:jsky

Hello, can you kindly review this latest submission. Draft:Jsky

The 3 notable secondary sources used are UK Regional print newspapers which solely discuss Jsky and his achievements:

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/showbiz-news/jsky-stephanie-davis-hollyoaks-celebrity-9091344

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/25012680.bbc-star-jsky-featured-new-bolton-museum-exhibition/

https://www.burytimes.co.uk/news/20287465.bury-star-jsky-first-carry-commonwealth-baton/ Humphrey.Mulberry (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

It seems that Draft:Jsky has had a long history and was rejected (which means "stop trying: this topic is not suitable for Wikipedia") in 2022. The more recent sources still fail to reach our notability requirements, since they are local newspapers giving limited information based mainly on interviews. We need three or so sources which meet the golden rules for good sources. These may appear after his single is released later this year. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:44, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Tags on my edits

I've had "Tags: possible BLP issue or vandalism" as tags on two of my most recent edits and I'm wondering if I am doing something wrong, or is this expected? Footballcrazyguy (talk) 21:38, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Footballcrazyguy. The filter tags these edits because they may add WP:UNSOURCED content to articles about living people or other problematic stuff. I suggest you read WP:BLP and make sure you're not adding anything against policy. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 22:26, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

@Footballcrazyguy Welcome to the Teahouse. I don't see any problems with the edits [2] or [3] in question. They were marked automatically by software, not editors, and they have not been reverted. I think that the filter may have worried that you have <30 edits and were using foreign-language sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:29, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, I'll keep doing what I'm doing in that case. Footballcrazyguy (talk) 00:03, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

This is not unusual, and wouldn't be considered a negative. I can be specific about both edits here. One is that you say someone has been fired. In many biographies this is worth flagging for a quick review (for review, not reversion). The second is a bit more obscure, and relates to the club name Petrocub Hîncești. If you speak English well, you may be able to see why this was picked up. Filters are coded by humans and not perfect. You'll find you'll hit the filters less after you've made more edits. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:43, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, those explanations make sense for both. I didn't notice the club name until you mentioned it, lol. Footballcrazyguy (talk) 00:03, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Uploading an image for a draft article

I have a draft called Draft:Stewart (brand), and I tried to upload Stewart's logo for the article, but it says I can't upload a image for a draft article when I get to the "What article is this image for" part. How do I upload it? Liam9287 (talk) 21:55, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

@Liam9287: Once your draft is moved to the mainspace, you can upload the image then. Because you want to upload a logo, it’s probably going to be WP:NONFREE content, which only allow such files in the mainspace. cyberdog958^Talk 22:07, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Ok thankk you 😄 Liam9287 (talk) 22:15, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Do you think my draft so far is good? Like the citations? Draft:Stewart (brand) Liam9287 (talk) 00:47, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

No. Three of your four refs are to the company website. You must find refs about Stewart that are independent from the company. David notMD (talk) 14:53, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

User signatures

How can I create a colourful signature for my username? ComeAndJoinTheMusic (talk) 00:44, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Go into Special:Preferences and look for the signature box, where you can edit your signature. ‹hamster717🐉› ^{(discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠)} 02:45, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

There's also a helpful guide at Wikipedia:Signatures. Cheers! ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:37, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

How do I know that my question has been asked earlier?

Hello all. I am a newbie and still learning "walking steps", so to say. I have a question "Can a stamp be copyrighted"? For instance, today, when I was searching for stamps on HIV, I came across this - https://www.alamy.com/discoverer-of-the-hiv-virus-luc-montagnier-on-stamp-image593202402.html. It shows a stamp issued by Bhutan and is related to HIV. I need to use it in one of my academic works. But it is supposed to be copyrighted by ALAMY. In the past too, I have seen several such stamps copyrighted by them or by some other agencies. My question is "Can someone simply put its logo on a stamp and assert it is copyrighted by them? How do we know for sure, it is copyrighted by them? Can a public image, like that of stamp be copyrighted?" Now my related question. Before putting this question in this group, I was very much aware that this is a common question, and probably has been asked [and answered] in this forum. Since I did not want to clutter up this space, with duplicate questions, I wanted to search for this question. But could not figure out how. For one thing, people might have asked the question using different words. Then how do I search? Are there any keywords or similar things to search for? How? Kindly explain. Thanks. Neotaruntius (talk) 04:24, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Neotaruntius, it's a good idea to "bookmark" c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory, from which you can easily reach c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Bhutan. And from c:Commons:Stamps you can easily reach c:Commons:Stamps/Asia, though unfortunately all this says about Bhutan is "No information available". ¶ Take "No information available" to mean "Lack of clear evidence that these are anything other than conventionally copyright ('all rights reserved')". If they are, or might be, conventionally copyright, they cannot be used on Wikimedia Commons; and if they can't be used there, they also can't be used on English-language Wikipedia, other perhaps than via a claim of "fair use". ¶ Alamy says that this image was contributed by "Peregrine". Click on the link on that page to "Peregrine", and one sees that this person has uploaded over a hundred images, of which most (all?) are of stamps from a great number of nations. I find it hard to believe that Peregrine has the rights to these. But this is the kind of thing that a website (whether Alamy or Wikipedia) can expect when it invites the carefree/optimistic/feckless to upload what they say is their own. ¶ The best place to ask about image copyright and related matters -- other than "fair use" -- is c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. -- Hoary (talk) 05:29, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Hoary, thanks. This is as detailed a reply as can be, although at this moment, I can't claim I have understood your answer completely. Instead of a binary yes or no, it is a much nuanced reply and I will need to understand this properly after visiting all these sites you mentioned. I have heard about Village pump, but I did not realize it had sub-sites also. Thanks again. Neotaruntius (talk) 08:23, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

And more, Neotaruntius. "Can someone simply put its logo on a stamp and assert it is copyrighted by them?" If an image is in the public domain, then yes, I believe that someone can do just that. (Making the claim doesn't necessarily mean that the claim will be taken seriously.) And if the "can" in that question is in the epistemic sense (a matter not of authorization but of probability, as it "It can snow in June", or "Nitwits can vandalize Wikipedia"), then yes. ¶ "How do we know for sure, it is copyrighted by them?" You could email Alamy to ask. ¶ "Can a public image, like that of stamp be copyrighted?" I don't know what you mean here by "public image"; but yes, many nations copyright their stamps. -- Hoary (talk) 05:46, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Hoary thanks for the second part. Come to think of it, I also have only a vague idea of what a public image is or should be. I would imagine that the image of sun should be a public image, because it is available for everyone to see and photograph freely. Probably a Bhutan stamp (but not an extremely rare stamp, or, say, the Kohinoor diamond) is also a public image, but I know you will now easily drag me onto a slippery wicket. Well, another important part of my question has remained unanswered. How do I know this question had been asked earlier? I might be asking a question already answered. Sorry, I sound so naive. Actually I am. Thanks. Neotaruntius (talk) 08:35, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Neotaruntius, in this context, "public image" is an unfamiliar term to me. I think that you mean by it something like "image of a sight available to the public". The outside of the building where I live is available to the public (you can come here and view it, or anyway one side of it). The inside is not: If I don't invite you in, you can't come in. But, however incredible it may seem, even the exteriors of buildings facing public streets/roads are, in many parts of the world, not available for published photography, because those areas don't have what's called "freedom of panorama". In many (most?) nations, you also have no right to publish the photographs you take of new statues that anyone is free to view in public places, etc etc. Publicly available/visible stamps, banknotes, posters, etc, must also be assumed to be conventionally copyright ("all rights reserved") unless there's a clear reason for them not to be (public availability/visibility of what's photographed is no reason at all). -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Independence Monument (27506800337).jpg is a "fun" example of FOP rules, read through the Licensing templates. Bonus "fun" at [4]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:07, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Hoary, this is really interesting. I would have imagined that I had a right to publish [on my own Facebook page] my own image taken in front of, say, "Statute of Liberty" and someone could have questioned its validity. I do not visit social media sites often, but whenever I do, I find so commonly people post their pictures by the side of, or in front of, famous sights, and no one takes it seriously. Well I think it may also depend on where you are posting it - in an informal Whats-app group or in an academic book available for sale. I realize "copyright" is a big area of law, and probably cannot be discussed in a series of questions and answers, certainly not with a beginner like me, who knows nothing about it. But your statement "In many (most?) nations, you also have no right to publish the photographs you take of new statues that anyone is free to view in public places, etc etc. " really astonished me. I shall keep learning, although currently it seems like an incredibly large ocean for me to swim across. It is fun to learn anyway. Thanks very much. Neotaruntius (talk) 10:50, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

@Neotaruntius To answer the search part of your question: there is a search box that works over the Help pages. You'll find it near the top of this Teahouse page. If you use the keywords "stamp" and "Bhutan" the search returns this hitlist, from which you can see that related questions have been asked and that this thread is already indexed as a hit. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:04, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

... see also Postage stamps and postal history of Bhutan and File:Stamp Bhutan Punakha Dzong bridge 2009 FDC.jpg, which suggests that the stamps are the copyright of the issuing authority, as is the case in very many countries. For the purpose you mention, it will depend on fair use rules in your territory. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:31, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Note that Alamy should not be trusted on matters of copyright. Many of the images which it offers for sale have been copied, without due credit, from Wikimedia Commons. Maproom (talk) 12:36, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes Maproom, this was actually the "core" part of my question. Honestly I wasn't very much worried about Bhutan stamp/its copyright, as much as was the authenticity of Alamy's claim, and the way to check it. I think there are several other similar companies which make similar claims. I think one is Shutterstock or something like that. Not pointing a finger on any one; they may all be making right claims. Just wondered if we can take these claims on their face value, or is there a genuine way of checking it. Thanks to all, who took time to answer a complete newcomer's genuine enquiry. Neotaruntius (talk) 15:11, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

In the case of this specific stamp/image, there are actually several (potential) copyrights to be aware of:

1. The stamp design: unless you can show that Bhutan freely licenses these designs or makes them copyright-free, or that the copyright would have expired, you should presume that this is in copyright.
2. The image of Montagnier: this looks as though it is based on a photograph; there is likely to be a separate copyright for this (which if it was specially commissioned by the government of Bhutan for this stamp may also rest with them; otherwise it is likely to be held by the photographer)
3. The photograph itself: in this case there is unlikely to be any copyright here. See Commons:COM:When to use the PD-Art tag

So Alamy/"Peregrine" probably do not actually have any copyright interest in this image, but the image itself is probably still encumbered by copyright. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 09:51, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

My. Kushwaha of Nepal article is not accepted yet

 Courtesy link: Draft:Kushwaha community of nepal

Please accept it fast Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 06:38, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

@Bhaskar sunsari: What's the rush? Wikipedia is a volunteer service and you cannot make demands on reviewers' time. You can see at the top of the draft submission box that there are over 2,300 drafts waiting for review. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 07:06, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

sir /mam i understand but this is my first article please accept it fast it will motivate me to write more article please Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 07:09, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, that's now how this works. It's better that you spend some time learning our rules and style guide before trying to create your first article. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 07:36, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

sir / mam some one decline my article saying it is a copy but i have made it for the kushwaha community of Nepal not India it is different please check it again kushwaha page exist it is for kushwaha of India not nepal I have made it for Nepal kushwaha are present in Nepal also Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 08:09, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Bhaskar sunsari: Now I see that this falls under the Contentious topics procedure so I reiterate that you need to spend more time learning the rules and style guidelines. You will not be allowed to edit or create articles in this area until you have more experience. (This rule applies to all new editors, not just you personally.) — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 08:33, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

i understand sir mam but look at once in my article( kushwaha community of nepal ) once it will help nepali kuswahas in study too it have listed their poplulation in different states of nepal and different districts too it is not related with kushwaha of india please sir/mam it will not harm wikipidea if you accept it and if you accept it it will even motivate me do more contribute to wikipidea please accept my article Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 08:46, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Bhaskar sunsari: You have been told why this is not going to happen. Continuing to resubmit it without any changes is just wasting everyone's time. If you think there needs to be a separate article from Kushwaha then you can make a suggestion on that article's talk page. Only do this if you have reliable sources to support your claim. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 09:05, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

ok sir /mam please tell me what changes i have to do to make it accepted i will do changes you will say please ... just tell mei just want to be my article accepted. Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 09:08, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Please slow down. There's no rush, there's no deadline. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

but sir/mam just tell what changes in have to do i will do please i beg you Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 09:17, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Please read the advice that you have already been given here and on the draft page by Theroadislong, DoubleGrazing, and myself. (By the way, my preferred gender pronouns are in my signature and you do not need to address me as Ma'am.)— ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 09:18, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

sir i have done too much changes to my page kushwaha community of nepal please accept it now if there is any mistake please suggest me i will correct it ...but look at it once please i m like your brother.... Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 12:50, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

I have declined your draft we already have an article on the topic here Kushwaha. Theroadislong (talk) 07:58, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Stop imploring at Teahouse to have your draft approved. Teahouse hosts are here to advise, not review drafts (although some also serve as reviewers). Repeatedly asking/begging to have your draft approved is just annoying. David notMD (talk) 14:56, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Need to contribute to Wikipedia

I’m an inexperienced editor on Wikipedia. I have been introduced to wiki editing. How do I get started then? Is there a game that introduces me to contributing to encyclopedia? CoolWeb092 (talk). 09:21, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

There is indeed a game! You can find it at The Wikipedia Adventure. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 09:26, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Is the Wikipedia Adventure new or old? CoolWeb092 (talk). 19:35, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

You can also look at WP:TASKS. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:11, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

I can see this. CoolWeb092 (talk). 23:20, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

But what does the task center do? CoolWeb092 (talk). 18:41, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Have you visited either of the links you've been given? You will find answers to your questions there. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 23:38, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes I have. CoolWeb092 (talk). 01:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

make sure to read everything on the page! you may be missing something on accident, happens to the best of us. :) ogusokumushi^{( ୧ ‧₊˚ 🎐 ⋅ )} 15:28, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Keeps getting logged out

MediaWiki keeps logging me out after browsing a few pages. -- Least Action (talk) 13:43, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Least Action. I believe this type of problem can probably be resolved by:

1. logging-out,
2. clearing your browser cookies (at least for the domains wikimedia.org and wikipedia.org),
3. if you restrict cookies with custom settings, then make sure you are allowing the new auth.wikimedia.org sub-domain
4. log-in again.

If that doesn't help, please either file a task in Phabricator (if you are comfortable doing that), or reply here with more details about your setup and the specific problem so that we can file a Phabricator task on your behalf, such as: which browser/OS/App are you using when you get logged-out, if you are using any browser-extensions that might be interfering (such as a cookie limiter), how long after logging-in you are getting unintentionally-logged-out (and does it seem to be time-dependent or number-of-pages-visited dependent as you describe above), if you are using a VPN or proxy or a satellite ISP, and anything else you think might be relevant.

General background note: There have been some recent updates to the system for logging-in. Overall, the changes should improve things for everyone, and the changes are needed due to the way that web-browser software is being updated (details at mw:MediaWiki Platform Team/SUL3).

I hope that information helps. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:18, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Incorrect re-edits to updated pages

Why should an author be allowed to revert to an old version of a personality page when the page has been especially re-edited to add updated achievements and information on the given personality? Jashnetalat (talk) 15:44, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Other editors have as much right to aim to improve an article as you have (or more, for a while, now that you've got yourself blocked for edit warring). When your block ends, you should discuss the issues on the article's talk page. Maproom (talk) 18:47, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Question about an article

This article [5] has some issues with it. It needs additional citations for verification and such. But, when I try to do a proposed deletion, it was already nominated. So I was wondering if an article can be re-nominated to be deleted or not. Thanks, Editz2341231 (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Editz2341231. Improvement of an article about a clearly notable topic is always preferable to deletion. If you go to Google Books and enter the character string "water weights load testing", you will find quite a few high quality reliable sources on this topic. Select and summarize the best of them, create references to them, and you will have dramatically improved the article. Cullen328 (talk) 19:03, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

@Cullen328 can I still add references to the sentences that are already in the article? Does the amount of content in an article determine it's notability? Editz2341231 (talk) 19:40, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Editz2341231, you are welcome to improve the article in any way you wish. Aside from a very few exceptions, articles don't have notability; however, an article should demonstrate the notability of its subject. Adding to the content of an article goes towards demonstrating the notability of its subject (or increases the obviousness of this notability), as long as the additions are sourced reliably (and, for many kinds of subject, are independent of the subject). -- Hoary (talk) 20:52, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Editz2341231, notability is a property of a topic, not a property of a Wikipedia article about that topic. A poor quality article about a clearly notable topic does not make the topic any less notable. It just means that the article cries out for expansion and improvement. Adding references to reliable sources that devote significant coverage to the topic is a good start. Summarizing those references and adding new content is even better. That's why we are here. Cullen328 (talk) 05:33, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, the policy is to never delete articles unless they're impossible to fix; basically, if sources exist that talk about the subject in depth, than an article could be written on it, even if the current page is just random ChatGPT-generated falsehoods with no citations whatsoever. In that case, all the text would be deleted and likely replaced with one cited sentence. Here, if you think that the uncited material might not be true, you're allowed to remove it (although someone else can put it back if they find a citation). Mrfoogles (talk) 20:06, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

How to get to extended confirmed

500 edits or 1000? ~ [[User:ComeAndJoinTheMusic|Music]]&nbsp;^{[[User talk:ComeAndJoinTheMusic|''what music?'']]} ~ (talk) 22:23, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi ComeAndJoinTheMusic - As stated at WP:XC "A registered editor becomes extendedconfirmed automatically one edit after the account has existed for at least 30 days and has made at least 500 edits." - Arjayay (talk) 22:27, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Is undoing enough

If I was just testing AFC submissions, was undoing the afc edit to stop the submission? Special:Diff/1283011776 Justjourney (talk) 22:34, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 10:18, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Nominate for deletion?

While expanding stubs I saw an article that doesn't seem to meet requirements based on what I've read. Can I nominate it for deletion as a newbie, or should I do something else? Don't want to overstep. Thanks. Milkywaythegodfather (talk) 23:02, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

@Milkywaythegodfather Absolutely you can - the "worst" thing that will happen is somebody finds better sourcing and makes a snarky comment at you. To mitigate the chances of that, make sure you do a proper WP:BEFORE to determine if the subject might be notable, despite the state of the article. That's going to probably involve looking through Google News, Google Scholar, Google Books, or other similar platforms. If the article's about an academic, however, make sure you look at ou guidelines for determining academic notability. They're very different, and even experienced users get caught out by that. Don't be afraid to withdraw if somebody finds better sourcing, and good luck on your Wikipedia journey! GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 23:16, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I did the nomination at Jacky Chou. If you get a chance, would love to know if I did it correctly. Thank you. Milkywaythegodfather (talk) 17:58, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@Milkywaythegodfather Yep, perfectly correctly as far as I can see! Good nom, too - contains an analysis of the sources and why you don't feel like they should qualify. And you appear to have managed the transclusions just fine - I remember how weird it was doing those for the first time. If you'd like to make the paperwork side of things easier in the future, now that your account is autoconfirmed, you can always use something like WP:TWINKLE to automate parts of it. You can enable it in Special:Preferences, and while it might look a bit scary, as long as you go slowly it's really useful for stuff like this. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 08:43, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, really appreciate it! I'll check out Twinkle. Milkywaythegodfather (talk) 14:48, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I just installed Twinkle early on and never had to learn the AFD nomination templates at all. It's a good tool. Mrfoogles (talk) 20:08, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Editing on high profile pages

Hello editors, I really wanted to edit articles that are metropolitan related, but for pages, such as Boston, Philadelphia, and New York City, it seems that these articles are monitored and patrolled by extended confirmed editors. Can you please explain how to start an edit to these articles without being it patrolled? Is there a way for an edit to be made un an article without being undone? (Magnent)”Harold” (talk) 23:47, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello @MagnentHarold. Assuming you don't mean the articles aren't extended protected, you can try to be bold and just make the edit and improve the article. If it's reverted, that's okay, because you can always discuss with the reverting editors on the article's talk page. Discussion is how Wikipedia grows. If you really aren't sure your edit will be an improvement or abide by guidelines, you can open up a section on the talk page and ask for advice. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 23:56, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

How can discussions grow on Wikipedia? (Magnent)”Harold” (talk) 00:48, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

What I meant is that discussions is how Wikipedia grows. In a collaborative environment, there will always be conflict. That conflict is settled in discussions. Those discussions are how we find how to improve articles. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 04:37, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Why would there be always conflict? (Magnent)”Harold” (talk) 05:10, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Because human nature leads to conflict. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 05:12, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Could conflicts not only happen in discussions, but also any media where communication is always the priority? (Magnent)”Harold” (talk) 08:19, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@MagnentHarold There won't be conflict every time, or even most times (depending on where you edit), but if you keep editing, sooner or later someone will disagree with you on something, and then it's time for discussion. To quote WP:COMMUNICATE. "Most article updates are uncontroversial, so discussion isn't needed. In cases of disagreements amongst editors, though, there is no choice but to communicate with others. All Wikipedia editors are expected to make a good-faith effort to use talk pages to discuss issues when needed." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:20, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

In some cases if a dispute is resolved, but editors still disagree, then what to do? (Magnent)”Harold” (talk) 06:39, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

In general, articles with more views per day tend to also have editors who have chosen to have those articles on their "Watch" list, meaning that every time they log in they can check their list to see what has been edited. I 'watch' about 30 articles; some people watch hundreds. And some articles have hundreds of watchers. As mentioned above, unless protected, relatively new editors can edit those articles, but may see that their edits were reverted for cause - most often lack of including a reference or invalid reference. David notMD (talk) 14:27, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

I could agree on that, but for lack of reference? That interesting to see this. (Magnent)”Harold” (talk) 18:40, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

How do you keep your watchlist so low? I think after a couple months on Wikipedia, my own watchlist was already well above 30. I have over 2000 articles on my watchlist and it's a constant struggle to keep it from growing without bound. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:15, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

While editing, I don’t usually turn on the watchlist after publishing. (Magnent)”Harold” (talk) 20:33, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Anachronist You can also edit your Watch list to remove articles. David notMD (talk) 18:19, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

A question I would like to ask

Let's say you are new on Wikipedia,then you want to start your own page in your own language,then you start to have some doubts about the language you chose because not everyone knows your language for example myself my language is Sepedi since I live in South Africa so not everyone knows my language

My question says: if you consider the factor could it lead you into no longer creating a page on Wikipedia? Lou tshimo (talk) 00:50, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes it could, Lou tshimo. But it could also lead me into putting more effort into creating pages in that language. I read that Sesotho sa Leboa has close to five million native speakers. That's a lot. The number of native speakers of Estonian is less than one third the number of native speakers of Sesotho sa Leboa. One can't evaluate an encyclopedia by comparing what's written (or isn't written) on a tiny number of subjects; but all the same, let's take a look.

• Sesotho sa Leboa (in Sesotho sa Leboa)
• Sesotho sa Leboa (in Estonian)
• [no article about Estonian in Sesotho sa Leboa]
• Estonian (in Estonian)

It seems to me that nso:Wikipedia needs some help. -- Hoary (talk) 08:42, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Question About A Submission

Hey All - I asked 4-5 weeks ago about a submissions "Thomas Haugh" he's a basketball player at the U of Florida. In my initial page, I did not indicate "Thomas Haugh (Basketball)" was hoping somebody could help edit. He's been on a tear during March Madness. Working to prove he's notable! Thanks!

- Grassroots Talk 101 GrassrootHoops101 (talk) 02:15, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Thomas Haugh is currently awaiting review. This may take three months or more. If the title needs changing the reviewing editor will take care of that. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:27, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi @GrassrootHoops101, having a parentheses after a name is only necessary when there are two people with the same name, and we need to have a disambiguator. For example there are more than two people called Joe Johnson who have Wikipedia articles called Joe Johnson, so we need to disambiguate them as Joe Johnson (basketball) and Joe Johnson (baseball). However since there is no other article yet called Thomas Haugh, the current title will be fine, should your draft be accepted. Good luck with your draft! Yeshivish613 (talk) 11:39, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Any chance deleting the page, and re uploading it will streamline it at all? GrassrootHoops101 (talk) 11:53, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@GrassrootHoops101, it is never necessary to delete and recreate articles, they can simply be moved to change the name. However as I said your draft is best at the current name, and as said above you should wait until it is reviewed and if it is accepted you can worry about the name. Yeshivish613 (talk) 12:01, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@GrassrootHoops101Your historical edits seem to be advertising for these basketball players. Do you have a personal interest, or are you being paid to promote them? Just Al (talk) 19:29, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

This user's edits before creating this draft appears to just be adding basic information, like statistics. I really see nothing about their edits that indicates advertising. Suggesting another editor might be making undisclosed paid contributions without evidence is not very nice... Perhaps they just really like basketball. MediaKyle (talk) 23:45, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

No advertising, just a person connected to North East Grassroots hoops! GrassrootHoops101 (talk) 12:15, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

• @GrassrootHoops101: I accepted the submission. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

  Appreciate the accepted review! Any chance to get Thomas Haugh (Basketball) as the title? If not no issue, thanks again GrassrootHoops101 (talk) 12:15, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

  As was explained to you above, we only add disambiguators like (Basketball) to differentiate between two articles with the same name. Because Wikipedia only has a single article on Thomas Haugh, no disambiguation is needed. Madam Fatal (talk) 15:24, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

  See the disambiguation policy. But if you're interested you can add a short description to the article saying e.g. "Basketball player". Mrfoogles (talk) 20:13, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Name

Can I change my Wikipedia name? Vestrix (talk) 04:11, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes, see Wikipedia:Changing username. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 04:35, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Pls review Wikipedia:Changing username Moxy🍁 04:35, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

How to cite.

Hi people, how can I cite information from pages? I need assistance on citing articles. SegmentYork390 (talk) 06:19, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi @SegmentYork390, do you mean how do you add a citation/reference to article? Is this what you are looking for? Knitsey (talk) 06:23, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes, that is my question. SegmentYork390 (talk) 06:59, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

This might be helpful. Knitsey (talk) 07:05, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Also, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources whilst not exhaustive, can help when choosing a source. Knitsey (talk) 07:08, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@Knitsey, I usually start with WP:REFVISUAL (or WP:REFBEGIN for any newbies who prefer the source editor). Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 10:10, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

For this, which format? Newspaper, journal, or a basically website? SegmentYork390 (talk) 18:43, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

i believe it depends on what youre citing, from my experience. the info you insert for a website article and a scientific journal vary a bit from eachother. ogusokumushi^{( ୧ ‧₊˚ 🎐 ⋅ )} 15:26, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, are they reliable sources? SegmentYork390 (talk) 17:08, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Kushwaha community of nepal

please check my article ( kuswaha community of nepal) and please tell me if i have to do anything changes but fast review Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 07:13, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

What can it be? SegmentYork390 (talk) 07:40, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

They always decline my article please tell me how can i make it acceptable Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 07:50, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

We cannot guarantee a speedy, successful review. What's your hurry? 331dot (talk) 08:03, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

I have checked the reason that why your article doesn't accepted and I found that the topic on which you are creating a article, already existed in Wikipedia as Kushwaha. The same reason is also given by the new page reviewer. Try creating a article on any other notable topic. Please check WP:AFC to avoid mistakes, and to qualify your draft as article. Thank you. ⚡ VortexPhantom ⚡ (talk) 08:03, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

but sir in kushwaha there is nothing listed clearly about kushwaha community of Nepal i want to add details about kushwaha community of Nepal but that page is locked so sir i m creating new page kushwaha community of Nepal and you guys are decling it it is for the kushwaha community of Nepal . Same there is yadavs page but some one yadav of Nepal page is existing but why not of kushwaha Kushwaha are also a legal citizens of nepal . please understand sir Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 08:07, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Again, what's your hurry? And why have you not done as suggested and first expand the existing article? It can always be split off later if needed. 331dot (talk) 08:16, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

I understand your concern, but keep a thing in mind that separate pages cannot be made for Kushwaha in both Nepal and India regions, consider editing in the existing page of you want to add content about Kushwaha in Nepal. If, the page is protected consider visiting Wikipedia:Requests for page protection for reducing page protection or request edit in protected pages. Thank you and happy editing. ⚡ VortexPhantom ⚡ (talk) 08:17, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@VortexPhantom, note that the Kushwaha article is covered by the contentious topics rules (see the talk page) so an editor who is not extended-confirmed can only make edit requests and it's unlikely that page protection will be reduced. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 08:22, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

ClaudineChionh Not all contentious topic areas have the extended-confirmed restriction. 331dot (talk) 08:24, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Oops, fair point! — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 08:28, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

I believe that we are not anyone to decide that article protection will be reduced or remain same, it's role of adminstrator and they must handle it. ⚡ VortexPhantom ⚡ (talk) 08:28, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

check my draft now is it ok or not brother.. Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 14:36, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@Bhaskar sunsari I choose "not [to] bother." 🇵🇸🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦🇵🇸 18:02, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Premature submit! We do not create new drafts when an article is locked. We request edits 🇵🇸🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦🇵🇸 18:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

i understand sir please don't get angry with me but i an wanting to write a article about kushwaha community of Nepal so i was asking please check my darfts of kushwaha community of Nepal is ok and im extremely sorry if i have said anything wrong forgive me Bhaskar sunsari (talk) 18:26, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

We are not angry with you, but you are ignoring what we are telling you. You seem to be in a great hurry to do this. Why? 331dot (talk) 18:36, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Bhaskar sunsari, you are free to make edit requests at the foot of the talk page of the existing article. Tips: (i) Say either precisely what should be changed to precisely what, or precisely what should be added. (If you want material deleted, then say precisely what you want deleted, and why.) (ii) Provide reliable sources for the material you want included. (iii) Start with no more than three requests, and don't let the number of your open requests exceed three. (iv) There's no reason to address anyone as "sir" or "madam". -- Hoary (talk) 08:19, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Unable to check the article draft, but can you find references about the religion of India? SegmentYork390 (talk) 08:20, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

How can I be an admin?

So I thought that "being an admin" is when a Wiki-user has over 500 edited pages, but I don't know the admin criteria. Respond me if you got a problem! Joe bitten (talk) 09:00, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Joe bitten: WP:RIGHTS lists the access levels. The 30 days and 500 edits is the threshold for extended confirmed, which removes most of the editing restrictions. Why do you think you want to become an administrator? I'm inclined to say that anyone who comes to the teahouse asking this question isn't ready to consider requesting this role, and would do well to keep working away on Wikipedia articles and the many other tasks available to them. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 09:08, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Joe bitten, and welcome to the Teahouse. Admin rights are granted by the community to an editor who persuades them that there is good reason for them to have those rights. Part of that is showing that they have enough experience, familiarity with Wikipedia's policies etc; another part is showing that there is something they want to do in Wikipedia which requires admin tools.

I have been an editor in Wikipedia for nearly twenty years, and have made over 26 000 edits; but I have never requested admin rights, because the things that I want to do in Wikipedia do not require them. ColinFine (talk) 10:28, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

And that's a good thing. It is difficult, once you're an administrator, to keep being a good content editor and creator, because there is no end of tasks for administrators to do. The role is jokingly referred to as "janitor", but it's no joke, there are always messes to mop up, and they always seem urgent. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:04, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@Joe bitten What do you feel that you might do as an admin that you are not doing today? I have no problem in your asking about the role, that is how we learn. 🇵🇸🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦🇵🇸 18:24, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Unable to have a wiki page approved.

Hi, I have an article of a coach but it wont get submitted. I can't understand why. "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:T._Dilip " is the URL Cartonfly (talk) 11:34, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

If you want to submit it, Cartonfly, click the so-called button that's marked "Resubmit". -- Hoary (talk) 11:57, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

3 questions

1. Proposal to permanently protect all administrator instruction pages. These pages are meant to guide administrators. They must be preserved to ensue best performance of the admins. As such, any edit here, except updates and corrections, must be kept out of these articles to prevent disruption, in other words, there's no legitmate reason to edit these pages, except in limited circumstances. When I wrote the message, the only articles were protected by my question was Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism/instructions, and Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism/Administrator instructions 2. Myth: Users that have customized signatures are desysopped administrators. Any truth? (I'm not a very smart person.) 3. How I do vote for deletion? (regular/speedy/proposed) CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 12:10, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

1. Pages are not protected proactively. 2. Some users with custom signatures are admins, some are former admins, most have never been admins. 3. Deletion processes are described here. Deletion discussions are not votes. --bonadea contributions talk 18:48, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @CreatorTheWikipedian2009, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I don't recommend asking several independent questions in one post, as you'll often find that some of them get missed.

However:

1. . We don't normally protect pages pre-emptively; but you are welcome to present your proposal at WP:VPR.
2. . I have never heard such a preposterous myth. Personally, I've never felt the slightest urge to customise my signature, and don't really understand why people want to; but if you search the archives of this page, you'll find plenty of newbies asking how to do so.
3. . You'll find all about the different deletion procedures at Deletion policy.

ColinFine (talk) 18:48, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

How do I propose something? Also, one more question, how I can get tools, that automatically help me with editing? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 20:39, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

CreatorTheWikipedian2009, what specifically are you trying to propose? And what kind of editing help are you wanting a tool for? There are a number of ways to accomplish both depending on your specific objective. Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 20:45, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Editing without risking. Finding something bad to correct, etc. CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 11:49, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

CreatorTheWikipedian2009, your Homepage should have some suggestions of articles to edit, and the options in the 'Fact-Checking' section at the Task Center are a great way to contribute. There's also de-orphaning articles – make sure to read that page first, and I would stay away from adding links to "See also" sections for now, but that's one of my favorite easy ways to contribute to Wikipedia and I'd be happy to give you more information about it on your talk page if you like. There's all sorts of things you can do that don't even require extra tools! Is there anything specifically that you're interested in? Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 16:12, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer! My suggestions will keep me from being blocked! CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 16:30, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

CreatorTheWikipedian2009, if you're thinking of proposing some change to page protection policy or criteria, please first reread the responses to your threads "About minimal amount of bad editing for protection" and "Arbitration Committee protection help", and also the friendly suggestion that BusterD made to you; and consider the possibility that you're keen to "flog a dead horse". My second amiable suggestion is that you make a few dozen substantive, reliably sourced improvements to Wikipedia articles. -- Hoary (talk) 21:56, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Display of images on Psoriatic arthritis

Hello, please could someone look at the above article, in the section "Imaging" and improve the way the images are displayed? I think it would be better not to have some as side align and others as centered gallery. Thank you, Moribundum (talk) 13:20, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@Moribundum Part of the problem seems to be that the images have lengthy captions and I agree that the results are poor. That article has 148 page watchers, so I'm surprised that no-one has tackled this before. Perhaps you should make a proposal on the talk page or just be bold and change the layout as you think is best. WP:CAPTION has some advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:37, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

My User Page

Hello community. I have find out that this place can help me. My user page is in assending descending order mean its disruptive and hard to understand. Please anyone can help me in arrangements of my user page user boxes and sections. Thank you Tuifjhf (talk) 13:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@Tuifjhf Welcome to the Teahouse. I've made some changes, which you can see here. The main trick is to use the templates {{Userboxtop}} and {{Userboxbottom}} to tidy things up. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:29, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. You made the Layout amazing. Can you please make more stylish and add more userboxes to my user page. Tuifjhf (talk) 13:33, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Also can you please add more items to my user page as other accounts user pages have like Infobox and recent changes section etc. Tuifjhf (talk) 13:37, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

The usual way to improve userpages is to look at some of the existing userboxes at WP:UBX/GALLERY. You need to choose your own: other people won't know what are relevant to you. Also, if you see somthing on another editor's page that you want to transfer to your own userpage, you can copy the source code. There's a tutorial at this help page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:46, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured topics/Almirante Latorre-class battleship

Wikipedia:Featured topics/Almirante Latorre-class battleship has all featured articles but it doesn’t show the symbol. How do you add the symbol showing if it has all the featured articles Thelifeofan413 (talk) 15:38, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured topics/Almirante Latorre-class battleship is a page in the Wikipedia name space and that page itself wouldn't be a featured article. That page just contains links to other featured articles, which do have the featured article symbol. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:58, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

I understand. Thelifeofan413 (talk) 19:22, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

talk page merge notice is wrong?

Talk:Pale_Moon has a notice at the top that another article was deleted and merged into it, with the link being set as a redirect, but this doesn't seem true (the link that the notice claims to be a redirect just links to an existing article)
should i delete this notice from the talk page? Wojtekpolska1013 (talk) 16:36, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Basilisk was merged into Pale Moon in 2021, but then in April 2024 the article was completely rewritten from scratch. Yes, you can remove the merge notice. That discussion is already linked from Talk:Basilisk (web browser). ~Anachronist (talk) 18:54, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@Wojtekpolska1013: The merge notice is part of the attribution for the merged content in [6]. I have modified the message.[7] PrimeHunter (talk) 19:11, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you both, I still find it a bit hard to work with the templates sometimes :) Wojtekpolska1013 (talk) 08:01, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

new page

How do I create a new page? I'm a registered user, but new. Jenna1993 (talk) 16:41, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, Jenna1993. We highly recommend that newer users do not dive right in to the very difficult task of creating a new article; imagine asking "how do I build a house" without knowing anything about land acquisition, permitting, obtaining supplies and labor, construction techniques, landscaping, etc. A lot goes into it. The same is with creating a new article. It's best to first learn more about Wikipedia by editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Using the new user tutorial is a good idea too. These things will greatly increase your chances for successfully creating a new article.

However, if you still want to try it now, please first read Your First Article, and use the Article Wizard to create and submit a draft]]. 331dot (talk) 18:07, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

The most important thing is to make sure the articles has 3 reliable and scrupulously independent, non-self-published sources, each writing a paragraph at least on the topic. That's what will get it through the notability criteria. Other than that, make sure each sentence is cited, and attribute any praise or criticism to the critic. Mrfoogles (talk) 06:00, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Request for Edits/Help

Hello! I recently made a page for a class (Kilby Block Party (music festival)) and would love any feedback and assistance in making it better. Thank you! Erinroddy (talk) 18:41, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

An improvement possible is the next. There are so many red links.

Maybe , there are articles to a non-English language version of Wikipedia for some bands mentionned.

You can use "Wikidata" to look if it does exist entries in any non-English Wikipedia about these.

If there are one. You could create an "Interlanguage link".

After that , the reader could access to a non-English language version of Wikipedia to read an article about the band.

It could incitate editors to create articles in English about these if subjects are "notable" accorded to guideline. Anatole-berthe (talk) 20:04, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Erinroddy, parenthetical content in an article title should be used only for disambiguation, e.g. Richard Jones (director), Richard Jones (economist). I would move your article to "Kilby Block Party" as no disambiguation is needed, but it needs an admin to move a page over a redirect. Maproom (talk) 06:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Help with Reviewing my Article

Hi! I am writing an article for my college capstone and looking to have fellow Wikipedians review my article and suggest anything or have any edits. Thank you in advanceE Rjalloh (talk) 18:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

The article is tagged "multiple issues". Work on these can improve the article. Anatole-berthe (talk) 20:11, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Please see above concerning the use of parenthses in an article title. Maproom (talk) 07:01, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Notability#RfC_on_change_of_name

Discussion if the name WP:NOTABILITY should change to something else. For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:25, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

I started to weigh in on this but then realized that in the title of this topic was a sort of invitation to look at a related RfC to get a general idea of the "back story" on this question. After doing that, I can see merit for both notability and suitability. But deserving of attention also comes to mind. That term is part of the discussion in Cambridge Dictionary's definition of notability. Augnablik (talk) 06:42, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Augnablik if you want to express your opinion you're supposed to do it on the RfC page, not here -- this is just a notice, nobody is supposed to comment. The people who close the discussion only look at the comments under the RfC. Mrfoogles (talk) 06:44, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Oh, sorry ... didn't realize, since the topic was posted here. Augnablik (talk) 06:55, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Augnablik In hindsight, I should have been more clear. This is what's known (to the people who tend to know these things) as a WP:APPNOTE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:07, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Samurai Stubs

I was looking at List of samurai and noticed that a lot of the entries are poorly sourced stubs. A typical example is Abe Masakatsu. The sources are a Japanese website that doesn't appear to be academic and OpenHistory. Some of these stubs could be combined together. For example, Masakatsu´s son, Abe Masatsugu has an article they could be combined to make one article about the family. Is there an efficient way to do this? at least go through all the articles and delete the worst ones? DrGlef (talk) 07:44, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

I suggest, DrGlef, that for now you do nothing. The list is now at AfD (I think rightly so), and if you tinker with what it lists then this might lead to an accusation that you're somehow scuppering the list by diminishing its content. (Yes, such an accusation would be silly, I know.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:44, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, that it understandable. It is best to avoid the appearance of impropriety. DrGlef (talk) 08:50, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

need help to create my first topic

Hi, I tried to create my first article on Smart Telescopes and it's rejected, I understand this is because of a lack of referencing and details. But I would still like to pursue in order to learn and to become better at this. Can anyone help me create this first article on Smart Telescopes ? Or is there a learning platform where I could learn ? many thanks in advance for your help. Cornedebouc (talk) 09:05, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The good news is that your draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted.

I would suggest that you first use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia and what is being looked for in article content. It will also help you to see Referencing for beginners. You did a nice job of telling what smart telescopes are, but you need to summarize what independent reliable sources say about them and what makes them notable, not just document their functionality.

Have you considered editing the Telescope article instead? It may be worth doing that first, and then seeing if you have enough to split off information about smart telescopes in particular into a separate article later. Writing a brand new article is the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia, and it isn't the only or even best way to contribute. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Smart telescope. See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to incorporate references. David notMD (talk) 13:00, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Notes

Hello,

Do let me know if this has been asked before, but how do I add notes? specifically in templates but generally as well, I am not sure how to do it. TheMagicalCraftyLion (talk) 10:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @TheMagicalCraftyLion, and welcome to the Teahouse. "Notes" could mean several different things - does WP:Notes answer your question? If not, please come back and explain more precisely what you want. ColinFine (talk) 11:14, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I am not sure if it does but here's what I mean as an example: Wikipedia:Citing sources#Notes, that is sort of what I want to do, and write say in note one of a page: "It is unknown exactly when X player left X club, but can be assumed in or before X year". and then if there is a reference I would say "see reference 2" or something like that. Or another saying "Distributed by X entertainment" like in this page- Still Life 2#Notes

those sort of citations. The page you show me does give some sort of answer but not fully.

Sorry if you still don't understand TheMagicalCraftyLion (talk) 11:28, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

@TheMagicalCraftyLion what you want are called "explanatory footnotes" and are added using the template {{efn}}: that link gives details. Standard references (sometimes, confusingly called "footnotes") go at the end of articles using the template {{reflist}} but explanatory footnotes need the extra template {{notelist}} to be placed where you want the explanatory notes to be placed. You can see the result in some articles like Joe Biden, which has both notes and references. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:16, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

that makes a lot of sense, thank you. Will take a deeper look when I can. TheMagicalCraftyLion (talk) 13:19, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

another thing, how do I go about adding the explanatory footnotes, I have looked at those links of the templates, but don't understand fully about adding them. So if I was to put one of them into a page, what happens? TheMagicalCraftyLion (talk) 13:51, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Anytime you're not sure how something editing-related works on Wikipedia, you can try it out in your sandbox to see what happens without affecting any articles. Here's a guide to the sandbox that you may find helpful. -- Avocado (talk) 14:00, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much Avocado, definitely will play around. TheMagicalCraftyLion (talk) 14:01, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

User:TheMagicalCraftyLion/sandbox

Tried adding a note but it does appear even though when I go into the edit I can see them, and when I would go to the citation tab the note kept duplicating but it wasn't actually duplicating, sorry if this makes no sense but I am still quite confused TheMagicalCraftyLion (talk) 12:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

So another tip is that if you see something on a page that you want to copy but you're not sure how, you can click "edit" on the page or section to see how it was accomplished. (You may need to choose "source editor" from the dropdown in the top right of the editing toolbar to see the difference.) That's what I just did to figure out how the list of notes is displayed in WP:Citing sources#Notes (I haven't used them before, either). Then I compared it to the source in your sandbox. Try doing the same and see if you can spot the difference; and if you get stuck, let us know. -- Avocado (talk) 12:59, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Got it! Needed to add:

"{{ notelist }}"

Spaced it out so it didn't convert the wikitext.

And thanks for the tip! TheMagicalCraftyLion (talk) 13:04, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Hurrah! -- Avocado (talk) 13:11, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Oh, btw, you may find Template:tlg and Template:tlc useful for discussing templates, too. -- Avocado (talk) 13:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Will have a look thank you! TheMagicalCraftyLion (talk) 13:19, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

it still disappears, I tried changing using note tag, when I add the notes list it shows a reference group. TheMagicalCraftyLion (talk) 13:11, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

okay. no using note tag with {{ note list }} just makes the notes disappear, explanatory footnotes with notelist the way to go TheMagicalCraftyLion (talk) 13:14, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Can an article that was rejected be republished?

I wrote an article a few years ago, but those who reviewed it felt it wasn’t strong enough for publication, and it was ultimately rejected. Is it possible to reconstruct and improve the article for republishing? Benjazper (talk) 12:40, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Benjazper If you think there are sources to get to WP:GNG, you can absolutely try. You can either start from scratch, or try WP:REFUND. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:02, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

The draft Draft:GlamCityz was repeatedly Declined, Speedy deleted and Rejected, and your account was indefinitely blocked. It appears you created a new account and tried again (that account blocked). You successfully appealed the initial block. In my opinion, the very, very, very last thing you should consider is again attempting to create a draft about GlamCityz. Please seek other means of contributing to Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 13:07, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

oh, I am not trying to create any draft about Glamcityz. I am just trying to gain more insight. Benjazper (talk) 13:38, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

You asked "Is it possible to reconstruct and improve the article for republishing?" If not that, what else are you asking about? David notMD (talk) 14:05, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

It's fine. Thank you very much. You've already answered my question. Benjazper (talk) 15:57, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Schiele Museum of Natural History

Hi folks! Although I've been on Wikipedia for a while, I've only recently made my first article, the Schiele Museum of Natural History. I've got a couple questions about the process, though.

1. How would I add this to WikiProject Museums? Will it add itself?
2. Does it meet WP:GNG? Do I need better sources? I understand some of them may be a little promotional, but I've tried to keep an NPOV. Some sections of the article may also need expanding.
3. What about pictures? I found one picture under CC-0 on another article that happened to be of a fossil from the museum, and another I took myself. Are these relevant enough to be put in the article, or should it be replaced with a picture of, say, the front of the building?

Answers to these question would be appreciated, and I'd also appreciate any edits! RidgelantRL (talk) 22:15, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

@RidgelantRL, I can answer one of your questions. The article will not add itself to the WikiProject. Normally the tags would be added when submitting a draft with AfC. I have added it for you, it can be added with {{WikiProject Museums}}. Happy Editing, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 23:17, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you!

RidgelantRL (talk) 01:06, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

As for #3, absolutely no problem with putting whatever images you can find on the article. Wikipedia is generally starved for images, what with the CC licensing requirements, and any at all are pretty good.

As for #2 -- the city is borderline as to independence, what with partially funding the museum. SHARE is written by it. VisitNC is unfortunately a travel guide, mostly not considered reliable. Mysteriously the ABC13 segment is sponsored, but by an unrelated company???????? So I suppose it's independent coverage. The WBTV segment looks good.

So basically, 1 clear reliable & scrupulously independent source. Probably could use another but not in dire straits by any means. Mrfoogles (talk) 06:26, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, that's kinda what I was worried about. You think you could find some more reliable sources? I found two about more recent events in the Gaston Gazzette.[8][9]

RidgelantRL (talk) 16:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Archiving sources on This is Gavin Newsom

I need help with archiving sources on the article This is Gavin Newsom, which I started. I put the dates where I archived sources, and some of them gave me an error? May anyone help me archive the sources on this article? You are also welcome to make any additional edits. I need to do this since the article is a Good Article nominee, and I need to satisfy the criteria. Editorthatedits (talk) 03:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Editorthatedits: Use the tool here - just paste in the title of your article (you will need to sign in to do so): https://iabot.wmcloud.org/index.php?page=runbotsingle Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:57, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Book-links

Hi

I was asked to remove "in line links to external sites".

The links in question are books, and they are formatted as books, so if I reformat them as simple references, a lot of information will get lost.

What do you advice in this case?

[10]

The follow up would be that these are links that aren´t in the body of the text, but under Publications, so I´m not sure if that rule applies?

Yours truly Audun H. Nilsen AudunNilsenOslo (talk) 02:47, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

As an example, you have written (in a list, not in the body): '' [https://theologicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/jisca/05-1_015.pdf Journal of the International Society of Christian Apologetics]''. If I thought the paper -- and yes, it's a paper, not an entire journal -- merited being listed, then I'd have written: "[https://theologicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/jisca/05-1_015.pdf Philosophical paradoxes of Darwinian evolutionary naturalism.]" ''Journal of the International Society of Christian Apologetics,'' vol. 5, no. 1 (April 2012), pp. 15–30. This of course still has the external link, but is a lot more informative about what's being linked to, and I think is unobjectionable. -- Hoary (talk) 09:03, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Better still, use {{Cite journal}}, but without <ref></ref> tags. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:00, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Request for feedback on Draft Article about Motion-Independent Orientation

Hi everyone, I’m working on an article in my sandbox and would really appreciate any feedback before I consider submitting it for review. The draft is here:

User:PatrickCDMM/sandbox

It’s titled Motion-Independent Orientation in Kinematic Systems and describes how objects can adpot an independent orientation regardless of their motion in 3D space — with potential applications in transportation, robotics, and engineering. I’ve tried to follow Wikipedia’s guidelines for tone, structure, and neutrality, but I’d be grateful for any comments or suggestions — particularly around clarity, notability, or anything that might need more work. Thanks for your time!

Best, Patrick PatrickCDMM (talk) 10:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

The draft is at User:PatrickCDMM/sandbox, and it was at User:PatrickCDMM as well. I've deleted the latter, as an improper use of a user page. As for the sandbox version, you can start by removing the header "Overview". And continue by using "sentence case" for the remaining headers: thus not "Motion-Independent Orientation" but "Motion-independent orientation". -- Hoary (talk) 10:55, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

PatrickCDMM Hello. The best way to get feedback is to submit the draft for review; if not accepted, the reviewer will leave feedback. You're essentially asking for a pre-review review, which duplicates effort. 331dot (talk) 10:57, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

I will add that Teahouse Hosts are not necessarily Reviewers. so may have a different view on your draft. David notMD (talk) 17:48, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

To be fair, AFC reviewers often just leave a template saying "references inadequate" without leaving people much an idea of what to do -- sending them here anyways. In a sense, they're just here early. Mrfoogles (talk) 06:31, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@PatrickCDMM, it looks like a lot of work went into writing this -- the things I notice are large sections are entirely uncited, which will likely be a problem at Articles For Creation, and your section titles are really long, which although not an AFC problem goes against style convention in Wikipedia -- generally you want to keep them as short as reasonable. Mrfoogles (talk) 06:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

PatrickCDMM, I've a few comments. (1.) The draft has long sections with multiple subsections, containing no references. I assume that's not all your original research. You need to cite the sources you got it from. (2.) Section headers should be in sentence case, not headline case. (3.) "A cat always lands on its feet" – I think is an example of the topic, which might be worth mentioning, Maproom (talk) 06:47, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Motion-Independent Orientation in Dynamic Systems. David notMD (talk) 18:04, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Technical feedback request on sandbox draft: Motion-Independent Orientation

Hello all,

I've been developing a draft article in my sandbox titled Motion-Independent Orientation in Dynamic Systems. It introduces the concept of decoupled orientation — where an object’s rotational frame evolves independently of its translational trajectory — with reference to robotics, aerospace, biomechanics, and inertial control.

The article includes definitions via rotation matrices, angular velocity in both spatial and object frames, and a typology of 1-, 2-, and 3-DOF configurations.

You can view the full draft here: User:PatrickCDMM/sandbox

I'd appreciate any technical or structural feedback — especially on clarity, neutrality, or whether it meets Wikipedia's notability and style expectations. PatrickCDMM (talk) 13:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

The best way to get feedback- at least about notability and sourcing- is to submit the draft so a reviewer can examine it. To ask for a pre-review review is redundant. 331dot (talk) 13:43, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Motion-Independent Orientation in Dynamic Systems. David notMD (talk) 18:04, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Why do my articles keep getting speedily deleted?

Once, I have tried to create some articles. I tried to create Alex Cheddar but it got deleted under sections A7 and A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Alex Cheddar was the author of the Find the Fox book.

Give me some advice on how to create articles without getting speedily deleted. FrierMAnaro (talk) 15:31, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse your previous attempt at an article Alex Cheddar was deleted because it was an article about a real person, which did not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject. Writing new articles is probably the hardest task here, better to gain experience with editing articles in general first.Theroadislong (talk) 15:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

He's not an author; that's not even a proper book, it's a word search puzzle that could have been compiled by anyone. See WP:NAUTHOR for the absolute minimum requirements for authors. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:46, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

The first thing you need when creating a new article is an appropriate topic. Without that, everything else is a waste of time and effort. Alex's videos are clever but there doesn't appear to be any independent coverage of him. DS (talk) 18:06, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Seeking clarity on how to improve chances of article approval

Hi, how can we get this article approved? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lucas_Ho

We have added a range of sources already, and the initial comment that "there is significant coverage of his plays but not of his person" appears contradictory - if a person's writerly output has received significant coverage, surely that person is therefore significant in some ways? Looking for some clarity here. Thank you in advance! :) Trismegishandy (talk) 21:04, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

To be honest I think I agree in this case. Not sure how AfC can turn into a discussion of notability, which is likely what is required here -- I'd recommend just making enough edits to manually create the article yourself (4 days old & 10 edits), then pinging the reviewer to let them know they can nominate it for deletion at articles for deletion, which they probably will anyway, and then presenting your arguments there, where discussion will happen.

The reviewers argument is basically that people are talking about his page & not him, so his plays deserve an article but not him, because WP:Notability isn't about significance -- just whether enough has been written to summarize into an article. Their argument is if people only write about his plays and not him, how can there be an article on him? Personally I think an article on him serves as well to talk about his plays as a hypothetical "Plays of Lucas Ho", discussing the plays but not him, would. Mrfoogles (talk) 06:42, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

In my opinion, "too soon" applies, as there has not been enough published about him as a playwright versus content on his plays. David notMD (talk) 12:46, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

but isn't content about a person's creative output also in some ways about that person as well? I do feel like there's a bit of splitting hairs here. Furthermore, our subject has had plays professional staged since 2013, which is more than 10 years ago. So we're not sure how notable or how soon qualifies here. Trismegishandy (talk) 18:02, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

See WP:42 for what qualifies as useful references. For a person to be Wikipedia-notable, people need to have published about him; referencing the existence of his work - here, his plays - is not sufficient. See also the Comments left at the draft. David notMD (talk) 18:07, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Biography of Dr Parveen Yograj

Hello,

I am seeking help from a neutral editor to review and possibly submit a well-sourced Wikipedia draft biography of Dr. Parveen Yograj, a senior medical professional and public health administrator from Jammu & Kashmir, India.

Due to conflict-of-interest guidelines, Dr. Yograj has decided not to submit the article himself and is requesting neutral assistance.

The draft has been carefully written and cites national and regional media coverage. It can be viewed here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Parveenyograj19631/sandbox

Any help from an experienced editor willing to review, improve, and submit the draft (if appropriate) would be deeply appreciated.

Thank you! Parveenyograj19631 (talk) 08:51, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Parveenyograi19631. You are speaking as if you are not him, but you are using his name as your username. Please clarify.

Your draft is now at Draft:Parveen Yograj. You need to click the "Submit your draft for review!" button in the submission box at the top to be able to submit it. 331dot (talk) 08:55, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

I infer from what I read at the foot of this version of this draft that the article subject himself wrote it and that you, Parveenyograj19631, (who uploaded it to your own sandbox) are simply following his directions. Please confirm this or correct it, writing in any one among (i) this thread right here (as 331dot has suggested), (ii) User talk:Parveenyograj19631 or (iii) Talk:Parveen Yograj. -- Hoary (talk) 10:44, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Update: Justlettersandnumbers has deleted the draft as mere promotion. -- Hoary (talk) 21:54, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

ABILENE

1. When was a Town Board elected. c 2. in the first years of the town board what types of crimes were committed by the cowboys. 3. During the town boards existence who were the famous sheriffs employed 4. What year was McCoy asked to leave. 5. Did McCoy finally leave. 115.189.130.30 (talk) 22:22, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

This is hard to understand -- do you mean Abilene, Texas? Mrfoogles (talk) 22:26, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

The IP means Abilene, Kansas. Carlstak (talk) 23:50, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Are you asking about information you want to add to the article about Abilene? If so, you need to find and incorporate references as you add information. If you want other people do to your research for you - no. David notMD (talk) 02:29, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Adding photo to person on Wikipedia page

I don't actually know how to add an image properly in the box on the page for a person. Can someone help me, please? AadamK (talk) 22:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Is this photograph one that's already at Wikimedia Commons, one that you took, one that you found on the web, one that you scanned from a printed page (or photographic print), or what, AadamK? -- Hoary (talk) 02:53, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

More details please. What article and what picture are you thinking of adding? That rule of thumb is that any random picture you find online (newsarticles, subjects social media etc) is under copyright and can't be used on WP. More at Help:Pictures. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:14, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia help for beginners

What can I do to help Wikipedia for new editors? Thanks. (TypesTornodo (talk) 04:54, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I suppose you could answer questions here or at the help desk. Become a host and whatnot. But you made your account today and only have one edit. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 05:00, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Or do you mean what can you (a new editor) do to help? MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 05:01, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes. (TypesTornodo (talk) 05:08, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

WP:TASKS may be of help to you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:15, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. (TypesTornodo (talk) 05:17, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

@TypesTornodo See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Geography and its talkpage, you might find something that interests you there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:31, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång. Thank you very much. (TypesTornodo (talk) 06:11, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Moving page to Wikipedia

Hi,

I’ve finished my drafts in my sandbox at User:Treasurerzuren/sandbox

Can someone help me move it to mainspace? Treasurerzuren (talk) 13:59, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Well, you should submit it to AfC to get a more experienced editor to help. However, looking at your article, it has no inline citations to back up the info and nothing to establish notability. It also lacks formating. See:

Wikipedia:Manual of Style

Help:Referencing for beginners

Help:Getting started

Wikipedia:No original research

Good luck, MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 14:13, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

User:Treasurerzuren/sandbox now deleted as inappropriate for Wikipedia. Please see the messages on your talk page. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:31, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

How can I improve my article writing?

I'd like to actually begin editing and making articles on obscure people, events and topics, any suggestions or tips? Local Events Man (talk) 00:00, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello Local Events Man. You'll need to make sure your obscure topics aren't too obscure, but will be about something that is notable for some reason. For example, I'm not noteworthy enough to have a Wikipedia article about me, even though I have a few friends and relatives who consider me to be a fairly nice person. You will also need to have at least three good references about your obscure topic. Alas, if nothing has been printed in a reliable publication about a topic it can't have a Wikipedia article. You may want to read Help:Your first article for more useful information. Best wishes on your work as an encyclopedia editor. Karenthewriter (talk) 02:23, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

See also WP:42 for what qualifies as Wikipedia-notability references. There are also additional specific requirements for musicians, academics, etc. David notMD (talk) 14:33, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Whats the policy on sexually explicit imagery in articles of animal species?

Images showing mating, genitalia, that sort of thing. For example, duck articles sometimes mention the corkscrew penis. Would it be acceptable accompany such content with an image of it? Bloopityboop (talk) 09:09, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not censored, but images should be used in such a way as to minimize "shock" to readers; the use of an image is best discussed on the article talk page of the relevant article. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Is there a policy saying that shock should be minimized? If so, I might mention it on the talk page of the Human feces article (for those new -- do not click unless you are prepared). I definitely think we need one. Mrfoogles (talk) 06:30, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

WP:OM basically says that. Yeshivish613 (talk) 14:43, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

While your personal editing style is up to you, as far as I am aware there is not policy that suggests attempting to “minimise shock” is a good thing. Contrarily, WP:NOTCENSORED states “Attempting to ensure that articles and images will be acceptable to all readers, or will adhere to general social or religious norms, is incompatible with the purposes of an encyclopedia.” -- NotCharizard ^🗨 14:08, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

A diagram is sometimes more helpful, as found at Lake duck#Penis. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:57, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Issue with redundant biographies between two selected bios

The bios of Al Williamson in these portals look near-similar, which do we keep for public display?

Thanks for a response. Odla101010 (talk) 10:40, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I don't know too much about portals, but if they are in two different portals why not keep both? MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 14:14, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Because the content of both bios is very similar, so might as well copy one to the other portal. Odla101010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Using an image from ar.wikipedia.org

I am drafting an article in English based on articles that already exist in other languages. I would like to use an image, but I cannot figure out how to do it.

The image I want to use is from https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%81

and I want to use it in this draft article here: Draft:Khaled Nashef

The previously written articles are

• https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khaled_Nashef
• https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%81#cite_note-%D9%85%D9%88%D9%84%D8%AF_%D8%AA%D9%84%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%8A%D8%A73-4
• https://arz.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%81

Any help or guidance is welcome. Isoceles-sai (talk) 14:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Isoceles-sai, that photo of Nashef was uploaded to Arabic Wikipedia under fair use. While it would probably meet the fair use criteria to be uploaded on English Wikipedia, fair use images are not allowed on draft articles. Therefore you should wait until your draft is accepted before adding the photo. All the best, Yeshivish613 (talk) 15:33, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Requesting step by step help with following WP:COI procedures

I am a new user. I want to follow WP:COI procedures which (according to an editor) include adding a special template to my userpage,and then requesting changes to the article with another template on the article Talk page. I have read the instructions multiple times but I'm having a tough time figuring out exactly what to do. Is there anyone who can walk me through it? Thanks in advance for any help! Monaco888 (talk) 17:23, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Monaco888: The templates are convenient (at least for those who understand them), but are not mandatory. You can simply write on your user page "I have a COI with X because Y", and on the article talk page "I have a COI, but please do Z". Note that you must also declare being paid, if that is the case. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I think I need to use the templates but don't understand how to do that. Specifically, the editor said, "Essentially, you have to add a special template to your userpage, not your Talk page, and then request changes to the article with another template on the article Talk page. For the exact details, please ask at the WP:Teahouse. Hopefully, you'll find someone there who is knowledgeable and can walk you through it." I'm hoping someone knowledgeable can guide me through this. Monaco888 (talk) 18:01, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

I would second what Andy said- while the templates are nice, they aren't required; what matters is being open and transparent with a COI, not specifically using the template. I would just type out a statement on your user page. 331dot (talk) 18:03, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

As for requesting changes to the article with another template on the article Talk page, you can try the Edit Request Wizard and see if that helps. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 14:46, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks to the very helpful people on here, problem is now solved. THANK YOU!!!! Monaco888 (talk) 16:19, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Article on Phulo and Jhano Murmu?

Hi Folks,

I was considering writing an article on Phulo and Jhano Murmu, however, I wanted to check on a few things. 1. Would the topic be considered notable? A brief search showed the following articles:

https://ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2408549.pdf - An academic article titled "Contributions Of Sidho-Kanho Murmu And Phulo- Jhano Of Santhal Pargana Of Jharkhand". The paper also notes a few books as references which talk of Phulo and Jhano Murmu.

https://www.oneindia.com/india/phulo-murmu-and-jhano-murmu-remembering-the-women-warriors-of-santhal-rebellion-3425580.html - A news article remembering Phulo and Jhano Murmu.

https://tribaldarshan.com/2016/11/04/tribal-heroines-phulo-murmu-and-jhano-murmu/ - A website highlighting the voices of tribal people in India has an article on the two sister, and mentions a booklet of note.

https://amritmahotsav.nic.in/district-reopsitory-detail.htm?24938 - A Government of India website celebrating independence in India talks of Phulo and Jhano Murmu's contributions to the freedom struggle.

2. If they are considered notable, would it make sense to refer to them together, or as separate articles? In most articles the two sisters are talked of together. This would then be similar to this article then: Sidhu and Kanhu Murmu.

Thanks! Circuited (talk) 19:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

resolving links to copyvio used in references

I've noticed that a certain website hosts PDFs of scans of music- and broadcasting-related magazines. These magazines are often cited in Wikipedia articles for songs, artists, musical tours, television shows, radio stations, and so on. Nothing wrong with referencing the magazines, for sure. But the references often include a URL to this website which hosts complete copies of the magazine. Since there's a wide variety of magazines (several dozen different titles) and no mention of endorsement by any of the publishers, my belief is that the site is hosting material that violates the owners' copyrights.

Wikipedia:Copyright violations says that Copyright-infringing material should also not be linked to. And so I've occasionally removed these references after discussing the issue at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. I've been doing other stuff, then noticed some more copyvio links and removed those today.

After doing that, I found there are about 60,0000 such links. Holy crap!

I thought it might be right to raise this issue Wikipedia:Copyright problems, but that seems to be only for single pages with copyvio issues.

Where is the best place to discuss this problem and seek a resolution? -- mikeblas (talk) 22:27, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Mikeblas WP:CP wouldn't be the place to go, since I believe they deal with actual infringements as opposed to links to infringements. It should not be too hard, on the other hand, to request a bot to unlink the website: it would just have to remove the entire URL parameter of the citation if your search pattern is found. That would leave some links that aren't in citation templates, but that's *hopefully* a small enough remainder to process manually. Cremastra _talk 22:51, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. A bot could clean up the links, sure. But how do we prevent new links from being added? Should WP:DEPHOW be followed to deprecate the site as a source? -- mikeblas (talk) 00:20, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I should also point out that some of those sources may not have had their copyrights renewed, and therefore they'd be in the public domain. Check individually, I guess? DS (talk) 19:12, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have no idea how to check that. -- mikeblas (talk) 19:26, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Permission sent from photographer to me -- can I upload the pic?

After attempts through the last couple months, I finally got permission to utilize a photo for this article I've been developing: Richard Raymond (publisher)

Stewart Brand, the creator of the image (in 1963), has sent the photo to me by email, and he expressed his permission to use it in the article. I can forward the email, if that can support the process.

I'll be very grateful for info preparing me to proceed. This will be my first time attempting an image upload.Joel Russ (talk) 22:23, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello Joel Russ, thank you very much for creating the article and requesting a picture for it. Usually, with exceptions described at WP:NFCC, permission for use in an article only wouldn't be sufficient. Please have a look at commons:Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team#If_you_are_NOT_the_copyright_holder for detials about licensing and the verification process. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:08, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, ToBeFree, for your prompt reply. I'll quote from Stewart Brand's email:

"Here you go. Shot by me at Dick Raymond’s home in January 1963.

Free to use every which way. WikiMedia, Creative Commons, etc."

Likely to pass muster? (I can forward the email as proof.)Joel Russ (talk) 23:26, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Forwarding such an e-mail wasn't accepted for the piano video on my user page; I had to ask the creator to send an e-mail to the VRT address themselves. The instructions on the linked Wikimedia Commons page are good. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:44, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Joel Russ, such a vague email statement is not enough. Brand must explicitly freely release the image using the precise legal language of an acceptable Creative Commons license or equivalent. Here, for example, is the text of the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, most commonly used for images these days. This is a legal transaction that must be done correctly. Cullen328 (talk) 01:54, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Basically, the photographer has to fill out a form and email it to a specific wikimedia address, for legal certainty (Wikipedia doesn't want to get sued). Mrfoogles (talk) 06:03, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

See WP:Donating copyrighted materials; that outlines the process. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 06:05, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Joel Russ what I've done in the past is to first upload the photo to Commons, ticking the box which says someone else gave permission and will send an email to VRTS, then reply to them and say something like "Thanks so much for the photo, for legal reasons Wikimedia requires you to contact them directly to release it, I would really appreciate if you could do this by emailing the text below to permissions-commonswikimedia.org", then fill in the declaration at WP:CONSENT and put it below. Hope this helps. Yeshivish613 (talk) 13:46, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm trying that. I emailed Stewart and told him that he, not I, is the person required to license his images. Stewart replied to my email this morning, saying he has consigned the two images he sent me to a CC BY-SA 4.0 license. So, I uploaded the images to Wikimedia Commons, as you suggested.

At this point, I'm hoping that Stewart (who is now 87 years old) did the licensing properly. I've got no idea how one confirms the licensing.Joel Russ (talk) 22:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

How to become an admin?

My name is Aiden and I’m from Georgia. I really liked reading Wikipedia articles and I did a little editing before I started an account. Honestly it’s been really good to have something to take my mind of the chemo even though they say i might not be responding to it. One of my doctors told me I shouldn’t let my condition prevent me from pursuing my dreams, so now I’m asking how I can become a Wikipedia administrator, even if only for one day? Thank you to anyone who has any advice. L$Aiden$L (talk) 19:04, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

The standard process for becoming an admin involves a week-long public vetting procedure, during which people will ask you questions about your previous actions on Wikipedia, your knowledge of procedure, and what you would do in various hypothetical situations. Then people state that they either support you becoming an admin, or oppose you. When the 'bureaucrat' counts the 'support' and 'oppose' opinions, they check each one to make sure it's actually from a genuine Wikipedia participant, and not someone who joined just to say "I SUPPORT THIS PERSON BECOMING AN ADMIN".

I hope you understand that giving someone admin access, without their having shown that they can be trusted with it, is an extraordinarily bad idea.

Good luck with chemo; I hope to see your edits in the future - and who knows, maybe you'll get to become an admin the normal way! DS (talk) 19:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Someone else put a message on my talk page about it so I understand that you’re supposed to have alot of edits and stuff but (Redacted) so I haven’t had much opportunity to get alot of edits. The problem is that because of my cancer I might not have time to do alot of edits. I promise I can be trusted though. L$Aiden$L (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@L$Aiden$L: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1252. Unfortunately, editors want to see that the person applying to be an administrator can be trusted, and that's shown by their behaviour on the site, usually spanning back years. The process can be very grueling and sensitive questions may be asked. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:13, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Becoming a Wikipedia admin is very difficult and usually only possible if you're already very experienced, unfortunately. But really, admins are just regular editors who can ban people, delete articles, and suchlike, which is definitely not the core of what Wikipedia is about. If you're trying to do something big you could definitely go for a featured article -- while it is difficult, anyone can write one of those. I'd recommend doing something like that, or just finding what you enjoy about editing Wikipedia and trying to reach milestone there -- even if you were an admin for a day, there probably wouldn't be much to do other than read deletion discussions and read people complaining about things. Mrfoogles (talk) 22:24, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Personally, I enjoy editing Wikipedia but have no desire to be an admin. I did try for a good article once (failed, unfortunately -- the topic was too new). Administrators are needed, but they're not really the purpose of Wikipedia. Mrfoogles (talk) 22:26, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

(Redacted) I don’t know how I would write a really good article that could make me an admin. I just want the chance to live out my dream even if only for one day because I might not have alot of time left. L$Aiden$L (talk) 22:32, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi User:Cremastra do you also have cancer that isn’t responding to chemo? L$Aiden$L (talk) 00:16, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

(WP:GAs are more attainable – I've written a couple and I'm also <20 years old. –me)

No, I don't. Cremastra _talk 00:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok. Let me know how attainable it is to write a few good articles when you have cancer that isn’t responding to chemo. L$Aiden$L (talk) 00:25, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

You don't have to write a brand new article to make a good contribution to Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 10:21, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I've seen this question asked before. To put it another way- what would the Boston Red Sox say if you asked if you could be their starting pitcher in an actual game to fulfill a dream while you are battling a medical concern? They would likely have much sympathy for you, but they also have a responsibility to their fans and their business to put the best team on the field they can for a game. They can't just let anyone be the starting pitcher or center fielder, no matter what the reason. It's the same as possessing the admin toolset(and that's what it is, a toolset more than a role). It can't be given to just anyone, no matter what the reason. And as noted, what would you do for a day? You don't need to have the admin tools to be a good contributor. You don't even have to write an entire new article. 331dot (talk) 22:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

I think it’s interesting that admins are saying you don’t need to be an admin, all you have to do is write good articles. Would they still be saying that if they weren’t admins? L$Aiden$L (talk) 00:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I mean, I'm not an admin and I'm saying you could write good articles. But people have different goals and different priorities. If you find you enjoy writing articles and feel satisfied after writing one – go with that. Cremastra _talk 00:19, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Well since my doctor is talking about stopping the chemo and leaving it up to “the universe”, I guess what I would enjoy is getting to be an admin on the website that has been my only source of comfort. L$Aiden$L (talk) 03:19, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I would still say that. Possessing the admin tools is an enhancement to work on Wikipedia, not a job in and of itself. The tools are only given to people who show a need for them, how it will aid what they do and how that benefits the community. I get what you're saying, that your need is that you're battling a medical issue and may not able to use Wikipedia much longer- but that's your own personal need, not a need that affects your Wikipedia work. If you say- spend your time fighting vandalism, you can then argue that giving you the tools will aid your fighting vandalism. If you participate in a lot of Articles for Deletion discussions, giving you the ability to delete articles would allow you to close those discussions.

No matter your personal situation, you won't be given the admin tools just as the Red Sox or the Atlanta Braves won't make you their starting pitcher for an actual game; the American people won't make you President of the US for a day, if that were your dream. Some things might happen- the Braves might let you throw out the ceremonial first pitch; the President might let you tour the White House and sit at his desk; Wikipedia will let you contribute to an article. We're not trying to crush your dreams, but dreams have to give way to reality sometimes. Contributing to an article has a bigger impact on Wikipedia than merely possessing the admin tools for a day. I would suggest that you find a topic you're interested in that you can contribute about; then your username is preserved in the edit history of articles on that topic for as long as Wikipedia exists. I wish you the best. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

• Hello @L$Aiden$L: there is a test Wikipedia where you can test the admin tools. Leo^talk 01:10, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

To be honest, creating any article, let alone a Good article is a hard task. Even raising an existing article to GA is a hard task that typically requires making scores of edits to improve the article and then addressing everything the GA reviewer said is still not good enough. If you enjoy Wikipedia, you may find a good early step is to work on improving existing articles, especially if there is a topic you like and know about. See Help:Referencing for beginners and WP:42 for why adding content calls for adding references. David notMD (talk) 02:24, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Even though it won’t be possible for you to become an overnight admin, here’s something you might enjoy: a virtual experience of “meeting” candidates from past elections, following the questions asked by the current admins and the responses the candidates made, and seeing the final vote tallies. I did this a few months back to get an idea of what admins do, wanting to expand my not-all-that-far-from-newbie understanding of what goes on in Wikipedia that "plain vanilla editors" like me rarely (if ever) see. I found it fascinating. If you think this might appeal to you, then:

• Go to the archives for successful admin requests over the years.
• Scroll down to the 2025 table and click on either of the editors' names.
• Now you can read what the candidate said by way of introduction and his or her responses to the mostly "what-if" questions tossed out by the current admins.
• Similar information is available for successful admin elections over earlier years, which appear below 2025. Enjoy!

And ... thoughts and prayers, @L$Aiden$L. Augnablik (talk) 07:01, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

@L$Aiden$L: Based on your userpage which says I really want to be a Wikipedia administrator so I can help block vandals and delete bad articles just like my heros and my own personal experience with having that as a special interest as a kid, you can help "block vandals and delete bad articles" without being an administrator. Specifically, I think you should set yourself a goal of passing the WP:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Academy.

You will not become an admin in the timescale you are discussing, as other have said. However, you can definitely get vandals blocked and delete bad articles. This is an attainable goal for you because it only requires free time and an ability to learn the policies. Since you are stuck in the hospital, you will be better at that than most people.

Right now, to gain edits (as WP:CVUA recommends you have 200 mainspace edits), you can install WP:Ultraviolet and look at Special:RecentChanges. You might also consider finding a Category:Wikipedia backlog (described at Wikipedia:Backlog) and starting to clear it. For example, Category:Succession box misuse tracking. I just removed one article from Category:S-bef: 'before' parameter includes the word 'created' with a simple one-line change. [11]

Feel free to leave me talk page messages if you want more advice. I hope to see you make contributions in the next few weeks. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 23:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Annotated links

How do you edit an annotation in an "annotated link"? For example, I am looking at the annotations from the "See also" section of the Philanthropy article. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:25, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Iljhgtn. To use {{Annotated link}} in its most basic form, the editor simply puts {{Annotated link|Article B}}, and the annotation note part will be automatically pulled from the Article B's short description. TO modify it, you'd have to modify the Article B's short description. Sometimes that's a good idea, sometimes it isn't - if, for whatever reason, you wish to modify the annotation without changing Article B's short description, I believe you'd have to simply turn it into a regular link instead. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 01:39, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you that answers my question. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:48, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

AfD question

In an AfD, occasionally, I am persuaded away from my initial !vote from a Keep to a Delete or vice versa, in those instances, should I strikethrough my initial !vote and make a comment about the change? Or should I simply edit my !vote away from what it initially was? What is the best protocol for a change-of-mind in an AfD? Iljhgtn (talk) 01:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

WP:AFDFORMAT advises to strike rather than silently change it. I usually add my new explanation as an indented response to my previous one (striking as necessary) so it's clear I am correcting myself. Others simply post a new comment in chronological order (with a comment that they are changing their mind) and strike the old one. DMacks (talk) 03:21, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

But strike in all cases. Ok, that works. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:29, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Can Fandom be used for references?

I'm drafting articles for multiple Overwatch characters but am having trouble finding references, and I was curious if Fandom could be used for references. Someone please get back to me as I am somewhat new to Wikipedia. AlexEditsStuff (talk) 00:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

No. Sources must be considered reliable by the community's definition, and as a user generated site, Fandom does not fit under our definition. Even Wikipedia itself cannot be used as a source for other Wikipedia articles. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 02:15, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Where can I find good references for these types of articles? AlexEditsStuff (talk) 02:33, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi AlexEditsStuff - Overwatch is a video game, correct? Well, the editors over at Wikiproject Video Games have made a list of sources they believe tend to be reliable for video-game related content. No promises, but you might have luck looking at through those. Good luck! GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 02:42, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Sometimes you can't, and then you shouldn't try to make a WP-article on the whatever. Existing is not enough, see WP:BACKWARDS. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winston (Overwatch) could be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Consensus against use of Fandom (website) can be found at WP:FANDOM. Cullen328 (talk) 06:52, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

@AlexEditsStuff Are the characters themselves had a significant coverage ?

Do you want to write an article for each characters or only the major characters ?

A draft on a minor character could be rejected and not declined without significant coverage.

Read this about the difference between "rejected" and "declined" : "Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Draft decline or reject help".

I advise you to read the message wrote by "Gråbergs Gråa Sång" in "APRIL/06/2025" at "05:06 UTC".

I advise you to read the message wrote by "Cullen328" in "APRIL/06/2025" at "06:52 UTC".

Now , I think you have the knowledge necessary to advance in this work. Good editing ! Anatole-berthe (talk) 02:36, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm doing articles for the playable characters that don't have one, Genji, Reaper, Mauga, etc AlexEditsStuff (talk) 03:08, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

@AlexEditsStuff Thanks for your message ! I think all playable characters are notable. Anatole-berthe (talk) 04:48, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk page question

I recall seeing a talk page banner saying something along the lines of "this webpage has copied text from Wikipedia and not vice versa. Do not consider this to be a copyright violation". Does anyone know what that banner is? Brent Silby (talk) 11:25, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

{{Backwards copy}}? DMacks (talk) 11:31, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Yep, that's the one. Thanks! Brent Silby (talk) 11:32, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

WP:PROMO question

Sometimes while patrolling new pages I came across pages such as User talk:Updatetv and User:Pecola Samara Coleman which contains only a few sentences of user's own biography or company introduction. Does these constitutes WP:G11/WP:U5? If not, is there any other actions that need to be taken? Syn73 (talk) 11:07, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

@Syn73: I personally would leave a message on their talk page informing them that this is against the rules and ask them to remove it. If they don't comply within ~48 hours, then remove it yourself. Plenty of new users simply don't know all the rules (I don't blame them, it's a sea of links and acronyms out there), and it's much better to explain to them what's wrong and giving them the opportunity to rectify it rather than deleting their contributions and shoving angry templates in their face. PhoenixCaelestis · Talk · Contributions 12:20, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Understood, thank you very much! Syn73 (talk) 12:22, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Accessing NEW images from Wikimedia Commons

Stewart Brand, the photographer & copyright holder, has provided photos for this article I've been developing: Richard Raymond (publisher)

Stewart has apprised me by email that he's now consigned the photos to public availability, having used the CC-BY-SA-4.0 option. This would have occurred within the last 16 hours.

However, doing a Wikimedia Commons search by the subject's name (trying both Richard Raymond and Dick Raymond, as he was usually called) seemed to turn up nothing. Is there a typical time lag for image availability? What can you tell me?Joel Russ (talk) 19:17, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Using the search mode of a wikipedia or commons site should be nearly automatic. There is sometimes a lag when material is *removed* (false positive) but I have rarely encountered the type of problem you are describing. Try asking him what filenames he used, or what his username is when he uploaded them. DMacks (talk) 19:47, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I tried some searches, and unfortunately there are (as you note) several possible name combinations; and also, these are several people with this name. DMacks (talk) 19:50, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Joel Russ. Who uploaded the pictures to Commons? Presumably you didn't yourself, or you'd know where to find them. There is no user on Commons with that name (though of course many users use a pseudonym), so you'll need to ask Brand if he uploaded them. If nobody has uploaded them, then they won't be in Commons: the don't appear there magically.

Unfortunately, while releasing them under CC-BY-SA is enough, informing you of the fact is not. He must either make a public declaration (eg publishing them on his website with the licence), or inform Wikimedia directly. The easiest way to do this, if he is willing, is for him to upload them to Commons, and then he can claim them as his own work and say that he has licensed them as required. The alternative is that he sends a mail to Wikimedia as explained at donating copyright materials and then you upload them. ColinFine (talk) 19:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

This was already discussed above. @Joel Russ, what do you mean that he released the photos under a CC BY 4.0 license? There are multiple ways one can release a picture, do you mean he uploaded it to Commons? Yeshivish613 (talk) 20:08, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I emailed Stewart last night, explaining to him that I could not apply for CC licensing. I sent him the URL for the page that explains how he could do that. By 8:30am PDT, Stewart had emailed back to me, indicating he had done it; saying simply. "So consigned."

Stewart has been a brilliant man most of this life, but he's now 87 years old. So I remain a bit concerned.Joel Russ (talk) 22:51, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

According to his article, he's actually 86, and he must have understood copyright when he campaigned for the image of the earth to be released in 1966. 😄 Yeshivish613 (talk) 00:15, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Though seriously, it could be that he emailed it to photosubmission@wikimedia.org, which would take a few days for it to be uploaded. Yeshivish613 (talk) 11:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

That gives me hope. Thanks again.Joel Russ (talk) 13:29, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

DYK article preview text

The article preview for one of todays DYK articles Sekijin sekiba reads as File: Three ghosts by Vishchun.png|thumb|right|6th-century sekijin (ICP) from Iwatoyama Kofun, Fukuoka Prefecture , but I can't figure why it would display this way when I look at the source code - any advice? Underswamp (talk) 13:42, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Underswamp, welcome to the Teahouse. Page Previews had cached a revision [12] which was reverted the same minute. A dummy edit [13] updated the preview. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:10, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Underswamp (talk) 14:21, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Overall opinion on a draft

I would appreciate any high level advice on this draft that I started, to know if I am going in the right direction and if there are obvious things I need to fix Draft:Radu Isac. Thank you! Viopatra (talk) 14:25, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Viopatra Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have submitted your draft for review; the reviewer will leave you feedback if it is not accepted. 331dot (talk) 14:30, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Viopatra (talk) 14:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

@Viopatra I am not a reviewer but there are a few things you should do to improve your chances of the draft being approved. First, comment at the top to show which sources best meet our golden rules for sourcing: being independent and with significant coverage in reliable sources. For example, the BBC is reliable but you have just given program listings in citations #8 and #9, so is not significant. The Guardian source #14 is mainly based on an interview, so is not independent, and so on. Your use of bolding does not follow the manual of style: see MOS:BOLD. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:25, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your input, appreciate this! I removed the bold in the text. For the sources, The Guardian source is an article that quotes multiple artists, not sure why this would not be considered independent. Viopatra (talk) 15:36, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

The Guardian is independent but the issue is whether it is giving significant coverage to Isac or merely quoting his views after interviewing him much as if he had provided them with a press release. We don't want to base articles mainly on what people say about themselves but mostly on what sources report without prompting: that's explained in detail in Wikipedia's guidance on how we judge topics to be notable. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:05, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Feedback on Article

Hello! I am a newcomer to Wikipedia as a part of an online communities class dedicated to wikieducation. I have been working on an article for Gourmet Makes for a while now which is now in the mainspace. I would greatly appreciate any feedback, edits, or advice from more experienced Wikipedia users, so I can make this article as effective and as perfect as possible. Thanks so much in advance!!! Bunchabananas (talk) 18:36, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

No replies or comments on a 5 day old articles for deletion discussion. What happens now?

I created the article AMP (streamer collective) on March 31. I initially made a draft for it before that so that I had a place to put together a decent start of an article first before it was put into the mainspace. It was accepted through Articles for Creation (AFC) soon after I submitted it for review once I had a decent draft made.

A few days later on April 3 a user proposed it for deletion per WP:PROD. However the deletion discussion (that discussion is here) hasn't gotten any replies or comments so far since then. I've never had an article I created get proposed for deletion and then not have at least a little bit of discussion occur soon after.

So what happens now in a situation like that? Like I said before I have never had this happen before. As such I have never dealt with such a scenario and though I'd ask about it here because of that.

Thanks in advance to anyone who replies. Greshthegreat (talk) 23:58, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Greshthegreat. This happens a lot with deletion discussions due to a chronic shortage of participants. If not enough people voice their opinions in the standard one-week period, it might be relisted for one or more weeks to get more participation, or possibly closed as "soft delete" if there's nobody arguing for keeping the article (articles that are soft deleted can be restored upon request). If discussion is minimal after several relists, it might be closed as "no consensus", and the article is retained. You are welcome to contribute to the discussion and explain why the article should be kept.

Note that WP:PROD is a different process than WP:Articles for deletion—looks like the editor initially tagged it with PROD but then switched to AfD. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:38, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

getting professional help for editing

Greetings, Can you send me the invitation next time you have a Teahouse forum for editing?

thank you (Redacted) Richard A Hooker (talk) 22:45, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

@Richooker I'm not sure what you're asking here. This page is for asking questions on WP-editing, and anyone can look at it/participate or search in the archived discussions if they want. WP doesn't have any workshops on how to edit if that's what you're after, but we have stuff like WP:TUTORIAL and Category:Instructional videos on using Wikipedia in English. You can also try searching Youtube, maybe there's something good there. Or just google, I recently found a "Top 5 Wikipedia writing services ranked" article, but my default assumption is that these services are probably WP:SCAMs. Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing might be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:17, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Need help on creating an article for a serial movie in a franchise of movies

Draft:Surge of Power: Revenge of the Sequel is the sequel to Surge of Power: The Stuff of Heroes

I have added citations but I don't have any content that would be considered neutral as I have not seen the movie. I have no idea how to rewrite the draft or if it would be accepted if rewritten.

Thank you for your time. JohnJonesSOP (talk) 19:02, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

JohnJonesSOP, your draft has been rejected. At the top of it, you see "STOP". Unsurprisingly, that means stop. Stop wasting your time, and others' time, on this thing. -- Hoary (talk) 21:01, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @JohnJonesSOP. As Hoary says, this is irrelevant in this case, as the draft has been rejected. But more generally, whether or not you have seen the movie is of little consequence, because what you know, think, or believe, about the subject you are writing an article about, is almost irrelevant. An article should be a neutral summary of what independent reliable sources have published about the subject, and very little else. The writer's knowledge shouldn't enter into it.

More generally, My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 09:08, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

How to mark categories for deletion?

Hi, I made a simple error with categories (title case instead of sentence case) and I have a few of them now that are useless because I created the properly named categories instead. There is no reason they should still exist. How do I delete them?

Category:Herbicides by Numeric HRAC ('Numeric' shouldn't be capitalised, similar error in subcategories) RustyOldShip (talk) 09:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @RustyOldShip, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please go to WP:CFD. ColinFine (talk) 09:11, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Unblock access and edit permission

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § Unblock access and edit permission

 – —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Request to cancel access ban Armin fozuni (talk) 15:59, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Your account is not blocked. To what are you referring? 331dot (talk) 16:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Based on edit history, I think it's Daylamites. Also based on edit history I'd be disinclined to do it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:34, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I can't edit in Persian. Someone has blocked me. They don't know why. If you could please unblock my IP, I've received a message saying, "Go to Duck or Spare." Armin fozuni (talk) 16:51, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Administrators here have no power or control over fa.wp, which is a separate project with its own standards and practices. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:03, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Okay, tanks Armin fozuni (talk) 03:31, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Do you know someone who can help me? Armin fozuni (talk) 04:18, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

You would need to put in an unblock request on your user talk page on fa.wp. We are completely unfamiliar with that particular Wikipedia's standards, practices, and admin corps. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 05:23, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

In Persian, if you mean "I can't because it's blocked and won't allow it" Armin fozuni (talk) 08:17, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

You are indefinitely blocked and have no talk page access on fa.wp, but we cannot help you here. Pinging the blocking admin user:Tisfoon (who is sometimes active on English Wikipedia) in case they care to comment. Meters (talk) 08:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

okey Thank you. Armin fozuni (talk) 09:15, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

From looking at the block log and putting it thru Google Translate, I get (roughly): "WP:DUCK sockpuppet of Armbbfazz^(fa)", who is themselves indef'd for (roughly) misrepresenting sources, not providing sources, and ignoring warnings to that effect. From a quick translation of a handful of Armbbfazz' edit summaries I get the sense that fa.wp's DUCK block is justified, given it tracks with what Armin's written on en.wp. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:34, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano and Meters: This user has been indefinitely blocked on Fawiki for multiple reasons, including disruptive edits and sockpuppetry. His previous account (User:Armbbfazz) was also indefinitely blocked due to vandalism. By creating different accounts and making the same edits on the same pages while ignoring all warnings, he has engaged in WP:GAME. As a result, his multiple accounts will remain blocked permanently on Fawiki. Tisfoon (talk) 04:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for that information. They are currently temporarily blocked here for these disruptive requests: refusing to listen when we say we cannot help here. DMacks (talk) 11:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Help with my first draft article, that just got refused for not respecting NPOV rules

Hello,

I'm happy to improve the content of the submitted article. As this one is very long (6000+ words), with some technical parts, I would like someone who could help me identify the conflictual parts.

Thanks in advance Pgrondier (talk) 09:30, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Pgrondier, and welcome to the Teahouse. Without looking in detail, I can see that Draft:Accounting for sustainability: the C.A.R.E. project reads very much as what CARE wants people to know about them.

Wikipedia has almost no interest in what the subject wants people to know about them. A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what independent reliable sources have published about the subject, and very little else.

It is likely that your best course is to throw away what you've writen, and start again, forgetting anything you may personally know about the project, and concentrating on summarising only what those independent sources have said about it. ColinFine (talk) 09:40, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

The majority of content, including the Phases sections, is not referenced, and is what the C.A.R.E. project says about itself. Delete all that. Basically start over. And, I am guessing that a lot of the content is copied from C.A.R.E., and copyright protected. Copying is forbidden. David notMD (talk) 12:58, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Editing Wikipedia files

Hello, I was wondering if the non-free file File:Reese-Robinson scene in 42.png could have the black border parts cropped out of the picture, much appreciated. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 15:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@Yovt I've done the crop. A bot will come along later and lower the resolution, as required by the non-free provisions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:22, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

First Article Pending Review

Hi! I'm relatively new to editing and finally decided to try my hand at a new article last month. It's been awaiting review in the New Page Patrol for a little over a week and I was wondering if anyone would have the time to take a look at it and give me some feedback? I did my best to provide NPOV, and am pretty confident it meets the notability standard as I was able to find plenty of documentation via reliable sources online (I chose a band that has pretty high profile coverage and used a similar sized band's page as a template). Would greatly appreciate any guidance from a more experienced editor! Thanks :)

The Thing (rock band) Ernst the Junger (talk) 16:44, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Others may choose to weigh in, but IMHO it looks quite good for a first attempt. I'd remove the spotify link; it doesn't help your article. BusterD (talk) 16:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Will do, thanks for the quick hit back. Ernst the Junger (talk) 17:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

By looking at the categories you've applied, you can see many other like articles for modeling. While you're browsing other articles, go to their talk pages, and see what WikiProject banners might be appropriate for this article. BusterD (talk) 17:42, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Not changeable ref

Hello guys! On this page, i have found very often some refs that cannot be changed either from visual or source editor (in the source editor it shows just a "ref name") and the ref doesn't repeat before. But, when i click their number out of the edit mode, it shows me a normal ref.

Can somebody say me (please!) what is this and how to modify them?

Best regards,

Dimitrie569 (talk) 18:45, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

The refs are defined at the end of the article I suppose. Please, see Wikipedia:List defined references. Ruslik_Zero 19:29, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I understand now :)

Dimitrie569 (talk) 19:37, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

How to remove page issue level of mahroos siddiquee nadim article

Mahroos siddiquee nadim article Sukhi vale (talk) 22:45, 8 April 2025 (UTC)https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahroos_Siddiquee_Nadim

@Sukhi vale: None of those sources are acceptable:

• We can't use Medium (no editorial oversight)
• Google Scholar is completely irrelevant for a football player
• We can't use Tring (online storefront, too sparse)
• We can't use The Players' Agent (too sparse).

—Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 22:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

To add to this, the player simply isn't notable. He may have more coverage in foreign language news, I wouldn't know, but looking him up in both the news section of Google and the main search there's nothing on him. It seems as if it's simply far too soon to make an article. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 22:52, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Photos on Wikimedia Commons, are they now usable

There are two photos supplied by Stewart Brand (the original photographer), that can now be found with a search on Wikimedia Commons. They are: Richard "Dick" Raymond, 1963.jpg and Whole Earth Truck Store.jpg Each is noted this way This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. (You can check this.)

Mr Brand told me, in a email, that he'd done the licensing. Once I found the files to be available, I added the pic of Richard Raymond to the Wikipedia article Richard Raymond (publisher).

On the Commons Help Desk, there is one advisor who insists that public usage has not yet been validated with these files... that proper registration has not been completed. I do not understand. Please let me know if this can be true? Joel Russ (talk) 00:35, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

About: this. -- Hoary (talk) 02:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I think the general policy is either Mr. Brand should upload the pictures, or that he should send a specific form email to the Wikimedia Foundation releasing them into the public domain. Maybe forwarding the emails would work if he stated the specific license? I don't know the details, though, this isn't exactly the right place. Mrfoogles (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Read the policy -- basically, I don't know how it works legally, but the policy on Wikipedia is that the copyright holder (Mr. Brand) should send an email to the Volunteer Response Team releasing it to CC-BY-4.0, and then they'll ask for clarification if necessary (it's usually necessary according to the page), and then they'll tag the image confirming they confirmed it.

"2) The copyright-holder—not the Wikimedian involved—needs to send email to VRT to grant or confirm the license. The COM:VRT page contains a sample of the email they would need to send, and also links to a generator to make it easier to generate the text of such an email. The email should also contain copies of the correspondence with you that got things this far. A few key details:"

See https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team.

Basically, I think the deal is you should ask him to use this generator, and send him the link to the commons page to put in; or just fill it out yourself and send him the text he should send the volunteer response team in order to release it. Mrfoogles (talk) 02:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Joel Russ, you wrote on the the file page of the portrait on Commons, An email, sent soon afterwards, told me he had consigned them to public domain using CC-BY-SA-4.0. I can forward the emails.. The problem is that putting the photo into the public domain eliminates the copyright on the photo while CC-BY-SA-4.0 maintains the copyright with just a few but still significant restrictions. Those who re-use the photo must credit the copyright holder and derivative works must also credit the copyright holder. In other words, public domain and CC-BY-SA-4.0 are different things that are incompatible with each other. You need to go to Wikimedia Commons and get this straightened out, because it is a mess right now. Cullen328 (talk) 03:34, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

How to reduce the width of the species table?

Many genus articles such as Theristicus, Balearica, Antigone, etc, have species tables that are too wide to appear beside the taxobox, and instead appear underneath it. Obviously this is not good, as it usually leaves a ridiculous amount of empty space above the species table. So how do you reduce the width of the species box? I couldn't figure it out despite a lot of experimenting. Bloopityboop (talk) 00:11, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@Bloopityboop: You shouldn't. You don't know the width of a reader's display, so can't finely adjust content this way. Infobox widths are set to display condensed information in an easily-readable way; making them narrower will reduce readability. The species tables, on the other hand, have large amounts of whitespace as a result of how they display images and maps in individual columns. I could argue that they should really be "plain" text divided into sections, as it seems that having them as tables is for formatting reasons only (which is forbidden). Bazza 7 (talk) 16:33, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@Bloopityboop: on Theristicus the species table has narrow-percent=75. Note that the default width for species table is 100%, so the narrow-percent=75 already makes it narrower that it otherwise would. On my monitor it still appears beside the infobox instead of underneath. The species table does include quite a lot of empty space though since the "Size and ecology" column has no data. The advice Bazza_7 gives is good however, since on mobile or small laptop might be too narrow. MKFI (talk) 10:54, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

New Blood Pop

Could you please explain to me how to re-phrase the first ref block to not "read like an advert ... to sell his work". I used these two currently published similar Wikipedia articles on other artists to base my phrasing on (Karl Maughan and Andy Warhol)). I tried to be as objective as possible, basing this on facts? Saluation97 (talk) 09:11, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Read why your submission was declined. What is the thing you don't understand ? I can help you to understand it if you ask.

The problem isn't only a sentence. It's deeper.

"Draft:New Blood Pop". Anatole-berthe (talk) 09:22, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@Saluation97 Welcome to the Teahouse. One immediate difference between the article on Andy Warhol and your draft is that the former has extensive citations to sources that are by reputable art critics who are entirely independent of the artist. Your draft's sourcing is mainly to the artist's own website or to galleries that are trying to sell his work or are writing based on what he said in interview. To be successful, you need mainly to base your draft on sources which are reliable, independent and contain significant coverage. If you mainly use these, you can add a few non-controversial parts based on less independent sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:24, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Saluation97, and welcome to the Teahouse. Many drafts by inexperienced editors about people or organisations make the mistake of telling what the person or organisation wants to the world to know about them. But this is inherently promotional, and is not what Wikipedia wants. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 12:58, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

New Article Improvements

Hi everyone! As part of a wiki.edu course, I've been writing my first Wikipedia article: Pretty privilege. As I work to improve the article, I was hoping to receive feedback/help from more experienced Wikipedians. Additionally, more perspectives would be appreciated regarding a discussion about merging the Pretty privilege article with an already existing article for Body privilege. If anyone has any suggestions, insights, or edits, please let me know or go ahead and do so! Thank you. Nabbatie (talk) 05:18, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Halo effect, we read, was first introduced by Edward Thorndike in his 1920 paper, “A constant error in psychological ratings.”^[7] -- that "17" pointing to Thorndike's paper. No, because a paper is not a good source for a claim that it, the selfsame paper, has achieved this or that. What you need to cite here is the assertion that it was Thorndike who, in this paper, first introduced it. (Googling "halo thorndike" -- without the quotes -- brings a lot of hits, but many of these look dodgy. I'd start by looking in a psychology text, psychology encyclopedia, or psychology dictionary, or indeed even oed.com.) If you think that readers may also be helped by publishing/availability details of the 1920 paper, then these details should go in a note. (Notes are best done via Template:Efn.) -- Hoary (talk) 06:50, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Needs a section on pre-career, i.e., school-age, as the beauty/handsome discrimination is stronger there than at the career level. Also could use content on male body image with its increasing desire for muscular appearance, 'gym body/beach body', and the older and somewhat lessened bias against baldness. Also consider adding content on body disadvantage keyed to being obese, as that is falsely perceived as a moral failing. David notMD (talk) 12:59, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Factual information in conflict between two articles. How do I reconcile the two?

I would like to flag conflicting statements in two articles. The artcle on the Archbasilica of Saint John Lateran claims it is the oldest basilica in the western world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archbasilica_of_Saint_John_Lateran#:~:text=and%20the%20oldest%20basilica%20of%20the%20Western%20world

However, the article on the Aula Palatina or Basilica of Copnstantine in Trier Germany claims it was built between AD 300 and 310, at least 14 years before the archbasilica was first built.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aula_Palatina#:~:text=built%20between%20AD%20300%20and%20310

Should I simply delete the claim in the first article or is there someone more knowledgeable than I who should rectify the conflict in claims?

Thank you,

Tim Heitman Theitman451 (talk) 17:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles rarely claim anything. Sources on the other hand often make assertions or claims. What wikipedians often do is to say something like "The Vatican regards x as the oldest..." or "UNESCO identifies the dates of construction as..." or some such. When there are significant disagreements between sources, it's not unusual for articles to discuss source disagreement itself. For a new editor, it's sometimes helpful to ask a more experienced editor here to repair it so that you have a model of good behavior to follow. We expect you to edit WP:BOLDLY, knowing newbies sometimes make mistakes, none of which will actually damage the pedia.

It's a good observation, though. Something an old-timer might not pay attention to. Thanks! BusterD (talk) 17:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Theitman451, and welcome to the Teahouse. Oddly enough, where (apparently reliable) sources disagree, the one thing you should not do is to try and reconcile them.

As BusterD says, you can report that the sources disagree, and make sure to identify the sources. (One might consider that a Vatican publication is not an independent source; but an article should not normally discuss the value of its sources.) ColinFine (talk) 11:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@Theitman451 There's a good essay about the general problem at WP:When sources are wrong. That gives several possible approaches. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:46, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, All. This is very helpful. Theitman451 (talk) 15:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Have a nice day!

I think this is a tea house right now and I wanted to come here too.

... Can you help me with this issue about the deletion on my page? As far as I have observed in the last 1-2 weeks, the battles within the war have started to be deleted. I have put a lot of effort into this page and created it by researching it one by one. I don't want much from you, I would be very happy if you could just give me information on what to do. :) BEFOR01 (talk) 02:09, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

BEFOR01, you're asking about Siege of Baghdad (1821), which is now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siege of Baghdad (1821). (1) The section "Analysis" consists of two paragraphs, the first of which is not explicitly referenced. The second has four references. One of these four is a master's thesis. Delete this. Presumably no one source will confirm all of this material; if I'm right, then add the relevant reference(s) after each assertion. (2) Concentrate more on improving the article than on arguing in the AfD. (3) Avoid boldface (and FULL CAPS) in the AfD. -- Hoary (talk) 04:19, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Yildiz, Gültekin (2019). "1828–1829 Osmanli-Rus Savaşi Doğu Cephesi̇'nde İnsan Kaynaklari Seferberli̇ği̇" [1828-1829 Human Resources mobilized in the Ottoman-Russian War Eastern Front] (PDF). Istanbul University (in Turkish).

For example, it says master's thesis. I didn't add it. It must have been added by a user named Okanthegreat. Should I remove it?

However, this source may be a thesis, but you also need to look at the bibliography it uses, after all, theses may not be random articles written by historians BEFOR01 (talk) 04:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Remove it. (No, I don't need to look at the bibliography it uses. And I know what an MA thesis is; more importantly, WP:THESIS says: "Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence.") -- Hoary (talk) 04:43, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I removed it. Do you have any other suggestions? BEFOR01 (talk) 05:25, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes. Above, I make three numbered suggestions. Reread the first of the three, and implement it. -- Hoary (talk) 06:07, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I think he means that the first paragraph of the analysis section doesn't have any citations after it -- if you meant to cite both paragraphs with all the sources at the end of that section, you should copy them to the first paragraph too (if they support all of what it says). But the content of the article isn't at issue at AFD, although it helps a lot -- you want to present multiple WP:RELIABLE sources describing the battle in detail and argue that it is WP:NOTABLE (read the policy, the term is misleading). Mrfoogles (talk) 15:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Request for edits and feedback

Hi! I recently added my contributions to expand on the subtab, Trainee System, under Industry on the K-pop page. I would love for any edits or feedback and thoughts to improve the section. Thank you! Taylorsydney (talk) 16:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I removed the photoghraph you added, the article is already over populated with photographs. Theroadislong (talk) 16:09, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Follow-up to Citation date: Duplicated citation

If I reuse a citation, like I did here, is there a need to change the access date? Justjourney (talk | contribs) 23:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

I think it's only for when you initially access it, so I don't think so. —Sparkle and Fade (talk • contributions) 00:11, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@Justjourney There's advice about this at WP:Link rot#Internet archives. The point is that the access-date is supposed to be the date that the original URL was accessed by a Wikipedia editor. So, if you looked at that today and confirmed it is still live, it is helpful if you update the date. On the other hand, if the URL has already been archived and is dead, it is the archive that readers will need to use in future and arguably the access-date can be removed entirely, relying on the archive-date for the date the information could be verified. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I think it can be a bit more complicated than that, @Michael D. Turnbull (though rarely, I think). Some websites get updated and their content changes - so it seems to me that if the site is still there and still verifies the information you should update the access-date. ColinFine (talk) 14:16, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, good point. The purpose of sources is always to verify what the WP article says. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for the responses. I will now change the access date Justjourney (talk | contribs) 16:56, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Editing "Orange (colour)"

The article is semi-protected. I want to know if I can edit. הראש (talk) 17:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @הראש, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your account is autoconfirmed, meaning you are able to edit it. Yeshivish613 (talk) 17:22, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Review of Draft Article in Submission

Hey All,

I'm still new to the processes here on Wikipedia and wanted to ask about the processes for reviewing articles, as well as wanting to ask if there is anyone that can help with reviewing an article that I have submitted. I have been working on Draft:Nashville's Highland Rim Forest for submission, which has gone through many edits and was recently resubmitted for review, and I was wondering if there is any way to proceed with the review process faster. There's a lot happening around this forest area in Nashville currently and I would like to get this information out there to connect with pertinent issues and ongoing discussions.

User @Rusty Cat gave some good feedback on the initial review, which helped with editing, but I still need some help with further for hopefully accepting the article, and if anything is missing or needs to be edited. Thank you! CreekBAnd38 (talk) 18:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @CreekBAnd38, and welcome to the Teahouse. No, there is no way to speed up the process. It involves one of the reviewers looking through the drafts, and choosing to review your draft. Drafts which are obviously not acceptable may get reviewed quicker, because the reviewer can see they will be quick; but there is little else you can do. ColinFine (talk) 09:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the information! I appreciate it. Hopefully the draft I've written will pop up for review sometime, so I'll wait till then. Thank you again! CreekBAnd38 (talk) 18:39, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@CreekBAnd38 One obvious issue with the current draft is the way you have done the referencing. We don't use external links in the main text: they need to be converted to proper citations or placed as a separate "External links" section at the foot of the article (see WP:EL for the guidance). Also, I see a bunch of reference numbers just above the section header at Draft:Nashville's Highland Rim Forest#Conservation History of NHRF but I'm not sure why they are there. If they are citations for the table, they should be within it: there's no reason to have that table hidden by default. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback! I was able to make some appropriate changes and edits to better fit the links within the chart, and someone helped with an edit to change "External Links" to "References" which is what I meant for them to be and just hadn't thought about the name. Thank you again! CreekBAnd38 (talk) 18:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Right/necessity of creating art. on notable village

I have started a discussion on a concrete case here, which would profit from the participation of experienced editors. I am arguing that a Transylvanian Saxon village with notability and its own distinct, centuries-old character, deserves its own article, which I had already brought beyond the status of a stub. A fellow editor deleted it arguing that villages, which are currently part of an administrative unit, in this case: a town 5 km away, which was formed/declared in 2004 by adding two villages to its territory (the town is "one of the smallest and least urbanised ones in the country"), must necessarily be dealt with as part of the article dealing with that town. I am looking forward to hearing your opinions. Arminden (talk) 18:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

My opinion is the next. I'm shared between the possibility that this village have its own article or have not.

I consider there are good arguments for and against.

Also , I consider there are bad arguments for and against. Anatole-berthe (talk) 07:55, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Anatole-berthe. When you have a disagreement with another editor, WP:DR tells you what are the next steps. ColinFine (talk) 11:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@ColinFine I haven't a disagreement with @Arminden (From my point of view).

I was just explaining that my opinion is shared between two possibilities.

In my message of "MARCH/09/2025" at "07:55 UTC" , I was talking implicitely about what I read in "Talk:Miercurea_Sibiului#Apoldu_de_Sus,_Dobârca_articles_needed!".

I think the link "Wikipedia:DR" can be useful for @Arminden and others involved in the dispute. Thanks ! Anatole-berthe (talk) 12:43, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Personally, I'd recommend just adding more information about the village where it already is, in the Miercurea Sibiului article. Once (or if) the village section gets large and unwieldy, then make a formal splitting proposal which will invite comments from other editors and resolve the issue. However, I wouldn't do that right now -- there's nothing to put into an article on the village alone other than that "it's a village". Mrfoogles (talk) 15:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, but that's far from being true: did you see the Romanian article? And the German one is just slightly smaller. So sorry, but that doesn't hold water. Arminden (talk) 19:21, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Is the citation acceptable and credible

I’d like to get feedback if my citation are considered credible and acceptable. I’ve removed YouTube and others that editors have adviced me to remove.

Draft:Matthew Lani Ashleyashville (talk) 19:39, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Ashleyashville, my comment above in "Looking for Advice/Feedback" applies here too. -- Hoary (talk) 22:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Hoary. I’d like for you to please look at my reference again. How I interpreted your comment on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse?markasread=335674887&markasreadwiki=enwiki#Looking_for_Advice/Feedback.

is that, the citation name mustn’t be www.whatever.com but must rather be the name of the website. Is that correct because I made changes to that effect.

id appreciate your opinion Ashleyashville (talk) 06:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, Ashleyashville, that's right. -- Hoary (talk) 23:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Two Unrelated Questions About the Education of New Users

I have two questions about new users that are basically about how they learn the ways of Wikipedia. I am seeing two errors that new users are sometimes making that are probably made in good faith, and suggest that new users may need better introductory materials.

What Is Vandalism?

I am not asking what is vandalism. I am sort of asking when and how new editors are introduced to the concept of vandalism. It is not uncommon for an inexperienced editor who is in a content dispute to start off by saying that another editor is vandalizing the article by reverting their edits. When they are told that Yelling Vandalism may be a personal attack, they often apologize and say that, as a new editor, they didn't know that. It has long been my view that if you have been editing Wikipedia long enough to know what is vandalism, you have been editing Wikipedia long enough to know what is not vandalism. But apparently some new editors know that there is such a thing as vandalism, and do not know what is not vandalism. So my question is how new editors learn that there is such a thing as vandalism, and conclude that it includes making edits that they disagree with, without knowing that the claim is a personal attack.

Maybe they do know better, and figure that they can use the new editor excuse at least once, but the good faith assumption is that they really don't know when not to Yell Vandalism. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:13, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

When and how introduced – their might be some clarification needed here: are we talking about the concept of it, the word itself, or both? Re the concept, imho this usually happens when they get a {{uw-vandalism1}} template placed on their Talk page. However, note that the template never uses the word vandalism, instead, it speaks of "unconstructive edits". The first template in the uw-vandalism* series to mention the word vandalism is {{uw-vandalism2}}, but it doesn't define it, although it links the term to Wikipedia:Vandalism where they can read about it.

This isn't quite your question, but a vandalism template is fairly frequently a user's first interaction with any Wikipedia editor. I think that that is unfortunate, and somewhere I had a proposal that all single-level and level-1 warning templates should offer a parametrized option to place a welcome template above the warning. Look at any of the links in this list of user Talk pages having a vandalism-1 warning but no welcome message. (Here's the same search with vandalism-2.)

I think part of the problem is the same one as we have with Notability; that is, the common English understanding of the word is not the same as Wikipedia's definition of the term. Someone suggested we change Notability to Wiki-notability just to deal with this problem; maybe the same thing pertains to "Wiki-vandalism", which is not quite the same as "vandalism" (although probably closer than "WP:N" and "notability" are). By the same token, not knowing what "wiki-vandalism" is, they often make mistakes when trying to call it out in others. Mathglot (talk) 00:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Large Language Models

Within the past months, since the widespread availability of large language models that offer to do one's writing for them, some users are using large language models to compose their posts to talk pages. Experienced editors often recognize that the text is output from a large language model. Sometimes the inexperienced editor acknowledges that they are using a large language model in order to be grammatically correct. (I have characterized using a large language model to ensure correct grammar as using a jackhammer to drive finishing nails, but that is just my sarcastic reference.) I think that we can agree that they were acting in good faith, because they didn't know that the use of artificial intelligence in Wikipedia is not permitted. So my question is whether some of the instructions for new users should include a statement not to use artificial intelligence. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:13, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Sometimes experienced editors acknowledge using it, too. To my knowledge, there is no guideline or policy that says that AI or LLM output is not permitted on Wikipedia, although there is a proposed guideline, and plenty of discussion about it. (My own opinion is that it should be banned.) But coming back to your comment: on what page(s) do you consider there to be instructions for new users? Are we talking about welcome templates? Certain Help pages? There are a few that are named, 'Help:FOO for beginners', or 'Help:Simple guide to FOO', and the like. Or did you have something else in mind? Mathglot (talk) 00:41, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Looking for Advice/Feedback

Hi, I am looking for advice and feedback as I begin attempting to improve an article before nominating it for Good-class. This is my first time attempting such improvements to an article - is there a specific place to ask for criticism and feedback? Or is this the best place?

The article I am working on is Bill Vukovich. I have created from scratch his early life section, based largely off of his two existing biographies. I have done little to no editing on the other sections of the article at this time.

I am wondering if my tone is neutral and encyclopedic. Perhaps there is too much detail? I am also wondering about citing. Am I citing too often? I also wonder if there is a format that would allow me to occasionally insert passage quotes into the note/citation. The Sfn format I was encouraged to use does not seem to allow this.

Thank you all. RegalZ8790 (talk) 03:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Something that you don't ask about, RegalZ8790, but: Where I'd expect to see the name of a website in a reference, you instead often provide the domain name, sometimes even with "www." in front. Rather than "Bill Vukovich". www.mshf.com., how about "Bill Vukovich". Motorsports Hall of Fame of America? -- Hoary (talk) 08:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the input. As I move further into the article I will be sure to add domain names. RegalZ8790 (talk) 15:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

RegalZ8790, let's recap. My recommendation was (if simplified): "Don't do A; instead, do B." Your response appears to be (if simplified): "I'll be sure to do A." Something has gone wrong here. -- Hoary (talk) 22:57, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I am aware of how they look now - A. I will change references to B as I encounter them the article. Forgive my typo. RegalZ8790 (talk) 02:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Changing a page efn

Hi I am wondering if I can have some guidance on changing a page efn. As at the moment it is not correct. Thankyou Foristslow (talk) 22:15, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Foristslow, sure; what article, and what does the efn say now? Mathglot (talk) 23:39, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi thanks for getting back to me, It is on the wuxing page. I have been editing this page for some time, To change it do's there need a consensus. Foristslow (talk) 04:18, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Foristslow, I assume you meant the article Wuxing (Chinese philosophy), is that correct? There are three {{efn}} templates on that page; which one are you talking about? Generally speaking, you can just make a bold edit, and see if anyone objects. Mathglot (talk) 06:22, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi yes that is the page correct, the list and order of the elements is the efn that needs changing. The order should be the generating cycle reading wood, fire, earth, metal, and then water. This in Chinese medicine and acupuncture is health. The order as it stands at present according to the theory is only seen in disease states to explain it simply. Foristslow (talk) 07:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

"User does not exist"

there is this diff in Babhangawan made my a user with name MCLgroup, but I was told the user does not exist at UAA, I am just curious as to what caused this. —Mint Keyphase (Did I mess up? What have I done?) 06:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Mint Keyphase It looks like this user account was renamed shortly after you filed the UAA request, which is probably where the confusion came from. Sam Walton (talk) 07:20, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Umm... should I be concerned about this action?... —Mint Keyphase (Did I mess up? What have I done?) 07:21, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Mint Keyphase Not at all - users can't rename their own accounts, the user requested a rename based on the very same reason you reported them, their username represented a group, and should have instead represented an individual. Now it does - Kshitiza Shukla M - so that issue is resolved. Sam Walton (talk) 07:30, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Alright, thanks! —Mint Keyphase (Did I mess up? What have I done?) 07:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Notability Issues

Hi, could any clarify that, what are the key aspects that need to be implemented for a living person notable sources? As, i followed the major lines from notability guidelines but still the article i wrote was declined, so, kindly anyone help me on this Thesazh (talk) 10:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Siddharth Gollapudi was declined, Thesazh, because the sources that were referenced for it "do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". If three sources referenced for it do, in your view, show significant coverage in such sources about this actor, then here (in this "teahouse" thread) please provide links to each of the three. -- Hoary (talk) 11:23, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

If a landholder is mentioned three different times in the Domesday book, should I merge their information into one table column?

Help everyone. I'm editing the article for Moulton, Northamptonshire and I'm adding a table (or three, actually) to show the village's entries in the Domesday book. Countess Judith of Lens is mentioned three times in the Domesday Book for the village, at 3 different points (page 228, entry c.29; page 228, entry d.33; and page 228, entry d.44). I've got a table currently which lists her in 3 different columns and displays the information for each entry. However, would it be better to combine all of the values and list her as just in one column? I'm using the visual editor fyi. Thanks in advance! LuvSam (talk) 10:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@LuvSam—I think it would be best to condense it and make it one person, but list all three lords from 1086 with a footnote, though what it would contain I have no idea. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 12:43, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

How do you add a quote to a sfn citation?

I want to add a quote to a sfn citation, as in "Krahmalkov 2001, pp. 1–4". Carlstak (talk) 13:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Never mind, I found the answer here. Carlstak (talk) 14:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Sock created pages/articles

I nominated an article Nick Bilton for deletion, which was created by a sock and has been edited by several since which are blocked (according to a gadget I have configured which makes usernames have a strikethrough when they have been blocked indefinitely. In the case of this article, would WP:DENY be a rationale for deletion? It could perhaps be remade later by others, if truly notable? I think that a sock that makes a page should be denied the ability to keep their work up on Wikipedia, is this view supported by policy or guidelines? I just feel like it should have been, or maybe I am missing something. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:13, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn Articles created in violation of a ban or block and which contain no significant edits by others may be speedily deleted under G5, which is essentially WP:DENY as rationale for deletion. This article wasn't created in violation of a ban, however, it was created in 2012 by an editor who wasn't blocked until 2017. So it wouldn't qualify. Similarly, it's been around since 2012 and has been edited by many other users, not all of which were blocked and not all of which were blocked as socks. Additionally, trying to delete articles soly because the editor who first made them has been blocked has been a historical point of contention, especially if the article is on a notable subject. As you've seen in the AfD, other editors do believe the subject is notable, and they'd rather work from this article than have no article at all. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 19:24, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying the WP:DENY details for me. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

That wasn't the only reason for nominating it by the way, I think the subject is also not notable by themselves, but I felt that was more evidence supporting their lack of notability. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:45, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Also, when you say, "This article wasn't created in violation of a ban, however, it was created in 2012 by an editor who wasn't blocked until 2017." How do you see all of that information? Iljhgtn (talk) 20:18, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

To see the reason an editor was blocked, you can got to Special:Log/Block and type in their username. This editor's entry only shows one block in 2017 for copyright violations. It wasn't until that after block where they started socking, apparently. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 20:54, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Am I the "performer" and they are the "target"? I cannot get it to work for me. Iljhgtn (talk) 00:40, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn Easier just to go to Special:Log and put User:Novonium as "Target", leaving "Performer" blank. Then you'll see all the log entries for that account. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:30, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn: Those two fields work on AND logic. Using Novonium as an example, the block was done by Beeblebrox. If you set "Performer" to Beeblebrox and "Target" to User:Novonium, you will only see log entries that involve Beeblebrox doing something to Novonium; in this case, the only item that appears is Beeblebrox blocking Novonium. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:09, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok thanks everyone. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:18, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Can't find information for my draft

Hello. I am working on a draft, Air Méditerranée Flight ML2673, and I am trying to find technical information like the call sign, aircraft registration, or just basic stuff like the pilot, injuries, even the people involved. I am 99% sure that this topic is notable (has many sources on Google), but I can't find any technical information online except for the flight number. Does anyone know any reliable sources where I can find this information? Thank you, loserhead (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Loserhead4512, and welcome to the teahouse! Wikiproject Aviation has a few pages you might find useful. This is a list of sources compiled by the people over at the aforementioned wikiproject that might have what you need. The aviation accidents task force may also be a good resource for you to check out, as it specifies in, well.. aviation accidents.

Best of luck with your draft! PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 20:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the links. loserhead (talk) 14:06, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi, @Loserhead4512. Totally get the frustration about not being able to find sources. I think all Wikipedia editors have been there. Having a look at this particular article, I'm not actually expecting to find any more in-depth ones, however. Sorting the Google results by date, and I find the most recent mention of this incident is from February 11, 2016. For events to be notable on Wikipedia, there needs to be some indication that they have a lasting significance. In other words, as soon as the 24 hour news cycle moved on, can you find evidence that people still wrote about and analyzed incident? That anaylsis can come in many forms - a newspaper article one year later discussing the incident, a paper in an academic journal talking about how it impacted air travel, or a book with a chapter about it. You can try using alternative search engines like Google Books or Google Scholar for those sorts of sources. I can't promise there will be anything, especially given the fact that most news coverage ended within twenty-four hours, but it's worth a look. I'll also echo PhoenixCaelestis's list of resources. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 20:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@GreenLipstickLesbian, thank you for the reply. I have been scouring Google Books/Scholar and the resources that PhoenixCaelestis provided, and still can't find much additional information. I've also looked at WP:NEVENT and WP:LASTING, and I've come to the conclusion that it isn't notable for Wikipedia. What should I do with the draft? Do I just abandon it and start a new one? loserhead (talk) 14:12, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Excuse me butting in Loserhead4512. You could just abandon it - and it will be deleted 6 months after the last edit, although other people may edit it in the meantime, which will extend the 6 month period. Or, as you are the only editor, you could add {{Db-g7}} to the top, which is for "Author requests deletion" - please see WP:G7 for the detail. Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 14:21, 10 April 2025 (UTC).

@Arjayay, thank you for the information. I think I'll just abandon it, just in case someone else wants to pick it up or it becomes notable in the future (unlikely but still possible) loserhead (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Help reviewing draft article on Nigerian humanitarian (Tolulola Bayode) before AfC resubmission

I’ve been working meticulously on a draft article ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tolulola_Olajibike_Bayode#Tolulola_Olajibike_Bayode ) about Tolulola Olajibike Bayode, a Nigerian philanthropist and social entrepreneur, with a strong focus on verifiability and neutrality. The article highlights her community development initiatives, policy advocacy, and recognitions (as reported by national newspapers). All claims are supported by inline citations from reliable Nigerian media outlets, each of which already has a Wikipedia article.

Before resubmitting to Articles for Creation (AfC), I’d appreciate any advice or feedback especially on tone, structure, or any concerns related to notability or sourcing.

Thank you in advance! Dechosenman (talk) 14:39, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Dechosenman I've wikilinked the President's Call to Service Award, which in itself is likely to make her notable as we require. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

You're asking for a pre-review review; the best way to get feedback is to submit. 331dot (talk) 15:57, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Tolulola Olajibike Bayode has been declined four times. The fourth declined raised a question about whether you utilized a large language model to develop the draft. Reply to this on your Talk page, with including an invitation to the reviewer, who can then decide to remove the tag or leave it stand. As you are a new editor, and this is the only thing you have been working on, also address whether you have been paid to create an article or have any personal connection to Bayode. David notMD (talk) 15:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Refs 4 and 15-18 are all derived from the same press release. Delete four. David notMD (talk) 15:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Feedback on my Wikipedia article

Hello everyone, as part of my Online Communities class, I had to work on and improve an existing Wikipedia article. I decided to improve the Hanoi Train Street wikipedia page. It would mean the world for me if you can provide me with your feedback on this article. Thank you BenjiDauNEU (talk) 21:43, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

BenjiDauNEU There is a conflict on how often per day trains pass through Train Street. Also, toward the end of the article, there is history content followed by more about it being a tourist attraction, so the latter is repetitive. Otherwise, very interesting. David notMD (talk) 12:51, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi David, thanks for the feedbacks. Can you elaborate more on the train schedule conflict? There are 2 trains (one at 3pm and 7pm daily) passing through the street.

Regarding the historical context, I thought it would be necessary to have a short a paragraph for a few historical highlights to the article before it became a tourist attraction. I had a really HARD time searching for the history of this street because there was barely any out there. BenjiDauNEU (talk) 18:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi David,

I saw you added a headline "As a tourist attraction" to my article. Do you think I should move the historical paragraph (the second to last) to the 3rd place in my article? Just right before you newly added headline? Please let me know what you think BenjiDauNEU (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

This is a good page, and a very bad street. Overall, I think you could make it a little more clear the timeline of the closures -- it starts by describing the closure, then local businesses opening due to traffic? Then the closure again, then local businesses again. I think it would be better to go through it chronologically, as it's a little confusing right now. Mrfoogles (talk) 02:33, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedbacks. I'm Vietnamese and I agree that this is a very bad street in Hanoi, I'm against the idea of the street running for tourism. Did you mean the street was closed more than once? Can you perhaps attach your source, please? I haven't lived in Vietnam for 7 years so I must have missed it BenjiDauNEU (talk) 17:58, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Brazil's position in the 2024 corruption perception index

My country, Brazil, is ranked 107th in the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index Guib25 (talk) 18:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations! What is it you want us to do with this knowledge? More importantly, what is it that you want us to do with this knowledge that you couldn't do yourself? mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 19:19, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Daniel Stowe Botanical Garden

Hi again, I was wondering if y'all could help me in a rewrite of this article? Before I started editing it, it didn't have any citations, and was just a couple blocks of text. I've started rewriting it by adding headers (and sorting specific stuff into their respective sections), removing some promotional text, and adding an infobox. I've also added two citations (which I'm aware is barely a start).

Would anybody be willing to help me with this? Thanks.

RidgelantRL (talk) 22:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Reliable sources

We all know that CNN is a reliable source. But what if CNN's only source for their article was social media? Can that information still be used in a Wikipedia article as fact? In the article in question, the majority of the article is about events that purportedly occurred; these events were generated on social media. CNN's article was about the social media stories. The Wikipedia article has been written, not as a social media phenomenon, but as actual events as reported in those social media accounts. A short example would be: an X account reports man ate 3000 hotdogs; CNN reports an X account stated man ate 3000 hotdogs; Wikipedia article states man ate 3000 hotdogs and uses CNN article as support. Ghost writer's cat (talk) 21:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

very much depends on the example, did they just repost a social media story? did they do follow up interviews? even though it's generally considered a reliable source you do have to use your own critical thinking on whether it's relevant, notable, or verified. if you go through wp:rs you can see it's not only the publisher you must consider but also the author and the content.

if you have a particular issue you're looking into, providing details on that would be more helpful for giving you advice. aquarium substrate^talk 22:06, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Ghost writer's cat As alluded to above, context is what matters the most when assessing a source. CNN being marked "generally reliable" on WP:RSP means exactly with it says; it is generally reliable, but there are other factors at play that makes something truly reliable. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 22:25, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Ghost writer's cat, hot dog eating contests are well organized and well documented. The current record is 83 in ten minutes. A new claim that someone ate 85 is plausible but a claim that someone ate 3000 in such a contest is ludicrous. Good editorial judgment is an essential part of Wikipedia editing. Plus, any claim of a new world's record in anything requires solidly reliable sourcing, not a self-serving social media post by a competitor. Cullen328 (talk) 22:47, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Cullen328 It was just an example of the situation I was describing. Not to be taken literally. Ghost writer's cat (talk) 22:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Ghost writer's cat, and I was giving you an example of the thought processes that an editor should go through when encountering such a hypothetical. Real world examples are always best for Teahouse discussions. Cullen328 (talk) 00:56, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

@Tarlby What I'm referring to is when a reliable source (RS) is simple doing a puff piece on something that's gathering traction on social media. E.g., someone posted on social media (SM) that some event happened. The RS wrote an article stating, "Someone on SM is claiming this event happened." The RS did not claim to have verified whether or not the even actually occurred. The Wikipedia editor then wrote that the event happened (as fact) and used the RS as their source. To me, that's not adequate sourcing. Ghost writer's cat (talk) 23:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

again, the specifics would help here. a link to it?

but it sounds like they are at the very least misquoting the source if they are making a 'claim' as 'fact'. not to mention the article in question should probably not be used. aquarium substrate^talk 23:22, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Aquarium substrate, @Cullen328 I agree the article shouldn't be used. I removed the material that had been quoted by CNN from social media and explained why, but it was reverted with "CNN is a reliable source." That was a couple months ago. Since then the text has been improved to mostly indicate the events are coming from a social media story, but I did have to edit to clarify that in one location. I'm waiting to see if it gets reverted as well before taking this any further. Ghost writer's cat (talk) 03:58, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Inclusion of customer cases

Hi Wikipedia editors,

I'm Yeran from Tencent, and have declared a conflict of interest in editing the Tencent Cloud page.

I've made a request to include some customer case materials (Talk:Tencent Cloud#Enhance the "Services" section). Despite effort to write in a more neutral tone, one editor still found them self-promotional in nature. May I seek another editor's opinion on this, and if there is any advice on how we can include these materials in?

Much appreciate the response in advance.

TencentCommsYeran (talk) 02:37, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, TencentCommsYeran. Wikipedia is not a product catalog for your company or any other company. Wikipedia articles should never include product or service descriptions referenced to a company's website or material generated by the company's press releases. That content belongs on your company's website, not here. Only if reliable sources completely independent of your company discuss these products in depth should they be described on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 04:40, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

I made some suggestions on the Talk page, but in general the whole article reads like a promotional pamphlet (still). I'd cut all the subheadings in History; all together they'd make only a paragraph or two, especially if you condensed some of the entries. (There are too many dated events.) You're obviously very proud of your company, which is great, but the article needs an overhaul. Maybe take a look at how articles have been written for some similar companies and how they resolved their conflicts of interest. (See Synaptics.) Ghost writer's cat (talk) 05:09, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of my Talk page for deleted Involve (think-tank) page

Hi, I'm kind of losing faith in Wikipedia right now by what I see as the suppression of debate on this topic. The wholesale deletion of the page on Involve seems to me to be an attempt at reputational salvage by a charity with a trustee with an employment history in an unethical industry. It doesn't feel right, especially as some other experienced editors were saying that parts of it were worthwhile. Chalk giant (talk) 05:12, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Involve_(think_tank).   Maproom (talk) 05:57, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

"my Talk page for deleted Involve (think-tank) page" seems to mean Talk:Involve (think tank), which appears to have been your re-creation (via copy-and-paste) of a version previously deleted when the article it complemented was deleted. The article itself was deleted as the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Involve (think tank). When any article is deleted, its talk page (if it has one) is deleted along with it. You wrote at the top of the talk page: "I request that the page itself and itself be reinstated." That's not where to make the request. The article was deleted "based on source assessment and the lack of reliable, independent sources brought to the discussion". If you become able to point to sources that are reliable and independent and go into depth about this "think tank", then you'll be free to ask Liz (who closed the discussion and deleted the article) to consider their merits and the viability of an article based on them. -- Hoary (talk) 06:28, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Suppression of debate, Chalk giant? Really? Dark hints about misconduct are way out of line. Reputational salvage? That's nonsense. Are you aware that well over half a million articles have been deleted at AfD over the years? I have partipated in thousands of those debates and there is nothing nefarious going on here. It is entirely about the quality of the sources. If multiple reliable independent sources devote significant coverage to the topic, then an acceptable article can be written. If not, an acceptable article is not possible. That is the whole thing in a nutshell. Cullen328 (talk) 06:43, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Difficulties with VisualEditor tables:

So I'm creating a table on Wikipedia and I have encountered some issues with copy-pasting parts of the table. When I try to copy the contents of one cell into another, nothing happens at all. When I select just the image - it freaks out and gives me this symbol ☢ (not the emoji, just the ASCII symbol). When I try to copy a template, it does paste but only the text, without the icons, also further editing of the cell becomes very difficult. I did not encounter those issues before. I use Firefox, and I have already disabled all of my browser extensions. I did not encounter this issue before

User Cremastra also encountered very simillar issues.

I had to revive this subject from the archive, as I did not get any solutions for the problem. Blitzkriegfree (talk) 09:18, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Blitzkriegfree If you didn't get any answers here, then I think you'll have to ask again at WP:VPT, which experts in the software tend to watch. Be as specific as possible, including details of which article/table you were trying to edit. Ping Cremastra to chip in with their experience. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Blitzkriegfree, I would start by raising your question at WT:Visual Editor. Mathglot (talk) 09:42, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Should AD/BC be added?

In the article Syriac Orthodox Church, Should AD/BC be added to three digit years, such as for example,

The Syriac Orthodox Church became distinct in 512 when Severus the Great, a leader who opposed the Council of Chalcedon, was chosen as patriarch

I know MOS:ERA says In general, omit CE or AD, except to avoid ambiguity or awkwardness, but can someone comment whether it looks awkward without it/with it? Cheers, Warriorglance(talk to me) 06:13, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Warriorglance. My personal opinion, which aligns with the Manual of Style, is that every reader with even the most fleeting familiarity with Christianity knows that Christianity did not exist BC. Accordingly, I see no benefit to readers in adding a bunch of ADs to articles about the early history of Christianity. Cullen328 (talk) 06:20, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok, Thank you so much! Warriorglance(talk to me) 14:46, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Writing Tone

Hi, my article draft has been repeatedly rejected because of the tone and sourcing: Draft:SolarSpell. My writing tone has been reviewed as as an advertisement, and, even though my sources are mostly independent peer-reviewed research journals, they continue to get flagged as not reliable. I would like to understand the specifics of what is wrong with the article. If you would provide some example sentences from the draft that are written in an "advertising tone" and rewrite them how you would in a neutral tone, that would be great, just so I can see what I need to change as a whole in the rewrite of the article. I would also love to know if you have any other advice for my rewrite of this article. Thank you! Giraffe1989 (talk) 17:05, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@Giraffe1989 Welcome to the Teahouse. For a start, please see Wikipedia:Avoid mission statements. We are not interested in what the organization says about itself, only what reliable secondary sources say. And remove the repeated use of "initiative". Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:11, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Okay, done! Anything else that stands out? Giraffe1989 (talk) 17:22, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

The topic looks to be an encyclopedic topic. Overall, the whole thing sounds like you are trying to sell me a product or have me donate.

For the lead (I am assuming, formatting is a bit wonky), I would establish what it is, any notable features of its model, and basic history (when it was founded and by who). The lead never establishes what SolarSpell is exactly, just saying it combines elements of a few things. This sounds like a Shark Tank opening and is overall vague. You have the final call, I am not familiar with it, but I would call it a digital offline library.

The history section is very anecdotal. I have already split its founding from the background to be more chronological. I would go through and fix some things if I broke anything related to context. As a side note, I would establish acronyms in the lead.

Current work I would rename to model or product as it sounds slightly less promotional.

I would say that it just needs a few rounds of revision to remove promotional language. If you need help, you can bounce some ideas off of me. ✶Quxyz✶ 22:13, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@Quxyz @Mathglot thank you so much for the detailed feedback! Apologies for making two different channels, so thank you for linking them. I have reevaluated my sources and rewrote the article. Does the tone sound any different? Does the article pass the notability standards? All my sources are independent peer-reviewed journals or reputable news sites. Please let me know if there are any specific phrases or sections that could be improved before I resubmit! Draft:SolarSpell Giraffe1989 (talk) 04:13, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Without going into an investigation into the sources, it looks like they would count assuming that SolarSpell does not have a merely trivial mention. If you want more security, you can always add more information (within reason). The body looks pretty good. It still has room to improve but it has also improved a lot. Once again, current work as a heading seems to be a bit promotional. Lead is still a bit iffy. Here is a proposed rendition of the first sentence:

SolarSPELL is a digital library system created by Arizona State University.

Alternatively, you could frame it as "...created by Laura Hosman from ASU". Overall, I would expand it with a couple more sources and work on the lead. For the relevent policy, see WP:LEAD. ✶Quxyz✶ 21:20, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

 Courtesy links: User talk:Ian (Wiki Ed) § Writing Tone, and    User talk:Giraffe1989 § Solar Spell feedback. Mathglot (talk) 00:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

"Lines" on an interactive map

I know it's possible to put points on an interactive map within a Wikipedia article, but is there a way to map a straight line? — E_F⁵ 15:56, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi EF5. You didn't give an example but points are usually added by displaying an uploaded standard image like File:Red pog.svg on top of the map. We don't try to do that for lines. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:39, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

PrimeHunter, a tornado track (basically a rough path a tornado took). This is a really good example of what I'm talking about. I've seen several times where we've highlighted specific roads (I.e. in the Infobox of Interstate 80) but was wondering if that could be done with straight lines, too. — E_F⁵ 20:41, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

@EF5: I meant an example of a Wikipedia map with a point. The highligted road in Interstate 80 is not made in Wikipedia but pulled from OpenStreetMap by mw:Help:Extension:Kartographer#External data. I don't know how to add such data to OpenStreetMap or what is required to make it possible. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:24, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you mean. I'll just assume it isn't possible/make a non-interactive version. — E_F⁵ 23:26, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

I think EF5 is referring to something like Data:Tornadoes of 2011 Super Outbreak.map over on the Commons, which is linked at the 2011 Super Outbreak article. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 23:38, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

WeatherWriter, indeed I am, but I was planning on doing one for the 1925 Tri-State tornado. — E_F⁵ 23:41, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

@EF5: I was apparently wrong. I linked mw:Help:Extension:Kartographer#External data but didn't read it properly. I thought it always pulled data from OpenStreetMap but it can also pull data from Commons. Interstate 80 uses commons:Data:Interstate 80.map. The data page has to be at Commons. Wikipedia has no data namespace. There is some documentation at mw:Help:Map Data. Special:ExpandTemplates shows the infobox in Interstate 80 makes this code to display the map:

<mapframe height="240" frameless="1" align="center" width="290">{"properties":{"stroke-width":6,"stroke":"#ff0000","title":"Interstate 80"},"type":"ExternalData","title":"Interstate 80.map","service":"page"}</mapframe>

PrimeHunter (talk) 01:04, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

A data page like commons:Data:Interstate 80.map has to be at Commons but the data can also be added directly to the mapframe tag. {{Maplink}} can help with that. 13th Ward of New Orleans says {{maplink|raw={{Wikipedia:Map data/13th Ward of New Orleans}}|frame=yes|text=Map of ward boundary}}. It uses Wikipedia:Map data/13th Ward of New Orleans. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

AFC drafts never being reviewed again

I'm not complaining or wanting my drafts to be reviewed, I'm just asking why it suddenly has taken so long. I created the draft, Illinois Education Association and submitted it. Within a day it was rejected. After polishing the article, I submitted it and it was rejected again within a day. I submit it a 3rd time and... its been 2 weeks since. I have created more drafts since and they are all not getting reviewed. I understand that AFC is clogged but why did I get 2 reviews within one day and then... nothing. DotesConks (talk) 23:56, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

DotesConks There is no particular order for reviewing AfC, so I'm guessing that obviously good and obviously bad articles are reviewed quickly, making those in the middle stuck in pending hell. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 00:52, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@Sungodtemple Will anything be done about the rapidly growing backlog? Maybe all ECP accounts should get the reviewer right in order to help curb the backlog that will grow so big that eventually drafts could last decades before being reviewed. DotesConks (talk) 01:26, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@DotesConks, the backlog will always keep on growing and shrinking to an extant. Regarding ECP, Personally I think that is a not so good idea. 30/500 is an arbitrary number (but the best one we have). Not all ECP users are trust worthy, some non-ECP reviewers are. Anyone who is ECP can apply, most don't. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:29, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@DotesConks, what Sungodtemple has said is kind of the situation. With a 3 month backlog, it is random chance. Some reviewers look at certain categories or topics. Ex. Space or submissions in the userspace. While it may seem lazy, reviewers look for quick fails or accepts to help clear the backlog.

For your draft two things. 1) I've seen articles with far less text here survive for years without being drafted or sent for deletion., see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS (while for deletion arguments, same logic). 2) You have sections (Racism, Gender and more) with no citations. You have other with just citation(s) at the end (State-of-Education Reports), each or most point should have a citation. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:26, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@CF-501 Falcon I assume you are referring to the IEA right? In that draft I generally used one citation for everything as that single citation covered what I wrote and I did not want to spam citations everywhere. Now for something like Draft:VeltPVP Bomb Threats or Draft:North Korean defection methods which is far more covered in news sources or RS, I had the liberty of adding multiple citations from multiple sources to back each sentence up. DotesConks (talk) 01:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes. Did you have another draft? Best, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:30, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

I just updated my comment DotesConks (talk) 01:31, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

I just saw it. (In the future, it might not be the best idea to do that to avoid confusion). In "Protests" it says The IEA has staged over 200 protests or walkouts throughout its history, despite it often being illegal and fines, arrests, and even sentences being imposed on protestors. In recent times the number has gradually decreased with collective bargaining being the more preferable option. Which sentence does the citation support? However this isn't as big as concern as the unreferenced sections. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:34, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@CF-501 Falcon I'm not exactly understanding what you are talking about. On the website you can see the teachers marching out of their classrooms and contains the amount of times the IEA has done protests and walkouts. Gradually overtime the IEA has moved towards collective bargaining. DotesConks (talk) 01:37, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@CF-501 Falcon Or in WP-shortcut speech, follow the guidance at WP:REDACT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:23, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@DotesConks, No where in the sources does it says "The IEA has staged over 200 protests or walkouts throughout its history". If the sources doesn't say it then another sources which says "over 200" should be used.

The source does support "collective bargaining" being used. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:45, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@CF-501 Falcon I got the information from InfluenceWatch and when I wrote that protests section, citation 5 was for InfluenceWatch. But IW is not considered reliable so I had to remove it which meant the citation was usurped by another. DotesConks (talk) 01:50, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@DotesConks, if InfluenceWatch is not reliable neither is anything you wrote based on it. The number 200 is the fruit of the poisonous tree. Wikipedia summarizes what reliable secondary sources have said about a topic. You can keep or add based whatever the new/current citation says. _{I may not be able to respond to any further questions, if anybody else would like to answer please do!} CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:56, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@CF-501 Falcon Well I removed anything written that used the citation of InfluenceWatch and replaced it with more reliable sources. DotesConks (talk) 02:00, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Could I Translate Some Articles in Vietnamese while i'm getting banned in Vietnamese Wikipedian ?

So if i banned in Vietnamese Wikipedia so could i can translate some articles don't have Vietnamese translate script ? NaughtyCupcakKeLover 08:10, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

@Namngocnghech Do you mean that you want to translate articles from Vietnamese Wikipedia to English Wikipedia? If so, see guidance at Help:Translation. Quote: "Articles translated from other languages are expected to meet English Wikipedia's notability guidelines; simply having an article on another Wikipedia project does not establish notability by itself." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa SångThanks for this information 👁👄👁👌🏻 and i needed to learn by this and know about them NaughtyCupcakKeLover 14:39, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

And what you do off Wikipedia will not be affected by a ban. But please consider why you might be banned on that Wikipedia, and do not get into similar trouble elsewhere like here! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:10, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

@Graeme BartlettYeah i was banned in Vietnamese Wikipedia cause of the reason "Roi" and i want to translate some articles to Vietnamese and i don't know if i translate into Vietnamese (which my user was banned) do it's affect to my user and block for vandalism or somewhere while translating them. NaughtyCupcakKeLover 14:37, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Well you can translate to vietnamese, but you will not be able to post anything to the wikipedia you were banned on. We do not welcome non-English contributions here, but you could hold then in yoiur user space here. However if they are vandalism or hoaxes, they will be deleted even if not in English. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:59, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks but i banned forever in Vietnamese Wikipedia so i can translate some articles doesn't appear in Vietnamese right 🤔 ? NaughtyCupcakKeLover 06:12, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Namngocnghech, I find it very difficult to understand what you're asking about. I think it's about finding some way around the block on vi:Wikipedia. I don't pretend to know the rules of vi:Wikipedia, but if they're like those of en:Wikipedia then anyone adding material produced by you would likely be blocked. (The rather unpleasant term used here in en:Wikipedia for such a person is "meatpuppet".) And Graeme Bartlett's suggestion that you could hold this material "in your user space here" surprises me: I'd class hosting it here as "misuse of Wikipedia as a web host". -- Hoary (talk) 08:31, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Hoary As a beginner of Wikipedia, i just feeling fearless for your noticed. Yeah Vietnamese Wikipedians will ban some random account or vandalism account just adding topic "Tran","Kayani","Vandalism" or their user name. I have banned more than 8 user and this is my recently user in English and this one was prohibited to Vietnamese Wikipedia. It's hard to let you understand about that. I don't know will Mr.Bartlett advice is useful but i glad it very useful too, i could rather to read content translation paragraph to understand about that. NaughtyCupcakKeLover 08:47, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Tag help

Can anyone add tags like "citation needed", or "this page is outdated", or it's a bot-only task? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 20:29, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello @CreatorTheWikipedian2009. These types of tags can be added by anyone. In the source code, typing {{citation needed}} or {{cn}} will produce Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 20:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

But, what if the article needs cleanup, but it isn't tagged? Should someone tag it? I've seen bots tagging text as "cleanup", but, seriously, can anyone do the same jobs as bots? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 20:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

You can tag the article or fix the problem yourself. The latter is usually the recommended option. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 20:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Why recommended? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 20:47, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

CreatorTheWikipedian2009, because this is a project to build, expand and improve an encyclopedia. Solving problems if you are able is always better than tagging problems. Cullen328 (talk) 21:13, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok, I have to solve problems. But how? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 07:05, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

In this case, by adding citations or updating the article. But you don't have to do that - tagging issues is also an option if you're not able or are unwilling to do the former. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

But that's allowed, per WP:HANDLE. CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 09:09, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, that's why I wrote that it's also an option. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:18, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Help?

I am new to this place and intend to write an article about the Amba River, a river in India. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amba_River&redirect=no but I'm being redirected to the Russian Amba (river), they're separate river. Would anyone mind splitting them or guiding me? Thanks in advance. Pasados (talk) 07:48, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Pasados. If you follow the instructions at Help:Your first article to create a draft article, the reviewing editor will take care of that for you if and when the draft is accepted. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:01, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Ton of thanks for the guidance @Cordless Larry. Pasados (talk) 09:18, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Template Q.

Explain me what is the purpose of this Template:Wikidata property tracking, there is no description about this template, senior editors please help me Mr.work-shy (talk) 22:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Mr.work-shy, welcome to the Teahouse. It was created a month ago by a new user and is currently only used in one article and two user pages.[14] The current claim of 603,000 pages was added manually and is false. Just ignore the template. The creator may have abandoned their plans. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:08, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Thnx u senior Mr.work-shy (talk) 10:10, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Can anyone create template like this Mr.work-shy (talk) 21:59, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

This template checks the Wikidata properties applied to the document to which this template is applied and puts them into categories. This template was imported from the Korean Wikipedia. Whatback11 (talk) 09:32, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Would Pop Journal be considered an acceptable source?

Pop Journal (https://popjournalofficial.com/) is an online magazine dedicated to P-pop and Filipino pop culture in general. They write their stuff news-style and have a lot of original photography of these artists, like this: https://www.instagram.com/abcpopjournal/p/DHibULVyei7/?img_index=1

However, I realized that their site is hosted by Wordpress because they use WP Moose theme for the site design. I know that Filipinos in general (both fans and artists) struggle with a lack of budget, though, so that probably explains their reliance on Wordpress as a host. They've built a pretty solid name and reputation among P-pop fans and offer lots of legit exclusive, original news and media (like pics and videos). Would they be considered an acceptable source or not? (I did read the "reliable source" article, but I thought to ask here for verification. The article said that blogs are a gray area.) Bloomagiliw (talk) 12:49, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@Bloomagiliw The site doesn't appear to be a blog and there is an editorial team, so at first glance this looks OK. Note that the fact they have lots of photos doesn't mean you can upload copies to Commons, since they will be copyright and I don't see any sign they are licensed with the right creative commons license. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:57, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

... the fact that there are no existing uses of that site is a little concerning, so you might want to ask again at the reliable sources noticeboard. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:00, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

What to do if i feel a user is acting in ill faith

Theres a lead for an article that i found too biased with a lot of excess "beating around the bush" and its also a bad lead in general. I edited to make it more balanced but i noticed an user reverted my entire edit saying that he needed consensus citing 1 single line, which you know could have been easily changed instead of a revert.

In addition i felt he made other malicious edits with different reason in the edit history, like saying "added italics" and then removed additional content. What to do, cause i am not jobless to engage in edit war LostCitrationHunter (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

You and the other editor have been editing Elon Musk salute controversy and have done the correct next step by opening a discussion at the Talk page of the article. If you cannot resolve the dispute, come back here to ask for next steps. David notMD (talk) 15:17, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Problems with editor

Hi I think I may be having a problem with a editor on the wuxing Chinese philosophy page. I am trying to give some clarity to a explanation of the elements and being reverted, I have gone to this editor talk page and left a note and on the talk page of the article. The editor responded by reverting my edit and hounding other edits of mine, his explanation is that I must follow the efn and respect Asian culture. The thing is that my edit is what is on the efn and this editor seems to be cherry picking what is relevant to their pov and at the same time not adding anything to the context of the article. Could I have some eyes on this for some direction. It would be much appreciated. Thankyou Foristslow (talk) 23:25, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

@Foristslow I don't have any concrete advice for you, but have you looked at the various pages on how to deal with conflicts? This article is helpful. The first step is always try to discuss it with the other editor, which you've done, but perhaps you can try again to engage them. At the end of that section, there's a link to an administrative page where you can request help if no one else responds here. Good luck! Ghost writer's cat (talk) 05:51, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou for this, I am trying to work through it there seems to be a lot of energy to keep it as they wish. Foristslow (talk) 07:23, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@Foristslow I sympathize completely. I'm finding a lot of rabid guard dogs on many pages recently, even on the most innocuous edits. Unfortunately, most of us have other things that demand our attention and don't have the time or energy the guard dogs do to keep defending our position. You'll notice one of the final suggestions on resolving an edit war is "Walk away." It's not very satisfactory, but sometimes it's the least draining (which is what the guard dogs are counting on.) Ghost writer's cat (talk) 18:49, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Boboiboy Movie 3

 Courtesy link: List of animated feature films of 2026

Hello, I’m Khadija ,and I want to add something to animated cgi feature films of 2026, and I want to add a movie that will arrive in 2026 soon called Boboiboy Movie 3. Could someone help me how to make a box adding that category, because I need help doing so. Sorry for this trouble, because I’m just a beginner. thanks. Khadija Loves Monsta (talk) 21:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Khadija Loves Monsta, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's great that you want to contribute to Wikipedia, but that choice may be problematic. All material in a Wikipedia article should be verifiable from a reliable published source; and WP:CRYSTALBALL tells us that for things that are in the future, there is a higher standard for inclusion. Where did you get the information about this film? Was it a reliable independent source that discusses the film in depth, or a passing mention in a gossip column, or something in between?

Personally, I think that a good many of the entries in that list should not, at the moment, be there, as the sources they cite are not sufficient to establish that there could be a standalone article about the film at present. ColinFine (talk) 16:17, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

I’ve known this film was going to come out since 2024, because I’m a fan of the Show Boboiboy Galaxy. This show was created by the animation studio settled in Malaysia called Monsta Studios, known for their CGI animation in Malaysia. They released the Show Boboiboy, following Boboiboy: The Movie, released in 2016,which was their first Boboiboy movie. Second, they released the still ongoing show Boboiboy Galaxy season 1, which following that show released Boboiboy Movie 2 in 2019, then 5 years after that they released Boboiboy Galaxy season 2, which is going on until their final part of the series, Boboiboy Galaxy Baraju will release in June 2025. After Boboiboy season 2 is over, they planned to release Boboiboy Movie 3 in 2026, even though it was supposed to be released in 2021, but due to delays, it was pushed to 2026. I’ve been a fan of Boboiboy since I was very young, so I know my stuff, thank you very much. I grew up with this series basically. And if you want to know more or if you are interested in this series, then you should research more about Monsta Studios and their original 2011 series, Boboiboy. Thanks! 😊 Khadija Loves Monsta (talk) 21:47, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@Khadija Loves Monsta Reading WP:NFILM to check that it currently passes the criteria set out is important. There is no point in attempting to create an article if it fails the criteria. Best to wait until it does, assuming it does not yet do so 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 21:58, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Number of GA Nominations

Hi,

You know how on GA Nominations you can see the number of successfully promoted articles and the number of reviews each nominator has completed? Do you know where I can find the number of GA reviews and article promotions a user has done if they aren't currently nominating an article on GA Nominations?

Thanks, Surfinsi (talk) 22:21, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@Surfinsi, see [15]. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:53, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Image rights BBC

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36704050

Note that the third image down is marked PA (an image rights management company), ofc that would not be fair to upload to the commons, but there are other images in the obituary that are not marked in anyway.

"Kaufman (3rd right) appearing on Not so Much a Programme, More a Way of Life" the second image down, would images such as this be fair to be uploaded as CC or not thanks for the clarity

I did have a look https://www.bbc.co.uk/creativearchive/faqs.shtml

But I am not 100% sure LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 20:23, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

LeChatiliers Pupper, I don't know what either "fair to upload to [Commons]" or "fair to be uploaded as CC" means. Looking at the BBC page about Kaufman, I see no suggestion that any of its images are anything other than conventionally copyright ("all rights reserved"). Even if I did see any such suggestion, that wouldn't suffice: one would need an explicit statement to that effect (and beyond). So none of them could be uploaded to Commons. -- Hoary (talk) 21:27, 12 April 2025 (UTC) Typos fixed -- Hoary (talk) 00:39, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

No copyright information is provided on that page for the image captioned "Kaufman (3rd right) appearing on Not so Much a Programme, More a Way of Life", LeChatiliers Pupper. Therefore it must be presumed to be conventionally copyright ("all rights reserved"). Somebody -- most likely the photographer or their estate -- holds the copyright. You aren't, and I'm not, the copyright holder; and therefore neither of us has the right to affix any Creative Commons (or other) copyleft claim to it, or to declare that it's in the public domain. It must not be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. As for a claim of "fair use", such a claim must be for a specified purpose. Please read and digest Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline. -- Hoary (talk) 00:49, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Shared IP

Hello... i created account on 7 April 2025 but I'm facing the IP address block issue. Currently which I'm using the IP address is blocked and my account is not blocked. I am using Mobile Sim Card internet or mobile internet and the IP address will be shared IP. Can anyone help that is it the IP address Block will affect my account or not ? Also currently im not facing any issue regarding block and I'm open to editing. Mlkfrz4455 (talk) 11:36, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@Mlkfrz4455, some IP blocks can affect editors when they're logged in, and others can't. If you can edit anywhere other than your talk page, you're not blocked. If you try to edit while logged in and receive a block notice, it will tell you what to do to deal with the block. -- asilvering (talk) 07:01, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok thanks Mlkfrz4455 (talk) 07:03, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Why is autoconfirmed user asked to not to post on semi-protected page

I am talking with this autoconfirmed editor who was asked User talk:Amir_Segev_Sarusi#Please_don't_post_to_Yair_Netanyahu not to post on Yair Netanyahu. I don't understand this. The article Yair Netanyahu is only semi-protected. Editor seems to me willing to learn. Is there some additional rule I don't know about for pages that are related to Israel or Palestine about who can edit? Lova Falk (talk) 08:38, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

See Talk:Yair Netanyahu - for some reason the article was not locked. I'll fix that. Did you look at the talk page first? Doug Weller talk 09:01, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Doug Weller talk thank you! Yes, I even wrote on the Talk page, but I checked the article page (actually, several times) to see what kind of protection it had. The idea to double-check this with the templates on the talk page simply didn't occur to me. Lova Falk (talk) 09:41, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is marked as answered. If you have a new comment, place it just below the box.

Request for Feedback on Draft:Ethis Before Submission

Hi everyone, I’ve been working on a Wikipedia draft titled Draft:Ethis and would greatly appreciate some guidance before submitting it for review.

This is my first time contributing a company draft, and I want to make sure it meets Wikipedia’s notability, neutrality, and formatting standards. I’ve included reliable sources, but I’m not sure if the references are strong enough or if any part of the content needs improvement.

Could someone from the Teahouse kindly take a look and let me know if there’s anything I should revise or improve before moving forward?

Thank you in advance for your time and support! Ayeshanissa (talk) 17:39, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The best way to get feedback is to submit the draft for review. It duplicates effort to ask for a pre-review review. That said, large passages of the draft are unsourced.

You declared a conflict of interest on the draft itself; I'd suggest doing so on your user page as well. What is the general nature of your COI? 331dot (talk) 18:30, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Ayeshanissa. As 331dot pointed out, paragraph after paragraph after paragraph of your draft are unreferenced, which violates Verifiability, a core content policy. You wrote Ethis aims to democratize alternative investments by offering accessible debt-based and capital market products to drive financial inclusion and sustainability in line with its objective of creating better finance to uplift humanity. Who says so? This is overtly promotional content that may have a place on the company's website or social media, but not in a neutrally written encyclopedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 18:46, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Removed promotional wording from Lead. David notMD (talk) 10:15, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Help me in making my article live

Hello! I’ve written an article about Houssed.com in my sandbox (User:Khushhe/sandbox), but I’m unable to move it to the mainspace due to an edit filter. Could someone please help me review it and move it live if appropriate? Khushhe (talk) 06:37, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

As Theroadislong has noted, this is just advertising. It's blatantly promotional, and the only attempts to source anything are to press releases and to the company's website. Do you have a connection with this company? If you do, it must be disclosed if you are going to make any edits related to this company. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 06:48, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

No, I've just been a customer to it. Khushhe (talk) 06:51, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

I have to admit to being skeptical, given how this reads like an advertising pamphlet and you also seem to have very specific information about this company and its corporate executives that is not part of even the press release/site information that you linked. Not to mention that you've been spamming links to this site in other articles, such as [16] and [17]. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 07:02, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

I've went ahead and removed six external links to this company's site. Except for your first two edits, nearly all your links are related to promotion of Houssed. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 07:22, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Not appropriate, Khushhe. Your draft appears to cite a total of three sources. Actually one of these just reproduces another, so in reality just two sources. One is the company itself, and the other is self-congratulatory PR junk. No article can be constructed from these sources. -- Hoary (talk) 07:04, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Khushhe Now at Draft:Houssed. I agree that in its current content, if submitted, it will be either Rejected or Speedy deleted. See WP:NCORP for the types of references needed for articles about companies. David notMD (talk) 10:21, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Route Between Porto Alegre and Lisbon

The route between Porto Alegre and Lisbon, the distance is 8774 km, the route is operated by TAP Air Portugal using the Airbus A330-900neo Guib25 (talk) 17:40, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi, do you have a question? 331dot (talk) 17:41, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

This Route Was Suspended Due to Flooding in May 2024 in Rio Grande do Sul, This Route Was Resumed On April 1, 2025 Guib25 (talk) 17:59, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, what's your question? 331dot (talk) 18:02, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

331dot, I think they are misunderstanding how the Teahouse works and trying to write article material here. Since other article creation pages (e.g. the AFC submission template) refer users to the Teahouse, they may be confused. —Sparkle and Fade (talk • contributions) 23:12, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 10:42, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Changing a nomination message on user talk pages

Hey, Teahouse. I need your help on something I did.

The notice originally said - "If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry (as in the targeted title section - Section title non-existant | the category's entry) on the categories for discussion page. But I changed it to the correct section name without proper authority instead of leaving it alone (from intended section title to correct section title by edit - from non-existant title to correct section | this category's entry). Is it wrong for me to do that? If it is, then I know I shouldn't done it. Let me know. DBrown SPS (talk) 09:52, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

You're in the clear. It's quite helpful to do this. -- asilvering (talk) 11:05, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

That's all I needed to know. Thanks. DBrown SPS (talk) 11:41, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Ministry of Agriculture (North Korea)

Hello, everyone. May be delete this draft? Thanks СтасС (talk) 14:02, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

@СтасС Just nominated it for author requested deletion. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 14:05, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Admins-enwiki, thank you.--СтасС (talk) 14:30, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

How to stop an article from being submitted

Hello. Today I just visited Draft:Plainrock124, and I realized the article got submitted for creation again. I think the editor behind the article already talked about this, but how can I prevent the article from being submitted, If the submission gets declined? Sparkbean (talk) 11:19, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

@Sparkbean, there's no way to do this that I'm aware of. But if a particular draft is frequently targetted by inappropriate edits, it might be a candidate for page protection, or if it's the same editor doing this repeatedly over other editors' objections, a block might be in order. -- asilvering (talk) 11:23, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

I’m really hoping that there’s no highly inappropriate content happening in the draft article. Sparkbean (talk) 11:35, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

I undid the AfC submission that had been made by an editor who had not had any previous interaction with the draft (or any other edits). David notMD (talk) 14:33, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! I should have undid it on the day I submitted the article and the creator got upset. Sparkbean (talk) 14:53, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Changing Header to Match Correct Accent Usage

Hi, this artist Gisela Colon spells her name with an accent on her website. I changed it throughout the article to adhere to her spelling, but cannot update the title name to have the accent. How do I do that?

Thanks! Empress-of-angels (talk) 14:42, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

@Empress-of-angels Changing titles like that is done by moving the page to the new title. See WP:Moving a page. You should be able to do that yourself but come back here if you have any problems. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:46, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

... incidentally, her Wikidata page is already correct. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:49, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

@Empress-of-angels, I have moved the article to Gisela Colón History6042😊 (Contact me) 17:45, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Proper Capitalization For Articles for deletion?

I was reading through WP:Perennial_proposals and fixed the acronym for Articles for deletion (AFD) to its "proper" form, AfD. I assumed this was correct since it's used that way on the AfD page itself, but then I realized that the full name for AfD, Articles for deletion, is capitalized in a way that implies the acronym Afd. I was wondering if it was a stylistic choice for the acronym to be spelled AfD? Or is it unintentional? Thx56 | Talk to me! 18:07, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

@Thx56 In acronyms F for "for" is often lower case, though this is somewhat inconsistent in Wikipedia:Wikipedia abbreviations. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:41, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Thx56, as for the capital D, this has been the accepted convention for many years. I have been partipating in AfD debates for 15 years and the acronym has always been AfD. Cullen328 (talk) 18:57, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

@Thx56: You also changed WP:AFD to WP:AfD [18] but acronyms with WP: are nearly always written upper case. Indeed, WP:AFD itself writes it uppercase in the shortcut box at the top right even though the page mostly says AfD when it's without WP:. You even changed it in a non-displayed id= but that generates an anchor which is linked from other pages where you broke the link. It also broke section links from other pages when you changed it in a section heading. I will revert your edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:26, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

I am not sure if this is important but WP:AfD with the lowercase w could be confused with Alternative for Germany's acronym AfD. History6042😊 (Contact me) 17:50, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Revert request

I see that here, unknown IP address delete without explanation, and a bunch of part is removed,so please revert it sorry for trouble 😵‍💫 , but I do not know how to revert disruptive edits Mr.work-shy (talk) 10:41, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

I've reverted the deletion. I can guess why the item was deleted; but the issue needs to be discussed. Maproom (talk) 11:02, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

I think that, there is a ahmadiyya mosque and some people hate them,

Thnx you senior Mr.work-shy (talk) 11:13, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Mr.work-shy. Your remark about ahmadiyya mosques is effectively a personal attack on the editor who deleted the material, as it implies that they did so out of personal prejudice: please do not do this.

As Maproom says, there is a very obvious reason in Wikipedia's policies why the material may have been removed: that it was unreferenced. ColinFine (talk) 19:22, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Why my article is not going live?

User:Khushhe/sandbox. Khushhe (talk) 21:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Because it hasn't been accepted as an article. It won't be accepted until it's submitted -- but if you were to submit it now, it would fail. Consider this example: Houssed.com plans to continue its expansion. The platform’s expansion strategy includes establishing a strong presence in Tier-2 and Tier-3 cities, where real estate transactions are growing rapidly. Houssed’s ultimate goal is to become one of the leading real estate platforms in India, serving both buyers and developers through a seamless, tech-powered interface. This is the kind of waffle that the company is free to use on its own website but has no place in an encyclopedia. And it makes one wonder: How are you, Khushhe, related to Houssed? -- Hoary (talk) 21:34, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

I've been a customer of Houssed and the platform seems valuable which can help buyers. So, I created the article to make the users aware of it.

What should I do to publish it? Khushhe (talk) 06:20, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Note that the draft is now at Draft:Houssed. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:58, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Also asked and answered on 13 April (see below). David notMD (talk) 10:40, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Advice on applying WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA

The Mastotermes page describes a termite genus with only one extant species but several extinct species described by the fossil record. The single extant species has its own page here Mastotermes_darwiniensis. There is extensive redundancy across these two pages, both of which also include significant errors (incorrect information, outdated research, etc.)

This termite species is notable because it is the earliest diverging extant termite species and thus is important for understanding termite evolution.

While fixing the issues with these pages I discovered WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA which establishes that in the case of monotypic taxa, such as a genus with only one species, where the species does not have a common name, then the binomial name - i.e. Mastotermes_darwiniensis should redirect to the monotypic taxa, which in this case is Mastotermes.

Question #1: does WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA apply to a genus with only one EXTANT (i.e. still living) species, but with multiple extinct species in the fossil record?

If it does, then Mastotermes_darwiniensis should be redirected to Mastotermes.

However, I suspect that WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA does not apply in this case. See the multiple pages for Orycteropus and Aardvark which is exactly analogous.

Question #2: Assuming that WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA does not apply in this case, due to the presence of multiple extinct species in the genus, I think there is still an issue. The issue is specifically with Mastotermes, which has significant redundancy in information with Mastotermes_darwiniensis. My understanding is that if WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA does NOT apply then Mastotermes should just be a stub with a simple lead pointing to Mastotermes_darwiniensis followed by a list of extinct species. This is how the Orycteropus page is structured.

Can you confirm that this is correct? And if so, how do I make this change? Can I make it myself or do I need to first open a conversation on the Mastotermes talk page? NicheSports (talk) 19:52, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

A genus with one extant and several extinct species can't be unusual – maybe you could ask for opinions at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Animals? nbsp; Maproom (talk) 07:40, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Will do, thanks NicheSports (talk) 02:21, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Auto-play on video (gif) clips

Some video clips within articles automatically and continually play on a loop while the article is open. This is very distracting and disruptive to some of us neuro-diverse individuals, but I can't find a way to stop their playing. Is there a trick? Why do some do this and others do not? (The one I just came across is a gif.) Ghost writer's cat (talk) 19:12, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Could you link to an example of a GIF that autoplays and a GIF that does not? jlwoodwa (talk) 19:56, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

@Jlwoodwa Here's one that loops. I don't have a ready example of one that doesn't. Maybe all gifs loop automatically and the other clips I've seen have been a different format. Really, I'm just looking for a way to keep any moving imagery from moving, whatever format it's in. Ghost writer's cat (talk) 21:26, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. If I'm interpreting MOS:ANIMATION correctly, infinitely-looping GIFs like that one should be converted to video files (which don't autoplay), so that article is currently in violation of Wikipedia's accessibility guidelines. The best solution would be converting every such file, but in the meantime there should be a user preference, gadget, or script that stops them from autoplaying/looping. I'll try to find/create one. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:32, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

@Jlwoodwa Thank you so much for your help! I probably won't be visiting that particular page again so no rush on this. Having now read MOS:ANIMATION, I agree it's in violation. It's a relief to know that there should be some sort of control in place. (As I read that policy, the gif shouldn't play longer than 5 seconds no matter what, either through cycle repetitions or through its single-cycle duration. If a cycle is longer than 5 seconds, it has to be converted to video so controls will be in place. This particular gif has about a 3-second cycle, so it should be stopping after 5 seconds, i.e. fewer than two repetitions.) Ghost writer's cat (talk) 05:56, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

How to take a redirect for RFD

Hi! I just want some help. I eventually want to start a Redirect for Discussion (RFD) but I don't know how to. Do I put it on the list when editing today's RFD'S? How do a take an article to Redirects for Discussion? Servite et contribuere (talk) 11:50, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

I suggest using Twinkle, which does this whole process for you. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:00, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Jlwoodwa How do I use Twinkle? Any other options asides that? Servite et contribuere (talk) 05:17, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Go to Special:Preferences § mw-prefsection-gadgets and enable Twinkle. Then go to the redirect. You'll see an XfD button (possibly inside a TW dropdown). Click it and fill in your reasoning (why you're nominating the redirect). Then press submit.

The alternative is to list the redirect manually, following the instructions at WP:RFDHOWTO. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:32, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Jlwoodwa Basically I could just copy and paste an existing RFD but make some edits to discuss the redirect I want to discuss rather than the one I pasted. Right? Servite et contribuere (talk) 05:50, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

That sounds like a bad idea. What if you missed something that needed to be changed? Please, just use Twinkle. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:52, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Jlwoodwa I can understand your concerns. I actually copy, paste and edit for pretty much all of my RM'S. Also, I have very fast visual processing. Anyways, if I didn't miss anything and changed everything needed, would it work? Servite et contribuere (talk) 05:57, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, if done correctly that would work, but the wikitext generated by {{subst:rfd2}} contains the redirect's title twelve different times, one of which is URL-encoded (so find-and-replace wouldn't be enough). I really think it would be easier to use Twinkle or the template. jlwoodwa (talk) 06:03, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Hiram R. Revels

Would someone please fix footnote 6 in Hiram R. Revels? I've tried without success. Maurice Magnus (talk) 19:40, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

@Maurice Magnus: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1252. If you're asking about the bullet point that's causing the information to jump to a different line, that seems to be coming from {{CongBio}}, which is template-protected. Maybe just copy the information generated from the template then paste over the actual template being used? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:46, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I think that I did it right. Maurice Magnus (talk) 11:49, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Name

Hello, so I was trying to change my name to WikipediaWizard, but it got rejected even though there is a user named WikipediaWizardsucks, so what do I do? Vestrix (talk) 21:53, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Pick something else to change it to? 331dot (talk) 21:59, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Yeah but why is it getting rejected? Vestrix (talk) 22:01, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Try WikipediaWizard with a different vulgarity attached to it? Maurice Magnus (talk) 23:42, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

There is an user "WikipediaWizardSUCKS" indeed, who got blocked in 2006. Since then limitations have probably been set in place that blocks any username containing "Wikipedia" to avoid confusing users they are speaking with someone with elevated permissions etc. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 07:29, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok, thank you Vestrix (talk) 11:58, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

How would I be able to redirect to a page in-article

I notice sometimes pages with titles that are often synonyms link to each other like "for more uses of (x), see (y)" or "for the (subject)(x), see (y)".

I want to know how to link the page "Gigil" to "Cute Aggression" and Secondarily if that would make sense to do, because the topics aren't necessarily relevant but "Gigil" does refer to Cute Aggression, another thing is I'm unsure if this conversation ask is suited for the Teahouse but I'm unsure where else I'd open it. JaztyMania (talk) 15:30, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi JaztyMania, welcome to the Teahouse. It's called hatnotes. {{For}} can be used if there is only one other meaning in Wikipedia but a search also found brief mentions of several works. I have created Gigil (disambiguation) and added {{Other uses}} to the top of Gigil. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:24, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Regraded

How do I get an article that is say a stub-class regraded and rereviewed? Vestrix (talk) 17:10, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Which article are you talking about? User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 17:30, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

2003 Gibraltar general election Vestrix (talk) 17:32, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

The article is now long enough to not be considered a stub, and as such I've removed the stub marker accordingly. Have a nice day, User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 17:36, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Vestrix, if you see an article rated as a stub that is clearly no longer a stub, you are welcome to change the rating to start. I've done that many times. The only ratings that require a formal process are Good article and Featured article. Cullen328 (talk) 17:52, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Requesting review/possible reclassification of article?

Hello! I am contributing to the editing of a Wikipedia article as part of a class project, and I selected a page from the Women Scientists Wikiproject to improve. I have been updating the page for data scientist and political activist Megan Squire, which is classed as "start" quality. Is there a process by which the page can be reevaluated, reclassed if appropriate, and any feedback can be offered? Megedits (talk) 19:25, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Up to the B-class anybody can reclassify any article. Ruslik_Zero 20:04, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for that info. I have reclassed the article as B based on my understanding of the criteria. Happy to discuss with any editors who think a different classification is appropriate. Megedits (talk) 20:23, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Google search Full Metal Dojo

Hi, I have created Full Metal Dojo on feb 15 this year, and I tried to googling the promotion today and it didn't show up in search results. Does someone know how long it usually takes for an article to get indexed by google? Cheers Lekkha Moun (talk) 20:14, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Lekkha Moun. A new article is indexed for search engines after 90 days at maximum. It will be indexed sooner if the article is reviewed by the new pages patrol or created by a highly experienced account with the autopatrolled user right. Please read Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing for complete details. Cullen328 (talk) 20:22, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Lekkha Moun (talk) 20:29, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Suggestion: time duration in days

Suggestion: can someone program the regular bot that does birthdays so that, where it says a person is (or was) so many years old, it also says how many days that is? Peter Jedicke (talk) 01:11, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

That's not a bot, but rather the {{birth date and age}} template. I don't think the number of days would be useful to most readers. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:34, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

{{Birth date and age in years and days}} -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 10:47, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Due to caching and other technical details, it's quite possible that it would not always be up-to-date when a reader sees it. I'm with Jlwoodwa, that it's too small a detail. DMacks (talk) 00:06, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Some articles have move-protected template and some don't

Why is this the case? The article Sicily has move protection template on it while Gaza war has no template. Why is this the case? DotesConks (talk) 01:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

The Gaza war article is move-protected for one reason and extended-confirmed protected for another. There can only be one icon, so it's the general protection one, which is more relevant to more editors, than the separate move-protection. DMacks (talk) 03:05, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Content cited to a dead link

Is it acceptable to remove content which is cited to a dead link? Or is that better to remove the cited content in those cases? For example, at this page, there is this line, "The foundation provided the staff support and funding behind the Talk Israel mobile app, which launched in December 2015 with the goal to 'bring the pro-Israel community together.'"

That is cited to a dead link. Should it just be deleted or what is the best practice in this situation? Iljhgtn (talk) 01:34, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

The WP:DEADREF guideline instructs not to delete the link, but instead suggests several alternatives. DMacks (talk) 01:42, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I think step 6 might be the move here. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:47, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I think [19] is the step 3 solution, based on some educated guessing about step 2. DMacks (talk) 03:09, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Potentially AI Images?

Do the images in the articles National Party (Haiti) and Liberal Party (Haiti) appear to be AI-generated? I am unsure and would appreciate any clarification. 🍫 TheBrowniess (talk) (contribs) 🍫 04:09, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Looks pretty obviously so. I see no evidence of these being used historically, and the thing that is real, Haiti's coat of arms, is absolute mangled as an element in these quick mockups. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 06:50, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Luckily for us, they've also clearly used the wrong license, so we can simply delete them on Commons. -- asilvering (talk) 06:58, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure what it says about me, but I'm mildly disappointed that they're not even convincing AI images. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 07:32, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

yeaah loooks pretty not real to me man probably ai generated 😦 GrapedOrange (talk) 07:02, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

@TheBrowniess, I removed both images. History6042😊 (Contact me) 17:47, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you all for responding! 🍫 TheBrowniess (talk) (contribs) 🍫 05:44, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Good point. ~ [[User:ComeAndJoinTheMusic|Music]]&nbsp;^{[[User talk:ComeAndJoinTheMusic|''what music?'']]} ~ (talk) 06:58, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Can I...

Can I invite new users to the teahouse. ~ [[User:ComeAndJoinTheMusic|Music]]&nbsp;^{[[User talk:ComeAndJoinTheMusic|''what music?'']]} ~ (talk) 06:36, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, ComeAndJoinTheMusic, anybody is welcome to do so, so of course you are. But perhaps you'd care to fix your signature first? (In its current, faulty state, it's not attractive; and also it might slightly confuse the people you're trying to encourage. If you're not in the mood for diagnosing what's wrong, I suggest reverting to the default signature: you can try again to improve on that later, when you're in the mood to do so.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:47, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

@ComeAndJoinTheMusic: Select "Treat the above as wiki markup" at Special:Preferences##mw-htmlform-signature. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:24, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Request for Feedback on Draft: France Life Imaging

Hello everyone,

I have been working on a translation of a french article in my draft called "France Life Imaging" that have been rejected due to "promotional content". I have made many edits to remove promotional language, inappropriate external links and to add a text written for a neutral point of view.

I would greatly appreciate any feedback, edits, or advice from more experienced Wikipedia users before submitting it for review.

Thank you in advance for your time and support ! Vivienne24 (talk) 07:20, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi there. I’ve not looked at it in enough detail to be able to confidently accept it or decline it, but I would say that in some areas, the English is not great. The person who came along added commentary, which I removed but I would recommend improving the English in the article as it is not great. Is it machine translated? ScrabbleTiles (talk) 08:53, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Vivienne24, the prose is ponderous, like corporate image PR material, designed to lull rather than inform the reader. Sample: The implementation of national infrastructures in 2010-2011 was the result of a twofold observation, researchers needed to use high-tech platforms ( medical imaging, biological imaging, -omics, etc.) and the cost and complexity of using the most innovative equipment was such that no research unit could have its own equipment. Guess: The new national infrastructure of 2010‐2011 was implemented because researchers needed to use equipment (medical and biological imaging, etc) so expensive that no research unit could have its own.? -- Hoary (talk) 08:58, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

It appears the article is just a copy and paste from a machine translator, as I put the French Wikipedia article into a translator and got exactly the same output. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 09:08, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Vivienne24, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The draft very obviously says what the company wants people to know, (wherever the text came from): that is what makes it promotional.

Wikipedia has essentially no interest in what the company wants people to know. An article should be a neutral summary of what people who have no connection with the company have chosen to publish about it in reliable sources, and very little else. ColinFine (talk) 13:24, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Resolving a title that is in conflict with an existing (and redirected title)

I am having trouble understanding how to resolve a title conflict for a draft that has not yet been accepted.

I have a page named "Johnson_Elementary_School" at Draft talk:Johnson Elementary School. A page with the same name exists, with a redirect to another city in another state.

It feels like changing the title is the correct next move, but I am unsure and could use advice. I am unable to change the title of my article -- at least the option isn't presented to me.

I have reviewed the helpful articles about disambiguation and redirect pages, but I don't know how to resolve the problem if someone else already made a redirect page. Additionally, I have posted for help in the "Talk" section, but I am not sure if that is seen by reviewers.

What is the appropriate next step?

Thanks.

Cydonia90 (talk) 16:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. You have submitted the draft for review(you linked to its talk page above, and not the draft itself, but that's okay); the reviewer will place it at the proper title if it is accepted. You don't need to do anything. 331dot (talk) 16:57, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Cydonia90, elementary schools are eligible for Wikipedia articles only if they are of great historical or architectural significance. Your draft shows no evidence of that. Please read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#Schools. Cullen328 (talk) 18:07, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Understood. This is helpful. Thank you. Cydonia90 (talk) 19:15, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Moved to Draft:Johnson Elementary School (Natick, Massachusetts). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:04, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Accidental "hide" of contents

I accidentally clicked "hide", or was seeing what would happen. Now I want to "unhide" the table of contents on AfD main page and others, but I do not see that option anywhere. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:07, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I think "Move to sidebar" is what I needed to click to undo it... Confusing that they do not just call it "Unhide"... Bad wording. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:12, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Help with coordinates

I've been trying to add coordinates to the article Battle of Albulena, but it didn't work. I read the template documentation, and decided that CoordDM would be better for this. I tried, and it didn't work, so I removed it from the mainspace article and fiddled with it in my userpage. I have no idea what the error messages are talking about or what I'm doing wrong, but something doesn't work. Could someone please have a look at my recent coords-related contributions on 3 April and see what on earth I'm doing wrong? User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 17:28, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

@Chorchapu: I guess you mean your edits of 4 April. I don't see that you used {{CoordDM}} in the article, but you seem to have figured out that your first edit was missing the latitude and longitude directions (N and E). Your second and third edits fixed the problem (though the {{coord}} template was lacking type and region parameters), and the coordinates were displaying correctly, so I don't see that you're doing anything wrong. I've readded the coordinates, and the article looks OK to me. If you want only degrees and minutes for the coordinates, just delete the seconds "|07" and "|05" in the template. Deor (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's on 3 April (I didn't make any edits on the 4th), and I did use CoordDM on my user page such as this diff, which didn't work. I have, however, noticed that the coordinates on the actual article did work (?) and so I guess that's fixed? Thing is, when I made those edits it didn't work so I don't know what happened. Thanks for re-adding the coords. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 23:58, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

@Chorchapu, the edit Deor linked to was made at 2025-04-04T01:22:03. If you're 15 degrees or more West of Greenwich (which I guess you are), that edit was on the 3rd for you. ColinFine (talk) 16:44, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Okay then, although the time shown on my edits that I see isn't accurate to my timezone either, it's in UTC at 20:22 on 3 April. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 17:12, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Battles of the River Stour

Page about the two battles of the River Stour. How can I improve this page so it is accepted please? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Battles_of_the_River_Stour Chiefsub68 (talk) 20:31, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Chiefsub68, and welcome to the Teahouse. A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what reliable secondary sources say about a subject, and very little else.

You have only one citqation, with a very short summary (of unknown provenance) and a primary source. A Wikipedia article on a historical battle should normally be based on at least three separate scholarly works which discuss the battle in some depth - books from reputable publishers, or papers in reputable peer-reviewed journals. ColinFine (talk) 21:12, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

person notability

i would like to translate this article to english: fi:Alma Tuuva

but i'm scared that the article would be deleted due to the person not being notable enough. this person is a helsinki city council member and a social media persona with 35k followers. are these enough to merit an article in the eng wikipedia Warpfrz (talk) 10:52, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

No they aren't. What in-depth coverage of him has there been in reliable sources, independent of him and of each other? -- Hoary (talk) 11:38, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

please do not assume genders. she has been covered on yle.fi, hs.fi and is.fi Warpfrz (talk) 13:26, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

A fair comment. I don't know how or why I assumed "he"; a stupid mistake. -- Hoary (talk) 21:20, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Warpfrz. If the sources in the Finnish article meet the criteria in 42, then they probably establish that she is notable by English Wikipedia's standard, and you can translate the article. (It would still be worth looking for English sources, as they are preferred if they are equally good as sources; but if these don't exist, the Finnish sources may be used).

If the Finnish sources are not adequate to establish notability, then attempting to translate the article would result in an English draft that was written backwards. In that case, it would be better to look for better sources - in English or Finnish - before trying to write a draft from them. If you cannot find suitable sources, you'll know not to spend any time on this. ColinFine (talk) 13:33, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

FWIW – and keeping my views on this person's ideologies etc. strictly to myself! – I do think the sources in the fi.wiki article are likely enough to establish notability here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:29, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Comeback at Eurovision!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eurovision_Song_Contest_2025&action=edit&section=15 JLStevenNgao (talk) 01:03, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

This may relate to Eurovision Song Contest 2025. Do you have a question? David notMD (talk) 01:42, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Seemingly vandalism-only account, how to proceed?

A couple weeks back, I saw an edit that updated peak chart positions for songs. However, the claimed positions did not match the source. For example: on the song "Edamame", the previous revision said peak in Canada was 13, and edit claims it went up to 6. However, https://www.billboard.com/artist/bbno/chart-history/can/ says it went to 13. Most of the user's other contributions are similar incorrect chart adjustments. The user has already received three warnings on their talk page for incorrect chart adjustments and one for something else. I made a request for administrator intervention which resulted in a 72-hour block, however the behavior promptly continued after the block expired.

How do I proceed from here? Do I just submit another request for admin intervention? Do more warnings need to be issued before that's possible? Could/should all edits made by this user be reverted? Yhvr (talk) 23:42, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Yhvr. If this user has vandalized, been blocked, and continued vandalizing from that point, continue reverting them and report them again. Thank you. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 02:26, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Will do, thank you! Yhvr (talk) 02:28, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

I still don’t understand why people decide to vandalize information on the internet that’s what fake news is for am I right? Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:04, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

how do i report an experienced user who never read the warning given on their talk page?

I have warned User:Imdeadinside12 twice to start using edit summaries in their talk page. Then, i look into their talk page, seems like this user has been warned regarding other edit related stuff too from other users multiple times. Is there a way to report an account that behaves this way? Http iosue (talk) 02:03, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Per User talk:Imdeadinside12, dating back to 2021, this editor has been warned on Talk page to A) Provide edit summaries, B) not enter original research, C) provide references. The editor has not created a User page or ever replied on own Talk page, so may not be aware there is a Talk page. However, Imdeadinside12 has successfully made thousands of edits to article with a low revert rate, so maybe this is not the fight to pick. David notMD (talk) 02:55, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Draft:James Ashcroft

Hello This draft article I wrote is going through the AfC process, but I'd rather put it straight into mainspace (which I've done with articles before). I'm not sure how to do this now it's in AfC. Also, the name is a redirect, so that would have to be fixed (there's a note on it about this). Can someone help with this. Many thanks. Blackballnz (talk) 09:24, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Blackballnz, and welcome to the Teahouse.

You can withdraw it from AFC simply by editing it to remove the AFC header (and comments).

In order to move it over a redirect, you will need to make a request at WP:RM. ColinFine (talk) 13:26, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @ColinFine- so I would withdraw it from AFC & put into mainspace first? And then make the request at WP:RM? James Ashcroft currently redirects to Jimmy Ashcroft (a footballer). Blackballnz (talk) 07:24, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

No, you don't need to move it to mainspace first, as far as I know, @Blackballnz - you can request a technical move from Draft space to mainspace. ColinFine (talk) 09:12, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

New view?

Did the WMF or people who control the top of how everything looks related to skins just change something today? Or maybe I am just going crazy, but some things look different on my "home page",. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:29, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure, however you can change how things look at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 17:14, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn If so, there ought to be comments at the mediawiki page but I don't see any. You could ask on that talk page, although this whole area looks fairly inactive. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:30, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

How are you able to locate that sort of thing? I can click the link you provided, but I mean how did you find the link that you provided to me? Iljhgtn (talk) 17:59, 15 April 2025 (UTC)a

@Iljhgtn: The feature is Special:Homepage. I would enter mw: in our search box to go to mw: (www.mediawiki.org) which is the wiki about the MediaWiki software. There I would try a search on homepage. The linked page is the first result. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:15, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

"mw" with a ":" takes you directly to MediaWiki you say? Learned something new today. Iljhgtn (talk) 23:58, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

See more at Help:Interwiki linking#Prefix codes for linking to Wikimedia sister projects. mw is a shortcut for the long and clumsy mediawikiwiki. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:08, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

mediawikiwiki is long and clumsy alright. Iljhgtn (talk) 00:15, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn To answer your "how": I'm a mentor to new editors, so I knew the homepage is part of the "Growth Team features". So I entered WP:GTF into the search box, which took me to a page from which there is a link to the mediawiki page. I entered the latter link as a URL rather than a wikilink as I found that easier in this case. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:04, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Question about country articles

Take a country on Wikipedia like Iceland for example. Iceland, like many other countries on Wikipedia, has sub-articles that go along with the parent country. However, what if an article related to Iceland, like Languages of Iceland, seems too short? Can it be merged into its own section on the country's article, or is it required to be its own separate article on Wikipedia? DiamondFrxsh (talk) 23:51, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

@DiamondFrxsh, Welcome to the Teahouse. Nothing "requires" an article on Wikipedia. If you think that it should be merged, see the instructions at WP:Merging. If the instructions are too complicated, feel free to ask for more help. Happy editing! CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:13, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Languages of Iceland has had a "additional citations needed" tag on it since September 2014. I would search for additional references first, and then perhaps merge it to Icelandic language if the aforementioned article can't be improved. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 07:52, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

I was thinking about proposing a merge to that article, but wanted to ask this question first on whether countries required sub-articles. Thanks! DiamondFrxsh (talk) 11:36, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

What do I do with the TemplateData?

I edited the sandbox of Template:Infobox Russian inhabited locality. When I added a new parameter via UI, it generated template data for all parameters at the end of the template.

In the test cases, it now always gets appended after template. So that's obviously not right.

Does this template data serve any purpose aside from documentation, and would I have to move it there?

~< Valentinianus I (talk) >~ 11:39, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Request to change protection level

Where should a request to change the protection level be posted? This is the one I'm talking about (but regardless, I would like to know): Talk:Kushwaha#Extended-confirmed-protected_edit_request_on_16_April_2025 TIA! Lova Falk (talk) 11:58, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

I've responded at Talk:Kushwaha, Lova Falk. -- Hoary (talk) 12:13, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Lova Falk (talk) 12:22, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Map Template Errors

I just finished writing an article on a Lake in Sweden --- Pulsujärvi (lake), I had used Infobox Water body template but when I added the coordinates, It is not showing the Map preview, I donno if it's an error or something like that, Need Guidance! 👑 Jesus isGreat7 👑 | 📜 Royal Talk 15:47, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

What you have is correct! All pages lead to a place like that! (Boeing747Pilot) Boeing747Pilot (talk) 16:29, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

If you press the if you press the goes URL then it will take you to Google Earth. (Boeing747Pilot) Boeing747Pilot (talk) 16:52, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @JesusisGreat7. You have added the coordinates, but you haven't specified a map in the pushpin_map argument. See Template:Infobox body of water ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Images

I need to add images to my draft but it would be impossible to make it my own work and it would be hard to contact the creator. What do i do? (Boeing747Pilot) Boeing747Pilot (talk) 15:37, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello again, @Boeing747Pilot. If you are able to take a photo of the subject (not of an existing image, which is almost certainly somebody else's copyright) yourself, then it is your own work, and you have the legal power to license it in the way that Wikimedia Commons requires. IN most other cases, you cannot. See WP:image use policy.

But if you are talking about Draft:The Stupendium, there is no point in worrying about images before you've established that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - it's like trying to paint the windows of a house before you've even surveyed the plot to make sure it's fit to build on. Images won't affect whether the draft is accepted as an article or not. ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok thanks. I will build on to the article. I don’t plan on completing soon considering what i need to do and the time i have. (Boeing747Pilot) Boeing747Pilot (talk) 17:08, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Yearbook a reliable source?

Hello, I edited a Wikipedia page for a school and put the school's yearbook as a source for some dates related to the school, and someone else edited the page and marked it as a possibly unreliable source. Is a school's own yearbook an unreliable source for the school? ShamrockFrog64 (talk) 15:12, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

WP:RSN has discussed it occasionally, and typically sees it as a self-published/non-independent source. So it could verify some details about a school similar to how the school's own website would. DMacks (talk) 18:25, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Question about the most appropriate way to list Notable Works

Hello! When listing notable works at the end of an article, is there a specific format that must be followed? I see notable works listed in different ways at the end of articles (like journalists, writers, filmmakers, etc.) and sometimes it's a table, sometimes it's a list that only has the title/year. Other times with more details... Is there a preferred or "more correct" way than others? Thank you! Kinfolx1114 (talk) 00:07, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

@Kinfolx1114 As you have found, there are many ways to do these lists. The official manual of style on the topic is at MOS:LISTSOFWORKS, so please be guided by that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:44, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Kinfolx1114 (talk) 19:12, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Jakob Erbar

Hi!  I was viewing info on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakob_Erbar.  In the Reference section, one reference has a glaring error.  However, I am stumped on how to change it as the edit link does not show the information.  What to do?  Thanks. Wdrazo (talk) 18:39, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

I've fixed an error ("Macmillsn" for "Macmillan"). I don't know if that's the one you mean. Maproom (talk) 20:26, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! Wdrazo (talk) 23:34, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Wdrazo, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The probable reason why you couldn't find it is that in the source, the text of references is not in the reference section, but in the section where the reference is first cited. The software collects them into the refernce section. So Maproom fixed the typo where Reference 2 is defined, at the end of the first paragraph. ColinFine (talk) 20:33, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Nothing like something staring you in the face for years. Thanks for clearing that up! Wdrazo (talk) 23:35, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Archiving References

What is happening with the "Analyze a page" program for archiving references? It has a huge backlog and I have been unsuccessful in getting it to work twice. At a time when web pages at universities are being removed, I think it is important to archive these references. TwoScars (talk) 13:17, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello @TwoScars, Keep in mind that the tool won’t archive all references for a particular article on Wikipedia, If the Archive tool isn’t working very fine and you wish to archive a particular citation, consider using alternative methods, you can try (https://archive.ph/) then add the archive link and access date to the existing reference. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 23:39, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Formatting help

Something fucky is up with this page Banyamulenge but I'm not used to wiki formatting enough to fix it. Can someone take a look? Thanks! Sock-the-guy (talk) 23:35, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Someone fixed it, thanks! Sock-the-guy (talk) 23:43, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Changing faulty secondary source to correct primary source

I was reading the page for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guy_She_Was_Interested_in_Wasn%27t_a_Guy_at_All and in its other section it mentions a playlist being published by Apple Music and Spotify, but the playlist is published by Universal Music Japan, I couldn't find any secondary sources that say this info, would it be correct to replace the wrong secondary source with a primary link to the playlist on the official Universal Music Japan youtube channel/tweet from the authors account Jackdawss (talk) 19:20, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

@Jackdawss, welcome to the Teahouse. Primary sources which are reliably published are fine for facts. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:32, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Primary Sources

are there supposed to be no primary sources for an organization's page? as in internal documentation etc Brokebutbrilliant (talk) 21:04, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

this is also about corporate notability. can I ask about certain links? Brokebutbrilliant (talk) 21:29, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your "paid" declaration for Draft:Presearch, Brokebutbrilliant. Very limited use can be made of primary sources. However, any claim that rises above the very humdrum has to depend on secondary sources, as does demonstration of notability. It seems to me that this draft is going nowhere. Perhaps Presearch will be notable a couple of years from now. -- Hoary (talk) 21:52, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

You're very welcome. That first response was to ensure that removing this primary sources was needed, as I eliminated it all for secondary sources. (At first I thought it was good to provide primary sources). I'm going to upload the draft after this reply. TechCrunch, The New Stack, PCMag, Lifewire, and the Search Engine Journal are the secondary sources for notability, but there were others added for further references. Those secondary sources mention the subject as the headline and focus, and not including lists of alternatives, which I'm assuming for now means subject written about in passing. If that is rejected, are the Teahouse -- or the reviewing editor -- able to give specific parameters? In reference to the sector, search engines, there is a handful of companies, listed on List of Search Engines and with their own pages, that have less or comparable secondary, notable publications by Wikipedia's guidelines. Seeks maybe two. Dogpile maybe seven, two of which were about raising or acquisitions -- which aren't included in the latest draft:presearch after reply. Kagi six. Elasticsearch seven. OpenSearch_(software) maybe 7. If YaCy, in the same distributed sector, touts Heise Online, The Register, and PC World, then it would seem logical to me that TechCrunch, The New Stack, PCMag, Lifewire, and the Search Engine Journal, even if whittled down to compare to YaCy's notable publications, would be comparable for draft:presearch. -bbb Brokebutbrilliant (talk) 23:03, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is written about the question of article deletion, but it's just as valid for the question of article creation. -- Hoary (talk) 01:16, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Mango's Cafe

I'm trying to make an article on a local café called Magno's, and I have no idea how to add the title on the draft. Can someone help me with this? QeedIsAWatermelon (talk) 23:03, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello @QeedIsAWatermelon, Here you go Draft:Magno's, You can click on the link to start your draft and write about the subject, make sure you search the web for reliable sources. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 23:31, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

I added a draft submission template to the top and a section for references at the bottom. To have these added automatically, use Wikipedia:Article wizard. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 06:09, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Need your help

Hello everyone,

I’d really appreciate any helpful input regarding a biography currently under deletion discussion on Simple English Wikipedia.

The article is about a dermatologist and public health educator whose work has been featured in Khaleej Times, Financial Express, and Times of India. It focuses on his efforts in digital health education.

If anyone has time to take a look and share their thoughts, I’d be truly grateful.

Article: simple:Yousef Abo Zarad

Deletion discussion: simple:Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2025/Yousef Abo Zarad

Thank you so much for your time! Mvfra (talk) 12:04, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I note that, as per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yousef Abo Zarad, an article on this person was deleted from the English Wikipedia. - Arjayay (talk) 12:12, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

@Mvfra "Wikipedia in English" and "Wikipedia in Simple English" are distinct projects and each of these are independent of each others.

Therefore , those who doesn't contribute to "Wikipedia in Simple English" can't help.

In my point of view , this matter have to be discussed on "Wikipedia in Simple English". Anatole-berthe (talk) 07:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

In the News proposal process

Hello, I’ve proposed a new item for in the news at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#Women’s World Chess Championship

Is there anything else I need to do personally, or is it a matter of enough people supporting/opposing it?

Do I need to monitor the entry to see if people support it and then add the (Ready) tag? Xrisk (talk) 09:19, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. I'd suggest asking questions about the ITN process at its talk page. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

How to seek Visual and Source editor experts

Is there a way to quickly find Wiki editors experienced in using one or the other editor and willing to help with occasional questions beyond the basics?

I was originally going to ask how I could find someone who's an expert in the Visual editor, as I'd really like advice about some reference work in that editor. Then it occurred to me that there might be other Teahouse frequenters wondering how to get special help in using the Source editor — plus others who like me also prefer the Visual editor — and so I'm asking on behalf of both groups. Augnablik (talk) 07:39, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Augnablik, I suggest that you ask your questions here in the Teahouse. An answer may be inexpert or plain wrong; but if so then somebody better informed is likely to correct it. -- Hoary (talk) 12:57, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Most experienced editors use the source editor and may assume others do so always state clearly if a post is about VisualEditor. Somebody who knows it well enough will probably come. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:58, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

All right, but reluctantly, @Hoary and @PrimeHunter — let me begin with what should be a simple question for seasoned editors who use the VE:

I know there’s a template that creates the equivalent of footnotes for articles. I’ve used it frequently, though I’m always surprised that it puts authors’ surnames before their first names, like in a traditional bibliography. But is there also a template in VE to create a traditional bibliography? I haven’t yet found one. Augnablik (talk) 20:54, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

@Augnablik, VE is kind of annoying for this. You can stick a bunch of footnotes at the bottom of the article, then switch to source mode and remove the ref tags. Or you can use "insert template" and search for the one you want - they all start with "cite", eg Template:Cite book. But then you have to input each field manually. I switch back and forth between the two editors a lot for this reason. -- asilvering (talk) 07:05, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, @Asilvering … I was beginning to think there really weren’t any Wiki editors who use VE for citation work! The situation you describe does sound annoying, as you put it. I would think that because there’s a way to do the equivalent of footnotes in VE, there’d also be a way to do the equivalent of a bibliography. I wonder if that’s being worked on and we just don’t know about it. Augnablik (talk) 04:08, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

_____________

@Asilvering, I tried what you suggested, but I found that I couldn't do what I had in mind — which was to keep the footnotes in place but also have a section below it for a bibliography. When I tried to copy the footnotes and create a new section where I could paste them and then (using the Source editor) remove all the ref tags, I found that whatever I did in the copy/pasted references would affect the original footnotes themselves. Disappointing. Augnablik (talk) 13:00, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

You've done it out of order - create the footnotes that become the bibliography first, then switch to SE and remove the ref tags. You can then switch back to VE and copy-paste the bibliography entries into your actual in-text footnotes (use the "manual" tab when adding the footnotes in VE), or just generate new footnotes. Like I said, it's a pain... but I haven't found anything better, myself. This is why so many people use sfn. -- asilvering (talk) 02:54, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

But I did create the footnotes first. Or were you saying that was the exact opposite of what you were suggesting?

Augnablik (talk) 03:38, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

@Augnablik, I figured this would be easier to demonstrate than to try explaining again, so have a look at the page history of User:Asilvering/footnotes. -- asilvering (talk) 04:13, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

@Asilvering, much appreciate your help ... I'll try out what you suggested at your Talk page, and we can take up the thread there. Augnablik (talk) 07:32, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

@Augnablik I've added a comment on that talk page. ash (talk) 11:14, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

AFD Stats Tool not working

Hello,

I am having issues getting the AFD Stats tool to work for my account. Am I doing something wrong? https://afdstats.toolforge.org/

Thanks! Gjb0zWxOb (talk) Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 14:06, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I tried for you.

I get "AfD Statistics for User:Gjb0zWxOb

ERROR: No AfDs found. This user may not exist. Note that if the user's username does not appear in the wikitext of their signature, you may need to specify an alternate name."

I don't know what is the problem because your account does exist. Anatole-berthe (talk) 14:11, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

AfD stats implies that either this username doesn't exist (which isn't true) or that you haven't actually !voted in any AfDs, which looks like the explanation. According to XTools you have only edited four pages in the Wikipedia namespace, none of them AfDs. Have you !voted in any AfDs? ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 14:24, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

How long do middle-class drafts wait until review?

I asked why AFCs took so long earlier here in the teahouse, but it seems to have been archived. I wanted to ask editors who have been on this site longer, how long does it take for drafts that are not amazing nor are they terrible to get reviewed? Theres a backlog of 3,000 and historically, it seems like this has always been the case. DotesConks (talk) 23:40, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello @DotesConks, thank you for reaching out to Teahouse, To my best of knowledge, it depends on the time you created your draft, Someone will attend to a draft if they are active at the time you created the draft else if not reviewed as soon as possible, it goes to backlog which some reviews still check, and it also depends on your created piece, some articles get attention than the other especially if it’s of public interest, important, a spam or otherwise. Editors likely review the first set of articles they see per WP:NPP and try to send a feedback, but if you create directly, There is not stipulated timeframe as new page reviewers can patrol on there own discretion. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 23:50, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

@Chippla360 I understand, but I was already told this and really I'm just asking for an estimated review time for drafts that don't excel yet aren't dumpster fires. Given that the oldest draft is 20 months old, this has me awfully concerned. DotesConks (talk) 00:10, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Review has no timeframe, It depends on when someone gets to it, but I assure you if you’re a user actively creating clean pages, there is a possibility your articles get reviewed within a week. A 20 month draft ? In Wikipedia unedited drafts are deleted after a period of 6months which is the G13 delete so if the draft is 20 months, I suggest you either resubmit the draft or ask a reviewer to have a look at it, hope it meets WP:GNG? Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 00:18, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

DotesConks, you are correct that excellent drafts tend to get accepted pretty promptly and terrible drafts tend to get declined or rejected pretty promptly. So, the best way to get a draft of middling quality approved quickly is to improve it significantly. Problems that cause drafts to stall are several: Thinking that adding lots of mediocre references is better than selecting fewer excellent quality references. That's false, and reference quality is vastly more important than quantity. Failing to make a plausible claim of notability in the lead section. Using promotional language instead of rigorously neutral language. Also, the fact is that drafts about highly technical topics often languish. This applies also to drafts where most of the references are in foreign languages, especially those written in non-Latin scripts. Many reviewers are less likely to feel comfortable with such drafts requiring special skills to assess properly. Cullen328 (talk) 00:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

hello @Cullen328 who are you tagging on the text lol ? Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 00:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Chippla, please clarify your remark and your "lol". Cullen328 (talk) 04:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@DotesConks take a look at your Draft talk:North Korean defection methods, you noted on your Userpage it’s the best you have created, there are reliable source but it still fails verification, so many citation needed tags, lacks verifiable inline citations. So probably this could pend also untill issues are resolved. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 00:26, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@Chippla360 I already explained to the editor what my manual of style is. I'd say 80% of the citation needed templates should be removed. DotesConks (talk) 01:19, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I've tried my best to supply as many high quality and medium quality sources to my created drafts but it just isn't enough to make it outstanding. Which is why I am asking this question now, nearly 3 weeks on from submitting my drafts. If I have to play the long game, how long will that game be? DotesConks (talk) 00:25, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Clarification - after 6 months, unedited drafts are eligible for deletion. This doesn't mean that they will be. DS (talk) 15:22, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Just for the record, before that "20 months" claim becomes canonised, the oldest draft currently at AfC is 3½ months old. There are 24 drafts over 3 months, accounting for <1% of the pending c. 2,800 drafts. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:26, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

My first reaction (luckily, only in my head) to this thread was "Aw, stop whingeing." But then I took a look at Draft:North Korean defection methods. This is littered with admonishing templates. Sample: Upon reaching a "friendly"{{Clarify|reason=Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which requires content to be factual, accurate, and reasonably precise. Thus, referring to "friendly" countries, especially without clarification of the term, is not good enough. I suggest changing it to a description of how these countries view defectors, or some other factual collective description of "friendly" countries. According to Wikipedia, no countries are "friendly".|date=April 2025}} country, North Koreans surrender themselves to the police.... I suggest that in the particular context (which is, after all, how we normally understand words), "friendly" is easily interpretable as "believed by potential defectors from North Korea and/or their assistants to be receptive to applications for refugee status" or similar. "Friendly" is perhaps not the best word; it doesn't have to be: (i) it's in quotes, suggesting that it's not in Wikipedia's voice; (ii) this is an article candidate, not a Featured Article candidate. I have already removed one admonishing template as mere pettifogging; other experienced editors may wish to take a look at the draft and consider the aptness of its templates. -- Hoary (talk) 02:05, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Is there a page to cite to generally uninformed people about Wikipedia's backend?

Like an essay explaining namespaces, what constitutes a reliable source, that we generally follow WP:TRUTH, policies, etc. There's a lot of people out-of-wiki I see that generally don't know what's going on here, and it'd be nice to link to one essay instead of a bunch of essays, policies, and guidelines that nobody will read. KeyGremlin (talk) 19:32, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

One could look up Wikipedia in an encyclopedia, KeyGremlin, and thereby arrive at Notability in the English Wikipedia, Wikipedia community, Reliability of Wikipedia, and more. I suspect that any "essay" that not only explained "notability", described who contributes to en:Wikipedia, evaluated the reliability of what results, and also explained such matters as namespaces, protection levels and so on would be an "essay" in the sense of 'attempt', or similar to An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding (originally published in four volumes). But one day perhaps we'll see Wikipedia added to "List of Very Short Introductions books". -- Hoary (talk) 02:44, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

@KeyGremlin Your idea is interesting.

If I understood rightly , the idea is to create a short text linking to a few of "Policies and guidelines" and a few "essays" ?

Am I right ?

There are already a directory about "essays". This directory is only about the "Wikipedia essays" and not the "users essays".

There are already a "List of policies and guidelines" and an item "List of policies". Anatole-berthe (talk) 07:02, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Just the important ones so that people can grasp why things are the way they are on Wikipedia. KeyGremlin (talk) 17:40, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@KeyGremlin I think that I understood what you want. What do you think ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 17:59, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Block evasion by IP editor (but not disruptively editing)

I want to assume good faith upon this and this IP editor, who both appear to be block evading Nazruliman2008 (talk · contribs). I have a feeling that this is not intentional, and according to WP:BLOCKEVADE, "an administrator may reset the block of a user who intentionally evades a block". I suggested the user do what you are supposed to do if you are globally locked on Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines. Now I am not sure what to do next. Should I open a WP:SPI case, or just assume good faith upon this editor? Justjourney (talk | contribs) 16:29, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@User:Nazruliman2008 is globally locked. In the hypothetical case the IP is the same user. We should intervene.

The account was banned for the next reason : (Clearly not here to build an encyclopedia). Anatole-berthe (talk) 16:57, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@Anatole-berthe I added a comment at WT:TPG to reply to IP user (putting their comment in the wrong location), see Wikipedia_talk:Talk_page_guidelines#Nazruliman2008. Since the subject line is "User:Nazruliman2008", and with the use of emojis, that's the reason I think the IP may be a sock of said user. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 17:43, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I think you did rightly intervened. I believe others editors can confirm. Anatole-berthe (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

ANI

Regarding the Administrators' noticeboard for incidents, is anyone allowed to give their input in an ANI discussion? RedactedHumanoid (talk) 19:07, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

RedactedHumanoid, welcome to the Teahouse! As long as comments there are constructive, yes, anyone can comment on a discussion. — E_F⁵ 19:10, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 19:11, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Could this topic be eligible for "Did you know..."?

"Did you know...

that the Car Seat Headrest song Vincent references At Eternity's Gate from the clinical depression Wikipedia article?"

Within Vincent, it links to Teens of Denial. Would that be eligible for DYK or would there have to be an independent article for Vincent (song) to be eligible?

Shanshansan (talk) 11:05, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@Shanshansan Welcome to the Teahouse. See WP:DYK for details. DYK only "showcases new or expanded articles" so I don't think that article would qualify. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:26, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Shanshansan. You would need to expand the article to at least 5 times its current size or promote it to WP:GA. So far, these conditions haven't been met, so this would not pass. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 21:41, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Article waiting for review

I have an article with the AFC template that is waiting for review. I am wondering if I should ask someone to look at the article and give advice. It has been in Draft for about two months. I am still learning so would like to hear from someone if possible. Thanks. HarvResearch (talk) 22:17, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Done. (See Draft:Jim Simon (writer).) -- Hoary (talk) 22:59, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

HarvResearch While someone was able to respond to your request; we cannot guarantee a speedy review on this primarily volunteer project. People work on what they choose to work on when they have time to do so- and drafts are reviewed in no particular order. It's not always possible to "jump the line"; everyone would like their draft reviewed quickly. 331dot (talk) 08:33, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Broken reference at Anna Riwkin-Brick

Could someone have a look at this article? It has an undefined reference ("Tellgreen") and I can't see how to resolve it as I can't find the ref in earlier versions of the article. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 08:59, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Tacyarg. I clicked "Find addition/removal" at top of the page history and searched for Tellgren (the spelling actually in the article).with "Force searching for wikitext" enabled. It found [20] which added it without a definition but the edit summary linked https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Riwkin-Brick which defines it. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:10, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Help about Adam Linder wikipedia Page

Draft:Adam Linder

Hi, I would like to publish my article but I get rejected twice.

Would it be possible to explicitly know the sentences that contains one of this problem ? Because from my beginner point of view, I can't see them.

- This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article.

- Entries should be written from a neutral point of view.

- References should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources.

- Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format.

- Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

I'm probably wrong but, to my mind, I don't use peacock terms. I tried to use as much as I could, independent and reliable sources, and if they were not very independent nor reliable, I tried to double check by putting another source that was speaking about the same reference, which was independent and reliable. And finally, I aimed to have a neutral point of view.

I would like to increase my knowledge about editing a Wikipedia article to make it perfect but I'm still sailing in the fog.

Thanks for your help and your time.

Simononwiki1 (talk) 08:28, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@Simononwiki1 Your use of "discovered" and "compelling" are peacock terms in that context. Do they mean anything? I only checked one of your references, no.4 (WMMagazine), and it does not say what you claim it says. Your draft must reflect what your references say. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:19, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I removed those peacock terms. The Style and influence section needs to be removed, as the wording is laudatory whereas the references are reviews that either barely mention Linder or are a scathing negative review of his museum performance creation. David notMD (talk) 12:21, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the peacock terms. I also erased the style and influence section. Is there anything else that is not completing the previous point that can be found ?

Thanks for helping.

Simononwiki1 (talk) 14:14, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Simononwiki1 and welcome to the Teahouse. The thing to remember is that what you know, believe, or think, about the subject is irrelevant, unless a reliable independent source says the same thing.

An approach I often recommend is, once you have found your independent sources, to forget everything you know about the subject, and write a summary of what those sources say - sometimes even if you think they are wrong. ColinFine (talk) 13:40, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I erased and added the only reliable information found through the newspapers and online. Now, do you think there is any terms or formulation that could lead the article to a unpublish state ?

Thanks for your help.

Simononwiki1 (talk) 14:32, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

References

If a webpage has been archived is it still considered acceptable as a valid reference? I want to make sure I’m following best practices when citing sources that are no longer live but still accessible via archive links. https://www.bostonradio.org/nerw/nerw-030203.html http://ctradio.freeservers.com/archives/smith/sandb1.htm Toyosikehinde22 (talk) 13:55, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@Toyosikehinde22 Yes, we use the Internet Archive and other similar sites very often. See WP:LINKROT for some of the considerations and note that the fact a site has been archived doesn't make it more reliable. That will depend on the reliability of the original. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:23, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Can you please create the images of Andrew Overtoom and Liliana Mumy?

I don't know how I could do it, but could you please help me? Julian Louis (talk) 14:15, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@Julian Louis. Welcome to the Teahouse. Teahouse hosts won't normally try to find copyright-free images for you, as they are not easy to find, but we can refer you to the instructions at Wikipedia:Images. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:09, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@Julian Louis It's quite possible you can't. If you want, you can try to contact these people and point them to Wikipedia:A picture of you. The default assumption is that any random pic you find online is under copyright and can't be used on en-WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:25, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Violet Sky

My Draft:Violet Sky needs to be improved. But I have a question, is it notable enough to be on Wikipedia, and how can I improve it? Aubreeprincess (talk) 06:48, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Aubreeprincess, Bonadea has written "No real claim to notability in the draft, and the sources are local publications and/or build directly on interviews." If you disagree with part (or all) of this, then bring up the matter with Bonadea. But if you (perhaps sadly) concede that Bonadea is right, then be sure to cite better sources. (If these don't exist, no article can be produced.) If you want a second opinion on the value of the sources you've already cited, then please, in this Teahouse thread, link to the three that you consider the best among the seven. -- Hoary (talk) 09:55, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

For the record, Aubreeprincess did also post to my user talk page to ask about this, and I responded there – unfortunately, they also posted some personal attacks at another help desk and on their own user talk page, and they were blocked for a couple of days. --bonadea contributions talk 10:00, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Oh dear. Yes, and also an essay (now deleted). Aubreeprincess, finding reliable sources to confirm what one already knows is true can be very difficult, and it's very hard to persuade other editors to do this for one. -- Hoary (talk) 10:16, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Apparently you wrote the article WP:BACKWARD. The correct way to write a draft is to collect all your sources first, sources that comply with WP:Golden Rule, and only then start writing the draft. Not the other way round. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:24, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Creating a previously deleted article

I was planning on creating an English article about Alejandro Cotto but can see that it was previously deleted in 2006. I can't see the content other than what's shown on the deletion notice. Should I start creating a draft article from scratch and have it reviewed or should I request that the previously deleted article be undeleted and then edit that? I'll be using the Wikidata entry, Spanish article (Alejandro Cotto) and reliable sources for reference. Guiding Knight (talk) 03:16, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Guiding Knight! As noted in the deletion log, the deleted article only contained "Alejandro Cotto is a filmaker from El Salvador." I would recommend creating a draft article from scratch. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:20, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Firefangledfeathers! I wasn't sure if that was the entire content of the article or just the first line or something like that. I'll start it from scratch. Guiding Knight (talk) 03:53, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Shotgun Willy

Why can’t we give the rapper Shotgun Willy his own Wiki page Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:41, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

We can, if he is notable. The notability criteria specific to musicians are at WP:MUSICBIO. General notability criteria for any biography are at WP:NBIO. Meters (talk) 02:55, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Also it would never be "his own Wiki page". It would be Wikipedia's article about him, and it would not necessarily say what he would like it to say. He might of course be able to have his own wiki page at some other wiki. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:47, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Author Names in Book Citation

I noticed that the entry concerning Giovanni Bellini misstated the current views of Daniel Wallace Maze. I understand why his name is in red in the entry, but I do not understand why using the cite book template his name is also listed in red. Please note that Maze is listed as an author of a different type of publication in ref 4. Here his name is listed in black type. Have I made an error in using thee template? Oldsilenus (talk) 22:05, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Oldsilenus. I see you fixed the problem after posting here.

Resolved

ColinFine (talk) 08:56, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Leonardo Perdomo

Hello! I have been working on this draft for a little while but I need help polishing it (Draft:Leonardo Perdomo) SpainMMAfan123 (talk) 22:18, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @SpainMMAfan123, and welcome to the Teahouse. You're unlikely to get anybody to collaborate on the draft by asking here - not impossible, but unlikely. You might have more luck asking at WT:WikiProject Boxing or WT:WikiProject Cuba. ColinFine (talk) 08:58, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

“Feedback needed on declined draft: Vijay Kapoor (director)”

Hi! I’ve created a draft article about Vijay Kapoor, a Hindi film director: Draft:Vijay Kapoor (director)

It was declined for not having sufficient reliable sources, but I’ve since added multiple references from Hindi and English newspapers that provide significant coverage.

Could someone please take a look and let me know whether the revised draft is good enough to meet the notability guidelines? Any guidance would be appreciated. Thanks so much! FreshPaint1999 (talk) 11:54, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

FreshPaint1999 Hello and welcome. The best way to get feedback is to resubmit the draft. Asking for a pre-review review is redundant. 331dot (talk) 12:26, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

How to Become admin. Stepwise Approach.

Give a step by step approach DitorWiki (talk) 09:31, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Please see WP:RFA. In short, you should spend a long time demonstrating a good temperament and understanding of policies, as well as showing a need for the tools. The admin tools are just that- tools- admins have no more authority than any other editor. While there is no formal number required other than being extended confirmed, generally successful candidates have several thousand edits. 331dot (talk) 09:45, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

I'd also see the discussion above ("help making an rfa") which has excellent advice. 331dot (talk) 09:49, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @DitorWiki, you could also check out Wikipedia:Requests for adminship by year to look at recent applications. This might give you an idea as to what the community is looking for, or not, as the case may be. Knitsey (talk) 10:02, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

You have had an account for two years and have done fewer than 500 edits. Ask again in five years during which you have made thousands of edits, created articles, participated in article deletion discussions, combated vandalism, perhaps raised articles to Good Article status, etc. David notMD (talk) 13:48, 19 April 2025 (UTC).

Page patrolled

Would someone with the New Page Patrol permission be able to patrol this page if they have a free moment please? Iljhgtn (talk) 21:52, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn, page patrollers don't patrol on demand, you'll have to wait for someone to patrol it. -- asilvering (talk) 01:12, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

The back log is getting pretty immense (and growing faster by the second it seems) and I was thinking this one was pretty straightforward but thank you anyway. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:28, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Teahouse Hosts not necessarily NPPS (or AfC reviewers). David notMD (talk) 04:28, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

True, but sometimes they might be and I know of no other outlet for such a thing, especially when the backlog is so incredibly massive. No worries though, just thought I might find some kind person with the NPR permission. Iljhgtn (talk) 10:55, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

I believe that if NPP does not act within 90 days the article moves into main space, and in time should be 'seen' be search engines. David notMD (talk) 14:33, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Help making an rfa

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

---

Hi everyone I was going to ask this earlier but I didn’t get to because I was in a coma for a while. I’m back now though and I’m excited about becoming an admin. I remember someone said I need to apply through rfa. Can someone please help me create a request? L$Aiden$L (talk) 04:16, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Per what became a lengthy discussion in response to 'I want to be an Admin' that you started earlier this month, you do not have the experience (years and thousands of edits and other stuff) to qualify for becoming an Administrator. Please find other ways to contribute to Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 04:33, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

I don’t know how you would expect me to have thousands of edits? I can start doing alot now if you think it would help. Being a Wikipedia admin is the only thing I want since I can’t ask to not have cancer anymore L$Aiden$L (talk) 04:52, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Your account is only 1 week old with 25 edits. That hardly demonstrates experience or familiarity with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you've been editing before under a different username, what was your previous account? If you want to be an administrator, you would know that you must disclose this. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:40, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

I only did it before without having an account. L$Aiden$L (talk) 04:43, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Then disclose the IP addresses. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:45, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok I will try to find them and I can let you know. I think it’s weird to ask someone for their IP address since it’s kind of personal, but if that’s what I have to do to become an admin I L$Aiden$L (talk) 04:55, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Enthusiasm is great, but to reiterate what many have already told you, you are not going to be an admin for the short or even long-term future. It won't happen today, tomorrow, Tuesday, 10 or 22 weeks from now. Admin permissions are given when the user is especially trusted and need those tools. It's incredibly easy to fail an RFA to any sort of tradition not obvious enough to those who have never seen them. Some editors, even with tens of thousands of edits over many years, never obtain those rights; some don't even want those rights. With all of that in mind, I and many others find it incredibly unlikely for you, having a 2 week old account with only 28+ edits, to have a droplet of a chance at such a process. I'm sorry.

But the thing is, that's okay. Not being an admin doesn't make you any less worthy of a contributor to creating an encyclopedia. Non-admins can still write great articles, revert vandalism, greeting newcomers on noticeboards like this, or just fixing random typos you find while wandering! These are all legit and helpful ways to improve Wikipedia. Adminship shouldn't be seen as a final step; it's not the true core of Wikipedia. There's a lot more that you can do here than ban people. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 05:10, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Here is an ironic truism, L$Aiden$L. The editors who talk the most about wanting to become an adminstrator are the least likely to actually become an adminstrator. Cullen328 (talk) 07:30, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

@L$Aiden$L Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. You don't need to become an admin to do useful editing, but you do need to understand the basics. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:43, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Please stop asking. Not only is your account very new, but to date you have not contributed to improving any existing articles, or made any other useful contribution to Wikipedia. There is no such thing as being an "honorary" Administrator. Admins have the power to indefinitely block editors, rule on whether articles should be deleted, etc. "With great power comes great responsibility," which has to be earned, not awarded. David notMD (talk) 13:56, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

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

3RRNO and edit summaries

A while back, I had been silently reverting a wave of pretty obvious vandalism on an article and received a stern warning on my talk page about not including edit summaries on my reverts per WP:3RRNO, which I accepted and I've made sure to include edit summaries on any reverts past 3rr since then. A couple times now, I've seen more experienced editors reverting without summaries repeatedly(such as a wave of BLP violations currently happening at Sukhbir Singh Badal). When I had previously gone to such an editor with the same warning I was given, I was directed to WP:BANREVERT(editor had been reverting a sock) as justification for why they didn't need to include edit summaries.

To summarize, I've been hearing conflicting information on whether 3RRNO reverts must have edit summaries, and the page itself seems ambiguous as to if they're required or just strongly encouraged. I'm personally going to keep using summaries regardless, but I'm coming here hoping to get some clarity. Is it optional? A case by case basis? Is ban evasion the only exception where summaries aren't required? Thanks. Taffer😊💬_(she/they) 18:17, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@LaffyTaffer The guidance is at H:FIES, which suggests they are best practice for reverts but can be brief. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:48, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Awesome, thank you :) Taffer😊💬_(she/they) 18:52, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@LaffyTaffer: See also WP:DENY. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:59, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Where to find answer

I was thinking: links to the same article - but 1 link is the actual article the other is to a sub-title: both display the intro via the cursor contact: if coding could be changed the sub-link could display the sub-section which would be more time use effective if the information is available only by moving the cursor (instead of loading times obvs.). Where to find answer of how this could would be possible to implement. (𒌋*𓆏)𓆭 22:54, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

You need to be more specific. Which article? Which section? What link? Where?

You can link to section names by using ArticleName#SectionName as the link target. You can also use the {{Section link}} template. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:35, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

I think they might be referring to the hover preview. -- Avocado (talk) 20:16, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

@Onemillionthtree See WP:ANCHOR. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:50, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Auckland Int'l Airport-sourcing issue

 Courtesy link: Auckland Airport

Hello. Go to Auckland Intl Airport article, line #4, reference#6. Having problems going to the PDF for Decemmber 2024 PAX data, like in the infobox, ref#1. Can you fix? Thanks for your time. Have a good day. Theairportman33531 (talk) 15:55, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

@Theairportman33531: Firstly, please link to articles when you mention them elsewhere.

Secondly the fourth line on your screen is the third on mine and may be fifth or sixth for others; please quote text.

The |url= value was invalid, because it included a space (it ended December 2024.ashx). The correct value is https://corporate.aucklandairport.co.nz/-/media/Files/Corporate/Monthly_Traffic_Reports/2024/MTU_Month_December_2024.ashx. I found that by entering the title of the document, as given in the citation, into the site's search field. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:18, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Have a good day. Theairportman33531 (talk) 21:48, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Improving article?

so over the past few months I've been doing this article Oslo Mosquito Raid (1944)

And I don't really know how to improve/fix the issues currently plaguing it HCPM (talk) 10:48, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Well, for one thing, there's a paragraph starting "The first wave commenced an attack run". Where does this material come from? -- Hoary (talk) 11:46, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

It very annoyingly comes from an official document that doesn't exist online, it is publicly accessible for free at IWM London however, my memory is a bit foggy but if i remember correctly its either from the Air Ministry or the Government, either way its official government papers (declassified after the war iirc) HCPM (talk) 02:55, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@HCPM I've copyedited the article but there are still two issues: (1) there are few inline citations and (2) two of the 4 existing citations aren't appropriate. ash (talk) 11:44, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

The one from the IWM doesnt exist to my knowledge anywhere online, ive seen the source in person and it does talk about the Oslo Mosquito raid in 42 and 44, no other source i could find goes into such detail

I did take photos (granted they aren't the best) of all the information but not sure what i should do with them

I apologise about the Audio one tho! HCPM (talk) 02:49, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@HCPM This it the Chicago Style Citation for a book: Author's Last Name, First Name. Title of Book. Place of Publication: Publisher, Year of Publication. You can add the Stenersen book under a heading title "Bibilography" under "References".

But if the book is a source for facts in the article, try to add the book as an inline citation using the citation tool. You can choose Basic and just copy and paste that info, or choose Manual and paste the info into the correct fields. ash (talk) 03:19, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@HCPM Also, you might create a wikidata page for the book. ash (talk) 03:24, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

or on wikisource Depotadore (talk) 03:32, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Fixed Infobox Depotadore (talk) 03:45, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Switching back to Visual Editor

After getting the Source editor (forced for some reason), I have been unable to switch back to visual editing as the usual edit button (visual) or the Visual editor button has been replaced or removed. Comsofcoms (talk) 18:52, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Have you tried checking your preferences? If you check Editing --> Editing mode, it might be on either "Remember my last editor" or "Always give me the source editor". — Tenshi! (Talk page) 18:59, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Comsofcoms, you can also have both tabs visible on every page, so you can choose either one on a case by case basis. Mathglot (talk) 03:44, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

thanks for the suggestion, it works! Comsofcoms (talk) 07:37, 20 April 2025 (UTC)