Wikipedia:Teahouse

Tenryuu, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

Can't edit this page? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

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

Help Wikipedia

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

The Teahouse is frequently semi-protected, meaning the Teahouse pages cannot be edited by unregistered users (users with IP addresses), as well as accounts that are not confirmed or autoconfirmed (accounts that are at least 4 days old with at least 10 edits on English Wikipedia).

However, you can still get direct assistance on your talk page. ; a volunteer will reply to you there shortly. Alternatively, you can contact an experienced editor by visiting your homepage and clicking "Ask your mentor a question about editing".

There are currently 0 user(s) asking for help via the {{Help me}} template:

Help with biography article

Hi Guys!

Drmies invided me over.

I started the biography below, and I've spent a cople of months on and off writing it, listening to feedback and trying to get it over the line. I saw the guy speaking a while ago and thought he was intersting enough for an article here.

Some of the feeback I recieved was the sources werent indpendent enough - I've found journals where he's been published and the university where he works at and other places not on the subject's website.

One person staid I should be usining scopus, but I'm told ORCID is what they use in this filed, the subject has an ORCID profile, but not a scopus one.

Any thoughs and advice would be appreciated.

Draft:Con Kennedy (graphic artist)

Many thanks AD Antediluvian2009 (talk) 14:13, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Please see WP:INDY for more on what we consider "independent", with regard to sources. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:27, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Much appreciate. I've tried to have as much 3rd pary spources as possible - I've nrewspaper articels, books and magaziens cited. But it still doens't seem to meet the critera, I'm at a bit of a loss to be honest about what eles I can add! :D Antediluvian2009 (talk) 14:46, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

I know it's frustrating, but if the required sources don't (yet) exist, it may be that the subject does not (yet) qualify for a Wikipedia article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:49, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

I'd argue they do! I thought the article had a fair balance. Thanks for you help Antediluvian2009 (talk) 15:21, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

In that case, which three of your sources meet all of the requirements outlined at WP:GOLDENRULE? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:04, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

These discuss the subject's work, independent of the subject and university:

https://luc.devroye.org/fonts-27620.html

https://www.evertype.com/celtscript/fonthist.html

https://www.klingspor-museum.de/KlingsporKuenstler/Schriftdesigner/Kennedy/CKennedy.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20150211184418/http://www.workformoneydesignforlove.com/contributors/

This is a government agency

https://enterprise.gov.ie/en/publications/publication-files/workshop-on-design-in-ireland.pdf

Peer-revirewed Acadmeic papersand conferences

https://designprinciplesandpractices.com/assets/downloads/design/G18FinalProgram_revised.pdf

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09504222211013742

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/09504222211013742

books featuring the subject's work

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1592536905

https://web.archive.org/web/20150211184418/http://www.workformoneydesignforlove.com/contributors/

Media

https://www.rte.ie/radio/radio1/clips/3135847/

there's more in there, I thought these would have been enough Antediluvian2009 (talk) 19:34, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Which three... meet all of the requirements..? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:40, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

I can see why Andy's getting frustrated. You list four cites as "discussing the subject's work, independent of the subject and university."

For the first link, let's assume this Luc Devroye is a reliable source. It's a very short paragraph describing the very basic details of Kennedy without much depth. But let's be generous and call this one.

None of the other three links have anything even that could even remotely be called a discussion. There's a link to his site. There's a link to his email address. There's another link to his site. At no point is anything discussed or any information about the subject provided other than the fact that he made some fonts. Significant coverage of a subject isn't simply seeing their name somewhere. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 03:16, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

but it idipendantly confirms the subject created these fonts. not from the subject, but a source independant of the subject.The fonts are just one part of the body of work Antediluvian2009 (talk) 15:04, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, but what's needed is significant coverage, not just verification of facts. Please see WP:42 on this. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:13, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

You have made zero changes to your draft since 15 May, and instead spent your time arguing—and ignoring advice—here. How much do you think that has improved the chances of your draft article being published? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:30, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

new village information is present or not then add info

Hi, I would like to create a Wikipedia page for a village named Sonurle in [Kolhapur, Maharashtra, India]. It has a population of 1739 and is mentioned in official census data. RutujaKarale (talk) 17:18, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

@RutujaKarale Welcome to the Teahouse. You can certainly attempt to create such an article but as a newcomer it would be best to use the WP:Articles for creation process so that experienced editors can review your work to ensure it is OK. There is a description of our notability guidelines for settlements, which the village should meet. However, I suggest you read a recent essay at this link which gives additional guidance. An alternative would be to add cited information about the village at the existing article about Kolhapur. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:28, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @RutujaKarale, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.

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) 20:50, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Creating articles is an extremely difficult process. I would advise against new users creating articles until they have at least 100 edits (probably more) and have read Wikipedia policy. Article creation is a much more complex process than it used to be. 22ManzanaBoy (talk) 13:16, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Conflict of interest acceptable?

I've just created my first Wikipedia page called ROSI, Ratio of Orthostatic Indices. I'm a General Practitioner in the UK with a special interest in using postural changes in systolic blood pressure and heart rate in the detection of conditions that can cause shock such as sepsis, dehydration and bleeding. I thought I was the first to come up with the formula only to recently discover Prof Witting had created it in 2003. I have a copy of the full paper he wrote in 2003 and have just added the bare minimum of detail to the page to avoid any impression of undue bias. I'd like to submit a rapid response to a British Medical Journal article on the detection of early detection of sepsis using his formula. Does my having the same goal as he, namely to help educate clinicians to use this simple technique, count as a conflict of interest? If so, given the potential benefits can the page remain?

ROSI, Ratio of Orthostatic Shock Indices. Katonas (talk) 21:29, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Katonas, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure whether that would count as a conflict of interest or not: citing your own papers certainly is, but reporting on something which you have independently worked on, I'm not sure.

However, I don't think this matters much, because if the only source you have is Witting's article, then this is not suitable for a Wikipedia article.

A Wikipedia article should be a summary of reliable secondary sources - and for medical articles in particular, there is a higher standard for sources: see MEDRS.

Note that "potential benefits" of a Wikipedia article are of zero relevance as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for "getting the message out there", no matter how significant or beneficial the message might be. Wikipedia is only interested in things that have already been secondarily written about, by people unconnected with the originators. ColinFine (talk) 22:16, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Colin, as far as I know Prof Witting's formula has never been used in a trial or written about until I came up with the same formula independently (without ever having heard of a shock index) and created an online calculator for it in 2017. I've written two online letters about it, one to the BMJ and another to the BJGP mentioning an audit of 70 patients I'd calculated a score on. A few months ago I emailed Prof Witting for advice and he informed me he'd created the same formula 14 years before me. It's simply a mathematical way of converting four physiological variables into one number.

If we deleted the bit about what a normal value should be, leaving only the formula, would that be acceptable?

I find it strange there is no page dedicated to the shock index (SI) given there are countless publications on it including multiple variations incorporating other parameters such as age. Not mentioning the existence of ROSI as simply the ratio of two shock indices on such a page would be quite an omission. I didn't want to write a page on the SI as it's such a big topic. Katonas (talk) 23:41, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Inclusion of what the normal value should be isn't really your problem here, Katonas. What you'd need to demonstrate for the topic to be acceptable as the subject of a Wikipedia article is that it's been written about in some depth by multiple authors who are independent of it. This requirement is neatly summarised at WP:42. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:39, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Regarding 'sources independent to the subject', I presume a reputable Journal is counted as being independent. In this case, there should be no problem creating a more detailed page for the Shock Index (SI) which already has a brief mention on another Wikipedia page (link below). Currently by the criteria you mention, I'm not sure even that has enough references on its page (only 3) as they discuss its clinical use. I'm also not sure whether the data they show from a paper should be allowed.

Hypovolemic shock#Diagnosis. Katonas (talk) 08:01, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

A journal article is independent if the author isn't the person who came up with the concept. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:31, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi Larry, on reflection I suppose I could write a page referring to all the ways in which the Shock Index (SI) has been used and reference multiple studies and the conclusions from review articles. Is there a limit to the number of references you can add to a page?

I could also email Prof Witting again and ask whether he has any other references confirming the existence of his formula (Ratio of Shock Indexes). I had assumed the strict criteria for medical articles would refer to information regarding the clinical interetation and use of such a formula, rather than simply acknowledging its existence.

I'll read the link you just added. Apologies, I was in the middle of writing this when you replied. Katonas (talk) 07:49, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

There's no limit on the number of references, no. But to emphasise, it's not about confirming the existence of a formula, but rather than it meets Wikipedia's notability criteria that are summarised by WP:42. Lots of things exist but don't qualify for Wikipedia articles. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:32, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello again @Katonas. Shock Index is already discussed at Hypovolemic shock#Diagnosis. If you think that Shock Index has been independently discussed several times in literature that meets WP:MEDRS, then it is possible you can write an article about it, based on those discussions; and those might include discussion of particular studies or formulations. But papers which use or refer to it, without discussing it specifically, will not help to establish notability, though some of them may be appropriate to refer to once there is enough to establish that. ColinFine (talk) 14:23, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Need Sandbox turned into Article

I need User:107.191.2.10/sandbox turned into an article Acidcvltllc (talk) 00:19, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

No,you don't. You need food, air, water. You want that draft approved and moved into mainspace, which in its current condition is not going to happen because your only source is Mr Simone's Spotify page. DS (talk) 00:33, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

The draft, unfortunately, is nowhere near mainspace-ready at this time. It has one source, to Simone's spotify, which I'd assume is user-generated and self-published (thus making it unacceptable). Do you have any connection to Simone? Are you him, are you being paid by him to write an article, etc.? PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 00:33, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Acidcvltllc, what very little User:107.191.2.10/sandbox says is confusing. Is this fellow a musician, or is he a project that consists of himself? -- Hoary (talk) 00:42, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

May I ask, are you Simone? There are quite a lot of musicians who try to start articles on themselves but aren’t well-versed in Wikipedia policy.

WP:COI explains why people can’t create articles based on themselves. If you have any questions, please ask. If you perceive me as being aggressive, that isn’t my intention. 22ManzanaBoy (talk) 13:12, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Not gonna happen unless you can demonstrate clearly that Simone meets at least one of the criteria described in WP:MUSICBIO. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:09, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

I have moved the page to Draft:Nick Simone. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:57, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Florence Nightingale

Florence Nightingale's section titled the Lady with the Lamp has made me come to the Teahouse to ask if it is okay to put Wikipedia library links into a citation, because they are only available for certain Wikipedians. Thelifeofan413 (talk) 08:51, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

@Thelifeofan413 No, please don't do that for the reason you mention. You can give the citation in the form of {{cite book}}, {{cite news}} without a link or in many cases will be able to convert the link into one which will in principle work directly, although the result may still be paywalled and prevent most users reaching it. If you tell us here which link you wanted to use, we may be able to give more advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:58, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

THis is the link:

The Sick And Wounded Fund. Thelifeofan413 (talk) 17:53, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

@Thelifeofan413 A shorter link is https://link-gale-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/apps/doc/CS118000712/TTDA?u=wikipedia&sid=bookmark-TTDA&pg=7&xid=ca5ad163 but I don't know how to make that work directly at Gale. Maybe someone else will help. Meanwhile, since this is The Times from 1855, I suggest you just use {{cite news}} and leave out the link. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:46, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

The version of that link without the Wikipedia Library bits is https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CS118000712/TTDA, Thelifeofan413. I had to work that out by manually editing the URL (not sure if there's a better way). Cordless Larry (talk) 16:52, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thelifeofan413 Well done Cordless Larry! That link still requires that anyone clicking it has access via a university, school or conventional library, so you should add the |url-access= parameter to the citation if you use it (see template documentation). Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:00, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Is there any Japanese language related work I can do?

私にできる日本語関係の作業はありますか？

Hello.

I added the hiragana reading to the article about Tokugawa Ieyasu, but it was removed during the editing process. Are there other types of edits on the English Wikipedia (such as translation work) that are less likely to be deleted? I’d appreciate your answer.

*This message was translated into English using a machine translation tool.* Hdialk (talk) 09:57, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

@Hdialk: one suggestion if you want to do translation work to improve English Wikipedia is by adding text translated from Japanese Wikipedia. See Category:Articles needing translation from Japanese Wikipedia, and you can choose any article and work on it! —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {u - t? - _uselessc} 10:31, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I will check the Japanese Wikipedia "Category:Articles that need translation" and start editing. Hdialk (talk) 12:18, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hdialk, your addition of 「とくがわいえやす」 seems very odd to me as a (perhaps inadequate) skim-read suggests that it's in a context for 「とくがわいへやす」. But my grasp of 旧仮名づかい is minimal, so perhaps I misunderstand. ¶ Talk of names reminds me: I'd welcome an article here about 有職読み. -- Hoary (talk) 11:30, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I appreciate you pointing out the mistake. Hdialk (talk) 12:19, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Wikispecies needs translations of some taxonomic and related terms, into many languages, including Japanese. Please see the list at species:Wikispecies:Localization.

Wikidata welcomes translations of item labels and descriptions, again in many languages including Japanese. See d:Help:Multilingual.

You might prefer to translate material from the English Wikipedia to the Japanese Wikipedia; see WP:Translate us. (It's always easier to translate into your native language, and that way you learn new English vocabulary as well.)

You can use WP:Babel on all of these projects, to indicate which languages you can read and wrote, and how well. ON\ Wikidata, it is required, to make labels & descriptions in those languages show up for you.

If you prefer to communicate in Japanese on this project, you may do so at WT:Embassy (see also WP:Embassy). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:24, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

update an article about a college

Friends,

I need advice on how to update an article about a college (LaGrange College). I work there, and some of the statistics are especially dated.

I believe the last time we tried to update the information, the edits were denied. Guidance would be appreciated.LaGrange College Dean.allen1202 (talk) 14:39, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

@Dean.allen1202 Welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for declaring your connection to the College, which means you also need to follow the mandatory procedure described at WP:PAID. Wikipedia relies on material being cited to reliable sources, so you should propose changes to the article on its Talk Page, perhaps using the edit request wizard so your suggestions will be noticed by editors who specialise in fulfilling (or not) such requests. See also WP:ASFAQ for some general advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:45, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Draft: Dianne Valencia

 Courtesy link: User:MarieAnne25/sandbox

Hi, I’m seeking further advice regarding my draft article on Dianne Valencia. The article is currently in my userspace. I’ve followed feedback and included properly formatted offline citations using {{cite magazine}} from reliable Philippine publications (MOD Girl, GIRL Magazine, Mr. & Ms., Candy, etc.), mostly from 1999–2004. These are full cover features and multi-page editorials — not interviews — and I’ve listed all required bibliographic details (dates, page numbers, publishers, etc.). The challenge is that: These sources are offline only (pre-digital era), and cannot be found online. I do possess high-quality scans of these articles and covers, but I understand I can’t upload them unless the article is accepted or moved to mainspace due to copyright and notability rules. The article was declined at AfC, likely due to the offline nature of the sources. I’ve rewritten and restructured the draft to address concerns, but I’m unsure how to demonstrate notability clearly when coverage exists, but is not digitally archived. My questions: Are properly cited offline sources (from notable print magazines with substantial features) acceptable for establishing notability? If yes, what is the best next step? Should I submit it again to AfC or request a move to mainspace via WP:RM or WP:AFC/R? Is there anything else I can do to support verifiability when the sources are offline? Thanks so much for your time and help! — User:MarieAnne25 MarieAnne25 (talk) 17:15, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

@MarieAnne25: No, MarieAnne25, you can't use those scans full-stop, as you'd understand if you actually listened to what I said on -en-help. We cannot so much as link to copyright-violating material. Your problem is your draft is a poorly-cited biography of a still-living person that reads more like a CV than an encyclopaedia article. Offline cites are good enough, but your problem is that you have nowhere near enough of them to support the article, and what you do have are all incomplete cites (missing article name, article byline, and page numbers; we don't cite covers). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:21, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Above, MarieAnne25, you write: "I do possess high-quality scans of these articles and covers...." In "Notes", you write: "Scans of the cited magazines are in the subject’s possession...." If you are Dianne Valencia (or more precisely the person who previously used that name), then an "autobiography" template is appropriate; if you aren't, please explain. -- Hoary (talk) 22:34, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Number of Accounts

How many accounts can I make? 205.175.106.10 (talk) 21:30, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse.

There is no specific limitation on the number of accounts you may have, provided you are not using them for a forbidden purpose, such as sock-puppeting (eg, making it look as if several different editors are contributing to a discussion when there is only you) or evading a block.

See WP:SOCKLEGIT. ColinFine (talk) 21:39, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

The practical answer is: one. One account is all the vast majority of people need. There are legitimate reasons to have more than one, but those are special circumstances. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:08, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Edit Reverted By Suspicious Account

A user has left a message on my talk page (titled July 2025) talking about reverting an edit which I made to this page (I don't know how to link the specific edit but it is my most recent). I don't mind my edits being reverted because I'm very new and I am sure I make mistakes all the time, but all I did was remove some italicizations on some apostrophes that are not a part of the (correctly) italicized publications. The reason I bring it up here and not with that user or the article's talk page is because the user has the username"ivebeenhacked" which makes me wary of engaging with them in any way, as I am not sure if that's just their username or if I'm being notified somehow that it is a hacked account.

I'd appreciate any information on what I should do (if anything at all) or what is going on (do I have any reason to be paranoid?). Thanks! DavidL87 (talk) 21:38, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Generally, it is best to provide an edit summary for every edit, it helps other editors understand your edits from the page history and when reviewing your changes, such as in this case. You could try doing the same edit again with a summary explaining your changes, i.e. as you say all I did was remove some italicizations on some apostrophes that are not a part of the (correctly) italicized publications.— Tenshi! (Talk page) 21:48, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @DavidL87, and welcome to the Teahouse.

@Ivebeenhacked appears to have been renamed from User:CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine on 2023-02-17, and has nearly 10 thousands edits in their history, so I don't think you need to worry about the name.

Your edit looks reasonable to me, but you didn't provide an edit summary explaining what your rather arcane code was doing. I suggest replying to Ivebeenhacked, explaining. (see WP:BRD) ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice and assurance! It was done manually—I'm not sure how to run any kind of code on wikipedia. I'll be sure to let them know. DavidL87 (talk) 22:06, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello everyone. I apologise for causing trouble here as I should've looked more into the edit instead of rushing. Again, I apologise. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 23:49, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

\{\{Cleanup\}\} in the Perplexity AI article

The Perplexity AI article has improved and addressed the specific issues mentioned in the cleanup request. So, on the one hand, the cleanup template needs to be revised, but on the other hand, I am not sure if the cleanup request can be removed entirely. Hopefully, someone with more experience can take a look. Thx

Bob the Guilder (talk) 01:59, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Seafarer Exploration

Hi! I previously posted here under a different username that has since been renamed to meet Wikipedia’s username policy. I’ve disclosed my COI and paid status on my user page. I’m working on a well-sourced draft about Seafarer Exploration, a publicly traded company focused on underwater rescue archaeology. The sandbox draft is located here: User:FloridaMaritimeHistorian/sandbox Could an uninvolved editor please review the draft and advise whether it’s suitable for submission or what improvements are needed? Thanks so much for your time! FloridaMaritimeHistorian (talk) 05:05, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

You say it's well sourced, but hardly any of the sentences, let alone entire paragraphs, use inline citations. Note that press releases, financial statements, company profiles, and so on are not independent of the company and therefore those sources do nothing to establish notability.

I recommend you read WP:CORP carefully, to understand what an article about a company needs. A brief overview can be found at WP:Golden Rule. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:27, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for renaming yourself, FloridaMaritimeHistorian. I've moved the draft to Draft:Seafarer Exploration. Anachronist (above) and I (in a reviewer comment) agree with each other. You have a lot of work to do. -- Hoary (talk) 06:36, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Hoary, @Anachronist — thank you for moving the article and pointing me in the right direction.

I’m now working to revise the draft based on community feedback and want to be sure I stay in bounds with Wikipedia’s notability and sourcing standards. I’ve read the WP:CORP and WP:GNG guidelines carefully, and I’m revisiting every source to ensure it’s independent and significant.

If any editors are willing to point out specific areas that still read as promotional or unsourced, I’ll fix them right away. My goal is to submit a version that aligns fully with Wikipedia's expectations.

Thanks again for your time,

– FloridaMaritimeHistorian FloridaMaritimeHistorian (talk) 16:49, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @FloridaMaritimeHistorian, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please note that 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.

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. And that's even without the COI issue. ColinFine (talk) 10:12, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Declined Article Draft for RDIAS

Hello Teahouse

I'm a new editor working on an article draft about Rukmini Devi Institute of Advanced Studies (RDIAS). I recently submitted it through Articles for Creation, but unfortunately, it was declined.

I would appreciate your help in understanding why the article was declined and what specific improvements or sources are needed to make it acceptable for publication on Wikipedia.

The institution is affiliated with Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, is AICTE approved, and NAAC A accredited, with active academic programs in MBA, BBA, and B.Com (Hons). I tried to follow a neutral tone, but I'm open to feedback.

Here is the draft: [Rukmini Devi Institute of Advanced Studies] Any guidance on notability, reliable sources, and article structure would be great.

Any guidance on notability, reliable sources, and article structure would be great.

Thank you so much for your time and help!

— @RDResearcher2025 RDResearcher2025 (talk) 08:56, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

You need to address the inquiry on your user talk page, or you may be blocked from editing.

Declined reviews must remain on the draft until it is accepted. Please review those messages carefully, as they state the reason the draft has been declined. 331dot (talk) 09:01, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @RDResearcher2025, and welcome to the Teahouse.

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.

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) 10:14, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Trying to become a good Wikipediana :)

Hello, can somebody help me get my first article published? I had a bunch of questions about the review I got.

It's posted here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Ralf_S._Engelschall

LarsArtmann (talk) 10:10, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @LarsArtmann. Just a note for the future, when you make replies to editors please ping them in so they are notified. @Caleb Stanford likely never saw your message on the Talk Paage.

You didn't answer the question on if AI was used to create this draft - can you confirm it an AI chatbot was used at all?

You can link to other language Wikis via the Help:Interwiki linking process. qcne (talk) 11:50, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

I don't think confirmation from LarsArtmann is needed; it's pretty obvious that much of the article is AI-generated. The formatting and the citations to group chats, blogs, and GitHub are hallmarks. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:19, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

@LarsArtmann: Hi Lars! I have responded to your questions at Draft talk:Ralf S. Engelschall. Kind regards, Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:14, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Peter Dawe

- Pipex / Unipalm - father of UK commercial internet

List of Internet pioneers

Hi, I'm too close to the subject as he is a friend. But, wondering why Peter Dawe is not included in this page? He already has a wikipage. Hope OK to ask this. 2A02:C7C:7595:9600:680E:54E6:19B0:C1A9 (talk) 13:00, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Maybe no one has ever suggested it? You may do so on Talk:List of Internet pioneers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:43, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

IP editor: that list has a rather specific set of criteria to have a mini-biography in the main part of the article, with a number of other names who don't meet any of those criteria placed at the end. Thus it would be best if your suggestion included at least one citation to illustrate where in the list Peter Dawe should be placed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:32, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Paragraph headers?

you know the ones, the ones that so elegently section an article into different sections, you know the ones! Im sorry if I am using overly informal language I am new to wikipedia, (just started yesterday.) I enjoy webcomics (talk) 13:50, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

See Help:Section. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:39, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

DKA class F10

An F10 on display at the Ambarawa Railway Museum

The category of steam locomotives in Indonesia is rather bare, but I think that the category is slowly progressing with the articles on the CC50 and the E10 rack railway engines. The F10’s are large 12 driver tank engines built between 1912 and 1920 and were used for freight work. Their smaller yet large brother the E10 has it’s own article, but what about the F10’s? 199.192.122.199 (talk) 16:06, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Your question is unclear. If you mean:

• Can there be an article about the F10s? - Yes, if there are three or more sources abut them that meet all of the requirements outlined at WP:GOLDENRULE
• How do I write an article about them? - See WP:Your first article.
• Will someone write an article about them for me? - Probably not, but you can ask at WT:WikiProject Trains to see if anyone is interested.

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:32, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

I asked if there can be an article? 199.192.122.199 (talk) 17:25, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

IP editor. Andy's reply is clear. There can be but only if someone takes time and effort to write it based on reliable published sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:31, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Editing references "authority control"

Hi. I am trying to fix some issues on this page - Giovanni Aloi - and when I scroll to the reference section in the editor it says "authority control". I looked it up to learn more about it, but am not sure how I can edit this. Can you please advise? Thank you! CrissCollab (talk) 19:30, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

See Template:Authority control. So long as you leave the {{Authority control}} template code undisturbed, you can edit anything before or after it.

You may, though, find it easier to edit categories using WP:HOTCAT. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:14, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

First large-scale edit

Hello!

I've done a number of Newcomer tasks and citation hunt edits, and have just made my first large expansion of an article, Bortle scale (diff). I would love confirmation that my changes were productive. Is it enough to upgrade the article's rating in its talk page from Start to C? RN Andreww (talk) 20:22, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm not a subject expert, but I don't see any glaring errors. You added a citation to the lede, which generally we don't do—the lede should cite summarise things that are cited in the body of the article.

WP:RATER agrees this is C-class. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:51, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Or rather, the lede should summarise things that are cited in the body of the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:55, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Fixed, thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:12, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Good work, RN Andreww; most definitely productive. But, unsurprisingly, there are lingering oddities. Within Limiting magnitude with 12.5" reflector is 15.2 I suspect that 12.5" was somebody's mistake for 12.5″ (not an ASCII non-directional double quotation mark, but a double prime). However, the MoS proscribes this as well. Putting aside for a moment the question of how to write "inch(es)", I must confess my ignorance of this technology: in this context, is "12.5 inch" straightforwardly a size, or is it instead a conventional description that no longer necessarily expresses a size? (For an admittedly extreme and ridiculous example of the latter, consider "ten-gallon hat".) If the former, I'd expect to see it expressed in millimetres. -- Hoary (talk) 23:44, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you everyone for the advice! I've made changes in line with your suggestions.

12.5" here is a size of a telescope, yeah – I changed most instances to 32 cm to dodge MOS:INCH and to match Bortle's original article. RN Andreww (talk) 03:01, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@RN Andreww: You can always use the {{convert}} and {{cvt}} templates to help. For example, {{convert|12.5|in|adj=on}} produces 12.5-inch (320 mm). Bazza 7 (talk) 08:59, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

submitting article from my sandbox

having difficulty submitting my first article from my sandbox. I see this:

Please check draft title. No such draft exists. KendalLiddle (talk) 00:25, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@KendalLiddle hi, looks like you've successfully submitted Draft:Écoute audio - is this still an issue? Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 01:00, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Submission was declined as "a topic not yet shown to meet general notability guidelines".

@KendalLiddle: You need to include three sources that meet all of the requirements outlined at WP:GOLDENRULE. If you cannot then the subject does not qualify for a Wikipedia article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:22, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@KendalLiddle If you plan to continue working on the draft, take a look at Help:Referencing for beginners. We don't use external links in the main text, for example. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:45, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @KendalLiddle, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.

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) 11:18, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Official Photo for Politican

Hello,

Am I able to use a picture of a politician from the legislative body's official government page as their Wikipedia photo? This photo would be taken from the About section for the politican.

Thank you! InterestInsomniac (talk) 01:11, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

InterestInsomniac, there isn't a simple yes/no here, especially without seeing the permissions of the website you wish to take the photo from, or the page you wish to place it on. If it is for *just the page about the politician*, then something called Fair use may apply I would shift this question to Wikipedia Commons, where they deal with this sort of question all the time. I would re-post your question at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Good luck, Mathglot (talk) 01:37, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

If this is a living politician (as seems likely), then other than in truly exceptional circumstances you cannot claim "fair use". Please do not ask about "fair use" at Wikimedia Commons. Precisely what is written on the particular web page about copyright, copyleft, or "Creative Commons"? -- Hoary (talk) 05:14, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, InterestInsomniac, In the case of US federal politicians whose portraits are taken by staff photographers, all of their work is in the public domain and free of any copyright restrictions. This applies to the work of a famous photographer like Pete Souza while he was on the White House staff working for Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama. Each of the 50 states has their own law. Some release staff photography into the public domain and some don't. Even Ansel Adams worked for the US Department of the Interior for a while. The photos he took while on the government clock are public domain. Those taken privately are not, except the ones over 95 years old. Copyright is starting to expire on his oldest work. The bottom line is that you need to do your homework. Cullen328 (talk) 05:27, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Which country is this in? Can you link to the page where you saw the photo? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:17, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

How do I find reliable enough sources for this draft?

I want to get the Class of '09 draft published but the problem is I can't find good sources that meet the criteria. Could someone help me? Blitzite3 (talk) 02:55, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@Blitzite3: are you sure the game is notable? Please read Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability, in which case you may want to write about a topic that is notable. —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {u - t? - _uselessc} 05:22, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:21, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

First thing you should do is go through the article and remove all content that is not covered in the independent sources you cite (see WP:42 for the kind of sources we need). You have a fair number of sources already, but far too much detail that nobody cares about. Submit the pared-down article for review and see what happens. ~Anachronist (talk) 11:31, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Not all sources need to be independent. Non-independent sources can be used for some non-controversial facts, such as the the name of the publisher or the year of release.

WP:42 is about demonstrating notability, not the suitability of sources for verifying content.

Some relevant guidance is at WP:NIS. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:09, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I need a hand making an account to promote myself as an artist an business. I have more than one article, my LLC, my DUNS, and other certificates.

music 1Xenos (talk) 04:56, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

WP:PROMO, WP:YOURSELF. TurboSuperA+_[talk] 05:00, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

If you'd like to promote yourself, 1Xenos, you're at the wrong website. -- Hoary (talk) 05:09, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

1Xenos, self-promotion is strictly forbidden on Wikipedia. Don't go there. Cullen328 (talk) 05:31, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

If you attempt to promote yourself on Wikipedia, then you will be quickly blocked, and anyone looking for your name on Wikipedia will see the block notice. Is that really what you want?

An artist who is up-and-coming cannot have a Wikipedia article. You must have already arrived. You must become successful without Wikipedia's help, and only then would you merit an article here. ~Anachronist (talk) 11:28, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Scratch21 article?

Hi :-)

I wonder whether to create an article about furry rock band Scratch21? I think there would be some resources, plus their song are somewhat popular ("Aliens" - written differently, but whatever - has 1.5 million views on YT).

It just caught my attention that they have no article on Wikipedia and maybe they should? ;-)

Best wishes

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 07:03, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Check out Help:Your first article. Make sure the article cites enough independent and reputable sources to establish notability.

You can create the draft and practice in your sandbox. When you think the article is ready, you can submit it through Articles for Creation. TurboSuperA+_[talk] 07:21, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@Kaworu1992: If the band does not meet any of the criteria listed in WP:BAND, then it cannot have an article on Wikipedia. Note that YouTube views, iTunes downloads, and other crowdsource things are not notability criteria. ~Anachronist (talk) 11:26, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Publishing Article about typhoon co-may

so the storm article is currently a draft it'd called Typhoon Co-may (Philippine name Emong) 2025 it's been time and it think it finally deserves an article Hypercyclone 2 (talk) 14:35, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Hypercyclone 2. You resubmitted the draft Draft:Typhoon Co-may yesterday, and in time a reviewer will get to it. Please be patient. ColinFine (talk) 14:51, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

You have manually published the draft (as Typhoon Co-may (Emong)) which I had marked as undergoing review, and then blanked, the article. Why?

And what are you trying to do at Typhoon Co-may? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:06, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Question on honours section entries

I am confused about the classification in the "Honours" section of List of awards and nominations received by Tamannaah Bhatia. If I strictly apply the definition of honours, only the Kalaimamani (2010) and Honorary Doctorate (2017) belong in the "Honours" section. The other entries, being media-driven or industry-specific, do not seem to fit in this section. Can someone clarify this and suggest how to proceed? Anoop Bhatia (talk) 15:51, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

[Not answering the query, but I have converted your heading to the correct format so that it is not mistaken for a part of the previous query and overlooked. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.7.140.167 (talk) 16:33, 2 August 2025 (UTC)]

Deletion delay

A WP:CfD was closed with consensus to delete over a week ago, but the category still has not been deleted. Where should I go to nudge someone about this? Martin IIIa (talk) 16:29, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Closure requests. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:36, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? My understanding was always that Wikipedia:Closure requests was for discussions that have not yet been closed, and looking over the page now I'm not seeing a section designated for discussions that have already been closed. Martin IIIa (talk) 18:08, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

"Closure" involves taking all the steps needed to close a process, not just a discussion. An AFD discussion that closed as "delete" without the article being deleted is fair game to ask for closure because the process was never completed. Particularly if administrator action is required. Nobody will complain if you list such a request there. You can list it in "Other" at the end of the page.

You can also just ask an administrator directly. Point me to the discussion and I'll do what's needed. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:06, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

public page

I've logged in. I've created a user page. I see that I'm now considered an editor. I was trying to creat and post a public page. I was a leading dancer in the 80s and had my own touring show for 8 years in the 2000s. I've created some recent art and have a YouTube channel. How might I go about this? Regan Patno (talk) 16:40, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Regan Patno, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia.

I'm afraid that the simple answer is, You don't.

If you meet English Wikipedia's criteria for notability (or the more general criteria GNG) then there can be an article about you. You are strongly advised not to attempt this yourself, as most people are not able to distance themselves adequately to create autobiographical articles successfully.

Note that if there is ever an article about you (whoever creates it), it will not belong to you, it will not be controlled by you, it will not necessarily say what you would like it to say, and it will be based on what people wholly unconnected with you have published about you, not on what you or your associates say or want to say.

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) 17:21, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. I will work on other things in other areas of my life for now and let others see me as significant in history as worthy of a Wiki public page.

Neutrally, I do believe I meet your criteria, but also recognize it's not my view that matters.

Thank you again. Regan Patno (talk) 17:31, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Flagging possible non-obvious vandalism

Mount Laurel doctrine has an inexperienced IP editor making massive cuts across a string of edits, including the deletion of the criticism section. I can't tell if this is simply bold editing or subtle vandalism.

I wanted to note this somewhere that more experienced editors might be able to see and be able to take a look. The village pump has no applicable category, ANI feels wayyyyy too blunt a tool for this (it's just me flagging something that seems off), and AIV only accepts obvious cases. I tried seeing if WP:CVU had a noticeboard but I couldn't find one.

The question is ultimately where the place for "this seems off, but I'm not experienced enough to look at it" would be. Of course if that place isn't here, someone reading here might deal with it anyway but it's still helpful to know for the future. Cabinetkey (she/her • ☎) 17:38, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Article talk page; relevant WikiProject talk pages listed on the article's talk page; or WP:NPOVN (also WP:BLPN if a future case affects a living person). Or follow the process outlined at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:03, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

My recommendation is just to revert with an edit summary requesting talk-page consensus. Patrick 🐈‍⬛ (talk) 19:28, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I won't revert it if it goes against the consensus here, but I urge you to read my edits versus what it was prior to my edits. You'll find that I worked to balance out the subjectivity of the initial edit, which read as biased criticism of the controversial subject matter, especially when there was already a "criticism" section. 47.225.127.187 (talk) 00:00, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Oxylabs.io – full of misinformation

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oxylabs

Oxylabs was previously deleted from Wikipedia and reappeared as Oxylabs.io.

Oxylabs.io is full of misinformation.

Dozens of examples, here are 7:

1. The article states "The company was founded in Tesonet accelerator[4], established by Tomas Okmanas and Eimantas Sabaliauskas.[5][6][7]"
   – None of the sources support this statement.
2. The article states "The company expanded its product suite in 2017 with the launch of residential proxies and data acquisition service" and provides two sources.
   – The sources do NOT support this statement.
3. In 2023, Oxylabs received the Data Breakthrough Award for “Data as a Service Company of the Year”,[25]
   – This link contains countless awards to countless companies. It's some sort of participation award, definitely not encyclopedic information.
4. Article: "In 2023, Oxylabs made a donation of around half a million euros to support people defending Ukraine.[44] "
   – Referenced with a paid source.
5. In 2020, Oxylabs.io introduced a framework for ethical proxy sourcing and announced that its proxy pool had reached over 102 million IP addresses.[17]
   – Not supported by the source
6. "and won "Best Place to Work in Data & AI".[31]"
   – Open the source. Check it. Countless winners. Some nische participation award, non encyclopedic information.
7. In July of the same year, Oxylabs launched AI Studio, a suite of four AI-driven web scraping tools (AI‑Crawler, AI‑Scraper, Browser Agent, and AI‑Search) that let users extract data using natural‑language prompts, making web data collection accessible without coding.[32][33]
   – Not supported by any of the two sources.

Why does such misinformation get to stay on Wikipedia? 2A00:801:707:613F:31BA:AA0F:857A:9576 (talk) 19:07, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

To the two people who edited the article:

Ping @SKAG123 & Ping @Augmented Seventh

I am travelling through Swedish wilderness and might not be able to see the responses in the coming days. But this particular article is blatant promo. Such obvious blatant promo. 2A00:801:707:613F:31BA:AA0F:857A:9576 (talk) 19:10, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Note: while the IP's rant is not appropriate (the article was created only 12 hours ago, and the IP has not attempted to engage with @Devlaph-allar who created it) there do appear to be some suspicious things about the article.

First, it was created in one go, with Infobox and 31 citations - which is not unknown, but is unusual. Secondly, reference 4 had the correct title, but linked to a completely different article (I have corrected the link). ColinFine (talk) 19:56, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I was responding to a large serial deletion, one specifically that claimed sources were behind a pay wall, when the paywall was not in evidence when I checked.

Another edit cast aspersions on the notability of sourced industry awards. Augmented Seventh🎱 21:38, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

The article has been draftified, and currently resides at Draft:Oxylabs.io. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:23, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

My article got nominated for deletion. Can you please help improve it?

hi. I am new to Wikipedia editing and I recently created an article for a prominent Sri Lankan Violinist Sulara Nanayakkara. This page has been nominated for deletion. Since then I have read the guidelines and improved the page as much as possible. I would be grateful if you could let me know if the page could be saved and what more can be done to save it. Thanks in advance Withanakasun (talk) 20:17, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Your mistake was attempting to publish an article directly in main space without having the experience or knowledge of what is required. As a new editor, you should have followed the process at WP:AFC. The thing to do now is let the deletion discussion run its course. I have already stated in the discussion that the article should be moved to draft space to give it time to be improved. If the consensus is to delete, you can always ask the deleting admin to restore it to draft space for improvement. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:14, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

thanks a lot. I would appreciate it if you could point out the issues in the article, so it could be edited in the draft space and sent for review Withanakasun (talk) 00:05, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

New page: Leon & Malia

Yesterday, 1 August 2025, I started uploading and editing into my Sandbox a new page titled "Leon & Malia." This morning I intended to take up work on it but could not find it. I need to retrieve it. What do I do? Butcan 20:20, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Butcan. Does Special:Contributions/Butcan help? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:34, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

People who speak Czech and French - help

Dear Friends.

I tried to "sourcify" my draft of an article about the Cypher System (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cypher_System) by using scientific literature in which CS got mentioned. Sadly, most of that was in Czech or French - languages I do not speak. So when I used Googe Translate to understand what was written, I believe this is no proper tool of reading scientific literature. Can people who know Czech and/or French look at the draft, read the sources and double check if I haven't done something pretty silly because of a language barrier? I would be pretty grateful.

Best wishes!

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 00:23, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

@Kaworu1992: Unless the Cypher System specifically was the focus of those papers, they won't help for eligibility (too sparse). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 00:34, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Cypher system was a bigger or lesser part of that scientific research. I believe all the papers by Philippe Lepinard were focused mostly/exclusively on CS. The article about mental health got just a short mention, but that's more "supportive" reference than a main part of the section in a draft - I offered just a single statement supported by that reference.

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 00:40, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

A question on edit warring

Is it considered edit warring if I repeatedly add back declined AfC submission templates that a user keeps removing? Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 01:18, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

...and how about restoring the AfD notice when a deletion discussion is in progress? Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:39, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Getting google search to delete the talk page and direct to live page

Hi! I’ve just published the article Ulysses Lisbon Speakeasy, which is live and accessible. However, Google is still showing the Talk page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ulysses_Lisbon_Speakeasy) in search results instead of the live article. Is there a way to suppress or redirect the Talk page to help with search visibility? Thank you! TheCocktailCloset (talk) 03:35, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Redirect or suppression request

Hello. The article Ulysses Lisbon Speakeasy is now live and published, but Google is still showing this Talk page as the main result in searches. Could this page be redirected or suppressed from indexing to avoid confusion for new readers? Thank you! TheCocktailCloset (talk) 03:37, 3 August 2025 (UTC)