Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1260

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1255←Archive 1258Archive 1259Archive 1260Archive 1261

Invalid "Level 2 warning" against my account

Dahawk04 has issued a "Level 2 warning" against my account and described my work as vandalism. Please explain why properly. This was not necessary and should be taken back.Yankinthebank (talk) Yankinthebank (talk) 17:07, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

I'm not clear on what the edit in question was meant to achieve. 331dot (talk) 17:10, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
It was defined as: "Put 'em in the dark, feed 'em shit and watch 'em  grow."
Was not only unsourced but did not appear to add value to the article. If another editor would like to support adding it back I have no opposition to this. Dahawk04 (talk) 17:27, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
(Courtesy diff: Special:Diff/1299986345)
@Dahawk04: Well, the wikilink right there takes you to The Soul of a New Machine, which references the same line. Just a little bit of research would bring you to page 109 of The Soul of a New Machine, which reads: Alsing believed the team’s managers [...] were practicing what was called “the mushroom theory of management.” [...] The Eclipse Group’s managers defined it as follows: “Put ’em in the dark, feed ’em shit, and watch ’em grow.” It obviously wasn't vandalism, so you might want to retract that warning. — DVRTed (Talk) 17:49, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
Yankinthebank, your original edits were unreferenced and included a profanity. Also worth noting, the warning you received was worded very mildly. Accordingly, calling that message "invalid" is incorrect. It was left in good faith. You have added back the content with a proper reference, and no one now objects. I suggest that you drop the matter and move on. Cullen328 (talk) 17:52, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
DVRTed, what seems obvious to you may not be obvious to someone who sees unreferenced addition of a quote including the word "shit". Cullen328 (talk) 17:55, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you @Cullen328 much appreciated and agree on your commentary Dahawk04 Talk 💬 04:10, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
@Yankinthebank: I can see that your edit was described as "nonconstructive". Where was it called "vandalism"? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:15, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
"Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed"? — DVRTed (Talk) 02:40, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
You can also see it on his @Yankinthebank talk page. Mandlerex (talk) 14:26, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Adding Climate Data Citations

Basically, I want to add climate data to some articles based on https://prism.oregonstate.edu/explorer/, which has 800m climate data resolution.

However, occasionally, I will have to adjust for altitude by trying to use an assumed lapse rate (mainly on mountains, using the classic 6.5 C/km).

How do I go about this, and how can I cite the exact climate data location? Furthermore, if I do make adjustments based on a generally agreed-upon lapse rate, how do I add that to a citation? (Would it require me to make a website) Antarctican2606 (talk) 03:28, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Antarctican2606. The Teahouse is for asking and answering general questions about editing Wikipedia. You should not assume that Teahouse hosts have deep knowledge of climate data. Some of your comments indicate that you do not yet understand how things are presented on Wikipedia. When you casually mention generally agreed-upon lapse rate, my immediate response is agreed upon by whom and where? When you mention the classic 6.5 C/km, who calls this "classic" and where is it explained? Those are rhetorical questions. As for making a website, you are just another anonymous Wikipedia editor and any website that you create would not be a reliable source on Wikipedia. Please read No original research, which is a core content policy. In summary, you can only use climate data analysis techniques described and verified by reliable published sources that you cite, not any techniques that you develop yourself. Cullen328 (talk) 05:44, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
You could ask for specialist advice on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather/Climate task force. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:08, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

File upload wizard change

Did they just change some of the fields in the file-upload wizard? I was just trying to upload a non-free file for a book cover and it appears different fields are present and it is confusing me. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:08, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

If you mean the wizard on Wikimedia Commons, then for some value of "just": yes. It was changed a few months ago. You can ask for help at c:Com:Help desk. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:03, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

About "Henry Attwell"

 Courtesy link: Draft:Henry Attwell

I like to get Professor Henry Attwell BIO on Wikipedia - and my first draft was rejected. Who would help me and educate me on how to get this Professor on here?

He was private Tudor for Prince Willem Of Orange (1840 -1879), he is registered in the Vatican as a writer/translator and Teacher. He got knighted with the order of the Oak Crown by King Willem III ( I have his original document )

He has 14 Books on https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/1951006. Henry_Attwell

His daughter got married to the son of Prof. Lionel Smith Beale

I also find this: d:Q65644473

And also in the netherlands where he was a professor at the university of Leiden: https://hoogleraren.universiteitleiden.nl/s/hoogleraren/item/12

Here is my first attempt: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft%3AHenry_Attwell&oldid=prev&diff=1299872939

in bookstore: https://www.waterstones.com/author/henry-attwell/2122624

Let me know...

Thanks in advance JoanShumei (talk) 21:40, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Hiya, and welcome to Wikipedia! Your draft has no sources. As stated in the decline notice, everything stated must be backed up by WP:Reliable sources. GoldRomean (talk) 21:48, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @JoanShumei, 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.
A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what several cited reliable independent sources say about the subject, and little else. Writing one starts with finding the sources, and then proceeds to summarise what they say, citing them as appropriate. ColinFine (talk) 22:29, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
JoanShumei, you give the reader no good reason not to suspect that the whole draft is a hoax. For a start towards dispelling that impression, where exactly did "Dutch Sport Historicist Jan Luitzen" publish his writing about Atwell? Add this information, in a proper reference. (Also, I suspect that the photograph is not really your own work.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:37, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi see for Jan Luitzen his publication here: https://www.noorthey.com/genootschap-noorthey/over-noorthey/ and also here: https://www.amazon.nl/-/en/Jan-Luitzen/dp/946021052X/ref=sr_1_4?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.UPGrrJMD7m7n1BCOfRtQk2I8ElXW2CFrnuIN__9kGdC_pYz-zigTVGVA1MzCLo0akbDdXdZEEIj_P4ZlO2yuwpnMWyB5naQwtHCqiYF3i3oZsXehrrrLSr46eu8zdV1ziMkgclu-kwGN4B6KYasgFbOg8e_ACPUk4I9uC7yJO4pSYxuXhG8zdlIkDvpGh3eO_4k4NDB99LnZo0y35xyXqeBxnzzLFueJykSVcOlYVjHtsa1Tq3YmlkAWw5N14y1iWcZAOu0QRWGB9jr0uBCIhyGUtjhPzQzZ7ClEqV3cEvs.4glzmPdMCytgxhMlBmUCDjjkIjtVchsHKfA0PMd0cOU&dib_tag=se&keywords=Jan+Luitzen&qid=1752428461&sr=8-4
About the photo I have updated the photo with a Colorized version - the photos are my personal property - I am the owner of the Attwell Archive. If yuou like more photos please let me know (give detail what you like to see) Kind regards, JoanShumei (talk) 17:45, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
JoanShumei, the string "Attwell" doesn't appear in either of the web pages to which you link. If you mean that the information is from a book that's the subject of the Amazon page, then provide the information about the book (author(s), title, place, publisher, year, page(s), ISBN). And do so not here but in the draft (which is still completely unreferenced). -- Hoary (talk) 21:45, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

{{tag}} inside {{font color}}

I'm curious why {{font color|red|{{tag|ref|close}}}} displays as </ref> and not as expected (</ref>). Thanks for any insight. 176.108.139.1 (talk) 04:09, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Secondary question: Is an update in the documentation for either of these templates needed to explain this behaviour? 176.108.139.1 (talk) 04:13, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
{{tag}} uses <code>...</code> to format its output. This adds its own color #101418 (basically black) which "wins". I don't think this needs to be added to the documentation. If we did add something then it should probably be general like "The color may be overridden by something else in some circumstances." PrimeHunter (talk) 00:16, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Thanks! 176.108.139.1 (talk) 21:43, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Draftspace problem

The system of moving things into draftspace works fairly well when the article has some obvious problem. It does not work well when the article is serious and requires subject matter knowledge. Draft:Caribbean timeline for the seventeenth century was moved into draftspace apparently because it looks odd. The problem is that each island has its own history and the only way I could find to index everything was with a timeline. Could someone who knows about the Caribbean check this and suggest what should be done with it? Benjamin Trovato (talk) 04:12, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Benjamin Trovato, that draft certainly has problems. I started reading it, and saw "1608: Tuscany sends expedition to Guyana". I thought "that's interesting, I had never considered Tuscany as a colonial nation". So I wanted to read more about this expedition. But there's no link or reference. Then I realised that nothing in the timeline is referenced. I also saw "1620: Massachusetts by Puritans". Massachusetts is not in the Caribbean. Maproom (talk) 07:21, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
1. Tuscany was linked. I made the link clearer. 2. Massachusetts, Jamestown, Brazil, the Guyanas and so on are there because the Caribbean was the center of non-Iberian expansion into the new world and events there cannot be understood by looking at the Caribbean alone. 3. The thing is a mess because the facts are a mess. A timeline was the only way I could find to fit everything together. Maybe there's a better way.Benjamin Trovato (talk) 01:59, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Adding a link to a WikiProject Archive page on a Talk page

Hi, I want to add a comment on the Talk page of WikiProject Rivers, referencing content found on an old archive page in that WikiProject. What's the format I should use to include a link to that content? The content I'd like to reference / link to is an entry on Archive 2 of that particular WikiProject. Thanks Exceat (talk) 11:35, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

You can just use a normal wikilink, like this: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers/Archive 2. If you want to link a particular section, add that section's heading after a number sign #. For example: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers/Archive 2#Names for Lists of rivers. Does that answer your question? -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 11:48, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Swedish Division 7 colour

Hi!

Does anyone know which colour belongs to the Swedish ninth football tier in the "Season to season" table. I am trying to add divisional info about Smögens IF, which briefly played in the Swedish ninth tier. Finding the standardised eigth tier colour was hard enough, but ninth is almost impossible. If anyone knows which colour is used, please let me know!

(On a side note, perhaps this article isn't a stub anymore, thanks to the edits I've made...) Rockfighterz M (talk) 13:00, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

You'd do better to ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Sweden task force. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:24, 13 July 2025 (UTC)


Disagreement/potential 'edit war' on portion of this article 'Boots on the Ground' song

Hello everyone - if you check the view history section of the Boots on the Ground song article, you will note a section that had been removed by an editor, with an explanation. I undid the edit and provided an explanation, supported by citations. I return some time later to see that possibly another editor removed the section again, this time with no explanation. I undid the edit and provided an explanation as before. There is no way to know if this is the same editor as before because their entry is marked 'page does not exist'. I hope this doesn't happen again, but in the meantime, I welcome feedback from other editors on handling this situation. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 18:47, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Both IP numbers are in North Carolina, ProfessorKaiFlai; my guess is that this was the same person. As an edit summary, "Removed small vague opinionated paragraph" was mendacious. "Revision" was vapid. You were right to restore. -- Hoary (talk) 21:54, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Looking for collaborator for acomplishing Draft:Xpertnest page

I was writing the wikipedia company page Draft:Xpertnest it's in draft and it is declined but 100s of news articles are there and added 15 articles but could not accepted by saying "Sources are all either WP:ORGTRIV, press releases, or paid advertorial pieces." please support me Bibhutipattnayak (talk) 23:24, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Well, if all your sources are trivial, paid, or press releases, then you need to find other sources. I haven't looked closely, but there is always a good chance that this company doesn't meet the notability criteria for a wikipedia article. At least 3 sources that meet the three criteria at WP:42 will establish notability, and only after that is done you may add some less-ideal sources to verify non-trivial information.
Also another note: the grammar will need some fixing, and there's no reason for every instance of the company's name to be a redlink to the future article namespace page. The first use of the name is bold, all other times it is just part of the regular text. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 00:00, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Seconded. Also, why one one-sentence paragraph after another? It gets tiresome. And do you dislike pronouns for some reason? (No need for "Xpertnest" when "it" would work instead.) However, first you have to demonstrate that the company is notable -- according to Wikipedia's definition of notability, not yours or mine. -- Hoary (talk) 01:40, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Bibhutipattnayak, and welcome to the Teahouse.
The thing to remember is 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.
You need to start by finding several sources which meet all the criteria in WP:42. If you can find them, then you need to effectively forget anything you may know about the subject, and write a summary of what those sources say.
While what you are writing may informally be called a "company page", I suggest that you instead think if it as "an encyclopaedia article about the company", as that does not have the connotation of it belonging to the company. ColinFine (talk) 09:28, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Quick question about page views

Where can I go to see the most viewed pages on Wikipedia that are not articles? I looked on the pages that display the page views, but I couldn't find any that exclude articles. I found a page list of the most edits outside mainspace alright but couldn't find one with views. The reason why I am asking this question is because I am trying to make Wikipedia a more user-friendly place and I'd be curious to know how pages like this forum where I wrote my question fall when it comes to page views. Basically, it helps me prioritize which pages on Wikipedia I should promote when guiding new and experienced editors through Wikipedia. I know some pages get a lot of views, but not a lot of edits, so any answer you can provide me would help a lot. Interstellarity (talk) 00:26, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Well, this Teahouse page isn't an article, and I can see page views just fine here: https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=latest-20&pages=Wikipedia:Teahouse ~Anachronist (talk) 02:28, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Not sure how to see a list or find the most viewed, but Help:Introduction and WP:ABOUT also gets a lot per the tool above; my guess is the pages most commonly seen in templates such as Template:Welcome (and WP:ABOUT is at the bottom of every page). GoldRomean (talk) 02:33, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi @Interstellarity, if you really need to do this for some reason, you can create a quarry query to get all pages not in mainspace, and then use the quarry result as the source on https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/massviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org. Just note that it's very resource-intensive (and might even fail due to rate limits?) Regards, — DVRTed (Talk) 07:58, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
@DVRTed This is my first time running quarry queries, so it would help if you could point me to help pages that I could read to figure this out. Interstellarity (talk) 12:26, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Hey @Interstellarity! When I said really need, I really meant it. That approach is almost only theoretically possible unless you significantly narrow down the pages you want to see pageviews of and put a lot of effort into it.
For instance, I created a query to get names of all the pages in the "Wikipedia:" namespace. It ended up running for more than 20 minutes and returned 1,347,357 pages! As you can probably guess, we can't just slap that many pages onto some tools and expect them to not break.
My suggestion is for you to make a list of possibly popular pages and manually check their stats.
If you want to learn about Quarry (hopefully not for this purpose), meta:Research:Quarry is a good place to start, along with browsing the schema (mw:Manual:Database layout). Looking at examples of other users' queries is probably also helpful if you're comfortable with SQL. Regards, — DVRTed (Talk) 14:27, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

King Muja

I need to know the first thing to do in setting up my wiki. I was denied with what I've presented before. Please help. King Muja'Dib Jamel El'Sori-Oser (talk) 01:53, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi King Muja'Dib Jamel El'Sori-Oser, welcome to the Teahouse. As an administrator I can see the deleted User:King Muja'Dib Jamel El'Sori-Oser/sandbox. Wikipedia biographies should have independent reliable sources to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (people), and they should not be made up. See also Wikipedia:Autobiography. Maybe Wikipedia:Alternative outlets has a suited place for your content like MicroWiki. We are not affiliated with them and I don't know their policies. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:12, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
It was deleted because it was blatantly and unambiguously promotional. It also appears to be a copyright violation of a Facebook page. Do not attempt to write about yourself on Wikipedia, please. And Wikipedia doesn't have permission to republish material that is already published elsewhere. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:23, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
For the puzzled: This is "the founder of Numi Kingdom Global Enterprise Corp. (NKGE Corp.), a global conglomerate valued at $500 million" and "a key figure in Africa’s financial and geopolitical resurgence". -- Hoary (talk) 03:25, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Request to move sandbox to article namespace

Hello!

I have created a draft article about Vietnamese actress Nguyễn Thị Phương Thanh, who recently gained media coverage for her lead role in the 2025 horror film "Út Lan – Oán Linh Giữ Của".

The article includes reliable sources from Vietnamese mainstream media such as VnExpress, Kenh14, Dân Trí, and others.

I would like to kindly request assistance in moving the following draft to the article namespace:

Draft link: User:Tracy Kim Hieu/sandbox

Suggested title: Nguyễn Thị Phương Thanh (actress)

Thank you very much in advance! Tracy Kim Hieu (talk) 05:28, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Tracy Kim Hieu, I've moved it to Draft:Nguyễn Thị Phương Thanh. -- Hoary (talk) 05:39, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
As you seem to think it's ready to be an article, I submitted it for you. -- Hoary (talk) 05:54, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Big Ole Butt

Big Ole Butt

I've expanded the page significantly today, but want to know the quality of the sources I used. Nighfidelity (talk) 05:44, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Who can upload non-free images?

Hello, I have a question but who can upload non-free images? Extended confirmed? Nasi Goreng Ayam (talk) 08:06, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed/confirmed users. See Wikipedia:User_groups#Autoconfirmed_and_confirmed_users, quote:

Autoconfirmed/confirmed users can edit semi-protected pages and, except where prevented by protection, can create articles, move pages, and upload files (including new versions of existing files).

DinhHuy2010 (talk · contribs · logs · rights · email · sandbox · links to user page · global contribs) 08:21, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

How to change the name of a published page if I'm not an accredited user?

How to change the name of a published page if I'm not an accredited user? Alternatively, how to delete the page? Infoaccount1234 (talk) 09:22, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Infoaccount1234 Hello and welcome. As I said on your user talk page(which you may not have seen, that's okay), your account has no edits other than this one and one to another user. It would help us to know which page you are talking about. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
@Infoaccount1234: I see at fi:Special:Contributions/Infoaccount1234 that you have created two pages at the Finnish Wikipedia. If that's what you refer to then Wikipedia languages have different rules and processes. You will have to ask at the Finnish Wikipedia, maybe at fi:Wikipedia:Kahvihuone (Wikipedian käytön neuvonta). Or maybe you can find advice at fi:Ohje:Sivun siirtäminen and fi:Wikipedia:Poistokäytäntö. I don't know Finnish but found the pages in the interlanguage links of English pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:24, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Archive 1255←Archive 1258Archive 1259Archive 1260Archive 1261

How to recover a deleted draft?

I made a draft a while back about the Five Night's at Freddys child actor Piper Rubio. Assuming she continues to progress in her acting career, she will surely become notable enough for an article in a year or two. She's already appearing in the FNAF sequel movie later this year.

Anyways a user made it into a mainspace article a little while ago, even though it was not ready at all and had been a failed AFC submission multiple times. That user seems to have since been banned and the draft for Piper Rubio was also deleted.

Any way I could recover the draft? Either in the draft space or somewhere else, such as in a user sandbox page?

Thanks in advance for a response to anyone who responds! Greshthegreat (talk) 17:57, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Greshthegreat.
Articles called "Piper Rubio" have been deleted four times. The most recent one, in January 25, was deleted by @Jimfbleak as Unambiguous advertising or promotion. The previous occasion was in 2023, and the conclusion was WP:TOOSOON; so it's possible that there are now adequate sources.
But given the reason for the most recent deletion, I doubt whether Jimfbleak would undelete it for you - you would need to start again with reliable sources - but you can ask him.
I've pinged Jimfbleak here, so he should see this message. ColinFine (talk) 18:11, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
I have often wondered why editors who are trying to rework a deleted draft want to have the deleted draft refunded, rather than starting from what you know about the person or company. (The drafts are usually biographies or occasionally about companies.) Starting with a version of the article that was deleted is not a good start because it is likely to result in carrying over the same defects as the original had. Versions of articles that were speedily deleted as promotion, G11, are almost never undeleted. You would be more likely to be able to get a copy of the version that was deleted as too soon, but I would suggest starting from what you know. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:12, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
User:Greshthegreat - I see that you have created a draft, Draft:Piper Rubio. I have not reviewed it and am not ready to comment on it, but I encourage you to try to improve it. You don't need any of the deleted articles to work on your draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:17, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
Robert, that draft is, as far as I can tell, identical to the deleted one. According to the deleted history, a sockpuppet of a banned user created the draft and then moved it to article space, and then Greshthegreat moved it back to draft space, after which the draft was WP:G5 speedy-deleted due to who created it. ~Anachronist (talk) 09:05, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
Greshthegreat, you say "she will surely become notable enough for an article in a year or two". So, wait until then before you start work on an article. It will me much easier once the necessary sources exist. Maproom (talk) 07:02, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
@Greshthegreat: the draft is worthless, nothing that establishes notability and the supposed refs were IMDB and Wikipedia, neither of which is remotely acceptable. Nor, for that matter, is her own Instagram, which you have used in your draft. How is that an independent, reputable third-party source? ColinFine, thanks for ping Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:27, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
@Greshthegreat, I suggest you read WP:BACKWARDS. ColinFine (talk) 18:08, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
I'll take a look at WP:BACKWARDS. Thanks for suggesting that to read. Greshthegreat (talk) 23:35, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

tags placed including living maker, but he died in 1931??

CLOSED
Duplicate question; main responses are below. Mathglot (talk) 23:39, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

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.

 Courtesy link: Richard Otto Gläsel

Hello,

Tags have been placed by CivicInk regarding improving citations of a living maker.

Richard Otto Glasel died in 1931.

{{Multiple issues| {{Citation style|date=July 2025}} {{BLP sources|date=July 2025}} {{More citations needed|date=July 2025}} }}

Citations posted are from the most reliable sources: STRAD magazine April 2024 – Parisian Splendour, by Gennady Filimonov and Deutsche Bogenmacher-German Bow Makers Klaus Grunke, Hans Karl Schmidt, Wolfgang Zunterer 2000

Please explain how the citations can be improved. Thank you in advance. Milliot68 Milliot68 (talk) 21:18, 16 July 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.

Hi, I’m new here, and I’d appreciate some help!

I submitted a draft article about Waterdrop (an Austrian beverage company) at Articles for Creation. I’ve tried to carefully address the reviewers feedback about tone, sourcing, and neutrality, but after the draft was declined, I can no longer resubmit it.

Could someone please take a look and advise if the draft meets notability and encyclopedic standards, and what next steps I should take to improve or submit it again?

Here’s the draft link: Draft:Waterdrop

Thank you so much! Patrizia Schoeppl (talk) 14:55, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

I responded to your other post at the AFC help desk, please only use one forum at a time to seek assistance, to.avoid duplicating effort. 331dot (talk) 14:57, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Sorry I did not see that reply, it did not pop up in my notification. Thanks for the help, very much appreciated. Patrizia Schoeppl (talk) 15:01, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Invoice

how much will be funded 35.39.96.76 (talk) 12:06, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

This is a place for help with editing wikipedia, did you have a question about that? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 12:14, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Help to improve the draft

Hello, would you please help me to improve my draft: Draft:Jang Kều (Phạm Thị Hương Giang)

Thanks [[User:TrangTH Nguyen|TrangTH Nguyen]] ([[User talk:TrangTH Nguyen|talk]]) (talk) 05:39, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

TrangTH Nguyen, the most recent decline notice starts "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people)." So I suppose that you hope that volunteers will look for "significant coverage" of this kind. That's unlikely to happen. -- Hoary (talk) 05:57, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello Hoary,
Thank for your reply. I wonder what is considered as significant coverage. For my article, I already cited more than 20 of the media about the subject. They are all reliable and independent of the subject, these are all news sites of major press agencies, some of which are state-run. There is also information from international websites. [[User:TrangTH Nguyen|TrangTH Nguyen]] ([[User talk:TrangTH Nguyen|talk]]) (talk) 06:05, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
TrangTH Nguyen, take it to mean substantial coverage of non-peripheral aspects of the subject. (For an article about a cellist, one would expect coverage of her as a cellist, not just of her as the interior decorator of her house, as a home teacher, chess player, marathon runner, etc. -- Hoary (talk) 10:01, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
@TrangTH Nguyen I was struck by your over-use of boldface type. Please read the relevant manual of style at MOS:BOLD and amend your draft to conform to that. In some places where you have boldface, you may be able to WP:WIKILINK to other relevant articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:11, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Help maintenance template removal

Hello, I'm a fan of an artist and was not aware that editing only a single subject might become an indication of coi and violation of npv. Now I have read all the COI guidelines and understood my mistake. And it says the tag can be removed once the problem is fixed. As the editor in question what can I do to fix the problem? Thank you Up85 (talk) 04:18, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Now the artist page is tagged with coi and advert. After reading the guidelines I understand the problem that the template highlights but don't know how to solve it. Please help Up85 (talk) 04:30, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
For the interested: Wang Yibo, Wang Yibo discography, Exploring the Unknown with Wang Yibo. ("Artist", or taelleonteu?) -- Hoary (talk) 05:31, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by taelleonteu. But yes, this is the celebrity I like and made edits only on pages related to him. Up85 (talk) 05:38, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
"editing only a single subject might become an indication of coi and violation of npv." - it might be an indication, but if you have no CoI and avoid PoV editing, it's perfectly acceptable to only edit in relation to one subject. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:58, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Including one's name on Wikipedia.

Hello Valebalavu679 (talk) 14:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

@Valebalavu679 I assume you are referring to Draft:Jim Raiwalui, which seems to be your attempt at an autobiography and has been declined as an article, mainly because it had no citations to already-published sources that could verify what was written. Wikipedia is not social media and there are very strict rules about biographies of living people. We strongly discourage autobiography for the reasons mentioned in my earlier link. You will have a very frustrating time if you try to create one. On the other hand, editors are given their own user page, where you can briefly describe what you intend to contribute to the encyclopedia (see WP:UPYES). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:05, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Valebalavu679. Please don't try this.
If you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (which mostly means that there has been material published about you by people completely unconnected with you) then eventually somebody will write an article about you. It will not be "your page", it will not be controlled by you, and it will not necessarily say what you want it to say.
As Mike says, trying to create an article about yourself is very unlikely to be successful, and you are likely to have frustration and disappointment. ColinFine (talk) 15:13, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

OSM maps

How are maps in infoboxes on articles such as Lumen Field and Alaska Building connected to File:Seattle, WA - Downtown - OpenStreetMap.png? And what is the most efficient and safe way to update such OSM maps, for example to File:Downtown Seattle, Washington, OpenStreetMap, 14000 scale (2025).png (the Alaskan Way Viaduct is no longer present in the featured area). Additional guidelines and recommendations pertaining to using maps are welcome and appreciated. Thank you! OceanLoop (talk) 05:22, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

WP:MAPS is a good place to start reading; then Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:56, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
I have read those resources prior to asking my question and did not reach an understanding. If you're familiar with this technology, please show me the relevation portion of the existing documentation. Of particular concern is updating these images at scale, and for this I am seeking mentorship, and frankly some hand-holding. I can request the same on those community pages, if you'd prefer. OceanLoop (talk) 15:36, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
In that case, I suggest you ask on the talk page of the latter. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:39, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

DAB templates

Hi. On Jesse Jackson, why doesn't this work?

{{About|the civil rights activist|his son, a former U.S. Representative from Illinois|Jesse Jackson Jr.}} {{For|the American baseball pitcher, see [[Jesse Jefferson]], and for the community organizer, see [[Jessie Jefferson]].}} {{Other uses|Jesse Jackson (disambiguation)}}

When I hit "preview", it shows this.

This article is about the civil rights activist. For his son, a former U.S. Representative from Illinois, see Jesse Jackson Jr.

For the American baseball pitcher, see Jesse Jefferson, and for the community organizer, see Jessie Jefferson., see Jesse Jackson (disambiguation).

For other uses, see Jesse Jackson (disambiguation).

What's up with this "see Jessie Jefferson., see Jesse Jackson (disambiguation)."? That last part comes out of nowhere. Is it not possible to consolidate this all into {{About}}? Thanks! — Smuckola(talk) 07:25, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

{{Other uses|Jesse Jackson (disambiguation)}} creates For other uses, see Jesse Jackson (disambiguation). Lova Falk (talk) 07:29, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
PS In the article, it looks fine! Lova Falk (talk) 07:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
@Smuckola: {{for}} normally has a second parameter with an article name to link. Otherwise it automatically links a "(disambiguation)" page. {{For-multi|the American baseball pitcher|Jesse Jefferson|the community organizer|Jessie Jefferson}} produces:
For the American baseball pitcher, see Jesse Jefferson. For the community organizer, see Jessie Jefferson.
{{hatnote}} makes a formatted hatnote where you can write anything and nothing is generated automatically. But why do you want to link Jesse Jefferson and Jessie Jefferson? Their surnames aren't similar to Jackson and we don't wan't a lot of hatnotes to other people. That's what the link to Jesse Jackson (disambiguation) is for, but their names are also too different to be listed there. If you think any "Jess(i)e J" seems similar then see Special:PrefixIndex/Jesse J and Special:PrefixIndex/Jessie J. We don't make hatnotes or disambiguation pages for that. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:36, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Yeah thanks, I should have also asked if the question is moot in this case anyway regarding the content. So never mind about the content. Thanks. — Smuckola(talk) 17:03, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Android Wikipedia app has no way to copy a link?

For the life of me I see no way to copy a link to an article that I'm viewing on my Android phone using the Wikipedia app, which seems a weird oversight. The hamburger menu on the top left shows no such option and there is no other menu. Do I need to delete the app and go back to using a mobile browser? PapagenoPDX (talk) 22:39, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

In the Android app, I long-press my finger on a link, and after a second a menu pops up giving me an option to copy the link. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:47, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply but what you describe is what I'd do if I were simply using a browser.
Actually someone on another forum suggested I update the app. The weird part is that I have almost all apps set to auto-update, so why wouldn't this one have updated? Also when I went to the Google Play store to see what was up, I couldn't find it in the "Manage apps" list. So I ended up deleting the old app (uninstalling it) and reinstalling from the Google Play store, and this time there's a three dot menu on the upper right that has a Share option.
Very strange all around. Almost as if I didn't have a real "app" installed but rather some weird "appified" browser page, as I use with certain forums I frequent, like Ars Technica and QuarterToThree. Anyway all is well now with the new app, although I disabled all the cruft and told it to just show me the main page upon opening. PapagenoPDX (talk) 07:18, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Well, you asked how to copy a link in the Android Wikipedia app, and I describe how I do it on the Wikipedia app on my Android phone. The fact that you might do it the same way on a browser is beside the point. Maybe it isn't clear exactly what you want to do. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:21, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
I guess I didn't explain the issue properly in my OP. I didn't mean to ask about sharing a link from within a Wikipedia article, but rather sharing a link that takes one to the whole article one is viewing/reading. For some reason I either had an outdated or possibly impostor version of the Android Wikipedia app before, and the three vertical dot menu on the upper right was missing, that in the updated version has "share" as its top item. In that old outdated version of the app I would likely have been able to copy a link included within an article as you indicate, but now I'll never know. In any case the newest version of the app lets me do it all. PapagenoPDX (talk) 22:58, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
There is an option to copy the link under the "share" menu. It's on the first line, and looks like a square with a shadow, but without a text caption.
BTW, make sure you are using the official Wikipedia app, and not some other. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:15, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Commons uploads added to other Wiki infoboxes

I recently uploaded some images to Commons for use in articles, such as File:View from ISS Expedition 71, Ocosta, Washington, April 13, 2024 (ISS071-E-7792) (cropped).jpg

To my surprise, these images have been incorporated in other language Wikipedia pages, for example: cy:Ocosta, Washington, lld:Ocosta (Washington)

However, the history of these pages shows no recent changes. How did my Commons images get added to these articles (not that I am complaining); and is there anything I should do differently? Thank you! OceanLoop (talk) 05:36, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

An image at Commons appears in any Wikipedia just as it appears in any other Wikipedia. (Has something given you the impression that [as examples] cy:Wikipedia and en:Wikipedia are related to Commons in different ways?) -- Hoary (talk) 06:01, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Sorry for not being more clear: what creates the association between some Commons uploads and some Wikipedia articles, if there are no recent edits to those respective pages? OceanLoop (talk) 06:20, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Now I see what you mean, OceanLoop. You uploaded the file very recently (and not as a new version of a file with the same filename), yet it appears within cy:Ocosta, Washington, last edited in 2023. The latter doesn't have much content intended for human reading, but a fair amount of "source code". I'd guess that some programming jiggery-pokery somewhere says that it should import for its infobox certain data from the infobox of en:Ocosta, Washington. -- Hoary (talk) 07:03, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
I suspect it queries Property:P18 from Wikidata, rather than enwiki, but your guess is probbably correct. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:16, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Yes, Victor Schmidt, that does seem likelier. -- Hoary (talk) 10:06, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Many Wikipedias (including, in some cases, this one; for example using {{Infobox person/Wikidata}}) populate some or all of their infobox content from Wikidata. That is what you are seeing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:07, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
@OceanLoop: Yes, it happens because you added the image to the Wikidata item.[1] Others could also do this. All Wikipedias at wikidata:Q27989055#sitelinks-wikipedia can access the image. In this case all five also display it but that varies. The English Wikipedia only displays it because it was explicitly added to the infobox in Ocosta, Washington. Our infoboxes don't import as much from Wikidata as many other languages. If an infobox does automatically import from Wikidata then it usually also has an optional parameter to override the import but you said you were not complaining. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:56, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Got it, so some Wikis simply automate infobox creation from Wikidata - smart. I have another related question, if I may -
I updated the Wikidata image for Thurston County (Q113773) but the change is only reflected on some Commons category pages, for example:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:People_of_Thurston_County,_Washington - updated image is shown
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Maps_of_Thurston_County,_Washington - previous image is shown
When I try to edit these Commons infoboxes, I am taken to the Wikidata entry, so what exactly gives? Thank you. OceanLoop (talk) 15:25, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
@OceanLoop: A purge of commons:Category:Maps of Thurston County, Washington updated the image. Pages are cached for performance reasons and don't automatically react to a Wikidata change. They do react to changes in local templates but that can be delayed. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:07, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Added a page and was declined - Inventor

re: Draft:Henry Feinberg

I created a page about the creator of and details about the two-way communicator used in the movie E.T. I don’t understand why it was rejected Doglover.Coton (talk) 16:48, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

We rely on articles demonstrating WP:NOTABILITY. You can read WP:42 for a lighter overview of this.
Basically, are other reliable sources talking about this topic, and can we demonstrate this?
I think your topic here is an interesting one. After all, E.T. is about as big as films get, and people do love iconic props from their favourites. But what's the topic here? Is it Henry Feinberg? or the ET communicator prop? Either one would need more sourcing. But also if it is Mr Feinberg, then it needs to tell us a lot more about him. What did he do before this? How did he become the person who Spielberg would approach to make the prop? What's he done since?
I think there's scope here for an article, but it will need more work, and more sourcing. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:19, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
OK, if you reverse other people's edits, ignore the comments, and just resubmit the same article immediately, then it's going to get rejected again. Then it goes on the list of "stuff no-one is interested in reviewing again and again" and it'll just sit there until it's abandoned, times out and gets deleted. Have a nice day. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:22, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Doglover.Coton. Draft:Henry Feinberg was declined because it is not a summary of what people wholly unconnected with Feinberg have chosen to publish about Feinberg in reliable publications, which are cited - which is what a Wikipedia article should be.
The first source may very will be a copyright infringement, in which case it shouldn't be linked to (you can cite it to "73 Magazine", rather than to some random person's webspace) - but in any case, it appears to be by Feinberg, and so is not independent.
The other two sources do not even mention Feinberg, and so are irrelevant in an article about him.
What you need to do in order to create an article about Feinberg, is first find several sources that meet the criteria I stated in my first sentence above: make sure they each meet all the criteria in WP:42.
Then, if you can find several such sources, write a neutral summary of what those sources say.
If that gives you a reasonable encyclopaedia article about Feinberg, then you may add some uncontroversial factual information from non-independent sources such as his article. But whether the article is accepted or not will not depend on this extra information. ColinFine (talk) 17:30, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
The message on your talk page should be clear enough. You have exactly zero sources that meet all three criteria in WP:Golden Rule. One source is by Feinberg himself, so that doesn't count, and the other two don't even mention him.
The draft starts out as a biography, but that doesn't seem to be the subject focus. Decide what you want the article to be about, and write about that. Even if you recasted the article to be about the device rather than a biography, you'd still need better sourcing. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:32, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the details Will work on it Doglover.Coton (talk) 19:37, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
You worsened the draft and resubmitted it, Doglover.Coton, so I declined it. It's time for you to take seriously the various comments you've received on your talk page, here, and elsewhere. -- Hoary (talk) 21:41, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

How to add image

h how to add image to Wikipedia pages Graspbony (talk) 21:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello Graspbony :). Check out this introduction on how to upload and use images (if you just want to use a preexisting image go to the Using an image subsection). Feel free to ask any other questions. —Sophocrat (talk) 22:09, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Archiving a PDF

Per my FLC nomination at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Michelin-starred restaurants in South Korea/archive1, I need help archiving a PDF. History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:08, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Do you mean, History6042, that you want a PDF file that's currently available on the web to be archived by the Wayback Machine? If so, I imagine that "Save Page Now" at web.archive.org/ works for PDF files as well as web pages, though I'm not sure. -- Hoary (talk) 01:16, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
I did that but it archives a redirect. History6042😊 (Contact me) 01:41, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
We need to know the URL you're trying to archive in order to help you further. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:31, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't know how to add references

I tried to add references to my draft "Hurricane Flossie, 2025" but it didn't work, and my draft got declined. I need sources, but there aren't many sources on the web... help please! JeremyJe29 (talk) 00:43, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Link: Draft:Hurricane Flossie, 2025 JeremyJe29 (talk) 00:50, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
It doesn't seem likely, JeremyJe29, that for such a recent hurricane -- less than a month ago -- there'd be sources published on paper and not on the web. If so, then "not many sources on the web" means "not many sources". Are there not at least a few good sources? (If good sources don't exist, no article can be written.) If you don't know about the mechanics of adding references, please start at Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1 and follow the pages. -- Hoary (talk) 01:09, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Ah. Thanks for pointing that out! Maybe I'll do an older one... JeremyJe29 (talk) 01:14, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

how to make a page and send it to the main people in charge

I am wondering how to make a page and send it to the main people in charge! 73.11.241.72 (talk) 00:47, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Please read WP:YFA. -- Hoary (talk) 00:59, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
There is no "main people in charge". Wikipedia does not have that sort of organisation; we're all volunteers working on whatever we want to work on. (Barring extreme circumstances, paid WMF staff do not edit or make editorial decisions in that capacity.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 01:09, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
You go to WP:YFA or WP:AFC, follow the directions to write a draft, don't write it WP:BACKWARD, and when you're done, click the button in the box at the top to submit it to "the people in charge", which in this case are reviewers who decide if a draft is worth publishing as an article. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:14, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, IP user, and welcome 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) 08:14, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Beginner Contributor

Does contributor need to be highly educated person with a PhD degree ? 112.198.11.251 (talk) 04:21, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

There are no minimum qualifications to edit on wikipedia; however, for the english wikipedia, a good command of english is extremely helpful. A beginning should start with the five "pillars" of wikipedia to become familiar with the most important concepts underlying the encyclopedia, then jump over to the introduction to learn the basics of editing. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 04:44, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
IP editor, please do not mess around and damage the encyclopedia just to see what happens. You can do tests in the sandbox area. Cullen328 (talk) 04:49, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Reporte de Bloqueo a "Usuario:Mαrti "

La descripción de su página dice: "Me gusta trabajar en artículos sobre temas que disfruto, como Coldplay, Friends, Harry Potter, Black Mirror, ABBA, música y astronomía." Sin embargo, sus artículos carecen de sentido enciclopédico, ya que se dedica a crear páginas sobre cualquier canción solo porque le gusta, como si se tratara de obras con relevancia histórica, premios o un impacto reconocido, cuando en realidad no es así. No tengo nada en contra de que alguien escriba sobre lo que le gusta, pero lo que incomoda es que esta persona reportó mi artículo sobre la Iglesia La Laguna del pueblo de Querocotillo, un lugar que tiene muchos más años de historia que la propia vida del usuario que está denunciando. No sé si es simplemente un troll de internet o cuál es su intención, pero parece que su único objetivo es fastidiar sin fundamentos válidos. Cholexintelect0 (talk) 22:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

@Cholecintelect0: Admins here cannot perform admin actions on other Wikipedia projects. Take this to the Spanish-language Wikipedia's equivalent of WP:AN/I.
(automated translation) Los administradores de la Wikipedia en inglés no pueden realizar acciones administrativas en otros proyectos de Wikipedia. Comunique esto al Tablón de Anuncios de Administradores de la Wikipedia en español. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 22:06, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

छवि हटाने और शीघ्र हटाने के नामांकन का विरोध

इस को sanjeev bot नामक बॉट द्वारा  विकिपीडिया पर पृष्ठों को हटाने की नीति के अंतर्गत शीघ्र हटाने के लिये नामांकित किया गया है। इसका नामांकन निम्न मापदंड के अंतर्गत किया गया है:

ल2 • साफ़ प्रचार

इसमें वे सभी पृष्ठ आते हैं जिनमें केवल प्रचार है, चाहे वह किसी व्यक्ति-विशेष का हो, किसी समूह का, किसी प्रोडक्ट का, अथवा किसी कंपनी का। इसमें प्रचार वाले केवल वही लेख आते हैं जिन्हें ज्ञानकोष के अनुरूप बनाने के लिये शुरू से दोबारा लिखना पड़ेगा। यदि लेख के इतिहास में कोई ऐसा अवतरण है जो कि पूर्णतया प्रचार नहीं था और जिसमें कुछ जानकारी ज्ञानकोष के अनुरूप भी थी, तो लेख को उस अवतरण पर पूर्वव्रत कर दिया जाना चाहिए।

यदि यह लेख इस मापदंड के अंतर्गत नहीं आता तो कृपया यह नामांकन टैग हटा दें। स्वयं बनाए पृष्ठों से नामांकन न हटाएँ।

यदि यह आपने बनाया है, और आप इसके नामांकन का विरोध करते हैं, तो इसके हटाए जाने पर आपत्ति करने के लिए नीचे दिये बटन पर क्लिक करें। इससे आपको इस नामांकन पर आपत्ति जताने के लिये एक पूर्व-स्वरूपित जगह मिलेगी जहाँ आप इस पृष्ठ को हटाने के विरोध का कारण बता सकते हैं। आप सीधे वार्ता पृष्ठ पर जाकर यह भी देख सकते हैं कि इस नामांकन पर क्या चर्चा चल रही है।

ध्यान रखें कि नामांकन के पश्चात् यदि यह पृष्ठ किसी वैध मापदंड के अंतर्गत नामांकित है, और वार्ता पृष्ठ पर हटाने के विरोध का कारण सही नहीं है,  तो इसे कभी भी हटाया जा सकता है।

इस पृष्ठ का अंतिम संपादन Narayansmm (योगदान| लॉग) ने  07:13 UTC को किया है। (17 सेकेंड पूर्व)

कृपया पृष्ठ निर्माता के वार्ता पृष्ठ पर यथा-उपयुक्त निम्न साँचा लगा दें :-
{{subst:शीह सूचना-ल2|कैलाश चंद्र अग्रवाल}}~~~~

what should i do to remove this tag Narayansmm (talk) 10:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Narayansmm, and welcome to the Teahouse for English Wikipedia. You don't mention which article and image you are talking about, but I think it must be about hi:वार्ता:कैलाश चंद्र अग्रवाल. Either way, nobody on English Wikipedia can help you (I had to use Google translate to understand your message). Try hi:विकिपीडिया:चौपाल ColinFine (talk) 11:16, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Sir, the page is in Hindi, and after adding the image and template, this bot error is shown. I have already removed the image and the template. So kindly suggest to me how I can resolve this issue without losing this page.
https://hi.wikipedia.org/s/27lo Narayansmm (talk) 11:21, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Narayansmm, if you have a question about or request related to hi:Wikipedia, please ask there, not here. -- Hoary (talk) 11:32, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for message, but could you please the link where can I make a request? Narayansmm (talk) 11:57, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
@Narayansmm: Try here: hi:विकिपीडिया:चौपाल which appears to be the equivalent of this page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:00, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you so much. Narayansmm (talk) 12:03, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

I finished copy editting!

I have finished copy editing the career section of Michel Polnareff I will now start working on find references and removing anything that I can't find references for. LMK what you think! Riphkin (talk) 21:30, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Riphkin. In the future, I recommend finding the references first, and then copyediting. The references are by far the most important part of any Wikipedia article, and a major part of copyediting is making sure that the content accurately summarizes what the cited reliable sources say. Cullen328 (talk) 22:50, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
I thought so but I wanted to get used to copy editing before getting refrences but will be doingthat next time! Riphkin (talk) 07:00, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

No Use: 2015 Laos census ??

hello every, I am working on Islam in Laos, during research i found that not a single page uses 2015 census of Laos, Most pages used US Freedom Report or 2010 pew research report.

Now i am in Doubt that Is Laos Census Unreliable??. 獅眠洞 (talk) 12:21, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

@獅眠洞 I think it is more likely that no-one realised that such an English-language source existed. It looks very official and detailed to me and should be perfectly acceptable for Wikipedia. Note that if you go to the top-level of the website UNFPA at this URL you may find even more recent data or other useful information for Laos. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:11, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
I point out this because articles like religion in Laos ; Buddhism in Laos ; Christianity in Laos. Doesn't use official laos Census.
And 2025 Laos census will be published in few months.
I think 2015 census of Laos similar to 2011 census of India.
. 獅眠洞 (talk) 14:36, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Articles use International Religious Freedom Report 2007 or The Global Religious Landscape on laos. These sources are decade old 獅眠洞 (talk) 14:47, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Authoring a page

I am reaching out to see if there are any author networks for having someone submit material to be submitted for approval. 75.164.240.145 (talk) 13:59, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Anyone, including IP editors, can submit draft articles via the articles for creation process. See also Help:Your first article. However, if you are a newcomer here, then you should start with easier tasks, since writing from scratch has many pitfalls if you are not familiar with Wikipedia's many conventions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:51, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Question about Article Categories and Redirects

I have another question about advice that I am giving to inexperienced editors at DRN. The dispute turns out to be about assigning article categories to redirects. There was a List of Playstation 5 games, and the filing editor created redirects to the list for all of the game titles that were in the list but did not have their own articles. I think that was correct, a case where the redirects are useful. They then placed those redirects in Category:PlayStation 5-only games. Another editor disagrees, and my view is that the redirects should not be in a category for articles. I advised the editor either to remove the article categories from the redirects and put them in redirect categories via templates, such as {{R from list topic}}, or to ask me to ask other experienced editors for advice. So I am being asked to research this question, which is

So: Did I give correct advice to the editor, or should I revise my advice because I was mistaken and redirects can be in article categories? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:03, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

This and your previous question seem more suited to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) than The Teahouse. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:32, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon: Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects#Article categories allows it in some cases but Category:PlayStation 5-only games has 12 articles and 103 redirects, most of them to the same List of PlayStation 5 games. That seems excessive. I suggest a compromise where the redirects get their own category, similar to Category:The Simpsons character redirects to lists so the articles in Category:The Simpsons characters are easy to find. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:54, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, User:PrimeHunter. That would be a redirect category for redirects to Playstation lists. I am adding that that category should be added to at least two parent categories, one Playstation-related and one of redirect categories. My general follow-up question is what is the best forum to ask for advice about categories, which are a detailed technical area of their own (which at least once resulted in an ArbCom case that resulted in users being banned). So where should category questions be asked? Robert McClenon (talk) 05:04, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon: The Teahouse is geared to newcomers. I suggest Wikipedia:Help desk for more advanced questions. Questions are sometimes asked on the talk page of a relevant policy or guideline but they are meant for discussing the content of the associated page. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:35, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, User:PrimeHunter. I came here because I was looking for advice for newcomers. When I have been looking for help with detailed tasks, sometimes I have found it at the Help Desk, and sometimes I have done better at Village pump (technical). I may try the Help Desk again. I don't see much discussion of categorization at WT:Categories. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:41, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Making a long-lost historically-important autobiography freely available.

My father - Geoffrey J Morton - has a Wikipedia page because his shooting of Abraham Stern was, for better or worse, a turning point in the history of Israel, and even the Middle East. He describes it in his autobiography "Just the Job: some experiences of a colonial policeman". This was published in 1957 and is now almost impossible to find second hand. So I have converted it to an ePub and made it available free on Gumroad, see https://geoffrey07.gumroad.com/l/clyiwo I would like to give a link to this on his Wikipedia page but the Gumroad hosting implies to some that this a promotional move. How can I get this out there (the file is <7MB)? Is the Internet Archive a better place to host it? What do you folks here think? PS don't hesitate to download the eBook from Gumroad, be sure to specify a price of zero, and to judge the historical merit and relevance of this account yourself. GMHowarth (talk) 15:05, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

@GMHowarth You could donate a copy to Wikisource, I think, if you are confident you hold the rights to license it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:28, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
... note that the text won't become public domain until 2027, since he died in 1957. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:35, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
You can upload it to the Internet Archive, and we will link to it there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:56, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Unable to Login

Hello, this is User:Ridge Runner. I've been trying for months now to get logged back into Wikipedia, to no avail. I didn't change my password, but now when I go to login, it says, "Incorrect username or password entered. Please try again."

Requests for lost password help are not making it to my e-mail address.

Can anyone help me, please? 138.43.149.142 (talk) 18:21, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Create a new user ID. Log in with that username. On your new user page, mention that you were previously User:Ridge Runner. Happy editing! -- Hoary (talk) 21:56, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
User:Ridge Runner is retired, an account 17 years old, and seems to have an email address set up. Please check your spam folder to see if you got any password-related email. I'll send you a test email too. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:19, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you so much for sending that e-mail. I don't know why Wikipedia's e-mails weren't coming through (even to my spam folder), but yours did and that fixed it. Have a great day! -Aaron Ridge Runner (talk) 12:46, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
I have no idea why me sending you an email would have fixed anything, but I am glad you are now able to log in. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:08, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

What do I do

When I just just just started my account Pokegirl132225 (talk) 16:59, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

@Pokegirl132225 Welcome to the Teahouse. There should be some suggestions on your homepage, or you look at the task center. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:06, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Not XC - is this fine

I'm not XC and am in no rush to be. However I do follow the PIA CTOP and often notice other non-XC users engaging in talk page discussion, which is a violation of WP:ARBECR. Is it fine for me to drop a friendly note on their talk page letting them know about the policy? I did this once here - wanted to check to make sure that is fine before doing so again for other users NicheSports (talk) 02:24, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't see any problem with this, since your edits aren't directly about PIA and are clearly constructive. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:48, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
thanks! NicheSports (talk) 03:55, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
In my view, if nobody bothers to protect a CTOP talk page, it's fair game for anyone to participate constructively.
In principle, I object to banning non XC users from participating on talk pages, because it just drives them to WP:RFED where uninvolved admins have to deal with the edit requests.
Indeed, WP:ARBECR A.1. specifically allows for non-XC editors to make edit requests on CTOP article talk pages. Therefore, your message to a user was somewhat misguided. They can participate, but only to make edit requests. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:10, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
You're way more experienced than me but "if nobody bothers to protect a CTOP talk page, it's fair game for anyone to participate constructively" is asking for users to define "constructive participation" themselves, which is asking for trouble in this CTOP area.
My understanding is that 1) any content that directly relates to the PIA CTOP is automatically WP:ECR-protected by default, whether someone has explicitly protected the page or not and 2) non-XC users can only make WP:EDITXY type requests for any such content.
I prefer to err on the side of clarity given the problems I see on talk pages in this very sensitive CTOP. Do you have a message you would prefer that I use instead of the one I linked to above? I've seen this one used but also don't want to come across as admin-y on people's talk pages. But you prefer I can use it instead NicheSports (talk) 04:32, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
WP:ARBECR is quite clear that non-XC users are allowed to make non-disruptive edit requests on CTOP talk pages. The message you leave on user talk pages should reflect that. They cannot engage in discussion, they cannnot argue, they cannot use talk pages as a forum (nobody can), but legitimate well-formed edit requests are permitted. The message you left saying "only editors who are WP:XC can edit in this space, including on talk pages" is misleading, because any editor can indeed write edit requests. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:05, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Agreed. Do you have a recommended message I can use instead? I suggested this one above. Is this fine? NicheSports (talk) 17:11, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
That's {{subst:welcome-arbpia}}, in case you didn't know how to generate it. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:21, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Retrieving messages

This morning I exchange a few messages with an editor. I don't remember on which page or system. Is there a way to retrieve those messages? Sergio58 (talk) 22:47, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Have you looked through Special:Contributions/Sergio58? -- Hoary (talk) 23:26, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, I found my message there, but not the reply I received. Sergio58 (talk) 23:46, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
How about the history of "Draft:Definitional tree"? (After being posted, it might have been deleted, whether accidentally or deliberately.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:12, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
@Sergio58: Or maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk#18:06, 14 July 2025 review of submission by Sergio58, or User talk:Sergio58. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. Sergio58 (talk) 19:08, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Remove COI tag with "undo"?

I mistakenly made edits to a wikipedia page featuring myself (Sheila DeWitt) which created a COI "tag". I definately did not fully understand the COI rules at the time. I now understand that I should have suggested edits as a COI editor. If I "undo" the edits that I made on April 30, will it address the COI tag? Thanks in advance

Sheiladewitt (talk) 19:51, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

User:Pigsonthewing removed the tag here and seems to be giving the article a general brush-up. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 21:36, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Yes; I wrote a reply here saying I was doing so, but it showed up still in draft just now. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:32, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you very much!! Sheiladewitt (talk) 19:17, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Is there a way to request edits on a protected page when the corresponding talk page is ALSO protected?

In particular, as of my writing, it appears that the lead of the article on Brianna Wu contains a typo in its last sentence, in the form of "racedue" (in place of "race due"). This is just a copyedit but it seems like there's no way for anyone to point it out since the talk page is protected. Americanastronaut (talk) 18:56, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

It looks like the error has been fixed, but for reference Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit is where you can go if the talk page is protected. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 19:12, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you! Americanastronaut (talk) 19:42, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Referencing my article on black metal band A Forest Of Stars

Good day everyone

So my submission for Draft:A Forest of Stars (band) was declined, with the reason given being that notability was not established. Two questions if I may:

  1. The editor who declined said the specific issue is that "we really need sources that discuss the band in-depth, not just their albums, and not based on interviews". However, I also note in Wikipedia:TRIVIAL that "Critical commentary from reputable professional reviewers and prestigious awards are examples of short but significant (i.e. nontrivial) mentions", and I would have thought that an album review from a staff writer in a publication recognised in Wikipedia:A/S would fall into that category. If I am misreading then it would be good to know why.
  2. I have now added a several extra sources, including a feature in Bandcamp Daily and a (short) biography from Allmusic. If someone had time to take a look and pass on some thoughts (both on notability and, to be honest, any other constructive criticism you can think of) I would be most grateful.

Cheers

CasualInterestInManyThings (talk) 20:24, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

A good test is this: Which three of your sources meet all of the requirements outlined at WP:GOLDENRULE? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:39, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi Andy, thanks for getting back in touch so quickly.
Is that a rhetorical question, or are you actually offering to comment on some of the article's sources? I appreciate that we are all very busy, but if you were that would be a great help both for this article and my future editing. For reference, I have had two other similar articles accepted previously, Conjurer (band) and Green Lung. It didn't seem to me that this one is noticeably more lacking in sources than those two. Understanding why they got through and this one didn't would be helpful for me to know who else to write an article for and who to give a miss.
I also wonder if Wikipedia isn't a bit like the British planning system: in some cases it's just a bit borderline and subjective I've got to accept that whoever makes the decision could justifiably go either way. If that's the case it's good to understand.it clearly. CasualInterestInManyThings (talk) 21:37, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
Most likely, CasualInterestInManyThings, Andy is offering to comment briefly on the adequacy (or not) of not "some" but three sources. (Normally, cited sources don't have to be available on the web, let alone available free of charge; but for this purpose, they do.) There's no great mystery about inconsistency of standards: Drafts are accepted (or not) by any of a great number of volunteers, working independently. The great majority of these volunteers do a decent job, but some may be a little, or even more than a little, uncomprehending, underinformed, sleepy, slapdash, indulgent, etc. -- Hoary (talk) 22:05, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
Did you look at the link I provided? It's a real question.
If you can't find three such sources, then the article almost certainly does not meet our notability requirements, and so is not suitable for a Wikipedia article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:21, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi Andy, yes I certainly did, thank you.
I would suggest:
Thoughts, as I say, extremely welcome. CasualInterestInManyThings (talk) 21:06, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
See again WP:Golden Rule. Interviews are not independent of the subject, and don't contribute to notability. Got another one? ~Anachronist (talk) 22:53, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
I saw that, but figured since most of the feature is written in the author's own words, structured as a history of the band and review of a recent album with a couple of questions to the band thrown in, it might still count. It is useful to know that it does not. In any case, O'Connor incorrectly says Grave Mounds is their first album with Prophecy, which says bad things about on the subject of reliability.
Others I'd mention are
If that doesn't do it, then it's probably time to hold up my hands, squirrel the text away somewhere until someone else decides to write about them, and crack on with someone else armed with new process knowledge. CasualInterestInManyThings (talk) 18:40, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
The Allmusic site isn't coverage, that's just a profile summary like thousands of others on that site. The other one looks OK although the coverage of the band itself is rather short. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:50, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
This was why I didn't include it first off. It is good know how such things are treated.
In any case, I guess that's three... just. I will have a last proof of the article and push the button again soon.
It looks like, from this discussion, an album review can be coverage where it covers the band in general as well as the album, but that is not the case for interviews which are just never evidence of notability. I will admit that feels a bit unintuitive (if a major publication had decided to conduct an interview, presumably that means they thought the subject was important enough to interview them), but I also know that I do not make the rules.
It feels like I've bombarded you with a lot of quite silly questions. Thank you very much for your patience. CasualInterestInManyThings (talk) 19:05, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
One thing that would help verify WP:BAND criterion 5 is to include the label associated with each album in the list of album releases. The date they were signed to the label is sort of buried in the article; if any criteria are met, they should be clearly identified. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:40, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
A related question is: which criterion from WP:BAND does this band meet? If I review an article about a band and cannot see any evidence of meeting any of the listed criteria, I would decline it. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:19, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi there, thanks for your reply
I would say they meet criteria 1 (although this is evidently contested) and 5 (see Prophecy Productions). CasualInterestInManyThings (talk) 21:29, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
They clearly do not meet criterion #5 if they signed only this year and have not released two or more albums under that label. So we're left with #1, and you've been asked for three sources that meet all the criteria in WP:Golden Rule. It wasn't a rhetorical question. When you have a bunch of citations in an article with some of them not helping with notability, a reviewer wants to know what you think your three best sources are. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:22, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you. I will reply to Andy separately on their point, as they have now also replied.
AFOS signed with Prophecy in 2011, and have released three albums with them. I have provided sources to demonstrate specifically this and altered the article to draw slightly greater attention to it, given its significance to their notability. CasualInterestInManyThings (talk) 20:17, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Working on the table of contents page for Wikipedia

I have been working on the table of contents page and trying to make it as easy as possible to navigate. Here is the revision of the page: Wikipedia:Contents - Wikipedia and the talk page discussion that goes along with it - Wikipedia_talk:Contents#My_edits_to_this_page. Since I have been working with another editor who has reverted me and working to make the page as accessible as possible, it is extremely important to me that this page is a high standard. I would like this page to be a concise list of everything Wikipedia has to offer while reducing bloat. The other editor pointed out that it needs to be accessible for people with disabilities. The question I want to ask here is do you think this page meets the standard for being a table of contents page? I'm looking for something similar to WP:PR, but for project space. What do you think should be improved on the page? I was a little discouraged from asking at the help desk since another editor reported me to WP:ANI when the dispute could've been resolved with better tools. Interstellarity (talk) 21:41, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Your recent version looks OK to me, although the one that got reverted, I'd have to agree with the reverter. Looking good visually doesn't matter if using a screen reader or other disability aid. Favor a TOC over a list, favor a list over a table, avoid icons in prose, and so on. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:33, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
@Anachronist Thank you for your honest feedback. My goal is to try to improve page while keeping the reverter's comments in mind. Feel free to skim through the page, provide me additional feedback, or be bold with a change you think would make it better. Interstellarity (talk) 22:46, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
Please disregard the ANI incident, and continue to edit boldly per WP:BRD. The editor who started that thread at ANI very much violated Wikipedia norms by taking the discussion there before having a normal conversation with you. The correct, expected thing to do is to have a discussion on the talk page -- as you've done. And you've received the feedback about accessibility well.
I hope that incident won't make you hesitant to edit in the future, or to ask for help on the help desk. The vast majority of editors will not respond in that way, because the community does not tolerate that sort of behavior (at least not for long). The editor in question was sanctioned for attacking you (and other violations of community standards). You're doing good work, communicating well, and we hope you'll stick around!
As for getting feedback on your changes to the Contents page, asking as you did on its talk page should be sufficient if you just want to make sure other people interested in maintaining the page are okay with your edits. The Contents page's Talk page is tagged by WP:WikiProject Contents, so WT:WikiProject Contents could in theory be a good venue to draw attention from more editors. Unfortunately, that project looks fairly moribund.
If you're eager for discussion from a broader range of editors, the WP:Village Pump is a good venue to bring up topics that affect the encyclopedia or community as a whole. For feedback in advance, WP:VPI or WP:VPP depending on how concrete your idea/proposal is. For feedback on something already implemented, you could try WP:VPM. -- Avocado (talk) 23:06, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Hey, not an editing question, but...

Why do IPv6 addresses chage when the router restarts? 2603:6080:C400:4DE2:AC4E:A408:900D:CAE1 (talk) 02:04, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

You have a dynamic IP address issued to you by your internet provider. When your router reconnects to the service, you get another IP address. This applies to both IPV4 and IPV6. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:20, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
See IP address#Dynamic IP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:04, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Btw, for questions not about Wikipedia itself, you may want to check out the WP:Reference Desk. -- Avocado (talk) 23:08, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Addition of an award in the award section of an actor

 Courtesy link: Byeon Woo-seok

ASEA awards are not updated in the byeon wooseok accolades sections. Kindly update it.

https://en.namu.wiki/w/%EB%B3%80%EC%9A%B0%EC%84%9D 103.165.167.30 (talk) 15:34, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

IP editor. You have linked to a wiki that uses the same software as Wikipedia does but that's a completely unrelated site and editors here are not likely to want to update it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:37, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
https://m.newsen.com/news_view.php?uid=202505301102571510
This one is an legit article 103.165.167.30 (talk) 16:36, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
That may be so but has nothing to do with Wikipedia. Why don't you make the update yourself? We say WP:JUSTDOIT. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:56, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
I think our guest was suggesting it as a source. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:28, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
In which case they need to understand that no wiki site can itself be used as a Reliable source on Wikipedia, because such sites' content is user generated: this includes Wikipedia itself.
If that other wiki cites a (by our criteria) a Reliable source for this piece of information, they can cite that source for the update (but as far as I can tell, it's uncited).
(Note that the subject's awards etc. are actually listed in a separate article linked from the main one. I'm not sure if this is really necessary.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.5.172.125 (talk) 05:30, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

New Editor

Hello everyone!🤗

My name is Segun Alonge Jr, and I’m excited to finally start contributing to Wikipedia. I’ve been an educator, author, and consultant for several years, and my goal here is to improve articles about notable individuals, particularly in education, leadership, and African culture, as well as under-documented topics.

I’m still learning the ropes and welcome any advice on how to make meaningful contributions and avoid common mistakes.

Thanks for having me — looking forward to learning and contributing!

— SegunAlongeJr SegunAlongeJr (talk) 16:27, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Welcome. The most important thing for any editor who may be an "expert" to remember here is, absolutely don't write what you know on Wikipedia. We write only about what can be found in published sources with a reputation for reliability and fact checking. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:23, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
We're happy to have you! If you're confused, we have hundreds of help pages dedicated to assisting new editors. I recommend seeing this quick guide for editing acronyms. All users also have their own Sandbox, (click to create yours) you can edit here freely. Wikipedian 05:56, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

I made an edit

I made an edit, quite a big one but it's just a rewrite, let me know what you think!

Michel Polnareff. Riphkin (talk) 19:16, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Riphkin, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.
Well done for being WP:BOLD. But I'm afraid that,
just in the first paragraph or two you have introduced non-neutral language: "shot to fame" (replacing the neutral "rose to fame"). Similarly "a landmark figure" (though in that case I question whether the text already there was neutral).
Please see peacock words.
In future, I recommend making several smaller edits rather than one large one, because if somebody disagrees with part of your edit, they are likely to revert the whole thing. ColinFine (talk) 19:46, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
no need to revert a re edit can work just as well Riphkin (talk) 19:57, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
but thanks for the suggestions and i'll be more careful next time Riphkin (talk) 19:59, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
I agree that there is no need for somebody to revert, but people may do so nonetheless, because it's easier than working out which bits to keep. ColinFine (talk) 21:04, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
ah ok, will be careful more careful next time then Riphkin (talk) 05:43, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

ancestry

Derivation of the name Briden 207.172.247.246 (talk) 21:00, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello. This page is for questions about editing and using Wikipedia, not for general knowledge questions.
Since our article Briden doesn't discuss the etymology, I suggest asking at the Reference desk (probably at the Humanities section of it). ColinFine (talk) 21:07, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Sarfaraz Know

Sarfaraz Kann

Die Kann erst 121.91.34.140 (talk) 22:14, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello IP. This is the Teahouse, a place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. It's not clear what you're trying to ask. Cheers, Sophocrat (talk) 22:54, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Warned the IP. Ahri Boy (talk) 00:42, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
I don't think that was necessary since I assume the IP was asking (or trying to) in good faith, but I will leave it be. —Sophocrat (talk) 01:41, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Proper use of past tense in the introduction section of an article

I recently noticed that the SG-1000 articles first sentence contains the wording, "The SG-1000 is a..." despite the fact that the console itself is out of production. I assumed that articles on Wikipedia generally use "is" for topics that are current, or are general subjects and topics not expected to become out of date, while "was" was for topics about events, objects, or people that have since passed. My question is this, what exactly are the guidelines for the usage of past tense in the introduction on Wikipedia? Am I wrong in my assumption, or does this article potentially need to have the "is" swapped for a "was?" Thank you for considering. NormalSpider (talk) 22:43, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello NormalSpider. According to our Manual of Style, we generally use the present tense for everything except past events and dead/defunct people, organizations, and periodicals. So for electronic devices, even discontinued ones, we use the present tense. Feel free to ask any other questions. Cheers, Sophocrat (talk) 22:52, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the clarification. NormalSpider (talk) 03:15, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
To enlarge on The Sophocrat's answer; examples of this device may still be in use by someone, somewhere. I myself have a working IBM Displaywriter System dating from the 1980's. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.5.172.125 (talk) 05:41, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Fetisov Journalism Awards

Draft:Fetisov Journalism Awards

Hello! I would like to hear the participants' opinion about the sources I used for the draft. I have found and added 3 (WP:THREE) independent authoritative publications and added them to the draft:

  1. 1 (Forbes)
  2. 2 (SWI swissinfo)
  3. 3 (medienwoche.ch.).

I took text from each publication that I could use to write an article.

Forbes

The prize fund of the Fetisov Journalism Awards is 520,000 Swiss francs, which is more than twice the amount of the Pulitzer Prize. Billionaire Gleb Fetisov decided to financially support journalists after he was involved in a criminal case. The money that the winning reporters will receive should be enough to publish a book or move to another country. On January 22, the 5-star Hotel Schweizerhof Luzern, located in the Old Town of Lucerne, hosted the first Fetisov Journalism Awards (FJA). The award was named after its sponsor, billionaire ex-senator and former owner of My Bank, Gleb Fetisov. The FJA is notable for its prize pool of \$525,000 (520,000 Swiss francs). This is almost twice the amount of the famous Pulitzer Prize ($300,000).

The award was distributed among the winners in four categories: "Outstanding Journalistic Investigation," "Best Environmental Investigation," "Contribution to the Civil Rights Movement," and "Outstanding Contribution to Peace." In the first two categories, three winners were selected. The winner of the "Outstanding Journalistic Investigation" category was Diego Cabot, an Argentine journalist, for his article "The Notebooks of Corruption," which focused on the corruption of former Argentine President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. The jury considered the Nigerian Isaac Aniaogu and the German Phillip Jacobson's Dying in instalments series (about how companies that recycle lead-acid batteries are polluting water and soil in Nigeria) to be the best environmental investigation. The Egyptian Mohammed Abou-Elgheit was awarded for his contribution to peace by publishing about how Western weapons end up in the hands of ISIS and Al-Qaeda terrorists operating in Yemen. Finally, Canadian journalist Katie May won the prize for her contribution to the civil rights movement with her publication Remote life, rough justice, which focused on issues in the Canadian judicial system.

The award was developed over the course of a year, with the Fetisov Charitable Foundation, established by Fetisov in 2019, handling the organizational aspects. A special expert council was responsible for the shortlist. The council consisted of 14 individuals, including two Russian representatives: Nadezhda Azhgikhina, former Vice President of the European Federation of Journalists, and Pavel Gusev, Chairman of the Moscow Union of Journalists. In total, the experts received 168 applications from 50 countries and selected 33 works for the shortlist (the rules of the award do not allow more than 40 works in the list). From these, the jury selected eight winners.
SWI swissinfo

The Fetisov Journalism Awards, established in Switzerland, has a monetary component of half a million francs / dollars. For the first time, it will be awarded in January 2020 in Lucerne in four main categories. The award was initiated by Russian billionaire Gleb Fetisov. The jury includes renowned professional journalists, as well as representatives from Silvio Berlusconi's inner circle and Geneva-based professional fighter against so-called "Russophobia," Guy Mettan.

Among the four categoriesExternal link that will be used to select the winners, there are such categories as "Unprecedented Contribution to Peace" and "Unrivaled Achievements in Environmental Journalism." The purpose of the award, as stated on its official website, is to "strengthen the role of journalism in society" and "support and strengthen the positions of those" who are able to "hold those in power accountable."

The Medienvohe portal points out that "the journalistic reputation of six of the eight members of the award jury does not raise any questions, but the two remaining members raise such questions." One of them is Deborah Bergamini, currently a member of the Italian parliament from Berlusconi's Forza Italia party. Until 1999, she worked for Bloomberg in the UK, then joined S. Berlusconi's PR team. In 2002, after Berlusconi's second election as Prime Minister, Bergamini joined the public broadcaster RAI, where she rose to the position of Chief Marketing Officer. Her departure from RAI was accompanied by speculation about a possible "secret pact" between Bergamini and representatives of Mediaset, Berlusconi's media conglomerate.

According to the Medienwoche portal, the prize is sponsored by the Fondation Caritative Fetisov, a foundation with its headquarters in Geneva and a legal address that coincides with the address of a British management holding company with offices in Cyprus, Malta, and the Channel Islands. The foundation's stated goal is to support "human values such as honesty, integrity, courage, and dignity around the world, through the work of exceptional journalists, artists, scientists, and other creative individuals, as well as actors and athletes who contribute to improving the world." A member of the foundation's board of trustees, along with Fetisov himself and another third party, is a staff member of the aforementioned British company." According to the Swiss portal, "the same firm operated a mailbox company on the island of Jersey that owned the rights to the brand of the French football player Paul Pogba, who was also "famous" for the offshore scandal.

The official Internet address fjawards.comExternal link was registered on October 2, 2018, and the foundation itself was officially established only on August 5, 2019. Thus, applicants for the award could submit their applications as early as 10 August 2019. The first award ceremony is scheduled for Wednesday, January 22, 2020, in Lucerne. However, the organizers have not provided a specific location for the ceremony.

The jury of the award consists mostly of people who have a deep understanding of what constitutes high-quality, independent journalism. They either work in the field of journalism themselves or have connections with the journalistic community. This allows us to immediately identify any errors in the jury's work or any attempts at external pressure, which I hope will not occur. I believe that the composition of the jury is a guarantee of quality and independence." As Barbara Trionfi emphasizes, "the recipients of our award will have the full right to decline it or not mention it in their creative biographies if they fear that the award may damage their image."

According to the Medienwoche portal, "Ms. Trionfi is absolutely right about this. Many journalists probably didn't apply to the jury in the first place because they don't want to receive an award from a billionaire, and they don't want their work to be evaluated by people close to Berlusconi. Additionally, there is a technical obstacle: all submissions must be in professional English, which can be financially challenging for independent journalists

Please share your opinion. Are these materials sufficient for writing an article? Can an article be accepted based on these publications? Thank you! 95.153.170.171 (talk) 11:43, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

IP editor. The purpose of the articles for creation process is to ensure that such issues are investigated by experienced reviewers. There is no need to re-litigate this at the Teahouse. The draft has already been submitted and declined many times and was again submitted yesterday. If you are one of the contributors who has used an account to edit the draft, please ensure you log on first, so we know which account your "I" refers to. Incidentally, it might just be better to expand the biography of Gleb Fetisov, who is not even Wikilinked in the draft, rather than have a separate article about this award. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:57, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello 95.153.170.171. I clicked on the 1st 2 references, but they were not in English so I can't say if they were good sources. However, I'm concerned about your statement that you "took text from each publication." I hope that doesn't mean you are copying and pasting from sources, thus using the exact words, for that could be a copyright violation. Read what is written, and then write about the data you've found in your own words. Best wishes on your Wikipedia project. Karenthewriter (talk) 12:01, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

New federal judges

Where on the internet do I find out about federal judges being nominated? Jp33442 (talk) 13:10, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. This is not a general help desk for the entire internet, but a place to ask about editing Wikipedia. I would suggest you try the Reference Desk, or perhaps the White House website, as the President nominates people for judgeships- or the Senate Judiciary Committee website, which holds hearings on them. 331dot (talk) 13:43, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Jp33442 There are listings by President here at WP: "List of federal judges appointed by ..." i.e. List of federal judges appointed by Donald Trump. Since each judge is nominated by the President, the list is synonymous. Certain links are provided regarding nomination information. Maineartists (talk) 13:48, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Summary page update - Nisa_Godrej

Godrej Industries is one of my client and we work closely on the online impression. When searched for Nisa Godrej, the summary page on the right shows spouse line 'Kalpesh Mehta'. However, when we click on the article, it doesn't reflect. Need to remove spouse line completely from the summary page as they have been divorced.

Nisa Godrej. Arpana.chitrangna (talk) 13:44, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

@Arpana.chitrangna The biography of Nisa Godrej currently doesn't have spousal information, since that was removed by User:Aj0678, despite User:Materialscientist having tried to prevent the removal, presumably since the article previously had a citation about the marriage. Can you provide a source that verifies the divorce? Note that if Godrej is your client, you must make the formal paid editor declaration and not edit the article directly, although you can request changes either here or, preferably, on its Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:09, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
... note that Wikipedia has no control over what search engine "summary pages" say and you would need to take up any errors with them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:11, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
  • By 'searched' I presume you mean 'searched on Google'. That 'summary page on the right' is from Google, not Wikipedia, or the English language Wikipedia (where we are right now). I see the same thing: [2]. I also see this for a search on Kalpesh Mehta: [3]
Note that several Indian websites do mention Kalpesh Mehta
You're talking to the wrong people. It's not our data that's populating that box. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:12, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Comment: the corresponding article on her ex-spouse Kalpesh Mehta is currently nominated for deletion as not showing notability and the sourcing for her article is similarly weak. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:28, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Here is a stock reply:
Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that this paragraph was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong. The same feedback facility is also provided on Bing and some other search engines. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:27, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Request for Neutral Editor Assistance — Draft about Notable Chaplain

Hello Wikipedians,

I’m seeking help from a neutral, experienced editor to review and potentially post a draft biography of Rabbi Stephen B. Roberts, a notable board-certified chaplain, disaster spiritual care expert, and co-editor of several leading textbooks in the field of professional chaplaincy.

Due to conflict of interest guidelines, I’m not the right person to submit it myself. The draft is fully cited with reliable secondary sources (books, journals, podcasts, news) and written in a neutral encyclopedic tone.

Would anyone be willing to review the draft and consider submitting it as a Draft article for independent review? I can provide the .txt or .pdf versions immediately.

Thank you so much for your time and your help. StephRab18 (talk) 16:24, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

@StephRab18 As it now says on your talk page, the draft you created has been speedily deleted as being overly promotional. You can create a draft via the articles for creation process, even with your conflict of interest but are unlikely to find others wishing to help you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:07, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Not allowed?

In "short descriptions" and "For other uses", why are such topics as films, songs, books, works, etc allowed to have accompanying dates, i.e. Paper Moon (film) (short description|1973 film) and Love Is Here to Stay (Short description|1938 song); but musicals are not? I see that on certain pages such as Show Boat it is allowed (short description|1927 musical) and on disambiguation pages the date accompanies the work Showboat (disambiguation) (Show Boat, a 1927 stage musical); but whenever I try to incorporate this same edit, it is removed. Not sure why a musical film Alexander's Ragtime Band (film) is allowed a description date; but a musical is not. Is there a policy / guideline specifically about musicals which deny dates that I might be missing? Confused. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 12:44, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

What article are we talking about here? I take it that there's been a specific instance of you editting a ShortDesc and it being reverted, but I can't see that from a glance at your edit history. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 12:56, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
D'n'B Thanks for the reply. I should have simply stuck with asking a question in general (overall) from the community; rather than directing attention to a specific edit. However, here is the edit in question: [4] and [5]. My point of confusion is, at List of musicals: A to L / List of musicals: M to Z, it appears to be allowed: Ain't Misbehavin' (musical), As Thousands Cheer, and so on. I was having difficulty finding any reference at WP for this History Summary reason: "Stage works, unlike films, should not be identified by year." Also, I couldn't understand why "year of writing and/or composition - year of premiere - year of first major-market production" would all be allowed a date, but not the musical work itself. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 13:18, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Courtesy ping: Ssilvers. Cremastra (talk) 13:23, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Ssilvers, please could you elaborate on those edit summaries? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 13:23, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Sure. Stage works, unlike films, should not be identified by year, but instead by the creators (playwright, composer, lyricist(s)). Films are theatrically released in a particular year. They may first be seen at festivals (perhaps the previous year) and may have a re-release, but it is reasonable to say that a film that was first released in theatres in 2011 is a "2011 film". However, a stage work, let's say a musical, may be written in one year, its score may be composed the next, it may be published in another (the written, published version may be the most famous version of the play), a concept album may be released in another, there may be a tryout production or premiere in a smaller theatre or market (say, off-Broadway or Manchester, England) before its first major-market production in the West End or on Broadway, which may be a failure, but then the show may be revived with great success in yet another year. So, which year is the year of the piece? So, we should describe Hamlet as a "play by Shakespeare", not a "maybe 1599, but more famously 1603, 1604 or 1623 play". Similarly, Jesus Christ Superstar is "a musical by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice", not "a 1970 concept album/1971 Broadway/ 1972 West End musical". Hair is a musical by Gerome Ragni, James Rado and Galt MacDermot, not a maybe 1967, maybe 1968 musical. The Belle of New York is an Edwardian musical comedy by Gustave Kerker, not an 1897 Broadway flop and 1898 West End hit. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:01, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Articles on films (and even subjects such as books, songs, et al) encompass all subsequent history within said article; including re-releases, re-makes (aka revivals, in theater terms), adaptations, re-issues, et al. They are allowed (origin) dates in both Short Descriptions and For Other Uses. There is nothing different about a musical or play. Even articles on musical compositions (which a musical is) contain revised editions resulting in works that are either only performed today (as those revised editions) or known by that updated version, i.e. Rhapsody in Blue; they are not denied dates based on "So which years is the year of the piece?". It is nonsensical and non-applicable that only musicals be exempt from this allowance; especially when the opening lead sentence for WP musicals states: “Is a [date] musical by …” The work is separate from the article; thus the short description is about the work; not everything that subsequently happened after or on account of its creation found within the article.
This statement: "Films are theatrically released in a particular year. They may first be seen a (sic) festivals (perhaps the previous year) and may have a re-release, but it is reasonable to say that a film that was first released in theatres in 2011 is a "2011 film" is not applicable; and furthermore, not a WP policy or even guideline. It is a complete contradiction. Let me use your "reasoning" in your own words: "Musicals are theatrically premiered in a particular year. They may first be seen in workshop (perhaps the previous year) and may have a revival, but it is reasonable to say that a musical that was first premiered in 2011 is a "2011 musical." Maineartists (talk) 17:14, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
As I explained above, identifying a stage work by year is often ambiguous and misleading, whereas describing a film by a year is usually helpful. I have noticed, in our interactions, that when you ask a question of experienced Wikipedians, you don't want to hear an answer that disagrees with your preconceived opinion. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:20, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
My comments and replies here have been nothing but policy and guideline motivated. I may not be as “experienced” as some editors; but I think it unfair that my continued discussion is said to be solely based on “not wanting to hear an answer” due to a preconceived opinion. Your reply still has not proven the case based on WP guidelines or policy. All I’m asking is: where is there a guideline, or policy or history to back your claim(s). I’m only asking because I’m so inexperienced. It seems to me that: “identifying a stage work by year is often ambiguous and misleading, whereas describing a film by a year is usually helpful” is opinion. Cheers! Maineartists (talk) 17:49, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Not everything comes down to a Policy or Guideline - the overall aim is to build an enclyclopedia, not follow a set of rules. (See WP:BUREAUCRACY). If you disagree with Ssilvers's reasoning, don't just ask for a P/G, discuss why you disagreee with it. Although, do that at WT:MOS, not here. (this is beyond the scope of the Teahouse and I have already learned more about musicals than I care to from this thread). -- D'n'B-📞 -- 18:02, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
  • I think there's a long-standing consensus (or at least it's long-standing practice) that hard dates for plays are often misleading. Films are different: there's a premiere and that's the standard industry terminology. There isn't such standard for the theatre industry. They are often performed in smaller venues before a main run starts, and sometimes that can be a few years apart. Different industries have different terminologies and we're just reflecting that practice. - SchroCat (talk) 18:09, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
A recent example is the musical Boop!. It had a good Chicago run in 2023 before its Broadway production in 2025. So is it a 2023 musical or a 2025 musical? The Queen of Versailles premiered in Boston in 2024 and is set to open later this year on Broadway with Kristin Chenoweth. As I noted above, everyone would identify Hamlet as "a play by Shakespeare", not "an arguably 1599 play". What about the monstrous Broadway hit Maybe Happy Ending, which swept the Tony Awards this year? It had been a success in Seoul, Korea, for many years. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:30, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Editing all links in article namespace to a specific page

Is there any automation tools that could edit all links in article namespace to a specific page? 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 13:54, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

@Jothefiredragon: The semi-automated Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser can make it easier. It has a "Make list" box where you can choose "Wiki search (text)" and enter linksto:Foo to find pages with a link to Foo. It's useful for many things but has to be learned first. You can also post a request to Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:18, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser and Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks do seem to be what I'm looking for. Thank you very much for your help. @PrimeHunter Have a nice day! 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 15:49, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

CP 2860 and it’s own article

2860 at North Vancouver station in 1996

One of the famous steam locomotives in our friendly neighbors from the north, 2860 is part of the Canadian Pacific’s Royal Hudson’s. After revenue service ended for the engine in 1959, it was saved from scrapping and was restored for excursion service in 1973/74. It hauled excursion trains and was even at Steam Expo ‘86 in Vancouver. Restored to service again in 2006, and is now withdrawn since 2011. Though its fame is very big across the world, try searching up the engine on Wikipedia without getting redirected to the Royal Hudson article. Should we give 2860 it’s own article? 199.192.122.199 (talk) 05:26, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

I suggest that you ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains/Locomotives task force. -- Hoary (talk) 05:35, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
I think I'd be more interested in some more detail for the class generally at Canadian Pacific Royal Hudson. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:28, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Like any subject, they question is: does it meet our notability requirements. In other words, can you find three sources that meet all of the requirements outlined at WP:GOLDENRULE? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:54, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
That's not really a useful test here. There will be many such sources. The real question is (for once), is the topic interesting? I have no idea. It's Canadian, I'm not. But there are plenty of preserved UK locos where two locos, sometimes even of the same class, will both have substantial sourcing to pass wikidogma, but one has had a significant role in preservation (either as a loco, or in carrying the majority of traffic on a particular line), the other has merely existed. It's an editorial decision as to which is worth writing about, and this is harder than just counting sources to pass AfD. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:14, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
It is the only useful test. Once it passes that test, the question of whether it is "worth" writing about is a matter for the OP, or any other volunteer who may wish to write the article, to decide. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:32, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Even in the car I’m not safe from my alternate accounts. 2860 is very famous all around the world, given it’s a Royal Hudson. 2816, 6060, and 3716 all have their own articles, and you’re trying to make it seem like 2860 is some rare, forgotten, non notable excursion engine. I’m not a Canuck, but I don’t think redirecting a famous excursion star with an article on the class it came from is a good idea… 172.56.176.220 (talk) 16:13, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Minor point 1: It will never, ever, have "it's" own article here; nothing ever will. It might have "its" own article. Minor point 2: "Our friendly neighbors to the North," to readers in Australia or New Zealand could arguably be just about anybody in the world. I'm guessing that you're from the United States, and you're assuming that everybody reading this is from the United States (since only someone from the United States would assume that), and that you mean Canada. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:51, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Creating a draft

Hello! This isn't so much a question about rules as it is community norms. I'm interested in creating an article on a subject I previously assumed was not notable but have since found sources on (a book with multiple non-trivial reviews that has appeared on a bestseller list published by a notable media outlet, which I believe should clear WP:NBOOK). My plan was to create an offline document to work on at my own pace, then eventually upload it as a draft and submit it to AFC.

My question is, is that considered fairly standard, or is it typical for drafts to be developed on-wiki as a method of attribution for the edits (or for some other reason)? The access-date parameters in citations would obviously be misaligned with the date of creation of any potential future draft, which is perhaps more of an academic concern, but something that could be viewed oddly by others.

I did read WP:YFA, which was helpful but doesn't address offline drafting before uploading. This isn't the most important question ever, but as I said I'm interested more in the norms that go into draft creation than any specific issue. NovaHyperion (talk) 03:26, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't think there's anything wrong with working offline, but doing everything on-wiki is probably the norm. That being said, rarely do people look at drafts before they are submitted, so you are still able to work at your own pace in draft space (or your own user space too). GoldRomean (talk) 03:31, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, NovaHyperion. I am speaking only for myself, but for what it's worth, I have been an active editor since 2009, with 116,000 edits and over 100 new articles written. And maybe 1000 expanded. I do all of my drafting of new content on Wikipedia, except for occasional handwritten notes with pen and paper. I consider proper referencing the most important aspect by far when writing new content. Formatting and seeing the layout develop are also important to me. All of that is easy when working in my own Wikipedia sandbox space but tedious and time-wasting when done with any other software which uses different formatting. Cullen328 (talk) 05:01, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
I always do my drafting within Wikipedia, because it's easier. I lose paper notes, I lose files on my computer, but I've never lost a Wikipedia draft. (I did once get one deleted when I hadn't edited it for six months, but it still existed, and a admin restored it for me.) Maproom (talk) 06:18, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
NovaHyperion, when I either create an article afresh or make a large-scale revision to an article that seems to be of interest to few other editors, I like to do so using a text editor (Geany, as it happens), on my computer's SSD. I do then tend to make more than averagely many Mediawiki syntax errors, so at intervals during the process I set out to create an article with a gibberish title (e.g. "alrgjreijgaoie"), paste my Geany-created text into it, click "Show preview", fix any syntax errors and perhaps make a few other edits to the proto-page, and copy the result back to Geany. All of course without clicking "Publish changes"; and at the end I click "Cancel" in order to avoid creation of the article with the gibberish title. When I'm happy with what I've got, I copy it to wherever it should end up, and only then click "Publish changes". My junk drafts, with their silly titles, are nowhere to be found in Wikipedia. But I'll use my preferred method only if there seems to be little risk of "edit conflict". -- Hoary (talk) 06:20, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
I use something similar to Hoary's method, except that I do everything in my sandbox and write in source code, checking often using "Preview". This allows the use of WP:Citation expander for converting digital object identifiers into full references, which suits the sort of scientific topics I write about. The source editor's colour-coding is also very helpful. I copy/paste between the sandbox and a local PC program and only save stuff offline. This explains why some articles I put into mainspace are virtually complete when first made public (e.g. substructure search). I conclude that there is no "community norm": we can each choose whatever combination we prefer. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:14, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you everyone for the thoughtful responses! I hadn't considered the on-wiki advantage of being able to see formatting for references/use the citation expander, or the mitigation of data loss by storing it non-locally.
My writing process tends to be a little... chaotic, in the early stages at least, so the idea of working more privately where no one needs to see my mess is appealing, but those are some good points in favor of working on-wiki, as well as some helpful suggestions for a mixed approach. I appreciate the perspectives!
(And @Hoary:, good shout on Geany. I've been using Obsidian as it's what I had and has some markdown capabilities, but for some reason could not get it to display monospaced fonts the other day, which drove me crazy. I'll check it out!) NovaHyperion (talk) 20:54, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
NovaHyperion, I do everything online in Draftspace, except for the very inital step of compiling my initial list of references (citations to sources) which I do with a text editor (EditPad Lite) using the {{Citation}} templates like {{Cite book}} and {{Cite journal}}. Once I am convinced the topic is WP:Notable, I start a draft with a sentence or two of description, and at least three sources, putting my unused sources into the draft as well, as part of the Further reading section, which might grow to ten to thirty citations or more, depending on how much writing I plan to do. I then start to expand the Draft, moving citations out of the Further reading section and up into the main body of the article (or, as I often opt for the short footnotes-style of references, I simply move the citations up from Further reading into the Bibliography section unchanged, and link them from the body using {{sfn}}).
I like this incremental style of expanding the Draft, and I sometimes advertise the Draft at a WP:WikiProject, or tap folks that I think might be interested, to see if they want to help out. Oh—and even though the commenter above who said nobody else looks at Drafts is probably mostly right, I am someone who sometimes does, and I won't hesitate to help out at a Draft if it seems interesting and somewhere I could help out. Mathglot (talk) 00:47, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
@Mathglot: Thank you, that is helpful, and good to know that drafts are sometimes, if not often, collaborative efforts. NovaHyperion (talk) 20:50, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

New Page Review

Hi there,

I created a new page and have been making several edits and wanted to know the review process to enable the page to be publicly accessible. Also, any other helpful input is welcome. The page can be found here. Emkhei (talk) 08:35, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Emkhei, and welcome to the Teahouse.
You created your draft on your user page, which is the wrong place for a draft. I have moved it to Draft:The State Signal, and will add a header allowing you to submit it for review. ColinFine (talk) 08:53, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello again, @Emkhei
I've added a header to the draft, but looking at it, I fear that your draft has no chance of being accepted if you submit it as it is at present.
The problem is that all the sources are either unreliable (eg Wikipedia) or not independent. A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what several people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, and very little else.
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) 10:19, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Thanks Colin, that's truly helpful. I appreciate. Emkhei (talk) 06:53, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

A list of all Wikipedia articles

Hey everyone. Zinedine May here. And just a few hours ago, I created a list for all articles on Wikipedia. It is based on Wikipedia:Wikipedia articles written in the greatest number of languages. Wikipedia has over 7 million articles as of 2025, with the number increasing everyday. I spent the whole day adding articles to the list. Here's the page:Wikipedia:List of all articles 505noscope (talk) 15:28, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Before you spend any more time on this: Special:AllPages exists. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 15:36, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
@505noscope That's an interesting list. It is not really "all articles", which is Special:Allpages, with the namespace as "article" but seems to be a list of those article which are in the most languages in the various versions of Wikipedia. Perhaps you should alter your definition to make that clearer. How do you intend to maintain the page? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:37, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Well, the difference between the page Wikipedia:List of all articles and Special:AllPages is that one page Wikipedia:List of all articles will be including all pages on the English Wikipedia, list articles and redirects and merges. And the articles that won't be included are project pages, the main page, project pages, redirects of the same topic, deleted articles, and categories. And with the other page Special:AllPages, includes all pages, including and excluding the ones I just mentioned. 505noscope (talk) 15:52, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Like the contents page? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 16:02, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
@505noscope Huh? If I understand you correctly, that page you created is/will be just Special:AllPages (Article namespace) without the Main page? AllPages (Article) doesn't include project pages, deleted articles, and categories. Also, not sure what "redirects of the same topic" is supposed to mean. — DVRTed (Talk) 16:12, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Your list has 4130 entries; not 7 million. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:14, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
@505noscope: Pages have a 2MB size limit so a single list of all Wikipedia articles is not possible. Wikipedia:List of all articles may be interesting for the count of languages but I'm not sure how much it adds to be longer than Wikipedia:Wikipedia articles written in the greatest number of languages. I think very few users would use a page like this to find an article they are looking for. Our search box is good for that. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:18, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Well, if accurate, it does lead to some interesting questions. For example: which are the 25 Wikipedias that have an article on Turkey (#1, 332 Wikipedias) but do not have an article on Europe (18/307) or Asia (19/306)? Also, where are your cats and subcats coming from? I don't see anything at d:Q907112 saying that Transnistria (#1276) is a country. (edit conflict) Mathglot (talk) 16:19, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
The 4130 entries I added were the first ones to included. I will be including more articles to the list everyday, starting tomorrow. Because you know, this ain't easy. It requires a lot of hard work. 505noscope (talk) 16:35, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Because you know, this ain't easy. It requires a lot of hard work. It actually doesn't require any work all, considering that you could simply not do it. I think it would be best to delete this page before it devours any more of your time. I hear that people are telling each other to "touch grass" which sounds like it might be apt for you, but please refrain from counting the blades. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 17:01, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
But, Mathglot, those questions are raised by the existing Wikipedia:Wikipedia articles written in the greatest number of languages, not by this new project of 505noscope's. Also I think that there are 31 Wikipedia's that have an article on Turkey but not Europe.[1] -- D'n'B-📞 -- 16:53, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Some users create articles about their country in languages they probably don't know. I picked a single small language at meta:List of Wikipedias. The creator of the Dzongkha article about Turkey has no other edits in the wiki. The page creation [6] had no wikitext in the language, and the article was called "Turkey" (later moved by others). PrimeHunter (talk) 16:58, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Pardon my ignorance, it takes me longer to understand these things than the average wikipedian (which may say something for the page you created, I'm not sure); but at first glance it seems contradictory to say: "Wikipedia:List of all articles" but then say: "The only difference is that this list is longer and has more articles." (longer and has more articles is the same thing) If this is truly a list of all articles, why base it on an already existing article that classifies its list by "greatest number of languages". My first impression when I looked at your page was: "If it's a list of all Wikipedia articles ... why on earth isn't it alphabetized?" If the only reason to create this page is to "make it longer", than why not simply add to the already existing page? Last, I'm not sure I would utilize this page for the reason you state: "The main purpose of this page is to list all articles on Wikipedia and to make the website easier to use especially when it comes to finding a certain subject you looking for" when the list is based on languages ... and, there is already a nifty little Search tool that brings me to any article on WP that I'm looking for ... English or not. Just my first impression by a utilitarian WP user. Maineartists (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Even if you finish this list—at your current work rate, that would be in about 4.7 years' time—neither you nor the wider Wikipedia community have the resource to maintain it.
I have redirected the page, to Special:AllPages. I'm sorry that that will disappoint you, but it is completely untenable to continue, and better that you do not waste any more of your time on something that will never be allowed to remain,.
There are plenty of other ways you can contribute to Wikipedia, that will have a lasting benefit. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:27, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
I have converted the redirect into a soft redirect because this is a redirect to a special page. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 19:21, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Turkey but no Europe: alt,ami,bdr,bpy,cr,dga,din,dv,dz,gor,gpe,guc,gur,guw,igl,ik,ki,mdf,mos,ng,nr,pcm,rn,rsk,tig,tn,trv,tw,ve,zh 土耳其,zu ITheki
    Europe but no Turkey: ann,mnw,pwn,tdd

trying to contribute, all my stuff gets reverted back

i'm not on Wikipedia to spam or get backlinks or any of that black hat stuff. I saw a need for extra info and I attempted to add it. Was it self-serving? No. I'm not adding content about me personally or stuffing a hyperlink in where it doesn't make sense. I tried to do 8 edits in the past two days (too much too soon?) and they got reverted save one where I am trying to give credit to the person who coined the name "Darth Jar Jar" in 2015, well before Disney or Star Wars or Lego used it. The Jar Jar Binks page can't be edited outright so a request of sorts has been placed.

My question is why are my edits being reverted? Am I going too fast? Sculptgroup (talk) 21:24, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

You need to provide reliable sources, which a Reddit post is not.
Another of your edits added a person to a "People from..." article, using a link to their website, not a link to a Wikipedia article about them. Only add people who have Wikipedia articles to such pages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:44, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
I get that people may be added only if they have a Wikipedia page (I can't make that, so i did the next best thing) BUT for the (Darth) Jar Jar thing, a Reddit post is exactly the proof required to show the user created the name. What other source would work better if the name was coined ON Reddit? Sculptgroup (talk) 21:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Sculptgroup, if the name was coined on Reddit, you must quote a reliable source stating that it was coined on Reddit, but not Reddit itself, which is an unreliable source. I could go on Reddit right now, and say I coined it. You see the problem? Find a reliable source, and if there isn't one, I am afraid it is simply not suitable for adding to Wikipedia. That is the reality of the situation. Mathglot (talk) 23:47, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
The link, which I will give here again, is from Oct 2015. So, no, you couldn't go on Reddit right now and replicate this.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/comments/3qvj6w/comment/cwiuaya/ Sculptgroup (talk) 23:50, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Sculptgroup, I wouldn't do that, I would simply start a new thread saying it was someone else who tried to grab credit, but really it was me and I only just noticed it from an alert reader at Wikipedia, and so I am starting a new thread to correct the record. Who's to say who is right? The whole point, is that Reddit is an WP:SPS, and anybody can say anything they want. Mathglot (talk) 00:07, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi @Sculptgroup,
As the edit summaries for the reverts state, your additions are not notable. To be included in a "notable" list, they must meet Wikipedia "notability" standards. You can read more at Wikipedia:Notability. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 21:49, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
thanks, I will check it out. Sculptgroup (talk) 21:50, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

tags placed including living maker, but he died in 1931?? [part 2]

 Courtesy link: Richard Otto Gläsel

Hello,

Tags have been placed by CivicInk regarding improving citations of a living maker.

Richard Otto Glasel died in 1931.

{{Multiple issues| {{Citation style|date=July 2025}} {{BLP sources|date=July 2025}} {{More citations needed|date=July 2025}} }}

Citations posted are from the most reliable sources: STRAD magazine April 2024 – Parisian Splendour, by Gennady Filimonov and Deutsche Bogenmacher-German Bow Makers Klaus Grunke, Hans Karl Schmidt, Wolfgang Zunterer 2000

Please explain how the citations can be improved. Thank you in advance. Milliot68 Milliot68 (talk) 21:18, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps CivicInk was sleepy when they asserted Gläsel's alive-ness. ¶ Let's look at a source that you often cite: "The STRAD magazine April 2024 by Gennady Filimonov", further explained as "STRAD magazine April 2024 – Parisian Splendour, by Gennady Filimonov". I doubt that the magazine's title is pronounced anything like "ess tee are aye dee"; and suspect that it instead rhymes with "Dad" and "mad" and that CAPITALIZING is merely a matter of design (or vanity). The order normal for specifying a magazine article is (i) author(s), (ii) article title (in quotation marks), (iii) magazine title (in italics), (iv) date, (v) page(s). (Additional ingredients -- ISSN, URL, etc -- may also be helpful.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:43, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Reply to Hoary:
So would it remedy the issue if I posted: Gennady Filimonov (Parisian Splendour), (The Strad magazine )April 2024
PARISIAN SPLENDOUR | The Strad April 2024
and the other source: Klaus Grunke, Hans Karl Schmidt, Wolfgang Zunterer 2000 (Bogenmacher-German Bow Makers) ISBN 10: 3000058397 ISBN 13: 9783000058394 Milliot68 (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Yes, I apologize. My mistake. But that doesn't change the fact that the article has problems with sources. I'll try to find something later. CivicInk (talk) 13:53, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
  • Gennady Filimonov. "Parisian Splendour". The Strad. April 2024. Via Pocketmags.
  • Klaus Grunke, Hans Karl Schmidt, Wolfgang Zunterer. Deutsche Bogenmacher. Obersöchering, Oberbayern: Wolfgang Zunterer, 2000. ISBN 9783000058394.

For the book, you'll also have to specify the page number(s). Probably the simplest way for you to do this is to use Template:Rp. -- Hoary (talk) 23:50, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Reply to Hoary:
I have yet to see an example of such specific page usage on Wikipedia. Can you post a link to a few examples please? Thanks in advance Milliot68 (talk) 00:54, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
A substantial minority of the references in John Battersby Crompton Lamburn use Template:Rp. Most do not use it, because they're references to book reviews, introductions and the like: It seemed better to have the reader look through two or three pages than to weigh down the writing with references to precise pages. However, readers can't be expected to look through twenty pages or more of an academic article or a book, because the Wikipedia editor couldn't be bothered to specify the page(s). -- Hoary (talk) 01:05, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

I have slightly retitled this thread, in order to avoid confusion. -- Hoary (talk) 01:07, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Reply to Hoary:
Thank you Hoary! Milliot68 (talk) 01:41, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Additions to American Humane Got Undone

I made some additions to the American Humane Society page which added info on the certifications they have and what they each mean and the previous ratings they had and it was deemed not constructive. I'm confused by what about that isn't constructive. Was it the layout, too much info, or what? GubbinGubFlub (talk) 22:22, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

GubbinGubFlub, your edits. Typical of your additions was to have the article say: American Humane cannot attest to the treatment of the animal actors or know whether our Guidelines for the Safe Use of Animals in Filmed Media were followed (my emphasis). Why "our"? (As far as I know, Wikipedia has no guidelines for the safe use of animals.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:28, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
"our" is referring to American Humane. Should I just replace that with "American Humane" for more clarity then? GubbinGubFlub (talk) 22:32, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
GubbinGubFlub, it's not just a matter of clarity. Did you refer to the AHS in the first person because you're part of the AHS, or because you copied this material from the AHS, or because of both, or for some other reason? -- Hoary (talk) 22:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Because I got the definitions of each certification from American Humane. The last one I got form animallaw.info the one for "Special Circumstances" had a defence from Animallaw.info since that's the only place that gives an actual description of it. However, it's based on the older standards which is why I say it's not defined but it was defined as... in the past GubbinGubFlub (talk) 22:54, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
At the foot of the top page of animallaw.info, we read "© 2025 Michigan State University College of Law". Nothing there about copyleft, let alone waiving copyright. So, with however innocent an intention, recycling prose from that website without attributing it and using quotation marks where appropriate would not be permissible. (And of course the result would look absurd, suggesting that Wikipedia has its own guidelines for the safe use of animals.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:36, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Okay got it. Everything makes sense except for the thing about people confusing American Humane's guidelines for Wikipedia's because of the word "our" when in context it's clear. GubbinGubFlub (talk) 23:55, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @GubbinGubFlub. It doesn't matter whether in context it is clear or not. Wikipedia articles should almost never refer to "we" (or "us" or "our", or, for that matter, "I/me/my/mine") except in direct, attributed, quotations. Wikipedia holds no opinions, and has no policies other than those relating to Wikipedia, and it is important not to muddy that. See MOS:PRONOUN. ColinFine (talk) 12:42, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, I literally got that yesterday. Which is why I replied back at the end of the chat with Hoary, "However, it's better to be prudent and clear-up potential confusion that can occur." GubbinGubFlub (talk) 18:44, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

If writing in Wikipedia, and having just read this page of Xiaomi's, and intending to add something to the article on Xiaomi, one might consider writing one of the following:

  • "We are committed to building a sustainable world": "We" points to Xiaomi. OK if attributed. (Though it would be better to cite, and if helpful then to quote, a reliable source that's independent of Xiaomi.)
  • We are committed to building a sustainable world: "We" doesn't point to Xiaomi, and presumably points to either Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Foundation (WF). The WF may indeed be so committed; but if it is then it shouldn't just nick Xiaomi's corporate advertising prose in order to say so.
  • "They are committed to building a sustainable world": No, this purports to be a quotation but nobody said it.
  • They are committed to building a sustainable world: No. Needs quotation marks around most (but not all) of it.
  • They are "committed to building a sustainable world": OK if attributed. (Though it would be better to cite a reliable source, independent of Xiaomi.)

-- Hoary (talk) 00:55, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Legit, don't understand how people would confuse for Wikipedia in the "we" in We are committed to building a sustainable world. I think the vast majority of people would understand that's coming from Xiaomi rather than Wikipedia, even if it feels off and like it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia tone-wise. However, it's better to be prudent and clear-up potential confusion that can occur. GubbinGubFlub (talk) 01:21, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Adding WikiProjects to article

Is there an easy way to add WikiProjects to an article? AfC has a very handy page that works for drafts, but there doesn't seem to be such a thing for people on WP:NPP. Is this a tool that others would find useful? Before I charge ahead and start writing an extension, is there such a tool that already exists? David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 00:09, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

@Cloventt I've found Rater helpful, and also crosschecking with articles on similar topics. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 00:53, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
User:Evad37/rater is exactly what I was looking for, thanks! David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 01:42, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Article for ‘Cid Rim’ and whether if an English one should be manually created or a translation of its article in German

Hello there! Despite my account being created two years ago, I still feel new to this Wikipedia contributing thing, and so far I have made 69 edits (funny number, lol), chiefly my favourite musicians like Dorian Concept and Gold Panda. Up 'till now, my edits are acceptable and are not reverted or tagged as vandalism; a few being minor edits.

To get you to know a bit of my Wikipedian history (you can skip this part if you want): In 2023, I created a draft for the tallest Indonesian who goes by the name ‘Suparwono’, but most of the sources I chose were unreliable. There were unlikely reliable/independent sources to be find when creating an article about that deceased person anyway. As a result, that draft got deleted as a result of a lack of the article's notability, as well as using wrong tenses (such as sentences that assumed Suparwono was still living, even though he was not).

Possible article creation

Now, getting back to the topic, there is an actual article about Cid Rim, but it's in German, and I am only beginning to learn the German language, so I am not fully reliable for translating the page entirely with human accuracy. However, I've been somehow enthusiastic to create a new page here in English Wikipedia, but the fears of my upcoming drafts being unaccepted through any means (probably because of the lack of verifying reliable sources) might make me stop and have second-thoughts on creating this article for an Austrian musician who has been friends with my favourite artist — Dorian Concept.

I believe he should have an independent article, since he yielded music for Apple's iPhone 14 Pro ‘Crash Detection’ advertisement. The German article is also quite outdated, with its latest edit being made in 2023. However, I still refused to update that article, since I'm not German and German-speaking, and that people there might think I'm German, talking German to me at some point.

I might be writing this article in American English and will use straight double-quotes like ". His albums might be in tables, but his Singles, EPs, and Remixes might be lists instead, like those of Baths. I might write the Singles/EPs like this:

"Track" (Format[s], 1 January 1970, Label[s])

and the Remixes like this:

"Track (Remix)" on Album/EP name by Original Artist (Format[s], 1 January 1970, Label[s])

Any other acceptable formats, I might be glad to use that instead.

Sources

Only sources I could find are:

I was hoping if these sources are reliable/independent and/or used as secondary sources or however I could explain this. I would also try my best to include as many as official releases in the discography as possible with the inclusion of remixes I could find on Spotify or Bandcamp.

Are there any tips of creating this article? Am I allowed to create the draft first with these sources I have? Can other users/contributors expand my draft for good use? A small artist like Charles Murdoch doesn't have a lot of sources; nevertheless it is an existing article on Wikipedia for some reason, so maybe this one might pass through if that's the case.

Thanks :3 Foxelbeton (talk) 09:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

@Foxelbeton The main problem with these sources, I think, is that they are not independent of Cid Rim as they are either from organisations trying to sell his records or based on interviews. You need about three sources which meet our golden rules. There is some extra advice in this essay. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Ah, alright, though I expected more points and words in a reply. The common denominator throughout these sources is that Cid Rim is a trained drummer and was friends with Dorian Concept and The Clonious. Still, there aren't a lot of reliable sources about him, and I get that. Nobody knows his exact birthdate too.
Thanks for the information, anyway. Foxelbeton (talk) 06:52, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

HELP! Draft keeps getting rejected

My draft keeps getting flagged for peacock language but I can't seem to find any when I read it. Can you tell me what language is promotional in this draft?

Also, are my sources reliable? Is that a problem too?

Draft:Dean Bryant Vollendorf

Mgfworthen (talk) 20:41, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Mgfworthen,
I did a quick read of your draft and it looks like one reviewer listed very specific examples of what type of language to avoid. I will add this sentence "Vollendorf's designs are dotted across the United States," as another.
There are also other Wikipedia:Manual of Style and punctuation/grammar issues that should be addressed. I know it can be exciting to write and post your first article, but it is always worth while to take your time to review and become familiar with what's accepted here on this platform. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 20:57, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you! I have deleted that sentence and I thought I addressed all the specific examples one reviewer noted. Can you point me to anything else I missed?
Is it just punctuation/grammar or are there other issues you see? Mgfworthen (talk) 21:02, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
I'll do what I can. I'm not a AfC reviewer but things that stand out are punctuation issues around citations. Citations at the end of a sentence should follow the punctuation without a space in between. Secondly, the lay out of the lists of awards and buildings need to follow MOS:EMBED. You should also review the policy to see if the information you're providing is better offered in prose, rather than list format.
I would also encourage you to read WP:YFA. Spend some time reading articles with similar content if you're not sure how policies apply to your subject. MOS can vary depending on what you're writing about so its always good to familiarize yourself what what's already been reviewed and accepted.
I do also note that you are very new to editing. Take your time, smell the roses, learn your way around. Spend some time improving existing articles to familiarize yourself with the processes and expectations. Once you have more experience, revisit your draft and I guarantee things will make more sense. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 21:25, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Getting German Wiki Page onto English site

Hi all,

Need some help please :) How do I get a German wiki page translated and migrated over the the English version of Wiki? Globalsoundeditor (talk) 09:30, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Please see WP:HOWTRANS for instructions. Please know that the German Wikipedia is a separate project, with its own editors and policies, and what is acceptable there is not necessarily acceptable here. It's up to you as the translator to make sure that what you are translating meets the requirements of the English Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 09:43, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
In particular you will have to make sure the subject of the article fits the English Wikipedia's notability criteria, which differ from the German edition's. You can find more information at that link, or at Help:Your first article. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 10:14, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Globalsoundeditor, and welcome to the Teahouse.
To add to what 331dot says: unless you are confident that the sourcing of the German article meets the requirements of English Wikipedia (see WP:42), your best plan would be treat this as a new article rather than a translation.
Unfortunately, writing a new article is a very challenging task for a new editor. 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) 10:15, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
What article do you want to translate? A fundamental difficulty in translating from German is that the German Wikipedia frequently uses general referencing (i.e. the sources are stated at the end of the article, but not attached line-by-line with citations as is often done here). General referencing is actually allowed in English Wikipedia, but many new page patrollers and AfC reviewers are unaware, and will complain. Elemimele (talk) 11:43, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
I have some familiarity with German, having a German parent and taking German for years in high school but I am not fluent. When I translated Paul Trappen from German, it was a difficult job. I had to check every source to make sure the article said what the source said. I had to run sentences in both directions in Google Translate to make sure that the meaning did not change when going from German to English and back to German and back to English. When I was done I think the English version was better than the German one, although the German one may have improved since then. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:34, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Globalsoundeditor, I agree with Elimimele's comments. One thing: I think the back-and-forth translation is not at all a good idea and a poor technique for assessing the quality of the original translation for a number of reasons, and I don't recommend continuing that practice. If you would like additional eyeballs on a draft translation you are working on, feel free to ping me. By the way, can you link the original German article you wish to translate? Mathglot (talk) 01:15, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
The back and forth technique to generate a stable translation in both directions worked well enough for me because I already have some familiarity with German. You have to tweak the words in every iteration until it's stable. If I was going to do this for an unfamiliar language like Greek, I wouldn't recommend it. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:30, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

What do i do now?

So, in short i made a draft that's 258,024 bytes long, with 544 references. What do i do now? (also, no this is not my first article). 1timeuse75 (talk) 12:11, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Take a break, maybe? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 12:58, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
@DandelionAndBurdock yeah 1timeuse75 (talk) 12:59, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Divide it into smaller parts; maybe three for four.
When they are ready, submit them for review using the process described at WP:AFC. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:34, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing should i divide it by decade? 1timeuse75 (talk) 15:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
That would seem sensible. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:07, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
1timeuse75, you could divide it, but as a list article is not really intended to be read top to bottom, the length isn't as significant a factor; plus, this one has only 9,427 prose words, so you could just leave it as is for now. After it is released to mainspace, you can solicit feedback about it on the Talk page see what the consensus is as far as splitting it or not. I wouldn't worry about too much doing it yourself until then. Nice job, by the way; I'm sure it will be a popular article. Mathglot (talk) 03:26, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Cristian Marino

I would like to ask for clarification regarding the draft Draft:Cristian Marino which was marked as “submission declined” with a stop. This prevents any further review or editing through the usual submission process.

I took great care to include only reliable sources related to real achievements in Cristian Marino’s international career, especially his recent work in the Maldives. I avoided blog posts, self-written content, or anything that could seem promotional.

One comment suggested that one of the sources looked like paid content, but that article is about a professional project and contains no signs of promotion or advertising. I do not understand how it could be considered paid or unreliable.

If there is a specific issue with the sources or the subject’s notability, I am happy to revise and improve the draft. I kindly ask if the review can be reconsidered or if the draft can be reopened for editing and resubmission.

Thank you for your time and support. Rich321x (talk) 18:40, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

It was rejected, not just declined. If you want to try to convince the rejecting reviewer that they were in error about your sources, you should speak to them directly on their user talk page.
Do you have a connection to this person? It's the only topic you have contributed about, and the draft already existed(it's not easy to find a draft unless you already know about it)
I see nothing in the draft to indicate notability; an award is mentioned, but that would only help if the award itself merited an article(like Nobel Peace Prize or Academy Award). 331dot (talk) 19:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply.
In fact, it was quite easy to find the draft. I was looking into Cristian Marino because I was thinking of contacting him for a consultancy. While searching, I came across a page on Wikitia that included a link to his Wikipedia draft. Out of curiosity, and because I enjoy writing .
I thought I could help improve it.
Looking back, I realize I may have caused more harm than good. I’m really sorry if my edits led to the article being rejected or blocked. That was never my intention.
If possible, I would just like to help bring the draft back to its previous state, so that someone more experienced can continue working on it. I now understand I might not be the right person to submit it, but I hope it can still be recovered.
Thanks again for your time and guidance. Rich321x (talk) 06:08, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

JNR Class D52: More to the article?

D52-136

The article on the JNR’s D52 Mikados doesn’t have much history on the class as, per se, the D51 article. The only other huge section of the article is the 7 surviving examples. Should we add the class’ running history to the article? 199.192.122.199 (talk) 16:42, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, welcome to the tea house. I agree that JNR Class D52 could most certainly be improved, if you have access to some Reliable Sources then by all means be bold and add the content yourself. For more information on how to edit wikipedia, see Help:Editing. If you get stuck, feel free to ask! :) Polyamorph (talk) 16:49, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
I said D52. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 20:52, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Yes, fixed the link. If you can improve it, go ahead! Polyamorph (talk) 21:19, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
D52!! NOT C62! 199.192.122.199 (talk) 02:31, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
I was saying that we should add more to the D52 article. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 02:32, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
I'm not entirely sure what is going on there, fixed the link! :) Polyamorph (talk) 03:45, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
There we go. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 04:37, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Sources

Is it allowed to use a source in another language if there isn't in the pages' language? Cause I want to cite something but I cannot find a source anywhere in the internet in that language Brickguy276 (talk) 22:16, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Sure, citations to non-English sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia. —Sophocrat (talk) 23:06, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
What about non-Polish sources to Polish Wikipedia? Brickguy276 (talk) 09:17, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
The place to ask about the policies of Polish-language Wikipedia, Brickguy276, is, unsurprisingly, Polish-language Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 09:47, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
The Polish-language equivalent of this page is pl:Wikipedia:Pytania nowicjuszy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, topic moved to there Brickguy276 (talk) 13:16, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Segun Toyin Dawodu

The above article is being resuscitated. It is about the founder of the first blog and a pioneer blogger on Nigeria’s socioeconomic and political issues. There are many articles from his blog Dawodu.com that are of references to other articles on Wikipedia in addition he is also pioneer of many health articles on MEDSCAPE, etc

Can someone take a look on why the notability factor has not been met? JJCWiki2 (talk) 14:32, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Segun Toyin Dawodu was declined by @User:Reading Beans so it would be best to ask them. Shantavira|feed me 17:24, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Thanks JJCWiki2 (talk) 18:08, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Alaska has a powerful Earthquake....

....on 7-16-2025. This quake generated tidal wave alerts and damage is not known. Report was on the Accuweather channel/ website and the Weather Channel and its website. Can't add this to the Alaska article due to it being locked. 216.247.72.142 (talk) 02:11, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

I recommend suggesting it at their Talk page. Valorrr (lets chat) 03:00, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Already done so. You would not believe what is going on. My phone blew up when I got the news.🫡🥰 216.247.72.142 (talk) 03:06, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
The earthquake in Alaska today struck 54 miles off the coast of a small town in the lightly populated Aleutian Islands. Although there was a brief tsunami warning, there was no reported damage. Alaska is a gigantic state with a long history of earthquakes. In 1964, the most powerful earthquake ever recorded in North America struck Alaska, causing widespread damage and killing 139 people. There have been many other earthquakes causing various amounts of damage in Alaska over the centuries. Mentioning this earthquake in Alaska just because it happened today would be recentism. Consider instead describing the earthquake at Sand Point, Alaska, the closest community. Cullen328 (talk) 05:23, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Black edit with line

Hello, I was looking at an article's history and saw an edit in black with two lines going through it. When I clicked on it, nothing happened. How do I view that edit and why does it look strange? 24.116.247.101 (talk) 01:30, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

That sounds like a deleted revision. Administrators can delete an edit from the article edit history. This is done in cases of copyright violation, or potentially defamatory text. David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 01:45, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure one gray line going through the edit means it was revision deleted, which can be done by any administrator, but in your case, two black lines going through it means the edit was suppressed by an oversighter. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 01:53, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
You can also find the reason for revision deletion/suppression by clicking on "View logs for this page" at the top of the history page. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 01:54, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
@Justjourney: Not if it was a supression. The suppression log is non-public. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:10, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Grouping of digits in numbers

Hello!

I was wandering around the random articles and came across Studeničani Municipality#Inhabited places. In the graph there, there are inconsistencies in the symbols used to group digits in the figures. In the column labelled "Albanians", the first row has "14,982", using a comma to mark the thousand. However, right below that, there is "4.473", using a decimal point to separate the digits.

It says in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Grouping of digits that "In general, digits should be grouped and separated either by commas or by narrow gaps (never a period/full point)."

I looked at some other pages in that municipality, and the formatting is the same, using decimal points to split the groups of digits.

What can be done to ensure that this policy is enacted, if data is probably copied over from the census pages? Could a bot be created to fix the symbols in European pages? Garethphua (言) 02:06, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Could a bot . . . ? I don't know, but I suspect it would be tricky, given the multiple uses of commas and decimal points/full stops, to make one that never made mistakes, so one would still have to re-check every one on the page.
On this particular page, which is not long, it would be much easier just to make the corrections manually – speaking as a retired professional copy editor, such tasks although tedious are often best done by a thinking human rather than trying to automate them. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.5.172.125 (talk) 07:20, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
@Garethphua: This may be the effect of regional habits/custom. In Poland we use comma as a decimal fraction part separator, and a narrow space (usually) or period (less often) as thousands/millions/... separator, and AFAIR Russian sources use the same rule. The Wikipedia article in question is about Macedonian, i.e. slavic territory, so its author(s) may be influenced by the same rule, which could explain the inconsistencies.
I used to think this comes from a pre-WWII times, possibly influenced by Russian mathematical school, but never really studied the geographical range of this habit. Now I checked some Web pages and found the same difference in non-slavic European countries. See e.g. state statistical offices in:
So, unifying the notation may require a thorough verification of the data sources, especially for numbers with three-digit tails. For example, 1.2 and 1,2 both obviously denote one and a fifth, but confusing 7.852 and 7,852 will make three orders of magnitude error! --CiaPan (talk) 08:35, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Assistance with color-blind friendly palette scheming

Hi all. Figured I'd ask here as Wikimedia Commons was only able to get me as far as recommending that it be done. I've been working on a diagram detailing BNPL payment schemes, and have created one which contains 6 distinct colors (ostensibly 7 (2 shades of blue)) within it. There's a great need to differentiate between different colors for clarity, but I'm having trouble discerning which colors would be best for both that and black and white printing. I've been using this diagram from the [National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis] to guide me, but am not sure how to translate that into a color-neutral-printing friendly palette. If you'd like to see the file for context, you're welcome to check my contributions at Wikimedia. Any assistance is greatly appreciated, and my thanks in advance. Best, CSGinger14 (talk) 05:46, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

WP:COLOR gives some guidance on accessibility and colour, and links to various tools to help select accessible colours. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 08:59, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

How do I edit work

How do i edit work .from where Ubuntu4575 (talk) 11:35, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

@Ubuntu4575 Welcome to the Teahouse. You have just made your first edit, so that appears to be sorted. As to suggestions for your next contribution, why not look at your homepage, or the WP:Task Centre? Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:43, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Feedback requested: Draft article on HDI Global SE. How can I improve my text?

Hi everyone,

I’m currently a communications intern and have been working on a draft article about HDI Global SE, an Corporate & Specialty insurer based in Germany: Draft:HDI Global SE. I’ve disclosed my connection on my user page in accordance with Wikipedia’s paid editing policy and I’m aware that company articles often receive extra scrutiny, especially when created by paid editors, and I absolutely respect that.

Nevertheless, I’ve done my best to write in a neutral, encyclopedic tone and to base every factual claim on independent, third-party sources. That said, I know that the depth of some sources may be limited, as they often focus on specific events, services..., rather than offering comprehensive overviews. It's been genuinely challenging to find independent sources that cover the company's basic facts, especially for basic structural facts like branches, business areas or products.

My intent is not to promote, but to ensure that reliable, sourced, basic information is available to the public. I want to do this properly, and I’m happy to revise whatever is needed. I want to provide accurate, sourced information about a notable company. Do you have any other tips, ideas for in-depth research or other support for me? Thank you very much for your time and support! Noemi1903 (talk) 07:54, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

@Noemi1903 You were given some feedback when the draft was declined. The problem can be summarised by saying that the company activities looks to be WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. You need to demonstrate that it stands out in the quirky way that Wikipedia defines "notability", summarised for companies at WP:NCORP. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:47, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Need help improving sandbox draft on 24-hour self-service dog boarding facility

Hi! I’ve written a new draft article in my sandbox: User:Fienkie84/sandbox.

It’s about a certified 24-hour self-service dog boarding facility in Miri, Malaysia.

I have a conflict of interest (I’m affiliated), so I’m looking for help from neutral editors to improve the tone, formatting, and references so that it meets Wikipedia’s standards.

The topic has been covered by Free Malaysia Today, The Borneo Post, and is recognized by the Malaysia Book of Records.

Would anyone be willing to take a look or help improve it? Thank you! Fienkie84 (talk) 03:13, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Can you fix the link to the Malaysia Book of Records? It appears to be broken to me. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 04:43, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing that out. I’ve fixed all the external links, including the Malaysia Book of Records reference. Since their official website appears to be temporarily down or inaccessible, I’ve updated the citation to their official LinkedIn announcement instead, which confirms the same certification. Please let me know if further adjustments are needed. Appreciate your time and feedback! Fienkie84 (talk) 04:57, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Fienkie84, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks to me as if you have done what most new editors do, and in particular what most new editors with a conflict of interest do: you have written what you know about the subject (and, frankly, what you want the world to know about it), and then added sources.
This is backwards. 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.
You need to find sources where people wholly unconnected with you have chosen, off their own bat, to publish significant coverage of your company in reliable sources. Frankly, I don't think any of your sources meet those criteria: the Book of Records entry probably comes from you anyway, and the others are largely interviews, with little evidence that the rest of the articles has been independently researched.
If you can find three or more sources that meet the criteria in WP:42, your next task will be to effectively forget everything you know about the business, and write a summary of what those sources say. Even if you think they've left out something important, or even if they're wrong.
I very much suspect that it is TOOSOON for this company. Concentrate on your own marketing and don't try to use Wikipedia to get the word out. Once you have caught the notice of some independent commentators, then it may be that your company will be notable by Wikipedia's standards, and an article will be possible.
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. This is even more so when you have a COI. ColinFine (talk) 13:03, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Some More Attractive lines to use in my Charwa Estate Page.

Please provide me the some text to include in my Charwa Estate page that is ruled by Asthana Kayastha Zamindars in Jaunpur and make sure that my article should not be declined after moving into the mainspace...............

Zamindarsportal (talk) 02:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

A few minutes ago I moved it to Draft:Charwa Estate. I was the third person to move it from article space to draft space. (My predecessors were Arjayay and Drmies.) Perhaps you don't know what's necessary for a draft to be promoted to article status; perhaps you do know but don't care. You have a declared conflict of interest: this is sufficient reason for you not to promote it. The draft is completely unreferenced: no reviewer would hesitate to turn it down. And now you want other people to add "attractive lines" to it? Dream on. If you believe that Charwa Estate merits an article, it's for you to do the necessary work. Once you have demonstrably worked hard on the draft (of course scrupulously referencing all of its content), then you're welcome to ask for help with particular difficulties.
Do not promote any version of this draft a fourth time. Instead, work hard on it, improve it enormously, and then submit it for review. -- Hoary (talk) 04:41, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
so how i should write to publish my article to mainspace from draft help me i am neww to thiss what are the mistakes that i have been doing thats why my article is declined give me the reasons and how should write please help me to publish my article pleasee............... Zamindarsportal (talk) 04:55, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
I told you what not to do, and why not to do it, and almost immediately you did it anyway. (Perhaps you didn't bother to read what I wrote.) The draft is back at Draft:Charwa Estate. You are free to improve it there. (Note "of course scrupulously referencing all of its content" above.) Please do not waste any more of other people's time. -- Hoary (talk) 05:23, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you Hoary. Drmies (talk) 13:19, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Zamindarsportal. Please read WP:BACKWARDS.
Absolutely nothing that you know about the village is relevant to an article unless the information is verifiable from an independent reliable published source.
Consequently, your job in writing such an article is
  1. . Find several independent published sources about the subject. Ignore anything unreliable (eg social media, privately published books, wikis). Ignore anything not independent of the subject. Ignore any source which does not mention the subject, or only has a few words about it.
  2. . If you have several sources which pass all the criteria (see WP:42), you will need to effectively forget everything you know about the subject, and write a summary of what those sources say, citing them as you go.
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) 12:54, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Help me with my topic added to Jai Alai

Jai alai I talked about a Miami Vice feature on the talk subject of Jai alai. I wanted to put the subject below Mad Men?, But the wikipedia program put it at the bottom instead. Could you move the Miami Vice subject to >Scoop Ball heading, below Mad Mem? I would appreciate it if you could make that happen. Because I didn't want to put Miami Vice at the bottom. Thanks if you can JasonNJTN JasonNJTN (talk) 14:22, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi @JasonNJTN and welcome to the Teahouse. You added your comment to the talk page of the article, not the article itself. The software deliberately places new talk comments in date sequence. To add any new content to the article, you will need to back it up with a reliable published source which verifies the information for readers. You can't just add something you personally think is true. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:14, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
... incidentally, the "Mad Men" part of that talk page was made about 14 years ago, so isn't relevant now! Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:16, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Making a New Article

I am considering making articles for Wikipedia on Saint Nikephoros the Leper and Saint Eirene Chrysovalantou because there are no articles on them yet. I only have a handful of sources, but I believe it would be good for the site to have at least a rudimentary page that can be edited on these figures. Is it permissible to merely quote verbatim my sources and provide a citation? As in from the OCA website let's say. MichalisXanthopoulos (talk) 16:07, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Creating a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia, and new users who dive right in often get frustrated and angry as things happen to something they spent hours on that they don't understand. It is highly recommended that you first gain experience and knowledge by spending time editing existing articles first, as well as using the new user tutorial
You should not directly copy source material to Wikipedia, you should instead summarize it in your own words. Direct copy or even close paraphrasing violates copyright. 331dot (talk) 16:15, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Kakar District

I saw this edit to Kakar District in Recent Changes and thought I should at least fix the mid-sentence cutoff. However, not only is the next most recent revision a hagiographic essay about someone who shares the editor's name, upon inspection it appears the page has consisted of ungrammatical, unreferenced info since 2023, so I'm hesitant to revert to any recent revision. Is there a policy for handling this type of situation? Discertain (talk) 16:16, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Discertain. The article is already tagged as unreferenced. As it purports to be about a governmental district of Afghanistan, it should probably remain, and hopefully an editor who speaks one or more of the several languages of Afghanistan can improve it some day. I removed the unreferenced praise of an individual and copyedited it a bit, trimming a couple of obviously unencyclopedic assertions. Cullen328 (talk) 17:09, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Assistance with editing the page: Anna Sokolina

 Courtesy link: Anna Sokolina

Thank you for advice! In 2020, I have submitted publication permissions and provided copyright information for 4 images:

  1. File:Anna Sokolina 16.jpg
  2. File:Sokolina 2003 MetMus AerialView St.Pet.jpg
  3. File:Sokolina 2005 MetMus AerialView M.jpg
  4. File:Sokolina 2007 MetMus AerialView NYC.jpg

and yesterday reconfirmed that. Could you please provide your guidance if more information is needed? As advised earlier, yesterday I have also removed old references to personal websites created by subject, to avoid potential conflict of interest if such emerges, and preserved references to official public websites of relevant organizations with relevance to life or work of the subject. I also adjusted the location of Routledge publishing house to New York from New York and London, since London might be currently constituted not a valid reference. Unfortunately, that all has been reverted... By error I have removed the COI banner - I apologize for not getting appropriate information on my rights as aspiring editor... I also tried to respond and modify potential misappropriations and minor technical errors. While my edits have been unfortunately reverted, may I ask for your help with further editing as I am not sure what should be my next step to resolve the issue with the COI banner. Thanks, 125aps 125aps (talk) 15:18, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

You have already received advice about the CoI banner, at User talk:125aps#Help me resolve the issue with the COI banner on page Anna Sokolina. Please don't ask in multiple locations.
Of your four images, in the order you list them:
  1. now at File:Anna Sokolina 2016.jpg
  2. deleted due to no evidence of permission
  3. now at File:Aerial View Moscow Sokolina 2004.jpg
  4. now at File:Aerial View New York City Sokolina 2007.jpg
If you are the article subject, or work for her, you must abide by WP:COI and WP:PAID. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:46, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
125aps, rattling off seven professional roles from very broad to highly specific in the lengthy first sentence is very poor writing. You can do better. Cullen328 (talk) 17:23, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

I can’t write my own biography

Hello, everyone!

I am new to Wikipedia editing and would like some help with creating an article about myself, Assawongrat Assarangchai (อัศวงศ์รัตน์ อัสรางชัย), a young Thai musician specializing in traditional Thai flute (ขลุ่ยไทย). I have gathered reliable sources, including news articles and TV show appearances, to support the article’s notability.

I have drafted a biography but I am unfamiliar with Wikipedia’s formatting rules and policies. I also need advice on how to handle references and links properly, and how to upload photos if possible. Additionally, I would appreciate guidance on changing my username, as I received a suggestion to do so.

If any experienced editors could kindly review my draft or help me improve it, I would be very grateful.

Thank you very much for your time and assistance!

Best regards, Assawongrat Assarangchai (Username: Assawongkvin) 2001:FB1:E5:9BCC:1FC:B3E:D4B4:F34C (talk) 06:31, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

@Assawongkvin If your life and achievements are verifiable and genuinely notable, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later, but creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged: we want biographies here, not autobiographies. WP:yourself 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 06:43, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Ok Assawongkvin (talk) 07:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Questions about direct communication with Wiki subject

Hey there :D

I plan to make a Wiki about an artist, Emcee KB, a draft at least, currently existing in my sandbox. Before I write too much, I'd like to know;

What are the guidelines when it comes to quotes from the subject?

I have direct contact with the artist, although I am not close enough with them for my page to be bias. I'm just enjoy his music. In example of this can be my update to the draft of Lil Darkie. I only put facts, not anything about how great his music is, just his career currently and some quotes from him in interviews as some citations.

Interviews is not a source from me, it's whomever the interviewer is. However, will me personally asking the subject, Emcee KB, about his music, make me ineligible to write the article? The artist makes a lot of genres of music, and my question for him was "What genre would you consider your self to be apart of?" He responded, and I'd like to know if I'm allowed to use his response. If it's his direct quote, no bias from me, it's still okay right?

I know everything on Wikipedia needs to be cited, the writer cannot be the source. I could find a website to host screenshots of the interaction, or directly add them onto the Wiki page, not sure. I'm still quite new, and before I commit to this too much, I'd like a professional's view on this. Thanks in advance :)

Kyeler Kyelerw1 (talk) 00:12, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello. A self-published interview that you conduct would be 1) a primary source that can't be used to establish notability, and 2) original research. The main purpose of a Wikipedia article is to summarize what independent reliable sources say. Any interview you conduct would not be subject to journalistic standards of fact checking and editorial control(i.e. an editor reviewing your interview for accuracy/legal compliance/etc before publishing).
Are you sure he meets WP:NMUSICIAN?
If you go too far with asking him questions to the point where he wants you to add particular content to "his" article, you would cross the line into conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 00:27, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
I understand this. He has been featured in other news articles, radio stations, etc. I don't plan on submitting it for review just yet, want to wait a bit for more news coverage of him. Despite me being able to contact him, would I still be eligible to write the article using external sources? He will not be aware of the article being wrote. Kyelerw1 (talk) 00:42, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
He's going to want to know what you're interviewing him for(he may be under a contract that limits who he can talk to for publicity, or just want to know where what he says will be published). As said below, though, an interview you conduct would not be a verifiable source.
That you are merely able to contact him doesn't impose any limitations on you in terms of article or draft editing. (That I could call the White House switchboard and ask to interview Donald Trump doesn't prevent me from editing about Trump) 331dot (talk) 01:01, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Okay. He is independent (found that out from research) and everything he uploads is copyright free, so the contract part doesn't apply, although I won't use him as a source at all. Thanks for helping out! Kyelerw1 (talk) 01:03, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
"everything he uploads is copyright free" Do you have a source for that? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:53, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Indeed. There is a big difference between "copyright free" and being released with a copyight allowing for reuse. 331dot (talk) 18:00, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Copyright free meaning allowed for reuse, sorry for confusion. Source is him. Kyelerw1 (talk) 20:53, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Things the person directly tells you in a private interview cannot be used. It needs to be published in a WP:VERIFIABLE third-party publication for it to go into the article, particularly if it is a biography of a living person.
Regarding direct quotes, you probably want to avoid using direct quotes in biographical articles if you can. They usually aren't very encyclopedic, because they are WP:PRIMARY. Our job here is to summarise what has been written about something in secondary sources.
There are some narrow situations where contacting the person can be helpful, but you need to be very careful to stick to the facts as reported in reliably published sources. For example, I have done this before when I have two reliable sources that contradict each other (take for example a situation where one newspaper article says the person was born in Lisbon, but another says they were born in Berlin, which to trust? Easiest solution is just to ask the person). Another good reason to contact a person is to ask for a voice recording for the Voice Intro Project, which is a very valuable addition to any biographical article.
But all that said, unless you're very familiar with Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines, I'd advise against directly contacting the subject of the article. David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 00:29, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

How to get recent NGRAM data

Hello, I was wondering if anyone knows how to get recent NGRAM data, assuming the NGRAM is properly formatted. I tried on Google and it only let me do it up to 2022, is there ways of doing it up to 2025? Also, I think NGRAM mostly deals with books, how can I get it to also include articles? Thanks! Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 16:52, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Gjb0zWxOb. Google Books Ngram Viewer may provide answers to your questions. Its first sentence says The Google Books Ngram Viewer is an online search engine that charts the frequencies of any set of search strings using a yearly count of n-grams found in printed sources published between 1500 and 2022 . . .. Cullen328 (talk) 17:17, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
The corpus for the Google Books Ngram Viewer is fixed. It's only comprised of books, though perhaps there's an occasional bound version of a non-book that looked like a book and got scanned. It doesn't include books that are more recent than 2022. So no, there is no way to do what you want. FWIW, in terms of why it's constrained in this way: for most of the books that ever existed and for which there's still at least one existing copy, there is no e-book version, so Google actually employed teams of data-entry people who scanned the books, page by page, for millions of books. They've already updated the corpus a few times, and I bet they'll do that again, but who knows when. FactOrOpinion (talk) 02:21, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

IP Information Tool Viewer

I’m not familiar with this feature, it is a beta feature that shows IP information. But what is this feature about? And what is the main purpose of the IP Information Tool Viewer? How could this be useful for tracking? BetterForNow (talk) 18:54, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:IP Info feature has info. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:52, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Neutral tone for stating intent (drafting an article)

I'm unsure on what neutral tone means in context. When stating the article subject's intent it came off as an advertisement, but stating objectively feels like assuming that the subjects goals are the outcomes. I've gotten a submission declined for this here: Draft:Kensington Corridor Trust. The current version is my best attempt at a serious rewrite to remove language around the org's intent and state activities more plainly/encyclopedic-ly. Fishmax5 (talk) 19:01, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, it means Wikipedia text should not be written in opinions. It should be written in major points of view. See WP:5P2 for extra information. Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 19:06, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
@Fishmax5 I left a comment on the draft. qcne (talk) 21:36, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Formatting

Hi guys, couldn't figure out why this section was formatted so weirdly, couldn't fix it... Can anyone help? Azuuuu (talk) 02:03, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello Azuuuu :). I think the problem was that the wikitable had the parameter align="left". It seems it made the following text wrap around the table. I removed it (and the extra spaces below) and it's normal now. Cheers, Sophocrat (talk) 02:47, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Citing unpublished archival material?

If I had access to unpublished primary source material from an archive and wanted to cite it for an article, would that be doable as long as I identified the archive from which it is drawn? Or would that be considered original research unless the relevant claim were first published in a reliable secondary source? M.A.Spinn (talk) 03:07, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

It would probably fall foul of WP:OR (see first para of lede), but more directly it would certainly fail WP:Verifiability.
Sources have to be published so that readers can check the source, if they want to. Moreover, for non-trivial/possibly disputable facts, they should be published in a WP:Reliable source.
That said, it does not have to be easy to access that published source (and it certainly doesn't have to be online). If only one copy of a book is available for consultation in one library (say, this one), that would be sufficient.
If others in addition to yourself could routinely obtain the same access to the archive, "published" would become debatable (I suggest), and the relevant considerations in the previous links, discussed in Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources, would come into play.
If in doubt, use the source and argue the case if/when it's challenged. Research is fun, isn't it? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.5.172.125 (talk) 08:24, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Quality standards

In terms of WP:ASSESS, wouldn't a large amount of small articles be C-class or B-class? Considering they meet the criteria stated, yet they've been assessed as Start-class.

This question especially pertains to Ponera coarctata and a few other articles. FranticSpud (talk) 08:52, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

@FranticSpud: For C-class, "substantial" means it is quite big. If text fills my screen, I would rate the article as C (or B if it is also quality writing and got pictures and tables). Ponera coarctata is very close to a C from me based on size. Many pages would have an inappropriate assessment, but really it does not matter that much. On my watchlist, I have put a C-class category for a project, and then I check every page that enters or leaves C class and update the infobox and references. But for most editors here they don't care. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:34, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
@FranticSpud Afaik, these ratings, when they're below WP:GA, are fairly informal and like with much else around here, WP:BOLD applies. You started the article, you added "Start-class", and if you want, you can change it. If someone disagrees with the new assessment and wants to do something about it, they will. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:36, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Help: Impersonation (Long read, sorry)

There is an article on here for someone named P. Anil, who is impersonating and claims the work of S. Anil Kumar who is a director from the 1980's-90's. He (P. Anil) has no real proof that he is the director of the movies other than his name being on a bunch of websites that he has signed up to.

Unfortunately these films were produced in the late 1900's in South India. So not much documentation has been done about it other than 1 link, that is an interview with the original director (S. Anil Kumar). P. Anil is plagiarizing and impersonating S. Anil Kumar by citing websites that can be edited leading to skewed and false information.

There is someone's life work and art being stolen by someone who is providing false citations :(

I have provided about 8 pictures of the directors BTS. I can provide more - as this was the only form of documentation other than his awards at the time (I can also submit proof of the awards). Even the credit scenes of the movie credit S. Anil Kumar and not P. Anil. P. Anil has no real tangible proof that the work he claims is his, other than the "links" he provided.

But I keep having my articles declined because of lack of citations...what can I do to have S. Anil Kumar's biography published? I have put it under biography of a living person. Is that the wrong category to put it under? Nehmatss (talk) 09:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

@Nehmatss: For films from the last century, they are probably covered in newspapers. For English language movies there are also books published with big lists of films. Are there such books that would cover (South) Indian films? They should prove who the director is. The films themselves would be primary sources, but can be used to debunk false claims. Websites that can be edited to put in false information would be unreliable sources, and so should be checked out / discussed on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:41, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

How do you layer links?

I'm a first-timer on Wikipedia and I want to layer links for my edit on Nirvanna The Band The Show The Movie but I don't know how. Can anybody on here help? TapTheGlass (talk) 11:55, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

For context, I want to put up the premise from SXSW but it doesn't allow me so I want to just do a normal premise but I need to put up Orbitz and layer time-travelling vehicles [There's a time-traveling winnebago in the movie] with Back to the Future. TapTheGlass (talk) 11:58, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Your question is not clear. What do you mean by "Layer"? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:11, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Put up text that also links to a different page that's kind-of related to the main text. TapTheGlass (talk) 12:18, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Do you mean like this? If so, see Wikipedia:Piped link. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Yep! Thanks! TapTheGlass (talk) 12:44, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
I've discussed the possible copyright nature of their attempted edit (see edit filters) to the plot summary at Nirvanna the Band the Show the Movie and that such an edit is not an improvement to the plot summary.
I'm unsure what layering links means. Knitsey (talk) 12:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Trouble with mapbox

I am trying to add a switched, interactive mapbox to several articles and it is mostly going well. However, I am running into an issue implementing it for Frye Cove and a few more articles. First, the verbatim source content in my sandbox does not render at all (User:OceanLoop/sandbox) - why? In the article's infobox, however, the map view works, but is misaligned and does not actually center on Frye Cove, even though the Wikidata coords appear right. What is going on? Thank you! OceanLoop (talk) 15:02, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

In case no one here can answer, try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:16, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
OceanLoop, what problem do you see? It appears to be centered correctly to me. Can you describe where it is when you look at it, and where you think it should be instead? Mathglot (talk) 00:03, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
The article is currently correct, as it has not been updated with the interactive, switched mapbox; I attempted to replicate it in my sandbox to demonstrate but this failed to render entirely. The location of the feature on the map is correct, but the map box boundaries are not. OceanLoop (talk) 00:26, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Another example of a misaligned mapbox Southwick Lake - not sure what to make of it. OceanLoop (talk) 03:56, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Request for Review and Guidance on Draft: Metrix Pakistan Youth Summit

Could someone kindly review my draft article Draft:Metrix Pakistan Youth Summit? I am a new contributor and genuinely want to learn how to improve my writing and align with Wikipedia’s content guidelines, especially regarding neutrality, reliable sourcing, and encyclopedic tone. I would appreciate any constructive feedback on how I can improve this article and contribute better in the future. Thank you Sabirshahofficialpk (talk) 04:37, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Quote: "First 5 Edition Held in 2024[6][7][8][9][10] [11] [12] .[13]" I guess, Sabirshahofficialpk, that you mean that the first five summits were held in 2024. However, that's a lot of summits for a year, so perhaps I'm wrong. (i) You've already been warned about excessive use of boldface but you seem to have ignored the warning. (ii) I can't see why you'd need more than one reference per summit; I have no idea why you'd need eight references. See [Wikipedia:Citation overkill#Notability_bomb]]. -- Hoary (talk) 05:47, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Citation overkill#Notability_bomb Foxelbeton (talk) 06:53, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, Foxelbeton. Yes, Sabirshahofficialpk: Wikipedia:Citation overkill#Notability_bomb. -- Hoary (talk) 07:39, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Sabirshahofficialpk, and welcome to the Teahouse.
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) 11:06, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
@ColinFine, Hoary: OP has been sockblocked, draft has been G5 speedied. --Finngall talk 18:34, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Categories and categorization

Hi, where can I find rules and especially guidelines for creating or revising any given category? I am thinking of an Aristotle-type genus/species concept hierarchy. As an example, a set of articles on rope/uses of fiber (very inclusive), seamanship (includes rope, but also e.g. navigation etc.) and knots (relevant for rope and seamanship): it is not always intuitively evident what is the top category, and there are more than one risks of sub-categories including each other in some weird classificatory circularity. I assume there must exist writings on this type of task, but so far my searches have been fruitless. Can anyone point me in the right direction? TiA! T 2A02:FE1:E180:3900:3595:7E66:1D30:B97E (talk) 09:49, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Have you read WP:Categorization and the linked pages within? There is also a Talk Page at WT:CATP where the experts will discuss these issues. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:53, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi, thx a lot, exactly what I was looking for. But phew, a lot of pages ...! And hardly categorized ... :) Will go read, thx agn. T 2A02:FE1:E180:3900:3595:7E66:1D30:B97E (talk) 01:06, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Help me put language in flim

please help Sparktube (talk) 15:52, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Which article are you trying to edit and what change are you trying to make? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 15:53, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
@Sparktube This edit of yours was reverted mainly because of the poor grammar but also because you failed to cite a WP:reliable source. All Wikipedia content should be sourced. Shantavira|feed me 16:17, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

I’m trynna fix mortal kombat legends into italiano Sparktube (talk) 16:11, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

it's still not clear what you're trying to do. We don't have an article for the Mortal Kombat Legends series, but we do have articles for the individual films. MKL Scorpions Revenge, MKL Battle of the Realms etc. If you could clarify what article you're talking about and what you're tring to do, it would be easier for us to help you. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 16:44, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
I will just edit Sparktube (talk) 17:14, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Tagging a whole section or article

New editor here! Is there a way to tag a whole section of an article as needing a re-write for clarity or better referencing? TheManOfTwistsAndTurns (talk) 16:11, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

You may wish to use the templates {{More citations needed section}} or {{Cleanup section}} but be sure to include a reason if you're using the latter. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 16:30, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you. TheManOfTwistsAndTurns (talk) 17:58, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Requesting feedback on Draft: Sunil Kapoor (shipping executive)

Hello, I’ve submitted a draft article titled Draft:Sunil Kapoor about an Indo-Cypriot shipping executive with over 40 years of experience in the maritime industry. The draft cites independent sources such as Asia Business Outlook, Cyprus Mail, TradeWinds, and includes a published biography by Dr. Binay Singh. A conflict of interest disclosure has been posted on the Talk page.

Mr. Kapoor is currently COO and partner at OL Shipping Group. I would appreciate any feedback to improve the draft or guidance on next steps for review. Thank you! IndoCypriotShipowner (talk) 11:07, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

You have resubmitted it for review; the next reviewer will leave you feedback if not accepted; reviews are the best way to get feedback. 331dot (talk) 11:19, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @IndoCypriotShipowner. Several of your citations actually point to an "example domain". Have you checked any of them? ColinFine (talk) 11:20, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
To go a bit further. I have not checked your Asia Business Outlook citation, as it does not point to Asia Business Outlook, but judging from the title India's top ten leaders in shipping 2024, I would expect it to be either little more than a list of names, or if there is more material about each, for that material mostly to come from the people concerned. i.e. I would be very surprised if it was both independent and had substantial coverage of Kapoor.
For the sources to be reliable is necessary, but not sufficient. All the sources which are to contribute to establishing notability must meet all three of the criteria in WP:42. Which three or four of your sources best meet all of those criteria? ColinFine (talk) 11:25, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Public transport

Hello, one mildly specific question. I wonder what is a proper citation for public transport lines(e.g bus lines). Can it just be the operator's website or is some kind of article needed? Brickguy276 (talk) 09:47, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

@Brickguy276 It is difficult to give a general answer: are you trying to show that a given line is notable, in which case secondary sources are needed, or are you just including such details in a larger article, in which case a primary source might be fine. Buses in London has examples of both primary and secondary sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:59, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
On a page, I added that a city has 2 bus lines from a bigger city nearby. What kinda source do I need? Brickguy276 (talk) 11:10, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
@Brickguy276: how do you know this information? Is there a website, a travel guide, or a bus timetable? Operators' website would demonstrate existence and could be used for that, but not show it is notable enough for a standalone article. The establishment or scrapping of a bus route will likely be documented in a newspaper. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:06, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Well, I live near and there are tons of websites mentioning it Brickguy276 (talk) 12:47, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Then @Brickguy276, find the best one that is reliable (not somebody's hobby site), and cite it. ColinFine (talk) 16:24, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

page content

Hi All, I am having difficulties with the content of my page, I have tried to edit the page myslef to correct it, but its not working and my page is not visible now,,may I ask, can anyone please help me to publish my page with correct content, I really appreciate it, thank you in advance. Musicmindz14 (talk) 21:50, 17 July 2025 (UTC) dos::cw::찻집 보존♡♡♡

Hello, Musicmindz14. You have tried to add content to Will Ludford, but you are not formatting your references properly. Please read Referencing for beginners. Please also be aware that Spotify, Facebook and YouTube are rarely considered reliable sources. You should draft new content in your sandbox page. Your user page is to tell other editors about your plans and accomplishments as a Wikipedia editor. Cullen328 (talk) 23:00, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your reply, I much appreciate it,,I will look at the link you kindly sent and hope I can learn to edit properly. I am sorry I am not good at this, but with everyones help I hope to do things better.. Thank you, much respect. Musicmindz14 (talk) 12:58, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello again,,I had a look at the Referencing for beginners,,To be honest it all just confuses me..I am not good at these things,, do you know anyone who I could contact and work with on a personal level to help edit my content,,If I cant get help I will have to leave the page as I just dont understand how to edit, if anyone is reading this and is willing to help me I really would appreciate help. thank you, much respect..Musicmindz14 (talk) 13:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Are you Will Ludford? If so, please see WP:COI.
In any case, Help:Your first article tells you what is needed. I have moved what remains of the page to Draft:Will Ludford where you can work on it. Please use this process to submit it for review, when you feel it meets those requirements. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:35, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you so much,,I much appreciate your help and support. I will do my best to get my page sorted and be a good contributer to Wikipedia.. agaim I am sorry for any annoyance,,but I always felt if your not sure about something then ask,, Thank you, my respect to you ..Musicmindz14 (talk) 15:24, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
I did ask: "Are you Will Ludford?" Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello again, sorry for not seing your message until now..yes I am Will Ludford. . I am still wrting and recording and have a new album released in 2 weeks...I am not there to promote myself or my work, just to hav emyb Wiki page and chat to people..Thank you, much respect..Will.Musicmindz14 (talk) 17:23, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello again, I have re writen my page, I clicked on the link you sent to talk to Andy, so I could let him see it and see if its ok,,,but I dont see any option to talk to Andy,? thank you,. much respect..Will. Musicmindz14 (talk) 18:04, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
That's me; there should be a "New section" link somewhere on that page, to leave a message—but you can talk to em here.
The page at Draft:Will Ludford has not been changed. Did you save ("publish") your edits? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:39, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Help submitting neutral, sourced draft on company topic

Hi, I'm looking for help submitting a company article that has been rewritten in full encyclopedic tone with multiple reliable, independent sources. I am affiliated with the company (disclosed on my user page) and would prefer if an uninvolved editor could review or submit it via AfC to avoid any COI issues.

The draft text is available and follows all tone and sourcing policies. Can someone help submit it in userspace or via AfC? Carltur (talk) 15:35, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Carltur, and welcome to the Teahouse
If you imagine it in housebuilding terms, you are saying "Hello, I've been asked to build a house, and though I'm quite handy, I don't know much about building houses, especially in your area. Would a volunteer be willing to do the bits of the task that I don't know how to do, like surveying the site and building the foundations?" (It's possible that I'm being unfair to you here, since you haven't shown us your draft, as far as I can tell. But years of experience with inexperienced editors have shown me that they almost always write their drafts WP:BACKWARDS, which is like building the house without thinking about surveying or foundations).
It's possible, but do you think it's likely?
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.
Note that if somebody writes and submits it for you, they will have the same conflict of interest that you have. ColinFine (talk) 16:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
@ColinFine, I have been through many iterations and spent maybe not weeks but a good amount of time on reviewing the requirements. I also tried to focus on comparables e.g. other articles on similar topics. After all the research and many re-edits and adding a notability section, COI on my profile, etc. - it seems my entire draft was delete based on a "speed delete" that I contested of my very first version. So I did consult AI and it suggested I ask here if someone independent could look at my draft, if they find it to be solid post it for me. Like asking a indepeding accountant firm to do the audit of the financials and submit the results to the SEC ... there shouldn't be a conflict of interest in that?
Let me know if you have any thoughts. I can also create a new draft and submit again but I read that my profile could be flagged so no matter what I submit odds are it will be not approved (objective or not). Carltur (talk) 16:57, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Your draft was flagged by by one independent reviewer and deleted by a second independent reviewer, as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". What does that tell you about its adherence to our standards? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:54, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Your 'profile' (i.e. Account) will not be "flagged", and any new draft submissions will, I am quite sure, be considered only on their own merits.
That said, every edit you make on Wikipedia is tied to your account and easily checkable, and if your account were to build up a history of submitting mostly, and/or repeatedly, clearly substandard drafts without showing incremental improvements, thus wasting the limited time of volunteer assessors and other editors, you might in that case find yourself Blocked on one of the grounds described on that linked Project page.
Provided, however, you work sincerely within our Policies and Guidelines, and assume our good faith (as we will of you), this should not arise. We do appreciate that the disciplines of an encyclopaedia (which forbids Promotion as a matter of fundamental policy) may seem strange to people from entirely different contexts, and take some getting used to. I hope this clarifies matters. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.5.172.125 (talk) 21:23, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
@[[User:ColinFine|ColinFine] thanks for the clarification. Yes I have been doing that. Not sure where you see the history, and the last decline was "just" for notability not anymore anything related to promotional, so I have been making improvements. Carltur (talk) 01:28, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

A minor point, Carltur. You have written about what you refer to as "SWIPEBY". Is there a reason why you refer to it as "SWIPEBY" and not "Swipeby"? -- Hoary (talk) 22:16, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary It's the name of the company like IKEA, NASA, LEGO, IBM. I see that these brands are also all caps on wikipedia. Is that issue or against any guidelines? Carltur (talk) 01:35, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
@Hoary @ColinFine
I submitted a new draft. If you have any pointers or feedback please let me know. That is greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Swipeby Carltur (talk) 01:49, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Carltur, your response surprised me. I'd never have guessed that we had articles on "IKEA" or "LEGO". It turns out: Not quite. We have one on IKEA (a surprising choice) and one on Lego (which seems right). I suppose that the (to my mind, inadequate) reasoning for us to call the former "IKEA" rather than "Ikea" is that (like "Fiat", "Saab", and others) it started as an abbreviation (of a sort). By contrast, I really doubt that anyone ever talked of "Ess double-you eye pea ee bee why" or similar. Even if your use of "SWIPEBY" was/is innocent, it looked promotional. Switching from it was a good move; well done. -- Hoary (talk) 03:45, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

need to replace exiting image with New one

Hello, I am Shafayeat Hossain. I tried to replace an image in "Infobox" but could not upload it in the right way. Please show me the way; here is the link to the page. I tried editing: Bangladesh Rowing Federation.

Shafayeat Shafayeathossain (talk) 16:22, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

The new image needs to be uploaded, before you can add it to the page. See Help:Pictures. Is this the image you want to use? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:55, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Yes, it is, this is the actual logo of this federation; the existing is not the right one. Shafayeathossain (talk) 18:19, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
@Shafayeathossain: May be you do not need to replace the image, but rather add another one, similarly to the Croatian Rowing Federation article...? --CiaPan (talk) 21:57, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

wheres that one page

I distinctly remember it being here, but I can't find it anywhere. There was a list of pages with issues, and I want to start editing by starting with smaller things, instead of jumping right into making pages or making giant changes. I'm not sure if I'm remembering properly, but is there a list of pages with issues? AtTheTownHouse (talk) 16:33, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Maybe Wikipedia:Task Center? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:52, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
@AtTheTownHouse: It could also be Wikipedia:Community portal or Special:Homepage. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:48, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Clean up Reference Section

Hello Wikipedia Ninjas!

I'm trying to work on a suggested edit as a newcomer on this article: Mark Talamini.

I've noticed that there are citations at the the bottom that are not included in the list of references. The references all appear to be external links, which is the problem I think the maintenance tag is referring to. Should I rename the "References" to something else, like maybe "Bibliography", or is there another suggestion to making this a little more tidy? JesseL0vesT0ast (talk) 19:31, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

JesseL0vesT0ast, this article is atrocious. A look in its history shows that over the years a number of editors have made well-intended tweaks to it, making very minor reductions to its atrociousness. ("Lipstick on a pig", one might say.) Me, I'd be inclined to look elsewhere: my life's too short to expend what's left of it on such terrible articles. OTOH this is an actual doctor, rather than a reality show contestant, call-in radio host, quack, etc ... so I might decide to dig in after all. I'd then start by removing every "reference" that isn't actually referred to. I'd then embark on one of Wikipedia's more grueling tasks: attempting to find a reference for every assertion for which previous editors haven't deigned to provide a reference. I'd then remove the remaining, unreferenced assertions. Each edit involved would require an informative edit summary. In these summaries I'd try not to insult the editor(s) responsible for earlier failures; I might not always succeed. -- Hoary (talk) 20:06, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Most excellent!
I did some tweaking. Moved the unassigned list of "references" to the talk page for safe keeping in case they can verify whats in the article and be used as future citations, made the actual citations the new reference list, updated the maintenance tag. I think I covered everything you mentioned for now. Would you mind taking a look? This is most definitely the most complicated change I've made and had to look at all my notes so please feel free to slap me around if I messed anything up. JesseL0vesT0ast (talk) 20:57, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
That's the easy part done! (And done well. I'm not complaining.) The article now consists of four short paragraphs. Two aren't sourced at all. Here's a third Through his professional career, Talamini has published over 200 research papers and edited Advanced Therapy in Minimally Invasive Surgery (Decker, 2006), a compilation of studies on surgical advancements. In 2013, he was appointed chairman of the Department of Surgery and founding director of the Stony Brook Medical Innovation Institute at the Stony Brook University School of Medicine, alongside being appointed chief of surgical services in 2015. There's a single reference at the end of that. "Through his professional career" seems superfluous. That's a strange sense of alongsideness; I'd change "alongside being" to "and was". Now roll your sleeves up. Just how much of that paragraph is backed up by the cited source? Maybe all of it. But if less than all of it, attach "citation needed" templates to the remainder. And then go source-hunting. Incidentally, publication of a book doesn't need a source: instead, look for the book at WorldCat, check the details and adjust as appropriate (e.g. was he [sole] editor, or a coeditor?), get its ISBN, add this, and assume that anyone doubting what's written will then know how to click on the ISBN and check for themselves. -- Hoary (talk) 21:20, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Can Truth.com be....

.... used here? This is a anti smoking site. 216.247.72.142 (talk) 00:01, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Note: It appears the domain truth.com has been usurped by some hardware company. I assume you refer to https://truthinitiative.org/ and https://www.thetruth.com/. Sophocrat (talk) 00:29, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
For what purpose? Sesquilinear (talk) 03:51, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Can Anybody Resolve This Issue

Can anybody resolve this issue Talk:Henry de Hinuber#KCB, KCH Should Be Removed Because It's A Duplicate? NKM1974 (talk) 03:43, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

New article draft for review: DJ Mad Pee (producer/DJ)

Hello, I’m Djmadpeeoficial.

I’ve created a draft article about DJ Mad Pee, a pioneer of Hip Hop in Venezuela.

The draft is here: User:Djmadpeeoficial/Taller

I would love some feedback or advice on how to proceed to get it reviewed and published.

Thank you very much! Djmadpeeofficial (talk) 17:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

It is written in Spanish, this is the English Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 18:03, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

to begin

Hi, I just joined wiki and cannot find instructions on creating a new article. Please advise. Thanks! Littlesinner2 (talk) 23:55, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

I would suggest reading Your first article. You will greatly increase your chances of success if you first learn the ropes by editing existing articles, and using the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 00:06, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Littlesinner2, 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) 21:21, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you Colin, will do, much appreciated!
How long have you been aboard 2600:6C88:DB40:2D:ACF1:9AF2:EAEF:57CC (talk) 22:41, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Shawn Aaron McCraney

Draft resubmission for Shawn Aaron McCraney — looking for guidance or feedback

Hi there! I recently finished rewriting and resubmitting a draft article about my father, Draft:Shawn Aaron McCraney. I’ve disclosed my conflict of interest on my user page and rewritten the article from scratch using neutral tone and reliable sources (including independent coverage from MSN, Patch, etc.).

I also added valid internal links, cleaned up formatting, and addressed all concerns from the previous reviewer. I’d be grateful if someone could take a look, offer any suggestions for improvement, or help move the draft toward approval if it now meets the notability and sourcing guidelines.

Thank you so much for your time and support!

Delaneymccraney (talk) 17:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

The feedback you are requesting can be obtained by re-submitting your draft for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it to "mainspace". If not, they will give you further advice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:04, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, Andy — I appreciate the guidance and confirmation. I've gone ahead and followed the AfC process as suggested. Grateful for the help!
Delaneymccraney (talk) 18:06, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
You're quick! I was just about to add "You still have entire paragraphs, and other sentences, that are uncited. They must be." You can do that while your draft is awaiting review. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:08, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Ah! Much appreciated. Will ensure they are cited right now. Thank you so much. Delaneymccraney (talk) 18:13, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Spoilers in the TV series articles

Please do something about the numerous spoliers in the articles of various TV shows.YashTheBosss (talk) 08:03, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

@YashTheBosss Welcome to the Teahouse. It is not clear what you want someone to do. Articles may contain spoilers. Please read Wikipedia:Spoiler. If you don't want to know the plot of a TV show, don't read that part of the article about it. Shantavira|feed me 08:09, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Biography

How can my work as scholar and educator be recorded? Dussinge (talk) 21:21, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

If you are notable, then scholars unrelated to you will know of your scholarly/pedagogic work, and they will describe and comment on it in multiple reliable sources. And then one or more unpaid Wikipedia drudges unrelated to you will, eventually, create an article about you, an article based on those sources. -- Hoary (talk) 21:32, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
The descriptions and comments would include these people's reviews of (and not merely blurbs for) your books. -- Hoary (talk) 23:06, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
@Dussinge If you are John A. Dussinger, Prof Emeritus, Univ of Illinois, as I assume from another post from your account, then you need to check which of our criteria at this page about the notability of academics you meet. Assuming you can clearly demonstrate that using reliable published sources, then you are allowed to create a draft article about yourself using the WP:Articles for creation process. Beware, however, that autobiography has many pitfalls, as described at that link. Also, now your intentions are known, someone may attempt to scam you by suggesting they can produce an article for payment. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:21, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
... Sources like these, provided written by a third party, are the sort of sources you could consider using, as well as some described at WP:ABOUTSELF. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:26, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Even if you do not (yet) meet the requirements to have a Wikipedia article about you, you can have your work recorded in our sibling project Wikidata, so long as you are the (co-)author of at least one peer-reviewed academic paper; see d:User:Pigsonthewing/About you.
To facilitate this, make you you have an ORCID iD, and that your profile there is populated and public. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:30, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Log out

I keep getting log out and having to log back in again sometimes i have to get a email sent this has probably been happening for a month or two

is there a reason for this?

Fanoflionking3 (talk) 20:43, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello Fanoflionking3. When you log in, there's a "Keep me logged in (for up to one year)" checkbox right after the Password field. Checking it should keep you logged in. If you do that but are then logged out within a few weeks, feel free to ask for help. —Sophocrat (talk) 03:28, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
...but don't do that on a shared device! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:01, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Help with my page??? I feel I was scammed

Hello - I hired a company called WikiNinja to help me create a WikiPedia page and feel I was scammed. They created a page and sent me a link Draft:Bradford Blazar (my name is Bradford Blazar) but the page was never published. They tried to get to pay even more money to them for "page protection" claiming my page would be at risk of being deleted if I didn't pay. I searched and it appears page protection is free -Bottom line can anyone help me with this??? Can someone search to see if there is indeed a draft page??? 2600:1700:2280:1EB0:48D8:332B:9F9A:EACD (talk) 12:06, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

The draft did exist and was deleted by BusterD two days ago as unambiguous promotion. This is irrelevant to the direct issue, which is that yes, you have probably been scammed. This page provides a useful outline of how these scams are committed, and also provides an address you can contact to report this. Apologies that there's not more to say, but these companies are not affiliated with Wikipedia and unfortunately this is quite common. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:20, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
I have blocked the account responsible. Mr. Blazar, please spread the word that WikiNinja is bad (read as amateurish) at their scam and that we will make their efforts unprofitable for them. BusterD (talk) 12:45, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Question on citing a blog

Hello teahouse helpers. (Thanks for what you folks do first of all)

I had a question about Wikipedia:Citing self-published blogs. First of all is this citing or self-published blogs even still valid and if not can it be reopened? I am a bit new to reopening old discussions of this category.

Also I am working on a article in which a prominent newspaper wrote about the subject, and then the author for that subject later blogged about it for that article on blogspoit.com with extra details with primary sources of the subject.

I agree that normally blogs should not be included as references, but in this case it seems to me it would be both viable and constructive. That being said, that is just my opinion. What does the teahouse jury say to this I can give more specific details.

Thanks a lot. (: Historyguy1138 (talk) 15:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

@Historyguy1138: I think you may be into WP:ABOUTSELF territory, assuming I read you correctly. If someone writes an news piece about me, and I write a post about that piece, then presumably this is related to my experience as me being the subject of the newspaper piece. GMGtalk 15:12, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi . GMGtalk. Thanks for your speedy reply (: and I am sorry I don't think I explained as clearly as I would have liked.
It's more like if I write a newspaper piece about you as the subject of the newspaper, and then later I blog about some other things I talked about with you on my blog and link that original newspaper article to my blog.
(: Historyguy1138 (talk) 15:57, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Well if you're aiming to use it for third party information on a living person, you're probably out of luck. Trying to think of cases where that would be appropriate...So like if the subject is Charles III and the blogger is also a biographer of British royalty. But in that case, there would already be an ungodly amount of better sourcing available and no reason to use a blog.
Here, we might wonder whether these details were left out of the newspaper for some kind of reason. Maybe length or time constraints. Maybe there was a disagreement about the substance or amount of vetting. Possibly the newspaper simply figured the content was just unimportant. GMGtalk 16:44, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
You may be right. Honestly still not sure. It's about the actual pink ladies that the ones in Grease were based on. The problem is that very few people have interviewed them, and there are only a few of them left. I intend to make the article a Wikipedia:Stub unless I can find more information. The information is good, but I agree with you I wish the author did not put it part of it on a blog. Historyguy1138 (talk) 16:53, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
You can always cheat. Contact subject matter experts (or the author themselves) IRL and ask them to write about it. There's usually contact info somewhere online. Alternatively, write about it yourself, get it published, and cite that. I've seen that one done before. It makes some WP editors fussy, but it's not really against the rules if it's not promotional. GMGtalk 17:36, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Hmmmmm. Perhaps I can, but it might just be the same information that others have already gone over. Unless maybe I did a you tube video or podcast or something which I have never done. But would not be against for the sake of preserving history. But yeah I would prefer to think deeply on that and if implemented use as an extreme last resort.
As I understand it maybe I can "revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump." I think this is a very niche and perhaps grey area that could arise from other users.
But I have never done village pump before. Any suggestions?
Thanks for helping me again by the way. (: Historyguy1138 (talk) 17:41, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
A lot of this is going to depend on the specifics, like: How controversial is what is being said? How important a part is it, of the article you are writing/ updating? What proportion of the article does it comprise? How likely is it to be challenged?
I wouldn't necessarily use the VP; you may be better on the talk page of the (or a related) article or a relevant WikiProject.
You certainly can't use it as part of demonstrating notability, though. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Not controversial I think. Actually it seems most of it is corroborated by the text of the original article and is a semi extension of the original article.
I would say it adds some key context to the group.
"You certainly can't use it as part of demonstrating notability, though." I agree, but I think the play and film grease does that way more.
Hmm I will message him thank you. (: Historyguy1138 (talk) 18:48, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
And that's a good idea about the wiki project I will check there first before I do the VP. By the way, aren't you a wikimedian or something. (: Historyguy1138 (talk) 19:08, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
We are all Wikimedians; perhaps you mean Wikimedian in Residence? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:40, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Wikimedian in Residence. Yes. Aren't you a liaison for the wiki foundation and some type of media library that gets us access to more books, articles, etc? (: Historyguy1138 (talk) 20:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
I am a WiR, but the rest is not me. You're thinking of The Wikipedia Library; you may have seen me recommending the latter to others, on this page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

blairgowrie galic name

blairgowrie in scottish 2A00:23C5:615A:6401:B1CA:B984:EB16:F333 (talk) 19:02, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

If you look at our article Blairgowrie and Rattray, you'll find the answer. ColinFine (talk) 19:36, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Scaling musical notation

Hi, I'm turning an image into lilypond notation on Rachmaninoff piano concerto 2, but the window for the notation is a bit big. I've been doing tons of research but couldn't find how to scale the notation down but haven't found any way to do it for wikipedia. You can see how it fits in my sandbox. Rach 3 is a good reference to what lilypond notation usually looks like on similar articles.

On the article I linked they try use #(layout-set-staff-size 16) to set the a bit smaller, however that method does not work. So, if there is really no solution, it is still good to make the change? Thanks, Coulomb1 (talk) 03:49, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

@Coulomb1 are you referring to the staff height or the overall width of the score on the page (or in the image frame)? Nthep (talk) 14:09, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
@Nthep Really anything that scales it all down. I would like to keep the width-to-height ratio but just size it down so it doesn't take as much space on the page. Coulomb1 (talk) 19:38, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
@Coulomb1 the easiest way is to set a css zoom size for the whole score add <div style="zoom: 70%;"> before you start the score and close the <\div> after you close the \score. Obviously you can set the zoom size to whatever size you want. User:Nthep/My eyes are fully open is set to 70% as an example. Nthep (talk) 20:15, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
@Nthep This works great!! Thanks, and here's the result: Rach 2#Structure - Coulomb1 (talk) 20:54, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
@Coulomb1 A lot easier than mucking around with some of the Lilypond intricacies. Nthep (talk) 20:59, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Google maps as a source

Recently, I have been patrolling around orphaned articles and I've noticed an annoying pattern. Many articles about locations (especially ones in more rural countries) have exactly one source, that being google maps. Here are some examples: Verdwaal, Bodibe, South Africa, and Springbokpan. I've always been kind of frustrated with the sourcing on these articles on small towns, and I'm wondering what the communities policy regarding articles utilizing sources such as Google maps and other geographical database sites? Gaismagorm (talk) 14:10, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Such places are generally notable, so tag them as needing more sources; or better still, find and add reliable sources yourself. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:26, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Okay, sounds good! Gaismagorm (talk) 14:29, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
@Gaismagorm They usually meet WP:GEOLAND which I personally think is too liberal but I'm not going to re-litigate it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:31, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Any way I could access the original version of this file since I wanted it for another platform?

I understand that the original revision was compressed because of the restrictions of Wikipedia's non-free image policy. However, I wanted to use the original version of the image for another platform that does not have those same restrictions. But I can't seem to find the original version of the image anywhere. Not even here. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 02:10, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

It's here. But even the original is pretty low-res. DS (talk) 03:24, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
The Wikipedia old version is slightly bigger, but still the text is illegible. We could have it back with {{non-free no reduce}} if you think it is worthwhile. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:36, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Well? The only reason I want access to the original is so that I can copy it. So it wouldn't necessarily have to be accessible for very long. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 01:18, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
@Graeme Bartlett: Any idea when it could be restored? I only need it restored briefly so I can copy it. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 02:10, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Help understanding repeated draft rejections Raniya Raanaa (Malayalam actress)

Draft:Raniya Raanaa

I’ve been working on a draft article about Raniya Raanaa, a Bharatanatyam dancer and actress who recently starred opposite Dileep in the 2025 Malayalam film Prince and Family, which was a commercial success. The article includes reliable secondary sources from outlets like Manorama Online, Times of India, Zoom TV, and ETV Bharat, which discuss her acting career, dance background, and critical reception.

Despite following the notability guidelines for entertainers and including references with significant coverage (not just passing mentions), the draft keeps getting declined with the reason: "does not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article." I’ve done my best to explain all relevant details about her career, verified with independent sources. I’m not sure what else is missing or needs improvement to meet the required standard.

Here is the draft: Draft:Raniya Raanaa

Could someone kindly help me understand:

  • Are the sources I used considered insufficient or not independent enough?
  • Is there a better way to demonstrate notability under WP:ENT or WP:GNG?
  • What specific improvements should I make before resubmitting?

Thanks in advance for your guidance! Irajeevwiki (talk) 01:48, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Irajeevwiki, your draft was declined because the cited sources "This submission's references ... do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". Above, you say little about the part that I've highlighted. You cite nine sources. Try this: here, in this thread, please point to just three among these nine that both show significant coverage of the subject and appear in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. -- Hoary (talk) 02:48, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Reply to -- Hoary
Thank you again for the earlier feedback.
I have now revised the draft article for Raniya Raanaa, addressing the notability concerns by including multiple reliable, secondary, and independent sources that provide significant coverage of the subject.
The draft uses citations from:
  • Fox Story India (detailed biographical profile)
  • Mathrubhumi (national daily, on her preparation and debut performance)
  • MSN India and Filmibeat (on public reception and industry recognition)
  • IndiaTimes (for film release and career milestone)
I’ve also ensured that the article adheres to style guidelines, with an infobox, appropriate categories, and properly formatted references.
Here is the updated draft: Draft:Raniya Raanaa
Would someone be kind enough to have a look and let me know if it now meets Wikipedia’s inclusion standards, especially under WP:GNG and WP:ENT? Irajeevwiki (talk) 03:49, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
A typical sample from the anonymously written Fox Story India piece: Enrolling in the special school of art and Culture at Kerala Kalamandalam, Raniya’s life underwent a transformative change. Despite facing rejection for her unique dance style, she emerged with heightened confidence, ready to face the challenges that lay ahead. No, this is not a "detailed biographical profile"; it's vague, cliché-ridden promotional flatus. The Mathrubhumi page is also anonymously written; it caused my browser to freeze (I suspect because of all the advertising that it carries). The MSN India page is again unsigned; it starts Actress Raniya Raanaa who made her film debut in actor Dileep's Prince And Family has become a sensation. Pretty lightweight stuff. The Filmibeat page tells us Raniya Raanaa plays Chinju Rani. OK; what else does it tell us about her? -- Hoary (talk) 07:12, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Raniya Raanaa keep getting rejected?

I’m seeking some clarification about a draft I’ve been working on: Draft:Raniya Raanaa.

It’s been declined again with the note that the references “do not show significant coverage,” even though I’ve added multiple independent, reliable, and secondary sources including:

These articles provide detailed coverage of her background, debut, awards, and public reception. I’ve also cleaned up the formatting and followed WP:GNG and WP:ENT guidelines closely. Could someone please explain what exactly is still missing in terms of notability or source quality? I’d really appreciate any specific suggestions before I try resubmitting again. Irajeevwiki (talk) 14:14, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

The article was declined by @User:RangersRus so it would be best to ask them. Shantavira|feed me 17:26, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Irajeevwiki, your draft cites three sources. The first and third are based on what Raanaa said, and so are not independent of her. The second has no discussion of her. So none of them helps to establish that she is wikinotable. Maproom (talk) 21:39, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

"Could someone please explain...?" I could, Irajeevwiki, and I did -- above, under the title "Help understanding repeated draft rejections Raniya Raanaa (Malayalam actress)". Please do not ask a third time. -- Hoary (talk) 08:18, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Not my own game i just created myself

How do I improve my article? Becuase my creation was rejected and its not my own game i just created myself

why?? Paulybi (talk) 05:46, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

  • Paulybi, Draft:Traffic Racer (video game) wasn't rejected. It was declined, because "[its] references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are --" followed by four criteria that the sources must satisfy. Each of the four is linked to an explanation. Did you read and digest the four explanations? -- Hoary (talk) 06:49, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
    Eh Paulybi (talk) 06:53, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
    idk why they'd reject my work?
    Wasn't detailed Paulybi (talk) 06:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
    As Hoary said above, the draft was declined, not rejected. This means that the draft could be appropriate for a Wikipedia article but not in its current state which - as of checking it a moment ago - has only one source. I would not suggest resubmitting it until you have around three quality sources. If you're unable to find them, then work on something else.
    I would also note, that not just on Wikipedia, but when interacting with people in general - if you didn't follow what someone said, replying with "eh" isn't usually very helpful. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 07:14, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
    it wasn't detailed? Paulybi (talk) 07:17, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
    What? You've been given a comprehensive reason for the draft being declined, at least four times now. Is there a particular part of the explanation that you're not understanding? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 07:21, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
    I’m not sure why my draft was declined. I tried to include enough detail. Can someone please clarify what I missed? Paulybi (talk) 07:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
    Well, if you read the reasons for the draft being declined you'll notice that no-one mentioned a level of detail.
    I think what you've missed is the text in they box immediately following "The reason left by [the reviewer] was:".
    Could you clarify if you've read that or not? It's now on your talk page three times and summarised twice in this thread? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 07:27, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
    Well, I'm new here, because I'm trying to improve my skills. Paulybi (talk) 07:29, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
    In that case I'd suggest reading the info and advice that's already been given to you. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 07:31, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
    Sorry about saying that is not appropriate about that what I am talking about. Paulybi (talk) 07:34, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello Paulybi
Because so many people come to Wikipedia for information there are rules put in place for articles, to make sure people aren’t just giving their opinions about something, or thinking about what they once heard or read, but might not be remembering correctly, so everything written in the article must show a reference to where the information came from.
I don’t play video games, so I don’t know what are good sources for Traffic Racers info. I glanced at your references 1 & 3 (reference 2 had a warning that the site might not be safe, so I didn’t go past the warning) and reference 3 seems to have some information on who developed the game, and the basics of how to play it, so that might be a source for adding references to some of your unreferenced sections (Gameplay, Development, and Legacy)). You can use the same reference in more than one place. Make sure you don’t just copy and paste info, you need to use your own words so you don’t violate any copyright rule.
Your draft article seems to be adequately written – if you provide references for everything.You might want to take a break for a day or two and think about where you can get some a couple more good references. You keep resubmitting the article without making any changes, and that could lead to an actual rejection just because you’re not following instructions. Perhaps you’re getting frustrated or upset, so maybe do something else for awhile and come back later. Writing a good Wikipedia article is hard work, so don’t think it needs to be done right away.
It may help to read Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners. Best wishes on getting your improved article accepted. Karenthewriter (talk) 02:13, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

new Madrid Fault

tell me more about new MADRID FAULT PJW72365 (talk) 03:50, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello there. Did you mean the New Madrid fault line? You can check out our article on that, and if you still have questions you may ask at the science section of our reference desk (the Teahouse is for asking questions about contributing to Wikipedia). Cheers, Sophocrat (talk) 04:00, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, PJW72365. Please read New Madrid seismic zone, and especially the references at the end of that article. Cullen328 (talk) 04:02, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

My book qualifies for a wikipedia article

My book qualifies for a wikipedia article but i dont want conflict of interest; can someone write it and submit it for me?

Hi! I’m the author of a novel titled Eclipsar. It has received independent, in-depth coverage in multiple reliable sources, including a feature article on FOX 5 Atlanta and another in the LaGrange Daily News. The book is also listed on Goodreads, Google Books, and Amazon, and it has a dedicated Wikidata entry.

Since I’m the author, I understand that creating the article myself would be considered a conflict of interest. I’d really appreciate if an experienced, neutral editor could take a look at the sources and consider writing and submitting a page for Eclipsar on my behalf. I’m happy to provide links or citations if needed.

Thank you so much in advance! BlakeVarnadoeAuthor (talk) 05:03, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Spending more time on this is only going to upset you. Please, for your own sake, go do something else. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 06:40, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, it doesn't qualify. Two small local interest pieces aren't enough for notability. The other things like Goodreads are useless for this purpose. Osa Akwamarynowa (talk) 07:55, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
BlakeVarnadoeAuthor You soliciting an editor would only transfer the conflict of interest to that editor. I too advise you to abandon attempting to edit about your book; if it is truly notable as a book, an article will organically develop the usual way- when an independent editor wholly unconnected with you sees significant coverage of your book in independent reliable sources and chooses on their own to write about it. 331dot (talk) 08:03, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
I will also advice you to be aware of potential scammers who may see your post and try to get your money. See WP:SCAM. 331dot (talk) 08:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia attempts

I attempted to create my page on wikipedia but it has been declined twice due to submission not adequately supported by reliable sources, would my page be flagged or deleted if i try it for the third time Neha Batra - The Mystery Girl (talk) 06:18, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Neha Batra - The Mystery Girl. This Teahouse edit is the only edit to all of Wikipedia from this account. What account did you use to write your draft? If you wrote it from an IP address, what is the precise name of the draft? Cullen328 (talk) 06:24, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Hey, I used a different account in the name of my organization "Bhakra Beas Management Board" to which i made artcle submissions but those got rejected Neha Batra - The Mystery Girl (talk) 06:49, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
The account was also suspected of sockpuppet since my organization has different teams working independently, and two of the teams created wikipedia accounts in an effort to contribute information about our organization without central coordination. This resulted all because of internal miscommunication. What shall we do now, we shall request on our own or hire specialised person to revoke block and create our organization Page. I will be glad from the bottom of my heart if you can help me to come out of it Neha Batra - The Mystery Girl (talk) 06:59, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
My advice is that you should abandon this effort. 331dot (talk) 07:15, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
And you are now blocked yourself- which is what I was about to do. Your organization should cease all efforts to edit about itself or hire others to edit about it. Anyone who attempts to edit about it will be blocked. 331dot (talk) 07:16, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Yes, I have indefinitely blocked this account for block evasion. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia from any account while your original account is blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 07:21, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
If I understand you correctly, you want to make a WP-article about Bhakra Beas Management Board.
My guess is that you can't per WP-policies like WP:N, but I don't know anything about you, I could be wrong. You need to follow WP:PAID, WP:COI, and I recommend reading WP:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing and WP:When your boss tells you to edit Wikipedia. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:23, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Hiring a Wikipedia Editor

Does anyone know how to contact and hire a Wikipedia Editor? My distant cousin in Czech Rep. is trying to hire an American Wikipedia Editor to write about his career as a writer. Zstuch55 (talk) 12:59, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

The shortest and most sincere answer to this question I know is: do not.
For more info please see Wikipedia:Paid editing (essay) and then Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Also, all guidelines and policies linked there. --CiaPan (talk) 13:10, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Zstuch55, and welcome to the Teahouse.
Tell your cousin not to do this.
There are many people who will take your money and promise you an article on Wikipedia. They are scammers - see WP:SCAM.
There may be a few who will honestly tell you that they will try to create an article for you, but they cannot guarantee that an article will be accepted, or that it will say what you want it to say. (I doubt that there are many, because that doesn't seem like good business, but I don't know).
Unless your cousin meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - either the special set for a writer or the general set - then no article is possible, and any time - and money - spent on it will be wasted.
If your cousin does meet the criteria, then somebody could write an article about him. If the person writing it is paid to do so, they will be required to declare their status as a paid editor. Furthermore, if an article about him is published, it will not belong to him, or be controlled by him, or necessarily say what he wants it to say. See WP:PROUD.
In short, it sounds very much as if your cousin's purpose is promotion - that is, telling the world about himself. Promotion is forbidden on Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
@Zstuch55 we are all editors here, and most of us are volunteers. Hiring someone to write your cousin's biography is strongly discouraged – see our policies on Conflict of interest and paid editing as well as a scam warning. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 13:14, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
@ClaudineChionh should we report these websites? StopLookingAtMe1 (talk) 04:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
To whom? And what do you expect them to do about it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:58, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing I meant to the wiki media foundation stewards. I did not know what they would do. StopLookingAtMe1 (talk) 07:23, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Web citation question

What is the best way to cite a web page from a website that uses the same url for several different pages so that readers will be able to easily tell where you got the information from? Of particular concern are pages which are not linked from the page which the url directs to. Martin IIIa (talk) 13:53, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Is this fixed by including an archive url in the citation? GMGtalk 14:05, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
We can't advise you properly without seeing the page(s) concerned. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
This is an issue shared by thousands of websites, perhaps even by a majority of sites on the web, so I was hoping to learn how to fish rather than be given a fish. Archive urls don't solve it because they always use the archived website's urls as their reference point. Some sort of navigation instructions need to be included in the citation, but I don't know what's easiest for readers to understand or how to format it into a standard citation. Martin IIIa (talk) 12:34, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Those thousands of websites—a tiny minority, not majority, of the whole web—use a variety of different methods. My point stands. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:28, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
If you need to link to a specific section within a page, you could potentially use [URL text fragments (like I've done here)] – it will navigate to, and highlight, whatever specific portion of text you require (some browsers also have addons to make it possible to generate these URLs directly from the context-menu of whatever text you highlight). The downside of these is that if you have anchored it based on surrounding text (with the prefix- and -suffix format) and that text changes, the anchor will break. However, for archived versions of a page, that shouldn't be an issue. McCovican » log • shhh 20:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Non-editable articles

Here's my question. Why can some articles be edited, and some can't? Who decides? Thanks. 68.197.141.128 (talk) 13:08, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Articles are protected from editing for many reasons, usually to prevent some sort of disruption. This can be done by request at WP:RFPP, among other ways. If there is a specific article that prompted your question, we can give a more specific answer.
Usually edits can still be requested on the article talk page, in the form of an edit request. 331dot (talk) 13:38, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
For more, see Wikipedia:Protection policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:15, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Dingo Pictures

Hello. I have just made an article for Dingo Pictures (studio), but there is this redirect link in place of the original article for Dingo Pictures without the "(studio)" (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dingo_Pictures&redirect=no), and even after reading the history merging and request move pages, I am not sure how to combine the new and old articles properly, since in 2024 Finngall added a redirect template saying, "Please do not create an article from this redirect (unless unless moving a ready draft here)." Please can you help? Bladerunner09 (talk) 18:40, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Bladerunner09, Dingo Pictures (studio) will very soon be deleted, unless somebody contests the deletion. It's unlikely that anybody other than you will contest it. You're free to contest it, but NB unless you do so according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, your appeal will be certain to fail. -- Hoary (talk) 09:21, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
I have just contested the deletion, which should never have been speedied on the basis suggested. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:42, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Move fails

I cannot move my article from the sandbox to Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jcarcione/sandbox?oldid=1301562498 Jcarcione (talk) 07:59, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

It's now at Draft:Babinet's principle in elastodynamics, Jcarcione. -- Hoary (talk) 09:08, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Submit the article for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it to "mainspace". If not, they will give you further advice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:35, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
@Jcarcione I've added the template that will allow you to submit the draft for review. The draft appears very technical and I was struck, for example by the last line As expected, lateral (refracted) and interface waves, such as the Rayleigh wave, do not fulfill the principle. As expected by whom and what is the source that verifies that statement? Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:41, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
... I note that there is already an article on Babinet's principle, as you know since you wikilinked it in your draft. Would your contribution be better as an addition there? Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:44, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Sen. Schumer

How best to add/update information about Sen. Schumer's personal connections to the tech industry

Sen. Chuck Schumer's daughters both work (or recently worked) for large corporations that are subject to policy/legislative actions. As of 2022, Jessica was reported to be a lobbyist for Amazon; Alison a manager at Meta. I haven't found more recent secondary sources but Jessica's LinkedIn profile indicates she is still at Amazon. I can't find a LinkedIn profile for Alison. In any case, I assume that LinkedIn is not an acceptable source but is helpful in guiding a search for other sources.

Chuck Schumer's entry currently notes Alison's position in a section about Schumer's connections to Facebook -- which seems like a good place for it. I'd like to update that. There is nothing in the article about Jessica's position at Amazon. There is a note in Personal Life about a previous notable position she held. I think the information about Amazon belongs in the policy sections, possibly within the existing Technology and the Internet or possibly a (new) section on antitrust. Chuck Schumer

I'd appreciate advice as to how best to add this information. Jreiss17 (talk) 15:12, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello. The best place to discuss this would be Talk:Chuck Schumer. 331dot (talk) 15:15, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
@Jreiss17 Note that WP:BLPNAME applies: information on these non-notable individuals is only useful if relevant to understanding Schumer himself and is very reliably sourced. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:53, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you 331.dot (for both the comment here and message) and Michael D. Turnbull for feedback. 331: I've tried using talk pages (though not often) but have been frustrated with lack of response. But this is a more prominent article so I will try again. (Also, have to note that looking back on my past talk posts, one has gotten a useful reply I will try to follow up on.

Mike: I agree. As I noted, I think this is notable information as possible influence on Sen. Schumer's policy positions. In any event, I'll post this inquiry on the appropriate talk page for further discussion. Jreiss17 (talk) 16:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Jreiss17 Yes, the prominence of an article helps- most of the 100 US Senators' articles are pretty visible- especially the senators in leadership. 331dot (talk) 16:15, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
There are, apparently, 354 watchers for that article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:26, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Notable Student Spokesperson

Hello! I would appreciate help from an experienced editor to review and potentially create a page for a notable Indian student spokesperson named Ahnaf Ishaq. He has been featured in several major Indian national news outlets (NDTV, India Today, Aaj Tak, The Print, EdexLive, etc.) during the 2025 Israel–Iran conflict for representing and speaking on behalf of Indian international students in Tehran. The coverage includes multiple video interviews and written profiles.

I have a properly formatted, neutrally written draft with all sources cited (both YouTube interviews and written articles). I’m not affiliated with the subject and just want to make sure the article is neutrally handled and reviewed.

If needed for clarification, i can be reached out at @ahnafishaq on instagram and twitter.

[ misplaced draft text moved to Draft:Ahnaf Ishaq ]

27.63.16.73 (talk) 18:41, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

You say you're not connected with the subject, yet you use his Twitter id as a method of contacting you too. I don't think you're being honest with use here. That aside, I don't think you meet the notability threshold, you're one of several people interviewed in each case, that doesn't make you a "key spokesperson". It makes you a witness to what's happening and to talk about your personal experiences but none of the interviews are really about you. Nthep (talk) 19:01, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Pardon me. I mean to say you can use his twitter and instagram to contact him only. I’m being careless with my words. Your help is appreciated. 27.63.16.73 (talk) 06:14, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
I have moved your text to Draft:Ahnaf Ishaq.
Please feel free to continue to work on it there, and if and when you feel the issues identified are adequately addressed, and only then, you may use The AFC process to submit it for review by a neutral editor. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:53, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
I have submitted it for review. Even though there might be various errors, I cannot identify them. Help is appreciated deeply. 27.63.16.73 (talk) 06:49, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
The draft has been declined today as not showing how this person is notable as defined by Wikpedia. There are two main issues: 1) the text does not conform to the policy for biographies of living people because it lacks inline sources for his "Education and role" etc. and 2) has few if any independent sources (interviews are not independent) to demonstrate his notability. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:16, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Non singles having articles

Hello,

I noticed recently that every song on Pink Floyd’s The Dark Side of the Moon has a wiki page, regardless of if the song is a single or not. I was wondering, why are these made, and what qualifies these songs that aren’t singles to have their own wiki page? SassafrassAlabass (talk) 16:37, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi SassafrassAlabass, please see WP:NSONG "Songs and singles are probably notable if they have received significant coverage as the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label." it doesn't have to be a single, but it needs "enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article" - the tracks on DSOTM meet these criteria - as do several of Led Zeppelin's songs - although they avoided issuing singles. _ Arjayay (talk) 16:46, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi, SassafrassAlabass, The notability criteria for songs states Songs and singles are probably notable if they have received significant coverage as the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label - so it's not really a requirement that they are ever released seperately (or released at all). The question of why they should have a seperate page, comes down to how much coverage of that topic individually. I think it's apparent that Eclipse has enough sources and there's enough to say about it, independently of the album, that it simply wouldn't fit on the page for Dark Side of the Moon. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 16:52, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for your help, I understand it much better now SassafrassAlabass (talk) 17:51, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Lower Greensand

Dear Sirs and Madams, the Lower Greensand page could be improved by pointing out to readers that the group is more strongly developed on the Isle of Wight than elsewhere and it achieves a thickness of about 850feet there. It is very fossiliferous with corals e.g. Holocystis elegans, Branchiopoda eg Sellithyris sella and bivalves eg Panopaea gurgitis. Crustacea e.g Meyeria can also occur. yours faithfully Paul Stevenson 2A02:C7C:73D1:1800:FD94:D97D:BB44:4176 (talk) 12:27, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Please make suggestions on the talk page for the article in this case Talk:Lower Greensand Group (I presume). When you do, you should include citations to reliable sources that support the claims, or they will not be included. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:47, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

My article draft keeps getting declined

My article draft keeps getting declined. I'd really appreciate any help or advice.

Hi everyone,

I'm reaching out to ask for some advice on how to improve my Wiki page so that it has a better chance of being approved. This is my first time helping a friend create a professional Wikipedia profile. I've tried multiple times, but the page keeps getting rejected.

I’d really appreciate any tips or suggestions from those with experience. Thank you so much!

Draft:Tony Tolovae AlexHuang8FG (talk) 04:24, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

@AlexHuang8FG: It's been rejected, which means it will not be considered further. And if it's your friend, then you have a conflict of interest which you should have declared (not that that will make a difference to the outcome).
(Teahouse helpers, see also Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk § 04:25, 20 July 2025 review of submission by AlexHuang8FG ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 06:46, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
All of the citations lead to 404s, I've flagged as a likely hoax and it reads to me like the entire thing is fabricated. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 06:54, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
See below (which predates my reading of this subsection); citations seem real. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:50, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
(edit semi-conflict; note it was the previous deleted version of the draft that had fake refs) @Pigsonthewing: Note that AlexHuang8FG's previous attempt at this draft was rejected at AfC and since deleted (and he was asking about it at § My article draft keeps getting declined. I'd really appreciate any help or advice. just a few threads earlier, before the draft was deleted). Contrary to some of the others who looked at it, I don't think this is a hoax – a cursory web search does turn up a basketball player with this name. However, Alex, even if you think your friend meets Wikipedia's notability criteria, submitting a draft with LLM-hallucinated references, without disclosing your conflict of interest, and continuing to push this draft after it has been rejected, is not doing your friend any favours. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 12:55, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Tony Tolovae

I’m creating a page for Australian basketball player Tony Tolovae. Appreciate any feedback to help get it approved. Thanks!

I’m creating a Wikipedia article for Tony Tolovae to help raise the profile of Australian basketball players. I’d be truly grateful for any suggestions. Thank you! AlexHuang8FG (talk) 12:32, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

I've moved the proposed article content that you posted here, to Draft:Tony Tolovae. The main thing that needs to be fixed is you have no inline citations. See Help:Referencing for beginners. These are required for articles about living people. When that is done, you can submit the article for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it. If not, they will give you further advice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:41, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Photo

I have an old photo that I want to insert from a site called Automotivetribune.com. The photo was originally used in a 1981 press release. How can I do that? There are a couple of these pics that I'd like to insert in my article. I work for the man in the photo and he has given his permission to use them but they originally were shown on that website and in a press release. Annellacarol34 (talk) 22:56, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Annellacarol34. A photo first published in 1981 is almost certainly still protected by copyright. You cannot use it unless you have convincing written evidence that it is in the public domain or has been freely licensed in an acceptable way. The subject of the photo is rarely the copyright holder. Most commonly, the photographer or their estate holds the copyright. Sometimes, in a written "work for hire" scenario, the party who hired the photographer holds the copyright. Cullen328 (talk) 04:06, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
@Annellacarol34 If you work for the person you're writing about, you are considered a paid editor and are required to make a paid-contribution disclosure regardless of whether you are specifically paid to edit. You should also read Wikipedia's conflict-of-interest guidelines.
If you are talking about Draft:Solar thermal automobile, pictures are less important than demonstrating that the topic meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. You need to add independent, reliable sources that directly discuss the solar thermal automobile with some amount of detail. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
Do you know who took the picture (and thus likely owns the copyright)? You say the subject "has given his permission"; he can only do so if he is the copyright holder. If he is, or you are in contact with the copyright holder, and they are willing, see c:COM:THIRD for terms and guidance.
Otherwise, you might be able to use the picture under fair use criteria, but only in a published article, not a draft. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:01, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Question

Hello! Sorry if this is a bad question or if this is the wrong place to put this. I created an account today and I wanted to help work on Swiss articles. So I looked at Switzerland to see if I could fix anything and saw there was a lock on the pencil to edit and that I couldn't edit the page? Why is that? Thanks in advance! Herisau (talk) 19:00, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Pages that get vandalised often are "protected". You can read about this at WP:Protection.
You might also be interested in WP:WikiProject Switzerland. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:20, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
@Herisau You could take a look at the articles within Category:Switzerland, especially the articles listed as "stubs" which could do with expansion. Few of the articles in this category will be protected. Thanks for wanting to improve coverage of Swiss-related topics. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:28, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

website I’m trying to credit being blacklisted

I’m trying to makeYouAreAnIdiot trojan page draft, but it appears that “youareanidiot.org” is blacklisted, disabling me from crediting it. How may I bypass this? InterstellarInterloper (talk) 14:52, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Why would you need to link to the site? I don't remember this particular site and have no opinion on whether or not it's notable, but I'm not sure I understand the issue here. --Onorem (talk) 14:59, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
It’s the fact that I cannot publish the draft without having to remove “youareanidiot.org.” It’s an essential part of the information in the draft. InterstellarInterloper (talk) 15:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
You can as for an exception to be made, at WT:WHITELIST. Otherwise, you can include URL as youareanidiot.org, without "https://", as you did here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:49, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
@InterstellarInterloper It is pointless trying to whitelist that domain until your article can demonstrate that the topic is notable as defined by Wikipedia. At present, your Draft:YouAreAnIdiot has been declined for lack of reliable sources meeting all of the necessary conditions. For example, a wiki, like Wikipedia itself, is not considered reliable. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:08, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Enter a page that needs edit quickly

Hi. I just want to know, how can I find articles that need to be edited faster? Is there a menu to find them? Or should I find them manually? PandaCreator (talk) 21:15, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

PandaCreator, tens of thousands need to be edited. But here's a tip: When an age is described as "tender", it's likely that the whole article is more or less promotional/sycophantic junk. And therefore: this. When you find a poor article, be sure to edit it slowly. (NB You must carefully distinguish between direct, attributed quotations on the one hand and what's written "in Wikipedia's voice" on the other.) -- Hoary (talk) 21:29, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Maintenance categories such as this one are a good place to find some articles to improve. 🧙‍♀️ Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 21:46, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
You might be looking for the Task Center. -- Avocado (talk) 17:26, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Assessment rating question

What is the rarest standard grade an article can receive? 2600:1700:6180:6290:4526:9A10:C29C:2F7A (talk) 04:16, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi IP, interesting question. A section below the one you linked should provide a satisfying answer. While Featured Articles (FA) are the highest an article can get, articles that get an "A" grade are more rare. Justiyaya 04:39, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
I don’t get it. StopLookingAtMe1 (talk) 04:41, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
@StopLookingAtMe1:: If article assessments were made for every article, you would expect Featured Articles (the highest grade) to be the rarest. However, article assessments are really a tool for 1) recognizing our quality articles (and the editors who wrote them) and 2) categorize our articles by quality. The assessment is not the goal in itself, so not all articles get assessed. In addition, only Good and Featured Articles are assessed through specialized processes (as opposed to any editor making a judgement call) and so their assessments receive more attention. This results in A-class articles (the highest non-formal grade) being overall the rarest grade, and that's why the IP's question was interesting. I deduced this from looking at the statistics table and knowing how article assessments work. Feel free to ask any other questions :). Cheers, Sophocrat (talk) 05:10, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Most articles that would be eligible for an A Grade are pretty close to Good Article standards, so editors working on them have a tendency to pursue Good Article status (and the associated prestige) than leave them at A Grade. -- Avocado (talk) 17:29, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Unverifiable offline sources

How do I identify which offline sources have caused my article to be rejected? Thirston House Feltonian (talk) 10:19, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

If you are referring to Draft:Thirston House, it 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.
Most of the sources you used seem to be very old; did you access them in a library? 331dot (talk) 10:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Do you have a connection to this historic structure? Your username suggests one. 331dot (talk) 10:28, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Yes I sourced the books in the Local Hisotry Section of my local library and the library at the Northumberland Archives. I don't have a connection to the building but I do live within nearby. Feltonian (talk) 11:57, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
SafariScribe, could you explain your decision to decline the submission in more detail? You wrote "Draft with unverifiable offline sources. Please read WP:OFFLINESOURCES", but per that linked page, offline sources are perfectly acceptable. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:23, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
@Feltonian One of the problems with your draft is that it veers off-topic with many interesting but hardly relevant items such as The fourth Thomas and Margaret had seven children over the next ten years. All were boys. One of the boys courted a labourer's illegitimate daughter named Mary Wallace who lived at East Thirston. He wrote a song about her entitled "The Lassie" which was set to the tune of "Roy's Wife" [with the full words of the song]. I think you would get a much better draft by trimming it down to focus just on the house, which as a grade II listed building, should easily pass our notabilty requirements. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:11, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you. Feltonian (talk) 12:03, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
[EC] Here's a sample: THIRSTON HOUSE, FELTON, SALE OF HOUSEHOLD FURNITURE, MESSRS. DONKIN & SON Instructed by the Representatives of the late R. E. Smith, Esq., will sell by auction on Thursday and Friday, March 26th and 27th, the whole of the HOUSEHOLD FURNITURE within the Mansion of Thirston House, viz. : Followed by a long list of, yes, the household furniture within the mansion of the house. Now, what's trivia to me may fascinate you (and indeed vice versa); but I venture to guess that this would seem trivia to most people. I suggest that this and material like it should be cut. -- Hoary (talk) 11:15, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you. I was trying to show how the house was being lived in by giving details of the furniture but I can see how that seems like trivia. Feltonian (talk) 12:02, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Yes I thought it was ok to include offline sources which is why I don't know which sources caused the article to be declined. Feltonian (talk) 12:00, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Offline sources have a minimum amount of information required to successfully cite them. For books, we need title, author, publisher, year of publication, page(s) being cited, and either the ISBN or OCLC #. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:37, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Much of the language is not encyclopedic ("closer examination shows..." etc). If some of the people mentioned are notable in their own right, they could have their own article. 219.89.24.171 (talk) 22:12, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
@Feltonian You have re-submitted your draft but I predict that it will be declined again. Among other problems, what you cite does not verify the full content, and that's because I suspect much of your text is original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. To take one example I happened to look at, you say After his marriage in 1719, Thomas Smith of West Thirston built a large house on the site of the present Thirston House, which appears to have been built onto an existing, possibly bastle, house. This earlier house may have been the medieval manor house, or hall, of the manor of Thirston. Into the new house Thomas had a stone inserted which bore the initials 'T' for Thomas and 'D' for his wife, Dorothy, and the date '1728' which is thought to be the date of the completion of the build. The stone still exists and has been reused as a lintel in an outbuilding. etc. The only citation for that paragraph is Hodgson (1899), p.305 which when checked on archive.org says absolutely none of that! It merely confirms a later bit about Robert Widdrington. Frankly, you would be better to delete all but your lead paragraphs, which currently don't serve as a summary of the main article, as they are supposed to do, but in fact tell us almost all we need to know to confirm that Thirston House itself is notable. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:03, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
I must check my references as it looks as if I have mixed them up during revisions and editing. And thank you for your rapid response and input. This is very helpful as it is the first time that I have tried to submit anything to Wikepedia. Feltonian (talk) 21:19, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Feltonian, and welcome to the Teahouse.
A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what several independent reliable sources say about the subject, and very little else (see WP:42). What you know (or what I know, or what any other random person on the internet knows) about the subject is irrelevant, except where it is verified by a reliable published source.
So, to write an article successfully, first find appropriate sources, then write a summary of them, then stop. (Actually, if you have a reasonable article, you can then add a limited amount of information from non-independent sources, but absolutely nothing which comes only from unpublished documents or from your personal knowledge.)
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) 21:18, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Telesforo Montes Bio

Hi, Teleforo Montes is my great, great grandfather. I wrote his life story and posted it on my website, www.montes-family.com. Telesforo Montes was honored by the El Paso Historical Society a few years ago.

Please let me know what I can do to post Telesforo Montes on wikipedia. Thanks 2600:6C4E:18F0:1BB0:644A:A7A8:C787:9388 (talk) 01:12, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello IP. I'm glad your ancestor was honored by the historical society but I strongly doubt he qualifies for an article. Subjects must be notable to have an article on Wikipedia. Here, notability basically means that articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. For example, 3 such sources talking in-depth of the subject would normally be sufficient. Looking online I can't find enough such coverage.
Feel free to ask any other questions. Cheers, Sophocrat (talk) 02:51, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Enlarging on Sophocrat's answer above (and I assume you have read the material and further links at the Project page they linked to), sources for an article do not have to be online; those in published printed material (books, print newspapers and journals, etc.) are equally valid (though harder to check) so long as the References to them that you create and cite give full bibliographic details, enabling an interested reader to, for example, find them in some library somewhere.
Since your great, great grandfather obviously flourished pre-internet, it may be that there are printed sources like these about him that have never been digitised. If so, you can use them as long as they meet the requirements. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.5.172.125 (talk) 10:43, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

article has been created. <-- what does "created" exactly mean ?

There is this line in the draft : Important, do not remove anything above this line before article has been created.

What, exactly, is "created". Dœs that mean "it exists as a draft" ? "it has been published" ? Something else ?

Thanks in advance,

Baudouin BaudouinVH (talk) 09:19, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello @BaudouinVH, in this context "created" means the draft has been moved to the mainspace. – AllCatsAreGrey (talk) 10:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

How to create Categories

I have been having challenges on how to create categories and to link them appropriately between sister projects. i.e. from Wikidata to Wikipedia etc. I will be glad if I can get some help on this. Thank you. Friday musa (talk) 09:58, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Does Wikipedia:Categorization help? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:30, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
To be asked at Wikipedia talk:Featured lists. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:04, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

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.

I knw, I know, I know. I'm not a newbie newcomer, but I couldn't think of anybody or anywhere else that could help me quickly. There is this article, Outline of Spain, that I want to nominate to be a Featured List (For those who don't know, that means if the nomination is approved, it's will become of the best lists in Wikipedia). I think it could pass the nominitaion according to the criteria, but a great part of what I've learned came from looking at source code, so I'm from 2% to around 32% sure it will pass. Also, I don't know if being third in autorship is enough. For you (yes you, the one watching this to check if your question has already been solved) to measure autorship of an article (how much has somebody written it), go here. Can somebody help? Earth605 (talk) 11:25, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

This question would be better asked on Wikipedia talk:Featured lists. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:59, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. How do I eliminate or make this disappear or whatever so I can transfer it there? Earth605 (talk) 12:02, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Like this... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:04, 23 July 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.

2 drafts for AfC review (Genomes.io & Tony Mafia)

Help! I have been working on two draft articles and would appreciate help submitting them for AfC review.

1. Draft:Genomes.io 2. Draft:Tony Mafia

I’ve made edits and added reliable sources and inline citations to address previous concerns. However, when I click “Resubmit,” the system immediately declines them without a new review. I believe it may be related to the AFC code or timestamp issue.

I’ve disclosed my COI on the Talk page of each draft and would really appreciate if someone could help get them properly submitted for review.

Anything you can tell me would be highly appreciated.

Thank you so much! Littleclown27 (talk) 12:59, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

to submit a draft, add {{subst:submit|draft creator}} to the page. however, the Genomes draft seem to dont have a lead section. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ choose only one... 13:06, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
That is very helpful! Thanks a lot:) Littleclown27 (talk) 13:38, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Correction made, my former reviewer -Ok it but won’t review it again

I have done the significant corrections MAYBE, but Can any reviewer available help me to review my draft content — Draft:Basorun seinde Arogbofa 9aija (talk) 9aija (talk) 11:52, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

@9aija Your draft has been submitted and will be reviewed in due course. I am not a reviewer but would say that your use of inline citations is now OK and the fact that Arogbofa was awarded the Order of the Federal Republic should be a big help in establishing his notability. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:02, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for your words of encouragement, I rlly can’t thank you enough! 9aija (talk) 9aija (talk) 12:11, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Share quantity

I have purchased 200 nos. of Jindal Vijaynagar Steel share certificate on 1995. Now please tell me today how many shares will count? 2409:40E0:28:9788:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 07:38, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

You're not going to get that answer from fora meant to help new users edit or read Wikipedia, practically all of whom aren't anywhere close to familiar enough with stocks or bonds to help appraise them. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 08:26, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
OP Please see https://www.google.com/finance/quote/JSWSTEEL:NSE Shantavira|feed me 10:18, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Zanan Ahmad

I have been contacted by an individual named Zanan Ahmad, of the page I was creating who has expressed that he does not wish to be on Wikipedia even though their their information is publicly online they’ve also mentioned that multiple people have previously attempted to create a page about him, but he has consistently opposed having any such presence on the platform. Out of respect for his personal wishes and privacy, I kindly request that this page be deleted. Thank you for your support Georgehundson (talk) 18:10, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

You do not need a person's permission to write about them. If you no longer wish to, that's certainly your option. If you would like the Draft:Zanan Ahmad deleted, please let me know.
We cannot prevent others from editing about him. 331dot (talk) 18:22, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Ironic, for a man who seemingly describes himself as "a popular British influencer" and "a renowned influencer".
That said, "publicistpaper.com" does not seem like the most reliable source. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:40, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

How can I add source?

I have modified a article and then add some source. Somehow a moderator (Thanks him) identified this as a promotional info and refuse this. So I want to learn how to avoid this and properly edit the content and add source. Any video will be helpful. Thanks all. Engineer.Johirul (talk) 15:02, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

@Engineer.Johirul I recommend familiarizing yourself with Wikipedia's neutral POV policy and reading this guide to learn the proper way to add references to articles. – AllCatsAreGrey (talk) 15:16, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Engineer.Johirul, and welcome to the Teahouse.
Thank you for wanting to help improve Wikipedia, and please don't be disheartened: there is a lot to understand about how Wikipedia works, and everybody makes mistakes at the beginning.
Every piece of information in an article should be verifiable from a reliable published source. (It's not strictly required to cite the source in all cases, but since you must have a source in order to add the information, why not cite it?)
Conversely, as far as I know, the only purpose of a citation in a Wikipedia article is to provide verification for one or more pieces of information in the article.
You added a load of uncited information to Walton Group, and then in a separate edit added a load of citations at the end, giving no indication of which citation supports which information. Please study referencing for beginners
The information you added all looks as if it is what Walton Group wants people to know about its products - that's why @Theroadislong said it was "promotional". 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.
By the way, Theroadislong is not a "moderator": we don't have moderators. They are simply a very experienced editor. ColinFine (talk) 15:18, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

wiki page creation

I tried to request publish a page but I am a newbee in editing wiki page so i made some mistakes. I have the content ready. Can anyone look into it and help me publish the page. Please guide me thanks. Pupps Roy 111.223.26.89 (talk) 19:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, I will give you some advice, though it may be not what you wanted. 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.
Unless you have gone about creating your draft in the following way, it is probably useless:
  1. Find several places where people wholly unconnected with the subject have independently published significant coverage of the subject in reliable publications: see WP:42
  2. If you can't find at least three such sources, do not continue: you will be wasting your time.
  3. Put aside everything that you know about the subject, and write a neutral summary of what those sources say even if you think they are wrong.
ColinFine (talk) 19:40, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Wiki Page Creation: need help

I previously tried creating a page, however I am a newbee so I made some mistakes and I dont want to do any mistakes anymore to disturn the pages. Can anyone guide me or help me publish a page? I have the content ready and its verified with the the required Links. Thanks Pupps Roy Puppsroy (talk) 19:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello. You submitted a blank sandbox as a draft. We suggest that the Article Wizard be used to create a draft.
We also recommend that new users not dive right in to creating articles- it can lead to frustration and anger as things happen to your work that you don't understand. We highly recommend that new users first gain experience by first editing existing articles, and using the new user tutorial.
It's not enough to have "verified content", you need to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic. See your first article. 331dot (talk) 19:18, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi, @Puppsroy. See my answer to you in the section just above. ColinFine (talk) 19:41, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

How to upload a fair-use picture

Hi!

I am trying to upload a cover image of a computer game into Wikipedia. I know I can not use WIkimedia Commons for that, since it's fair use. However, I do not know how to upload the copyrighted picture. And where? Directly into the Wikipedia article? Using which option(s)? What should I click?

I would really appreciate any help.

Thank you in advance Kaworu1992 (talk) 10:33, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I have found the option, sorry for the ruckus... :-) --Kaworu1992 (talk) 10:53, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Too American perspective

What is the template called that an article has too targeted or narrow of a perspective? I was looking at an article where I felt the coverage and writing on the page was too narrowly focused on just a USA pov and I felt a tag to call that out would be beneficial but I forgot how to add that one or what it was called? Iljhgtn (talk) 06:20, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn is that {{Globalize}}? ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 06:40, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
That is it. I appreciate your help. Iljhgtn (talk) 06:43, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Updates to page of E. Sally Ward

Hi,

I recently attempted to update the biographical page of E. Sally Ward. I have a working relationship with her and since several aspects of the page appeared to be out-of-date, I had made several edits to the page. However, the edits were rolled back. I have created a page in my user-space (User:Anishvabraham/E. Sally Ward - Wikipedia) with my edits to facilitate any discussion on my proposed changes.

Please let me know what I can do to have the edits published.

Thanks! Anishvabraham (talk) 03:56, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

@Anishvabraham: Discuss them at Talk:E. Sally Ward. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 05:52, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
@Anishvabraham Since you have a conflict of interest with the subject you should not edit the article directly. Instead, you can propose edits for review by a neutral editor using the edit request wizard. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:57, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
@Helpful Raccoon, @Jéské Couriano Thank you for the tips! Since the change I am proposing is somewhat major and primarily to elaborate on the work this scientist has performed, is it okay to simply link to draft in my user-space within the edit request? Anishvabraham (talk) 21:31, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
@Anishvabraham: Yes, it would be, but you will need to be prepared to defend the text when/if it is questioned on the talk page. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 21:36, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Citation and Guidance

I would like to clarify what sources are considered reliable for citations. CimonaSebastian (talk) 13:20, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

@CimonaSebastian There's advice at a special page at the link WP:RSPS. Note that it has archives you can search for other specific sources you are thinking of using. You can also ask about new ones at WP:RS/N. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:33, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
It depends very much on context. Some guidance at WP:RS. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:14, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi there, Gråbergs Gråa Sång, I also have a question about this so I hope it's okay if I pop in on this thread. Is the reliable sources / perennial sources list supposed to be an exhaustive compilation of news sources that can be cited on Wikipedia? Are you allowed to cite other encyclopedias or wikipedia-style websites? JJ for Arabella (talk) 14:09, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
@JJ for Arabella Hello! WP:RSP is not meant to be exhaustive, it just looks that way because it's long. It's "just" a list of sources that has been discussed repeatedly, which by now is a lot of American media. WP:RSPMISSING expands on this a bit. WP-style websites are, like WP, WP:USERG and generally not useful, but sometimes useful sources can be found there. Encyclopedias like WP:BRITANNICA can be an ok source, but the WP-philosophy is that instead of citing an encyclopedia article (WP:TERTIARY) about the Roman Empire, it's better to cite an actual history book (WP:SECONDARY) about the Roman Empire.
And for the WP-fanatic, we know have Perennial sources list, a WP-article about WP:RSP. Oh well. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for the additional information, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. I was able to search the noticeboard archives and find a discussion about the source I have questions about. As I suspected, editors don't think it should be cited on Wikipedia. Thank you again. JJ for Arabella (talk) 15:56, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest and Creation of a Wikipedia Page

To the Hosts of the Wikipedia Teahouse:

We would like to create a Wikipedia article about a notable person with whom we have a personal acquaintance, and about whom our Founder/Creator has written a published article in the past. Would such be frowned upon under the Wikipedia Conflict of Interest guidelines?

Likewise, we would like to create a Wikipedia article about museum created by a person to whom our Founder/Creator is related. Would such be frowned upon under the Wikipedia Conflict of Interest guidelines?

Many thanks in advance for your time.

ArtHistoryHistoiredelart (talk) 19:55, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Please see WP:COI and WP:PAID, with both of which you are required to comply. We also do not allow shared or organisational accounts, so please register one for each individual, separately, who will be editing.
You may also find WP:BOSS and WP:About you useful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:25, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Dear Andy Mabbett,
Thank You for your suggestions and references. I will definitely have a look at them, and proceed as seems fitting. For confirmation, this is an individual account for which contributions are not compensated in any way.
Please see my more detailed reply to your concerns on my talk page.
ArtHistoryHistoiredelart (talk) 20:26, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
I've already replied there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:30, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
OK. Thank You.
ArtHistoryHistoiredelart (talk) 21:10, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Hellpo, @ArtHistoryHistoiredelart. It is very unlikely that an article written for another purpose will be suitable for a Wikipedia article, because it is unlikely to be a neutral summary of independent reliable sources, with essentially no content coming from either the subject or their associates, or from the writer's knowledge: that is what a Wikipedia article should be.
Please see WP:42 for the kinds of sources which you should base essentially the whole of any article upon. ColinFine (talk) 21:54, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Dear Colin Fine,
Thank You for your response to my concern about what may or may not be considered appropriate contributions to Wikipedia in the context of the creation of an article.
There seems to be a more complex issue here, in my humble opinion: individuals will want to contribute and write about things in which they have a personal interest (an interest of personal experience, not necessarily a financial interest) and things that they know something about, as opposed to things which they know nothing about. Given that people naturally have a greater personal interest and greater knowledge about things to which they are personally connected, nuanced questions surrounding COI will typically arise, in my humble opinion.
In my humble opinion, the ultimate "checks" on this complexity and these nuanced questions surrounding COI are the Wikipedia source and citation requirements, and your reference in this regard is sincerely appreciated.
ArtHistoryHistoiredelart (talk) 20:47, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello again, @ArtHistoryHistoiredelart. Of course people mostly write about subjects they are interested in; but they need to take care that they do not put anything in an article which is either a) their own opinion, or b) known to them but not verifiable from a reliable published source, or c) sourceable only to primary or non-independent sources (exception a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information - see WP:SPS). Unfotunately, many new editors (and some not so new ones) do not understand this. ColinFine (talk) 21:12, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
No, "source and citation requirements" are not the ultimate checks with regard to COI editing. An article may be perfectly sourced and cited, but still a mass of PoV, non-neutral, promotional content.
I repeat what I have said elsewhere: you are required to comply, fully, with WP:COI and WP:PAID; and you should not edit where you have even a hint of COI, until you have answered the questions I put to you on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:20, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

1960 Ford Galaxie/Ranchero

In the book Ford Ranchero 1957-1979 Photo History By James C. Mays, chapter 2 pg.25. Its stated that before the down sized Rancheros were finally available for market, a good-sized order for Rancheros was received from a large power company in the Pacific Northwest. Rather than loose out to Chevrolet. Foord reached into the 1959 parts bin and cobbled together a number of full sized 1960 Rancheros based on the 1960 Galaxie body. I am looking for any photos of said Ranchero and or what power company purchased the ranchero order. 2601:58C:4302:9560:345D:BFAC:113:6744 (talk) 22:15, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to a page for people asking for help with using Wikipedia. Your request seems to belong to a Ford enthusiasts' forum, or Facebook group, or similar. -- Hoary (talk) 23:02, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
IP editor: have you tried looking at the pictures in commons:Category:Ford Ranchero? Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:05, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Admins

Do admins work for WMF? 71.231.11.148 (talk) 05:23, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Admins are volunteer editors just like everyone else. A few admins are also employees, but the crossover is very small. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 05:26, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
IP editor: WP:ADMIN gives the full details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

How do i improve my editing?

How do i improve my editing? (English, but letters that arent in the old english alphabet are replaced, and ligatures are there, the old english ones: Hoƿ Do I Improve Mȝ Editiŋ?)

Its actually my 6th time editing, and when i first joined wikipedia, i didn't know about the teahouse (if its a different name then say that in the response), and i just needed to improve my editing, and i didnt know what to do, i wanted to do lots of stuff, including the character Ⱡ in melpa and nii, (Letters not in old english are replaced by its old english counterpart, and old english ligatures are there: Its Actuallȝ mȝ 6þ/6ð time editinᵹ, and ƿhen i firſt Goined ƿikipedia, i didnt knoƿ about þe teahouſe, and i gust nēded to improve mȝ editing, and i didn't knoƿ ƿhat to do, i ƿanted to do lotſ of ſtuff, includiŋ þe character Ⱡ in melpa and nii.) Harry Brềnd Nế (talk) 08:33, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Harry Brềnd Nế, your list of contributions shows no contributions to articles. Once you contribute to articles, people will be able to tell you how you can improve. Meanwhile, your use of quaint characters doesn't help communication. -- Hoary (talk) 09:24, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
...doubly so when they are used incorrectly. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:38, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Fwiw, WP has an article about Ⱡ. WP:BACKWARD may be of help to you, and perhaps WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:49, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Harry_Brềnd_Nế, here is a draft, created by you alone, in the state it was in when you submitted it for review. As it lacks even a single sentence, it's not surprising that even its title ("UPA - Phonetic System") is obscure. (At a wild guess, it's somehow related to the Uralic Phonetic Alphabet. But if so, it's not clear how an additional article would be helpful.) ¶ How do you improve your editing? By starting at square one. -- Hoary (talk) 00:33, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
uralic phonetic alphabet? Its not that i think... but its also known as american something something, i don't know the last 2 words.
The IPA did reject the small capital a 3 or more times! It was going to be used for the turned a sound, but they used the turned A letter. Harry Brềnd Nế (talk) 13:30, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Notable company in niche industry

Draft:LRQA

Hello all, in a bit of an odd position, I'm trying to get the LRQA draft page through submission but it's been declined due to notability. The problem is this is not the kind of industry where mainstream media is lining up to report on it, in this case I wonder whether things like company size, search volume, consumer interest etc are taken into account? What I'm getting at is due to the niche nature of the industry, the company is notable to those within it but understandably less so in the eyes of the general public.

On a separate note, currently if you search LRQA on Wikipedia you are redirected to Lloyds Register, a company now unrelated and in a different industry to LRQA. Dhwani at LRQA (talk) 13:32, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

That is a very strong indication that we don't need an article on LRQA, articles are based on what reliable, independent sources report, if they don't report anything then we simply don't have an article. See WP:NCORP for the criteria. Theroadislong (talk) 14:20, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia's requirements does mean that some topics that do not recieve coverage in independent reliable sources will not be written about here, because there is nothing to verify that shows how the topic is notable. 331dot (talk) 14:23, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi @Dhwani at LRQA. I went through every single source when I reviewed this, trying to see how to approve it - but there was no indication any of the sources met Wikipedia:ORGCRIT. qcne (talk) 14:41, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
There are many other ways companies can communicate, not least through their own website. One of the surest ways to get an article on Wikipedia is when a company does something controversial or makes a mistake that is widely reported! More at this essay, which points out some of the pitfalls of having a Wikipedia article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:51, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

inserting a bio box

I have recently had an article accepted (Robert E. Bourke Jr) and want to insert a bio box upper right of page 1. How is the best way to do this? Legendt9455 (talk) 22:35, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

I would take a look at articles of similar individuals/topics and edit their source; there ought to be a corresponding "infobox" template you could copy and paste. I started one for you in case you prefer to use the visual editor. OceanLoop (talk) 23:35, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Legendt9455, the article Robert E. Bourke Jr. already has Template:Infobox person. Template:Infobox person/doc lists and describes what you can do with this. -- Hoary (talk) 00:03, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Main Wikipedia English Page

I was just wondering who is in charge of updating the main page of the English articles on Wikipedia? Is it an automatic update or does someone have to handpick which articles are being added everyday? 2601:8C0:600:3730:3158:B6A2:3D3B:9160 (talk) 03:02, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

The top page is a set of modules. One is "From today's featured article". At its foot are a number of links. One of these, "About", takes one to Wikipedia:About Today's featured article. This, together with what's linked from it, pretty much answers your question as regards featured articles. The other modules are explained similarly. -- Hoary (talk) 04:32, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates, where you can nominate articles to appear. There is also a nomination process for WP:Did you know, although that's usually only done by editors associated with the article they are nominating. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:36, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Deleting Article

Hello, I made a draft for an article Draft:Chernoh Alpha M. Bah, but need to delete it immediately. The subject contact me saying he does not consent to its posting and that it could put him at risk. Can someone help me get the deletion approved? Thank you so much!

In addition, it seems like a copy of the draft was posted on "Wikitia" which is like a fake Wikipedia? Does anything know anything about this and how I can get it taken down? I'm still new here and feel really terrible about this whole situation. Gnat8 (talk) 09:29, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Deleted by @DoubleGrazing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:04, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
@Gnat8: I have deleted the draft per your request. You're not quite the only editor to have worked on it, but close enough that I could delete it; we obviously don't want anyone's safety or security to be jeopardised by overly strict interpretation of our speedy deletion rules.
That being said, the subject's consent is not normally required for an article (less still, a draft) to be written. If the content is, as it should be, based on previously published sources, then all the information in the draft or article should be already publicly available somewhere, and Wikipedia summarising such content shouldn't matter much.
We have no control over Wikitia, you will have to take that up with them. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:05, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you. Have you heard of Wikitia or know anything about it? It seems like a scam where you pay to edit, but I'm really worried about getting this taken down. I'd appreciate any advice. Gnat8 (talk) 10:10, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
I have my views on Wikitia, but I should probably keep them to myself; I certainly couldn't comment on whether it is a 'scam' or not.
I know that Wikitia copies content from Wikipedia, including from our draft space: the Bah article seems to have been copied across already back in June 2024. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:17, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
As I understand it, it's out of our hands, see for example Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2020_October_12#Wikitia,_a_clone_site_of_Wikipedia_has_completely_copied_my_Wikipedia_draft. You can try to contact them and ask them to delete, but I'm very cynical here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:22, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Dismissed by Reviewer in less than 5 minutes...

 Courtesy link: User:BFPedro/sandbox

I have just finished writing an article and received in less than 5 minutes the following comment from the reviewer : "sources are appallingly bad." if you ask to any A.I. with internet access, they immediately show a lot of information that validates most if not all of the submitted information. and even on google, you can find a lot of info about from page 01 to page 05. but all I've got from the reviewer (in a lighting speed) was: "sources are appallingly bad."

I would like to either have a second opinion that takes the time to do the research or to be guided appropriately instead of being rudely dismissed with the vaguest line I've ever received.

Thank you in advance for the time and assistance. BFPedro (talk) 12:21, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I can't see a single independent reliable source in your draft and that is what we base articles on. Theroadislong (talk) 12:24, 23 July 2025 (UTC)0

As mentioned above, here's a list of independent reliable sources to help you with this:

Long list
1. Sources on Your Role at InkTec Europe (Application Manager, Senior Graphic Designer, Creative Art Director)
These corroborate your current position, expertise in DTG/DTF printing, and industry contributions since 2024.
Images Magazine Profile (2024): Features an interview/profile on you and colleague Ian Windebank at InkTec, discussing your role in technical sales support, graphic design, and printing innovations. Independent/reliable: Established UK-based trade magazine for the garment decoration and printing industry with editorial standards.
URL: https://www.images-magazine.com/ian-windebank-pedro-hernandez-inktec/
InkTec Europe Press Release (2024): Announces the new technical sales support team, naming you as Application Manager and highlighting your contributions to customer experience and growth in printing tech. Independent/reliable: Official company announcement from a reputable international firm (InkTec), often cited in Wikipedia for professional roles.
URL: https://www.inktec-europe.com/uncategorized/new-technical-sales-support-team-to-elevate-customer-experience-and-drive-growth/
Eye on Display Article (2024): Covers InkTec's team launch, mentioning your role in application management and design for DTG/DTF technologies. Independent/reliable: Industry news site focused on display and printing tech, providing secondary coverage by republishing and contextualizing press releases.
URL: https://www.eyeondisplay.com/inktec-launches-new-technical-sales-support-team/
Printwear & Promotion Magazine Mention (2024): Discusses InkTec's team expansion, including your expertise in graphic design and printing applications (found via search; mirrors Eye on Display but adds industry context). Independent/reliable: UK trade magazine for printwear and promotional products, with established credibility.
URL: https://printwearandpromotion.co.uk/inktec-launches-new-technical-sales-support-team/
2. Sources on Your Advocacy and Mental Health Work (Printing Charity Feature)
These verify your 2023 feature in Men's Health Awareness Week and advocacy for work-life balance in creative/printing industries.
The Printing Charity Article (2023): Part four of their Men's Health Awareness Week series, featuring your insights on stress management, travels, and resilience from Venezuela to the UK. Independent/reliable: Official publication from a UK charity with a long history (founded 1827), providing independent coverage of industry figures.
URL: https://www.theprintingcharity.org.uk/news/part-four-of-our-mens-health-awareness-week-series/
Printing Charity News Archive (2023): Broader coverage of the 2023 awareness week, linking to your feature and corroborating your advocacy role. Independent/reliable: Same charity's news hub, reinforcing the primary article.
URL: https://www.theprintingcharity.org.uk/news/mens-health-week-2023/
3. Sources on Beardman Vzla (Founding, Brand Development 2012–2015)
These corroborate the brand's existence, your role as founder, and its cultural impact in Venezuela (though coverage is limited due to the time elapsed and regional focus).
Scribd Document (2012): The constitutive act for Beardman Vzla C.A., detailing your founding and directorship (publicly uploaded document). Independent/reliable: While primary, Scribd hosts verifiable legal docs; often used in Wikipedia for business founding verification when no secondary sources exist.
URL: https://www.scribd.com/document/787841742/BEARDMAN-VZLA
La Prensa de Lara Mention (2014, archived via search): A local Venezuelan newspaper article (found via archived search) discussing Beardman Vzla's launch and your innovative approach to beard care amid economic challenges. Independent/reliable: Established regional newspaper in Lara, Venezuela, providing secondary coverage (note: Access may require archives like Wayback Machine).
URL: https://web.archive.org/web/201407XXXX/laprensalara.com.ve/articulo-beardman-vzla (exact archived link may vary; search for "Beardman Vzla La Prensa" yields hits from 2014).
4. Sources on Filmmaking and Workshops (e.g., 2013 Taller with William Goite)
These help verify your DOP/film director roles, workshop participation, and entry into filmmaking (coverage is sparser, but cross-references help).
CNAC (Centro Nacional Autónomo de Cinematografía) Archives (2013, via search): Official Venezuelan government film body records mentioning ANAC-CNAC workshops, including acting/cinema programs led by William Goite around 2013, aligning with your participation timeline. Independent/reliable: Government cultural institution's public archives, useful for verifying event existence.
URL: https://www.cnac.gob.ve/ (search for "Taller Actuación para Cine y Televisión William Goite 2013" or archived reports).
Venezuelan Film Workshop Coverage (2013, via El Universal archive search): Newspaper article on CNAC workshops, referencing participants and leaders like Goite, corroborating the program's structure and your described roles. Independent/reliable: Major Venezuelan newspaper (El Universal), providing secondary context.
URL: https://www.eluniversal.com/entretenimiento/1311XX/talleres-cnac-cine (archived; exact date matches November 2013).
5. General Career and Notability Sources
These provide broader corroboration of your overall career trajectory, relocations, and skills.
ENIC/UK NARIC Equivalency Records (general, via search): Confirms recognition of Venezuelan design qualifications (e.g., CIDIG) as UK-equivalent, supporting your education claims. Independent/reliable: Official UK government-linked body for qualification verification.
URL: https://www.enic.org.uk/Qualifications (search for "Venezuela graphic design equivalency").

Please let me know if these are not enough sources for you. Kind regards. BFPedro (talk) 12:37, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

these are sources generated by AI and most of them return 404 errors, please don't use AI to create drafts or to communicate here. Theroadislong (talk) 12:42, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
User:BFPedro/sandbox Got deleted under {{Db-u5}} criteria 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 14:05, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Guidance on name confusion

Hello Teahouse, I'm a new user who had a draft deleted for being an autobiography. I understand the policy now and won't recreate it. However, search results for "Pedro Hernandez" are dominated by a criminal case, confusing people with my career (graphic designer/filmmaker Pedro Hernandez) and this being the main reason I started with the article in the first place. Can someone advise on requesting an article via WP:REQUESTEDARTICLES or creating a disambiguation page? I believe I can provide independent sources. Thanks! Pedro Hernandez.BFPedro (talk) 13:54, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, BFPedro. First and foremost: you should know that search engine optimization is not a good reason to create a Wikipedia article. We have no control over what Google does or doesn't do with its search algorithm, and there's no guarantee that creating a Wikipedia article for yourself would help. Second, just so you know, we don't do disambiguation pages if there's only one article for a particular name; disambiguation pages are for between Wikipedia articles, not between people per se. As for requested articles, you can find the instructions at the top of this page, but do note that this is a volunteer project, and there's no guarantee that anyone will pick up that work, either. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:03, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
There is already a disambiguation page for Pedro Hernandez once you become notable in Wikipedia terms it might be possible to have an article about you, but it would be best if you didn't write it. Theroadislong (talk) 14:12, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you both, Writ Keeper and Theroadislong, for the quick and helpful responses
I appreciate the guidance as a new user and I completely understand that SEO isn't a valid reason for an article, and that disambiguation is for existing Wikipedia pages. No worries, I won't try to create anything myself. Noted about the existing Pedro Hernandez disambiguation page (quite useful resource by the way); if notability is established through independent coverage, I'll let others handle any additions.
For context (and if anyone's interested in volunteering via Requested Articles), here are some independent sources I've gathered that cover my career in graphic design, filmmaking, and entrepreneurship:
Images Magazine profile (2024) on my role at InkTec Europe: https://www.images-magazine.com/ian-windebank-pedro-hernandez-inktec/
The Printing Charity interview (2023) on mental health advocacy: https://www.theprintingcharity.org.uk/news/part-four-of-our-mens-health-awareness-week-series/
InkTec Europe announcement (2024): https://www.inktec-europe.com/uncategorized/new-technical-sales-support-team-to-elevate-customer-experience-and-drive-growth/
Scribd document on founding Beardman Vzla (2012): https://www.scribd.com/document/787841742/BEARDMAN-VZLA
Thanks again for your time. I'll focus on learning more about contributing to other areas of Wikipedia in the meantime! BFPedro (talk) 14:19, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
I'm afraid there is nothing there that could be used to support an article about you. Theroadislong (talk) 14:36, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

La-Zy

This appears to be nonsense. GMGtalk 17:58, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

La-Zy[ness] is a live band based on laziness. the members are @H .kumari,@Lawliet, and @U. former members are @Aowoa,@C,Jo Yu-ri,@R Sarkarr, @L . N. K. M. and @Elicorn. the albums are Lin are you,L,are,corla,My Tea-House,Oh my bunnieZ,PREdEtIl diaries and La-Zy academy.The album. their manager is @User:123 ABC. 2A01:110F:1C00:F700:B1E1:93F4:C27:EE68 (talk) 16:48, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. It is not clear why you are posting that here. Do you have a question about how to use or edit Wikipedia? Shantavira|feed me 17:19, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

JUJU-ZyZy

Juju-zyzy [formely AiScReam], is a 1 member group under Avex Trax, the members are @LilitA,Kim Ok-vin, and @UserAnnalie. former members are @Pau Conill,@Uli and @eli. 2A01:110F:1C00:F700:B1E1:93F4:C27:EE68 (talk) 16:56, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. It is not clear why you are posting that here. Do you have a question about how to use or edit Wikipedia? Shantavira|feed me 17:18, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Geli-Ode

GELiODἑ [طΈӺiἡἐ] is a duo under ٴ, it's conzits of @Van Aldin and @Anna=Lie origaly a 5 member group, members @Lilit Davtyan,@Magda El Hassan and @Jae 'Lolii' Ivy left in may 2037 albums are Kina,moru-kami and I have some aiscream. 2A01:110F:1C00:F700:B1E1:93F4:C27:EE68 (talk) 17:05, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Did you have a question? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:50, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Question

Hi editors,

I'm new to editing on Wikipedia and recently submitted a draft article for my company, which currently doesn’t have a formal Wikipedia page. I tried my best to follow the correct process through Articles for Creation and disclosed my affiliation with the company.

However, I’m having trouble understanding the current status of the submission and how to move it into the main article space. The article also displays the following tag at the top:

"This article may incorporate text from a large language model. Such text potentially includes hallucinated information or fictitious references. Copyright violations or claims lacking verification must be removed. Please see the associated project page for additional guidance. (June 2025)"

I’ve reviewed the article carefully to ensure all content is accurate, neutrally written, and supported by reliable, independent sources. I also left a note on the Talk page suggesting improvements, but I’m still unsure where I stand in the process or what steps to take next.

Could someone please review the page and let me know if the tag can be removed, or if there’s anything else I should address to help move the article forward? I’d really appreciate any guidance!

Here’s the page: Corix

Thank you. WikiMe220 (talk) 21:39, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @WikiMe220. I'm not sure what is going on with Corix. Looking through the history, I couldn't understand why @Qcne accepted a draft with so few satisfactory citations. But looking in the history, at that point it had 23 citations; but then @Laura240406 and @Theroadislong removed a lot of material including citations, so in my view it now has hardly any suitable sources.
I'm not sure what should be done with it, but I've pinged all those editors, so perhaps they can suggest what is done. ColinFine (talk) 22:03, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi @ColinFine,
Thank you for this. I really appreciate your prompt response and your time spent reviewing. I will stay tuned. WikiMe220 (talk) 22:14, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
With this edit [7] I removed blatant primary sourced promotion of systems. Theroadislong (talk) 07:28, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, I am not sure why I accepted it either. Even the revision with 28 sources.. there really isn't evidence of NORG in those sources. This was a bad accept by me. qcne (talk) 08:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi @Qcne,
Thank you for taking the time to review the article. After the initial feedback, I made sure to include additional notable sources and removed any promotional language. I also ensured that all claims were supported by reliable references.
I’m a bit confused about what might still be missing or incorrect and am wondering if there is a mistake here? Were the new sources not considered suitable? I’d really appreciate any clarification or guidance you can offer so I can continue improving the article in line with Wikipedia’s standards. I’ve put a lot of effort into getting this right and want to make sure I’m on the right track. WikiMe220 (talk) 15:29, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
What we're looking for at a minimum is three strong secondary sources that each meet: independent, reliable, and significant coverage. This precludes press releases, primary sources, interviews with staff, or sources linked to a parent/sister/child corporation. qcne (talk) 15:32, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
To be very blunt: is there any LLM-generated content in the page you included? Yes or no?
If not: was there ever? Yes or no? DS (talk) 22:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi @DragonflySixtyseven,
Thanks for your response. No, there is not and was never any LLM generated content on the page. WikiMe220 (talk) 22:12, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Han-Oh Park

I recently submitted Draft:Han-Oh Park, but it was declined with feedback suggesting that the draft may have been written using a large language model like ChatGPT, and that it contains issues such as promotional tone, vague statements, and essay-like writing.

I’ve gone through the draft again, corrected the reference links, and ensured that the sources used are reliable and independent to the best of my knowledge. However, I understand there may still be areas that need improvement.

Could an experienced editor please review my draft Draft:Han-Oh Park and let me know how I can improve it to meet Wikipedia’s standards? Thank you! SYParkOfBioneer (talk) 07:47, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

The feedback you are requesting can be obtained by re-submitting your draft for review. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:34, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello Andy, thank you for your response.
I mainly updated the references in my draft but haven’t changed much of the article’s tone or structure yet.
Before I resubmit, could you or any experienced editor point out the most important things I should revise?
Specific examples or feedback on problematic sentences/sections would be extremely helpful. SYParkOfBioneer (talk) 05:05, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello,
I have recently revised my draft article "Han-Oh Park" ([Draft:Han-Oh Park](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Han-Oh_Park)) in response to the previous feedback regarding promotional tone, vague statements, and essay-like writing.
This time, I carefully reviewed and improved the references, ensured that all sources are reliable and independent, and rephrased sections to adopt a more neutral, encyclopedic tone.
Before re-submitting the draft for review, I would greatly appreciate any specific advice on sentences, sections, or aspects that still require improvement relating to neutrality, style, structure, or clarity.
Concrete examples or direct quotes highlighting issues would be extremely helpful for making targeted revisions.
Thank you very much for your time and assistance! SYParkOfBioneer (talk) 07:29, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Deletion Review

Hi,

I have doubt on AFD closure. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anjani Sinha. I need help to put this for AFD review, but I am new to doing this. I don't know how to do this. Can anyone help? I read this: Wikipedia:Deletion review but this is so technical.  LKBT (talk) 16:52, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Looks like a near-unanimous keep, to me. The closer had no other option. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
@LKBT I see Wikipedia:Notability in the sources there - I don't think the Closer made an error in closing as keep. qcne (talk) 20:02, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Arizona article history

Why are some rows in the Revision history of Arizona highlighted in blue? And how do I become an approver of pending reviews, also in Revision history? Thank you. OceanLoop (talk) 23:32, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

OceanLoop, Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes says that "Articles with pending changes applied can be reviewed by administrators or users called pending changes reviewers (reviewer user group) who hold the pending changes reviewer permission." For the latter, see "Criteria to receive this permission". -- Hoary (talk) 23:58, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Nomination submitted, thank you; what of the former blue marking - is it related to this privilege? OceanLoop (talk) 00:07, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
I believe the edits in blue are "accepted", and the ones in yellow are "pending" (thus "pending changes"). GoldRomean (talk) 00:16, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Bermuda Triangle in Games

The Bermuda Triangle has its own race level in Hydro Thunder Hurricane why isn’t it mentioned Lordofcallofduty (talk) 03:05, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

It is mentioned once, under the updates and downloadable contents section. There's no elaboration or detail, primarily because in-universe information has to have out-of-universe relevance to be included. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 04:23, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Self-contradicting section

How do i resolve a self-contradicting section due to declasficatin of data and presumed Cover-up data being preent on article?

so State_of_Singapore_(Malaysia) has a scetion `Separation`, which has "cover ups" during the 1965 era where there was misinfomation being spred abiut the sepearation to " stir early nationalism" . after the release of the "albetras filess" . shold we leave the legacy part of the event for "documentation" or should we leave it there due to the widespread belifs? i have attempted to re=arrange the section to try to reduce further misconceptions Solomoncyj (talk) 11:38, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

@Solomoncyj That's the sort of question that is much better asked on the Talk Page of the article at Talk:State of Singapore (Malaysia). The article has over 100 page watchers, who are likely to be interested and informed about such issues. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:52, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Solomoncyj, I do not question (or affirm) the material you and Aleain have added in your recent edits to the article (I do not know enough about the subject – I lived in Singapore in 1964/5, and indeed narrowly escaped death in the MacDonald House bombing, but was a mere boy at the time).
However, I noticed that there were several grammatical errors and English infelicitations in the subsection "The "Albatross Files" and the actual Separation", and in the text and heading of the following subsection "Misconcepted Speration" (the latter simply impossible in English – I have assumed that "Misconceived Separation" was probably meant, although I'm not sure it is appropriate). I have therefore copyedited these. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.5.172.125 (talk) 10:50, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Draft article “List of aviation and aerospace parts suppliers”

Hello,

I have drafted a neutral article titled “List of aviation and aerospace parts suppliers” in my sandbox. As I have a connection to one of the companies mentioned (AMT Aerospace LLC), I would like to request a neutral editor to review the draft and, if appropriate, publish it in the main namespace.

Here is the draft: User:Aircraf Parts/sandbox

Thank you for your time and assistance. Aircraf Parts (talk) 10:48, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Your user name is "Aircraf Parts" not "Aircraft Parts". I have moved the user page you created to the correct spelling.
Your draft is at Draft:List of aviation and aerospace parts suppliers.
The feedback you are requesting can be obtained by submitting your draft for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it to "mainspace". If not, they will give you further advice.
That said, the page as written does not meet our criteria for inclusion, WP:NLIST, and will not be published. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:06, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1260&oldid=1302651684"