WP:Teahouse#Kind attention

On the article about the 0-4-0 wheel arrangement, I noticed Iceland wasn’t included. Iceland doesn’t have railways, but there used to be one within the capital city of Reykjavik. The Reykjavik Harbor Railway was a narrow gauge railway that was constructed in 1913. It had two 2ft gauge 0-4-0 tank engines built in the 1890’s by the German company Arnold Jung Lokomotivfabrik. These two engines were known as Minør and Pioner. The two engines were used to haul goods along the harbor, such as coal, minerals, and other material. Both engines are preserved today. Should we incorporate Iceland into that article?

For more info on the Reykjavik Harbor Railway, see Rail transport in Iceland 199.192.122.199 (talk) 04:25, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

:It sounds like it's the sort of addition that might be useful for the article, ideally with sourcing explaining what you've written. At the very least, you could add it in a WP:SEEALSO section as an interim measure. CMD (talk) 04:41, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

::Believe me, this is actual info. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 05:24, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

::: It's unlikely any content will be added without a source. See WP:V. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 05:30, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::File: 090625 Minoer.JPG

::::This is what Minør looks like.

:::::File: RHR-Pioner.JPG

::::and this is what Pioner looks like. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 05:47, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Also, Tarlby, I’ve noticed you have commented on my talk page. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 05:51, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::Whaddaya mean ridiculously massive? I didn’t see a problem with them on the rail transport in Iceland article. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 14:09, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::The images in that article very likely use the "##px" parametre, which sets their width (in pixels) and forcibly scales them down accordingly. Without that parametre, the images render at their native resolution - which was large enough that the images did not fit on my 1080 screen. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 18:29, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::::I still think we should add them. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 00:52, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

• See Talk:0-4-0#Should we add Iceland? (IMHO Oppose, BTW, as stated there.) Andy Dingley (talk) 14:49, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
• :BRUH WHY? They are 0-4-0’s after all. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 15:29, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::* So why ? It's up to any new addition to demonstrate why, and what, it adds to an article. Not assume that it does, unless shown otherwise.

::: These are 0-4-0, sure. But so are a huge number of locos (especially for 0-4-0, the Austrian 2-6-4s are a much rarer type). So even though '0-4-0' is obviously significant to the loco article, why are those locos significant in the context of the general 0-4-0 article? I can't see that they are. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:18, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Well, they ARE the only steam engines in Iceland. The other railways in Iceland (or should I say used to be) used either small diesels or no engines at all. Mainline steam would’ve been a thing in Iceland but now we can thank the proposal of roads which went through. Thanks to their stupid decision, Iceland is one of the countries I despise the most, IF NOT THE. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 19:32, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

I have just created a page for Martyn. This is the first time I have created a page on Wiki so I may well have made some elementary errors in the presentation and required information and referencing. The immediate feedback I got was it was not notable. Martyn is a well-known broadcaster in Wales as a rugby commentator and is also the author of several books. I have listed the books together with their ISBN numbers. Any advice as I how I should proceed from this point would be much appreciated. CofiCaerdydd47 (talk) 10:52, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

:@CofiCaerdydd47 A brief look shows me that your draft has muddled sourcing. You will need to re-do it after reading this guide to how to do references correctly. Wikipedia has very strict requirements for biographies of living people and drafts which don't conform will rapidly be declined. As you realise, the main aim of your draft will be to show how Williams is notable. There is some more advice in this essay. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:15, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

::Many thanks Mike. This was my first effort at my first article so lots to learnt I guess! I will follow your suggested links CofiCaerdydd47 (talk) 11:18, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Hello, @CofiCaerdydd47, a chroeso i Wikipedia.

:::{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}} ColinFine (talk) 21:25, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

My first wikipedia just has been accepted (see: Adam Linder). Due to my previous mistakes, I have some maintenance templates flags that I would like to remove. But I can't do it myself because this rule apply to me: You have been paid to edit the article or have some other conflict of interest [exceptions apply: see individual template documentation]. Nevertheless, some other flags are now outdated. For example: This article relies excessively on references to primary sources. (March 2025). How could I remove them ? Does someone else that doesn't have a conflict of interest should do it ? I think that now, given that the article has been accepted, it respects the Wikipedia's rules and these maintenance flags should be removed because they are now off-topic.

Thanks for your help.

Simononwiki1 (talk) 20:54, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

:Simononwiki1, if you are saying that promotion of a draft to full article status shows that (at least in the promoting reviewer's opinion) the resulting article is free of any problem noted in a template heading it, then no, not true. Seriously defective drafts can and do become articles. How about this article -- is it seriously defective? Perhaps somebody reading this either (a) is familiar with most of the cited sources (I'm not), or (b) has the time and energy to examine them (I haven't). If nobody steps up in the next few days, then I suggest that on Talk:Adam Linder you invite {{Noping|Timtrent}} (who [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adam_Linder&diff=1279769251&oldid=1279767989 attached the templates]) to take a second look. -- Hoary (talk) 22:49, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

:Removed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:46, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks a lot.

::Simononwiki1 (talk) 16:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

How would I create a new page? Wiki Operator Bob (talk) 23:05, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

:By reading and observing the copious instructions for doing so. (Links to these are conspicuously linked from this very page. Look on this page for "Help".) But if you are related to this business, please don't create a page for it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:20, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

::Their latest draft needs speedy deletion for G11, but an experienced editor should probably place the tags and talk page warning instead of me. It would be my first edit on Wikipedia and even though I'm confident it meets G11 criteria I don't know how to leave an appropriate talk page warning. 58.105.137.254 (talk) 01:56, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

:-- and not by perpetrating (in Draft:Microgreens Anti Cancerous Super Stars) such material as {{Olive|It has long been said that microgreens have many beneficial properties but what if something so easy to grow and cost effective came at some healthy advantages? Well buckle your seatbelts because we're diving into the anti-cancerous properties of the widely popular Microgreens. I've done research from articles and studies from many hospitals, universities and clinics to find the best information.}} First things first, Wiki Operator Bob: Read, digest and act on Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. -- Hoary (talk) 05:15, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

::by the way I was not doing it for any money it was simply a article to help Wiki Operator Bob (talk) 13:31, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

: Microgreen already exists. Note the tone and style used. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

[Thread restored after [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ATeahouse&diff=1296227779&oldid=1296227193 deletion]. -- Hoary (talk) 00:09, 19 June 2025 (UTC)]

I took the information off the copy I own which lists songs and lengths of each track. This is the most direct firsthand way I know to obtain the material. Mukilman (talk) 02:54, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hi @Mukilman.

:Wikipedia does not accept original research. The album you own might be a useful way of obtaining this information, but it can't be added to the encyclopaedia unless it is sourced from reliable, independent, and secondary sources. See WP:V for more information. If you cant find this information in reliable online sources, the album is likely not notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 03:31, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

::It looks like there is plently of coverage of this album, it probably is notable enough for wikipedia - you'll need to demonstrate that using secondary sources though. Using the liner notes for track lengths is fine though, I believe. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 07:22, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Yeah, it'll fine since that information isn't exactly controversial. Original research is more of a problem when it becomes difficult to track down that research. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 08:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

::That's not OR. Track lists and times are routinely taken from album sleeves/ CD inserts. See {{Tl|Cite AV media notes}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:39, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Hi {{u|Mukilman}}. I have edited Draft:Pedro the Lion Santa Cruz Album to include a few actual sources, you might like to use that as a jumping off point to fill out the draft more and hit resubmit when you think it is ready. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 21:26, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Thanks for doing that. The mention of several similar albums makes the article much better. I fine-tuned my original article a little so it should be ready to publish now. Mukilman (talk) 16:07, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Well if you're happy with it then you can hit resubmit and an AfC reviewer will look at it in due course. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 16:41, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, My previous thread has been archived. Today I made another attempt to rewrite the article to make the tone sound neutral. I am hoping that this will help remove the promotional and other tags. Any feedback for improvement is highly appreciated. Thanks Shyamalswiki (talk) 03:26, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

:I quote: {{Olive|The ensemble has toured internationally, including an 18-city North American schedule and appearances at Sydney Opera House and other major venues.^{[53][54][55][56][57] [58] [59][60][61][62][63][64][65]}}} A contrast with the claims for her appearances at {{Olive|Esplanade, Singapore / Hong Kong Arts Festival, Hong Kong / Rikskonsertene, Norway}}, which come with a total of zero references. Comments? -- Hoary (talk) 04:46, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

::I removed some irrelevant citations and added a few that were missing Shyamalswiki (talk) 03:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{reply|Shyamalswiki}} There are definitely WP:REFBOMB problems with the amount of references on the page. Also, the addition of external links in the body to the subjects YouTube videos and Ted Talks go against WP:NOELBODY and are not appropriate. There is also information that is promotional and probably unneeded, such as a list of venues the subject has performed in. I would probably highlight a couple of the notable festivals they were apart of, and remove the rest. The collaborations section would read a lot better in prose form, not another list. The "Cup O' Carnatic season highlights" subsection should probably be completely removed as it is not the subject of the page and is unnecessary trivial information. cyberdog958^Talk 06:25, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

::Removed repeated citations. Removed the highlights subsection Shyamalswiki (talk) 03:33, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::The TED talk links were already removed and I do not see any youtube links now. Can you point me to an example of external links in the body ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 03:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::Changed the collaboration section to prose form Shyamalswiki (talk) 04:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::Regarding the venues, I felt that these were all very important to be highlighted. There were plenty other that I decided not to include Shyamalswiki (talk) 04:11, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::Also pruned the venue list Shyamalswiki (talk) 04:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::a few citations look like this in the external links section- {{Cite news | last=Govind |first=Ranjani |date=2013-07-20|title=In the midst of a musical milieu | language=en-IN | work=TheHindu | url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/in-the-midst-of-a-musical-milieu/article4932606.ece | access-date=2025-05-13 |issn=} - how can we fix this Shyamalswiki (talk) 14:10, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::::@Shyamalswiki As you can see in your post, you were missing closing } characters. I've added them. Incidentally, these are not external links but just standard citations that happen to have associated URL. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Thank you Shyamalswiki (talk) 14:57, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::I saw that you had removed a discog link citing it as unreliable. Can you please explain why ? In the earlier teahouse topic (which has now been archived), it was mentioned that instead of youtube links to the album, it is advisable to give links such as discog Shyamalswiki (talk) 20:23, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::See WP:DISCOGS. It is not reliable as a source of information but is OK as an external link, which would be in a separate "External links" section of an article. This is similar to how we handle IMDb, although far too many editors treat that as it it were reliable. Both are user-generated sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:34, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Requesting editors to let me know if you think all the promotional content issues have been addressed ? Can I go ahead and remove the warning tags ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 01:46, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

I am a new editor here and will like to edit my account name ... don't know if it's possible to that. If yes, what is the procedures? EiraMa-diva (talk) 11:23, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

:@EiraMa-diva Since you just started this account, the easy way is to just abandon it and start a new one. Less easy way: WP:CHU. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

::As an administrator, I highly recommend renaming the account over abandonment, which would inherently prevent any real or perceived problems with having multiple accounts. Peaceray (talk) 16:13, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Okay. What is the procedure for renaming the account instead of abandonment? EiraMa-diva (talk) 17:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::::As said above, WP:CHU. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (need something?) 01:39, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

I am technically not new to Wikipedia but I barely edit so consider myself "new" so forgive me if I'm asking a question that's already been asked before; I tried searching to see if it was but am not coming up with quite the same question. I'm also in the process of orienting myself more on page editing protocol.

I am the President of the Historical Society of West Windsor, New Jersey. There is a blurb about a locally significant historical site (the Schenck-Covenhoven Cemetery) that is included as two short (and unfortunately historically-inaccurate) paragraphs under another historically distinct site (Washington Road Elm Allee). The cemetery is significant for multiple reasons - it's possibly among the oldest extant burial grounds in the state (not the oldest of course; I know there are older ones) and contains some of West Windsor Township's founders and some of its earliest colonial settlers. We believe it may warrant it being a separate Wikipedia article rather than just a blurb under the Washington Road Elm Allee article, which has very little historical relationship with the cemetery besides geographical proximity. Currently, searching for the "Schenck-Covenhoven Cemetery" on Wikipedia redirects to the Elm Allee's page.

My question: What is the "litmus test" for whether this "splitting off" is warranted? I'm considering writing a separate article, but if the current primary editor of the Washington Road Elm Allee does not accept editing the redirect, that may make those efforts redundant. I could theoretically write the article anyway, but would it risk redundancy - and thus deletion? Thank you in advance. Paulligeti (talk) 19:56, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{Ping|Paulligeti}} Welcome to the Teahouse. If you have resources that would allow you to create a substantial article about the cemetery, such as historical texts, newspaper articles, or similar, then you should go ahead and write the article. The primary author or creator of an article has no more ownership of it than anyone else. Even if the article were subject to a discussion about deletion, if consensus came to any conclusion, it would probably be to add what was written back to Washington Road Elm Allée. If you are really concerned about it you could contact the user at their talk page (User talk:Djkeddie) or create a new topic on the Washington Road Elm Allee page and notify them using @Djkeddie. -- Reconrabbit 20:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you very much for the detailed and rapid reply. Paulligeti (talk) 20:30, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

::But NB sticking "@" in front of a username doesn't ping that user. (That's something that can be achieved via any of User:Paulligeti, Paulligeti, {{U|Paulligeti}}, {{Ping|Paulligeti}}, {{Yo|Paulligeti}}, {{To|Paulligeti}}....) -- Hoary (talk) 22:45, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Hey Teahouse, for a while I've had a random drawing of a witch that I found on Commons as the infobox image in my user page, and I'd like to replace it with something that's a bit more personal to me. I've got a couple of questions about that which I wasn't able to dig up for myself:

1. Is it acceptable for me to upload some piece of art I've made, or is it preferable for me to use a photo of myself? I'm an extremely private person, so I'd prefer the former, the latter would force me to obscure my face enough to not be useful.
2. Should I upload it here to en, or do I need to wade through the arcane rules of Commons?
3. Aside from the necessary info marking the image as my own work, is there anything I should keep in mind for an image that's exclusively meant for my user page rather than an article?

Thank you in advance 🥰 Taffer😊💬_(she/they) 20:01, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

:The only rules you have to follow when uploading a photo to Commons is that it is within the project scope and falls under an appropriate free-use license for its reuse by others. The Commons project scope states: {{green|A file does not acquire educational value solely because it is in use on a user page. However, the uploading of small numbers of images for use on a personal user page of Commons or another project is allowed as long as that user is or was an active participant on that project.}} As an example, there are several images of Cullen328 that are hosted on Commons, an English Wikipedia administrator who does not have an article written about him. -- Reconrabbit 20:15, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

:As "an extremely private person", you may wish to consider forgoing any photograph. -- Hoary (talk) 22:37, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

{{courtesy link|Wikipedia:RedWarn}}

How do I set up RedWarm because I installed it but the buttons aren't there. Does it not like confirmed users or something? Anti-pro-air (talk) 01:56, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Pro-anti-air – Last time I checked, you did not have RedWarn installed on your common.js page, as that is required to install RedWarn. You can go to Special:MyPage/common.js, edit it, and type importScript('User:RedWarn/.js'); // Backlink: User:RedWarn/.js into your common.js and then hit "save". — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 03:06, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::Wrong person, AV is fine. I just wanna see how RedWarn works. --Anti-pro-air (talk) 03:07, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::@Pro-anti-air – In that case, you can simply install RedWarn and try it yourself or look at examples at WP:RW. Hope this helps. — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 03:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::::@Anti-pro-air – Apologies; I did not realize that the username was literally an alternate account. Your alternate account was created on 17 June 2025, and that is less than 4 days old. You need to wait until 21 June 2025 (Saturday) in order for RedWarn to work, as it requires users to have the autoconfirmed permission (4 days and 10+ edits) before using it. — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 03:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Never mind that either; your account has already been confirmed. I'm bad at context here; sorry. In that case I'm stumped as to how to proceed. It might be that your user configuration (Special:MyPage/redwarnConfig.js) or your rules page (Special:MyPage/redwarnRules.json) hasn't been set up yet. — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 03:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::Uhhhhh do you expect me to type the config code? How do I config the pages? --Anti-pro-air (talk) 04:18, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::@Anti-pro-air – Heavens, no! I believe that as soon as you installed RedWarn you should have received a dialog that asked you to configure your settings. If you dismissed the dialog or it never appeared, that might have been a problem.
Try looking at the troubleshooting page for RedWarn first. If that page doesn't answer the issue, then you can try the below:
You can try to uninstall the script and reinstall it again, and see if that works. Alternatively (not recommended) you can use my redwarnConfig settings (as my RedWarn works fine) by copy-pasting it into your redwarnConfig settings. — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 04:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

{{outdent|:::::::}}

At this point I think my browser hates RedWarn. Tried all these, the buttons and the dialog never appear. --Anti-pro-air (talk) 05:20, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:At this point you'd probably do better to ask at Wikipedia talk:Ultraviolet. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:25, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello guys,

I posted an article about a week and some days ago. I'm not sure if it's been reviewed, but it certainly hasn't been rated. I would appreciate feedback on the article: Lion Forge Entertainment. Repsjared (talk) 03:53, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Repsjared When the new pages patrol get round to reviewing the article, that will be reflected in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Lion+Forge+Entertainment the logs]. So, not so far. Forbes.com sources are problematic (see that link) but you have not over-relied on them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::@Michael D. Turnbull Thanks for the feedback. I'll take a look at it the link you mentioned. Repsjared (talk) 15:43, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello again, Teahouse.

Recently, I've been going through articles of mainly the Killers' related stuff and just doing general clean up as well as enforcing the "use mdy dates" or "use dmy dates", and when I do, I update the templates to say the last time that the article has been looked over, because I saw certain templates said you can do that. But then I also noticed on completely separate articles that there are notes explicitly saying to not edit the date in the template when it says both options, so I am confused as to whether I should update them or leave them be.

Example edits:

• [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shadowplay_(song)&diff=prev&oldid=1296305823 Shadowplay]
• [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Stoermer&diff=prev&oldid=1296119037 Mark Stoermer]
• [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rebel_Diamonds&diff=prev&oldid=1295967581 Rebel Diamonds]
• [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Imploding_the_Mirage_Tour&diff=prev&oldid=1295177854 Imploding the Mirage Tour]

Thanks,

SassafrassAlabass (talk) 05:39, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hi {{yo|SassafrassAlabass}} could you give an example of {{tq|notes explicitly saying to not edit the date in the template when it says both options}}? I can't actually spot that in the diffs you link to. --bonadea contributions talk 09:20, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi everyone, I’ve rewritten and resubmitted Draft:Superbet several times, each time making sure to follow notability and neutrality guidelines strictly. The article now uses only strong, independent secondary sources like Bloomberg, The Guardian, The Recursive, Economedia, iGaming Business, and Business Review. I’ve removed promotional content and focused only on verifiable milestones (investments, acquisitions, tech development, etc.).

However, the draft was declined again with a comment that the coverage is “mostly trivial and passing,” despite sources where Superbet is clearly the primary subject. I’d be very grateful for a second opinion: does this draft seem to meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria for companies? Or would it make more sense to integrate it into a broader article like Gambling in Romania? Thank you! Contributor Marius (talk) 07:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:Which three of your sources meet the criteria at WP:42? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:11, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks Andy! Here are three sources I believe meet the WP:42 criteria:

::# https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-26/blackstone-backed-e-bookie-eyes-global-expansion-from-romania – article about Blackstone’s €175M investment in Superbet and its international expansion. Superbet is the main subject.

::# https://economedia.ro/romanian-company-superbet-has-acquired-napoleon-sports-and-casino-the-third-largest-sports-betting-company-in-belgium-and-becomes-market-leader.html – detailed coverage of Superbet acquiring Napoleon Sports & Casino, making it market leader in Belgium.

::# https://therecursive.com/with-close-to-300-startups-248m-in-investments-sportstech-is-shaping-up-as-a-promising-industry-on-the-balkans/ – analysis of sportstech in the Balkans, with Superbet highlighted as a key player due to its tech hubs and innovation strategy.

::There are also mentions in The Guardian (regarding the Grand Chess Tour sponsorship) and several SBC News articles, but these are not in-depth enough under WP:42. Additionally, there’s a ranked profile in Business Review, listing Superbet as one of the top 15 most influential betting operators globally, if the source of that ranking is considered strong enough, I’d be happy to include it as well. Let me know if these seem appropriate or if I should reconsider. Thanks again! Contributor Marius (talk) 08:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Your third source includes {{Tq|1="The biggest deal comes from Romania in the shape of online gaming company Superbet, which managed to secure an investment of $196M in 2019."}}, and nothing else about Superbet. That is not significant coverage. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Thanks Andy, I appreciate the clarification. You're right, that source only includes a passing mention, so it wouldn’t qualify under WP:42. As a quick follow-up, I just came across this recent article from Tech.eu that’s entirely focused on Superbet Group and its tech company, Happening, covering strategy, expansion, and hiring plans. It seems to meet WP:42 as a secondary, reliable, and in-depth source: https://tech.eu/2024/06/11/superbet-happening-european-expansion/

::::If this changes the notability evaluation, I’d be happy to revise the draft accordingly.

::::Thanks again for your guidance! Contributor Marius (talk) 11:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Link is 404. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:04, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::Thanks again, Andy. I just noticed that the Tech.eu article I referenced was recently updated and now appears as sponsored content, so clearly, it no longer qualifies as an independent source under WP:42. I appreciate you flagging that. At this point, could you advise what options I might have to still publish a page on Superbet (or Superbet Group)? I’ve already stripped promotional tone and focused only on independently verifiable facts and sources. Would you suggest waiting for stronger coverage, or is there a potential middle-ground approach to keep the article live? Perhaps as a redirect to a section in a broader article, while preserving the “Superbet” or “Superbet Group” title? Thanks again for your time and guidance, it's been genuinely helpful. Contributor Marius (talk) 11:44, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::You need better sources; whether you can find them now or have to wait until more are published. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:58, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I'm representing a reputable musician to translate his wiki (other existing languages) into English and Japanese. Seems that I'm not allowed or not qualified. Could someone kindly explain how to earn the right to edit please? 182.239.87.206 (talk) 10:09, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:You should read "Wikipedia:Conflict of interest". Anatole-berthe (talk) 11:59, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::You may also find WP:BOSS to be a useful read. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 12:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::Concerning "Wikipedia in Japanese".

::We aren't able to help because this is not "Wikipedia in English". Each Wikipedia is independent.

::The equivalent page of "Wikipedia:Conflict of interest" for the "Wikipedia in Japanese" is ":jp:Wikipedia:利益相反行為".

::The page is partially wrote in Japanese and partially in English.

::It does seem that they aren't an equivalent of "WP:BOSS" concerning "Wikipedia in Japanese".

::Anyone know where is the equivalent of the "teahouse" or a similar page concerning "Wikipedia in Japanese ?" ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 12:10, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::This is "Wikipedia in English". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:You can find some guidance on translating articles from other Wikipedias into English at Wikipedia:Translation.

:Given your CoI, you should make an article in the draft namespace, then submit it for review using the process described at WP:AFC.

:It would be best for you to register an account before you start. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

A back story of a Sith Lord that was born on planet tatooine Panda plays January (talk) 13:39, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:We're sorry, but we're a group of volunteer editors and not a generative AI. If you have any questions about editing Wikipedia, please feel free to ask them here. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 13:43, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:If you have access to a pen and paper you can do it yourself. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 14:56, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::Or an online writing software. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 16:09, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:That would be Darth Vader. Sorry, George Lucas did it 48 years ago. GarethBaloney 19:44, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

{{courtesy link|Eyprepocprifas}}

I've been working on creating a page for a genus of grasshopper and I cant really figure out how to make a taxobox that resembles Cardiopelma as this genus of grasshopper is monotypic Birdkeeper1234 (talk) 14:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

: {{Ping|Peter coxhead}} Can you advise, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm just wondering how you put a link in a template 68.55.16.195 (talk) 19:10, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello. Which template? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:15, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:I see you use VisualEditor which has its own way of adding links but it doesn't work inside template parameters if that's what you're trying. There you have to use the method at Help:Link. If this doesn't help then both say which template, which link, and precisely where in the template you want it. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:10, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Is Template:Small any better than "..."? Or no? Why? Jako96 (talk) 19:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Jako96. Help:HTML in wikitext#small says: "{{tlx|small}} is recommended over {{tag|small|o}} since {{tag|small}} has a semantic meaning that is for fine print, whereas {{tlx|small}} is purely stylistic." See also MOS:SMALLFONT. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:03, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I made an edit without being logged in by accident, is it possible to associate it with my profile? Thanks! Itsthecon (talk) 21:47, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Itsthecon, welcome to the Teahouse. It's not possible to assign the edit to an account. If you don't want your IP address to be visible for privacy reasons then it can be hidden on request. See Wikipedia:Oversight. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:07, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::But I have to have a legit reason for that right? Not just like "I made an oopsie" - could i request someone undo the changes? Like is that a thing? Trying to get creative here Itsthecon (talk) 22:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:::{{ping|Itsthecon}} Privacy of an "oopsie"-revealed IP address is a legit reason for oversight and explicitly mentioned under point 1 at Wikipedia:Oversight#Policy. A normal undo of the edit would leave the original edit visible in the page history and just add another edit which does the opposite. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:46, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

::::oh wow I did not see that page when I previously looked at oversight - I think I was on the wrong page entirely. Thanks! Itsthecon (talk) 22:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello - I'm consistently finding articles during my research that appear to have insufficient or unreliable sources. It seems like these articles may have slipped through the initial review process somehow. Some don't seem to belong on Wikipedia at all. Others have very old and outdates sources, with broken links, redirects etc. that now would probably never pass a review process.

Could someone please advise on the best practice or procedure I should follow when identifying these types of articles? Thank you! JazzyOxygen (talk) 23:44, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{re|JazzyOxygen}} Wikipedia's policies and guidelines have evolved over its history, so there are many articles that have not gone through the quality control procedures in place today. Your options are to fix the issues yourself if you can; add appropriate maintenance templates so others can find and fix them; or, if you don't think they meet current notability standards, you can follow one of the deletion processes. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 00:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

In Marthe (novel), I added the first footnote and created a "References" section for it. But it ended up not under "References" but at the bottom. Maurice Magnus (talk) 00:11, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{re|Maurice Magnus}} The References section needed a {{tl|reflist}} template under the header. I've added it for you. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 00:35, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you. Maurice Magnus (talk) 00:41, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Teahouse,

I hope you're doing well, could I please ask for help with a weird extra heading in The Lifted Brow ?

I can't see how to change this, but there is an extra heading with their magazine title, under the neutral warning box. How can this be removed please, is it possible?

Thank you! SunnyBoi (talk) 03:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{done}} just needed to remove that text. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 04:12, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Is it possible for watchlist notifications to be sent to my email? I did not see an option for it in my notification settings but I could have missed it. Thank you. -- Dantus21 (talk) 04:11, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Dantus21 yes. There is an option under the user profile tab that says "Email me when a page or a file on my watchlist is changed". '​'​'[​[User:CanonNi]​]'​'​' (💬 • ✍️) 06:29, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::{{u|Dantus21}}, that option is practical only for editors with brief watchlists. After 16 years of editing, I have 71,136 items on my watchlist. I would have received 25 emails in the last ten minutes if I opted in. Cullen328 (talk) 08:43, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:::{{ping|Dantus21}} If you wonder why it's not under "Notifications", the watchlist email option is far older than the whole Notifications tab which is added by an extension. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:34, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Why does not Sherlock redirect to Sherlock Holmes? Why is this page a disambiguation? Is there anything else on Wikipedia that is more common than Sherlock? Why does not Commonname apply here?ইমরান ভূইয়া (talk)

:Hello, {{u|ইমরান ভূইয়া}}. You may well be right. Your first step should be to discuss the matter at Talk:Sherlock. The relevant guideline language can be found at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Cullen328 (talk) 08:35, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Wikipedia has 21 articles about people with the name "Sherlock". Sure, Sherlock Holmes is the best-known of these, but a user might well be searching for one of the others. Maproom (talk) 09:09, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|ইমরান ভূইয়া}} Most users searching for Sherlock Holmes will probably use the full name. Sherlock has many things which are only called Sherlock. The TV series alone only has 18% fewer page views than the character.[https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=latest-20&pages=Sherlock_Holmes|Sherlock_(TV_series)] And it's not enough to be the most likely target. Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Is there a primary topic? says: "A topic is {{strong|primary}} for a term with respect to {{em|usage}} if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term." PrimeHunter (talk) 11:24, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

When editing a disambiguation to add a musician, do I put them in in music or people? Reallythatdunce (talk) 09:04, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Reallythatdunce If it's the name of a musician, then it should be under people, as long as they already have a Wikipedia article. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:12, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

I want to change my username to RisingPhoenix815. Waffles815 11:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Waffles815, welcome to the Teahouse. See Wikipedia:Changing username. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:27, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::If you want to request changing your username, request this at :meta:Steward requests/Username changes. Fabvill (talk) 13:34, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

I posted the same article in uzbek language. I want to transslate it to english Asliddin Choriev (talk) 11:45, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:The first question is the next. Is "Komil Yusupov" "notable" ?

:Each Wikipedia is independent of each others.

:"Wikipedia in English" is reputed to be the strictest concerning the notability. Anatole-berthe (talk) 12:03, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::yes of course, he is the founder of modern Kurash, also deputy in Uzbekistan. Asliddin Choriev (talk) 12:19, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Please see WP:TRANSLATE for guidance. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:52, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, @Asliddin Choriev and welcome to the Teahouse.

:Your draft (which is on your user page - it should be moved either to your sandbox or to Draft:Komil Yusupov) has no inline citations, and neither of the two sites you link to is a reliable site, wholly unconnected with Yusupov, that talks in depth specifically about Yusupov. Without such sources, there is no chance that your draft will be accepted into English Wikipedia.

:Please read notability and WP:YFA as well as the page Andy suggested. ColinFine (talk) 18:46, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::If by "deputy in Uzbekistan" you mean he is an elected member of the Oliy Majlis, then he is 100% notable. All members of national legislatures are considered notable. However, you still need to provide sources. DS (talk) 00:39, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

There's an editor (who I don't want to name or link to, as this isn't a report rather a query) who has been making a very large volume of small edits to a single page - 41 in the past 24 hours. This of course is cluttering up the page history and watchlists. They were asked to consider making one large edit or using their sandbox, but their reply was, verbatim, {{tq|No.}}, which is rather unhelpful. Is this sort of thing normal? Danners430 (talk) 11:50, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:The editor is User:MRSC and you should notify other editors if you discuss their editing here or on any other such page. Saying you "don't want to name or link to" them is pointless, when it is so easy to trace who you mean.

:In the discussion at User talk:MRSC#Amendments to Upminster Tithe Barn you have accused them of being rude; they have not.

:Follow the process described at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:51, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::The thing is I specifically don’t want to discuss this particular editor, as I’m not too concerned - I wouldn’t want to go to the extremes of a DR etc. as I’d happily let the matter lie. I simply wanted to find out what the norm is, mostly to improve my own editing. Danners430 (talk) 12:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:::{{Tq|1="41 in the past 24 hours"}} is specific to the editor in question; not a general point. You also continued to goad them on their talk page, after they gave you an unequivocal answer to your initial question. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:10, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:It's within the range of normal editing.

:To describe two extremes: an editor could (a) make one large edit that changed dozens of individual things (punctuation, structure, individual words, cited facts and their references, addition of new material, etc.) in one massive edit, or (b) make a separate edit for every single comma addition/removal, etc., etc.

:(a) has the drawback that if someone disagrees with some but not all of the changes, they must either re-edit each disagreed point (tedious) or Revert the whole edit, including the points they do not object to, leading to interminable discussions of what to change and what not (even more tedious).

:(b) causes the clutter you mention, BUT means that each individual change, however large or small, can be reverted or otherwise addressed without affecting any other, making further discussions and consensus more easy. Bear in mind that page histories and watchlists are merely tools to aid editing and the monitoring of it, not things more important than the editing itself.

:Between those extremes, many editors choose to 'lump together' clusters of edits in various ways: one might make one pass through the Article making just punctuation amendments, followed by another copy editing vocabulary and grammar, then a third changing the article's layout, for example. Or one might make all the intended changes to one section, or subsection, at a time.

:Sometimes I might be consulting an article for its content, and (being a retired copy editor) might correct things as I read through it, without any overarching plan. Some articles, particularly those deriving from a different language and imperfectly rendered into English, have dozens of minor faults.

:Unless you have separate reasons to think that the editor is deliberately trying to inflate their edit count for nefarious reasons, or conceal non-policy edits within their activity, I see nothing in what you have said to suggest any problem – simply, we all have our individual editing approaches and styles. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.41.216 (talk) 12:52, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::Yeah that’s fair - and like I said, I don’t believe (or want to believe) this editor is doing anything wrong, I just wanted to educate myself above everything else :) Danners430 (talk) 12:58, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:::IMO, this is being too dismissive of the issue. For a variety of reasons, it can be irritating to look through an article history and see a screenful of short article edits from a single user. It's common (for me, at least) to review changes that have been recently made to an article. Certainly I can select to review the "diff" over that range of edits, but that's a distraction. There may also not be much in the way of a pertinent explanation about the changes. Additionally, there are performance implications and limits involving number of revisions, e.g. wikiblame limits the number of revisions in a "sequential" search. To a certain extent, the issue (from the perspective of viewing article history) could be mitigated by a feature in the display of article history that collapses a series of edits by a single user (perhaps within a given timeframe) to a single display within the article history. And yes, it does inflate edit count, and for better or worse, the system has incentives for doing this. To some, it makes it appear that we are rewarding what may reasonably be considered to be counter-productive behavior. Fabrickator (talk) 16:33, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::::All of what you say is also true, though you have introduced some additional hypotheticals beyond what the OP or myself mentioned. As with much in Wikipedia and in life, it seems to me counterproductive to rely on generalisations, which will inevitably generate both 'false positives' and 'false negatives'; rather, each case should be judged on its specifics. If there are no contraventions of policies or guidelines, and nothing suggestive of gaming the system, I would let well alone. And I doubt that potential malefactors are combing edit histories looking for practices to 'validate' their own excesses. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.41.216 (talk) 01:08, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

2025 Shandong factory explosion's AFD has concluded to merge it to List of explosions, however the AFD was closed without proper consensus. Is there anything I can do to re-open the discussion, as overall it has been closed without proper consensus, and I believe that since the investigation is underway, there likely will be sustained coverage in the near future. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 13:37, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Looks like a good close to me. WP:CRYSTAL applies; if your prediction turns out to be correct, the matter can always be discussed again.

:The answer to your question is to talk to whoever closed the discussion, in the first instance. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:49, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

{{courtesy link|Draft:Seabrun "Candy" Hunter Jr.}}

{{courtesy link|Draft talk:Seabrun "Candy" Hunter Jr. 2}}

Hello Teahouse team,

I’m working on a draft biography for Seabrun “Candy” Hunter Jr., a 20th‑century American musician, composer, road manager, and auto mechanic best known for his contributions alongside Little Richard in the 1970s (including co‑writing “Rockin’ Rockin’ Boogie” and touring during Wembley Stadium’s iconic Rock ’n’ Roll Show).

I have verified references from:

• Getty Images photos of Hunter onstage at Wembley (e.g. 1972)
• BMI repertoire records listing him as co‑author of key songs
• Published books by Hunter (the Miracle Series), fully catalogued in the Library of Congress
• Mentions in Little Richard’s authorized biography and testimonies from fellow bandmates like Alvin Taylor

Additional documentation includes estate archives, obituaries, music reviews, and veteran’s records (Born 4/1/49, Buffalo; Died 1/7/22; father of five).

My questions are:

• How best can I cite Hunter’s own published autobiography (Miracle Series) as a source in Wikipedia?
• How should I structure citations for the epitaph/haiku found in that book?
• Are family-curated archive documents acceptable if they contain verifiable, cited facts?
• Should I also post on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard if any source is questioned?
• Do I place the draft article in draftspace first, or can I request immediate article review now?

I want to ensure the draft strictly adheres to WP:VERIFIABLE and WP:NOTABILITY while honoring his spiritual legacy and layered career. Any stylistic or technical guidance would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your kind and thorough support,

Tyanna R. Battle (daughter & estate representative)

🕊️ Legacy Preserver Ty Bat Zan (talk) 13:49, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Please don't use AI to ask questions here, it looks like none of your sources are reliable or indepedent. Theroadislong (talk) 13:53, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:You need to show that your father meets the criteria set out in WP:NMUSICIAN; in short: which three of your sources meet all of the requirements outlined at WP:42? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:53, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, @Ty Bat Zan, and welcome to the Teahouse.

:It might help to understand that {{HD/WINI}} ColinFine (talk) 18:49, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

did a quick recap on my edit summaries, there are quite big numbers for converting double spaces to single space between words of a sentence. i did not bookmarked previous edit (by some editor) on which i am following blindly. after reading MOS:DOUBLESPACE i am not sure! please clarify. jiki (talk) 13:54, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|Kiji-Jiki}}, converting double spaces to single space between words of a sentence achieves nothing, is a waste of time, and bulks up page histories for no good reason. It is certainly not compulsory. Maproom (talk) 14:53, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:You can do so while making other edits if you want to; but you should not do so as the sole purpose of an edit. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:58, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Nothing in MOS:DOUBLESPACE suggests that one should remove double spaces, or even avoid using them. On the contrary, it says "{{tq|Some editors place two spaces after a period/full stop}}", without any deprecation of the practice. CodeTalker (talk) 18:19, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::OP's question was about double spaces "between words in a sentence". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:28, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:It clogs up edit histories if you do it on its own, but if you fix the double spacing alongside doing other things then it's perfectly fine under copyediting. GarethBaloney 19:50, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::i will wait until sunday midnight for any further comments. as of now i have stopped exclusive edits. jiki (talk) 06:22, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

How does one make an Afd? – KaijuEditor (talk) 16:03, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:@KaijuEditor You linked a page that has most of the instructions. There's a full "how-to" at WP:Guide to deletion. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:10, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::I meant RFC, how do I make one? – KaijuEditor (talk) 16:21, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:::@KaijuEditor You linked a page that has the instructions. See WP:RFC. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:42, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::::I’ve read it before, but how does set up or do an RFC for an article or source? (Like: The Washington Free Beacon, Jacobin (magazine), or Just Facts) – KaijuEditor (talk) 18:51, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Are you asking about an RfC for an article (in which case it would be on the talk page of that article, and would relate to a specific issue that had already been discussed between two or more editors) or an RfC for a source (in which case it would be on the reliable sources noticeboard). -- D'n'B-📞 -- 19:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

I noticed an addition to the page List of musicals: M to Z for the "musical" One Day. Since when does WP allow articles for subjects that have yet to happen? This musical is "slated" to premiere March 2026. I was always under the impression that once it happened, then it could be included; with sufficient RS for notability. Am I wrong? (I have been before) Maineartists (talk) 16:53, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:See WP:CRYSTAL. Lots of future events meet WP:N. Even Ultimate fate of the universe. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::Gee. Thanks. (I think) It would seem you are answering "in general" and not to this specific article. CRYSTAL: "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Dates are not definite until the event actually takes place, as even otherwise-notable events can be cancelled or postponed at the last minute by a major incident." Could you give some examples at WP of these so-called "future events" that meet WP:N? That would better help to see if this particular article falls under that guideline. Maineartists (talk) 19:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:::"See WP:CRYSTAL" was specific to the article in question.

:::Examples: https://w.wiki/EXfZ etc. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::::{{u|Maineartists}}, I have a different perspective. A list should have clearly defined selection criteria. This particular list says {{tpq|musicals that premiered}} using the past tense. In my opinion, a musical that has not yet premiered does not meet the selection criteria. See Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists#Selection criteria for additional information. Cullen328 (talk) 02:39, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I am having problems finding significant coverage, reliable sources and independent sources for Spaceballs. I keep doing citation overkill and/or bombardment when adding references. I added references to the group from databases like Demozoo, Pouett and Amiga Music Preservation, and social media sites like Reddit, YouTube, LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter; I have removed all those references. Some now-removed Demozoo references for the list of Spaceballs members have been replaced with new references, such as for Useless/Egil Thomas Hansen, Travolta/Rune Svendsen, Magnar/Lizard, and Facet/Martijn van Meel. Unfortunately, I could not find references solely for the other members and the group's demos in the "Selected productions" heading that are not databases. There are mentions of the group in books like Kunst, Code und Maschine: Die Ästhetik der Computer-Demoszene (2014), Freax: The Brief History of the Computer Demoscene (2016), The Future Was Here: The Commodore Amiga (2018), and Demoscene: The Amiga Years (2021), and I have used them as references for the article. Should I only stick to those as they are non-internet sources, and remove references to Spaceballs' website and news articles (Wired) and fansites (like Obligement.free) mentioning them, or should I leave it altogether? Bladerunner09 (talk) 18:58, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Non-internet sources are much harder to verify, although they can still be used. The amount of references in general is pretty excessive, and that big list of current or former members could become a timeline. List of Whitesnake members#Timeline is one such example of a (music) group with many members.

:I do have to say that most of the ex-Spaceballs members are really not worth mentioning given how obscure the group already is. GarethBaloney 19:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

David Newell in his Mr. McFeeley postman uniform with the word "Speedy Deletion" captioned as if he were speaking them as a play on Speedy Delivery. It'll add a bit of humor to Wikipedia but not in an overtly distracting kind of way. 72.72.200.176 (talk) 20:21, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Did you have a question? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:37, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Interesting idea, but I doubt it's a good idea to let users know that their article might be speedy deleted with a humorous image. GoldRomean (talk) 22:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

::I'd also say that such an image would probably be copyvio. DS (talk) 00:35, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I wanted to edit an article on wikipedia however that one in particular requires me to be logged in. So instead of creating a new account, I searched through my various emails and found a wikipedia account registered under it, however from what it looks like, it appears to have been made all the way back in 2014. In said email, titled "Wikipedia - email verification", I see what my username was, and since I already knew what the email associated with it was, I decided to go to the password reset page and input the credentials, however the recovery email is not arriving and I have a fear it will never arrive due to the account being potentially deactivated/deleted since I probably haven't logged onto it ever since I made it, over 11 years at this point. I know for a fact the account is at least still in the wikipedia account database as when I tried inputting the username in the user page URL, it did in fact take me to the user page, so there still could be hope for my old account. I know that the email can take up to 24 hours to be sent but since it's been so long, I feel like it might not arrive. In my case it would probably be the best idea to speak directly to the wikipedia management team or at least a part of it responsible for user accounts but I couldn't find any contacts about that, so this is my last resort. Any help would be appreciated. 46.205.204.206 (talk) 20:22, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Accounts and passwords never expire and are never deactivated. Try to check any spam folders. Try to only enter the username at Special:PasswordReset. If you have changed the email address stored in the Wikipedia account after the 2014 mail then you will get a mail to the new address. If you don't know the password and cannot receive a password reset then you have to create a new account. If the old account has edits then you can write on the user page of the new account that the old account was you. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:48, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:Also, in your email title "email verification", did it say that it was a successful email verification? I'm pretty sure you need a verified email in order to reset your Wikipedia password. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 00:08, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

::After looking at mw:Help:Reset password, apparently you don't need to confirm your email address to reset passwords. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 00:41, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

:::And then I read Help:Email confirmation, which contradicts this, saying "{{tq|before they can use email features such as emailing users, receiving email notifications, and the ability to reset your password}}". Justjourney (talk | contribs) 00:50, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

For the did you know section on the main page, I was going to write a quote about the article Nutmegger, but Wikipedia says its against its guidelines. Would the quote

"...that a Nutmegger is from Connecticut?"

Be inappropriate for today's did you know section? -2603:6011:7401:351C:5C79:CF89:FA3B:DC00 (talk) 00:41, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

:Did You Know has its own very specific workflows and guidelines. It's best to read about these at WP:DYK and ask your question on that talk page. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 00:48, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

:No opinion on the question, but it was my understanding that articles are only included in the 'Did you know . . .' section if they are either newly created or have just been significantly improved. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.41.216 (talk) 00:50, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

::Yep, you’re right. To be more specific, DYK articles have to meet a specific criteria (mentioned above), then you have to nominate it and it goes through this whole process. GoldRomean (talk) 01:54, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

I live in LaGrange, Georgia and there's a local author named Blake Varnadoe who's been featured in our local newspaper and TV segments on WTVM and WLTZ. I spoke to him and told him I used to be an occasional Wikipedia editor who had no clue what I was doing. All I did was fix typos. I had lost my account where I did all of the edits, but that's irrelevant. He said FOX 5 and WTVM articles were in the process, but he stated "I really want a Wikipedia article." So my question is, are 2 TV segments based on him and a local newspaper article enough coverage for me to write an article about him? Greattastingfruit (talk) 03:49, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Greattastingfruit I'm afraid not. Please see WP:42 for guidance. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:08, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

When referring to a living individual from the U.K. (assuming they are from England) should I write for example XYZ is "a British" actor (for example, but it can be a person of any career) or should I say is "an English" actor? which term is more correct, and more oftenly used? 76.68.113.121 (talk) 04:25, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

:British is more common, and more correct, since England is only part of the UK. Out of curiosity, what article are you referring to? TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 04:31, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

::For the most part, you should follow what sources say. In practice it often depends on what they are notable for: an athlete known for playing for the England Football Team is English, whereas one known for representing Britain in the Olympics is British. Members of Parliament are normally British unless they are members of the Scottish Parliament or Senedd Cymru in which case they are Scottish or Welsh. If they are an actor or musician from England, then I belive in most cases they would be English. But again, if several reliable sources say one thing or the other, that is where you should take your lead.

::(@{{u|TheDowningStreetCat|Larry}} I wouldn't say that one is inherently more correct than the other. Sure England is part of GB but following that logic we'd just describe everyone as being From Earth). -- D'n'B-📞 -- 04:57, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

:::An essay well worth reading is Wikipedia:Nationality of people from the United Kingdom. The best advice I can give is don't fight about it. Be flexible, open-minded and willing to compromise. Cullen328 (talk) 05:05, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Thank you Cullen I just spent 10 minutes trying to find that essay, couldnt remember what it was called and eventually gave up - so I'm glad someone linked to it. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 05:08, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

::::True, some people a more notably English than they are British. If IP user is referring to a pre-existing article, MOS:RETAIN would also reply, unless the current wording is obviously incorrect. Would still like to know what article we're talking about here, unless this is a hypothetical. I can't immediately find anything on the user's contribution page that matches (there's Elijah Wood, but he's American) TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 07:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::I'm talking about the Article on actress Raffey Cassidy, should she be referred to as a "British actress" or an "English actress"? 76.68.113.121 (talk) 07:38, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::In that article, the sources that specifcally bring up her nationality say British:

::::::

::::::

::::::And I'm not seeing any sources that say English - so taking the lead from them and also in the spirit of WP:RETAIN we can continue saying British. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 08:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello Team,

i want to send off wiki SPI evidence. Please share email address. Thanks in advance. 2409:40F0:8:4D14:E5DA:B7A5:B51A:7BB7 (talk) 04:55, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

:You will need to create a Wikipedia account and enable the email function. It's free and easy. User:Arbitration Committee explains how to email that committee. An alternative to ArbCom is to send an email to an individual administrator heavily active at WP:SPI. Cullen328 (talk) 05:12, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi! I edit on an Apple IPhone. I just got an Apple Laptop and my Phone and Computer have my Apple ID (Which I am obviously not giving anyone). Is it permitted for me to be signed in to my Wikipedia account on both my Phone and Computer? Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 05:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

:Yes absolutely you can use as many devices as your heart desires. I'm sure you will find some experienced editors who take pride in having edited from the greatest range of, or most niche internet enabled devices they could find. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 05:23, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks. Servite et contribuere (talk) 05:28, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

::{{u|Servite et contribuere}}, I too edit mostly from my phone, and occasionally on my laptop. One benefit of trying different devices is that you get a better sense of the dramatically different appearance of the same article on a tiny screen as opposed to a large screen. Cullen328 (talk) 07:26, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Rajiv Gandhi Manav Seva Award#cite note-13

i have attached my drafted articel above , would love some assisstance. Rohitmahali01 (talk) 06:45, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

: Standalone articles on awards can be tough, as there are sooooo many of them and there are typically far more articles on the bestowing of an award than on the award itself, it's history, origin and cultural significance. The initial origin of many "minor" award articles is as a section in the namesake rather than a stand alone article. Hope this helps. --07:10, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

platform Frank mutish (talk) 07:35, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

:Which platform ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 08:47, 21 June 2025 (UTC)