WP:Teahouse#Where to put References

Hello,

I am trying to understand what about the content on this page (Jayanthi Kumaresh) appears promotional. It earlier was indeed so (unintentionally) and has hence been edited to present a more neurtral tone and amply supported by citations. The tagger has indicated that there is still lots of puffery. Will anyone kindly help me review and edit the article to adhere to the wiki standards. Thank you.

Shyamala. Shyamalswiki (talk) 03:51, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

:Phrases such as {{tq|represent India’s Musical Heritage and promote Indian classical music; rigorous Veena training; renowned violinist; excelled in sparkling glee; gave a sold-out concert at Sydney Opera House}} all come across as promotional. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:59, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

::“excelled in sparkling glee" is a quote from a review. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:31, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Yes, but a cherry-picked quote. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:44, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

::::There are about 150 or so links where I do a google search and I am trying to figure out how to make an article about the subject using content from those sources. So, should I just be quoting lines from each of the articles - I thought, we could make factual statements and then give citations supporting it. Can you kindly pick one line out of the article and show me a rewritten version as a sample so I can understand what is wrong ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 16:17, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::I have removed some of the content you pointed out as appearing promotional. Kindly review. If it appears ok, what would be the next step to get the promotional tag removed ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 03:23, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::Also can you explain what in the name of the wikipedia is this? {{Tq|1=Darbar.org says she was one of the youngest veena artist to receive A-Top grading from All India Rad}}. Wh67890 (talk) 07:23, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::It is basically quoting a line from the website darbar.org .. Is there a better way of saying this ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 13:44, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::::Ask yourself if this is how we write informations in Wikipedia or is this way any Encyclopedia is written, the way you replied it without acknowledging the error, I think you need a course on how to write articles. Wh67890 (talk) 16:19, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::Kindly do not be offended. I am here in the teahouse to learn and seek the advice of experts like you. I am asking, I am unable to understand what the error is, what is a better way of saying this ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 17:21, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::Since you are commited to do it, why dont you try WP:RS, WP:Notability, WP:Article and WP:Verifiability. These are like constitution here in Wikipedia, reading them will help you getting familiarised with the idea of editing Wikipedia. Wh67890 (talk) 23:47, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::I went through notability already and made a few edits based on that. I will go through the other links you have provided. Thank you for your time and effort. Shyamalswiki (talk) 00:50, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::::Just for asking: Are you connected to the subject somehow? Wh67890 (talk) 23:54, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::I am a fan of her music and while looking for something found that her page was really old. So, I am trying to put my best foot forward and get it up to date. Shyamalswiki (talk) 00:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

::Veena Artist I think not notable Santalipedia (talk) 11:30, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::Also {{Tq|1=She is one of the youngest veena player with A-Top grading[cite the source for your claim]}} is only best version I can advise to you. Also Read some other article that share similarities with you but are in A-class or B-class phase, it will also help you to understand how to write a better encyclopedia.Wh67890 (talk) 23:51, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::I have made a similar edit and a citation was already there. Thank you for the pointer and suggestion. If you find any other sections with scope for improvement, kindly let me know. Shyamalswiki (talk) 00:57, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::What is A-class / B-class, how can I find such articles ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 01:30, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::this might be confusing: A class and B class articles that are neatly written, but not the best standard articles like featured or GAs. These articles follow almost all the rules and criteria that in Wikipedia needs; such as but not limited to, citing, reliability, notability, expansion et cetra. You cannot find them but it is shown, what class that article is of, in the top of the artile just below the title but only if you have enabled this in you gadgets menu.

::::::::::::these are some of the articles related to musics and BLP in your country (india) with A and B class criteria:

::::::::::::1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravi_Shankar Ravi Shankar actually a good article.

::::::::::::2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raga Raga Wh67890 (talk) 01:59, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::Thank you very much. I saw some of your pointers in the article and I have gone back and added more citations that I could find. I have more content to add but would like to wait until the current content is in the clear and we can remove the promo tag. In the mean time, I saw some of the citations got added with an auto tag and now some are being repeated. How can I fix this and prevent it from re occurring ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 02:19, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::Do not wait to make an article better. Promo tag will automatically be removed by one of us if you refine your article.

::::::::::::::I will not be here since i am busy. So here are some advice. Expand it, improve lede section so that reader understand the spot just liWikof success. ipedia is not just awards collection. Read WP:What Wikipedia is not.You don't need to verify everything but you need to verify sentences that makes claims. Wh67890 (talk) 02:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::*Understand the subject not just list of awards. Sorry my keyboard got jammed.

:::::::::::::::Wh67890 (talk) 02:53, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::Thank you very much again for the invaluable advice. what did u mean "lede section" ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 02:57, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::Lede section is the first section you see in article, such as in your case, it is the whole section just above early life and education. Wh67890 (talk) 03:09, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::::Lede section summa rise most important things that you see in the article . And sometime, with care, you can add extra information but make sure lede section is just summarise it. Wh67890 (talk) 03:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::Read WP:Lede section Wh67890 (talk) 03:15, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::::If the lead section looks ok now, can we remove that warning from the article ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 04:21, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Can you kindly elaborate what you mean by "not notable" Shyamalswiki (talk) 13:44, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:Some of the sections are marked as citation needed - “A Thousand Stars”.^{[citation needed]} Jayanthi Kumaresh has also released several albums with multiple themes and presentations. - Is it ok to include the you tube link as citation ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 16:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

::No youtube links are not used in Wikipedia, don't use them. Wh67890 (talk) 16:52, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:::The other links that show up are also similar - apple music, shazam, spotify etc. What is a way to add a citation here then ? Shyamalswiki (talk) 16:57, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

::::uhm. Since we don't allow these sites because they are not "WP: Primary source. Only options are:

::::1. Published articles from music magazines (e.g. Rolling Stone), reputable websites (Billboard), or industry databases (Discogs).

::::2. Record label or artist official press releases, album booklets, or liner notes.

::::3. Interviews, reliable news coverage, or historical archives.

::::Make sure they are not biased and promotional everything else is good. Wh67890 (talk) 17:03, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Wh67890 is not quite correct here – a YouTube video can be perfectly fine as a source, for instance a news report published by a reliable news organisation, a lecture by an acknowledged expert published by a major university, or a documentary produced and published by a reputable publisher. It is all about who has published the video – and to be clear, the absolute majority of everything published through YouTube is not going to be useable as a source, but it's not true that YT is never used. Now, if you were thinking about using YouTube videos of Jayanthi Kumaresh's performances to support statements in the article, that is not ideal since such a video is a primary source, and Wikipedia really prefers secondary sources in most situations. Note also that a link to a YT video can never be used to support a claim about how many views or follows or likes the video has. As for Apple Music, Spotify, Shazam, and similar, those are primary sources, and not useful for Wikipedia's purposes since they only show that a song or an album exists; in addition, links to streaming services or websites that sell products should always be avoided because Wikipedia doesn't want to send its readers off to commercial websites. Hope this makes sense. --bonadea contributions talk 18:35, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

::::thanks for noting the mistake. Actually yes you can use Youtube in certain cases but its very rare and only if no other sources (secondary sources) are available. For example Shyamalswiki can use this link https://www.youtube.com/@JayanthiKumareshVeena to cite directly one about her (subject's) channel OR her (subject's) piece of music, only for proving the existence through official sources, such as in this case the link leaves to her official Youtube account. Link however can be used like this “X, [https://youtube.com/xyz Interview with Artist Y,” YouTube, timestamp 3:45], Official Channel, Published Jan 2023." is appropriate. Also you can not use any unofficial Youtube channel even if it includes her (e.g. fan, promotional et cetra). But this is done carefully, thanks again. Wh67890 (talk) 01:24, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Thank you for offering more clarity Bonadea and Wh67890. I will then proceed to use her channel link when mentioning her albums. I have also expanded on the lead section and hopefully am getting better at writing it. Any feedback for improvement is highly appreciated. Shyamalswiki (talk) 02:22, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::Just a remainder, please if you can find, use some secondary sources too , just for sake of reliability. It will take more pain but it will worth it. Wh67890 (talk) 03:32, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::I see your comment regarding this line "unique blend of music, animation " .. that was directly taken from this article's subtitle https://www.thehindu.com/entertainment/music/veena-exponent-jayanthi-kumaresh-wins-over-young-listeners-with-her-new-live-show/article69601036.ece

:::::Why do you say that it has to be removed ? What other places do you see in the article that seem promotional? Shyamalswiki (talk) 04:31, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:I have added more expanded content to the sections mentioned and also added more details and citations. Appreciate any feedback for improvement. thanks Shyamalswiki (talk) 04:22, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi everyone! I recently submitted a draft article for review through AfC about Luca Volpe, a well-known Italian mentalist and performer. I have a professional connection, so I disclosed the COI transparently on the sandbox’s Talk page.

The page is at: User:Mnemonicbloom/sandbox

I believe he meets notability guidelines through national TV appearances (RAI1, RAI2), international performances, multiple industry awards (Merlin Award, Robert Houdin d’Or), and magazine features (e.g., Vanish Magazine).

Could someone take a quick peek and let me know if everything looks correct or if I need to move anything into Draft namespace? I’m still learning and happy to improve based on feedback!

Thank you so much for all the guidance! ~~~~ Mnemonicbloom (talk) 16:41, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, @Mnemonicbloom. I see your draft has been declined.

:A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what several people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, and very little else. Several of your sources are not reliable (eg Facebook), and others are not independent (eg suppliers). ColinFine (talk) 17:10, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

::

Thank you, ColinFine. I understand. I’ve now stepped away from editing this topic and respect the standards and policies in place. Wishing the editorial team all the best.

::Mnemonicbloom (talk) 19:38, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:::If you can find reliable independent sources, feel free to add them to the draft and eventually try to submit again :) CVDX (talk) 20:53, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

i found a article going by the name "if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around does it make any sound" and i found the name to be too long and complicated and that it would likely reduce the performance of the article and wouldnt help if people are searching the topic under a different name or a likely suitable title.

Are titles like these ok and are encyclopedic or a title change is in order for this article Narventer (talk) 18:03, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Narventer Per Talk:If_a_tree_falls_in_a_forest_and_no_one_is_around_to_hear_it,_does_it_make_a_sound%3F#Requested_move_7_April_2024 it seems to be the current consensus. Consensus can change. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:34, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

::There are several redirects from shorter titles.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere?target=If+a+tree+falls+in+a+forest+and+no+one+is+around+to+hear+it%2C+does+it+make+a+sound%3F&namespace=&hidetrans=1&hidelinks=1&limit=50] It's a famous thought experiment I may have heard dozens of times and it doesn't have a short name so the title seems appropriate to me. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:38, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:What does "reduce the performance of the article" mean? Longer loading time for the article? I really doubt that is a problem. --bonadea contributions talk 19:28, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

::i meant to say that people wouldnt be able to find the article beacuse of its twisted name and hence reduces the performance or the efficiency of the article to be on search results Narventer (talk) 06:34, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::That is why we use redirects, such as If a tree falls in a forest.

:::Also, a Google search for "If a tree falls in a forest" (with or without quotes) finds the article as the first result. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:49, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::::alright makes sense

::::quick question tho does this nominate for the longest article name or something Narventer (talk) 12:26, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Nowhere near; try Cneoridium dumosum (Nuttall) Hooker F. Collected March 26, 1960, at an Elevation of about 1450 Meters on Cerro Quemazón, 15 Miles South of Bahía de Los Angeles, Baja California, México, Apparently for a Southeastward Range Extension of Some 140 Miles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:36, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::i havnt been on this website enough Narventer (talk) 14:04, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::I've seen talkpage headings in much the same style. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:09, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Teahouse,

I recently submitted an article draft about my company/organization [BNW Developments] on Wikipedia, but it was not accepted. I tried to follow the guidelines, wrote in a neutral tone, and included references. However, it keeps getting declined or deleted, and I’m not sure what I’m doing wrong.

Can someone kindly help me understand what specific issues might be causing the rejection? Is it about notability, tone, sourcing, or something else?

I’d really appreciate any guidance or suggestions for improving it so that it meets Wikipedia’s standards.

Thanks in advance! SamCollierz (talk) 05:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:If you see it getting rejected, you will also find somewhere in the rejection field the reason for the AfC declined. Usually AfC reviewer must leave a reason as to why they have rejected the Article. Thankyou. Wh67890 (talk) 06:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

::Also the place where you wrote your WP:First article is called sandbox and it is different than draftspace and as I see it was deleted because it contains promotional tone. Please write new article in WP:About the sandbox but without any promotional tone. Wh67890 (talk) 07:34, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:::No, do not create article content in the public sandbox, it is for edit testing, and gets blanked frequently. (@Wh67890, please do not give incorrect or misleading advice.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

::::My mistake, I gave link on public sandbox instead of about the sandbox. Wh67890 (talk) 09:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

::Each time Wikipedia mention the reason that Promotional Content.

::Could you please help me to write the article? SamCollierz (talk) 03:09, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hi @SamCollierz: I assume you're referring to your sandbox draft User:SamCollierz/sandbox? This was deleted (a couple of months ago) as purely promotional, with no evidence of notability. I don't believe it was ever submitted for review, so wouldn't have been declined or rejected (which are two different outcomes) at AfC.

:I've posted a paid-editing query on your talk page, please read and action it. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:33, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:If you intend to work to improve it and make it suitable for publication, you can request undeletion of your sandbox: WP:REFUND. However, you should first be sure that you can demonstarte that the company meets the requirements at WP:NCORP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:25, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

::My business has been featured on several reputable websites and platforms. Given this visibility, I am unclear why it is still considered to lack notability. SamCollierz (talk) 03:11, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:::"featured on several reputable websites and platforms" is irrevelvant, if the coverage is not significant (i.e. in-depth), independent and in a reliable source.

:::Which three sources do you think meet those requirements? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:35, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

I have added an accurate comment about Neo-Nazis. I am a history professor who studies Nazism. Why removed? 2603:7080:AA40:69:84E1:221A:CF28:A08F (talk) 20:52, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dave_Smith_%28comedian%29&diff=1295284685&oldid=1294969756 This edit] was reverted by User:Pro-anti-air; you could ask them on their talk page, but now that I have mentioned them, hopefully they will comment here. I'll hazard a guess that it's because you described someone as a neo-nazi, without citing a source, contrary to our policy on biographies of living people.

:As a history professor, I'm sure you understand the importance of citing sources. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:06, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:There's a link to Gavin McInnes where you made your edit. If you're going to apply negative epithets to McInnes, you should either cite a reference, or use something from Wikipedia's article about him, preferably from its lead. There's plenty critical material there. Maproom (talk) 22:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

How do I appeal a block? 2600:382:3831:94C:2DD5:9D4C:7DE2:126A (talk) 00:09, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:Evading it to ask how to appeal is not a good start- if instructions were not provided on your user talk page, please see instructions and the unblock appeals guide. If you don't have access to your user talk page, use WP:UTRS. 331dot (talk) 00:19, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

::If their intent was to evade, they would have edited a page, not immediately noted that they were blocked. This is clearly in good faith and does not violate the purpose of a block (“prevent you from making disruptive edits”).

::Indeed, this actually makes it more difficult for them to violate the actual purpose of the block, because they just made it clear that they are blocked. So I would say a good start. LordDiscord (talk) 12:55, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

I am currently writing my PhD thesis on the subject of “greenwashing”.

In the course of my research, I noticed that a change was recently made to the Wikipedia entry on the term “greenwashing” and then restored by another editor with reference to certain sources.

For my scientific work, I am in urgent need of primary and absolutely reliable sources to verify the original coining of the term “greenwashing” by Jay Westerveld. The sources currently mentioned in the entry, which were added afterwards, are unfortunately not sufficient for my requirements as primary evidence. I have not been able to clearly identify the essay in which Jay Westerveld is said to have coined the term.

Could you please help me to find the exact reference or the exact location of this essay? A verified primary source for this is of utmost importance to my research and I urgently need your assistance in this search.

Thank you in advance for your help.

Sofia Verstappen Sofia Verstappen (talk) 11:11, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:It seems to me, {{U|Sofia Verstappen}}, that rather than asking about a concept, you're asking about a word. If this is so, then rather than asking here in Wikipedia, you'd be better off asking at Wiktionary. But that said: Even desultory googling brings plenty of (disappointingly imprecise) claims that Westerveld coined this -- somewhere, and meaning something -- in 1986. However, [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22greenwashing%22&tbm=bks&tbs=cdr:1,cd_min:1980,cd_max:1987&lr=lang_en this] brings earlier uses. (Change the values for cd_min and cd_max to taste.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:40, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:Courtesy link: Greenwashing.

:It may be that Westerveld was the first prominent writer to use and popularise the word, but had encountered it in previous more obscure writing. Hopefully, Sophia, others can help you, but in passing, note that as a Tertiary source, Wikipedia by policy prefers to base itself on Secondary sources, and only uses Primary sources sparingly: see further Wikipedia:No original research#Primary, secondary and tertiary sources and Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.40.15 (talk) 11:41, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Sofia Verstappen, welcome to Wikipedia. You may be looking in the wrong place, as Wikipedia – like all encyclopaedias – is a tertiary source which aims to summarise reliable secondary sources where possible. I did have a cursory look at the Greenwashing and Jay Westerveld articles as well as the wikt:greenwashing entry in our sister project Wiktionary, but didn't see references to Westerveld's essay in any of those places. To be honest, this sounds like a question you should take to your university library reference desk or your doctoral supervisor before a random assortment of strangers on the internet. (We do have our own reference desk here, but I really want to encourage you to use the resources provided by your institution before a bunch of volunteers who come and go as we please.) ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 11:43, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

::True, ClaudineChionh, but (i) Sofia may have queried those resources already; (ii) Wikipedia has a reputation, not entirely undeserved, of having a few editors who, if interested, can sometimes unearth hidden evidence rather as a well-trained pig unearths truffles. -- Hoary (talk) 11:51, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

::Hi Sofia,

::About all we can do is point to the references already in place at the article. So you could try following back a statement made at Greenwashing to the sources we used to determine it but that's really all we can do. Some Wikipedia editors have access to a large library of academic journals and other such materials but I'm sure you, as a PhD candidate, also have such access through your school. Beyond that all I can do is reinforce what others have told you: Wiktionary may be a better destination for a specific etymological question. Simonm223 (talk) 11:51, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:::@Sofia Verstappen

:::The Oxford English Dictionary attempts to find the earliest usage of words. For greenwashing, the earliest usage is from September 1987, and the source listed is "Commerc. Appeal (Memphis, Tennessee) 4 September (Final edition) a9/4" (whatever that might be). Blackballnz (talk) 01:37, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Teahouse Member's

I'm a Journalist and I have to create a Wikipedia page for myself. I infact tried to create a page, but it was rejected from the reviewer. Can Someone please support me? Journorahull (talk) 15:16, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:You do not "have to". See also WP:Autobiography. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:23, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:Plural nouns do not need apostrophes. Osa Akwamarynowa (talk) 02:38, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::I don't know who told you that you "have to" but I would suggest that you ask them to read WP:BOSS. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 09:23, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

{{courtesy link|Draft:Ling Bouvier}}

Hi! I submitted a draft for the article Ling Bouvier (The Simpsons) — would anyone be willing to take a look and provide feedback or possibly review it faster? Mirror5ioa (talk) 15:35, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{yo|Mirror5ioa}} Looks like someone has already done so. But why the hurry? You posted this request only a few minutes after creating the draft! --bonadea contributions talk 16:02, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Mirror5ioa The problem with your current draft (which has already been declined by a reviewer) is that it cites no sources. Hence readers can't verify what you write, no matter how true you think that is. You need to find published reliable sources that show that this character is notable in the specific way Wikipedia defines that word. Fan sites will not be sufficient: we need editorial oversight in the sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:04, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

::... See Lisa Simpson for the type of sources required for an article rated "good". Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:07, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

I made a major revision to the wiki page for Jerome McGann but @ 75.75.120.254 (talk) 16:21, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:There are no edits made under your IP address. Were you signed in? Did you select the "Publish" button?

:I have left some useful links on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:If you are User:InternalExile, this is explained at WP:Help desk#Completely befuddled. Please don't ask the same question in two places. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:00, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

In music articles, ive seen many mark the octave numbers with the HTML subscripts or use Template:Sub like this F3 and I started doing it myself and I think it looks nice. But somehow I didnt see it in MOS:SUBSCRIPT or MOS:MUSIC. drinks or coffee ~ ♪ 17:28, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:It would be best if you raised the matter on the talk page of those MOS pages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:44, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:And I will note that Unicode subscript digits (₀ ₁ ₂ ₃ ₄ ₅ ₆ ₇ ₈ ₉) should not be used. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:39, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

What is the most recent species to have gone extinct? Donald is Jurassic (talk) 20:52, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Donald is Jurassic, welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place to get help with using and editing Wikipedia. Your question would be better at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. Anyway, nobody knows. It takes a while before a species is declared extinct, and it's hard to be sure. Many small species like insects probably go extinct without ever having been discovered. Maybe the reference desk can find a list of recently declared extinct species by some authoritative source. You may also be interested in Special:PrefixIndex/List of recently extinct. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:37, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

I am new here and can't figure out how to link published pictures (giving appropriate credit/copyright consdierations) to articles. I've noticed those with pictures have much better engagement. Any obvious tips I'm missing? RockyGrrl (talk) 22:28, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:RockyGrrl, NB those "credit/copyright considerations" can be complex and they certainly don't resemble what goes on in Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Pinterest, and the like. ("Yes it's copyright, but I'll credit the copyright holder, say it's for Wikipedia only; I'm sure they won't mind" will not fly.) Unless you're planning to claim the "fair use" of a conventionally copyrighted picture for a particular purpose, you're better off uploading the public domain [in the legal sense of the term] or copyleft picture to Wikimedia Commons than to upload it here. :c:Help:Contents has a list of links to pages that explain the process. -- Hoary (talk) 02:32, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|RockyGrrl}} uploading images such as :File:Sylviaarenas2025.jpg is completely unacceptable. You have not done even the "giving appropriate credit/copyright consdierations" you said, but have instead provided "Source Public figure social media account" and "Author Unknown author". You cannot just grab a picture from the web and upload it to Commons; it is a copyright violation, plain and simple (see :c:COM:WEBCOPYVIO). To upload images you must either have taken them yourself, or they must have an existing free license (see :c:COM:L) or they must be in public domain (which does not mean that the image is widely available). And you must be able to prove the free license or public domain status. To upload pictures taken by others without such a license you must convince the copyright holder to send explicit permission via :c:VRT (and "permission to use in Wikipedia" is not sufficient either). MKFI (talk) 10:17, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Can someone direct me to the list of reliable sources. I remember Guinness Book was not acceptable. I ca't find the list. 2600:8802:3A09:6400:7589:F93C:4F07:A49A (talk) 00:49, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:Is WP:RSP what you're looking for? [[User:CanonNi]] (talk • contribs) 00:50, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::Please be aware that Reliable sources/Perennial sources {{tpq|is not a general or comprehensive list of all generally reliable or unreliable sources in the world}}. It is instead a list of sources whose reliability has been discussed frequently over the years. Editors need to develop the important skill of assessing the reliability of lesser known sources on their own. Cullen328 (talk) 11:04, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

According to Oxford dictionary, the verb forms of this word can be either single or double s. However, the preferred iOS spelling correction is focuses. Which is more appropriate?

Like the word gas, the plural can be either gases or gasses. MarcoToa1 (talk) 02:39, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:My American spellchecker is happy with both. HiLo48 (talk) 03:31, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::Although the two spelling are both acceptable in British or American English, I usually prefer the single s version. MarcoToa1 (talk) 05:14, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:::The double s version is not rare, but it is less common. MarcoToa1 (talk) 05:15, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::::While spelling should be consistent within a specific article, there may not be a WP-"appropriate" spelling, so leaving it alone on a WP-wide basis is probably fine. I don't know if this falls within WP:ENGVAR. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:40, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Your preference is immaterial; do not go around changing others' uses of the version you dislike, as you have recently been doing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:36, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

People sometimes use plural adjectival nouns (for example the blind, the disabled, the elderly). However, sometimes it may be considered inappropriate because it suggests that all people (for example people who are deaf/blind/elderly/homeless etc. are all the same. From now, if I find these uses in any articles, I’ll change it. (For example use people with disabilities or disabled people for the disabled and blind people for the blind) MarcoToa1 (talk) 05:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:The expressions without relation to disabilities is fine . MarcoToa1 (talk) 05:30, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::Avoid using these terms

::The disabled

::The deaf

::The blind

::The handicapped

::The subnormal

::The dumb

::The deaf and dumb

::The colo[u]r blind

::etc. MarcoToa1 (talk) 05:33, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:::This appears to be (mostly) a very personal preference. Be aware of WP:COMMUNICATE and WP:BRD, WP:EW can get you blocked. If this is something you want to suggest implementing WP-wide, the WP:MOS talkpage may be the place to start. The Teahouse is not the place for this kind of "declaration." You can also ask for input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disability. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:46, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Aside from personal preference, though, what would the real difference between the blind and blind people be? Augnablik (talk) 06:01, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::It feels natural to say the French voted for Macron, whereas French people are known for liking smelly cheese - so I'd say the difference is that the former is a statement about the group as a whole, rather than about it's members. Although a lot of organisations are called something like "Such And Such School For The Blind" and in those instances it is right to call things what they are called so personal preference doesn't really factor into it. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 08:23, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::I sort of see where you’re coming from, D’n’B, but it seems to me that to say “the French are known for liking smelly cheese” sounds just as natural as “French people …”

::::::That said, I think that if we made either declaration in Paris, we’d have to duck and run for describing cheese liked by French people/ the French as smelly! Sacré bleu! 🤭 Augnablik (talk) 11:00, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Out of curiosity, where did you see en-WP use "subnormal" about people, outside quotes etc? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:26, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Both "the handicapped" and "handicapped people" are poor style. They are too vague (too diverse a concept, both type and extent) to be useful in almost any context and are examples of typically needless identity-first language. That latter applies even to the more homogeneous groups listed. DMacks (talk) 09:36, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Several of the changes you have recently made to such terms were in quotations from published sources or speech. Do not edit quotations like that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:38, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, {{u|MarcoToa1}}. This is the second time that you have posted here to announce your personal rules for the use of English, and state that you intended to impose them unilaterally on Wikipedia. As I told you there, this is not the way to do this. However laudable your intention may be, Wikipedia is created by consensus, and one editor imposing their own views (particularly after others have objected) is disruptive editing, and may get you blocked.

:Discuss your proposals, and achieve consensus before you try implementing them; either at WP:VPP as I suggested or at the WP:MOS talk page as GGS suggested. --ColinFine (talk) 15:05, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

On the article William Marshall, 1st Earl of Pembroke, The Issue (children) is missing from infobox for some unknown reason, but its not missing from his wife Isabel de Clare, 4th Countess of Pembroke infobox. So for the sake of consistency, and for not confusing those who read the article, i've tried to add it in , but for some reason something weird happens and the infobox becomes messy. You try it yourself. What is going on? why is this happening? if it has something to do with not yet having an account, then can someone please add the issue in the infobox? 76.68.113.121 (talk) 06:10, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

You can add "| issue = {{plainlist|", followed by the right list. Look at how it is there for the Countess, and follow the details exactly. Bduke (talk) 06:23, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:I did that before too, it didnt work 76.68.113.121 (talk) 06:41, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::IP editor. I don't know what went wrong in your case but I had no trouble copying the list over from the wife, in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_Marshal%2C_1st_Earl_of_Pembroke&diff=1295543118&oldid=1295525011 this diff]. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:45, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

I've had an argument over whether gender inequality in Korea was related to the finger pinching conspiracy theory on Talk:Finger pinching conspiracy theory. The argument was that while some news articles have mentioned South Korea's gender inequality in their article, it can't be assumed that it is related to the topic, since none of them gave any links or relations to it. You can see the full discussion on the topic. During the debate, I was pointed to this Teahouse to seek advices for my doing. I have made some mistakes when I was new to wikipedia, but during the time of discussion, I didn't realize any violation of Wikipedia's policies to the point where it could be seen as disruptive. Could you help me with what I might have done wrong and what I could improve on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Someone123454321 (talk • contribs) 07:47, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:If you were directed here for that purpose, then whosever did so was mistaken. This forum is for advice on how to edit, not for dispute resolution.

:If talk page discussion is not helping, please follow the process outlined at WP:DR. One thing you might consider is asking for a third opinion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:33, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

I have an article I've created, and I've been trying to get published for over two years now. It is an article about my local public high school and contains facts about academics, extracurriculars, the history of the school, quick facts, and even the plans regarding the new football field.

Currently, the article has been rejected for appearing "to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." I do agree with this, and I’m open to fixing it. But even after multiple revisions, the submission is still dismissed for the same reason. I would greatly appreciate any help rewording parts of the article to meet Wikipedia’s standards. I truly just want this page to be published now, because I think it’s quite unfair that every single high school near me has a page (I checked), and mine doesn’t.

I kindly request any extra guidance regarding my article, and I’m flexible about changing any parts of it. And I would rather help than be told my article isn’t important like before.

Here's a link to my article: Draft:Springdale Jr-Sr High School (Pennsylvania)

Thank you, Cv822 (talk) 10:18, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:I agree that the article is more neutral than previous. I don't think it's ready yet though. The minutiae of what rooms are in each wing does not seem worthwhile content, nor do the naming of various areas. Those are both types of things that might be on an "about us" page of the school's own website and are likely interesting to those in the community, but aren't really "worldwide encyclopedia" material and could come across as self-promotional. The extensive level detail about the stadium is likewise only of interest to those in the community. However, and I know this is what you asked not to be told, but it's the real question: is this school actually notable, per WP:GNG? Individual high schools do not automatically merit their own articles (WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES). It's quite possible that only some of several in an area do (each must stand on its own merits, not by association) and it's also possible that existing nearby-school articles also do not meet current article standards either. Proving that it is means finding multiple high-quality in-depth refs, and those would be the basis for writing neutral content about it beyond the play-by-play of its construction and generic laundry-lists of its student activities. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice. DMacks (talk) 10:41, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:Courtesy link to Wikipedia:Other stuff exists

:Adding on to what DMacks said, just the creation of an article can be seen as promotion (even if that wasn't your intention, and I doubt it was), as not all information is notable enough for its inclusion in Wikipedia to be WP:NPOV. If the school is notable, then that will be demonstrated by in-depth coverage in reliable and independent sources. If that is the case, then only including the information discussed there, in the proportion discussed there, will help the article stay neutral. Unfortunately, as said above, your school might not be notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 11:18, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:Please don't use multiple forums to seek assistance. 331dot (talk) 11:25, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::Sorry, I didn't realize that was a rule Cv822 (talk) 11:28, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:::It's not a "rule" per se, but it duplicates effort. 331dot (talk) 11:31, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

my client Gameloft wants their wikipedia article locked from edits anyone know how to get it locked 2601:19E:4381:A500:2415:82BF:97A7:ECA9 (talk) 10:19, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:See WP:BOSS. An article shouldn't - and likely wont - be edited or changed because of the wishes of the subject or an editor paid by the subject, and such a paid relationship must be disclosed. If there is a legitimate reason that the article should be locked from edits, such as frequent vandalism, then the articles talk page is probably the best place to request that. Others could probably help you more with making that request. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 10:31, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:Courtesy link: Gameloft. IP user, in addition to WP:BOSS that TheDowningStreetCat links to above, you should ask your client to read this policy: Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Articles are protected ("locked") to protect the encyclopedia from disruption, and one common type of disruption is that somebody wants to make sure that the article about them contains no criticism, or that it is written in a very positive tone. That is not Wikipedia's purpose, and if this article were to be "locked" it would be to protect it from inappropriate edits such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gameloft&diff=prev&oldid=1295535014 this one]. --bonadea contributions talk 10:43, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:I note that you recently edited the article. As they are your client, you are required to abide by our WP:PAID policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:27, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:If your client wants "their" article (it's Wikipedia's article about them) locked, they've misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia.. Thank you for the warning. Maproom (talk) 22:33, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Please see this for more context

The articles on chinese firefighting are an absolute mess and have made the entire situation very confusing. In fact, the national fire and rescue administration article was originally meant to be for the China Fire and Rescue(the firefighting force, bit like how the US navy is under the department of the navy), but somehow ended up being about the post-2023 agency instead, ironically making the article older than the agency.

For whatever reason, whoever decided to change the topic of the original article moved it instead of splitting it, causing the horrible situation now where the NFRA article is somehow about both the NRFA and China Fire and Rescue.

Those are very very different things, and should be split; could somebody please do it for me as it likely could be very messy.(If you know Chinese, read the chinese articles, they have managed it pretty well)

Additionally, articles on the ministry of emergency management fire and rescue bureau and ministry of emergency management forest fire bureau should also be made. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 12:06, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:"National Fire and Rescue Administration" is certainly a misleading title. Maproom (talk) 22:37, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::NFRA is the agency, not the firefighting force. A split would certainly be needed. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 05:23, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I write to suggest that an article be devoted to Gloria Sengha, arguably the DRCongo’s most prominent democracy and human rights activist. I see there is a long article in the French Wikipedia but only a couple of scattered mentions in English. I would be happy to write up a first draft for review, if you like.

She has been arrested on multiple occasions and is currently being sought by the secret police. There is therefore some urgency.

thank you, Daronson64 (talk) 13:16, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|Daronson64}} Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. While we have no deadlines here, you may use the Article Wizard to create and submit a draft article, though writing a new article can be challenging. 331dot (talk) 13:23, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:Are you able to make a translation from the article available on "Wikipedia in French" ?

:Link to the article in French : ":fr:Gloria Sengha Panda Shala".

:It would be certainly easier than write an article from scratch. Anatole-berthe (talk) 13:35, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, @Daronson64, and welcome to the Teahouse. You are welcome to do this, but please start by reading WP:translation. Note that, whether you translate the French article, or try writing it in a different way, it is your responsibility to ensure that you have the sources necessary to establish that she meets English Wikipedia's criteria for notability. The sources cited in the French article may or may not be adequate for the English Wikipedia. (Being in French is not a problem, but they need to meet the triple criterion in WP:42 - I haven't checked whether or not they appear to do so) ColinFine (talk) 15:13, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I am writing this to show you that the Glitch Productions articles I created are being taken down for no apparent reason. Even the people who are taking it down are users, not administrators, who just won’t leave me alone.

Thank you. RockandHipHop (talk) 14:45, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:Grievances with user behavior should be brought to WP:ANI, but that should be a last resort after all other resolution efforts have failed. 331dot (talk) 14:50, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:Not for "no apparent reason", but for the reasons - good reasons - explained on your talk page, and in the deletion discussions linked from there. Please read those; and WP:42. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:55, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::I know doing so is for good reasons, but they just do speedy deletions, and when I check on there, the deleter is just a user. RockandHipHop (talk) 15:00, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:::No, the person proposing deletion is"just" a user; that's allowed. Only an admin can actually delete. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:06, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Does Wikipedia have a policy about quoting two speakers as if they were one?

The Shooting Brake entry has this quote:

:A body style with "a very interesting profile. It makes use of the road space it covers a little better than a normal coupé, and also helps the rear person with headroom. ... The occasional use of the rear seat means you can do one of these cars, even if such a wagon lacks the everyday practicality of four doors."

This makes it sound like it's quoting one person.

But the original looks like this. I've boldfaced the parts that were quoted in the Wikipedia article:

:It is not your basic two-door hatchback, a body style with different proportions: the hatchback tends to be squatty, while a shooting brake is sleek and has “a very interesting profile,” in the words of Peter Horbury, executive director of design for North America for the Ford Motor Company.

:“It makes use of the road space it covers a little better than a normal coupe, and also helps the rear person with headroom,” Mr. Horbury added. “Especially in America, every member of the family has their own car. The occasional use of the rear seat means you can do one of these cars,” even if such a wagon lacks the everyday practicality of four doors.

Most of the Wikepedia quote is from Peter Horbury, but the last part, "even if such a wagon lacks the everyday practicality of four doors." appears to be an addition by the original article's author, Willian Diem of the New York Times.

Should a Wikipedia quote make that distinction, or does it not matter on the prinicle that it is all a quote from that NYT article? Greg Lovern (talk) 18:39, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|Greg Lovern}}: Wikipedia should not attribute to the NYT (a reliable source) statements made by Mr. Horbury (who he?). Maproom (talk) 22:45, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:Greg Lovern, you're right to be wary of any simplification that obscures the distinction between what person A writes (by themselves) and what person A writes (quoting person B). And it's understandable that you're a little rattled by {{U|Mr.choppers}}' reversion (polite though it was) of your informatively summarized edit (see the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shooting_brake&action=history history]). I haven't looked at the NYT article, and I'll assume that your quotation of it above is correct. It's not obvious to me that

::"[...] {{Blue|The occasional use of the rear seat means you can do one of these cars}}," {{Olive|even if such a wagon lacks the everyday practicality of four doors}}.

:distinguishes between {{Blue|what Horbury says}} and {{Olive|what Diem says}}. Mightn't it instead distinguish between {{Blue|what Horbury says (quoted directly)}} and {{Olive|what Horbury says (quoted indirectly)}}? However, before puzzling over this, let's pause for a moment. Whether or not it's mangled, the item "It is not your basic two-door hatchback [...] executive director of design for North America for the Ford Motor Company" is presented in the WP article as an ingredient of the/a definition of shooting brake. However, it doesn't look to me like a definition, or even an ingredient of a definition. I'd cut it (and very likely also cut more besides, though I haven't checked). -- Hoary (talk) 22:59, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

::I just now read [https://archive.ph/20130130121613/http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26/automobiles/26BRAKE.html#selection-599.312-599.382 the article], and I would argue that this sounds like Diem paraphrasing Horbury. But that's not 100% certain and I agree with Greg above that the quote is a touch problematic.

::Moreover, what is certain is that the quote is included in a list of descriptions of a shooting brake - but to me it sounds more like Horbury expanding on the agreed on definition, its purpose and design and so on. After having read the article I think including it as a "different definition" is somewhat specious and only serves to muddy the waters. The same article also contains the words {{tq|The shooting brake, however, is a luxury coupe with a squared-off back}} which is a much more relevant quote.

::I would also like to add that Diem makes a misleading statement when he says that the German word for station wagon is "touring or variant"; those are merely BMW's and VW's marketing terms for their wagons, which are called Kombi in German.  Mr.choppers | ✎  13:30, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

In the list of vampire television series there are errors and omissions in Castlevania.

The original Anime Castlevania had 4 seasons, not 3, and 32 episodes.

Castlevania: Nocturne is not even listed and began in 2023 and the second season began in 2025 with a total of 16 episodes.

I can't edit because I'm not a coder.

Could someone please correct.

Thank you.

Debra Normand Dnormand (talk) 19:56, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello {{u|Dnormand}}. You can edit it yourself - there certainly shouldn't be any coding involved. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 20:17, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:If what you're worried about is wikitext markup, then you can also switch to the visual editor, which looks more like a regular word processor. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 21:52, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Do administrators on Wikipedia have to be 18 years old? What do they typically have? Super Salty (talk) 01:37, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Super Salty there isn't a minimum age requirement to become an administrator. It is far more important to have extensive experience in many areas of Wikipedia editing and maintenance. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 01:59, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::Because of the amount of experience required, I think it follows that admins would have to be at least four or five. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 03:44, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Four or five years on wikipedia, I assume. I don't recommend infantile administrators. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 05:00, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::::"Infantile" would be a pleasant upgrade from the things some admins routinely get called. DMacks (talk) 05:04, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:While we have had admins in the past who were under 18, in many cases we do not know, have no way of knowing, and no need to know, an individual's age. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:44, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::Right, admins don't have to give any personal information like name, age or nationality. If they had to give enough information for somebody to examine an age claim then many good candidates might refrain because identifying information could be leaked. See e.g. List of people imprisoned for editing Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:28, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Anything is possible Cwater1 (talk) 13:40, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I have edited pages, and my edits have been accepted. I have now created a new page, following all of Wiki's guidelines. It is in my SANDBOX, and has been, for over a week. Wiki has accepted the formatting.

I'm not sure if there is something further I should do to get it uploaded. Overlawed (talk) 08:21, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|Overlawed}} Hello and welcome. I have moved your draft to Draft space; it's okay to use your sandbox, but it's better to have drafts in draft space. In the future you can use the Article Wizard to create a draft. The draft is now at Draft:Prabha Sridevan.

:I added the appropriate information to allow you to submit your draft for review, but before you do, I would format the references so that they are not bare urls- please see referencing for beginners. 331dot (talk) 08:27, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{U|Overlawed}}, three points. (i) I quote: "We have dealt with this in detail only because we are of the opinion that...." Who are here referring to themselves as "we"? (ii) Is "husband's income � wife's income" perhaps supposed to read "husband's income ÷ wife's income"? (iii) Put references immediately after periods, commas, etc (and not immediately before them). -- Hoary (talk) 09:38, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

My article regarding muffler nuisance laws in the Philippines was declined due to unreliable sources. I am referring to actual laws and pending legislation in my article. Can someone help me point out why this article was declined, thanks! Dhogberg1 (talk) 11:56, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Muffler_noise_regulations_in_the_Philippines Dhogberg1 (talk) 12:02, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Dhogberg1 I see you've chosen to perform one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia, writing a successful article, as your first goal. This generally isn't advisable, as you really need to have some level of experience with Wikipedia's policies to be successful. It's advisable to perform some tasks first, as these will provide you with some easier things to do so you can get more experience before making your first article.

:As for the article itself, the issue is more that there aren't any references. Wikipedia articles require sources that are WP:RELIABLE, WP:SECONDARY and which primarily focus on the topic at hand for an article to be published. These are core principles of article creation. The article you drafted has no citations, it uses external links presumably to the regulations themselves. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:09, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::This is noted. So if a reference to a senate bill posted on a government website is not sufficient? Are the government websites in themselves sufficient? How do I prove that these are the applicable laws? 143.44.145.171 (talk) 13:19, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::You're missing the point- (and remember to log in) you need to summarize what independent reliable sources say about these laws, not what the government says about them. 331dot (talk) 13:26, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Ok, so I will need to find reliable sources confirming that the laws issued by the Philippine government are actuel laws issued by the Philippine government and not made up on governmental (.gov) websites? I understand that verification is crucial but the reason I am doing this is because of the lack of information presented to the public regarding actual laws regulating the use of loud mufflers. As a result, 99% of the delivery riders believe they are allowed to modify their motorbikes and make them noisier, when this is in fact illegal. As a result many residential communities are suffering from constant nuisance day and night with very limited tools to fight back, despite the fact that this behaviour is regulated by law. Dhogberg1 (talk) 13:51, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello and welcome. I fixed your link, the whole url is not needed when linking to another page or article on Wikipedia.

:Wikipedia articles primarily summarize what independent reliable sources say about a topic, and you are just summarizing what primary sources(the Filipino government) say about this topic. 331dot (talk) 12:10, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

The [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Swae_Lee_sig.svg| commons file] for the signature of Swae Lee is sourced from an eBay listing for a signed copy of a record - I'm not familiar with the source guidelines for Wikimedia Commons but this feels rather unsubstantial. Have checked WP:RSPS but it isn't listed, so just seeking some advice here. Thanks! Epsilon.Prota ^talk 13:49, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I am trying to publish about Siva Kandula, but why getting rejection always?

Draft:Siva Teja Reddy Kandula

Could you please help me? Sivateja16 (talk) 14:49, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|Sivateja16}} Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I see that you took a picture of Mr. Kandula, what is your connection with him? Is he your boss?

:You have almost no sources in the draft; a Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources say about a person, showing how they are a notable person. 331dot (talk) 14:53, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:I see on your user talk page that you say you have known Mr. Kandula for many years; I would suggest that you disclose this as a conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 14:54, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:User apparently requested deletion of their draft. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:26, 15 June 2025 (UTC)