Wikipedia:Teahouse#Advice About Style to New Editors

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)

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)

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, @Dhogberg1. Independent sources that confirm that these are actual laws, are probably not going to cut it. Notability must generally be based on sources that meet all three of the criteria in golden rule: that they are reliable, that they are independent/secondary, and that they contain significant coverage of the subject.

:::::You would need several reliable independent sources that talk ''about' the laws and bills. That discuss the arguments for or against, or the process by which they have been arrived at, or how they are being taken through the legislature.

:::::If you have a reliable source saying that there are many drivers breaking the laws, it might be appropriate to discuss this in the article.

:::::There are two things that you need to beware of, however:

:::::# You must summarise what individual sources say. You many not add any sort of argumentation or conclusion, even comparing two different sources (you could say that source 1 says X and source 2 says Y, but should not discuss that difference or recommend one of the views over the other). Putting any argument, discussion, or conclusion that is not found in one reliable source would be original research, which is forbidden in a Wikipedia article.

:::::# Make sure that you are not trying to RIGHTGREATWRONGS. That is not the purpose of Wikipedia.

:::::{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}} ColinFine (talk) 16:52, 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)

::Thanks a lot for all of your input @Rambley, @CommissarDoggo‬‬, @331dot and @ColinFine‬. I am starting to realize the very basics of how this site works and completely agree with it. The articles are meant to provide verified facts, unbiased but true, as opposed to someone's opinion backed up by selected facts from a particular angle. With that said I will continue my research in order to improve my work before attempting to publish this article again. Dhogberg1 (talk) 17:20, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::@Dhogberg1 And even if you succeed in getting a Wikipedia article, it won't stop the 99% of delivery riders who illegally modify their motorbikes and make them noisier. That will take a different approach. Blackballnz (talk) 00:28, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

::::So far, I’ve been doing the groundwork myself, handing out leaflets, talking directly to riders, and attending meetings with LGUs (local government units), law enforcement, and the police, but progress is slow. Even among "educated" individuals, including some police officers, there’s a surprising lack of awareness about the relevant legislation. As for the riders (mostly young males), they simply don't care. Laws, rules, and regulations don’t interest them. Their behavior seems to be shaped more by habit and culture than by any respect for public order. The noise they create, regardless of the time of day or night, doesn’t seem to matter to them, and not to those tasked with enforcing the law. What does seem to matter is that their 100cc mopeds sound like spitfires, roaring through residential streets as if that’s somehow a point of pride, never mind the families they disturb in the process! Having said that, many of the residents here in my village, local and foreign, appreciate my efforts and would like to see a change just like me. I mean, the laws are already there, we have the enforcers as well (guarded checkpoints at every entry/exit) so we simply need to get them to enforce these laws consistently. Every rider we educate and/or prevent from entering our village is a win. Do you have any other good ideas on how to tackle this problem? Dhogberg1 (talk) 03:56, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Trust me, it’s incredibly frustrating to have motorbikes roaring past your home, generating 75-95 decibels in a purely residential area where the legal limit is 55 dB. What makes it worse is that most of these bikes are clearly fitted with visible aftermarket exhausts (easy for anyone to identify) yet they’re still allowed to pass through guarded checkpoints 40-50 times a day, even during the night! The more accurate information I can share to support and highlight both local and national laws, the better. This issue ultimately comes down to one thing, enforcing the laws that already exist! Dhogberg1 (talk) 04:11, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

The 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)

:Hi, @Epsilon:Prota.

:(I have replaced your URL by a Wikilink to commons).

:I agree that that does not seem a reliable source to me. We don't normally accept sales sites as reliable anyway, but there's nothing to prove that it was Lee that signed that album. ColinFine (talk) 16:57, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::Great, thanks very much. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 09:52, 16 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)

How to remove a citation which refers to a primary source of information Aita04 (talk) 16:49, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|Aita04}}, I wonder why you would want to? A secondary source which specifies its own primary sources seems an excellent thing to cite. Can you give details? Maproom (talk) 22:15, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:How can we help you if we don't know about which article are you talking ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 05:42, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

If it were to be translated into English, would the Cantonese Wikipedia article for Jack Massey Welsh be a good Wikipedia article based on the text and sources? I'm asking this question because I know about the "beef" that the Wikipedia community has with any mention of Jack Massey Welsh on Wikipedia, considering that even the draft pages for Jack Massey Welsh and JackSucksAtLife (though not Draft:JackSucksatLife) (Welsh's main YouTube channel) are salted. Seeing then that the Cantonese Wikipedia has an article for Welsh made me curious whether there is a chance for Jack to finally have his own article on the English Wikipedia. Could someone please read through that article and check the sources? I really want to know. Crocusfleur (talk) 17:03, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{ping|Crocusfleur}} We don't have a "beef" with him as such; the issue is his fans pretty much spammed us with badly-written and fatally-undersourced biographies, which left us little choice but to salt/protect any page they were editing. Given that most of us here on the Help Desk can't read Chinese, I would suggest editing the JackSucksatLife draft to try and bring it up to par; a good draft that can pass the AfC process is in itself a reason to lift the salting. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:07, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:I should then perhaps try to contact some of the users in :Category:User yue, to get the required competence for the answer to my question. Although, I would just like to remind anyone who may want to take on my task but doesn't speak Cantonese: You can of course put the article through Google Translate, and reading the sources won't be an issue, since all sources except a single [https://web.archive.org/web/20210506164746/https://medialeaks.ru/0505aad-trnd-funeral-insta/ Russian one] are in English. I should probably contact someone in :Category:User ru to read that source. Crocusfleur (talk) 17:17, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::The problem with that is that most East Asian languages, Chinese included, tend to be heavily context-dependent, and running it thru automated tools (such as Google Translate) results in a "blind idiot" translation that either makes little sense or says the complete opposite of what is actually being implied in the text. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:21, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::If he isn't notable enough to get onto the notable people list at Bishop Auckland then he's pretty non-notable. The bar isn't very high at BA. - Roxy the dog 17:29, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Well, he has no connection to southern China/Hong Kong/Macau, but it seems he is notable enough to have his own article in Cantonese. Also, maybe the reason for him being not notable enough to get on the notable people list at Bishop Auckland is that he doesn't have his own Wikipedia article, and the reason for that is that every attempted article written about him thus far has been very poorly sourced. This is why I brought this up, since I was curious whether the Cantonese Wikipedia article about him is good enough to be translated into English. I wrote this here in hopes that anyone who speaks Cantonese, English or Russian would check the article and its sources to see whether said article can warrant being translated into English Crocusfleur (talk) 17:39, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::If somebody has an article in en:Wikipedia, Crocusfleur, then this doesn't mean that the article demonstrates sufficient notability for it to exist. Perhaps the article fails to do so but is only read by employees/relatives/fans; perhaps its failure has only been noticed by people lacking the time and/or effort to do anything about this. The existence of the en:Wikipedia article certainly doesn't mean that if expertly translated into language xyz it would satisfy the requirements for xyz:Wikipedia. I can't think why articles in yue:Wikipedia would be free of analogous problems. To be fair, it's been seven years since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Massey Welsh and seven years is enough for many people to acquire (Wikipedia-defined) notability; also, the most recently deleted version of the article reads as if written by a very young editor, innocent of the requirements for Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. Once you've digested it, here, in this thread, please provide links to three of the best sources about Welsh. Probably someone will then comment on their adequacy. (Not me, because I know very little about criteria for notability of Youtube "personalities".) -- Hoary (talk) 01:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::Of course @Hoary. I understand. Notability on Wikipedia and notability outside of Wikipedia are two very different things. If someone has [https://www.youtube.com/Jacksucksatlife 4.62 million subscribers] on their YouTube channel, then they can easily be seen as notable outside of Wikipedia. But per WP:YN, that won't fly on Wikipedia. No matter how many subscribers/views someone has, they won't count as notable on Wikipedia unless they have significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic (as you said). My argument was simply "enough people from around the world care about him to attempt to write an article about him in their Wikipedia (in this case, Cantonese)." This means that he is a topic that could warrant revisiting (even if all previous attempts to write an article about him have failed), since many people would love to read a Wikipedia article about him. Also, if there was a good, well-sourced Wikipedia article about Jack Massey Welsh, I don't see any reason why he shouldn't be included in the notable people segment of the Bishop Auckland article. Crocusfleur (talk) 08:11, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello Teahouse editors,

I’m requesting feedback on a recently declined draft for a biography on Zack Zook, an arts administrator, curator, and nonprofit leader based in the U.S. Virgin Islands and formerly Brooklyn, NY. The draft was declined with the note that it lacks significant coverage in reliable secondary sources, but I believe it includes multiple qualifying sources that establish notability.

Most notably, The New York Times published a dedicated article on the closing of BookCourt, the independent bookstore founded by Zook’s family, which includes multiple direct quotes from him and detailed context about his management of the store and its cultural legacy ([https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/06/nyregion/bookcourt-closing-cobble-hill.html NYT article link]).

Additional independent coverage includes:

• A Publishers Weekly profile focused specifically on Zack Zook and his work at BookCourt, describing him as a “passionate bookseller” with notable industry influence
• A feature in Brooklyn Magazine naming him one of the “100 Most Influential People in Brooklyn Culture”
• Coverage of his nonprofit 81C Arts and its programs in Virgin Islands Daily News, St. Thomas Source, and WTJX (PBS affiliate in the Virgin Islands)
• A live CNN interview with Anderson Cooper following Hurricane Irma, offering broad public visibility and context about Zook’s leadership role in post-storm recovery

I’ve disclosed my conflict of interest as the subject of the article and welcome neutral input or recommendations on improving the draft to meet Wikipedia’s standards.

Draft link: User:Baranauma/sandbox

Thank you sincerely for your time and consideration. Baranauma (talk) 18:42, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:Of all the sources in the article, which three meet all of the criteria listed at WP:42? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:48, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|Baranauma}}, the sources you list above are not well chosen. The first is based on what Zook said, and so is not independent. The second uses the word "passionate", which will trigger many editors' bullshit detectors. Maproom (talk) 22:25, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:There are a problem with at least three sources. I think that my message would be sufficient to explain the problems.

:If necessary , I can continue if you ask.

:"* A feature in Brooklyn Magazine naming him one of the “100 Most Influential People in Brooklyn Culture”"

:Do you understand that this magazine is a local magazine ? It's maybe a "reliable source" but I don't think that this is an evidence of a "significant coverage".

:"* Coverage of his nonprofit 81C Arts and its programs in Virgin Islands Daily News, St. Thomas Source, and WTJX (PBS affiliate in the Virgin Islands)"

:This is not centred on him. What I read is about "81C Arts" and not him.

:"* A live CNN interview with Anderson Cooper following Hurricane Irma, offering broad public visibility and context about Zook’s leadership role in post-storm recovery"

:This is an interview. Anatole-berthe (talk) 06:02, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:Looks to me as if BookCourt is more likely to be notable than ZZ is, though I haven't spent more than a minute looking into the matter. But meanwhile, Anatole-berthe: "Do you understand that [Brooklyn Magazine] is a local magazine?" Actually Brooklyn Magazine is now merely a website. Yes, it's local -- but do you understand that Brooklyn has a population of circa 2.6 million? Brooklyn is a long way from Podunk. More to the point, "[two/three-digit number] most influential people in [place]" is a reliable if tired space filler in a slow news month. What has the influence been? -- Hoary (talk) 07:43, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

::These information about "Brooklyn Magazine" are interessant. Thanks !

::I understand that "Brooklyn" has a population of circa 2,6 millions. The area is approximately 250 km² (96,5255 sq mi).

::Also , I understand that this place is one of the "Boroughs of New York City".

::The capital of my country is "Paris" and there are circa 2 millions of people living there (The only place of France with at least 1 million of inhabitants).

::The area is approximately 100 km² (38,6102 sq mi).

::Brooklyn has more inhabitants than Paris and the area is bigger.

::

::I don't think that there are a publication similar to "Brooklyn Magazine" concerning one of the "Arrondissements of Paris" (Similar to Boroughs of NYC).

::If this magazine is merely a website. It can be accessed in the whole world. Thanks again for infos about this publication that I didn't knew. Anatole-berthe (talk) 11:21, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

I came to this page because I was unable to cite a reference in the Wikipedia article on Thermodynamics, and I found a link leading me here.

In 2020nI wrote an article on the history of thermodynamics, which analyzes many of the original articles from the point of view of a practicing (but now retired) physicist. It contains useful information and would like to cite it in Wikipedia but the references to the Wikipedia article on Thermodynamics have been autoprotected.

The article is given below, and is Open Source, and should be easily downloaded as a pdf.

Saslow, W.M. (2020).  A History of Thermodynamics: The Missing Manual, Entropy 2020, 22, 77; doi:10.3390/e22010077 www.mdpi.com/journal/entropy WMSwiki (talk) 18:49, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello {{u|WMSwiki}}, what difficulty are you having exactly? I can see that you made [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thermodynamics&diff=1295763184&oldid=1294940050 some edits] to the article Thermodynamics shortly before asking this question - so I'm struggling to understand what the problem is. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 19:56, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::Also, if you are the WMS in question, then perhaps read WP:SELFCITE before you decide to make the edit. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 20:02, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::First, thank you for responding. Indeed I am trying to self-cite.

:::The article in question, which cost me a great deal of effort, currently has well over a hundred citations, according to Google Scholar, so I think it should be considered legitimate.

:::However, the Wikipedia referencing is protected. See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thermodynamics&action=edit§ion=25. I was unable to contact the autoprotect enabler MadScientist, perhaps because I did not root around enough for how to do so, but I am also aware of how easy it is to give unclear instructions. WMSwiki (talk) 21:00, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::::WMSwiki, I took up your invitation to look at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thermodynamics&action=edit§ion=25 . What I read there was ==References==

{{Reflist|2}}. This didn't surprise me at all. It means: "Add the heading 'References'; and under it (and in two columns), dump all the references that editors have provided above." It's rare for this section to need editing. You need to add each reference immediately after whatever the reference is for. -- Hoary (talk) 01:41, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::{{ping|WMSwiki}} See more at Help:Referencing for beginners. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:37, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

I wish to create a new article about a person who influenced the movie theater industry. I have extensive references. Are there people who would want to to do this for me? If not, how should I get started? I am a good writer and understand HTML. Thanks for your suggestions. Bouncy99 / Peter Bouncy99 (talk) 20:51, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, @Bouncy99, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.

:The first thing I will say is that it is unlikely that somebody will come forward to create an article for you - not impossible, but unlikely. You may request an article at WP:RA, but the take-up there is very small: really your only hope would be to get the intention of somebody who is already interested in that area, so perhaps posting at the talk page of WikiProject Film. But even there I doubt if you are likely to find somebody.

:So if you want this article, your best bet is to create it yourself. Unfortunately, a knowledge of HTML is not relevant, and being a "good writer" is only somewhat relevant, as Wikipedia requires different skills from most writing.

:{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}}

:One final comment: since you have posted this request here, it is quite likely that somebody will approach you offering to write an article for money. I very strongly advise you not to take them up. Such people are not in any way endorsed by Wikipedia - they are tolerated as long as they comply with our regulations for paid editors - and many of them are scam merchants: see WP:SCAM. ColinFine (talk) 21:17, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you for your informative reply and suggestions based on your experience. I am 81-years of age and feel I don't have the patience or "time" to go through this learning experience. The article is about this man [https://sydneyscohen.wordpress.com/] my grandfather, whose work needs to be documented -- it had an enormous impact on the movie business in the 'teens and 1920's. I guess that realistically, I need to find someone to help or "partner" with me - either paid or volunteer. I do have extensive references. Thanks again. Bouncy99 (talk) 21:37, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::To add to the response above, while it is heavily discouraged for inexperienced editors to go straight to article creation, it is not entirely impossible, so you can still try. It is best for you to make a draft and submit it to WP:AFC for review. Good luck with your future work. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 21:56, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::I think your best chance is, as Colinfine suggests, to post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film, providing several (at least three, but few enough that people there may actually look at them) good references. These should be reliable (not the Daily Mail) independent (not written by him, or his busness associates, or his employer) published sources. This{{cite news |title=Sydney S. Cohen, Film Leader, Dead |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1935/12/13/archives/sydney-s-cohen-film-leader-dead-former-president-of-motion-picture.html |access-date=15 June 2025 |work=New York Times |date=13 December 1935}} is an excellent example, no doubt you're already aware of it. Maproom (talk) 22:02, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:I put a response at User_talk:Bouncy99#A_WP-article_about_Sydney_S._Cohen. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:04, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

Dear Friends.

I would like to give Shannon Appelcline a infobox person. I gained biographical information directly from them. However, how do I do so in order to avoid accusations of my own research? Should I just write "Personal correspondence with Shannon Appelcline" inside of ref tags? Or maybe we are doing such things in some other fashion? Is it really allowed?

I would appreciate some advice ;-)

Best wishes

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 22:53, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello and welcome. To be in an article, information must be found in a reliable source that can be verified, typically an independent source. Primary source information is only acceptable in certain circumstances.

:We cannot independently verify your personal correspondence with Shannon Appelcline, nor is it publicly available(i.e. in a library or public database) so it cannot be used as a source on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 23:02, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::Dear Friend.

::That kinda sucks, to be honest x_x And yes, I would Google the information myself- with the problem it is not available anywhere online :/

::Can I at least upload their photo on Wikimedia Commons (I have an allowance to publish it using Creative Commons license)? Working with just their photo and some basic information would be minimum I could do - not as "fun" and detailed as what I had in mind, but at least I could do something, right?

::Best wishes

::-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 23:10, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::If they publish some basic biographical information online (on their own website or social media account), such as when and where they were born, that would be an acceptable source for that information on Wikipedia (WP:ABOUTSELF). jlwoodwa (talk) 23:19, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:::If you took the image, or can otherwise show its license is compatible with Wikipedia's, you may indeed upload it, see WP:UPIMAGE. 331dot (talk) 00:51, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:::@Kaworu1992 Assuming that pic you uploaded is a selfie, the way you did it is not good enough. If you are in contact with him, you can point him to Wikipedia:A picture of you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:50, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:If you are acting on behalf of the article subject, or are their friend or colleague, please see WP:COI.

:If you did not take the picture, see c:COM:THIRD. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:16, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

What is pseudo-rollback and normal rollback, and how are they different from one another?

--pro-anti-air (talk) --pro-anti-air (talk) 23:22, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Pro-anti-air – The term "pseudo-rollback" may refer to Twinkle/RW/UV's "rollback" or "rollback-like" revert. Essentially, "pseudo-rollback" is a form a rapid reversion that technically uses MediaWiki's undo tool. Any autoconfirmed user can install Twinkle/RW/UV and use "pseudo-rollback". Normal rollback requires the rollback permission to use; it can be requested at WP:PERM/R (but likely requires a substantial anti-vandalism record, perhaps using pseudo-rollback). — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 01:46, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Specifically, "Museum Mile" in Fifth Avenue. Maurice Magnus (talk) 01:25, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Maurice Magnus. You can create a section link with {{nowrap|displayed text}}, see more at WP:ANCHOR. So in your case, you would write in wikitext: {{nowrap|display text here}}, and change 'display text here' to be whatever you want the hyperlinked text in the article to say. You can also use the section link template: {{nowrap|{{Section link|Page name|Section name}}}} which formats the link with the § symbol, which is also explained at WP:ANCHOR. Hope this helps. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 01:42, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you. I used it twice in Manhattan. Maurice Magnus (talk) 02:15, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

How do I request close on a page move discussion? I looked around but I can't find a forum to find a noninvolved editor to close my move discussion. PHShanghai | they/them (talk) 01:55, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:The Requested-moves queue keeps track of what is >7 days old (the usual timeframe for RM), and several editors tend to patrol that list. However, there is often a backlog at any given time, so I'm not surprised if things that are ripe for close sometimes do not get handled promptly (especially if they are complex, or there are other complex ones that suck up those editors' time). Which one are you discussing? If it's a straightforward request and clear consensus with reasonable participation in the first week, I can take a look. DMacks (talk) 04:20, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, Teahouse hosts. I recently declined Draft:Philip Anthony Silva on the basis of the subject already having his own article at Phil Silva. However, the article itself on Phil Silva was created on 14 June, whereas the draft itself was created much earlier on 4 June. Comparing the article and the draft at Special:Diff/1295817777/1295821182 yields some content similar, but I'm not too familiar with the policy on HISTMERGEs. Could someone please point out the next step in how to resolve this? Thanks. — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 02:07, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:Such actions require the use of admin tools, so ask at WP:AN. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:14, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

::@Pigsonthewing – Thanks for letting me know. I'm also aware of WP:RFHM. I guess the question here really was: is it suitable to request histmerge (as this probably seems like a case of WP:PHIST)? — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 11:32, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

The Capitalism article used to have a section on Stakeholder Capitalism which lights up a web search. I can't see it for many years. Is there a tool to find the last entry before an edit removed a heading? Or is there some way to generate the revisions for an article such that one could use a script to find text in the history of an article? Or maybe there is such a tool already? Bodysurfinyon (talk) 05:57, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:Welcome back to the Teahouse, {{u|Bodysurfinyon}}. It sounds like you're looking for WikiBlame. You can find a link to it on the history page of each article (or other type of page). Cordless Larry (talk) 06:31, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{re|Bodysurfinyon}} When you look at a Wikipedia article history (or talk page history or any non-automatically-generated page history) you will find a list of External tools somewhere above the revisions listing. There is a link 'Find addition/removal' there, which brings you to the WikiBlame page with some fields pre-filled. --CiaPan (talk) 07:17, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

How can I write articles that get selected? Tripmish (talk) 07:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Tripmish, and welcome to the teahouse.

:On your talk page, the reason given for the decline of your most recent draft is that the sources do not demonstrate notability to Wikipedia's standards. Unfortunately the draft is blanked, so I can't see what sources you have used. In general though, a subjects notability should be established through use of reliable, secondary, and independant sources that describe the subject in detail. Make sure that all sources cited are independent of the subject, non-promotional, and secondary. WP:GNG may help. If you have any more questions let me know. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 08:17, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:@Tripmish It looks like you are trying to insert links to an exam prep service. This is considered spamming and these links have no place anywhere on Wikipedia; please go elsewhere if you want to promote this website. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 08:18, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi! I'm new to Wikipedia and I recently submitted an article titled "Iran–Israel 2025 conflict". It was declined because the topic is already covered. Can you please help me understand which parts are already available? Also, can you suggest a unique or missing topic I can write about? And lastly, what’s the best way to properly add reliable sources? Thank you! 🙏 Shahmeerhayyat (talk) 10:46, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hello and welcome. Please see Referencing for beginners to learn about referencing.

:There is already an article about June 2025 Israeli strikes on Iran. 331dot (talk) 10:47, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:Also know that editing about Israel can have special rules, I will notify you of these on your talk page. 331dot (talk) 10:49, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

About the Population Europe Page.

The page of Population Europe (which is a network of leading Universities and research institutions throughout Europe, hosted by the Max Planck Society as a public institution and funded mainly from the Max Planck Society, the German government and the European Commission) has been heavily outdated (the last entry was in 2013) and therefore needs an update. That is why the whole text was removed and a new one added. I see that the usage of the link to the homepage is truly disproportionate, that can be easily adjusted. Since as a public research organization we have no commercial interest whatsoever in mind, this editing is meant purely for the factual correctness and not advertisement.

I am a student assistant at this organization, so I need to disclose my connection, which I will do in the edit summary or via the {connected contributor}. I apologize for unintentionally missing this before!

As for the inline citations, I will do my best to work more cohesively! Also, there was no intention of adding inappropriate external links, could you point out which one causes a problem?

Is there a possibility to let an edit be checked before uploading it, in order to see errors or insufficiencies before and have the opportunity for adjustment? Since my first attempts at editing have been removed (without further explanation), I would like to be on the safe side in order to not be banned in the future.

Thank you for your time,

RikaBieligg (talk) 10:48, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:Hi {{u|RikaBieligg}}, thank you for disclosing your conflict of interest. In theory, because of your COI, you should submit edit requests to the article's talk-page rather than editing it directly. The only exception would be things that are totally non-contentious. If you do choose to edit the article, I would suggest making lots of small edits so that if anyone disagrees, they can revert (and discuss!) the individual changes, rather than reverting the whole lot. You will need to make sure that everything you write is neutral in tone (don't try to advertise the network), and backed up by sources independent of the network. If you find that the vast majority of what you're writing is sourced to the network's own press-releases, then the information is probably not suitable for Wikipedia. If you make edit requests on the talk page, it is best to say exactly what you want to be included/deleted, with clear sourcing. But having given all these caveats, thank you for updating; it's good to make sure our articles aren't stuck in a time-warp. Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 11:27, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:[Edit conflict] Reasons were given in the Edit Summary of the removal, which can be seen on the page's 'View history' tab [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Population_Europe&action=history here]: they were in the form of 'rv' for "reverted' followed by links to two Project pages which covered the infractions involved.

:See for much more detailed explanations the posts now made on your own Talk page, and note that Wikipedia does not allow Promotion of any subject, regardless of whether it is non-commercial and/or a 'good cause': 'promotion' does not only imply a commercial motivation. Sections of the Project page Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause are applicable to your situation.

:Hopefully you will first study in detail the various links you have been given about editing on Wikipedia before trying again, which you are welcome to do within our policies and guidelines. I suggest you start again by finding Reliable sources that are independent of your organisation, and adding material summarising only those (difficult for someone with a CoI), one step at a time so disinterested editors can assess each change separately – a wholesale replacement allows only a blanket acceptance or (more likely) reversion, as you have already experienced. I hope this helps! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.137.14 (talk) 11:31, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate the welcoming comment, and apologise for not ensuring 'that alll sources cited are independent of the subject, non-promotional and secondary.

I should be grateful to receive your interpretation, on a suggested replacement narrative below, twhich is endeavouring to fully take into account the above requirements.

Suggested replacement narrative.

'On the 27th of March 2024 poteen history was made following the 27 countries approval in the EU, of Decision 1/2023 of the Joint Committee established by the Withdrawal Agreement, when HMRC then authorised a UK poitin maker to export production to the EU using exclusively Irish distillate over 80% vol. with the Commodity Code commencing No. 2207, subject to guidance in the agreement.

N.B. EU domestic produced poteen product was not authorised.

https://knockeenhillsspirits.com/information/

'On the 27th of March 2024 poteen history was made following the 27 countries approval in the EU, of Decision 1/2023 of the Joint Committee established by the Withdrawal Agreement, HMRC then authorised UK poitin maker Knockeen Hills Spirits Ltd to export poteen to the EU using exclusively Irish distillate over 80% vol. with the Commodity Code commencing No. 2207, subject to guidance in the agreement.

N.B. EU domestic produced poteen product was not authorised.

For authorisation see:-

https://knockeenhillsspirits.com/information/

Thank you. --AlanStibbe (talk) 16:14, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

@AlanStibbe all edits on Wikipedia must comply with being non WP:PROMO which this product placement does not comply with unfortunately. I included some helpful links on your talk page ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 16:35, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

AlanStibbe (talk) 11:27, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Working through :Category:Pages with duplicate reference names, I came across 2011 Waikato Bay of Plenty Magic season, which uses LST to transclude sections from 2011 ANZ Championship season which details the semi-finals and finals. However, these sections include named references that are not defined within those sections, so when transcluded to the 2011 Waikato Bay page, it throws errors saying that these references are not defined. What would be the optimal way to fix this? In my mind, being able to somehow define the references in the 2011 Waikato Bay page without displaying them so that when the sections are transcluded they can access said references would be the easiest fix. Weirdguyz (talk) 11:34, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Asking Travisscotterfan (talk) 12:32, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

:Are you talking about the rejected Draft:Julian Tran? That is an unsourced piece of text while according to WP:BLP all biographies of living persons must be sourced with reliable, independent sources. The Banner talk 12:43, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

::To add to this, your draft did not actually get deleted. It is still there, as linked above. GoldRomean (talk) 13:23, 16 June 2025 (UTC)