Wikipedia:Teahouse#Deleting redirect

How can I sort a wikitable from earliest to latest in the filmography section, which is currently ordered from latest to earliest? — ArćRèv • talk 02:57, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hello @Arc Rev, If you are a registered user then you can add a user script to automatically reverse table rows or provide advanced sorting. This is more advanced and for personal use only. If this looks complex to you then you can see further here. Fade258 (talk) 03:05, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:: {{re|Fade258}} Could you let me know which userscript to use or which section of the article you're referring to? — ArćRèv • talk 03:16, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Currently, I could not find any user scripts that automatically sort. May be, I will create that scripts soon, otherwise you could go for help link in (click on here) which I mentioned in my previous message. You could see filmography section of Ansha Sayed, may be this helps you. Fade258 (talk) 03:55, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Arc Rev, you might be able to simply make the table itself sortable, see Help:Sortable tables. CMD (talk) 04:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

{{courtesy link|Persian Gulf}}

As stated in the title, this is not about political influence or forced change - it's about geographical accuracy and the historical context behind the name. It's extremely disappointing to see the page admin modify the article to include "Also known as," as if alternative names carry equal weight without proper historical or geographical basis.

If everyone begins renaming places on maps to suit political agendas or personal narratives, the result will be confusion and chaos.

Any naming - like any other claim - must be supported by credible references and historical evidence.

Unfortunately, the admin of the Persian Gulf article has not only locked the page but also restricted access to the talk section. This means the admin can unilaterally impose their own viewpoint without allowing community input or open discussion.

This not only contradicts the spirit of Wikipedia’s core principles, but also undermines the values of collaborative editing, neutrality, and transparency that the platform is meant to uphold.

This is not the Wikipedia I used to support. Mani.zaeim (talk) 10:00, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:Welcome! Please read Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars. Thank you, Polygnotus (talk) 10:20, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{Tq|1="the admin of the Persian Gulf article"}}—There is no such role on Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:45, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::In fairness, it appears that it was the LLM used that thinks there's a page admin... CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 01:27, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi everyone,

I want to improve articles related to Indian herbs and Ayurveda. Sometimes I find really good information in Hindi-language books or government PDFs.

Can I use non-English sources if I translate them myself, and will they be accepted as reliable references?

Thanks in advance. Cognowriter (talk) 10:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:Welcome. I am afraid the answer is no. See WP:MEDRS for more information. For new users I would not recommend getting involved in medical-related topics on Wikipedia, because that is probably the second-most difficult topic to get involved in. Did an AI write your userpage? Polygnotus (talk) 10:15, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:@Cognowriter If you wish to write about topics in :Category:Herbs, without making medical/health claims, then you can certainly use non-English sources. See this part of our policy for the details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:05, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::@Michael D. Turnbull Check their userpage. Polygnotus (talk) 11:15, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:::I did, before I replied. It is possible to write about plants without making medical claims and I like to think that respondents at the Teahouse should try to answer the question asked, even if we need to caution about WP:MEDRS-compliant sources, as you did. I see this as an implication of WP:BITE. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:11, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::::That is not how WP:BITE should be interpreted. Polygnotus (talk) 13:43, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::{{u|Polygnotus}}, please explain your interpretation of WP:BITE. It seems to me that {{u|Michael D. Turnbull}} has done an excellent job of encouraging {{u|Cognowriter}} while making them aware of a relevant WP policy. Maproom (talk) 22:05, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::@Maproom That is, obviously, offtopic. Also you can just click --> WP:BITE <-- there and read it. We should be polite to newcomers (but aren't), but that does not mean that we should tell them that unreliable sources are fine. Indian sources are not reliable in the context of {{tq|Indian herbs and Ayurveda}}. Even if they wouldn't be making medical/health claims, which they explicitly told us they will be, and appears to be their raison d'être judging by their userpage, unreliable sources are still unreliable sources and they cannot be used on Wikipedia. Polygnotus (talk) 22:06, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you for the clarification, Mike. That helps a lot.

:: I understand the importance of MEDRS for health claims, and I will stick to improving articles with verifiable, non-medical plant information — especially focusing on structure, common uses, and cultural relevance.

:: I’ll also make sure to properly translate and cite any non-English sources per WP:NONENG.

::Appreciate your support and the guidance! Cognowriter (talk) 13:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

At Peter Swales (historian), is it possible to reduce the size of footnote 14 -- I mean the [14] in the text? Maurice Magnus (talk) 13:17, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|Maurice Magnus}}: yes, as I've demonstrated by doing it (though my change doesn't reduce the size of the [14] in the contents list). But this shouldn't be an issue. Links to footnotes should follow the statement that the linked source confirms. But a section header is not a statement, and so doesn't warrant a link to a source. Maproom (talk) 15:50, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::We don't put citations in headings—see WP:CITEFOOT. I've therefore [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Swales_%28historian%29&diff=1289958993&oldid=1289955966 added some text and moved the citation there]. Deor (talk) 22:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi Tea Drinkers,

I'm writing the article for Adam Linder and it is about to be submitted. I really would like to know if the article is ready because it has already been rejected twice. I really would like to know your opinion about if I'm respecting every writing policies and if there isn't any errors. Someone told me that I had a tense error in the Award section but I can't find it. If there is some little modification to do, I would like to know it before publishing it because revision takes time.

Here is the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Adam_Linder

Thanks a lot for your help.

Simononwiki1 (talk) 19:23, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

: A bit off-topic: a simple wikilink Draft:Adam Linder. --CiaPan (talk) 19:47, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:"Other works include LOYALTY (2017). . . ." If that's pronounced something like "ell oh why ay ell tee why", fine; but if it's pronounced like "loyalty", then change that to "Other works include Loyalty (2017). . . ." (Ditto for WANT.) And then submit the result. -- Hoary (talk) 22:24, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks Hoary, I will change it immediatly. Simononwiki1 (talk) 09:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

If you are reading this, then I’m new to this site, this wiki. And I wanted to read multiple pages with great information. I am willing to participate in Wikipedia. I created my account lately. I did took a survey, after creating my account. So please to see, what do I need to explore first? What could you bring me into that, so I can be an editor? AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 21:38, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{ping|AmazingWikis4386}} Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Some interesting things you can do on Wikipedia are listed at this task center. Are you interested in any topic in particular? If so, there are also some interesting WikiProjects, which focus on one subject area. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 21:41, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::Ok, tasks to solve? AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@AmazingWikis4386 When you said "I wanted to read multiple pages with great information".

:::Are you talking about the articles in the encyclopedia or "policy and guidelines" ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 21:48, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Articles in the encyclopedia. It’s just the information I enjoy reading. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 21:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::Welcome to Wikipedia ! Anatole-berthe (talk) 21:54, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::@Anatole-berthe What can I do first? AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 22:08, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Have you tried visiting Special:Homepage? I believe it's now enabled by default for new accounts. It will list some suggestions for changes you can make as a new editor, and may also pair you up with a mentor. If you don't see the newcomer homepage linked from the top of your user page, instructions to enable it are here. -- Avocado (talk) 22:53, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::@Avocado Yes, I visited the homepage and it’s looking fine to me. What is the mentor for? AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 23:43, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::The mentor is someone you can ask questions about using and editing Wikipedia. You can also ask questions here at the Teahouse, but the mentor is a specific person who interacts with you repeatedly. They can give you more personalized support and feedback. You have no obligation to ask your mentor instead of the Teahouse when you have questions. But some people find the 1-1 discussion with the mentor more comfortable than asking on a more public forum like this one, and some people find the longer-term relationship valuable. -- Avocado (talk) Avocado (talk) 23:57, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::More personalized support and feedback? That’s cool. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 00:31, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::"More personalized support and feedback? " , I think you have all the necessary to make your path.

:::::::::::This is not necessary to be fast. Anatole-berthe (talk) 00:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::On editing suggestions, does these articles or pages change after you edit them? AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 01:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::Yes. Your edits change the articles. And then after you complete an editing suggestion, you should receive a new suggestion. -- Avocado (talk) 01:46, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::Could suggestions include adding new information or fixing typos? AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 01:56, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::@Avocado Could this suggestion be either difficult or simple? AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 09:48, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::They could be either difficult or simple. And different people find different things difficult vs. simple. Why don't you try a few and find out how they are for you? -- Avocado (talk) 11:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::::I will try and find out. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 16:09, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::I think those are sometimes among the suggestions, but I'm not sure. I don't know a ton of detail about what types of suggestions are offered, or how they're chosen. I suggest you just go to Special:Homepage and try a few. Don't be afraid to try. You'll learn more about the tasks by trying them than by asking what they are. Don't worry about getting everything just right -- if you make a mistake, someone will come along and fix it sooner or later. -- Avocado (talk) 11:52, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::That’s fine tough. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 16:10, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::@Anatole-berthe @Avocado @Relativity And whenever I checked the mentor on my Wikipedia homepage, it shows a specific random user, they suggested me to contact, instead of an administrator. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 18:54, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::::Yes. You only need an administrator if you need someone with special permissions to do certain things like delete pages. Your mentor will be a normal (but experienced) editor. As are most of us here at the Teahouse. -- Avocado (talk) 20:34, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::::@Avocado Is being a mentor a special user right or a privilege? AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 17:17, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::::::Here's the FAQ for mentors. I think it answers that question. -- Avocado (talk) 17:23, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::::::@Avocado Could you even be a historian, despite not having over 500 edits to become extended confirmed editor? AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 19:36, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::{{outdent|12}} (outdent) What do you mean by being a historian?

::::::::You're asking a lot of questions about a lot of different things, without giving context to your questions. So it's hard for me to understand what it is you're trying to learn. What is your goal? What's standing in the way of your achieving that goal? -- Avocado (talk) 22:19, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::What said @Relativity in the message published in "MAY/11/2025" at "21:41 UTC" isn't sufficient for you ?

:::::::There are also the message of @Avocado published in "MAY/11/2025" at "22:53 UTC".

:::::::Do you need more ? I think these things are sufficient for the moment.

:::::::Step by step. There are not an emmergency. Anatole-berthe (talk) 23:00, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::@Anatole-berthe Yes, I think I need more. And this is sufficient for me. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 23:43, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::Excellent ! Anatole-berthe (talk) 00:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::Thank you really much for this. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 04:07, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::Hello, @AmazingWikis4386, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.

:::::::::::One thing I want to warn you of: you may find that when you make an edit, somebody reverts your edit. Please don't get disheartened if this happens. It doesn't mean you are wrong: it means that the other editor disagrees that your edit was an improvement. This might be because they are more experienced in Wikipedia, and understand some policies better than you; or it might be because they know about that subject better than you. But it might be that they don't know the subject as well as you, and other editors would agree that your edit was a good one. Or it might be just that the two of you disagree about how best to say something.

:::::::::::If this happens, please don't just apply your edit again: either choose to let it go, or start a discussion with them and see if you can reach agreement. See WP:BRD for how this works. ColinFine (talk) 10:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::@ColinFine Thanks for telling me about the reverts, I’m sure on what can be an edit improvement. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 16:09, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Find a subject you're interested in, and edit there. Different topics have different kinds of small edits that need to be made – for example, articles on invertebrates tend to have old and poor-quality photos, so I've spent some time lately uploading free and better images. What sort of things are you interested in, and what topics do you think you'd like to edit? (These are not necessarily the same. I'm interested in politics but almost never edit there, for example). Cremastra (u — c) 23:55, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::@Cremastra @Avocado I’m interested in wikis, but I’m interested in learning something new and mostly recent events and ancient history, as well as literature in some cases. I don’t edit until I feel like it or I need to. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 01:36, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::I would like to edit on Wikipedia, when I feel like it, on a specific date. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 19:37, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

: Islam in South Asia

Senior please see this page, unknown IP address delete a entire section ex:- History, Demographics. Mr.work-shy (talk) 06:10, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:The person should be request a peer view instead deleting more than 60% of the Article Mr.work-shy (talk) 06:11, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::I have restored the deleted content and reported the IP to AIV- this appears to be an ongoing issue over the past two weeks. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 07:30, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm interested in colors, so I joined to Wikipedia:WikiProject Color. What can I do during being project member? The join of a project is first to me. Upset New Bird (talk) 06:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:@Upset New Bird I don't know how active that Project is these days but you could, for example, look at the articles mentioned on WP:WPCOL that are categorised as, say, stubs and try to upgrade them to start or above by adding content. Alternatively, you could ask for suggestions on the related Talk Page for the Project. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:03, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:You could introduce yourself on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Color. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:58, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello! I recently came across the article Home Wanted while clicking around, and I had a question regarding the Plot section. It has a citation to 1919 review, and the text in that section appears to be copied word for word from the source. My question is, is it appropriate to copy that much text from a presumably public domain source in an article and attribute it via in-line citation?

I apologize if this is a silly question, but there are a lot of different policies that I'm still getting a handle on, and I want to make sure I understand them properly. NovaHyperion (talk) 07:22, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:It's not at all a silly question, NovaHyperion. I haven't read the article or what it "cites" (allegedly plagiarizes), and am responding to your account of it. No, such copying is not appropriate. It's wrong. For a start, such material should be clearly marked as such, whether

like this

(if long) or "like this" (if not), and of course using ellipses and/or square brackets to show deviations from the original. And after this start, much of what's so identified will probably better lose its new formatting and instead be rewritten, summarized, or perhaps just cut. -- Hoary (talk) 07:55, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you for your prompt response Hoary. I am aware that copying/plagiarism is frowned upon in general, but I wasn't sure if there were any Wikipedia-specific policies that governed copying text from a source that old with an inline citation.

::I have no stake in this article in particular, but I will look into making the changes you suggest. Thanks! NovaHyperion (talk) 23:51, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Well, NovaHyperion, it does seem that there's at least a tacit policy of tolerating copy 'n' paste incorporation of public domain material, without clear identification via either indentation or quotation marks. :Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica is vast; inclusion in it is triggered by application of Template:EB1911 or Template:Sect1911. See also WP:Template index/Sources of articles#Public_domain; these templates might inspire you to create something similar (not necessarily a template) for the source recycled here. ....That said, not all that's tolerable is beneficial. -- Hoary (talk) 00:56, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I am writing about what I study nowadays. I am studying an International standard from ITU-T about cybersecurity in computer science.

It is my first writing on Wikipedia, and it was rejected because of its non-neutral tone (the manager said my writing is like advertising).

I want to introduce what I am studying, especially the positive side of technologies, to everyone in the wiki.

What should I modify in my writing?

Please check my writing about X.1280 and leave any comments for me.

URL : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:X.1280.

Best regards. Baker232 (talk) 07:27, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Baker232. In an article you want avoid stating personal opinion, so comparing something to alternatives and insinuating that it's better than them is against best practice. It also probably requires more citations, especially in sections when none are present. There's a Wikipedia policy page on neutral point of view writing Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, I want to particularly draw your interest to the due and undue weight, balance, and how to write neutrally sections. It's also important note that you want to try to avoid conflicts of interest, so it's inadvisable to write articles on anything you're directly involved in. Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Feel free to reach out if you have any other questions or need help. Nixleovel (talk) 07:42, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you for your comment. I tried to put my opinion because simple summary is not enough to upload.

::Before I modify my writing, I need to read two policies of the wiki.

::May I ask something about conflict of interest?

::If there are some comparisons on standard document, are they available to write on the wiki or not? Baker232 (talk) 07:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::You'll want to avoid writing them in the introduction, and when you do need to use them, make sure to quote them instead. Quoting makes it clear to all readers that the comparison is that of the party referenced, not Wikipedia. Nixleovel (talk) 08:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{U|Baker232}}, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:X.1280&oldid=1286664581 this] is the first version, uploaded by you, of Draft:X.1280. As I skimread it, I don't get the impression that it was written by the person who posted the message above: it seems to have been written by somebody else. Any comment on this? -- Hoary (talk) 07:45, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you for your comment about wrong url. I fixed not to point prev writing.

::Please visit this page.

::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:X.1280. Baker232 (talk) 07:51, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::I visited that page, {{U|Baker232}}. No URL is wrong. Do you have any comment on the great difference in prose styles between your writing here and your writing (if it is yours) there? -- Hoary (talk) 07:58, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Sorry, I forgot sharing the manager's comment. The comment is here.

::::"This is an advertisement for a particular product standard, not an encyclopedic article that covers information about the project as covered in reliable, independent sources." Baker232 (talk) 08:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::We can see that, {{U|Baker232}}. How about answering my question? Simply, it seems from what you write here that English is a second language for you. But it seems that the writer of the draft is using English as a first ("native") language. Why the difference? -- Hoary (talk) 08:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::As you mentioned, I am not native English speaker. So I use a program to write english correctly and put lots of time to write. The name is Grammarly extention. Why I didn't answer yours is I couldn't understand what you meant. Baker232 (talk) 08:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Thank you for the explanation, {{U|Baker232}}. -- Hoary (talk) 09:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:I don't find it helpful when people describe drafts like this as "like a advertisement". It is nothing like an advert. Quite clearly, if it was already published, it would not be deleted.

:That said, it does read like a usage guide, and it would benefit from more about what independent third parties have said, about the standard:— whether or not it is useful and the impact it has had on the industry, for example.

:Finally, please note that no-one here is a "Manager"—the article was reviewed by a volunteer who has no more or less authority than any other. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:54, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you for your comment. I tried to emphasize that he standard can be useful for a specific purpose.

::I agree with your opinion, but I need to modify it because it has been rejected.

::I use the term "Manager" very often in my office. It would be better to call the guy an "Editor" or a "Reviewer" on wiki. Baker232 (talk) 00:45, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello all! I'm curious whether there are plans in the future to create a partnership feature to facilitate easy collaboration between users across projects, recognizing the existence of groups. It would be helpful to be able to alert other editors I know in a specific field that a certain article needs additions or references, and fast-track the process as opposed to the somewhat random chance of the talk page, which are nonetheless useful for their own purposes, and for community wide discussion. Let me know what you all think, and if anyone knows of similar tools I'm missing by all means let me know.

All my best - CSGinger14 (talk) 07:42, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hello! We do have some collaboration-related tools, but they are possibly not what you are looking for. We got WP:PING, WP:WIKIPROJECT and WikiProject banners. There are also things like WP:IRC and WP:DISCORD. Polygnotus (talk) 08:14, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

The video of the newsreel of the Hindenburg disaster keeps having its audio cut out Lordofcallofduty (talk) 10:16, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:@Lordofcallofduty I've just played the video perfectly well, so I suspect the problem may be your Internet connection. Have you tried downloading the file from Commons and playing it when you are offline? Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::Weird I don’t have that as an option is the video that broken that you hear it differently even if I try that audio won’t work Lordofcallofduty (talk) 10:57, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@Lordofcallofduty We might not be talking about the same file. I mean :File:1937-05-10 Special Release - Zeppelin Explodes Scores Dead.ogv on Commons and I can play that directly from the file page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:56, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::I was asking why the audio was cutting out on the article Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:05, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::Yes, that's what I tried, from Hindenburg disaster, when I first replied to you. It worked then and is still working today, hence my other suggestions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:10, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::I swear is it happening to only me? Because it always happens when I use the article Is the video that old Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, please help me. I'm new here — I've been active for just one week. I have already created a draft translation from Arabic to English for an actor's page. I only translated the content without making any changes. How can I confirm or publish it? Farah244 (talk) 10:17, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:@Farah244 What's the draft called? Mainly you should read this when translating articles. Remember to give attribution. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 10:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::Hello dear, thank you so much, this is Draft:Fatima Al Safi. translate from :ar:فاطمة الصفي. Farah244 (talk) 10:25, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@Farah244 Here's a quick overview: Make sure you translate the template for the files in the article and also other template. Also, make sure sentences sound grammatically correct and flow cohesively, and also makes sense. the biography also needs more references to meet the notability guidelines for a biography. Also, remember to give attribution on the talk page. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 10:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Thank you so much! I truly appreciate your feedback and will work on all your notes. Farah244 (talk) 10:43, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::I have added AFC tags to the draft. When you are done, just submit it and an editor would review it. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 10:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@Farah244 Welcome to the Teahouse. the various language versions of Wikipedia operate independently. So the fact that there is an Arabic article does not mean that there automatically may be an English one. Here on the English Wikipedia we have strict policies on what may be included. In relation to biographies of living people, there are very strict requirements for inline citations to reliable sources for all statements that could be challenged. The draft also needs to show that she is notable in the way we define this for actors. I'm afraid that IMDb is not considered a reliable source, (see WP:IMDB), so at present your draft falls considerably short of what we require. Please read the pages I have linked for more details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:46, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi, looking for opinions on Draft:Wikipedia:Project S.C.R.A.M., whether it should be accepted or declined.--Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 10:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:It's been submitted for review at AfC. A reviewer will deal with it sooner or later. As the header notice on that page currently says: {{Tq|1="This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,185 pending submissions waiting for review."}} Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:07, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Cactusisme|Pigsonthewing}} I don't think you can promote something to the Wikipedia namespace from AfC, which is Articles for Creation. AfC is about promotion to mainspace (the articles). Usually you'd have something like this as an essay in your userspace, and if many people like it it may get moved to the Wikipedia namespace. Polygnotus (talk) 12:18, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@Pigsonthewing I am reviewer, I was wondering if such things should be submitted via here. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 12:32, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::{{ping|Cactusisme}} No, they cannot. I think you should just move it to your WP:USERSPACE and then add the appropriate category :Category:User essays. And then the redirect should be removed as a cross-namespace redirect. Polygnotus (talk) 12:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::{{done}} Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 12:55, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::Got it, thanks for clarifying. What would your advice be for getting people to read the essay I wrote? Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 12:58, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Usually, people would just check the category I added to the page. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 12:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::People often list their essays on their userpage. You can also make an "advert" for it and stick that on your userpage. Polygnotus (talk) 13:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::Just a note: redirect wasn't removed per WP:RDRAFT Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 11:02, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Im writing up a draft for a article about a airshow, (User:Echmo/draftTOMI) and if you scroll down to the shows section and look at 2018, you can see a very, very long list of preforming aircraft that bloats up the screen. Is there a way to use the space on the right so that it can run on both sides? Thanks. Echmo 14:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Echmo please see Help:Columns for different ways to set columns - Arjayay (talk) 14:26, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::Oh that's exactly what I needed, couldn't find it. Thanks mate, I appreciate it. Echmo 14:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Maximum articles in watchlist? — ArćRèv • talk 14:43, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:More than you'll need. People have thousands of articles on their watchlist. Polygnotus (talk) 14:51, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Go to (-90.624, 35.856) at [https://apps.dat.noaa.gov/stormdamage/damageviewer/ this source] and you'll see a road named "Laura Lea" (with no "Rd" or "St" after). What do I call this in an article? I have a street abbreviation paper open, and "Lea" isn't on that list. — ^EF⁵ 14:56, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Google Maps says the same. "A street called..."? Polygnotus (talk) 15:02, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::Polygnotus, that's the thing, I have no idea whether it's a street, road, cove, point, lane etc... what a weird road name. — ^EF⁵ 15:04, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::Not sure why people see a requirement to end the name of a road with Rd, Dr, St, etc. Avenue of the Stars has enough notability to get an article.

::The USPS ZIP code lookup site uses 'LAURA LEA'. I see the same from property listings and a tax document from Jonesboro. 'Lea' could be a given name or a reference to a pasture or meadow.

::But, someone listed as the GIS Coordinator for Jonesboro did list it as 'Laura Lea Dr' in a document created around 2022 named 'Jonesboro Road Names In Use'. I reached out via email to see if there is an official source on the name. Just Al (talk) 17:49, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::In this case, saying “the tornado then impacted Laura Lea” makes it sounds like it hit a person, which is misleading. Avenue of the Stars has, well, “avenue” in it, so it’s less confusing. “Lea”, however, isn’t a common road name. ^EF⁵ 17:52, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Sure, but writing clearly is the key to reducing confusion. Just like this attempt to sort out the best article name. I was not implying that 'Lea' is a common road name. Maybe it's easier to digest for some people if everything is programmed and repetitive. But it's not a requirement to be common to exist. In this case, however, 'drive' might be the official designation. That makes it easier. Just Al (talk) 18:37, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::National Map lists it as Laura Lea Drive. Search coordinates 35.855474, -90.623587 at https://apps.nationalmap.gov/viewer/ Just Al (talk) 18:29, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:@EF5 OpenStreetMap to the rescue! https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=35%C2%B051%2721.6%22N%2090%C2%B037%2726.4%22W&zoom=12&minlon=-90.8397674560547&minlat=35.61683738705965&maxlon=-90.30075073242189&maxlat=35.86178725699083#map=18/35.855668/-90.624161 Laura Lea Drive. Polygnotus (talk) 15:03, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:See https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=Carpenders+Park&zoom=12&minlon=-90.83290100097658&minlat=35.766572101173516&maxlon=-90.40374755859375&maxlat=35.956888171215326#map=17/51.626622/-0.376046 (where my brother used to live) for a district where none of the roads have "Road" or "Drive" or "Street" or "Avenue". ColinFine (talk) 15:55, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::That's so weird, here in the U.S. every street has a "Rd" or "Pl" at the end. Thanks {{ping|Polygnotus}}, I've added the "Drive" per your link. — ^EF⁵ 15:57, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Google suggests "Laura Lea" is a lot more common that "Laura Lea Drive", and [https://www.google.com/maps/@35.8546774,-90.6233816,3a,15y,311.64h,91.48t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipMyzAyn3NWhF_oSiSJ7LSdo-2pHHKZLggSxUMRW!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh3.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipMyzAyn3NWhF_oSiSJ7LSdo-2pHHKZLggSxUMRW%3Dw900-h600-k-no-pi-1.476620335935209-ya10.37690572969126-ro0-fo100!7i7680!8i3840?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDUwNy4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D the street sign says Laura Lea St]. DuncanHill (talk) 16:11, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::DuncanHill, hm... Drive or Street? I know its a minor issue, but I want it to be verifiable. I'd go with "Drive", but the "Street" is also compelling. Maybe a note? — ^EF⁵ 19:12, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::I mean footnotes are a reasonable suggestion in cases such as this. Polygnotus (talk) 19:25, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Dear Teahouse members,

Following the suggestion of user Caleb Stanford - i bring this topic here, to see if you can help me unblock this publication.

I believe i have followed all steps, and removed most of the parts from previous edits that would have made the article not follow the WP guidelines (e.g. being more sales-focused or copied products from company site instead of notable and independent references)

Now, when comparing to alternative company profiles like IDquantique , I find similar sections approved, so I would think that the submission should be valid.

Can anyone provide further suggestions or help with this matter please?

Really appreciate your support! :) FrankTWW (talk) 15:31, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|FrankTWW}} Please see other stuff exists. That another article exists does not necessarily mean it or its content was "approved" by anyone. Standards have changed over time so that what was once acceptable is no longer; also, the draft process has not always existed, and is not required of everyone- so there are many ways inappropriate content can exist. This cannot justify adding more inappropriate content. Though understandable, it is a poor idea to use any random article as a model or example- instead, use those that are considered good articles, which have received community vetting. 331dot (talk) 15:34, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Nothing has really changed from what I said in my review. 331dot (talk) 15:36, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Note that "IDquantique" has been marked as problematic since 2015, so it definitely is not a good example to go by. 331dot (talk) 15:37, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::FrankTWW has since been blocked pursuant to a UPE queue ticket. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 15:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::(ec) I have blocked this user based on off wiki information, I have established a COIVRT ticket where I provided the basis for the block. 331dot (talk) 15:49, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Why is this page name protected? This is a historically important former African American neighborhood in Shreveport, Louisiana. The area is now known as Ledbetter Heights, which redirect to the album title of a white musician. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:It states;
{{tq|1=You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:{{pb}}The page title that you have attempted to create contains a right single quotation mark (’) Unicode character. Per MOS:STRAIGHT, such characters should not normally be used in page titles. Please replace it with a standard apostrophe, or a modifier letter turned comma (ʻ) or modifier letter apostrophe (ʼ) character if appropriate, and try again. If you got here by clicking on a red link in an article, you should go back and fix the link first. If you have a good reason for creating a page with this title, please let us know at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Be sure to specify the exact title of the page you are trying to create or edit, as well as a brief explanation of what you were trying to do. Thank you.}}
Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 16:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::{{u|FloridaArmy}}: Wikipedia disaproves of the use of curly apostrophes "St. Paul’s", and forbids them in article titles. Why not just use a regular apostrophe "St. Paul's"? Maproom (talk) 21:58, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

If you hover over sovereign states on List of citizenships refused entry to foreign states, it shows something entirely different. I have a picture but I don't know how to publish it. Hovering says "Millcient is described as or true Innocent... no matter what" RoyalSilver 16:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Someone vandalised the page a few hours ago, but it's fixed now! CoconutOctopus talk 16:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

There is a big reason for users to have an account on Wikipedia. But how can we edit pages or timelines without making a literal single mistake on an encyclopedia? Are extensions useful? Thanks if told. Userbase10000 (talk) 17:31, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:You don't need to edit without making any mistakes! If you mess up, they can always be fixed. GoldRomean (talk) 17:36, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::@GoldRomean @Tarlby What about mass editing pages? Userbase10000 (talk) 17:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::I'm not sure what "mass editing pages" mean, could you clarify? True "mass editing" would require bots or tools that you have to get special permission to use. GoldRomean (talk) 18:11, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::That defines as making large amount of edits in a short time. Including this user editing pages. Userbase10000 (talk) 18:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::There's no problem with that. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 19:10, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::Userbase10000, Special:Contributions/Userbase10000 currently tells me that you are: "A user with 17 edits. Account created on 3 May 2025. The 17 include only just three edits, all trivial, to articles. Pace {{U|Tarlby}}, but that's one reason why it seems very likely that there would be problems with mass edits. (A second reason is that your English is hard or even impossible to understand. Example: How could you "making large amount of edits in a short time" not "[include yourself] editing pages"?) Please start by making careful, constructive, and of course reliably sourced edits to a small number of articles. When you've got some experience in doing this successfully, you can of course be more ambitious. Your purpose in editing should not be to draw attention to yourself but instead to improve articles. -- Hoary (talk) 01:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::Did understand, and I will make reliably sourced edits to articles. Userbase10000 (talk) 01:59, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hello @Userbase10000. You are always encouraged to fix any mistake you see. Mistakes can easily be reversed and fixed. Be bold! Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 17:38, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::How can they be fixed? Userbase10000 (talk) 17:58, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::The same way they're made- by editing. 331dot (talk) 18:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::The edit summaries, like fixing mistakes. Userbase10000 (talk) 18:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::You can make a dummy edit with a different edit summary. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 19:10, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::A dummy edit? It’s just only a minor edit, with blank spaces. Userbase10000 (talk) 20:26, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

I've been active recently in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, and I've seen articles which could use the help of knowledgeable editors about the subject. Example: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solinas prime could use the help of a mathematician.

Is it good or bad etiquette to ask a WikiProject for help?

If it's OK, should I just a section on the project's talk page?

Thank you. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 19:30, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:@Itzcuauhtli11 In general, it's perfectly fine to WP:APPNOTE a Wikiproject to an afd, but see that link, your message should be "Your input is welcome" rather than "Please help me save (or get rid of) this article!!!" And yes, just start a new section like you normally would. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:You can check out WP:CANVASS for where the line is and isn't. Like Gråbergs said, a neutral message on a WikiProject is near-universally totally fine. I would go further and suggest that explicitly asking for help finding sources to establish notability for the sake of the discussion is fine; after all, both sides at an AfD discussion are trying to make articles conform to notability standards, so you're helping both sides in finding reliable, independent sources with significant coverage. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 20:54, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello editors! For a while now, I have had open requests on the Michael Meldman page and Discovery Land Company page articles.

I have tried posting to relevant Wikiprojects, however, I have not received much response. Is there another place where I can go to present this to editors who might find this topic interesting?

Also, I can answer any questions on those articles' talk pages. Thanks for the assistance on how to proceed! AmandaDLC (talk) 21:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hi @AmandaDLC: you've not only posted the edit requests on those articles' talk pages, you've posted a help request on yours, and this message here. I get that for you the articles about your employer are of supreme importance, but please understand that a) other editors have other interests, b) Wikipedia is a volunteer project, and everyone edits what they want, when they want, and c) there are no deadlines here. I'm sure someone will get around to dealing with your requests sooner or later. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:09, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi all! I have several articles I've made major improvements to that I'd like to be assessed for a new grade. I wasn't certain where to go about this, but if any admin are here that could post this comment in the right discussion space I'd appreciate it. I doubt any of the articles are up to full standard yet, but I think they've been critically improved to a level that they're deserving of a reassessment at the very least. You can find the articles I've made the most improvements to @ Contributions (Please notify me before removing major edits) with current grades attached on my userpage. All articles with a (**) that are at start grade or below I think are eligible for reassessment. I'm not as certain about any articles that are C or higher. My thanks in advance.

All the best - CSGinger14 (talk) 22:30, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Fun fact: you can do this yourself! According to Wikipedia:Content assessment, "[you can change it] if you think a different rating is justified. This only applies if it is not a source of major dispute. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 23:22, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::The WP:Rater gadget may be used to do this. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 00:35, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Unrelated, but I tried installing Rater a few days ago and it gave me a bunch of errors, I'm super bad at all the Javascript stuff, what am I doing wrong? @Sarsenet thanks. GoldRomean (talk) 20:38, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'd like to make an article for My Schizophrenic Life: The Road to Recovery from Mental Illness by Sandra Yuen MacKay. It's a book. I read WP:NBOOK and it says two or more reliable publications for reviews constitute notability, but that that presumption can be rebutted. I found [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/000841741107800301 this] and [https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ps.650104 this] in terms of reviews. I also found [https://www.libraryjournal.com/review/my-schizophrenic-life-the-road-to-recovery-from-mental-illness this] rather lithe review in Library Journal and [https://rex.libraries.wsu.edu/view/pdfCoverPage?instCode=01ALLIANCE_WSU&filePid=13349964450001842&download=true this] in a dissertation (warning, downloads automatically). Any opinions welcome. Therapyisgood (talk) 23:00, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:All three are from professional sources. So long as you spread out citations and don't plagiarize you should be just fine. Just make sure you back it up with additional background info and citations therein. I may be wrong but none seem sketchy.

:- Best CSGinger14 (talk) 23:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Also, I might recommend you create a userpage. You can find info on doing so at Wikipedia:User pages. If I can be of assistance, let me know in my talk page. CSGinger14 (talk) 23:25, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Seconding what CSGinger said, since notability is often a contentious topic. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 01:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:Therapyisgood, NB Thaller's unpublished dissertation is just that: see the warnings about dissertations/theses within Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Scholarship. Also, note that this was submitted to the university's Department of English, not that of psychiatry or similar. So it can be cited, but judiciously. (Have you looked for reviews in newspapers or non-academic magazines?) -- Hoary (talk) 01:37, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Hoary}} I found two more reviews-- one in The Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy and another in Geist, though I don't have access to the Geist article. See [https://www.proquest.com/docview/871242504/321B27ACF3834202PQ/1?accountid=196403&sourcetype=Scholarly%20Journals here] and [https://www.proquest.com/docview/1011583946?accountid=196403&sourcetype=Magazines here]. I believe this now clears the notability requirement! That's four reviews, double what NBOOK suggests. Thanks again. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:22, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::OK, good luck with a draft, Therapyisgood. I was about to recommend WP:RX for the Geist review, but I see that you've found that page already. Incidentally, we normally skip a book's subtitle when titling an article or draft about it; so rather than "Draft:My Schizophrenic Life: The Road to Recovery from Mental Illness" I suggest "Draft:My Schizophrenic Life" (and rather than "Draft:Operators and Things: The Inner Life of a Schizophrenic" I suggest "Draft:Operators and Things). -- Hoary (talk) 23:09, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

What do i link on articles thta need linking AAAAAYEHA (talk) 04:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:Please digest Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking, AAAAAYEHA. But if that doesn't help you, please specify the article (or one of the articles) from which you think it would be helpful to add links. You'll then be more likely to get a helpful response. -- Hoary (talk) 07:25, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I recently created this page, which was tagged as an orphan, upon searching via the User:Edward/Find link, which shows [https://edwardbetts.com/find_link/North_Rhine-Westphalian_Academy_of_Sciences,_Humanities_and_the_Arts the result here]. But there are simply too many instances that need to be linked, so is there any way to automatically link all of them at once? Xpander (talk) 05:00, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:No, wikilinks should never be automated as that would produce too many links, and this indicates there are currently 26 links to the article, which is already plenty. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi all, I'm brand new at making these kinds of articles, and attempted to make a article, just to have it declined. User talk:Waalktheeaarth#Your submission at Articles for creation: Dunfermline Learning Campus (May 13) see here. WalkTheEarth (talk) 09:20, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|Waalktheeaarth}} Writing a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia; it's best to first gain experience and knowledge as to how Wikipedia works by first editing existing articles in areas that interest you. Writing a new article is not the only or even best way one can contribute- many people contribute successfully without writing a single new article. We have millions of articles that need work. Using the new user tutorial is a good idea, too.

:Your draft does little more than document the existence of the school. You must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the school and show how it meets the definition of a notable organization.

:I would add that your signature is piped very oddly; something closer to your actual username would be better. 331dot (talk) 09:28, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::yeah for some reason my usual username (WalkTheEarth) didnt work, so yeah WalkTheEarth (talk) 09:30, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::WalkTheEarth was registered by someone in 2013 and as such is taken. Given that the account never made any edits, usurpation might be possible (but if it isn't, you should change your link title to avoid the impression of being someone you're not). Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 10:16, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{re|Waalktheeaarth}} Echoing what 331dot said: I've been the primary author on two featured articles, I patrol new articles, I've been here almost eight years, and creating new articles (except for species articles) is so hard that I prefer to do almost anything else. On top of that, living people, extant organizations, and products are even more scrutinized than most new articles. Our task center lists items by difficulty, and we suggest article creation for "advanced editors" because it really is just that hard. At 7 million articles, finding something notable to write about gets much harder. To be crystal clear: notability does not in any way reflect on the author of the article – the amount of work they put in, their aptitude for contributing, the quality of their prose, their intentions, nothing; it's a characteristic of the subject none of us can change.

:You did the right thing by using articles for creation. You did the right thing by waiting for a review. You did the right thing by contributing about something you're passionate about. You did the right thing by citing your statements to a reliable source. You did the right thing by keeping your article neutral in tone. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TCX90yALsI You did nothing wrong here]; it's just possible that our guideline on WP:NSCHOOL can't be overcome for this subject. That you tried in the first place is something to be proud of. My biggest suggestion if this experience hasn't (understandably) turned you off from contributing is to look at the task center; specifically, expanding out small articles is similar to but vastly easier than creating new ones because they've probably already overcome the hurdle of notability. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 15:53, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Dear friends!

I just finished my work on article about Karkonosze University of Applied Sciences. If somebody could look at that, check grammar and vocab, and generally other stuff, I would be grateful ;-) I'm not a native speaker of English and pretty new Wikipedian still, so you know... ;-)

Best wishes! :) Kaworu1992 (talk) 09:29, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:I made a few minor corrections regarding grammatical and spelling errors to enhance clarity and readability.VeritasVanguard☎ 10:47, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:Did some minor cleanup. Regards, Grumpylawnchair (talk) 14:20, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you both so much UwU --Kaworu1992 (talk) 16:20, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Can anyone help me remove the word advertisement from this article? Draft:BVG India Limited TYPEINFO (talk) 10:00, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:At this stage, {{U|TypeInfo}}, there's not much point. "History": the one reference is to the company itself. "Operations": not referenced at all. Total number of sources referenced: three, one of which is the company itself, the other two seemingly humdrum (though each demands that I should disable ad-blocking, and as I have no intention of doing so, I can't see either article). First, have the draft demonstrate "notability"; once it has reached that stage, remove the promotional language. -- Hoary (talk) 11:01, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:* One source is the company website, one is a press release put out by the company, and the third is routine coverage. None of these contribute to notability, and two of them are just "whatever the company wants to say about themselves". The third appears to just be rephrasing an existing press release rather than original journalism.

:* The 'History' section addresses the founders with honorifics (this reads very weirdly in my view, but maybe this is a barrier between American and Indian English).

:* "the company [...] was inspired by a vision to create employment opportunities for rural youth and contribute to India's development" ("rural individuals" later comes up in 'Workforce')

:* Further associates the business with charity by invoking a non-profit previously created by one of its founders with the current business (as an example, not once in Microsoft do we mention, let alone associate it with, the Gates Foundation, for good reason).

:* "The company serves [...] prestigious institutions"

:* "The company [...] has a significant presence across the country"

:* "BVG India Limited offers a wide range of services, including:" is a hyperlink away from Wikipedia being an affiliate advertiser for BVG.

:* "The company [...] is recognized for its commitment to social responsibility and sustainable practices"

:It is not our job to be any subject's wingman and write for them like this, although I do believe it was not your intent for this to sound like an advertisement. It's okay to point out if praise or criticism of them has been discussed in reliable, independent sources, but we have to let only those sources decide how we describe subjects. PS: Your removal of commercial spam at Excitel Broadband is highly appreciated. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 22:41, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

I want to add sources for information about colleges and universities in India. Details like campus size, enrollment, staff size, website, affiliations, and gradings can be checked using NAAC Information Sheets, Affiliation Documents, and NIRF Applications. Are these considered reliable sources according to Wikipedia’s policies?

Also, I have noticed that many mottos are in Indian languages. Should these be replaced with English versions if available?

VeritasVanguard☎ 10:08, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:VeritasVanguard, Welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to see if the sources are reliable, you can read this informative page. None of the sources you mentioned seems to be reliable. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 11:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::They are either issued by the college themselves for Ranking purposes or issued by authorities. NAAC And NIRF are government agencies.VeritasVanguard☎ 11:46, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@VeritasVanguard I would think that these are acceptable sources for this sort of information: i.e. non-controversial facts. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

I have encountered multiple users performing vandalism on related articles. How can I report them? Prober90 (talk) 11:10, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:Vandalism may be reported to WP:AIV. 331dot (talk) 11:12, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks Prober90 (talk) 11:13, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

I received this message "You still have not adequately responded or taken action to the inquiry regarding your appearance as an undisclosed paid editor. If you make any additional edits without complying, you may be blocked from editing. S0091 (talk) 16:15, 5 May 2025 (UTC)"

someone replied "You may make the disclosure on your user page." and I don't get it what to do, I am so sorry Robbydillallo (talk) 14:17, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:@Robbydillallo The full details of what to do are explained on this page. Normally, people use the template {{t|paid}} to make the disclosure. Your userpage is currently a red link from your signature but if you click on that you'll be able to add the necessary content. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:21, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::thank you. what if I am not paid? what should I add? Robbydillallo (talk) 15:29, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::Sorry, I may have misunderstood your question. If you don't have any COI, you can state that one the Talk Page of the article in question. We have a guideline to assume good faith if you do so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:30, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::sorry, I read the article but didn't get it. "you can state that one the Talk Page of the article in question." what exactly has to be done? I am a bit confused, please, don't be mad at me Robbydillallo (talk) 15:38, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::If this is about your draft, then go to its talk page by clicking here and open a new section. State in simple terms what, if any, your relationship to that organisation is. If none, just say that. This will not make it more likely that your draft will be accepted but will clear up the possible COI issue. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:48, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::okay, I did it on the talk page I suppose Robbydillallo (talk) 16:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::Yes, that's fine. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:29, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

I've noticed that the unincorporated community "Boca Chica", located Texas, has been renamed "Starbase" on Wikipedia and is now presented as a city: see e.g. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boca_Chica_(Texas)&diff=prev&oldid=1290220394] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Starbase,_Texas&diff=prev&oldid=1290216021]. However, my understanding was that, for the city to be incorporated, the county judge had to enter an order. I cannot find anything about this having happened in the news / in the sources of the articles Boca Chica (Texas) & Starbase, Texas. Therefore, it seems to me that as of today Boca Chica hasn't been incorporated/renamed yet — in which case the recent changes linked above should be reverted. I am not from the US so I would greatly appreciate feedback from someone more familiar with the incorporation process.

See the following relevant talk page: Talk:Starbase, Texas.

Malparti (talk) 14:35, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:As an uninvolved party, I know nothing except this: a requested move was opened at the talk page, initially closed by a completely new user, contested at technical requests (permalink), and re-closed by {{u|wbm1058}}. From what I can tell, the relevant part of WP:NAMECHANGES seems to be: {{tq|common sense can be applied – if the subject of an article has a name change, it is reasonable to consider the usage following the change in reliable, English-language sources}}. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:14, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::Hi @Rotideypoc41352 and thanks for your feedback. There were two separate points in my message:

::* The designation as a city (or type C municipality), which appeared premature, given that from a legal point of view the community hasn't been "incorporated" yet. I'd say this has been solved, in large part with the help of @Wbm1058.

::* The renaming "Boca Chica" → "Starbase". From a legal point of view, I guess that the renaming hasn't happened yet; but I understand that the "official" name in US government databases isn't necessarily the WP:COMMONNAME (since anyway the "official" name seemed to be Kopernik Shores). That said, I guess a case can be made that we do not know yet whether the name "Starbase" is going to catch on and become the common name — so there is a bit of WP:CRYSTAL going on here. However I am not going to fight the renaming.

::In addition to these two points, I think that @SomethingForDeletion had a point when they said [my words, not theirs] the activity around the renaming was suspicious. In particular, it seems reasonably clear that the main reason for the creation of the account @DCAllStar has been to close requested move and enact the renaming. I wouldn't go as far as to say that this means that DCAllStar is a SockPuppet; but SomethingForDeletion is factually correct in saying that this user's behaviour is "not normal [...] for a brand new user". Not everyone has to be normal of course, so in case DCAllStar is a real user and is reading this: I do not mean to be unwelcoming, on the contrary. It's just that in a world where the person who suggested renaming that community is paying people to make it look like they are good at video games, my threshold for considering something "not unlikely" is quite low... Malparti (talk) 19:50, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Dear Friends :D

I think I finished working on an article about Cypher System, a (tt)RPG from Monte Cook Games. The article is wholly my own invention, and it has no references, but... all the data can be found in 2nd edition Corebook I listed in bibliography section? Is that okay? (???).

Also, I am unsure about my grammar and spelling, if some native speaker could do a check, I would be grateful ;-)

LINK to my draft is in here; User:Kaworu1992/Cypher System

Best wishes! --Kaworu1992 (talk) 16:19, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hello @Kaworu1992, welcome to the teahouse! I would look at this link if you haven't already. You also should not have any categories as the draft is not a mainspace article yet, and each claim the article makes should have a source - but the article looks good so far. If you want more specific help, you may want to ask over at WikipPoject Video Games. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 16:41, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::My dear ;-)

::It's not about a video game, but rather (pen and paper) RPG game ;-) You know, you buy a book and it describes how to play the game with your friends? ;-0 And you are rolling dice? ;-)

::I will also try to look over the Corebook and maybe "sourcerize" my claims ;-) Thanks for clarification in that matter ;-)

::Best wishes!

::-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 16:51, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Whoops, that's what I get for just lightly skimming the article.. ignore everything I said above haha. Try WikiProject Board and Table Games, and I think normal notability guidelines apply. I think there are enough independent sources per the reviews, but the in-text citations should be placed after the period (example: Lorem ipsum end.^[1]). My apologies for my earlier error. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 17:20, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::PS. I believes the categories begin with ":", so it's okay? At least we do that on Polish Wikipedia when working on drafts... ;-) Kaworu1992 (talk) 16:51, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Yes, that's how we do it here, too. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, @Kaworu1992, and welcome to the Teahouse.

:I'm afraid the answer is No, that's not enough.

:A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what several people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, and very little else.

:It looks to me as if none of your sources are both independent and reliable (WP:BGS says "there is weak consensus that the user-generated forum RPGnet is unreliable"). Without such sources, there can be no article. ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::Dear Colin.

::Would citing the Core book itself make the article/sources more reliable? Or maybe it is a different kind of problem? -- Kaworu1992 (talk) 18:50, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Also, do you think I should put the CSRD in bibliography? I kinda do not know how to reference that, can somebody help me, please? -- Kaworu1992 (talk) 19:17, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Okay, very fast and not getting too deep, I added refs for official webpages of CSOL, Cypher System and Monte Cook Games. In the incoming days I am gonna cite the Corebook for the RPG system. Could somebody look at my reflist and tell me whether I am moving in the right direction?

::::Best wishes!

::::-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 20:16, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:@Kaworu1992 (and also to the others who've responded, who may not be gamers): We actually do have a WikiProject dedicated to TTRPGs, at WP:RPG. The Statistics section of the WikiProject lists Featured and Good articles which might give you some ideas for improving your draft. At first glance, the draft still relies too heavily on primary sources (rulebook and publisher's blog) and looks like it's mostly a summary of the key features and rules. I'd be looking for more discussion of the system in independent sources, placing it in the wider context of TTRPGs including previous Monte Cook systems. Cypher has been around for ten years now, so you should be able to find a few more secondary sources offering robust discussion and critique (but do read our guidelines on reliable sources, if you haven't already done so). ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 23:07, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

I've been working on Draft:Nahida (Genshin Impact character) and let @Nahida, an editor who seemed interested in Genshin Impact before, know about the draft in their talk page and asked if they were interested in helping out. They mentioned that they'd want to be careful editing a page like that given WP:COI. They have the exact same username as the character, although they did say they'd be interested in minor edits and suggestions. Given that the Nahida in the game is obviously fictional, does the COI policy apply here, and if so, what implications would it have on their ability to edit the article while following the rules? Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 17:20, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:Taking what has been said at face value, User:Nahida has been overly cautious and need not refrain from editing the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:01, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello guys! I did some changes on the page named "Wi-Fi Protected Setup", and i don't know if they are correct. If anyone is interested or in the domain of cybersecurity, networking or telecommunications, i would be grateful if they verify my recent changes [on that page].

Thanks in advance, --Dimitrie569 (Talk) 17:36, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{ping|Dimitrie569}} You'll probably have more luck on WP:VPT. Polygnotus (talk) 00:11, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

I have noticed another editor clearly engaging in Wikipedia:Canvassing. What is the proper warning or result for such behavior? See user:Gcolllins94 history for canvassing of user:Trs9k and user:Orxenhorf in an attempt to bring them into a talk page discussion on the Cody Wilson talk page. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:40, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:The proper warning is {{subst:Uw-canvass|Talk:Cody Wilson}}. Just post that on their talk page and save your changes. When you're done, it should look something like this:

::File:Ambox_warning_pn.svg It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Talk:Cody Wilson. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you.

:Also, just FYI you can use the {{User}} or {{IP}} templates to quickly generate links to the user's talk page like this: {{User|Gcollins94}}, {{User|Trs9k}} and {{User|Orxenhorf}}. Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 17:54, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:I would strongly encourage users to check the conversations that happened on the talk pages of the specific users mentioned above. First of all, the discussion on TsR9k's page wasn't an "invitation to the talk page" (where he had already participated - so "inviting" him would have been a bit of a moot point), but rather conduct. I'm relatively new to editing, so I was trying to ask someone who had more experience than me how I should proceed. Nevertheless, you showed up. You got warned by an administrator for harassment because you posted an ominous and vaguely threatening comment that included my city and state. That was the point where I told you that these "notices" needed to stop. As I said on my talk page: please take a step back. Even if you think you're in the right, it's time to let someone else take care of it. What you did, coupled with what you're do it now, has bothered me so much that I've thought about washing my hands of the situation and perhaps nuking this account - which I made to read, not edit. It's almost not worth it, and over some mere objections I raised on an article. Secondly, the other user - if you check that profile, you'll see that I mistakenly thought he had reverted something (I was tired at the time), corrected myself, then yes - politely invited him to take a look at it. If that's a faux pas, I do apologize, but this was days ago, and notably days before the RfC, which I would imagine is your real issue at the moment. Rest assured, there's only one other user there besides myself - I thought it was strange you weren't participating, given your intense investment in this issue, but whatever. Please though: if you want to discuss the article, we can do it there, and I promise I'll remain cordial as possible. But as I said on my talk page, this needs to stop. It's time to take a step back. If I've blundered and you feel that needs correction - at this point, please just inform someone else. Bgx14 (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::I am not harassing you, and I suppose I regret the mention of region, but no harm was meant. The notices are standard practice for each time that you violate a policy in a vandalistic fashion. Most recently the act of canvassing. Furthermore, you do indeed seem to be a very experienced editor for one that has made less than 100 edits, so I just find that intriguing. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@Bgx14 A couple other minor points if I may. You seem to take personal offense to the warning templates. No offense is meant by them, they are simply standard procedure for when someone runs afoul of the policies and guidelines, as you have. Also, typically there are up to four such warnings in a month prior to a block, unless the behavior is really obviously vandalism or some other problem is present. In this case, I will admit that it is somewhat hard for me to tell, the line is a bit blurry, but that is why the standard warning templates are exactly the right choice of warning you and abiding Wikipedia:AGF. I have no issue of course as well with you removing them from your page, as has been mentioned, when you remove them from your talk page it is just assumed that you have read the warning. It is your talk page after all! And just as in the warnings, there are policies and guidelines that advise editor conduct in that arena as well. Please note though that blanking your own talk page of warnings does not suddenly change the warning level (let's say you are at a tier 2 warning or tier 3, if you blank that, you do not suddenly revert back down to 1... so just keep that in mind). Additionally, while it is regrettable to ever lose any editor on Wikipedia, except clear and persistent vandals, you mentioned you made the account, "...to read, not edit." If this is indeed true, you do not need an account for that. Anyone can read Wikipedia. Only editing comes with additional rules, privileges and policy and guideline restrictions, which are taken seriously. Lastly, I plan to comment over the next week or so in depth on the original page related to all of your claims, I just need to find the time to do it. Please keep in mind Wikipedia:TIND. I am not sure of the sudden rush? I am impressed by your flurry of edits over the past couple of days, especially given that we had first had this discussion almost 6 months ago and then you were almost completely silent since that time. Why the sudden interest again, and why did we not just continue the conversation at that time? Even with the archive bot, there would have been at least a full month before any discussions would have been archived. Still seems very interesting to me. Iljhgtn (talk) 04:13, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

When writing the career section of a biographical article about an actor, is it necessary to include all television and film appearances, or only the most notable and widely recognized ones? Thank you. — ArćRèv • talk 18:13, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:The most notable. Anatole-berthe (talk) 18:45, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

My apologies for inviting negative attention here at the Teahouse, but there have been some particularly acrimonious interactions and I asked earlier about a canvassing warning, and now the editor is especially hostile just for using the templated response. Please let me know if I am out of bounds in this interaction.

Note, it would also appear as if the user "Gcollins94" just today even changed their username to "Bgx14". I was not even sure one could change their account name. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:12, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:The name change was directly related to this, where you brought up my location in a message that made me genuinely uncomfortable:

:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk%3ATrs9k#c-Iljhgtn-20250511033200-Gcollins94-20250511030100?wprov=sfla1

:I had to request it. I'm going to leave it at that. It should be self-evident why I'm pleading with you to stop sending me these countless notices, to allow a third party to intervene if you feel it's absolutely necessary. Bgx14 (talk) 20:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::I won't respond further, but I think that comment, whatever its details, was a very bad call on Iljhgtn's part, given it has now had to be oversighted. By the way, renamings are a very standard procedure. Cremastra (u — c) 23:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::I am not really interested in the renaming. I was mainly seeking input on the act of canvassing. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:41, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi Tearoom. I'm sure I've seen somewhere a policy or guidance about avoiding lists of articles by the subject of an article, and only including a few particularly notable ones. I referred to WP:NOTRESUME and WP:NOTDIR in cutting a long list from Elizabeth Sims; the subject's wife has responded that she has {{tq|carefully read WP:NOTRESUME and WP:NOTDIR and don't see support for your statement that the list is "too long"}}. I've let her know about the CoI policy; but where can I find guidance on the specific list issue? Thanks as ever. Tacyarg (talk) 22:48, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:I'm not sure that any such guidance exists. Lists that others might find long don't worry me, as long as the items in those lists are substantial. (Articles shouldn't look like rather desperately bulked-up résumés.) In the lists within this article, most items do appear to be substantial; though I wonder about items such as {{Blue|Sims, Elizabeth (contributor 2019); and Amy Jones, (editor, 2019). 2020 Novel & Short Story Writer's Market [...]}}: just what did ES contribute to this book? Perhaps a good rule of thumb is: If a book contribution merits listing, then the contribution should be specified. -- Hoary (talk) 23:30, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:I think the relevant guideline might be {{slink|Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works#Basic list style – examples}}, which encourages {{tq|complete lists of works}}, and suggests splitting the list off into a separate article {{tq|if the list becomes so long that its inclusion in the main article would be unsuitable}}. However, I'm not sure that every contribution that Sims made to the various 'where to get published'-style books warrants inclusion in any such list – just the fiction and any substantial works of non-fiction. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 23:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks, that's helpful. It's the long list I cut [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Sims&diff=1290088949&oldid=1290088190 here], rather than the list of books in the article as it now is. Tacyarg (talk)…

I was thrown back when I read this line:

"He was imprisoned in Loevestein Castle for his involvement in the controversies over religious policy of the Dutch Republic, but escaped hidden in a chest of books that was regularly brought to him and was transported to Gorinchem."

on the page Hugo Grotius, and I thought "this is perfect for a DYK," but then I found out that DYK are only for articles that have been created within the last seven days, according to WP:DYKNEW. Why is this the case? There are plenty of things I've seen that I didn't think much about until like a month later or more.

Is this because of the small number of DKY volunteers? Lack of server space? Guylaen (talk) 00:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, {{u|Guylaen}}. This has nothing to do with the number of volunteers or the availability of server space. The purpose of DYK is to encourage writing new content, either new articles or 5X expansion of existing articles. It is not intended to highlight interesting old content. Cullen328 (talk) 00:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

::So you're basically telling me I have to stick with talking to my friends and family about the interesting stuff I find in old articles? Ugh, lame. Guylaen (talk) 00:34, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Yes, that is correct. That is the way it works. Cremastra (u — c) 01:17, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

:::You could create a blog, Guylaen: "Interesting stuff I find in old Wikipedia articles". -- Hoary (talk) 02:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Or TikTok, Instagram, or what's not. – robertsky (talk) 02:59, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@Guylaen You could write a column for the Signpost maybe, if you collect it for a month or so. I see some people put a bunch of weird facts on their user pages. Mrfoogles (talk) 04:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

See Depths of Wikipedia. Polygnotus (talk) 06:50, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

I was able to put the banner on the top of the article, but the discussion page is not working. The template is messed up and doesn't show up correctly, even after cleaning it up in source view. DankPedia (talk) 02:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hello there {{user link|DankPedia}} :). You are missing an opening curly brace ( { ) at the beginning of the template. Feel free to ask any other questions. The Sophocrat (talk) 02:49, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks, probably gonna use Twinkle from now on. DankPedia (talk) 02:51, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Also, your user page currently displays the text "{{User aviation}", whereas you presumably meant to write "{{User aviation}}" to display the user box. The Sophocrat (talk) 02:53, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Changed that as well. Thanks for the help! DankPedia (talk) 02:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::You are welcome! The Sophocrat (talk) 02:56, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm currently submitting Template:Did you know nominations/Wang Xiaolong (Chinese coast guardsman) for DYK, but it's been quite some time and there still hasn't been a review. May I ask how long DYK articles take to get reviewed on average?

P.S.

May I ask if I can also nominate multiple DYKs at once? I may be publishing some drafts soon Thehistorianisaac (talk) 06:51, 14 May 2025 (UTC)