Wikipedia:Teahouse#Possibility of viewing tooltips on mobile

Hi!

I wonder whether you think the computer game Nox Archaist (which has the last appearance of Lord British is encyclopedic and should have its own article? There is a book about the game's creation, plus maybe some reviews, but it's hard for me to tell whether it's enough sources (or if their quality is alright)?

Best wishes!

--Kaworu1992 (talk) 10:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

:What's the book? Who's it by, who published it? DS (talk) 13:30, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

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

:You can determine the quality of the sources by evaluating them against all the criteria in WP:42.

:So, to take your book: if it was published by a reputable publisher (not self-published, or through a vanity press); if nobody involved with the game played a significant role in the creating and publication of the book; and if the book contains significant coverage of the game (which, by your statement above, it does), then it will probably contribute to establishing that the game is notable, though a single source is not usually enough.

:But if, for example, the book was written by the game's producers (even if in collaboration with other people), then it is not independent, and will not contribute to notability. ColinFine (talk) 13:57, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

::The book is called The Making of Nox Archaist, the author is Mark Lemmert, and it was published by 6502 Workshop (the company which created the game).

::I suppose then it is not the right kind of source? Okay, better to know now than after writing a whole article :-P ;-)

::Best wishes!

::-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 14:12, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

:::hm... I believe I could, besides the book, add articles from VICE and ShroudOfTheAwatar. Maybe some more googleable resources. I dunno how this influences the encyclopedic thing.

:::And what about the Kickstarter?

:::--Kaworu1992 (talk) 01:29, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

::::Henlo!

::::I reached in the book the section about awards and achievements and it seems Nox Archaist has 3 things to list, including the award for the best Ultima-inspired game of year... 2020 I believe (?). Does that make the game encyclopedic?

::::(I mean, i dunno, it's sometimes hard to tell...)

::::Best wishes!

::::-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 18:13, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I submitted a draft about Prakruthi N. Banwasi that was rejected for not showing notability. However, the subject has:

• A full-page profile in The Hindu (3 Sept 2000)
• A feature-length article in The Sunday Times of India (7 Oct 2001)
• Multiple articles in Bangalore Weekly and Prajavani
• Recognition in the Limca Book of Records
• National media coverage for police training programs (Economic Times, New Indian Express)

These are cited inline, and a Talk page note explains offline source verification.

Here’s the draft:

Draft:Prakruthi N. Banwasi

Can someone advise whether this meets WP:BIO? Or what else is needed for acceptance?

Thank You Likith Athreya (talk) 05:53, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:Rejection means that it will not be considered further, plase note that the Times of India is not generally considered a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 06:41, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

::What is considered as a reliable source? Please let me know so that I can check whether i can find them.

::Thanks. Likith Athreya (talk) 07:04, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:::See reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 07:10, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

::::I have provided 17 references including The Hindu. Are none of them reliable? Likith Athreya (talk) 08:28, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::They may be reliable. But, to establish that Banwasi is wikinotable, each source needs to be reliable and indepedent of him and include extansive discussion of him. None of the ones I checked did that. Maproom (talk) 08:44, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::I have offline newspaper clippings from The Hindi, Bangalore weekly, Times of India where the subject is the discussed extensively and independently. I have also cited them on the page. I can provide it upon request. Is it still not enough? Likith Athreya (talk) 11:29, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::::The draft has been rejected. I quote Theroadislong: "Rejection means that it will not be considered further". That means what it says. There's a big "Stop" sign at the top. That too means what it says. Please stop. -- Hoary (talk) 12:33, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:Perhaps before proceeding with creating an article, it would be to your benefit to review Help:Your first article, Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Learning the ropes. Try your hand at contributing to existing articles so you can gain some hands on experience within the guidelines of Wikipedia. After you've done that, you may have better instincts on what's allowed and what's not. Best of luck! Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 20:20, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Pandyan Civil War (1169–1177) In this article me and another user is unable to come to a decision and how do I contact mods to check the talk page and give a decision TeenX808 (talk) 14:27, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:There are no mods on Wikipedia. If the disagreement is between just two editors then there is the option to request a third opinion alternatively you could try a Request For Comment which is a more formal process. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 14:37, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:If the above don't work for you, please follow the process outlined at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:01, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

I wrote a page for liquid canvas and i would like to migrate the page from the sandbox. Jusi Ishaya (talk) 16:18, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hello and welcome. The draft was a blatant advertisement and has been deleted. If you are able to start fresh and summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about Liquid Canvas, and not merely describe its features promotionally, you should use the Article Wizard to create a draft.

:If you are associated with it, that must be disclosed, see WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 16:33, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

I mean like how do I even find something that is barely remember by super nerds (if you wondering what I meant by super nerd I meant very knowledgeable person) Vicelock (talk) 16:34, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:Your question isn't very clear. What are you trying to do? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 16:46, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:I mean like try to find not will know myth, leaged and folklore Vicelock (talk) 17:06, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

::Or like very useful for power system Vicelock (talk) 17:10, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:::Wikipedia has dozens of articles relating to mythology and superstitions, many of which refer to the work of knowledgeable people. You could look at some of these. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:16, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:::I don't think "not will know myth" is a term in English. GMG^talk 17:16, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

::::I imagine the intent is "not well-known". Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:20, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

I'm a novice at writing articles for Wikipedia and my article got ALMOST accepted, with the reasons left for the rejection being 'iMDB is not a reliable source. Do not cite Wikipedia itself as a source.' I was writing an article about the 1968 manga Otoko Ippiki Gaki Daishō and I wanted some examples of actual reliable sources :)

Pardon me for any gramatical mistakes, english is not my native language Mis4akii (talk) 16:44, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:@Mis4akii Welcome to the Teahouse. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:53, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

::Oh, I wasn't finding this for some reason. Thanks :) Mis4akii (talk) 16:55, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:::When you've read that, see WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:11, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

I am wanting to add the full discography (whether that be album titles, artists, song lists, album cover or some combination of that data and possibly other data depending on what is allowed) to a page titled 8bitpeoples, a now mostly defunct online label. Currently there doesn't seem to be a list of this kind and I know that artists will sometimes have separate pages for their discography. What I'm wondering I suppose is this. Since it is a label/collective am I able to create that kind of a list (whether in that page or another) and if I am do I need to separate it into another page?

Thanks for any help Vulspyr (talk) 18:23, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, @Vulspyr.

:I have tagged the article 8bitpeoples as lacking any independent sources, and the subject being quite possibly not notable.

:The only thing that is worth anybody's time to do to that article right now, is to find some reliable independent sources with significant coverage of the label - sources that meet the criteria in WP:42. If none can be found, then it should be deleted.

:Doing anything else to it would be like (in housebuilding terms) adding turrets and windows to a house whose plot is experiencing subsidence: unless the house is underpinned, it is likely to fall down, and any added work would be wasted. ColinFine (talk) 19:18, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

I'm both a student and employed by the University of Mississippi. I've already disclosed my conflict of interest as a student of the university, but the employment part is new as of recently. While I am an employee of the university, I'm not getting paid to edit articles about them.

Do I need to go a step further and disclose my connection using the Connected contribution-paid template or not, pursuant to both Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure? Jwilli39 (talk) 19:12, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hello and welcome. Thanks for asking. If you are employed by the university, and editing about the university, you meet the definition of a paid editor. It does not require specific payment for editing or specific instructions to edit. 331dot (talk) 19:17, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks! Adjusting my COI now. Jwilli39 (talk) 19:18, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:I have to admit I'm curious what the general nature of your duties is. Colleges tend to be large organizations with many employees. Do we really require a paid editing disclosure for someone who works on the line at the cafeteria, for example? Buddy Gripple (talk) 20:13, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

::I think it's far better to err on the side of more transparency and disclosure than less. Any employee at an organization may see it to their professional advantage to improve the organization's Wikipedia coverage. And there's no obvious bright line here; we'd end up spending valuable time to get in pointless fights over which company's specific employees have to disclose and which don't. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 07:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::In case you're wondering, I'm a student worker in the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs. It's a higher-level student worker position than the vast majority of other students would get for a job on-campus, so I think it is warranted in this instance.

:::In any case, I've disclosed my WP:PAID on the talk pages for University of Mississippi, Ole Miss Rebels, and my user page. Jwilli39 (talk) 13:28, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::{{u|Buddy Gripple}} I certainly would be much more forgiving for someone who says "I'm the janitor at XYZ organization and I have nothing to do with its actual activities", but I'd still say it would be best if they disclosed. Once it became known in the public that such people didn't need to disclose(if that were the case) every paid editor would claim that they are a lower-level employee. 331dot (talk) 13:34, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello :)

I can't view the ToC on my mobile phone.

I'd like to be able to do it without having to click on Desktop view.

Is it possible to view the ToC on mobile phone without having to click on Desktop view please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.252.146.154 (talk) 19:26, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:I have actually found an (unsatisfying) way to do it: if I rotate my phone in landscape mode then a "Contents" widget appears above the first section and when I click on that widget the ToC appears. That's interesting but I'd like to be able to see the ToC without the gymnastics of clicking on "Desktop view" or having to rotate my phone in landscape mode! After some further tests (using "Mobile view" on Desktop) it appears that in mobile view, if the screen/window/viewport whatever it is called, becomes "quite narrow" then that "Contents"/ToC widget just disappears and nowhere to be seen! But why?! Why does the "Contents/Toc" widget disappear and becomes inaccessible when the screen/window/viewport is "quite narrow"?! I don't see the technical justification for it! It is just a Toc and should easily fit on a mobile phone in portrait mode! Please enlight me, thank you so much in advance :)))) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.252.146.154 (talk) 19:45, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

{{od}}

Investigating further using Firefox developer tools I have found the guilty piece of MediaWiki CSS code:

@media screen and (min-width: 640px) {

.toc .toctitle {

visibility: visible;

}

}

so my remaining question is very precise:

• Why is the ToC hidden in mobile view if the viewport width is less than 640px ????!!!!
• Would someone be able to reply to me on that?! (It especially makes no sense to me at all because in desktop view if I resize the window to make it ultra-narrow like 200px width, the ToC is still showing without problem!)

Please someone answer me, thank you so much in advance!

:))))

:Hi @148.252.146.154 and welcome to the Teahouse! While that might not be a perfect solution for you, Wikipedia is available as an app on most phones, and should allow you to access the ToC easily! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:16, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you so much for your answer and another way to see the ToC on mobile, very appreciated :)))

::BUT!

::# I usually avoid using mobile apps if I have a good enough way to do the same thing in a browser because I don't like bloating my phone with many apps, you generally have to take care of keeping the apps up to date, etc..., etc... Don't get my wrong, I like mobile apps but only for specific things which are intrinsically much better suited with a mobile app than with a web app!

::# I am still very very very curious why the ToC is made to be invisible if the screen is less than 640px wide in mobile view (specially the Toc is shown on desktop view without problem even on a 200px wide window!). If someone could answer this very specific question that would be great! I am so so so curious about that!!! Thank you so much in advance! :)))) 148.252.146.154 (talk) 20:31, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

{{Od}}

1. I avoid "apps" too. With their annoying messages ("[Name of website] is better on the app!", etc), the websites of these organizations are so keen for me to install the "apps" that I presume their motive is to "track" me more effectively, to serve me adverts that I currently manage to block, or otherwise to annoy me.
2. You might ask at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), (Suggestion: don't inflict multiple exclamation or question marks on your readers.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:10, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

{{od}}

1. Indeed!!!!! Sorry, I meant "Indeed!" ;-)
2. Sorry for being overly hyper & enthusiastic haha!!!!! ;) No problem I will follow your kind suggestion!
3. I found a hack to make it work on my mobile phone!

Here is the hack: in my Firefox ublock origin plugin settings I have added the following rule/line:

:en.m.wikipedia.org##.toc{ display: inherit !important; }

And now the ToC shows on my mobile phone in the default mobile view in portrait mode without any problem whatsoever! Yeah! (so hard for me not to add 10 exclamation points lol!)

The same question remains though, why is MediaWiki preventing something that works perfectly well?! (I hope one question mark and one exclamation mark together is still ok?! Lol!)

I will check that with the Village pump (technical), thank you so much for that pointer!

PS: my IP address has been changed but it is still "me" haha! 148.252.141.30 (talk) 22:43, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

I came across this photo of Oscar Piastri :file:Oscar Piastri.png. It looks very high quality, and very cropped. In addition, the uploader has no other images. Could someone take another look and see if it was taken from somewhere else? Sorry in advance, but also thanks in advance. MagicalBear0 (talk) 22:29, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:{{re|MagicalBear0}} Compare [https://www.paimages.co.uk/image-details/2.76754192]. I've nominated it for deletion. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:09, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

{{courtesy link|Draft:Dorado Records}}

Hello everyone, I was hoping you could help me. I have created a draft page for British record label Dorado Records, however the issue i am facing for references is that as a record label, press coverage is around the artists they represent who will simply mention their label, but it never really goes into much depth. This was the reason for it being declined, although I have included many references mentioning the label, some in fair details, but this doesn't seem to be sufficient. I would really appreciate if someone could advise on a way around this - particularly regarding record labels, what reference sources allowed them to be published? The big issue is that the label was really big in the 1990s - e.g before everything had a digital footprint - and they did have significant coverage in print magazines such as Mixmag and i-D but I am unable to find the entire magazines digitally archived online to be able to correctly site them, Any help would be hugely appreciated as I spent so long researching and finding references for this! Also the main artists on the labels roster all have Wikipedia pages already! Thanks so much :) Liselladen (talk) 22:40, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:{{Olive|they did have significant coverage in print magazines such as Mixmag and i-D but I am unable to find the entire magazines digitally archived online to be able to correctly [cite] them}} It seems that you have to visit a large reference library and go through the crumbling newsprint. But if some reissuer/repackager of older recordings (such as Proper Records) has put out "The Complete Dorado Records" or similar, this might have a scrupulously compiled, informative and citeable booklet. Or of course it might not. -- Hoary (talk) 23:22, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you - this is what I have feared! I have however just found a recent stand-alone magazine feature piece solely on Dorado with the label founder Ollie Buckwell interviewed. Totally about the label itself and very comprehensive. Is it pointless to resubmit with just the addition of this (which I will probably do tomorrow as there's info to expand the article too) - e.g., will more such sources be required even though this is incredibly comprehensive and it a reputable publication? Thank you Liselladen (talk) 00:18, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::Liselladen, {{Olive|a recent stand-alone magazine feature piece solely on Dorado with the label founder Ollie Buckwell interviewed}} hardly sounds like a source that's independent of Dorado or its founder. -- Hoary (talk) 03:33, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:11, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi all. I'm working on the article Cardinality, but I'm worried it may be too technical. The intended audience is roughly a math-interested high-schooler, or high-school graduate. I'm not sure if there is a better place for this, but if you have a minute, could you read over it and let me know how easy/difficult it was to read? Or any other changes you think need to be made? Thank you in advance – Farkle Griffen (talk) 00:19, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:I don't think it is that bad. Many other maths articles are far worse. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:34, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:I found it easy enough to read – but my understanding of the subject is at university level. I was struck by its very high ratio of words used to information conveyed. I read through it hoping to find something about the relationship between א and ℶ cardinals, but the latter aren't even mentioned. That's fair enough if it's intended for high school graduates. But in that case I feel it should be possible to convey its content, more readably, in many fewer words. Maproom (talk) 08:51, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::Hi {{u|Maproom}}, beth numbers are mentioned (very) breifly at the bottom of {{slink|Cardinality|Cardinality of the continuum}}. Unfortunately theres not a lot to say about their relationship. If the Generalized Continuum Hypothesis holds, then $\backslash aleph\_\backslash alpha\; =\; \backslash beth\_\backslash alpha$ for every $\backslash alpha$. Otherwise, there's no cannonical relationship between them. – Farkle Griffen (talk) 12:04, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::So they are! Thank you, {{u|Farkle Griffen}}. My mistake was to search the page for "beth", but not "ℶ". Maproom (talk) 16:02, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, good morning! What should you pay more attention to when preventing vandalism? (I love yourwiki (talk) 01:10, 2 July 2025 (UTC))

:{{yo|I love yourwiki}} More popular articles appear to be vandalised more. Some are semiprotected to stop that, so check popular topics that have no protection. Things that are popular with school kids are at higher risk, eg an article about a school. I would suggest that you make use of the edit summary field to explain what you are doing or why. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:29, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::Ok. (I love yourwiki (talk) 01:35, 2 July 2025 (UTC))

:{{U|I love yourwiki}}, your desire to prevent vandalism is admirable; but you're a very new user, and a lot of well-intentioned, very new users seem to have a hazy (or even wrong) idea of what vandalism is, or even of what is undesirable. For [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bring_Her_Back&diff=prev&oldid=1298375150 this edit of yours], you didn't provide an edit summary (other than in the form "Undid revision X by Y"). How would you now describe the purpose of that edit? -- Hoary (talk) 03:44, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::Should I undo this edit? (I love yourwiki (talk) 03:50, 2 July 2025 (UTC))

:::How would you now describe your purpose in making that edit, I love yourwiki? (It may have been constructive as well as well-intentioned. I've hardly glanced at it, though one or two oddities within it did catch my eye.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:10, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::@Hoary This edit is not constructive in my opinion, because I think the article was in good condition before? This is close to vandalism! (I love yourwiki (talk) 04:20, 2 July 2025 (UTC))

:::::It looks to me that [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bring_Her_Back&diff=prev&oldid=1298375150 the edit] removed archive links from citations. Archive links are useful because a link that is currently live may not be live in the future. TurboSuperA+_(connect) 04:34, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::Well done, {{U|TurboSuperA+}}! -- Hoary (talk) 04:54, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::I doubt, I love yourwiki, that your intention was to be unconstructive, let alone to perpetrate an edit "close to vandalism". (I was hoping that you'd respond similarly to "This was rather complex. I saw that the article was stuffed with X, which didn't seem to do anything. Regarding it as no better than useless flab, I removed it. But I've now read the page Y and so I realize that I was mistaken.") But enough of this. I have an alternative suggestion. Put vandalism-hunting aside for two or three weeks, or however long it will take you before you can (more often than not) describe what people are doing. Because you have to be at least pretty good at describing it. ([https://theonion.com/wikipedia-celebrates-750-years-of-american-independence-1819568571/ Simple, old fashioned silliness] now seems rather uncommon.) And more importantly, you have to know what you're doing. (The occasional mistake is of course permissible. Or anyway I hope it is, because I certainly make them.) During these two or three weeks, try improving articles. Start with modest edits; gradually become more ambitious. Happy editing! And soon enough, you'll find that you're equipped to be a proficient zapper of vandalism. -- Hoary (talk) 04:54, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::Thanks! So, is it the correct edit? Is that so? (I love yourwiki (talk) 06:45, 2 July 2025 (UTC))

:::::::{{U|I love yourwiki}}, please reread, digest, and think about the implications of, what {{U|TurboSuperA+}} writes above. -- Hoary (talk) 11:24, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Can you help me process from the "reply" section where I already "reply" in User talk:PawPatroler/TWA/Earth, as the game doesn't let me process, and help my continue with Mission 5?

PawPatroler (talk) 01:31, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Cabinet Secretariat (North Korea)

Unfortunately, let's are deleting this draft. I don't know even who can help me now.СтасС (talk) 06:00, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Who says were are deleting it? You were given help here yesterday for which you expressed thanks. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:05, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello all,

I’m currently working on a draft article about the sculptor Fernando Casasempere. It’s been declined a couple of times at AfC, mostly for notability and citation-related reasons. I’ve since added several references from museum collections (V&A, MFA Boston, etc.) and exhibitions (San Diego Museum of Art, Somerset House, ect)

May I kindly ask:

• What else should I add to help establish notability more clearly?
• Are the sources I’ve used sufficient, or do I still need stronger coverage from independent art critics or major publications?

• https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/fernando-casasempere-installation-at-somerset-house - What is a good way to better know if an image is free-use, thus allowing it to be added to Wikipedia? Also, I hope I addressed the concerns regarding the issues. I am rather inexperienced in drafting articles for people of notability; however, I believe that Fernando Casaempere should pass it WP:ARTIST.

One can find my draft at Draft:Fernando Casaempere

Any advice would be appreciated.

Warm regards, Issac I Navarro (talk) 06:08, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:@Issac I Navarro Yes, as User:Hoary advised you in February, you need independent, reliable sources to better establish notability. The bad news is that even your own photograph of his work in a US museum is not allowed in Wikipedia, since the US does not have freedom of panorama for recent artworks (see :c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/United_States#Freedom_of_panorama). That file should in my opinion be deleted. Files from Getty Images are also unlikely to have suitable licenses for Commons, since Getty is a commercial organisation. There is a facility in Google image search to restrict files by creative commons licenses, so it is possible you could find some. However, the AfC process does not worry about the images: your draft has to pass the notability requirements based on the text alone. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:17, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::@Michael D. Turnbull Thank you again for your helpful insights.

::I’ve gone ahead and tagged the museum photo I previously uploaded to Wikimedia Commons for deletion, per your advice.

::As a follow-up, I’ve located several potential images on Flickr, such as this one: https://www.flickr.com/photos/casamerica/49530120267 and another here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/casamerica/49530120122. Both are photographs of Fernando Casasempere, shared by Casa de América.

::If either image is marked under a Creative Commons license that allows commercial use and modification (e.g., CC BY or CC BY-SA), would these be acceptable for upload to Wikimedia Commons?

::I ask because I’d like to ensure everything is fully compliant before considering any media inclusion in the future.

::Thank you kindly for your time, Issac I Navarro (talk) 17:07, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::@Issac I Navarro Thanks for nominating your own photo for deletion. You could have gone for "speedy deletion" (see :c:Commons:Deletion_policy#Speedy_deletion) but that's not a problem. Copyright is complicated and I note that the Flickr images are both CC BY-NC-ND 2.0. The "NC-ND" part rules out use here on Wikipedia because Commons does not allow the "nocommercial re-use / no derivatives" part. We can only take CC BY-SA, or of course public domain. There is a concept of WP:FAIRUSE but that's not allowed for images of living people. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:23, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::@Michael D. TurnbullMichael D. Turnbull Thank you once again for your clear explanation and continued guidance. I appreciate the clarification regarding the NC-ND license restrictions—especially as they pertain to Wikimedia Commons’ standards.

::::I shall keep to seeking media only under licenses such as CC BY or CC BY-SA, or alternatively those in the public domain. Your point regarding WP:FAIRUSE and living persons is also well taken. Where may I be able to find such images? I was trying to use this tool to aid me in my search : https://fist.toolforge.org/fist.php?

::::If I do locate a properly licensed image in future, I’ll ensure it meets all Commons requirements before proceeding. I would like to ask though what specific images may be an example?

::::Also I went ahead and add some images I found on Commons to Draft:Fernando Casaempere Issac I Navarro (talk) 17:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, @Issac I Navarro, and welcome to the Teahouse.

:Unfortunately, sources connected with museums who have exhibited Casaempere are not independent, and so will not contribute to establishing notability. We need places where people wholly unconnected with him have chosen to publish significant material about him in reliable publications.

:I suggest you do not worry about images at this stage: they will not play any part in getting your draft accepted. But you should assume that any image is copyright, and so not usable, unless you can adduce positive evidence to the contrary. ColinFine (talk) 11:33, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you again, @ColinFine, for the clarifications. I understand now that many of the museum or gallery-based sources I included are not considered independent under WP:GNG or WP:ARTIST.

::That said, I wanted to highlight some of the sources I believe may help support notability, as they are both independent and substantial:

::Architectural Digest India (2019) – covered his work at the Salon Art + Design in New York

::[https://www.architecturaldigest.in/magazine-story/new-york-salon-art-design-fernando-casasempere/ That link can be found here:]

::T Magazine / The New York Times (2012) – wrote about his installation Out of Sync

::[https://archive.nytimes.com/tmagazine.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/16/now-blooming-out-of-sync/ That link can be found here]

::BBC News (2012) – reported on the Somerset House exhibition featuring 10,000 clay flowers

::[https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-17399137 That link can be found here]

::KPBS Public Media (2022) – listed his exhibition TERRA as a highlight in San Diego

::[https://www.kpbs.org/news/arts-culture/2022/05/06/5-works-of-art-to-see-in-san-diego-in-may That link can be found here]

::ianVisits (2023) – offered a piece on his public sculpture in London

::[https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/londons-public-art-geology-rebuilt-2022-59604/ That link can be found here]

::Unpopular Culture blog (2012) – gave visual and descriptive context to Out of Sync

::[https://unpopularcultureblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/20/out-of-sync-fernando-casasempere-somerset-house-pics/ That link can be found here]

::Would these be considered strong enough to meet the notability threshold if combined with reliable citations of museum holdings?

::I’ll continue searching for more critical, independent commentary. I truly appreciate the time and direction.

::Warm regards, Issac I Navarro (talk) 16:49, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::Also, Also, I noticed that Fernando Casasempere already has a page on the French Wikipedia: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernando_Casasempere. I understand that interwiki presence doesn’t guarantee notability on English Wikipedia, but I wonder if its existence might help guide me toward additional independent sources that were used there. Issac I Navarro (talk) 17:17, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::Again, that was a good idea but the French article only has one source, his own website, so your draft was already much better in that regard! I see that it has been declined for the moment but you can continue to look for sources meeting our golden rules and with luck you may come up with something. I'll take a look on newspapers.com tomorrow and let you know if I find anything useful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:29, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::If I may, point to my reply above towards @ColinFine, I’m a bit puzzled by the impression that my draft was declined due to poor sourcing, when I’ve gone ahead and included several independent news articles—such as those from Architectural Digest India, The New York Times (T Magazine), BBC News, and KPBS Public Media—all of which offer substantial coverage of Mr. Casasempere’s exhibitions and work.

::::Would these not align with the kind of independent, reliable sources that contribute to establishing notability under WP:GNG or WP:ARTIST?

::::I’m, of course, still in search of further critical commentary, as most of information seems sufficiency then why was it decline? Or perhaps, the shortcomings of these particular sources as they stand how many more would be needed?

::::Also, while I do understand that the formation of the page dose need some work in it's formation, the reason for it's decline was due to sourcing and Notability Concerns. Issac I Navarro (talk) 17:38, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::Hello again, @Issac I Navarro.

:::::I agree that Casasempere looks like an exciting artist: if he had exhibited at the Yorkshire Sculpture Park since I started going there around 10 years ago, I'm sure I would know his name and his work, and I hope that he will be shown there at some point.

:::::But whether he meets our requirements, I'm not so sure.

:::::Looking at the first few sources in your list above:

:::::* The Architectural Digest piece says of him that he is Chilean, London based, represented by the Sassoon Gallery, and has created a set of four sculptures. That's it (apart from quoting him). Not exactly significant coverage/.

:::::* The NY Times piece says that he brought 12 tons of Chilean clay when he moved to Lond on in 1997, and that he adds industrial byproducts to his clay mixtures.

:::::* The only thing added in the BBC piece is that he made each flower individually (unlike other artists?). Much of what it says is ascribed to Somerset House, which is not independent.

:::::* The KBPS piece has more on the individual works, but very little on him.

:::::These are not doing much, individually or severally, to establish his Wiki-notability. Are there any books or journals which have talked at length about him? ColinFine (talk) 18:15, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::Regarding what qualifies as significant coverage under our standards. That said, I see now that brief mentions or quotes, even in reputable publications, fall short if they don't offer in-depth analysis or commentary on the artist's impact, career, or work.

::::::To your point, I’ve begun searching through academic journals and exhibition catalogues, particularly from institutions not directly affiliated with his exhibitions. Thus far, I’ve not found any substantial sources of that kind. I did come across Fernando Casasempere: Works 1991–2016, though it appears to be authored by Casasempere himself, and therefore does not meet the standard of independence.

::::::As you’ve rightly noted, many of the publications currently available do appear to be closely tied to the exhibiting museums or galleries. Issac I Navarro (talk) 18:33, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::::User:Issac I Navarro I've added what newspaper coverage I can find to Draft talk:Fernando Casaempere. There is only one I'd call significant coverage (in Spanish) but you might like to take a look. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:43, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I'm not sure how to best go about it, so I thought to ask. Recently Moldovan Parliament adopted a [https://www.legis.md/cautare/getResults?doc_id=149264&lang=ro law] in which some settlements/subdivisions have been amalgamated. The provided link has a Russian version (top-right corner) if it's more suitable for you. The law went into effect on June 28, 2025. I have tried to update Chetriș but couldn't find a suitable infobox so I may have made the article worse. If I list the changes here, I hope someone can lend a helping hand. So, here they are, I'll try to be clear:

1. Fălești District now has 30 communes (used to be 32) – done.
2. Călinești, Fălești becomes a commune. The village of Călinești is its seat.
3. *comment: unfortunately, English Wikipedia doesn't seem to have articles about the villages that are part of communes (like this one).
4. Călinești commune contains 4 villages: Călinești, Chetriș, Chetrișul Nou, Hîncești.
5. Chetriș commune ceases to exist. It used to contain two villages: Chetriș and Chetrișul Nou. Here was my attempt to update the article.
6. Hîncești, Fălești is no longer a standalone village.
7. Leova District now has 4 settlements that are part of a city (used to be 1), 20 communes (down from 23), 34 settlements that are part of a commune (used to be 37) – done.
8. Sărata-Răzeși is no longer a standalone village, it is now part of the town of Leova
9. Sîrma is no longer a standalone village, it is now part of the town of Leova
10. Tochile-Răducani is no longer a standalone village, it is now part of the town of Leova

In an attempt to explain the problem with standalone villages that are not part of a commune, here's how it goes: a district may have municipalities (means big-ish towns); towns; villages that are part of towns; communes; standalone villages; and villages that are part of communes. Basically if a village is part of the district directly (no town or commune inbetween), then its official designation is "village (commune)" Gikü (talk) 08:25, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:You may want to bring this up on Wikiproject Moldova since it appears to be such a large task. There should be editors willing to tackle this there, since they're all united by their interest in Moldova. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 13:15, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::I will leave a link to here in the project talk page, thanks for your suggestion. I wouldn't say the task is large – I have updated the articles. What I don't know is whether I left the articles in a satisfactory state. Most of all I'm worried about Chetriș. Gikü (talk) 15:33, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Can the anthology series table be separated from the main television performances table? The actor appeared multiple times in the same anthology series but in different years and episodes. If we include these in the main table along with regular series, it would lead to many repeated entries and make the table too long and cluttered. - Arcrev1 (talk) 11:06, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:@Arcrev1 You don't mention which article you have been looking at but this sounds to me like a case for being WP:BOLD, explaining your rationale in your edit summary. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:41, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::{{re|Michael D. Turnbull}} I'm referring generally to all actor biography articles. In this case, I'm using actor Jake Vargas as an example. I initially created two wikitables: one for his television performances and another for his film roles. However, the television table looked cluttered because the same anthology series appeared multiple times across different years. So, I decided to create a separate table specifically for his anthology series appearances. I'm asking for feedback to ensure this approach doesn't go against any existing guidelines. - Arcrev1 (talk) 11:50, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::If you want to suggest such a change in multiple biographies, I think that the best place to ask would be on the Talk Page of the relevant Project, WT:FILMBIO, since that's where more of the relevant editors should be watching, more than here at the Teahouse. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:46, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::{{re|Michael D. Turnbull}} Thanks for the feedback. If I plan to make major edits across multiple biographical articles, I’ll make sure to discuss them on the talk page first. Since the WikiProject doesn’t specifically prohibit separating tables by television categories, I believe my approach isn’t wrong. But I won’t apply this to all articles—only to those that seem cluttered due to multiple anthology entries.- Arcrev1 (talk) 13:15, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

{{courtesy link|Draft:Durrani Campaign to Kabul (1747)}}

Hello so I am new to wikipedia and i have submitted a draft named Durrani Campaign to Kabul (1747) and was wondering if anyone could review it and tell me if it is missing something or all good. Iranian.Shah (talk) 11:57, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:You have submitted it for review and it is pending. 331dot (talk) 11:59, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi Teahouse,

I’m a newer editor and recently created the article FINIS, Inc. It currently has

{{tl|promotional}}

and

{{tl|notability}}

tags. I’ve revised the content to make it more neutral and added independent, reliable sources like the Wall Street Journal and PLOS ONE.

Would someone be willing to review the changes or offer advice on improving the article further? If the issues are resolved, is it okay to remove the tags or should I wait for an experienced editor?

Thanks in advance!

Dennisaxim (talk) 12:38, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hi @Dennisaxim, welcome to the teahouse! I just did some minor copyediting of the page (in-text citations should follow punctuation, mainly), and I'll leave you a bit of feedback.

:The article largely appears to be about the company's products, and does not exactly show why the company itself is notable. Wikipedia is not a directory of a company's products, which is what the article appears to largely be. If you can write about, maybe, the company's impact on people that use the technology that it makes, then I think it would pass the notability guidelines. But you have to make sure you write about it in a neutral way and are not promoting the company in any way.

:The tags should not be removed until these issues have been addressed. Best of luck with the article! PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 13:21, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::Hi @PhoenixCaelestis, thanks so much for the warm welcome and for taking the time to copyedit and provide detailed feedback — I really appreciate it.

::I understand your point about the article focusing too heavily on the company’s products, which may affect its notability. If I remove the product section entirely, would that help the article better align with Wikipedia’s notability and neutrality guidelines? Or would it be more appropriate to summarize the section briefly instead of deleting it?

::Thanks again for your guidance!

::Dennisaxim (talk) 14:32, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::Hi {{Re|Dennisaxim}}, I note that you identify yourself with FINIS, Inc, to the extent that your WP:User page is a redirect to the Draft article. If you have an interest beyond the encyclopedic in FINIS, then you are subject to Wikipedia's WP:COI rules, and possibly to WP:PAID if you are employed by them. If this is the case, please take action accordingly (and if not, I'm sure there are much more interesting things you could put on your user page). -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 14:54, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::Hi @Verbarson, thanks for pointing that out — I understand the concern.

::::Just to clarify: I am not affiliated with FINIS, Inc. in any way, nor am I being paid to write about them. I created the article simply out of personal interest in swimming and swim technology.

::::I had set my user page to redirect as a placeholder, but I now realize that’s misleading — I’ve now updated it to reflect my actual interests as an editor.

::::If possible, I’d appreciate any further guidance on what I should improve in the article next to address the existing tags (notability and promotional). I’m happy to revise, reduce content, or improve sourcing as needed to bring it in line with Wikipedia’s standards.

::::Thanks again for your time and feedback! Dennisaxim (talk) 15:05, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::That's an improvement to your user page (IMHO!) -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 09:48, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

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

:::One thing to remember is that {{HD/WINI}}

:::Your focus in working on this draft - and nearly your sole focus - should be "what have people wholly unconnected with the company published about it in reliable publications?" Anything else - or, at least, very much of anything else - is irrelevant. ColinFine (talk) 15:32, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::Hi @ColinFine, thank you for the helpful clarification. I now have a much better understanding of how important it is that article content — especially when establishing notability — is based on substantial, independent coverage from reliable sources.

::::I’ll review what I’ve added so far and refocus the article around high-quality third-party publications that have covered the company in a meaningful and unprompted way.

::::I really appreciate your time and feedback Dennisaxim (talk) 15:38, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi Teahouse,

I recently rewrote the article FINIS, Inc to address earlier concerns about promotional tone and notability. I've revised the language to be more neutral and focused on verifiable facts, and I’ve added citations from independent, reliable sources such as The Wall Street Journal, PLOS ONE, and The New York Times.

I’d really appreciate it if someone could take a look and let me know whether the current version meets Wikipedia’s standards — especially regarding notability and neutrality. If further improvements are needed, I’m happy to keep working on it. If it looks okay, would it be appropriate for the tags to be removed? Dennisaxim (talk) 16:36, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:It's now at Draft:Finis, Inc. -- Hoary (talk) 08:58, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi Teahouse,

I’m a newer editor and recently created the article FINIS, Inc. It currently has {{promotional}} and {{notability}} tags. I’ve revised the content to make it more neutral and added independent, reliable sources like the Wall Street Journal and PLOS ONE.

Would someone be willing to review the changes or offer advice on improving the article further? If the issues are resolved, is it okay to remove the tags or should I wait for an experienced editor?

Thanks in advance! Dennisaxim (talk) 00:57, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello!

I was doing suggested maintenance on this article Dr. Mehta's Hospital. In an attempt to click on the link for the 4th reference to clean up the citation, it took me to a page where I was bombarded with threat popups. What do we do in this case? Can someone with wiki ninja skills fix this and share the process? JesseL0vesT0ast (talk) 16:50, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:{{ping|JesseL0vesT0ast}} I've removed the source and the section it was in (as it was now utterly unsourced). Firefox refuses to load the page due to an SSL too-long error. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:56, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::Ok, that was easier than expected. Thanks for the assist! JesseL0vesT0ast (talk) 17:07, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Fwiw, sometimes this happens because there was a reference linking to a legit source, but the domain expired and someone malicious bought it. (Or sometimes not malicious and just out to make a buck -- you'll see older links occasionally redirecting to porn sites, unfortunately.) If you want to rescue the source, your best bet is to copy the URL directly from Wikipedia and check the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine for archived versions of the original source. If a good copy is found, you can replace the original link with the archived one. See also: {{tlg|Webarchive}} -- Avocado (talk) 17:37, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::That makes sense. Thank you for expanding on the explanation! JesseL0vesT0ast (talk) 17:54, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

I want to add Audio adaptations to Moby-Dick page but it says it's protected. Inu Etc (talk) 17:14, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, @Inu Etc, and welcome to the Teahouse. Moby-Dick is Semi-protected, but your account is more than four days old and has made more than 10 edits, so you should be able to edit it.

:Perhaps you're seeing the warning message that comes up when you try to edit it, and thinking it's aimed at you? It isn't. Everybody sees it. ColinFine (talk) 19:04, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

There was still a time when Wikipedia was founded that physical newspapers and magazines existed. People reported and reviewed others' work, and that often was enough to establish objective evaluation.

Now, everything is digital, and while some newspapers and magazines have continued online, the more frequent way we learn about artists and writers now is through audio and visual resources. There is a weird prejudice about not accepting interviews as sources, but they usually include evaluative comments by the interviewer, and the mere fact that an interview happened, when the blogger or podcaster is publishing content more often than The Financial Times or The Atlantic, suggests an importance and a reach. And if the material in the interview is slanted or false, it will be called out by viewers/listeners, if not by the host.

Here is a summary of SOME of my coverage:

[https://www.youtube.com/live/Cy6TDA7Mxy0?si=rO0YmvxQn-5PIxCy "Conversation with Mark Salzwedel," interview and reading with Paul Hagen, journalist, BGSQD bookstore, New York, NY, June 5, 2025.]

"[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06aT6CTTYI4&t=13s&pp=ygUObWFyayBzYWx6d2VkZWw%3D OBSESSED with Gay SciFi by Mark Salzwedel: PRIDE Author Interview]," interview with Alexander Casillas, Four Elements Press, May 26, 2025.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTAdbePyRig "Mark Salzwedel: Writer, Composer, Everything Else," MOXIE Press interview and reading, December 5, 2024.] Description: We're kind of jealous of Mark Salzwedel. He's an incredible writer, a composer, an artist who grew up with an artistic childhood, and much more. As our first spotlight of 2025, he's the writer of a lovely little short sci-fi piece titled An Unexpected Cookie, of which you can hear him read an excerpt in this episode.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJI92aINclI&t=1s Ep. 06- Mark Salzwedel (writer & Music Composer), Creativity Worth Expressing interview with Ryan Anthony, October 2, 2024.]

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcQzQIWsUxw #wrotepodcast Author Interview: Mark Salzwedel | Novel Release | S09E35, interview on WROTE Podcast, August 30, 2024]

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hs9J655GIC8&t=1s&pp=ygUObWFyayBzYWx6d2VkZWw%3D The process of being a writer and musician with Mark Salzwedel | OG], interview with Nosa Ogbeiwi of OG Ascension Programme, August 15, 2024.

"[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6wFGuvg8ms&t=2652s&pp=ygUObWFyayBzYWx6d2VkZWw%3D Panel: The Physicality and Sensory Pleasures of Worldbuilding]," panel discussion at Rainbow Space Magic convention 2024, September 21, 2024. Description: with K.L. Noone (moderator), Antonia Aquilante, Heather O'Malley, & Mark Salzwedel

[https://thebookchronicle.substack.com/p/the-miraculous-life-of-rupert-rocket "The Miraculous Life of Rupert Rocket by Mark Salzwedel," The Book Chronicles, Sam H. Arnold, September 20, 2024.]

[https://www.newinbooks.com/interview-with-mark-salzwedel-author-of-the-miraculous-life-of-rupert-rocket-a-novel-of-the-fae/ "Interview with Mark Salzwedel, Author of The Miraculous Life of Rupert Rocket: A Novel of the Fae," New in Books, April 17, 2024.]

[https://wildheartedcreativemagazine.com/an-interview-with-mark-salzwedel/ "Embracing Creativity and Finding Balance: An Interview with Mark Salzwedel," Wild Hearted Creative Magazine, August 27, 2024.]

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRIgEFZu_gY "Bacon Ice Cream Presents - A Few Minutes with Mark Salzwedel!," Bacon Ice Cream Productions, May 24, 2009.]

Does this really suggest that Mark Salzwedel does not have enough notoriety to deserve an article on Wikipedia? MarkSalzwedel (talk) 17:14, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:{{ping|MarkSalzwedel}} We don't cite anything a subject says about themselves because this would require us to interpret them - which an encyclopaedia should not be doing. This is why we don't accept interviews as valid sources barring extensive non-interview material in the piece. The outlet is irrelevant; a New York Times interview is just as useless as an interview conducted by Borat Sagdiyev. There is also WP:Biographies of living persons to consider, which takes the position that a subject is, for whatever reason, not the best person to ask for facts about themselves. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:26, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::The rejection of the article was solely on notoriety. Shouldn't a preponderance of interviews and reviews indicate notoriety? I'm not using interviews as a source any more in the article. MarkSalzwedel (talk) 17:45, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::It's "notability" not "notoriety"(which can sometimes have a negative connotation). Independent, unsolicited reviews by professional reviewers would contribute to notability, but not a large number of interviews, because interviews regardless of their number are still you speaking about yourself. 331dot (talk) 17:52, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::The preponderance of interviews, whether or not they can be used as individual references, are a measure of notability. You don't get interviews if you're not unique or notable. MarkSalzwedel (talk) 17:54, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::An article about me would still rely on things I told the writer. A review about me would still cover things I wrote. The source of such information is never from any other source when you're a writer. The amount of interpretation involved is the only thing that differs, whether someone is teaching a college survey course on your work, writing a retrospective comparing your works, or being evaluated whether you're notable enough to be interviewed. MarkSalzwedel (talk) 17:59, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::Hello, @MarkSalzwedel. In some ways "Notability" is an unfortunate word, because it sometimes suggests something different from what it actually means in Wikipedia. (But it's hard to come up with a better word).

::::::What Notability means in Wikipedia is, roughly, "enough indepedent material has been published about the subject in reliable sources to base an article on" - remembering that {{HD/WINI}} ColinFine (talk) 19:07, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::"You don't get interviews if you're not unique or notable".....possibly, but then we want to know what others say that is, not what you say it is about yourself. 331dot (talk) 19:16, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::::They say things like: "We're kind of jealous of Mark Salzwedel. He's an incredible writer, a composer, an artist who grew up with an artistic childhood, and much more." -- MOXIE Press

:::::::And "I'm so glad to hear you mention that particular part of the process. .. .I 100% ascribe to your belief that the author is long-form playing all the characters in a drama, and the more you invest, as you were saying, the greater the drama that appears on the page. . . . The idea of not just being in the world but inventing the world as you write about it is absolutely thrilling to me." -- Paul Hagen, journalist MarkSalzwedel (talk) 20:05, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::::Hi, @MarkSalzwedel. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I feel I have to concur with the other editors here in that the sourcing is inadequate for an article. Take a look at a couple of the shorter writer bios I've put out recently like Oisin Curran and Anna Quon, if you look at the references you'll see they both have coverage from an extended period of time, across a variety of different notable publications at a national level, and each of them have some sort of extra claim to notability like "won x award" or a poet laureate position. A writer who is "notable" by Wikipedia standards would typically have a certain volume of reviews from reliable publications (i.e., not self-published sources and blogs and such). That would be basically the minimum you're looking for. The good news: you do qualify for a Wikidata entry. All the best, MediaKyle (talk) 01:39, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello!

I tried to send a Wikilove to another user, but there was no heart.

What do I do if there isn't a heart? Artem's pages (talk) 17:38, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Artem's pages, welcome to the Teahouse. It appears that Wikilove only works in the desktop version. It's bad that the documentation doesn't say this. You can click "Desktop" at the bottom of the mobile version and later click "Mobile view" to get back. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:33, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hi PrimeHunter! I still do not see a heart. Artem's pages (talk) 07:22, 3 July 2025 (UTC)Artem's pages

::{{ping|Artem's pages}} Were you in the desktop version when you viewed the user or talk page of the user? Is "Enable showing appreciation for other users with the WikiLove tab" enabled at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing? What is your skin at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering? In Vector 2022 I see a heart to the right of the "View history" tab. Which user is it? Do you see a heart at other users when you are in desktop? PrimeHunter (talk) 10:24, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::The poster told me this is resolved.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:PrimeHunter&diff=prev&oldid=1298587070] PrimeHunter (talk) 12:32, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

I recently created the Category:Wikipedians and added a user-box that someone else made (you can see how i added it on the category’s page.) However, I’ve noticed that adding the user-box onto one’s user page doesn’t automatically add you to the category. What am I doing wrong? I don’t really know much about the technicalities of Wikipedia and just copied the format of the University of Toronto category (the user-box attached to it does automatically add you to the category.) Thefoggysystem (talk) 17:51, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

: {{re|Thefoggysystem}} As far as I can see, you are there. What is the indication that your user page hasn't been added to a category? --CiaPan (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:: Oh, I did this little addition to the template Special:Diff/1298469232 – please check if it helps. {{smiley}} CiaPan (talk) 18:10, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::It works now!! Thank you so much!! :) Thefoggysystem (talk) 18:11, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::I added the category manually, before I added the userbox. And if i just add the userbox, the category does not appear.

::Also, if you look at other pages which have the userbox, they are not added to the category. Thefoggysystem (talk) 18:10, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

::{{re|Thefoggysystem}} I have just added the template to my Userpage – the categeory link appeared at the bottom of the page, and my userpage appeared in the category, as well. Everything works as expected, IMHO... --CiaPan (talk) 18:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::Yes, as i said above, it works. Thanks a lot :) Thefoggysystem (talk) 18:34, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:::: OK, now I see your reply above. What concerns other users: the userpages don't get included in the category immediately when a template is changed. This wil get updated later by some automatic background task. The immediate reindexing (and category update) occurs, for example, when you edit a page. So when you modify a userpage it gets added to (or removed from) categories at once. If you modify a template, they will be automagically updated later.
You may also use the WP:PURGE function on any specific page (User page in this case) to request a prompt reindexing. The link to activate purging may be displayed as the word 'purge' or as an asterisk. However, this works on that single page where you clicked the purge link.
HTH. --CiaPan (talk) 18:43, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

I remember Charlie Kirk, Donald Trump, Republican Party (US) and other conservative figureheads being called far right or fascist, but now they are just called "Right wing populist", is there an RFC that changed this? Perhaps a discussion on the Village Pump? I do not see any but I know ideological changes are rare on Wikipedia. 135.180.128.228 (talk) 18:38, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:In all those cases, the terminology is discussed on the talk pages for those articles. That is the place to discuss changes to articles. The terminology will also depend on what reliable sources say. That's what Wikipedia should report, not from any Wikipedia ideology. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:44, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:And what matters is what the preponderance of reliable sources use for a term. If one source describes any politician as a "fascist" that does not necessarily entitle that term to be named in the article. 331dot (talk) 20:52, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

I am editing the article on Far-left politics and I'm trying to insert an efn footnote. However when I hover over it, nothing happens. How do I fix it? 135.180.128.228 (talk) 21:28, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:I have fixed it [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Far-left_politics&diff=1298497077&oldid=1298494494 like this]. DuncanHill (talk) 21:50, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

I have wanted to create an article for a dish of some sort (dish as in a specific instructions to make a food) and I wanna use TasteAtlas, but I don't know if it is a reliable source. PLBF61371 (talk) 22:19, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:PLBF61371, first go to WP:RSN and look in its archives. If there's no mention there of "TasteAtlas" (or if the mentions don't help you), open a new thread on WP:RSN, asking about it. Be sure to link to the relevant "TasteAtlas" page and to say for what kind(s) of assertions you want to use it as a source. -- Hoary (talk) 07:57, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Is it OK to use Ancestry.com as a reference source for information? I know that Ancestry is a paid service so I would not be able to supply a link to the marriage or death certificates, but can I use the source information provided from ancestry in regard to using it as a reference source? Erin865 (talk) 23:59, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hello. Ancestry is nof considered a reliable source, see WP:ANCESTRY. 331dot (talk) 00:05, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::If the document has source information where ancestry got it, would that be ok? I am wanting to use information from a marriage license and death certificate. Thank you for responding to me. Erin865 (talk) 00:13, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::Some information is suitable as a primary source. Such as birth, death or marriage certificates. But user contributed material is not counted as reliable. And you would need good evidence that the certificates are for the person you are writing about. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:22, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::If I do use the marriage certificate for a reference source and I put the source down would I need to supply a digital copy of it or just the source itself? Sorry, for so many questions, I am doing a wiki edit for a class and I found a marriage certificate and death certificate on a person that I want to edit. Ancestry does document where they received it but I can't put a digital copy of it on there. Is it best for me to find something else? Erin865 (talk) 00:33, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::It just has to be verifiable, so if other people with an account can verify it on Ancestry, then that is OK. If the certificate is very old so as to be in the public domain, then it could be uploaded here, but that is not needed. And you could also reference the original source, but note that you did not consult it, so perhaps there is interpretation or copying errors not present in the original. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:59, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::Thank you for your help and clarifying this information for me. Erin865 (talk) 22:14, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

I'm adding userboxes in my user page, but they appear in a weird zigzag pattern. How do I make them in straight columns? PLBF61371 (talk) 00:24, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:Wikipedia:Userboxes#Grouping_userboxes might help. randomdude121    00:34, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Someone removed all but five of my edits over six years and now I lost my auto confirmed status. What can I do? Plantaganet1 (talk) 14:44, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|Plantaganet1}} Actually, your edit history and autoconfirmed status are both still intact, see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Plantaganet1 your contributions] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:UserRights/Plantaganet1 your status]. - Shearonink (talk) 14:56, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

User:Puppsroy/sandbox. Puppsroy (talk) 15:09, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:@Puppsroy First of all, drafts are generally not reviewed on request. There is a large backlog and yours will be reviewed eventually. Secondly, I wouldn't accept the draft anyway because there's nothing to publish – by accident or on purpose that page is blank except for the reviewing template and the sandbox notice.

:By the way, you can link to other Wikipedia pages using square brackets: if you type Yorkshire in the source editor, you'll get Yorkshire. Cremastra (talk) 15:21, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::Link fixed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:34, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:{{ec}}{{u|Puppsroy}} - ? There's no real content there. You're a new editor - Please study up on & read & understand Wikipedia:Questions, Help:Introduction, and Wikipedia:Tips. Also, for many reasons, like conflict-of-interest editing and Notability ("Only subjects that have received significant outside attention warrant being included on Wikipedia"), don't try to write a autobiographical blurb about yourself, per Wikipedia:Autobiography. - Shearonink (talk) 15:30, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::Also, @Puppsroy, do not disrupt pages, as you have done twice according to your edit history today, marking large removals as "minor", or you are likely to be blocked from editing. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:02, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

So {{Template|Userbox sample compact}} was deleted and later replaced with new (different) template code... where can I go to ask for the old code? I'd like to restore it to how it appears at Wikipedia:Userboxes#Userbox sampling templates. Gommeh 🎮 18:40, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:WP:REFUND, or ask the admin who deleted it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:18, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi there — I’m a new editor and I’ve drafted a Wikipedia article in my sandbox about a European research software company called Tellet.

I’ve tried to keep it neutral and sourced with independent coverage (e.g. MT/Sprout, Silicon Canals, Emerce, etc).

Would someone be willing to take a look and let me know if it’s suitable for the Articles for Creation process, or what I might need to improve?

Draft link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Goizargi_prawn/sandbox

I'm so new I don't even really know how to share the link? My user name is Goizargi prawn but should it be Goizargi_prawn ?!

Thanks in advance! Goizargi prawn (talk) 19:56, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:Welcome! That sandbox link appears to have no content, so there's nothing to review. You can create a wikilink by putting something in square brackets like this: User:Goizargi prawn/sandbox. It looks like Goizargi_prawn because URLs can't have spaces in them. GoldRomean (talk) 20:03, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hello, @Goizargi prawn, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.

:{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}}

:When people create a Wikipedia account, and immediately plunge into the very challenging task of creating a new article about a company, it is very often the case that they are trying to write about their own company or employer; so I'm going to ask - do you have a connection with Tellet? If you do, then please read about editing with a conflict of interest; further, if you are in any way employed by the company you are a paid editor, and must make a formal declaration. If you have no connection, that's fine, but it will save you further questioning if you make that clear.

:Whether you have a connection or not, what often happens when a new editor tries to create an article is that they write what they know. To be blunt about it, Wikipedia isn't interested in what you know about a subject (or what I know, or what any random person on the internet knows), unless you are summarising what independent sources have published about the subject. ColinFine (talk) 20:27, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

I added 24 referances but showes only 12 of them. They are not reused. They just don't show up. SummoneRise123 (talk) 21:15, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:@SummoneRise123 Are you having problems User:SummoneRise123/sandbox? Please always link to what you're editing.

:You say you added 24 refs but only 12 are shown, and you affirm that it's not that the refs are being reused. Your edits show you adding references and then setting the urlstatus to "live" (which FYI isn't necessary here). The most likely thing seems to be you made an edit adding more references that got hit by some technical error and didn't publish properly. If you can give use more information about (1) where specifically in the text you added these missing references and (2) what problem are you encountering with the refs that made you add the urlstatus parameter? Thanks, Cremastra (talk) 21:23, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::Hi, thanks for your help!

::You're right — I was trying to build a full reference list for my sandbox draft here: User:SummoneRise123/sandbox.

::I added 24 tags manually, but only 12 show up in the reference list at the bottom, even though they aren’t reused. I also used the url-status=live parameter in some places because I saw it in other templates and thought it was required — thanks for clarifying that it isn’t necessary here.

::It’s possible some edits didn’t save correctly, or I made a formatting mistake (like an unclosed tag). I’ll go back through the source and check it out.

::If needed, I’ll clean the references section and re-add any missing sources.

::Thanks again — I appreciate the review! SummoneRise123 (talk) 21:26, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::SummoneRise123 - reflists need or {{reflist}} whereas you have - and we don't want a list of references at the end, please put them in the relevant place in the article, or make them External links. Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 21:33, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::@Arjayay I added a reflist to the draft. It does not change the display. Cremastra (talk) 21:35, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::SummoneRise123 - as explained above, you did not add a reflist, you added which does not produce a reflist. I have now corrected this to {{reflist}} which produces 2 lists, one for the references in the article and one for the list under references. You need to incorporate the list in the article. - Arjayay (talk) 21:40, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::I'm currently trying to understand how this "reflist" etc.. works. Will fix it tommorrow hopefully. I'm going to watch few videos about it. SummoneRise123 (talk) 22:02, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::Yeah, the url-status parameter is for when there are archived copies of webpages. Often webpages disappear, but we can still access archived copies of them at the Wayback Machine, so we add an archive url parameter and set the "url-status" to dead. Sometimes, though, we add archive urls preventatively, in anticipation of the link going dead. To change the display of the reference to make the primary link go to the live webpage we make the "url-status" live.

:::Basically:

:::{{Cite web|title=This webpage is live |url=https://www.example.com |url-status=live |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20250301002714/https://example.com/ |archivedate=1 Mar 2025}}

:::Gives us:

:::{{Cite web|title=This webpage is live |url=https://www.example.com |url-status=live |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20250301002714/https://example.com/ |archivedate=1 Mar 2025}} Cremastra (talk) 21:32, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::You have used AI to create the draft in your sandbox, all the references are hallucinated and are useless. Theroadislong (talk) 21:53, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::I just write English that way? SummoneRise123 (talk) 21:54, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::Christ, you're right. I didn't even bother to check the links. {{facepalm}}

::::::@SummoneRise123 I'm highly skeptical that you "just write English" with hallucinated references. Cremastra (talk) 21:56, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Yeah, I did use AI to help draft the page, but I realize now I really should’ve checked those links better. I’m going through everything again to make sure the references are legit and not made up.

:::::::If you spot any specific ones that look off, just let me know. I want to get this right and improve the page properly.

:::::::I just try my best, SummoneRise123 (talk) 21:59, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::::None of them are correct and the Linkedin.com ones need to be removed. Theroadislong (talk) 22:06, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::I did remove them? Didn't I? I'm pretty sure I did. SummoneRise123 (talk) 22:07, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::Hello, @SummoneRise123, and welcome to the Teahouse.

::::::::::In the same way that a LLM makes up references, it is likely to make up the information that is supposedly verified from the reference.

::::::::::So, not only would you need to check that all the references exist, you would also need to check that all the references are relevant to the subject, and contain the information that the LLM has decided to attach the citation to.

::::::::::I believe that this will be more work than writing the draft properly yourself, working frorward from the sources.

::::::::::You have a similar problem to writing the draft BACKWARDS (which is something inexperienced editors often do) - only worse.

::::::::::Please do not use LLMs to write anything in Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 22:43, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

{{courtesy link|Hal Yinger}}

Help! Two people have edited the article I submitted about my dad, who was a football coach at Central Missouri State College. The article was for the catagory Mule football coaches. The editors do not like my sources because they are not available to be checked on the internet. This article was written using primary sources per my mom’s scrap book, newspaper clippings only those with the paper and date of the paper were used. And the various articles in our alumni newspapers and local newspapers. The dates of my sources range from the 1940’s to 2000. I totally get it that a 1943 article I sourced from the Salt Lake City Tribune might not be available on line.

My dad belongs in the catagory as it is factual he was the football coach at Central Missouri State College.

So,I will willing provide info requested. However, three editors have at one time looked at this article! I would like some consistent criteria. I can resource my submitted article sourcing mainly his articles from our Daily Star Journal dated 1984 and 2000. He retired in 1984 and died in 2000. Andy Yinger (talk) 22:08, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:What is the problem? Your article has been accepted and is a published Wikipedia article. You are responding like they said rejected. Maybe you made a mistake when you read it?

:If the problem is that others are editing the article, that is how Wikipedia works. You don't own the article so others can make changes. Osa Akwamarynowa (talk) 10:50, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:{{Tq|The editors do not like my sources because they are not available to be checked on the internet.}}

:They are right to do so, because verifiability is policy.

:{{Tq|This article was written using primary sources per my mom’s scrap book, newspaper clippings only those with the paper and date of the paper were used.}}

:You can scan the newspaper clippings (and upload them to web.archive.org). If you know the Newspaper's name, author of the article, date of publication/issue, then you could cite it.

:Please read Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. I think you need to disclose your relationship to the subject. TurboSuperA+_(connect) 10:59, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

::@Andy Yinger Just t clarify Wikipedia's policy on sources. While they must be published and from a reliable source, they do not have to be currently available online. See WP:OFFLINE for the details. Hence, if you have an old newspaper clipping, you can cite it using the {{t|cite news}} template. Many old newspapers are by now in archives such as at newspapers.com but they are valid for use here even if not now accessible through the Internet. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:20, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:Just a point on terminology: when we say primary sources, we mean things like letters, or birth certificates. Use of primary sources on Wikipedia is restricted to a few special cases. Newspaper clippings are secondary sources.

Hey everyone, I would like to ask if experienced editors think the French literary club "The Hydropathes" deserves its own article. The group has a page on the French Wikipedia and I have managed to find a couple thesis and several articles talking about its artists and influence. However, I have also noticed that (in general terms) the movement is covered in the Émile Goudeau page. Is it enough as is or could its notability grant it an article on its own? HC226 (talk) 23:25, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:HC226, the articles Émile Goudeau and :fr:Émile Goudeau are largely about the Hydropathes. Is Goudeau notable other than for the Hydropathes? If not, then how about moving "Émile Goudeau" to "Les Hydropathes" (or "The Hydropathes"; offhand I don't know which would be preferable) and of course revising it accordingly? -- Hoary (talk) 23:46, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

::Goudeau's only notable work (by which i mean of continuous importance on the study of french literature), seems to be "Dix ans de bohème", a memoir often used to study the artistic development and bohemian life in Montmartre. However, this book does not have a page here nor in the French Wikipedia. Outside of that, it seems he had minor roles in some of Montmartre's clubs and cabarets. Any other long-lasting impact he may have seems to have directly originated in or be related to "The Hydropathes". HC226 (talk) 00:26, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:::*With this in mind, I think that moving Goudeau into a new page dedicated to "The Hydropathes" would be a good choice.

:::HC226 (talk) 00:30, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'd like to write an article for Life Inside, a memoir by Mandy Lewis. However, we already have "The Life Inside", a television show episode. So what should I call the memoir article: Life Inside, or should Life Inside be a DAB page and I name the book's article Life Inside (book) or Life Inside: A Memoir, what should I do? Therapyisgood (talk) 23:55, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

:{{U|Therapyisgood}}, I googled {{Blue|"Mandy Lewis" "life inside"}} but found nothing. Did I make some mistake? -- Hoary (talk) 00:21, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Hoary}} sorry author name is Mindy Lewis. Therapyisgood (talk) 00:28, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:::Got it. I'd title it "Life Inside (book)". -- Hoary (talk) 00:43, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

{{courtesy link|Cordial (candy)}}

Just a quick question about citation. If I am using a direct quote from a source, is it ok if I use APA 7th edition to cite it? For example, "cordial candy contains cherries with a little kirsch." (Smith, 2023). Would this be ok for a citation? Thank you for your help. Erin865 (talk) 00:18, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:It would be better to use the regular Wikipedia inline citation format, which creates a footnote. Just make sure to enter it right after the direct quote. In regards to the format used on the source, you can keep its original format by simply pressing "manual" when creating the citation. If you need more information about how and when to cite on Wikipedia you can check here or,for information specifically on inline citations, here. HC226 (talk) 00:43, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

::Ok, great. With the direct quote I created the footnote. At the end of the write up, do I need to also cite the article I got the information from? I direct quoted from the same source that I did the write up on. Thank you for your help. Erin865 (talk) 01:31, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:::Can you elaborate/send the work you did? If you used the editing tool the footnote created automatically is enough. However, if you feel like the article can help readers get a substantial amount of additional information on the subject, you can put it in the "Further reading" section. HC226 (talk) 01:44, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

In Mayiladuthurai district#Notable people, does every name require citation and description of person? Excellenc1 (talk) 05:49, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:As I understand it, citations in this list are not required because every entry is wikilinked to an article about that person, and those articles should contain all the citations necessary. If the citation used in the list is not used in the actual article, it would be a good idea to add it there (supporting appropriate text, of course).

:If someone were added who would probably qualify for an article, but does not have one yet, it would be useful to have a citation; the name might also be red linked to encourage the creation of one.

:Brief descriptions are useful, sufficient to distinguish the person from others with the same name, or confirm if a half-remembered name is likely this person: one line should be ample as all the details should be in the linked article. Some of the existing descriptions are, in my judgement, unnecessarily long. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.159.137 (talk) 07:04, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

::The page is full of unnecesaary additions including citation in front of people whose article already exist. I would like if you invest a bit of time reading WP:Citing sources. You do not need to c

::TL;DR

::You just need citations for claims and descriptions. Sys64wiki (talk) 07:30, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:::*Cite everything that exist in article, only if {{tq|X said to Y that Z happened in W}}, this is where you have to add atleast one secondary source to prove the claim.

:::Sys64wiki (talk) 07:32, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

::should, sure, but quite often it doesn't. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:51, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

::@90.210.159.137, I thought Teahouse was semi-protected by now, did we life the protection. Seeing IP so..... Sys64wiki (talk) 10:05, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:::? Sys64wiki (talk) 10:05, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:{{u|Excellenc1}}: taking just one example, your description of S. R. D. Vaidyanathan reads "Might be known for contributions in medicine, arts, or another field.{{cn|date=June 2025}}". That is unhelpful. It would be better to have a quick look at the article about him, and write "musician". When editors do give citations in "Notable people" sections, they should be to support the claim that the person is indeed from that place. Maproom (talk) 07:18, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, sir. We are from Indian Pentecostal Assemblies, Coimbatore, South India. We are a religious Organization.We would like to create a page for our organization so that people would know about our organization in wikipedia. So, please help us create an article. Indian Pentecostal Assemblies (talk) 06:04, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:We have no interest in helping advertize your organisation. We would need strong third-party sources that discuss the Assemblies before we can even consider an article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 06:12, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:For context, OP has been blocked. Sys64wiki (talk) 07:17, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

::Soft block only, due to user name. Account has been renamed; expect unblock imminently. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:32, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi Teahouse, I'm currently working on fixing up the Tlingit language article as it's in pretty bad shape. As I already mentioned on its talk page, [https://xtools.wmcloud.org/authorship/en.wikipedia.org/Tlingit_language almost half] of the article, including the entire Grammar section, was written by one person: Dzéiwsh/James Crippen, a Tlingit linguist, who also didn't cite anything inline. My second problem with this article, and the one I need help from someone with, is that I think a lot of the Grammar section is too detailed, technical, and not notable enough to warrant inclusion in the encyclopedia (and has no citations besides the ones I added!). I definitely don't want to delete huge swaths of it, though, if a more experienced editor can tell me I shouldn't. I don't know if this is the right place to ask my question, especially because I have already posted it on the article's talk page, but I'm impatient and I really need an experienced editor's advice about what should happen with this article. Thank you for all of your assistance, EllaMinnowPea371 (talk) 08:36, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hi, @EllaMinnowPea371, that's a great question, but ask it to 10 different Wikpedians and you'll probably get 12 different answers. I'll try to give you mine. Technically, inline citations are not as required as they first seem. Everything needs to be supported by a reference, and those little footnotes make it a whole lot easier to find the text, but if you remove text that is supported by a general reference (especially one that's internet accessible), then other editors can get annoyed. Especially if you don't replace it; it's an unfortunate reality that we don't have enough editors to maintain many of our article, so if you chainsaw an entire section, chances are that nobody's going to replace it. Personally, I only remove material without replacing it if I believe having no text would serve our readers better than having the text. For example, if the original writer was known to have made things up, or plagiarized often, or the material is otherwise dubious, then yeah I'll remove text wholesale and tell other people who get annoyed at that that they'll just have to deal with it. Similarly, unsourced information about living peop!e can be removed on sight. But being overly technical wouldn't be enough for me; it's suboptimal writing, of course, but given how little people pay attention to the Tlingit language, I personally think it's better than nothing. (Others may disagree) Now if you'd like to rewrite that section, or trim some overly detailed parts, then that's you going to make other editors and readers happier with you and shouldn't get as much pushback, no matter how radical the changes are. In this particular case, you can probably trim quite heavily, removing all the editorializing and getting things down to just the bare facts. (The editorializing here is the main issue for me; NPOV is a pillar of Wikipedia, perfection is not) Then, hunt down sources for those facts, and try to rephrase then in a way that would make sense to somebody without a PhD in linguistics. That's going to take a while. Getting the appropriate amount of detail is going to be the hardest part- in Wiki-speak it's actually called WP:DUE, not notability, as an FYI, as notability is more related to "should we even have an article on this subject at all - you can have a look at categories articles:Category:FA-Class language articles articles or :Category:GA-Class language articles to get an idea about what that might look like. And good luck improving the article, and thank you for what you've done for it already! I was born in Southeast Alaska, so I always get excited when I see new editors taking an interest in the region. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 09:44, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

:I suppose, EllaMinnowPea371, that it was Crippen who added a [https://tlingitlanguage.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Grammar-of-Tlingit-Language.pdf preprint of his book] to the list of external links. Unlike many preprints, this one (as far as I can see) doesn't have a request that it not be cited. I haven't started to read it, but Lingít Yoo Xʼatángi: A Grammar of the Tlingit Language looks to be what its title promises. If it was indeed Crippen who wrote most of the grammar content of this article, I suppose that most of it can be sourced to his book (or its preprint). This is likely to be exhausting work, of course. And ... was the book ever published? (WorldCat [https://search.worldcat.org/search?q=ti%3Atlingit+AND+au%3Acrippen doesn't seem to show that it was].) If it wasn't, does this matter? Suggestion: Choose some chunk of the description of the grammar that you think is particularly rebarbative, and ask about it (probably better in Talk:Tlingit language than here). Then we (you, {{U|GreenLipstickLesbian}}, me, anyone) can discuss whether/how to simplify it. -- Hoary (talk) 11:34, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

I was curious about [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rick_Allen_%28politician%29&diff=1298130522&oldid=1298130272 this diff]. I inserted the template in the wp:first sentence, and it was changed it back to how most articles look. Is there a guideline that says we shouldn't use that template in the first sentence? Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) 13:33, 4 July 2025 (UTC)