Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1255#How to be welcomed here
{{Automatic archive navigator}}
Include 2 videos?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epfWIUK_efA&t=1s
This has also been transferred to vimeo. There is extensive crediting info that I don't understand. Can I use this on the site for Vilem Sokol?
Also, similar question to use this film documentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q_iI1jhb7U&t=1470s Chamber Music Queen (talk) 19:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello! I believe the first video you linked (the 1812 overture involving Sokol) is good as an external link, as it improves the article and is not a copyright violation. You can check the explanatory essay Wikipedia:Video links to determine whether a video link is appropriate or not (you can use the flowchart there). Personally I would prefer to link to the original video on Vimeo because it's the original source, but the YouTube link is fine too if you think it's more convenient. The reason it's fine is because the original video is licensed with Creative Commons "Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives" (it says so below the credits on Vimeo). This basically means the video can be reused as long as its properly attributed, used non-commercially and left unaltered. The YouTube video respects that so it's not a copyright violation (which we usually mustn't link to on Wikipedia).
:So, the video may be inserted in the article as [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epfWIUK_efA Tchaikovsky 1812 overture directed by Vilem Sokol], by writing the following wikitext:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epfWIUK_efA Tchaikovsky 1812 overture directed by Vilem Sokol]under an
:About the second video: that one is a clear copyright violation, as the reuploader is not the copyright holder of the documentary nor does he have permission or license to reupload it. In consequence we can not link to it. You can however cite the [https://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-10ffb954222 American Archive link] the reuploader (improperly) linked to in the video description. The archive doesn't provide the video itself though, it only documents its existence. I think you can still use it as a reference anyway and then use the documentary's information on the Wikipedia article, although I'm not entirely certain. Hopefully another editor can clear this doubt. The Sophocrat (talk) 22:46, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
::Ah, I just saw you already linked to the first video on the Films subsection of the article. I believe that is appropriate as well. The Sophocrat (talk) 22:47, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Thanks for this info.
:::I hope I did the 2nd video link correctly!
:::Also, can you remove the block at the top saying that the article still needs references? Thanks!! Chamber Music Queen (talk) 22:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
::::The 2nd video link seems fine to me.
::::Sure, the references are enough to remove the template. I have done so and improved a few of your references. You might already know about it, but The Seattle Times has [https://seattletimes.newsbank.com/ its own archives] which you could use to find and cite online scans of the pre-Internet citations of the newspaper in the article. For example, here are the two Seattle Times offline articles you currently cite: [https://seattletimes.newsbank.com/search?text=%22Graffman+Prove+Match%22&content_added=&date_from=&date_to=&pub%5B%5D=127D718D1E33F961] [https://seattletimes.newsbank.com/search?text=%22Symphony+Adds+Sokol%22&content_added=&date_from=&date_to=&pub%5B%5D=127D718D1E33F961]. It requires a paid subscription to access however, which I don't have. You might be interested in it though.
::::Also, I asked another editor about using the documentary as a source of information, and he agrees that it's okay to use it even though we can't link to the full video (analogous to citing an offline book).
::::Happy editing :) The Sophocrat (talk) 00:36, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::thanks very much! I appreciate the tips! Chamber Music Queen (talk) 04:08, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:FYI: see this user talk page section, where I answered the question without realising it had already been addressed here. Graham87 (talk) 08:02, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Update article
Do you know if Sarsenet will be available? I had modified an article and the changes were removed a few days later. He sent me a msg but I was too busy to respond. I’ve revised my changes and wanted to implement them. I sent him a msg a little while ago. DRHovis (talk) 17:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:Good day @DRHovis, @Sarsenet may not be online at the time or may have not gotten notice of your changes. I have mentioned them in this comment, which should get their attention. Do you need Sarsenet specifically or do you just generally need help from an experienced editor. Thanks, ✶Quxyz✶ 19:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
::Abo Yemen was assigned to help me by Sarsenet so I contacted him. He checked and I was not blocked, so I revised the article. Thank you for your help!
::There are a lot of places to go in the Wiki environment. It is interesting! DRHovis (talk) 20:03, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
On average, how long do DYK articles take to get reviewed?
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)
:Was your second question not answered on 10 May? -- Hoary (talk) 11:12, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
::Oh ok thanks. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 11:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Thehistorianisaac Your DYK was reviewed on 3 May and was fine except for the issue about the image. That prevented it getting the little green tick from User:Peaceray which would have drawn it to the attention of someone to promote the DYK to the next stage. I'm sure my alert here will mean that Peaceray will fix that, given you are new to the process. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:24, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
::::So can I find some way for it to not need the photo in DYK? the article has no problems Thehistorianisaac (talk) 17:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Thehistorianisaac}} I have approved it as a DYK with the caveat that the non-free image is okay in the article but should not be used on the main page. Peaceray (talk) 00:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Oh ok thanks Thehistorianisaac (talk) 00:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::@Thehistorianisaac So now the nomination is at WP:DYKNA and will move on from there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Yeah I heard, that's great; Is there anything else I need to do, or is it ok from now on? Thehistorianisaac (talk) 15:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::No, it should all be automatic, unless those editors who move things on have questions for you, in which case I'd expect a WP:PING. It may still take a couple of weeks to get to the main page but you should be able to follow progress through the prep areas and queues. You will certainly be notified on your talk page when the hook goes live. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Oh ok thanks! Thehistorianisaac (talk) 16:18, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
I’m new to this site. What should I do first?
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)
:::::::::@Avocado Apologies for late reply, but I forgot to change from “historian” to a Teahouse host, possibly a typo error. I can say that is this possible to become a host in Teahouse, even though I’m not extended confirmed user?
:::::::::For this, my goal on this site is to edit Wikipedia often and become a regular contributor. My standing of that way is to keep track of the articles that require improvement and fixation. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 07:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::Teahouse hosts are whoever feels like hanging out here and answering questions. If you see a question you are confident you know the correct answer to, you're welcome to answer it. I've been on Wikipedia for a while, but I still don't know everything, so I only answer questions about things I do know.
::::::::::There are two main ways to find articles that need to be fixed. One is to pick a type of fixing that you like to do (adding references? translating from another language you're fluent in? updating outdated information? adding images?), and look at categories of articles that have been tagged as needing that sort of fix.
::::::::::The other way is to choose a topic that interests you (tabletop games? cambodian history? planes, trains, or automobiles? a specific sport? etc.) and look at articles in that topic to see how you can improve them.
::::::::::Which approach sounds more appealing to you? -- Avocado (talk) 11:54, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::@Avocado Editing in random topic areas and fixing articles by adding references and updating the outdated information sounds approaching to me, at least I can do it. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 17:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::Great! You might find the lists here useful for finding those tasks. There's a "more..." link at the bottom of each short list where you can find a longer list of articles that need work. And also a "learn how" link so you can be confident you understand what's expected for that type of task. Hopefully that's enough to get you started. -- Avocado (talk) 21:12, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Alright, thank you for give me a task center and assisting me on Wikipedia. I do appreciate your posts on Teahouse. Maybe someday I can become a regular contributor on Wikipedia. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 22:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::At this point, after getting about 500 edits, I will become extended confirmed user, meaning that I will contribute to pages with extended confirmed protection. Thanks to anyone who reply to me and giving me a warm welcome to a website. I would do these edits to pages later then. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 02:48, 16 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)
::::Is editing Wikipedia a way to learn stuff? I guess that depends on what you want to learn. For instance, you might be able to look up Alcatraz Federal Penitentiary and eventually learn what procedure a President might (theoretically) need to go through to convert it from its current status as a landmark to an operating prison. You can also ask chatgpt. Both will have a certain risk of inaccuracy (and it's not unusual for that inaccuracy to be fed by Wikipedia (see citogenesis).
::::You indicate that you want to edit "when you feel like it" ... which you can already do. I see you've created a page called "self" ... there's a lot of people who set up these pages about themselves, and there's nothing per se wrong with doing that, but the presumed purpose of being a wikipedia editor is to help "build an encyclopedia", so my personal feeling is that this sort of personal content is mostly a distraction... but maybe at some point it can become useful. Do bear in mind, however, that there are something like 30k or more "active" editors, it's quite likely that nobody will notice what you do unless you do something bad. From the beginning, you would have been able to edit almost any article on wikipedia, but they might have been subject to a review. However, after a mere 4 days and 10 edits, which is almost nothing (especially since the edit count includes non-article edits), then you become autoconfirmed, which means you're able to edit nearly any article you want.
::::Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Especially when it comes to creating new articles. There are a bunch of rules about articles. Rules about what meets the notability requirements (just because something is obviously notable to you doesn't mean it qualifies, there are rules about "making claims" (you're supposed to have a 'reliable source to make a claim (in principle, every statement you make in an article is backed up by a reliable source, and preferably one that can be accessed via a link.
::::Now I'll speak straight! I'm a tad hostile toward people who just think about how they can "participate" ... just use the site. You'll know when it's time to participate, because you'll see an article that you feel is deficient in some way. Even when you encounter something like that, don't be thinking "Here's my chance." There's really no reward for contributing ... but aside from that, there are many reasons why what you think is a really useful edit is actually counter-productive. You might think you're fixing a grammatical error, but you're wrong. You might think your edit is adding useful content, but it really doesn't belong. You might think you're correcting spelling, not realizing that the article is written using British English.
::::OTOH, the time will come when there's some obvious constructive edit you can make, then go for it. Bear in mind, if you're adding a fact and there's not already a citation to support it, then you should provide a citation to go along with it. Good luck! Fabrickator (talk) 05:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::@Fabrickator Oh boy, you are here, for the first one, yes. Editing Wikipedia is a way to learn stuff, especially when you fix typos or errors when editing an article. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 07:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::And for this, I can at least enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. AmazingWikis4386 (talk) 17:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::::
{{Clear}}
Are dead children children?
Hi helpful people! I'm curious, is there a policy about including dead children in a person's infobox? If one of their kids died and one is alive, do we say they have 1 or 2 children? Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi! Yes, they do count as children (I don't think any policy mentions it specifically but it makes sense and there's plenty of articles with noted dead children). So in your example we would say they have 2 children, but we would only name or cover them if they were notable. Feel free to ask any other questions. Happy edditing! The Sophocrat (talk) 03:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::@The Sophocrat, thanks for the swift response! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Newly users writng essay question
hello there can i write a essay as anew user AAAAAYEHA (talk) 11:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello and welcome. Wikipedia does not host essays of original research. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia composed of articles that summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage choose on their own to say about a topic. Writing a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia, and diving right in without knowledge and experience is likely to fail. You should first spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Using the new user tutorial is a good idea as well. It's highly recommended that you use the article wizard to create and submit a draft once you are ready. 331dot (talk) 11:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::well there are some wikipedia essays AAAAAYEHA (talk) 11:36, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::I didn't realize that was the type of essay you were talking about. There is nothing preventing you from doing so, say in your sandbox, but please see WP:ESSAY. 331dot (talk) 11:46, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
Clarification on COI, citation consistency, and orphan articles
Hello! I'm a new editor still learning how to navigate article contributions responsibly, especially around conflict of interest.
I previously contributed to the Rebecca B. Alston article, but after feedback about promotional tone and a possible COI, I stepped away from directly editing the page. Since then, the article has been cleaned up with better alignment to standards, but it still carries several tags. I'm trying to understand what I could do better next time, or how to help responsibly from a distance.
I had a few specific questions:
– The article is tagged for lacking a citation for the subject's birthdate, but I noticed that Peter Frank’s article does not cite a birthdate either, and has no similar tag. I'm trying to understand how consistency works in applying these tags — not to dispute it, just to learn what’s expected.
– The “orphan article” tag is a bit unclear. I understand it means no other articles link to it, but I’d appreciate practical guidance on how to identify good linking opportunities or how to resolve that.
– There’s also a historic connection between Rebecca B. Alston and Peter Frank (he was quoted in earlier drafts), but due to the nature of her career, most references are physical media like gallery invites and reviews — harder to verify online. Is there a proper way to cite this kind of non-digital source when digital alternatives aren’t available?
I had considered reaching out to Anachronist directly, since they contributed to the original COI conversation, but wanted to check if it’s better to keep the discussion here in a community forum. I’m asking in good faith and truly want to improve as a contributor.
Thanks so much for your time and help. Archfusionpro (talk) 19:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:1. For the birthdate citation, you are free to add a citation needed tag or add a source mentioning his birthday to Peter Frank (whichever one you are referring to). Thank you for pointing out this issue! Wikipedia is a volunteer project after all, so not all issues with articles are recognized or fixed.
:2. WP:DE-ORPHAN can provide useful suggestions on how one could de-orphan an article. For example, adding links from related articles through intersecting categories or different language Wikipedias.
:3. Yes, a source can still be valid even if it isn't online. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 21:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:Archfusionpro, most of the "Solo exhibitions" are unreferenced. Almost all of the "Selected group exhibitions" are unreferenced, and most are described so vaguely as to be unhelpful even to an energetic reader. (Random example: "1988: Anna Bornholt Gallery in London, England". When in 1988? What was it titled?) Many of the references are unhelpful. (Random example 1: "'Artists'. The New York Review. Boone Productions. 1986." If this is The New York Review of Books, then say so -- but what is the status of "Boone Productions"? If it isn't the NYRB, then what is it? Whatever it is, is it really dated no more precisely than "1986"? Random example 2: "Frank, Peter. 'REBECCA ALSTON: BIO-ABSTRACTION'. 2014." There's no need to SHOUT. Was it really an annual; and if not, then when in 2014? Whether an annual or not, what's the publication titled?) -- Hoary (talk) 22:52, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Requesting feedback on submitted draft: MusicRadar
Hi! I recently created a new draft article at Draft:MusicRadar and submitted it through Articles for Creation. The topic had been previously deleted, so I’ve rewritten it from scratch with multiple reliable sources to address notability concerns.
I’d really appreciate any feedback or suggestions while I wait for review. Thank you! Kitfox64 (talk) 05:41, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, {{u|Kitfox64}}. I highly recommend that you transform your references from bare URLs to fully fleshed out references with complete bibliographic information. This is not mandatory but it looks far more professional, is much more informative for readers, and makes it much easier for reviewers to evaluate your sources. It is to your benefit to make things smoother for the reviewers and to create a positive impression. See Referencing for beginners for the techniques. Cullen328 (talk) 05:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:More importantly and more urgently, Kitfox64, summarize what has been written about MusicRadar in reliable sources that are independent of MusicRadar. Because references to MusicRadar's own website, to prnewswire.com (mere PR fluff), and to pages such as [https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/future-launches-musicradar-site/764487 this] that merely recycle what MusicRadar says about itself will be inadequate for information about MusicRadar, no matter how scrupulously these references have been fleshed out. (Once the draft has a variety of solid references, written and published independently of MusicRadar, then yes, these references should be made informative and helpful.) -- Hoary (talk) 06:17, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
Help with Cypher System ttRPG article in my draft
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)
::My dear :-)
::About the secondary sources, hm... the only thing I can think of are reviews? Could you maybe name some other text I could search for?
::Also, I think I have seen at least 1 video on YT about ttRPG where author argumented that Cypher System is superior to D&D, hm... I think I would like to use that as a resource for the article. But where to put that? In Reception section?
::Best wishes!
::-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 08:56, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Dear Friends.
:::I improved the article and sources as much as I could without reaching for 2nd edition Corebook to "sourcerize" my mechanics claims. Generally speaking, if RPGnet reviews aren't good sources, then we have problem with secondary sources for ttRPGs in whole, because on English Internet, ttRPG reviews are either RPGnet ones or some other published on "private" blogs. However, in the article there is also a ref for Polter.pl, which is, I believe, a "serious" resource (in Poland, you can not know that if you aren't Polish speakers, but Polter.pl is a regular editorial group that publishes its reviews and other texts).
:::I think I cannot improve the article further without getting the Corebook, as I said. Could you take a look and tell me what you think of sources I have used?
:::Best wishes
:::-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 09:33, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
::::EDIT: I have found around 3 reviews from Italian Internet that seem to come from reliable sources. Could I use them as "proper" sources in this case? -- Kaworu1992 (talk) 09:57, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Oh, and do you think I should divide "Reception" section into, I dunno, "English Internet", "Italian Internet", "Polish Internet" etc.? Kaworu1992 (talk) 10:41, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Dear Friends.
I added Italian reviews for my article. I hope that together with a Polter.pl review these sources are reliable. Could you have a look and tell me what you think?
LINK: User:Kaworu1992/Cypher System
If everything is okay, I shall be adding to sources the Corebook.
Best wishes
-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 10:44, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Feedback
{{atop|Feedback given on draft page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)}}
Please write to me an understandable essay including feedback for my draft: Draft:David Thomas King School. Rafaelthegreat (talk) 23:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @Rafaelthegreat, welcome to the teahouse! The best way to get feedback on your draft is to submit the article for review once more. Underneath the big banner, and before the article begins, there is a little yellow exclamation mark and the word "Comment". Your reviewer will leave feedback there. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 23:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:No, Rafaelthegreat, I am not going to write an essay. However: (1) A reference is normally used in order to provide evidence for an assertion. But a large percentage of the references in Draft:David Thomas King School are not for this. Indeed, I don't know what they're for. (2) What have reliable sources that are independent of David Thomas King School written about David Thomas King School? (If nobody can find such sources, no article can be created.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
{{abot}}
{{Clear}}
Speedy Article Review
{{atop|1=Already at 2025 Pakistani airspace closure. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:14, 17 May 2025 (UTC)}}
Hello! I need some help at the Teahouse as i need my article to be reviewed by next monday. I usually get my articles reviewed in a day or so. My topic has been mentioned very little or passed by in 1-2 articles but i made a deep down explanation of my topic situation. I ask that somebody help me get my article reviewed and possibly published and approved! SVSWIKIPED (talk) 02:10, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:the current one im making is one called Draft:2025 Pakistani airspace closure. Im hoping that this will get approved. SVSWIKIPED (talk) 02:11, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::SVSWIKIPED, allow me to quote SVSWIKIPED, which tells us: "I learned over my little time here to take your time. Don't rush on a article even if you don't have much time. Take it slow and make sure to re-read and cite your sources...." (Also, there is currently a backlog of over {{SAFESUBST:
:::Yea the thing that i was concerned about mostly was the fact that this was graded. I just got the email saying that my educator was fine with it. I decided this one time to rush.
:::I always wonder how many people work for AfC team and more. How does backlog get this bad. : ( SVSWIKIPED (talk) 03:28, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::One reason why it gets bad, SVSWIKIPED, is that very many drafts smell promotional without being indisputably promotional, another is that very many suggest notability while failing to demonstrate it, another is that very many cite sources that are pretty crappy without being indisputably crappy ... and any of these factors can lead to declines, further submissions, further declines, etc. And then, if a draft is basically OK, well, I for one am reluctant to accept any draft as an article that I wouldn't want to read. The necessary (I think) even if humdrum editing takes time ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Manchester%2C_Calgary&diff=1290618579&oldid=1276485512 most recent example]). -- Hoary (talk) 04:12, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::I was curious and wanted to know the qualifications to not need people to approve your article and just directly publish it. SVSWIKIPED (talk) 22:17, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::@SVSWIKIPED, you are already able to directly publish articles. However, if they don't meet our guidelines for whatever reason, a patroller may nominate them for deletion or move them to draftspace. -- asilvering (talk) 22:50, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Why do i need to undergo review then? SVSWIKIPED (talk) 23:06, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::I would be considered quite experienced here, editing Wikipedia almost daily for the past 19 years. And even then I occasionally submit an article for review to get another set of eyes on it, and advice, especially if I'm uncertain about the community's judgment of notability. In one case a reviewer suggested I re-cast an article about an author to an article about his books instead, because the books were clearly notable, so I did that.
::::::::You seem to be under the misconception that the community respects deadlines. See WP:DEADLINE; there are no deadlines on Wikipedia. If you have an assignment due by a certain date, you take your chances. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:28, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::I do understand that there are no deadlines. These replies from people at the tea house have made me learned stuff I didn’t even know. I appreciate all of yall as I begin writing for Wikipedia. SVSWIKIPED (talk) 01:56, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::@SVSWIKIPED, you don't. That's what I'm saying. You can create an article in mainspace like any other autoconfirmed user - you've been able to do this since May 9th. (See: [https://xtools.wmcloud.org/ec-rightschanges/en.wikipedia.org/SVSWIKIPED]) -- asilvering (talk) 02:48, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Ok i think i'm starting to see what you are saying. Let me see what you attached. SVSWIKIPED (talk) 03:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Omg thanks so much cause i just found out how to. This is ground breaking for me. SVSWIKIPED (talk) 03:34, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::@SVSWIKIPED: we're all volunteers, that's how! AfC reviewers are doing this on top of all the other things they do for the encyclopedia (like writing articles). You can see a list of us all at WP:AFCP - not really very many! Administrators and people with WP:NPP rights can review drafts too. Maybe you can join in once you've got some more experience. :) -- asilvering (talk) 06:04, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Hello, @SVSWIKIPED, and welcome to the Teahouse. If somebody (whether you or your teachers) have made your educational qualification dependent on getting a Wikipedia article accepted in a certain time, then they have made a very very very very bad decision, and put you in an impossible situation. Neither you nor anybody else can guarantee that a draft will be looked at by a certain date.
::::{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}} ColinFine (talk) 15:58, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::I agree with you and your right. Wikipedia is like my fun place but if you have seen my other submissions, they were frustrating when it became rejected. I found it hard but I slowly learned the basics through the first few submissions and stuff. I just came here because the article I have that I made getting approved is important for my teacher (idk why she made such task) and my grade in that class. That’s why I seeked help and I look forward to working with others.
:::::Rejection of the article is leading me to other articles. I’m making one about airline partnerships but I feel like every attempt is getting rejected. SVSWIKIPED (talk) 22:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::I have to say that Draft:2025 Pakistani airspace closure does look like it's in decent shape, however. Articles about current or recent events aren't my area of focus, so I am not familiar with what's expected, although I wouldn't see a problem if this draft was moved to article space.
:::::That said, the thing I'm uncertain about is whether the topic should be a standalone article, or whether this event should be merged into 2025 India–Pakistan conflict, which already describes various impacts, of which this is one. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:09, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
{{abot}}
{{Clear}}
LLM "Opinion" vs LLM refine the expression of my authentic idea clarification
Hi,
I made one edit suggestion on a page, now 2 editors from that page are following me around reverting ALL subsequent wikipedia contributions I do. They claim they have the absolute authority to render an opinion that an edit was made with LLM and revert all edits of mine and that's what they do claiming it is for the betterment of wikipedia. So, apparently I'm shadow-banned for making edits in wikipedia. Or am I? I do use LLM to refine the expression of my authentic idea, which is supposed to be fine. Or is it? Do I have to take a video of me typing just to be an editor at wikipedia? Do I make a disclosure? Seems a tad absurd. Thanks in advance. ScholarLoop (talk) 23:21, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, {{u|ScholarLoop}}. The obvious solution is to write entirely in your own words. Human Wikipedia editors are not interested in conversations with robots prone to hallucinations based on hidden prompts. Cullen328 (talk) 01:09, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks so even though there is a policy on LLM use and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:LLMDISCLOSE&redirect=no WP:LLMDISCLOSE] , any editor can just revert a well formed and verified sourced wikipedia edit which means effectively not only are all well formed LLM article edits in practice are actually banned, if some editor doesn't like your edit they can just make an "opinion" and revert it in its entirety. Got it thanks, that's what I thought. ScholarLoop (talk) 01:33, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:You don't need to use LLM to "refine the expression" of your ideas. That's just using it as a crutch, which shouldn't be needed. If you write clearly enough in your own words, other editors will eventually come along and improve them if they need refining. In this way, LLMs need never be involved, and Wikipedia articles remain human-generated. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks so even though there is a policy on LLM use and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:LLMDISCLOSE&redirect=no WP:LLMDISCLOSE] , any editor can just revert a well formed and verified sourced wikipedia edit which means effectively not only are all well formed LLM article edits in practice are actually banned, if some editor doesn't like your edit they can just make an "opinion" and revert it in its entirety. Got it thanks, that's what I thought. ScholarLoop (talk) 01:33, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::{{u|ScholarLoop}}, I guess that neither you nor your robot friend noticed that WP:LLMDISCLOSE is not an official Wikipedia policy. It is just a subsection of a user essay. As it says at the very top, {{tpq|This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.}} Why didn't you notice that? This essay is not widely accepted. Cullen328 (talk) 01:52, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::because the editors stalking my edits and reverting them referenced this essay - so are you saying the reverts are not justified since its not widely accepted? ScholarLoop (talk) 02:10, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::{{u|ScholarLoop}}, I was simply informing you that this essay is not a policy, which you had said it was. Use of AI and LLMs is highly contentious on Wikipedia, as you have now learned. Please be aware that "vandalism" and "stalking" are grave accusations that require solid evidence. Without such evidence, these charges are personal attacks contrary to an actual policy No personal attacks. I suggest that you back off a bit and recalibrate your approach because arguing with every highly experienced editor you run across is not the path to success in editing Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 02:23, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Thanks, not arguing, seeking clarification. I am an experienced editor from 10 years ago and this AI thing is new, but thanks for verifying the solid evidence I need. I've dealt with stalking and vandalism in the drama boards before. Thanks for the help! ScholarLoop (talk) 03:01, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::ScholarLoop: That is a non-sequitur reply to my comment. Did you use an LLM for that? I ask because it makes no sense in the context of my comment. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:01, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::No, probably because you comment was non-sequitur to my comment. ScholarLoop (talk) 02:11, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Really? I directly quoted you in my reply. Oh well. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Thanks for the friendly help! ScholarLoop (talk) 02:56, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Hello, @ScholarLoop. One other point: Yes, "any editor can just revert a well formed and verified sourced wikipedia edit" (emphasis added) - if they don't agree that it is well-formed and verified, or they don't think it is an improvement for other reasons (eg UNDUE). And then you have the option to discuss it per BRD. This is not new. ColinFine (talk) 10:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::Indeed if that was the actual case for an individual edit. In this case an editor decided to stalk my entire history and revert multiple article contributions simply calling it "trash." ScholarLoop (talk) 11:17, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:If you are unhappy with the actions of another editor or editors, please follow the process outlined at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:55, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you I will, as the gang of editors claim I will be banned if I try. ScholarLoop (talk) 11:18, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Where do I ask for help in this case?
Currently, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chinese_police_overseas_service_stations&oldid=1290639480 my edits] on Chinese police overseas service stations have constantly been reverted by two users. I have also been falsely accused of doing "POV edits" and doing "WP:PROMOTION". As far as I know, I have complied with wikipedia guidelines for the most part, and a lot of the statements made were clearly in violation of WP:AGF and there was also quite some WP:WL involved.
Now, where do I get help for this? WP:AN3 seems really overkill, and let's admit it, outside of the people reverting my edits, nobody is looking at the talk page(where I already have a discussion for this). Thehistorianisaac (talk) 15:53, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @Thehistorianisaac. If you cannot reach agreement with the other editors, the proper next steps are laid out in dispute resolution. ColinFine (talk) 17:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::@ColinFine Can third opinion also be used in this situation even though it is 3 people? The talk page likely will not have any other editors, and I don't think the issue is big enough for dispute resolution and ANI to be involved; Third opinion seems to be the best place I have found so far Thehistorianisaac (talk) 17:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Third opinion requests are typically closed without comment if more than two editors are involved, although I have made exceptions to this in the past, if two editors are dominating the discussion. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:39, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Oh ok thanks Thehistorianisaac (talk) 03:40, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
Approval of an article of mainly local interest
:{{courtesy link|Draft:William Cullen McBride High School}}
I've just completed my final draft of "William Cullen McBride High School" and have submitted it for approval. The school closed in 1971 but has reasonably general local interest due to an active philanthropic alumni club. However, the youngest graduate is in his 70s and, although a likely reader of Wikipedia, has no idea how to submit articles, much less approve them. (I am, to my knowledge so far, the only exception, and that only recently) My point is that the article is definitely of interest to a reasonably good sized, but local, population, but I doubt it is to likely reviewers. Is it still reasonable for me to expect it will be reviewed and approved despite this?
By the way, I really enjoyed my foray into wiki-authorship. So much to learn, and so many pitfalls to avoid.
Thanks in advance for your replies. This Teahouse concept is brilliant. Sickingm (talk) 04:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
- Happy to read that you like it here, Sickingm. Well, the draft has a chance. Start by cutting those sections within it that are unreferenced -- notably, "McBride Alumni Club" (which aside from being unreferenced is excessively detailed). Continue by cutting "Notable alumni" who aren't linked (such as Mark Bernsen) and those who are redlinked (such as Frank P. Boro). -- Hoary (talk) 05:03, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:It will certainly be reviewed, though this is likely to take time, regardless of the subject. The decision to publish will depend on suitability (per WP:N) and quality (particularly the citations), not the reviewer's personal interest in the subject. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:59, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks. I'll get working on it. Sickingm (talk) 19:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::Sorry if I'm being obtuse. Can you clarify - or point me to where I can get clarification - on the difference between a link, a reference, and a citation?
::Does a link refer only to WP articles or is it any hyperlink pointing to the subject?
::Is a reference an external, non-hyperlink, reference?
::So then is a citation a completely different animal from the other two?
::- Matt Sicking (sickingm) Sickingm (talk) 21:29, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::I'll answer that in the subsection below. Terminological mysteries aside, thank you for your [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:William_Cullen_McBride_High_School&diff=prev&oldid=1287682220 candid edit summary]. Now I know how it is that the "Legacy" section is in somniferous LLM-speak: It was produced by a LLM ("AI"). Please do not subject readers to LLM-speak. -- Hoary (talk) 00:25, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
=Links, references, citations=
{{U|Sickingm}}, I'll try to answer your question about "hyperlinks", "references", and "citations".
"Hyperlinks" is a word normally shortened to "links". These can be "internal" (example: Depths of Wikipedia) or "external" (example: [https://bsky.app/profile/depthsofwikipedia.bsky.social Depths of Wikipedia]). Internal links can be used freely; but (since they point to Wikipedia, classed as an unreliable source) they can't be used as evidence for assertions. (They also can't demonstrate notability.) External links can't be used in body text, but if used in their place can be used as evidence for assertions and can add up to demonstrate notability.
From Depths of Wikipedia:
{{Blue|1=Annie Rauwerda, then a student in neuroscience at the University of Michigan,{{Cite magazine |last=Shamani |first=Joshi |date=January 13, 2022 |title=I Look For the Weirdest and Wildest Things on Wikipedia. Here's What I've Learned. |url=https://www.vice.com/en/article/depths-of-wikipedia-viral-instagram-tiktok-facts-trivia/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220125063955/https://www.vice.com/en/article/dypdzv/depths-of-wikipedia-viral-instagram-tiktok-facts-trivia |archive-date=January 25, 2022 |access-date=March 24, 2022 |magazine=Vice}}.... }}
Within that, there are internal links to 'Annie Rauwerda', 'neuroscience', and 'University of Michigan'. There's a single reference:
One of these decades, I might get around to improving the article on Issei Suda. If I did, I'd want to cite the editorial material in the back of his posthumous photobook My Japan (Amsterdam: Fw, 2021; {{ISBN|9789490119959}}. I'd do so by looking into the physical codex (the dead-tree original): a copy resides on my bookshelf. As far as I know, the web has no PDF or similar that I might link to. But of course I can still cite the book, via a reference that won't have a link to the book. So citations and references don't always use links, rather as links aren't always for references or citations. -- Hoary (talk) 00:31, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
How to get eyes on an article?
In recent months, I have carried out a personal project to improve and overhaul the Deadmau5 article as it stands. Despite the amount of my edits and the depth of their changes, I have failed to attract the attention of contributors who would be interested in helping the article. It was so bad that Drmies, in their evaluation of the article's quality, didn't really cite any examples for what they were rejecting the good article nomination for. Help? ~ GoatLordServant(Talk) 14:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:Courtesy ping to {{yo|Drmies|p=.}} Grumpylawnchair [ALT] (talk) 14:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:There are four WP:WikiProjects listed on the article's talk page. Ask on their talk pages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:54, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you Andy Mabbett, I have added a section to the Canada and Musician Wikiprojects in light of your advice. The rest of the wikiprojects are both semi-active or inactive, so I have posting withheld a notice there (for now). Thank you!! ~ GoatLordServant(Talk) 15:12, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::"I'm going to give this a quick fail: this has been open for months, and the article is undergoing constant revision, and there is some dispute in the history. At any rate it's simply not good enough now in terms of sourcing, formatting, and structure, before we even get to the writing. Hint: start weeding out poor sources, standardize all citations with the proper templates." Drmies (talk) 16:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::::I am not familiar with all the sources in the article and this is the first time I have tackled a whole article that's been around this long. I am both unfamiliar with what you're referring to, where anything unstandardized would be, or even how to navigate references all that comfortably. That's a big reason I'm here, and again, I don't have any examples. ~ GoatLordServant(Talk) 16:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::@GoatLordServant Getting an article to "good" status can be a hard slog. You need to look at the instructions at WP:GOOD and all the related tabs on that page. One of the ideas of the review is that the article already be fairly stable (i.e. not needing much more content, only formatting and perhaps somewhat pedantic tweaks) before the review starts. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:02, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::That was not what it was like when I was helping with Sans (Undertale), so I had not understood that. It would have been considered 'unstable' anywho with the controversy tag added late in its life as a submission-- was destined for rejection anyway. ~ GoatLordServant(Talk) 17:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::I'm not sure what the doctor's problem with the citation templates is, but if I opened a GAN that had been in the queue for months and found that the nominator was still actively editing it, I'd probably put it down too. You might want to try to get some help at WP:PR, but these can also stand open for a long, long time. -- asilvering (talk) 06:15, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
Question regarding copyright for map
Hello, I have a question regarding copyright in regard to maps of kingdoms from books sourced,(Draft:Kingdom of Aboh), in my draft here I uploaded a map for the Kingdom of Aboh, however I'm unfamiliar with copyright rules and I uploaded it through Commons Upload Wizard, is that constituted under fair use for the site ? Dangermanmeetz (talk) 15:21, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:Also to prevent my draft from being declined/deleted when reviewed. Thanks! Dangermanmeetz (talk) 15:22, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{yo|Dangermanmeetz}} Do you know who made it? Do you know when it was made? Do you know if there's any copyright on it? Please also see WP:COPY and WP:YFA. Worgisbor (congregate) 16:18, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Yea I credited the author, it was made in 1971, but I don't know how to check if there's copyright on it, that's why a moderator(?), sent me this link to see if you would be able to identify it. However, after checking Common Uploads Wizard description:f you do not own the copyright on this file, or you wish to release it under a different license, consider using the Commons Upload Wizard." It seems I'm safe to use it ? Dangermanmeetz (talk) 16:31, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion from that explanation. You don't own the copyright, so you can't use it. -- asilvering (talk) 16:37, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::than whats the utility of the Common Upload Wizard ? The description says IF you don't own copyright, use this medium. Otherwise its a pointless tool,no? Dangermanmeetz (talk) 16:56, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::I also see maps used on Wikipedia that were created within the last decade or so, are they also are copyright owned. Dangermanmeetz (talk) 16:58, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::If you can point at a specific one, we can try to answer that question. But probably the answer is going to be "that, too, is copyrighted, and should not be on Wikipedia". Unless a passing copyright-fluent editor sees them, well... -- asilvering (talk) 17:23, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Regarding your question about the Upload Wizard: its purpose is to make uploading files to Commons much easier. The classical method requires more technical knowledge. As the image at the start of the wizard notes, if you don't have permission to freely upload something then you mustn't upload it to Commons. Where did you read that "if you do not own the copyright on this file [...] consider using the Commons Upload Wizard"? Maybe you misread something (that's okay, that's why we are here at the Teahouse). Happy editing! –The Sophocrat (talk) 23:19, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Hello, @Dangermanmeetz, and welcome to the Teahouse. Copyright is complicated, and Wikimedia projects are more careful about it than many sites on the Internet.
::::Materials may be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons only if they are free to use - meaning that either they are in the public domain (either by having been explicitly released there, or by reason of their age), or they have been explicitly released under a suitable license such as CC-BY-SA.
::::A map from a book published in 1971 is probably not in the public domain (though this depends on a number of factors, including which country it was published in). It is also unlikely to have been licensed as Commons requires (and Commons would require an explicit statement of such licensing).
::::Wikipedia (not Commons) does allow non-free material to be uploaded (to Wikipedia) and used, but the uploader needs to be able to justify that the way the material is used meets all of the criteria in the non-free content criteria. I can conceive that a map of a historical kingdom might be usable in that way. However one of the criteria is that non-free materials may be used only in articles, not in drafts - so if you take that route, you should forget about the map until you have had the draft accepted as an article. Illustrations - even maps - do not make any difference to whether drafts are accepted, which depends on quality of sources, suitability of text, and notability of the subject. ColinFine (talk) 17:10, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Ok perfect! Thanks so much for the response! I'll just add it into the article after the draft is deemed acceptable. Dangermanmeetz (talk) 17:15, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:If you ask at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop, preferably with an external link to (or offer to email a copy of) the one you shouldn’t have uploaded someone will make you a new, open-licence version. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:09, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
Personal interaction between users
I suppose this is a question on protocol or etiquette or ethics(?). Is there an appropriate method for me to send a personal note to a user whom I believe I recognize? For instance, hypothetically, suppose I read
:{{u|Sickingm}}, some users (including {{u|ColinFine}}), have an "Email this user" link, about ⅔ of the way down the list of links at the left of their user page. You won't be able to find their email address from it, but you will be able to use it to send them a personal message. Maproom (talk) 21:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::^ That's a great observation. The user setting is at Special:Preferences | Email options | Allow other users to email me Just Al (talk) 22:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi, @Sickingm. I think I know who you are, and I tried to email you, but you haven't set up an email address, so I couldn't. ColinFine (talk) 22:35, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::@ColinFine It looks like @Sickingm added their email onto their user page after you posted this comment. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 23:56, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
Rowing in Scotland
I would like to request this as a article here on English Wikipedia, thanks. Rowing in Scotland BigKrow (talk) 23:49, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, {{u|BigKrow}}. We already have Scottish Rowing. Are there any "Rowing in Country X" articles that you would like to emulate? Cullen328 (talk) 01:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
Whitewashing... opposite?
Is there a term for the opposite of WP:Whitewashing? In other words, the desire by some editors to exert a Herculean effort to include a negative piece of information or something? As opposed to the Herculean effort to remove a negative piece of information. I am just curious if such a term or policy or essay exists. If not, then may it should. Iljhgtn (talk) 06:40, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi @Iljhgtn, I think that there’s no official name for the opposite of whitewashing, the behavior is still covered by core content policies like WP:NPOV, WP:UNDUE, and WP:COATRACK. Similarly, If no clear term exists, proposing an essay or coining a suitable name could be a valuable contribution to the Wikipedia community’s editorial discourse. - IMO Fade258 (talk) 06:46, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::Yes, I am familiar with those policies, and could read up more on this. I think I might need to write my first essay then. I am open to suggestions on what to call it... "blackwashing" sounds awful and inappropriate, but something that effectively means the exact opposite of "whitewashing" would be good. Iljhgtn (talk) 06:48, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Yes, You're absolutely right "blackwashing" carries problematic connotations and should be avoided. Since, you're looking for a term that clearly and appropriately conveys the opposite of "whitewashing". I would suggest a term "Smearwashing". Fade258 (talk) 07:25, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::What about simply smearing? Augnablik (talk) 07:45, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Yeah, I was just about to say that. -- asilvering (talk) 07:45, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Isn't this "opposite of whitewashing" often the purpose behind creating WP:COATRACKs? ~Anachronist (talk) 01:59, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Tarring? -- Hoary (talk) 08:10, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:smear, malign, calumniate, libel, slander, asperse, disparage, degrade... TLJ3 (talk) 10:48, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::vilify TLJ3 (talk) 10:49, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Many of the above could be good shortcuts for the essay. I'll get to work on it next week or whenever I find the time. If anyone wants to help I'd be open to having an extra hand in it. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:17, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
Large Language model use for source gathering
Hello I was wondering if it would be acceptable to use a llm to gather sources and then verify them myself and use them? Cheers OwlLemons (talk) 23:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:I have tried this. If you try it, be sure to check each and every single one of the sources you get. In my case, I observed a high incidence of hallucination, where the source didn't exist, the author didn't exist, the ISBN didn't exist, or the source referenced didn't actually contain what the AI said it did. I did get a couple of decent sources but the reliability of the AI suggestions, I found, was quite low. And the AI annoyingly provides them in a supremely confident, assured way, to sway you into taking its word.
:This was a year ago. Things may have improved.
:But definitely do not cite a source blindly if given to you by an AI. Check it out. Go to the library if you have to. You'll find that you'll be doing as much work validating the AI-generated sources as you would finding the sources yourself. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
::@OwlLemons, LLMs have improved at this since @Anachronist last experimented. They still present many of the same problems, but much less badly. One thing they absolutely struggle to do, though, is to give you appropriate sources. Sometimes, they'll give you sources - real ones! - that no one in history has ever cited before. This presents some real problems for balanced wikipedia editing, since one of our major principles with regards to article sourcing and content is WP:DUE. So, I wouldn't recommend them for source-hunting either. However, there's something they are becoming quite useful for, which you may find convenient: finding a source you're thinking of when you already know what it is. Let's say you've read something before, but you can't remember what source you read it in. You're sure you've read it - but who wrote it and where? An LLM is great for this, because it can search much more quickly and effectively than you can, and you can easily and immediately tell if it's wrong. If it gives you results to things you haven't read, you know that's not it. If it gives you something you have, just open the source, check the location it specifies, and see if that's indeed the thing you remember. -- asilvering (talk) 00:12, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Ok thanks for the information! OwlLemons (talk) 15:18, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @OwlLemons! LLMs should not be used to do much of anything - they love to hallucinate and make stuff up. You can read WP:LLM (an essay about the usage of LLMs on Wikipedia) if you want more information. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 23:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:No. Cremastra (u — c) 23:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:Yes. Why wouldn't it be acceptable? It doesn't matter where the sources come from so long as they are reliable sources. If you're really asking if you can use the text that LLM gave you along with those sources, the answer is no, that would be plagiarism. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 21:14, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::It wouldn't be plagiarism, since AI text isn't copyrighted. It would just be dumb. Cremastra (u — c) 22:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Much of AI text actually is copyrighted, because the AI often uses verbatim phrasing from copyrighted sources it trained on. This becomes quite evident if you ask an AI to write an article and then you check those sources that it didn't hallucinate. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::[citation needed] Counterfeit Purses (talk) 03:49, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Try it yourself. In my experience testing a few kinds of prompts a few months ago, I did experience this problem. -- asilvering (talk) 03:58, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Cremastra It would be plagiarism, even if it isn't copyright violation. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 03:47, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
Image removal from my WIKI page keeps being reinstated
How do I stop an image being constantly added to my Wikipedia page that I dislike? StanleyTimberlake (talk) 13:51, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:It might help if you provided a free image that you do like. That doesn't necessarily prevent someone from trying to use the other image, but it would give an alternative to those who want to include images on every bio. --Onorem (talk) 14:00, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{ping|StanleyTimberlake}} you can't remove the picture simply because you do not like it. I recommend that you upload a better image instead, but please note that if it is a taken by someone else then we need permission from the photographer. See Wikipedia:A picture of you. MKFI (talk) 14:03, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Yep, see Wikipedia:Ownership of content. GoldRomean (talk) 15:00, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{u|StanleyTimberlake}} Something else you can do is take a selfie with your phone and upload it so it can be added to the article about you. 331dot (talk) 14:21, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::{{u|StanleyTimberlake}}, I assume that the page you a referring to is Tracy Wiles, as you refer to this as "my" page. If so, keep in mind that this is not "your" page. You do not own it, and you have no control over what other editors might add or take away from it. This is something that everyone who is the subject of a Wikipedia article should keep in mind. Mike Marchmont (talk) 14:39, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:@StanleyTimberlake You might find the info at Wikipedia:A picture of you helpful. Like stated above, this is Wikipedia's article about Tracy Wiles, not your article. A picture of the article subject is generally considered a good thing around here, and my personal opinion is that that picture is better than no picture. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:44, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::Alternatively, simply update Tracy's website at [https://www.tracywiles.com/portraits-and-headshots this URL] to indicate that the photographer Ruth Crafer has licensed one or more of her images as CC BY SA 4.0 and we can copy it/them over to Wikimedia Commons. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:52, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Don't {{Tq|1="simply update Tracy's website ... to indicate that the photographer Ruth Crafer has licensed one or more of her images as CC BY SA 4.0 "}} unless the photographer has understood what that means and agreed to it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Raboe001, ping to you since we're talking about your picture. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:12, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:Noting alternatives at Category:Tracy Wiles. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:52, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
Film and Television
Why don't articles related to this use a hyphen when there are two genres, like comedy horror, instead of comedy-horror with a hyphen? — ArćRèv • talk 13:31, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:Who can say? Feel free to boldly edit and make such a change; then start a discussion if other editors disagree. See also MOS:Hyphen. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{re|Pigsonthewing}} There are no editors who disagreed — I'm just asking why, in almost all film and television articles on Wikipedia, the first sentence lists multiple genres without hyphens. For example, it says "Blank is an American comedy horror film" instead of "comedy-horror." Is this part of Wikipedia's standard guidelines? I'm just a bit confused. I looked at the Manual of Style (MOS), particularly the hyphens section, but it's quite long, and I couldn’t find a clear reason why genres aren’t hyphenated. — ArćRèv • talk 12:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
Is the 'Researcher' user right still active?
Hey! Just wondering, are there any active users with the "Researcher" user rights right now? I checked the stats page, but it doesn’t seem to show any recent updates. Is that user right still in use or has it kind of faded out? Just curious, thanks! 👑 Jesus isGreat7 👑 | 📜 Royal Talk 08:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:@JesusisGreat7, I'm not a Teahouse host but I can still answer this for you. This description of the "researcher" user right states that there are 0 users with this user right. This probably mean that the role is not used by anybody right now. Of course, if the role was faded out, the role would be listed at the "Former levels" section instead, so assuming the page is up-to-date, the role has not faded out yet. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 11:27, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::Its still listed at Special:ListGroupRights#researcher, so as far as the software is concerned, the right still exists. Given the assigned permissions I suspect it was kept around for future use even if it was created for a specific project. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:As a run-of-the mill administrator, there is a list of 15 rights I can change in user accounts, and 14 rights are grayed out that I cannot change, including obscure rights like importer, researcher, founder, etc.
:WP:RESEARCHER says a researcher can "perform a title search for deleted pages, view deleted history entries, and view deleted contents." Honestly, that isn't exactly what I thought "researcher" would mean. Any administrator can already do those things, and there are hundreds of us. I imagine the right was deemed redundant with administrator rights and it hasn't been necessary to grant those abilities to non-administrators. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:40, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::Got it, thanks y’all! Jesus isGreat7 ☾⋆ | Ping Me 16:33, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
Question about the naming and scope of “Manyo Botanical Garden” articles in Japan
Hello, and thank you in advance.
I’m still new to editing Wikipedia, and I’m trying to understand how article titles and structure should work when there are multiple places with similar names.
I recently came across two articles that seem to refer to the same botanical garden in Nara:
However, “Manyo Botanical Garden, Nara” does not exist as a real or official name.
The actual name of the garden is Kasuga Taisha Manyo Botanical Garden, located within the grounds of Kasuga Taisha Shrine in Nara.
In Japanese, the garden uses the classical character “萬” instead of the modern “万”.
There are also other botanical gardens in Japan with similar names, such as:
- Ichikawa Manyo Botanical Garden
- Kokubunji Manyo Botanical Garden
- Dazaifu Manyo Botanical Garden
Each of these is a separate facility in a different city, with its own background and features.
Given this, I’m unsure whether it’s appropriate to have both a general article titled “Manyo Botanical Garden” and another titled “Manyo Botanical Garden, Nara,” especially when the latter is not the correct name.
Since I’m still learning, I don’t feel confident making structural changes myself,
but I’d really appreciate any thoughts or guidance from more experienced editors on how this might best be handled.
Thank you again. CamelliaNote (talk) 06:42, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:However "real name" can reasonably be interpreted, CamelliaNote, I think that "Manyo Botanical Garden" and 萬葉植物園 are "real names". After all, like them or not, they're what Google Maps shows. (No, I certainly do not claim that Google Maps is infallible.) I think that [https://www.kasugataisha.or.jp/manyou-s/ www.kasugataisha.or.jp/manyou-s/] is what could be called the official web page; it says "Manyou Botanical Garden" and 春日大社 [in a small font] 萬葉植物園 [in a large font]: putting aside the romanization of 萬葉 for a moment, I think this can more plausibly be interpreted as "Manyo Botanical Garden" (as a part of, or run by/for, Kasuga Taisha) than as "Kasuga Taisha Manyo Botanical Garden". The title "Manyo Botanical Garden, Nara" should be interpreted not as "The garden named 'Manyo Botanical Garden, Nara'" but instead "The garden named 'Manyo Botanical Garden' that's in Nara" -- compare the article title Fuchū, Tokyo: nobody claims that there's a suburb named "Fuchū, Tokyo"; instead, there's one named "Fuchū" that's in Tokyo and shouldn't be confused with the other one (in Hiroshima). (And romanization/spelling: en:Wikipedia normally uses Hepburn romanization, according to which 萬葉 is "Man'yō"; however, this may clash with the rule of using the most widely used name, correct or otherwise.) HTH -- Hoary (talk) 07:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you very much for your detailed and kind reply.
::Your explanation comparing the title “Manyo Botanical Garden, Nara” with “Fuchū, Tokyo” was very helpful and cleared up my misunderstanding.
::I now understand that “Nara” in the title is not part of the official name, but rather a geographical disambiguation, and I appreciate your insights about how it appears on Google Maps and the official website.
::I’m still learning how to edit Wikipedia properly, so your guidance means a lot.
::Thank you again for your thoughtful support. CamelliaNote (talk) 07:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Thank you for the kind words, CamelliaNote, but my support was perhaps insufficiently thoughtful. I didn't look at the other article you linked to, which I now look at and see is titled Man'yō botanical garden, a title that arguably clashes with the titles of the articles on man'yō gardens to which it links. This all adds up to ... a bit of a mess. No solution I can immediately think of is simple and unlikely to get some opposition. Perhaps the best thing for you to do is keep quiet about the matter while you accustom yourself to en:Wikipedia and its sometimes odd titling, and when you have an idea that you're pretty confident is good, put it forward on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan. -- Hoary (talk) 08:26, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Thank you very much for your kind and thoughtful reply.
::::I’m still very new to editing Wikipedia, and I was actually feeling a bit discouraged yesterday after realizing that I had made some mistakes in an earlier edit.
::::This question about the botanical garden came to mind while I was reflecting, and I decided to post it here—though I now feel that it may have been too early for me to raise such issues. Still, I truly appreciate your response and your insights.
::::Thank you again for taking the time. CamelliaNote (talk) 08:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::@CamelliaNote You can probably add a redirect to this article as an alternative name (or longer name). Just make sure that the name is plausible and exists. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 16:36, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::{{u|Hoary}}, it doesn't strike me as a mess. Wikipedia has an article Art gallery, and many articles on individual art galleries. The same can work for Manyo Botanical Garden, it's not a problem having both the articles that {{u|CamelliaNote}} mentions. Maproom (talk) 10:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Maproom, your first sentence aside, I warmly agree. Whether you care to write it 萬葉 or 万葉, the word/name is (according to Hepburn) pronounced man'yō (corresponding to マンヨウ). Both the apostrophe and the macron are commonly dropped for one reason or another, resulting in manyo (which, taken literally, corresponds to マニョ). マニョ is not pronounced like マンヨウ. So, man'yō or manyo? Or, as now, two different forms within the same article? -- Hoary (talk) 11:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Fair Use
Hi! How can I upload the cover art of a song under Fair Use? I’m not sure what the correct process is. Regards, Jet Pilot 18:42, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:See WP:FAIRUSE. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:06, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello! Give me a moment to write an introduction to that fair use document the other editor linked to. The Sophocrat (talk) 19:07, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello {{user link|Jet Pilot}} :). The process is detailed on Wikipedia:Non-free content. Basically it goes as follows:
:# Determine if the file should be uploaded. In order to be uploaded, it must:
:## Comply with Wikipedia's fair use policy. In summary this means there must be no free equivalent, it must respect the commercial opportunities of the copyright owner, it must be useful for an article, and it must be uploaded to Wikipedia (rather than to Commons, which is for free media). I would think all of these are usually met for notable song covers but you should check it for each image.
:# Upload the photo (of low resolution to comply with fair use). You can do that at Wikipedia:File upload wizard. Make sure to state the fair use rationale.
:# Use it in an article. The non-free content guideline I linked to states "Cover art: Cover art from various items, for visual identification {{em|only in the context}} of critical commentary {{em|of that item}} (not for identification {{em|without}} critical commentary)."
:Check out the policy I linked to for details. See :File:JColeTheComeUp.jpg for an example of a successful upload (note in particular the fair use rationale). Feel free to ask any other questions you may have. Thank you for your contributions, and have a nice day! The Sophocrat (talk) 19:14, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you so much for the detailed explanation, The Sophocrat! I really appreciate you taking the time to walk me through the process. I’ve uploaded the file [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:March_to_the_Sea_-_Baroness.webp&oldid=1291211975 here]. Jet Pilot 19:53, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Great! I'm glad you found the explanation useful. The Sophocrat (talk) 19:55, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
Guideline on writing article about celebrities
What is the guide when writing about a celebrity, can someone here help me draft one Born A Geek (talk) 23:46, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Born A Geek, the guideline for people can be found at WP:BIO. I would strongly recommend that you gather all/most of the sources about that person before writing the draft, to avoid writing it backwards. There is a comprehensive guide at Your first article. Good luck! Best, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 00:39, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:Born A Geek, here's an example of what not to write: {{Olive|[Name of celeb]'s style is characterized by authenticity, humor, and relatability, appealing to both local and international audiences. His content blends entertainment with education, often highlighting cultural pride and social issues.}} Why should the reader believe this? Which source, independent of the celeb, says (i) that the celeb's style is characterized by this or that, or (ii) what the celeb's content blends, or (iii) what it highlights? (The celeb's Twitter/"X" account is a particularly poor source.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:28, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{reply|Born A Geek}} See also WP:BACKWARD and write your drafts forward instead. That is, find all of your reliable sources first, before you write a single word! These sources must be independent of the subject and provide significant coverage as explained succinctly in WP:Golden Rule. Only then should you start writing an article based on what those sources say, not based on what you know or what the subject says about himself or herself. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:34, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::@Born A Geek I've left you an expanded welcome template with a lot of links on your talk page. That should get you started. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:42, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
Can i add an image i took
I'm new. This is for a sandbox. EvanSimms (talk) 15:38, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{ping|EvanSimms}} Assuming you're willing to release it under a Creative Commons licence (0, By, or By-SA), you can upload it to Commons. However, an image will not help a draft; reviewers are looking at your text and sources and will ignore images. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:42, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::But how do i get it onto Wikipedia EvanSimms (talk) 15:55, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Hello, @EvanSimms, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wherever possible, images should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, so that all Wikimedia projects can use them.
:::Provided the image meets Commons' requirements for licensing (as Jeske said), and meets also Commons' COM:Project scope, you can upload it to Commons using the upload wizard. Once an image is on Commons, you can add it to a Wikipedia article or other page - I believe that at the end of uploading, the wizard will give you the magic string you would add to the page. ColinFine (talk) 16:56, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::{{u|EvanSimms}}. Uploading photos that you have taken is relatively easy, but there are limitations. If the thing you are photographing is itself copyrighted, then the copyright restriction will also restrict your photo. So, you need to be careful about modern paintings and sculpture, movie posters, book covers, commercially packaged products and so on. On the other hand, common landscape photos, photos of utilitarian objects and plants and animals and photos of celebrities appearing in public are fine. Cullen328 (talk) 07:13, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
Potential conflict of interest
If someone adds themselves to a list (see List of Australian street artists), is it a conflict of interest that should be reverted? Sushidude21! (talk) 07:47, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Sushidude21! Not necessarily. It can be reverted if it conflicts with WP:LISTPEOPLE. Shantavira|feed me 10:18, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:I have removed that entry and two others which have no article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:I've removed two more entries. -- Hoary (talk) 12:29, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
Frizzle (chicken breed)
They are not using correct pictures
this is their actual look
https://poultrykeeper.com/chicken-breeds/poland-chickens/
https://backyardpoultry.iamcountryside.com/chickens-101/frizzle-chickens-unusual-eye-candy-in-a-flock/ Fruit Orchard (talk) 07:32, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:Is any of these any good, Fruit Orchard? -- Hoary (talk) 08:29, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::Social media says the way Frizzle chicken looks like, but in same article links to Polish chicken which is described as Frizzle chicken online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fruit Orchard (talk • contribs) 11:41, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:We can't decide such matters on the Teahouse; please start a discussion on the article talk page, and post a link to that discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Agriculture. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:While, as Andy notes, Teahouse can't really settle these things, both the sites you link to actively assert their rights to the copyrights of their photos, and do not release these materials under a Wikipedia-compliant license, which must allow irrevocable use of the photographs by any party, with attribution, for any reason whatsoever. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 13:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::I don't see anywhere where the OP was asking us to use images from those pages; they merely cited them as evidence to support their comment. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Thanks, I mistakenly thought that was the implication. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 15:09, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
When should you state a subject is "one of the best X of all time"?
I was looking over the Apollo 13 (film) article when I saw the claim in the lead that it was "considered to be among the best films of all time", and then cited "The New York Times Guide to the Best 1,000 Movies Ever Made", published in 2004. I was unsure about how to take this claim, looking at user aggregate websites like IMDb or [https://letterboxd.com/film/apollo-13/ Letterboxd] the average rating is good, but not in the top 1000 of either website (although I'm aware we're not supposed to take user websites like this as sources, this is just to get a ground feeling). Apollo 13 didn't show up on any of the list of the best films of just the decade that I looked up. [https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-lists/the-100-greatest-movies-of-the-nineties-195513/][https://www.indiewire.com/gallery/best-90s-movies/][https://www.indiewire.com/gallery/best-movies-90s-stars-lists/2021-toronto-international-film-festival-the-wheel-photo-call/][https://www.worldofreel.com/blog/2020/5/1990s][https://www.bfi.org.uk/lists/90-great-films-1990s] (I couldn't find a list that included it on the first page of google). Examples of very acclaimed films that do not have the "greatest films of all time" label in the lead include High and Low (1963 film), Sátántangó, City of God (2002 film) and Before Sunrise, which seem to have to have all gained a higher level of critical acclaim than Apollo 13. What's the best way to determine whether a movie (or any work more generally) should have this label? ALittleClass (talk) 05:28, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:ALittleClass, how about changing that to "It is listed in The New York Times Guide to the Best 1,000 Movies Ever Made (2004)"? (I'm assuming that it is so listed. I haven't checked.) Compare Citizen Kane, the article about which tells us that it "is frequently cited as the greatest film ever made." This is accompanied by a note citing 16 or so such citings, so OK -- uh, no, scrub that; no, it isn't OK, as every one of the citings is British (as if Brits had a world monopoly on taste!) and only from an extraordinarily limited range of British sources at that. -- Hoary (talk) 06:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:@ALittleClass There is an essay that gives some advice about this at WP:GREATEST. My opinion is that all records can be broken and hence are only valid at the time they were made, if ever. Hence an encyclopedia like Wikipedia should always explicitly state the source and date for the claim. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:46, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
How to Create Interactive & Custom Boundary Maps on Wikimedia/Wikipedia
Hi Teahouse,
I'm fairly new to editing on Wikipedia and wanted to ask for some help regarding maps.
I’m interested in learning how to:
Create interactive maps on Wikipedia/Wikimedia (like those where you can click on regions or hover for info).
Add or edit boundary maps for specific areas (like districts, cities, custom zones).
Possibly upload and use my own custom boundary maps if the existing ones don't work for what I need.
I’ve seen some amazing interactive maps on various pages and would love to understand the process. I’m especially curious about which tools/templates I should use, and how to format/upload GeoJSON or any other required files properly.
If there are any beginner-friendly tutorials or sandbox examples I can check out, I’d really appreciate it!
Thanks a lot for your time and help!
Warm regards, Wikiuser829 (talk) 15:44, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Wikiuser829 There is a lot of information you may find helpful at WP:GRAPHLAB. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:49, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
Backlog for p-mover request
There is a backlog currently here. Would any admin mind stepping in and reviewing some of these? Iljhgtn (talk) 19:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Iljhgtn, the place to post about backlogs is WP:AN. But don't post about this one there - this isn't much of a backlog at all. -- asilvering (talk) 19:57, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::Ok, thanks asilvering. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:53, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
Weird arrows
Sometimes in the visual editor there are arrows pointing down and left replacing spaces. There is also this: " ", which you can only see in editor. I want to know what these are. If you need an example of these "arrows" see TRANSP.
Pro-anti-air (talk) 05:30, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Pro-anti-air: {{welcometea}} You are most likely referring to carriage return symbols, which designate that there has been a line break there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:33, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{u|Pro-anti-air}}, your "this" is a non-breaking space. Maproom (talk) 07:41, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:By interesting coincidence, @Pro-anti-air, I asked the same question at the Help Desk just a few weeks ago ("Arrow symbol mystery," Archive 67) and received the same reply.
:What I'd really like to understand is why the symbol shows up in Visual editor only some of the time, not every time there would be a carriage return (line break) in the markup. Augnablik (talk) 15:51, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::In my experience it shows up when there is a single carriage return in the source code, which does not create a line break in the formatted text. If it shows up only sometimes when that happens, I have no idea - but that's how I've triggered it myself. -- asilvering (talk) 18:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
i have a date format proposal
is it possible to have the date format based on device settings?
it is possible like on yume.wiki,but i wonder if its possible here? Metro8102 (talk) 21:33, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @Metro8102, and welcome to the Teahouse. To do this, I think you would have to create multiple accounts (which I think would be permitted for this kind of purpose - see WP:GOODSOCK) and set the date format in the preferences of each account. ColinFine (talk) 21:44, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
New article help
Hi all. I've just published a new page on Touch-Starvation. It is oddly linked because I created it as a separate article due to some problems I encountered attempting to change it to a new page from the existing sub-link on the Haptic communication page. If someone could help with redirecting those to the new page it would be appreciated
All my best,
CSGinger14 (talk) 22:43, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:@CSGinger14, I'm afraid I don't quite know what you mean by oddly linked. It seems to be working for me, maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're asking? PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 22:54, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::Hi, sorry, I'm trying to figure it out on my own but I'm having difficulties. There's a redirect code somewhere in the Haptic communication article which is preventing me from changing the name of the article from Touch-starvation to Touch starvation (no -). It doesn't necessarily have to be changed, but it's about a paragraph in length vs the full page article I just created from it. I'd assumed it would be an easy fix, the problem is that there isn't actually a redirect code for "skin hunger" anywhere in the haptic communication article, despite the fact that it reports there is when I try to create a redirect of my own on the page. Any help would be appreciated, I may figure it out before then but regardless thank you.
::Best, CSGinger14 (talk) 22:58, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Aah, I think I understand now. The page you speak of is this here (sorry for the external link, it just takes you to the non-redirected version of the page). You can find info on merging your existing article with this redirect at WP:MERGE. I hope this answers your question! PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 23:01, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Minor addendum since clicking my link does not work: Typing in "Touch starvation" does indeed redirect to the Haptic communication article, but scrolling back up to the top should say "Redirected from Touch starvation" in parentheses. Clicking on that touch starvation link takes you to the redirect. My bad. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 23:02, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::::@PhoenixCaelestis Hi Phoenix, so I had actually figured it out. This is going to sound like a bit of a weird request, but I'd appreciate some help in changing the name to simply 'Touch starvation' without moving it to another page. It celebrates my 500th edit on the website, and, though I'm aware that it skirts the edge of WP:OWN guidelines, I'd really appreciate being able to go back to the page's first edit as a memento, instead of going through edits of a previous version of the page which I didn't participate in the creation of nor read in advance. In no way am I attempting to nor do I want to assert any control, ownership, or responsibility for the page, simply to have it as a marker/memory. Reasonably the page that's been saved (under "skin hunger," as opposed to "touch starvation") is saved for record-keeping purposes that don't have to do with the page I created. I'd argue that it would make it more difficult for administrators to find those records independently, given that its tied more to its merger with the haptic communication page than the creation of my page, which it simply serves as a redirect for. If merging the "touch starvation" page into the "touch-starvation" page would suffice (as opposed to vice versa), that's fine as well.
::::In plain (please read above for context), I'm just asking someone to delete or cache the page for "Touch starvation" (case sensitive) as opposed to merging the article I created with it, as it would remove my edit as the creation of the page, which I don't see as being practically any more useful for record keeping, given that its history consists of four edits, 1 of which created the page as a redirect to 'Skin hunger' (which will be stored anyway, as the page hasn't been deleted), one of which was a bot, and two of which were me. It's the only time I plan to make such a request, partly as its the only time I suspect it would be applicable. I would not be asking if I didn't have a god awful week, at the end of which I was supposed to graduate (but will not be, all my best to the fifth-year seniors of the world), and I really just need a win to be honest. I'm not sure what guidelines are, but if you'd be willing to work within the grey lines I'd appreciate it.
::::All my best,
::::CSGinger14 (talk) 23:37, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::I believe you need to first take the redirect to redirects for discussion. Then, if the redirect is deleted, you should be able to move your page to the one that was just deleted. Moving your page preserves the page's history; it is not deleted. Hope this finally solves your dilemma. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 23:49, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::@CSGinger14 This is a common problem, and there's no need to go to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. The proper venue is WP:Requested moves/Technical requests, where you can ask that an administrator delete the redirect and replace it with your article. As PhoenixCaelestis said, this will preserve the page history. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:43, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
Closer..
This is now the second time a major RfC was archived without being closed. Would anyone who has the ability to be able to go through and properly [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AReliable_sources%2FNoticeboard&oldid=prev&diff=1290878626 close this]? Iljhgtn (talk) 17:50, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Iljhgtn, if you need a formal close on it, post it at WP:RFCC. You can also add the do-not-archive tag to it. -- asilvering (talk) 19:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::I did not know about this tag. Would have been useful. It has already been archived for now though and I brought it back from the archive once.. might be overkill to do so a second time. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:53, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Yes, and if you post it at RFCC people there are used to fishing old RfCs out of the archives, so that's not a big deal anyway. -- asilvering (talk) 18:19, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Someone had mentioned it might already be there, how can I check? Iljhgtn (talk) 18:35, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::CTRL+F. And yes, it is: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Closure_requests#Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#RFC:_Euro-Mediterranean_Human_Rights_Monitor]. -- asilvering (talk) 18:45, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Seems like its been there for a moment then.. I commented on the feed. Looks like we just wait now? Iljhgtn (talk) 18:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Yep. Sometimes for quite a long time, alas. -- asilvering (talk) 05:31, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
Need for links on the page, Boston Female Liberation
The page I created for Boston Female Liberation has been designated an "orphan." I need help linking it to the page, The Second Wave, a magazine of the new feminism.
Thank you. Liberationfemale (talk) 14:21, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Liberationfemale I've added it for you in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Second_Wave:_A_Magazine_of_The_New_Feminism&diff=prev&oldid=1291173015 this] edit. Shantavira|feed me 14:56, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:I read the article "Boston Female Liberation". In references , a book by "Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz" is mentionned.
:You can use "Wikidata" to look for articles available on any language version of "Wikipedia" about authors mentionned and books they wrote.
:Sometime , an article on "Wikipedia" isn't linked to an item on "Wikidata" and therefore you can't find it with "Wikidata".
:This advice above can help you to add links yourself in the article "Boston Female Liberation" and maybe find articles mentionning this organisation.
:The object of your request is to get links pointing to the article about this organisation.
:Why not create links in the article "Boston Female Liberation" and create links in others articles if this organisation is mentionned ?
:If you find an article on another version than "Wikipedia in English".
:Read "Help:Interwiki linking". Anatole-berthe (talk) 15:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
How to be welcomed here
Hello greeting to editors. I’m really new to contributions. I want a tutorial. How do these editors welcome me as a newcomer? Would there be a homepage? SeekHousing1900 (talk) 05:55, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:Welcome to en:Wikipedia, SeekHousing1900. You'll find tutorials linked to from Help:Contents. -- Hoary (talk) 05:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you. I need more on how a website works. SeekHousing1900 (talk) 13:34, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure Is this what you are looking for @SeekHousing1900? Knitsey (talk) 13:37, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::::@Knitsey Yes it is. SeekHousing1900 (talk) 17:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Great! Have a play with it and see how you get on. Good luck, Knitsey (talk) 17:38, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::@Knitsey After completing The Wikipedia Adventure, does it automatically create pages? SeekHousing1900 (talk) 22:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::I'm not sure what you mean? Do you mean articles? Knitsey (talk) 23:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::@Knitsey Well, I completed some of the tasks in TWA, and it automatically places messages on my talk page and subpages on my userspace. It does not mean main space articles. What software does TWA use? SeekHousing1900 (talk) 01:55, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:Your home page is at Special:Homepage; Wikipedia has a "home" page at Main Page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:26, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::@Pigsonthewing Can the homepage need some improvements? If you disagree, I am ok with this. SeekHousing1900 (talk) 23:01, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@SeekHousing1900 Special:homepage is a Wikipedia growth team feature. There's lots of information at that link and it has a talk page where you can ask questions or suggest improvements. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::::@Michael D. Turnbull I agree, thanks for the advice on growth team features. SeekHousing1900 (talk) 15:49, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
Split Article Request
i want to request a split of Tibetan Muslims from Islam in Tibet, because Now mass migration of chinese muslims done by CCP.
But Now know how to request it Mr.work-shy (talk) 18:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:See Wikipedia:Splitting, then follow the guidance at Wikipedia:Proposed article splits. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:06, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
Help.
{{atop|1=Answered on the Help Desk. See also WP:FORUMSHOPPING. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:21, 19 May 2025 (UTC) }}
I wrote an article on Predicativism, philosophical topic, after a lot of research and mental fatigue, I wrote an article in most jargon way possible in my knowledge. I did everything to cite every single source and even edited to meet every WK criteria. The page about the predicativism, opposite of Impredicative and I have used every thing possible to make it right.
An editor, with what they say "I am 1000 year old editor and I have voldemort stick of death" deleted the 18000 characters article and did not even bother me to at least ask where i can fix or improve it. Yeah yeah, I that got you have experience of how to maintain this platform safe but WK is not your personal property (thanks to CC license) nor you are supposed to have experience on how to write a deep and good article on maths and philosophy which I have. Because the person @Onel5969, (I am not targeting anyone) I dont think have even knowledge on subject of precativism or he even knows what is it.
I dont know how to act, I am already confused and find few times to use my curiosity of life to put it in words. I want to just get help if I can. Please I need somebody who is not mixed up because most of "admins" are family type so even some of them act injustice their family member will help him.
Lets say I am wrong in my defense please do not cancel me, I am just an editor. Please use your authority in a way that a serious editor respect not turn against you.
P.S. I am sorry if i sound noisy, the moment i am writing it i am feeling very sleepy (I havent slept for two days). Wh67890 (talk) 15:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:See replies at WP:Help_desk#Mentally fatigued. Please only ask at one venue. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:13, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{Tq|1="See replies"}} Yes replies are that was not for my help. Okay now this is frustrating. I came here because I got no help there. I am not taking this as joy typing everywhere. I wrote that article using my time, I just want an answer why it was removed, can it be reverted and how can I stop it from happening.
::Also are you checking where I gave question or not? Wh67890 (talk) 15:18, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::I have now given you an extensive reply at the Help Desk, though I suspect that it will not be the reply that you want. ColinFine (talk) 15:42, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Yes because your reply is what I see usually from 100 editors, which is both frustrating and feels automatic script written for admins. Wh67890 (talk) 15:59, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::I am not an admin, and I did not use a script (though I did use a template
:::::Considering you're frustrated by editors answering your question, it doesn't really seem like you're actually looking for help. You're looking for justification. The advice given to you is correct, so you should take it. Tarlby (t) (c) 17:50, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
{{abot}}
{{Clear}}
Greets, thx, see you
Thank you for the invite. I must admit I was a bit discouraged by the first attempts I was following, so it is no coincidence that I take a brake. Basically, I did not understand the connection between rejections and Wikipedia's rules and guidelines that I spent ages studying. Also, the editors (or whatever they are called) demands seemed mutually exclusive to me. Finally, the stuff I have been involved in is not limited by languages. Hence, it is usually not very present in the secondary sources Wikipedia intents to replicate. I know zero about pop-stars, tv-shows etc. ;-) Some day, I will return. I am excited to see if Wikipedia is going to survive the AI-development. I hope so, because curated content is more important than ever before. 146.255.74.5 (talk) 11:14, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Yes, thank you so much for your quick reply! Could I send you my draft? If it's convenient for you, I would really appreciate it if you could take a look and help me with a few issues. Thank you again! Rachel Zenggggg (talk) 11:24, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
new bibliography added badly
I have tried to add a bibliography to the Thomas Hawksley page, but botched the formatting... Any help? James Douet (talk) 17:07, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:@James Douet Fixed, I hope, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Hawksley&diff=1291665263&oldid=1291660588 in this edit]. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:20, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::Amazing, thanks very much! 62.83.98.92 (talk) 17:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Editor reluctant to wait for a consensus
{{atop|1= Both editors need to follow WP:DR, or blocks will surely follow. This is not a further arena for you to continue your WP:BATTLEGROUND behaviour. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:26, 22 May 2025 (UTC)}}
I am currently in the middle of a content dispute, and this editor - {{ping|Arc Rev}}, said they aren't willing to wait for a consensus because they didn't ask for a consensus and stating they have their own "guideline".[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AArc_Rev&diff=1291655855&oldid=1291655318] I find the statement from the editor, concerning. Is there anything that can be done with this behavior. The editor was already warned for edit warring today, before they made that comment. Hotwiki (talk) 16:21, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Please follow the process at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:45, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::I already had a discussion with that editor, but he chose to not agree, so I do not have control over that editor's choice, so I said I will never seek a consensus. I never said I am not willing. Why? I already refrain from editing the article we are referring to. And also, I said, "I have my guidelines." That's not literally mine; I have guidelines to present, that is what I meant, and the editor answered by saying, Just ignore it. It's just a simple edit I made; why does he need to revert? Are all guidelines for Wikipedia made by a consensus? I provided it to his talk page. That means there is already a consensus for this; he only chose not to comply and warned me instead. — ArćRèv • talk 16:49, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Arc Rev and @Hotwiki: Consensus is not something you "wait for": it is something that all parties need to work towards. Anybody who says (or who acts as if they are saying) "I am right and I won't budge" is not working towards consensus. (I have picked up vibes of that position, but I have not looked to see who they are coming from, or looked at the issue on which you are disagreeing). Please read WP:DR again, and follow it. ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::::I suggested to ArcRev to wait for someone to chime in, since me/ArcRev couldn't see eye to eye. Thats when Arc Rev said, they weren't going to wait for a consensus and that they have their own "guideline". I would try to bring this up to DR when I get some free time. The article should also get increase in daily clicks, when the TV series airs next month, so who knows if another editor, chimes into the dispute. Hotwiki (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
{{abot}}
{{Clear}}
Knowledge on Wikipedia
How much knowledge is there on Wikipedia? Does Wikipedia have the same amount of knowledge as with paper encyclopedias? How do you gain experience? Knowledge542 (talk) 20:28, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @Knowledge542, welcome to the teahouse! Wikipedia probably has more knowledge in it then any other encyclopedia ever. That's one of the benefits of being an online encyclopedia - it all gets updated and expanded in real time! As per your second question, simply edit! If you're unsure what you can do, I'd suggest checking out the task center for a good list of things you can try out. From there, you can do all sorts of stuff - copyedit, source, categorize, and maybe even write an article once you feel you're ready! PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 20:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::@PhoenixCaelestis How could Wikipedia have more knowledge than any other encyclopedia? Knowledge542 (talk) 21:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Knowledge542, by volume alone? The World Book Encyclopedia claims to have over 17,000 articles in the 2025 set. Wikipedia has over 6 million. When I was a kid, we had two different full sets Funk & Wagnalls and the World Book, and a third set that was written for an audience of children learners. I read them. A lot. I tried to read cover-to-cover. For World Book, the jump references were too enticing, and I'd end up pulling out a different volume and reading that article. The articles were well edited. But, there were not the many thousands of contributors that Wikipedia has. And, there are only so many pages available. Some encyclopediae are more concise based on subject, or just to keep the page count low. Wikipedia does not have that physical limit. It does not have the same level of editorial oversight. Some articles are sparse or badly written. But they exist, or can be made to exist fairly quickly. This is not the case with an encyclopedia that is frozen in time. Even with the annual yearbook updates, the World Book became stale. Countries changed. Historical and scientific assumptions were disproved. We went from atoms being invisible to printing a photograph of an atom...a huge change in perception, and expensive addendum to a printed encyclopedia.
:::Have you read much of a conventional encyclopedia set? What has your experience been? Just Al (talk) 22:27, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::::@Just Al @PhoenixCaelestis Yes I read a convention encyclopedia set and they look spectacular to me. I wish Wikipedia would be in print. What is the reason on lack of editorial oversight? Knowledge542 (talk) 00:42, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::My experience has been fine to me. Knowledge542 (talk) 00:43, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Primarily, Wikipedia is maintained by volunteers in their own time. Published paper encyclopediae have paid writers, editors, proofreaders, fact-checkers, and other support staff to keep the business running. They also have deadlines. In publishing, there are drop-dead dates that mean an article is pulled and replaced if it is not deemed acceptable when the layouts are locked in before the printing process begins. An article must be polished, or it is scrubbed for another date (or not at all). That pressure will limit the count of articles, but also improve the quality of the few that remain. At Wikipedia, there are no deadlines. And drafts are acceptable to publish because it allows other editors to participate or provide advice. It's always a work-in-progress. Just Al (talk) 17:49, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::@Just Al However, are World Book encyclopedias still relevant today, despite being published annually? Knowledge542 (talk) 04:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::I’m still waiting for responses. Knowledge542 (talk) 09:01, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::I'm not sure what information you're looking for. Printed encyclopediae have the goal of making money via library sales and monthly subscriptions from consumers. Wikipedia is not that. Both are sources of information. Only one is able to be cited as a sourth of information. One is curated to a higher degree to meet deadlines, editorial expectations, and production limitations. Only you can answer if they are relevant for you. Just Al (talk) 18:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::@Just Al I think that print encyclopedias are still relevant to me, despite being in the age of Information Technology world. The digital encyclopedia really did outnumber print though. Knowledge542 (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:Wikipedia has more knowledge than any other encyclopedia because it is created and updated by millions of people around the world. Unlike traditional encyclopedias written by a small group of experts, Wikipedia allows anyone to contribute, which means it can cover a much wider range of topics. It is constantly updated, available in many languages, and free to access, making it one of the most comprehensive and up-to-date sources of information globally. Sasolely (talk) 18:03, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:You gain experience by doing things repeatedly, learning from mistakes, and reflecting on what works and what doesn’t. Whether it’s studying, working, practicing a skill, or interacting with others, each time you take action, you build knowledge and confidence. Over time, these experiences help you improve, make better decisions, and handle challenges more effectively. In short: you gain experience by trying, failing, learning, and trying again. Sasolely (talk) 18:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Replacing a dead link with an archived version
I've found an article with a link to a dead site (specifically citation six on Joseph Fletcher). I've found an archived version at [https://web.archive.org/web/20141206172212/http://www.riverbendds.org/index.htm?page=fletcher.html], how would I go about replacing the citation? Vəssel [talk to mə] 10:59, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Vəssel Welcome to the Teahouse. There is general advice at WP:LINKROT. If you run into problems with creating the new citations after reading the instructions, just ask back here for more advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:36, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::@Vəssel For better or worse, with the help of your providing the archive link, I have fixed this.
::Presumably there are bots that go around repairing what fraction of the links they can, with whatever limited ability they have. It's considerably easier when someone has provided a good archive link, but then again, if a good archive link is readily available, then (I wa under the impression that) the bots should be fixing them.
::Properly fixing an archive link (assuming the bots will never catch up) is at least one of the better unmitigated improvements you can make to Wikipedia, and you can be sure there will be ample broken links to work on. The challenge often is actually to find a working archive link. You often need a bag of tricks to locate good archive links, and to my knowledge, there is no place where it's written down, and often what you need to know is not obviously documented. So you can spend a fair amount of time in some cases and pat your self on the back when you've succeeded with a particularly challenging case. Fabrickator (talk) 12:34, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Oh, huh - with this one I just plugged it into the wayback machine and it already had an archive. Maybe I was lucky. Vəssel [talk to mə] 13:14, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
::::@Vəssel Thank goodness it already had an archive, because the link was broken as of December 2023, and once the link is broken, it's too late to create the archive. But that means the link has been broken for over a year, why had the bots not fixed it in that period of time?
::::I would suggest that if Wikipedia doesn't have the resources to keep links working, then the project is on a doomed mission. It take a lot of volunteer resources to make WP what it is, the size of WP constantly grows, but if links break and don't automatically get fixed (even when the archive is readily available), then the project is on a downward trend that will continue to get worse. Fabrickator (talk) 14:44, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Have a look at User:InternetArchiveBot, a bot that can help you proactively add these archive links ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 10:48, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::I had assumed that we have something running InternetArchiveBot and similar bots across all articles ... if we're supposed to be relying on manual invocations, that would not seem like a particularly viable solution. Fabrickator (talk) 01:28, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::I thought so too, but now I can't find documentation for this. In any case, even if a bot is crawling article links automatically, there's a lot of crawling to do so it doesn't hurt to manually poke the bot for articles that we want to prioritise. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 01:34, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::Selecting a good archive link is really beyond the capability of the bot. Sure, there may be nothing wrong with it most of the time, but if I have to do something manually, I'd rather just do it myself so we can be sure that we're linking to a good archive copy. Fabrickator (talk) 18:44, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Cliché terms: Cult Film, Urban Legend, etc.
I feel that cliché terms like "cult film" and "urban legend" don't necessarily benefit an article. Cliché terms in some articles, like the mention of "cult following" for the film Troll 2, are properly sourced. Other articles have cliché terms, such as "urban legend" in the Jayne Mansfield article, that are unsourced.
I'm interested in learning how to modify a Wikipedia bot to find examples of these terms and manually determine which are unsourced. Assuming I find lots of articles with unsourced cliché terms, should I post a notice on each Talk page to get input before deleting them, or should I notify those who handle Wikipedia policy and get their input?
-- Gamboler (talk) 01:36, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Gamboler, to rephrase, you're talking about: 1) looking for cliche phrases like "cult following" in the body text of articles, 2) checking to see if this is verified by a citation in the article, and 3) removing the mention of "cult following" or whatever from the article if it's not verified? If that's what you mean, that's fine, just go ahead and do that, no need to get anyone's input. Of course, if someone complains, you'll have to stop and talk it out with them, but until that happens, this is just normal editing, so go ahead and be WP:BOLD. It looks like you have [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?fulltext=1&search=%22cult%20following%22&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1&ns4=1&ns10=1&ns12=1 about 7000 articles] to check. If it were me, well, I can't say I'd want to bother, but you can spend your time however you like. -- asilvering (talk) 05:43, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::@asilvering, thank you very much for your response, and your paraphrase is accurate. How did you find the 7000 article total, and is that only for "cult following" or for the three terms combined? I agree that my attention might wane with so many articles to manually check. Gamboler (talk) 12:49, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::That's just for "cult following", since I forgot to add "urban legend" to that search. 7k+ articles is the number of results. -- asilvering (talk) 20:16, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Gamboler I for one would not agree these are "cliché terms". They are well established and widely recognized concepts and we have substantial articles on cult films and urban legends. What term would you substitute? Shantavira|feed me 08:51, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::@Shantaviral, thanks very much for your reply. You're correct that my calling them "cliché terms" isn't fair, at least without establishing firmer reasoning for doing so. Thank you for pointing out that I need to further research these terms to clarify my thinking about how best to describe them. You pose an interesting question about what term to use. I'll review the articles you mentioned, as well as their sources. I'll focus any editing efforts only on those that aren't sourced. Gamboler (talk) 12:57, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
How should I bring a discussion to a larger audiences?
Hello! I need advice on how should I bring a discussion about artists' song and album listicles which was discussed on Stray Kids' accolades page because it's only discussed cluelessly between the two of us. Should I go to each WikiProject's talk page and ask them to join the discussion on Stray Kids' page or should I ask for a new discussion in one of the WikiProject's talk page while mentioning my past discussion?— Shenaall (t ♣ c) 02:28, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Shenaall, the Teahouse is probably wide enough to give you an answer to your question, but I don't have a clue what you're asking on that talk page. Can you give us some better context? -- asilvering (talk) 05:34, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::@Asilvering, it is about this listicles that I added in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Stray_Kids&diff=1290489181&oldid=1290196406 this revision]. I and PepeBonus were confused about "should we include listicles about the best songs/albums of 20XX (which is not focused to the artist) to the artist's accolades article or not?". Some example from the Featured List of other artists' accolades include them (SB19, Bini & Tyla) but some only include listicles that has the title "Best of All Time" or "Best of decades" (Taylor Swift & SZA). To avoid edit conflict, I open the discussion — Shenaall (t ♣ c) 06:19, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Shenaall You can try WP:APPNOTEing related wikiprojects, they are listed at the top of Talk:List of awards and nominations received by Stray Kids, lists and pop music perhaps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:45, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::::@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thank you for your advice!— Shenaall (t ♣ c) 03:18, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Need help with article
I need help in order to make [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Someonefighter/draft:Avraham_Zagdon Avraham Zagdon's] article good enough for mainspace. I do not know how to write such pages, and have never written an article from scratch. I dumped a few sources and stuff there, but there are things in all of the sources I have yet to add as text to the draft. I would like help with:
- Proof reading the stuff I added from Hebrew sources, and expanding on it (This request is for Hebrew speakers, I have used AI to extract content from Hebrew sources)
- Help add more information from Garb's book (in addition to the Hebrew sources I have mentioned earlier)
- Help formatting everything
The Hebrew research I did was assisted by translators. If you are a native speaker, I would greatly appreciate if you could search for more information yourself as well Someonefighter (talk) 08:59, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi @Someonefighter: whilst it's not impossible to get such topic- and language-specific help at the Teahouse, it's quite a long shot given the generic scope, and transient nature (messages posted tend to get archived pretty quickly), of this forum. You may want to try your luck with one (or more) of the WikiProjects instead, such as WikiProject Judaism. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:24, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::I have posted requests in their talk page, but they are not active at all so I figured I'd request help here. Also, the general organization questions do not require Judaism-interested people. Thank you for your response and suggestions Someonefighter (talk) 10:46, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Someonefighter You might do better to look at :Category:User he-N. If you have navigation popups activated, you can rapidly scan by hover-over to find users fluent in Hebrew who have edited recently. Then you could politely ask them for assistance via their talk page. Whether people will be interesting in helping you draft a biography about someone who is a leader of a messianic cult is another question.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:39, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Thank you! Will do Someonefighter (talk) 12:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:"Books radiate spiritual power, even unopened, especially those linked to his teachings. Therefore the best way to read is a book in hand and several lying around." The article Antilibrary already exists but it invites augmentation. Simply googling for {{blue|unread books site:theguardian.com}} brings a fair amount of commentary (admittedly pretty lightweight). -- Hoary (talk) 12:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::I am not sure what to do with your suggestion. None of the sources you suggested explain or can be linked to this cult teaching Someonefighter (talk) 14:18, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Someonefighter, if your plans for an article on this fellow fall through, then, reliable sources permitting, you might be able to put certain bits of the intended article within other, existing articles. -- Hoary (talk) 22:47, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Thank you for the suggestion, I will look into it. Do you have any suggestions? Someonefighter (talk) 06:57, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:I've read the draft, and I'm left wondering whether he's a fraudster or a practical joker. But I can't read Hebrew, so I've no right to comment. Maproom (talk) 13:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::I have done extensive research on the guy from before I started contributing to wikipedia. [ WP:BLP applies] Someonefighter (talk) 13:56, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
How do I request an assessment box for a wikiproject?
How do I ask for or create an assessment box for Wikipedia:WikiProject World Heritage Sites. Nevermind I was trying to make one of those rectangular boxes which tell you what importance and class an article is and I succeeded, thanks for everyones responses. Easternsahara (talk) 17:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi there {{user link|Easternsahara}}. In general, when an article is of interest to a certain WikiProject, the relevant WikiProject banner template is placed at the top of the talk page like this:
:
{{WikiProject banner shell |class= |
{{WikiProject World Heritage Sites |importance= }}
}}
:You can see the specific guidelines for the WikiProject you mention at Wikipedia:WikiProject World Heritage Sites/Assessment. While that page has a Requests for assessment subsection it seems to be inactive, so instead I suggest you try {{em|assessing it yourself!}} The class parameter classifies how well-written the article is. You can grade the article with the grading scheme. The only restriction is that good articles (with the green-plus icon) and featured articles (with the star icon) have a more formal review process. The importance parameter indicates how much priority a WikiProject gives to a certain article. It's somewhat subjective but you can guide yourself with the table in this page (ignore the rest of the page, it's about a discontinued project). Feel free to ask any other questions. Have a nice day :) –The Sophocrat (talk) 20:07, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Image Linked in Text
I'm having trouble finding any relevant MoS entries regarding linking an image directly in text rather than having it appear in the article. For example: green sea turtle. Should images used in an article always be visible? Or is linking an image in this way acceptable? Amstrad00 (talk) 17:15, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @Amstrad00, and welcome to the Teahouse. Images that can't be uploaded may be linked in an "External links" section, provided this is justified along the lines of ELYES. They should almost never be used in the text. ColinFine (talk) 18:12, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::That's an internal image link. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:19, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:In theory you can do it, but why would you want to? How does that serve the reader more than displaying the image would do? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:20, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::The instance I saw it come up in and was unsure about was on an article that already had what feels like too many images and the linked image was being used in an attempt by another editor to serve as a psudo-citation for an uncited statement. I was hoping to be linked a concrete MoS entry I could cite in my edit summary to support de-linking the image. In the end I decided to just be WP:BOLD and just remove the statement that was tagged as uncited for 5 years. Amstrad00 (talk) 21:32, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Age and oversight
I am confused. What age a person should reach to provide personal information without being suppressed? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 17:35, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @CreatorTheWikipedian2009! Oversight's FAQ says that "[t]hough the English Wikipedia is not bound by the American Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, which causes many websites to bar users under thirteen, [they] do take the safety and privacy of minors, both over thirteen and under, quite seriously." I believe it is primarily on a case-by-case basis. I hope this answers your question! PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 17:58, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::That wasn't the answer! The FAQ says that any personal information, provided by a person under 18 will be deleted, while WP:FORKIDS, and an age notice in Wikipedia:Userboxes/Life#Age_and_generation say that you shouldn't provide personal information (e.g. your age, name, location) until you turn 16. What's the age where you can provide your information without oversight? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 18:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::{{ping|CreatorTheWikipedian2009}} This is ultimately a judgment call on the part of the suppressors. I would look at WP:Protecting children's privacy, however. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:12, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Does person's personal information get suppressed if they are between 16 and 18? In their user page? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 18:15, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::{{ping|CreatorTheWikipedian2009}} That is a judgment call on the part of the suppressors. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:17, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Hello, @CreatorTheWikipedian2009, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please note that WP:FORKIDS says that it is an essay, not a Wikipedia policy; so I would suggest that the Oversight FAQ takes precedence. If you are concerned at this inconsistency, discuss it on the talk page WT:Guidance for younger editors. ColinFine (talk) 18:18, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Okay. CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 18:20, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::{{Tq|1="The FAQ says that any personal information, provided by a person under 18 will be deleted"}} Which FAQ, and which part of it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:13, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::::WP:Oversight/FAQ, as Creator said, @Andy. The fourth item in "Types of content that may or may not require suppression". ColinFine (talk) 19:55, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::That does not say {{Tq|1="any personal information, provided by a person under 18 will be deleted"}}. Quite the opposite; it makes clear that "discretion will apply to the specifics of any individual case". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::What specifics? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 20:28, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::{{ping|CreatorTheWikipedian2009}} Specifics are dependent on the individual suppressor and situation. Stop asking the question; you're not going to get a single hard-and-fast answer to this (and those who are in a position to give one for themselves aren't going to). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 22:44, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
What to do when uncertain
So, I stumbled upon this page. And I think it should be deleted. However, I'm uncertain if it truly should. to me it looks like a word salad, but it has plenty of sources. The thing that bugs me is that I don't know what the article is. At no point does this article cohesively tell me what "Childfree Russia" aims to do. Is shipping this article to AfD an overstep? ☩ (Babysharkboss2) 17:35, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:Welcome to the teahouse @Babysharkboss2. I think I agree with your assessment, I don't think this fits WP:ORG or the related guidelines, so it should be able to be deleted under G8 of the deletion policy. I would contact the creator of the page and ask them about it but they haven't been online for over a year.. I'd ask on their talk page anyway and propose the page for deletion if you don't get a response in a few days. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 17:51, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:The first thing to do is follow the process described at WP:BEFORE. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:I agree with you, {{u|Babysharkboss2}}. I don't understand the objective of the movement described in the article. As far as I'm aware, the government of Russia does not compel its citizens to procreate. But the lack of explanation is not a reason to delete the article. It is a reason to encourage the article's creator, {{u|GeryLud}}, to clarify the nature of the disagreement between the Russian government and the Childfree Russia movement. Maproom (talk) 22:55, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Image formatting
I want to start uploading some of my pictures, and uploaded one to this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kiyomizu-dera&oldid=1291201948
I wanted to put it in the “gallery” section with the other pictures, but when I pasted it, it was all big.
How do I do it correctly? DankPedia (talk) 18:34, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:You need to specify that the images are shown as "thumbnnails". See WP:IMAGES. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:07, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello again {{user link|DankPedia}} :). For a first introduction on handling images in articles, see Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup/3, and for more details check out Wikipedia:Extended image syntax (there's a subsection on size specifically). Feel free to ask any other questions. Thank you for your contributions! –The Sophocrat (talk) 19:23, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:If you want your picture in a gallery, you should see in the page source a section led by a <gallery> tag and ending with a closing </gallery> tag, with a list of images and descriptions in between. Just add the name of your image to the list. There is no need to precede the name with the File: designation. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:23, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Site guidelines on ongoing legal cases
Hi all. I was planning on making a page of a case currently working its way through the courts that has received several judgements from the Supreme Court as of the past several days. I haven't been able to find any specific site guidelines that point to whether or not current cases can be discussed, but I know that normally information on pages for elections that haven't occurred and (potential) candidates for those elections is supposed to be kept to a minimum. If anybody could shed some light on this it would be appreciated.
All the best - CSGinger14 (talk) 22:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:@CSGinger14 Wikipedia has plenty of articles about upcoming elections and court cases; e.g. the bluelinked articles listed at List of pending United States Supreme Court cases and List of elections in 2026. If the case has been discussed in reliable sources then it should probably have an article.
:I don't think there's a need to keep information about upcoming elections to a minimum, other than following the WP:NPOL notability guideline for candidates and filtering out routine news items such as "Candidate holds a rally". Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:18, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Help
How do I search Wikipedia category? Eunice Ameh (talk) 10:27, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:For example, search for "cheese incategory:food" (without quotes). For more search tips, see Help:Searching. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:29, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you Eunice Ameh (talk) 10:47, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{A note}} This is used to find a page in a category. For searching directly for categories in general, you can search Category:{{tq|put search term here}} Cooldudeseven7 talkcontribs 14:39, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
New Article
Heyo yall, im just here to ask for some constructive criticism on another article im making. Draft:VOICEPEAK here is the draft WalkTheEarth (talk) 10:32, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Waalktheeaarth Welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft has so little content at present that it is difficult to comment except to say that its two sources (Twitter and Fandom) are not considered of high quality. You would be advised to read the essay WP:BACKWARDS to get some general advice. I'm not sure why you say that the name of the program is stylised VOICEPEAK, since the logo you have uploaded isn't. In any case, Wikipedia will use the lower-case title. I think that you will struggle to show how this software is wikinotable and that should be your main focus. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:43, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Waalktheeaarth I'm noticing that your only sources are Twitter and Fandom, neither of which establish notability. MallardTV Talk to me! 11:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
help with links to disambiguation
I would like to put a link to Cyn_(disambiguation) on the top of the page of Cyn.in in the format of "this article is about (blank) for other uses see" since Cyn.in is on the disambiguation page but I don't know how I would describe cyn.in in since format or if the link's even necessary since all the other pages of Cyn_(disambiguation) don't have ".in" Skeletons are the axiom (talk) 14:51, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Use {{Tl|Other uses}} or {{Tl|For}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:12, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi Skeletons. WP:NOTAMB says a hatnote link to the disambiguation page is not preferred in situations like this. If you think an exception applies, you'd use formatting like {{tlx|about|collaboration software| |Cyn (disambiguation)}} Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:22, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::thanks Skeletons are the axiom (talk) 15:59, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
How to restore an article?
Hi all,
The page HaKol HaYehudi used to contain an article about an Israeli newspaper, but now it redirects to an irrelevant article which mentions it once.
I would like to restore the page. The decision to delete it (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HaKol HaYehudi) was voted on by one person (they voted to delete it, I don't know how it became a redirect).
How should I go about it? Tioaeu8943 (talk) 01:32, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi Tioaeu8943. If you believe that the deletion was improper or consensus was not established then you can file a deletion review here. Fade258 (talk) 01:45, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::Hi, {{u|Tioaeu8943}}! In my view, to successfully restore the article, we must show that the newspaper meets the criteria for a standalone article, sometimes called WP:GNG or "[wiki]notability". That involves seeing how many reliable secondary sources independent of the subject cover the subject beyond a passing mention (significant coverage). In this specific case, we would need to see significant coverage on the paper itself, not the raid. With enough appropriate sources, you can simply restore an older version of the article and improve it with said sources. If not enough such sources exist, not even deletion review can help. Finding and analyzing sources is not a trivial task and can trip up even experienced editors. As for the original deletion discussion, the nomination statement ends with {{tq|Should be redirected to Yitzhar#2011 or deleted}} (wikilink original). Deletion discussions are not a vote, and closers try to use alternatives to deletion whenever possible; the discussion generated no opposition to redirecting. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 03:39, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:The article was never deleted. It is still all there in the history: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=HaKol_HaYehudi&action=history
:You can restore one of the recent revisions to draft space for improvement and submit it for review. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:07, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
Jordan & Bek Ge'ez creating article
I was wandering if I create an article about them. Lirress 3 (talk) 12:21, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:If they meet the notability qualities for music artists, then yes! Please see this segment about the notability of such people. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 12:41, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
Then what should we do? Lirress 3 (talk) 12:48, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:If they meet the requirements, then you can create this page. It is a draft article, and you can then begin working on the article. Once it is finished, you can submit it for review. You should read this page, which contains information about creating your first article. You'll need to find reliable and independent sources which establish Wikipedia notability in order for your draft to be approved. If the draft gets declined, don't worry. Follow the reviewer's advice and submit it again once you feel you have addressed their concerns. Best of luck! PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 13:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Also, please describe who is this "we" you are referring to? Is your account shared by multiple people? ~Anachronist (talk) 14:03, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:As {{User|Anachronist}} said, {{Tq|...please describe who is this "we" you are referring to? Is your account shared by multiple people?}}, Sharing accounts is NOT allowed, as according to this quote:
{{tq|Sharing an account – or the password to an account – with others is not permitted, and evidence of doing so will result in the user being required to stop the practice and change their password, or in sanctions (up to and including the account being blocked), depending on circumstances.}}. You can read more here Cooldudeseven7 talkcontribs 14:49, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
Oldest motorcycle club in Canada
In wikipedia it says The red devils from Hamilton is the oldest club 1948 it is not The Blackhawks mc from Hamilton est.1938 50.100.188.108 (talk) 15:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi! Please link the article you are referring to. Also, do you have a reliable source supporting this? GoldRomean (talk) 15:55, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
Article Accuracy (List of Turkish Football Champions)
I would like to know why the following article represents "unrecognized" championships as recognized? How is this in line with Wikipedia's accuracy guidelines..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Turkish_football_champions 162.223.16.47 (talk) 18:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:I'm not familiar with this article, but I believe it's because it's titled List of Turkish football champions, not List of recognized Turkish football champions. The unrecognized ones are notable, and thus should be included. GoldRomean (talk) 18:41, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
= Article Accuracy (List of Turkish Football Champions) =
I would like to know why the following article represents "unrecognized" championships as recognized? How is this in line with Wikipedia's accuracy guidelines..
List of Turkish football champions. 162.223.16.47 (talk) 18:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Please don't repost, someone will get to your question soon! GoldRomean (talk) 18:12, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
Working on my first article
So, I am looking into working on a new article for Wikipedia focused on covering another wiki's existence (Consumer Rights Wiki), however, as I am a prolific contributor on this other wiki, I do feel some concerns due to the conflict of interest rules established by Wikipedia.
Should I consider leaving this towards a contributor who exists on this wiki or simply abandon the article's idea entirely? JamesTDG (talk) 19:56, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:You should follow the guidance at WP:COI. If the wiki meets the criteria at WP:N, you can draft an article about it using WP:AFC, and an independent editor will review it. Then you should only make requests for changes on its talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:36, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
Link with special characters
Hello! I would like to embed the link https://www.amazon.com/Hardened-Accessories-Temperature-Wear-Resistant-1-75Consumables/dp/B0CN14LBMJ?gQT=1 into a footnote, but make it appear as [https://google.com these], but the link includes the characters "=" and "?", which causes it to break the footnote. How can I fix this issue? Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 18:23, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, can you please explain what you want it to appear as? It seems you've accidentally linked the Google homepage instead of whatever it was you intended. Out of my own personal curiosity, what article are you trying to embed this link in? mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 18:47, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::@mgjertson Because I couldn't get the original link to work, I just used google.com as a placeholder. The article I'm putting it into is Draft:Nueva Montaña Quijano, specifically footnote "ii" (Although upon further research, it doesn't seem to be what I thought it was at first). Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 21:59, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Commandant Quacks-a-lot, you can fix the issue by removing the ? and everything after it. But also - why are you trying to cite an amazon sales listing? -- asilvering (talk) 18:49, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{ping|Commandant Quacks-a-lot}} It works here to just remove the end as said above. There are different ways to make footnotes but you probably encountered the issue at the second bullet at Help:Template#Hints and workarounds which gives more general solutions. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:29, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks for your help! I'm trying to show a couple possible products that an unspecific term in one of my original sources may be referring to. Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 22:03, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Commandant Quacks-a-lot, I'm not sure exactly because I'm not seeing it in the context you intended, but my strong suspicion is that the edit you were hoping to make would be WP:OR anyway. Typically we only want to include things that are mentioned in secondary sources. -- asilvering (talk) 22:24, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Thanks for pointing out the WP:OR bit. I'm going to leave the footnote in there for now, but if it gets deleted, so be it. Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 22:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
Quick fix for a broken template?
Just curious if anyone could take a look at this broken template. Template:Jewish Encyclopedia
The Talk page had a couple editors that now seem to be offline, so thought someone here might be able to take a look to see if the template can be fixed. The "title" value is showing an error wherever that template is being used. If the template can be easily be fixed, please do so. If not feel, free to add any comments to that Talk page if you have any ideas. 24.96.215.116 (talk) 00:21, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:I see no error in any examined page using the template, e.g. Amnon#References. Please post an example with the problem. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:30, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
NOTNEWS question
Hello! I know there are more official avenues on the encyclopedia to ask this question, but just as a quick check, I wanted to see what others thought on if Maxim Lepushenko, the recently-detained administrator of Belarusian-language Wikipedia, could have his own article? I have a number of good sources I've found ([https://nashaniva.com/ru/367720 1], [https://nashaniva.com/ru/368138 2], [https://spring96.org/ru/news/117972 3], [https://news.zerkalo.io/life/99526.html 4]), and some others with no credited author but still look good ([https://ru.belsat.eu/86764590/prodolzhayutsya-repressii-protiv-belarusskoj-vikipedii-zaderzhan-administrator-maksim-lepushenko 5], [https://reform.news/zaderzhan-administrator-belarusskoj-vikipedii-maksim-lepushenko 6], [https://udf.name/news/politic/279130-zaderzhali-administratora-belorusskoj-vikipedii-maksima-lepushenko.html 7]) but they're all dated recently. Without spending too much time on this, could someone give their thoughts on if this violate NOTNEWS, or can an article be made? Cheers! Johnson524 01:04, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Most of the articles are very short and simply state he was detained and nothing else. Imagine if you were to take those seven sources and write a Wikipedia article about him. How much could you really say? I think not a lot. So, I think this can be considered WP:NOTNEWS. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:52, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::@Sungodtemple: I completely agree, thanks for your second opinion! Johnson524 01:53, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Is adding lyrics in wikipedia articles of songs ok ?
hello i am new here and i see that most of the articles on songs usually do not have lyrics in them is this a section i need to make or is it usually looked down upon Narventer (talk) 15:50, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @Narventer, unfortunately, adding song lyrics in full would be a copyright violation. ☩ (Babysharkboss2) 15:51, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::oh ok thanks for the headsup Narventer (talk) 15:56, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:::{{u|Narventer}}, the full lyrics of songs first published in the US in 1929 and before are now out of copyright. But it is not usually encyclopedic to include complete lyrics. It is best to include specific brief quotes from the lyrics that have been discussed and analyzed in reliable sources. That is acceptable for all songs. Cullen328 (talk) 05:41, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Dictionary of National Biography and notability
Hi, just checking on something. Does an article sourced only to an entry in the 1900 Dictionary of National Biography automatically pass WP:GNG, or should WP:SIGCOV still be found in multiple sources? Boynamedsue (talk) 05:49, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Boynamedsue See WP:ANYBIO point three; there's probably been AfDs or merge discussions that have decided against stand-alone biographies in certain cases, but the Dictionary of National Biography is typically much more selective than we are with the GNG. People at AfD will !vote keep on that basis alone, but if you look in the right places, you're almost certainly going to find additional sources anyway. And, while the text in the two articles I think you're looking at obviously came from the 1900 edition, the two subjects have new entries in the 2004 edition. Facts should be sourceable to the more modern edition, if you're that worried about age. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 06:37, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Understood, there's no point nominating for deletion then. It's not really the age that worries me, more the absence of sourcing on the page and in the DNB, and the lack of any sourcing for the older Fothergill online. It is likely that sigcov exists somewhere in print in 19th and early 20th century sources, I suppose, but are we supposed to go on "it's likely"? I'm really uncomfortable with articles lifted wholesale from out of copyright tertiary sources, and if it were up to me they'd all be deleted by a cleansing bot. But it isn't and they won't, so that's by the by.Boynamedsue (talk) 06:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Basic question
Hi, I'm new here and trying to learn more about Wikipedia. I was wondering, how do you know that anything on Wikipedia is *true*? Sasolely (talk) 17:49, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @Sasolely. You can always check the reliable sources at the bottom of any article that should (hopefully) be cited. Wikipedia mainly relies upon secondary sources for its information, so you should treat it as a tertiary source. Tarlby (t) (c) 17:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks for your message. Sasolely (talk) 17:56, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Sasolely It is important that you read Wikipedia:General disclaimer. (There is a link to this at the foot of every Wikipedia page). Shantavira|feed me 09:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Auto-importing category entries from another wiki?
Sometimes there are useful categories from another wiki that can be imported into en-wiki, like this one, where there are hundreds of entries which is just cumbersome to add manually. Is there a just more simple way to do this? Xpander (talk) 09:18, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @Xpander1, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know for sure that there is no way, but I would be surprised, because in order to add a hundred articles to a category, you would need to edit every one of those hundred articles.
:Having said that, it is possible that it could be done by a bot, or by WP:AWB (which I have never used and don't know how to use). ColinFine (talk) 10:33, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Follow-up to Adding my Book Series to Wikipedia
: Adding my Book Series to Wikipedia
Add my book series "The Talisman Series" to Wikipedia Google search for my name and the series and there is more than enough information to have it added.
Thank you!
Brett salter Mojarra69 (talk) 18:36, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Please provide multiple reliable sources showing notability and significant coverage of this book. You can request an article at WP:REQ, or write the article yourself, though you must then declare your conflict of interest. GoldRomean (talk) 18:38, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Putting this text into Google only brings up results about a book by Stephen King. You will have to do the work yourself to show you should have an article. Why should others do it for you? Osa Akwamarynowa (talk) 11:19, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Moving Article to Draft Namespace
Hi everyone,
I hope you're all doing well!
I've prepared an article in my user sandbox about Dr. Dylan Attard, and I would like to request that it be moved to the Draft namespace for review and further improvement. I’ve made a few requests on the relevant talk page, but I haven’t received a response yet.
Could someone kindly assist me with moving the page, or let me know if there’s anything I should do differently?
Thank you so much for your time and support Dr. Dylan Attard (talk) 07:28, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{courtesy link|User:Dr._Dylan_Attard/sandbox}} Maproom (talk) 08:26, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Dr. Dylan Attard It is technically quite easy to move your draft into the Draft namespace but I'm not going to do that. Instead, I'd like to advise you against proceeding with this attempt at an autobiography because it has virtually no chance of being accepted into Wikipedia. Please read that link and the policy on biographies of living people to understand why. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:39, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello Dylan. I agree with everything Mike has said, as your article is unsourced and seems to mostly be written to promote yourself so is not appropriate for Wikipedia.
:I also wanted to add though that you said you have “made a few requests on the relevant talk page” but you have only posted on your own talk page, which is where users would go to send you messages. You have effectively sent those messages to yourself and it is likely nobody else has seen them until today. I am glad you were able to find the Teahouse in order to get help instead. -- NotCharizard 🗨 13:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Dr. Dylan Attard Adding to {{User|Michael D. Turnbull}}, you also do need to follow the MOS (manual of style.) Specifically,
:* MOS:GOODHEAD and others not listed here.
:Please also see the following pages-
:* Wikipedia:AUTOPROBLEM, WP:YOURSELF, and WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY in general
:* WP:COIE (more in depth version here)
:Cooldudeseven7 talk/contribs 13:11, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Unable to add reference
In Visual editing, I am unable to add book review in old news paperand magazine . I have the link to news paperand magazine.
will you pl help Adigesi (talk) 08:11, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Adigesi To which article are you referring? If you mean your sandbox, the dates are formatted incorrectly. See WP:REFBEGIN. You don't need to link to the newspaper article, just cite it. However, your draft will not be accepted for publication as we already have an extensive article about the Volkswagen emissions scandal. I suggest you focus your efforts there by making suggestions on the article talk page. Shantavira|feed me 09:00, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:If you’re using Wikipedia’s Visual Editor and want to add a book review from an old newspaper or magazine, just click “Edit” at the top, place your cursor where the review should be cited, and hit the “Cite” button (the little quote mark). If it doesn’t auto-fill from your link, choose “Manual” or “Basic” and fill in the details like title, author, publication, date, and link. Then hit “Insert” — and you’re done! If the review is behind a paywall or in an archive, just link to the page and note that it’s archived or requires access. Sasolely (talk) 13:22, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
biography of a professor
hello, i am editing a biography of my supervisor. i submitted to review and the comments are that i need to add reliable sources, but i added sources to prove the sentences that i wrote. I wonder where should i add more sources and how is reliable or how is not, it is not clear enough.
Draft:Bart Van der Bruggen - Wikipedia Yzlei (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @Yzlei, and welcome to the Teahouse. {{HD/WINI}} ColinFine (talk) 21:32, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Yzlei, as I look through the draft, I get the strong impression that it was written by somebody other than the person who wrote the question above. Can you comment on this? -- Hoary (talk) 22:51, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::really? but i wrote the draft, and i also asked this question. there is no one else involved Yzlei (talk) 03:23, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Yzlei It looks to me as though this academic will pass the relevant notability guideline on a number of counts. However, your draft has many problems. For example, to show he was awarded the Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz International Prize for Water you need to cite that Prize's website (or, better an independent source) not just give what is in effect a wikilink to that article. Similarly for editorial posts he holds/held. Also, remove the peacock language. Let his accomplishments speak for themselves. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:57, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::The article reads like advertising, not encyclopedic knowledge. The user subpage User:Yzlei/Sample page is a résumé, and is written from the POV of the professor, saying "I am active reviewer..." and "I am active in development...". Just Al (talk) 15:53, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Rewards
How to achieve all rewards Sasolely (talk) 17:44, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @Sasolely. Can you clarify what you mean? Tarlby (t) (c) 17:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::I try to achieve communicator reward, but still can’t get after trying for many times. Sasolely (talk) 17:50, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Can anyone answer? Sasolely (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::Looks like something related to WP:TWA, {{u|Ocaasi}} sorry for the ping but you're probably the best person to answer this. GoldRomean (talk) 18:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:::This is more of a @Pppery question, although this issue is probably more about triggering the right action than anything wrong with the game or a bug. Ocaasi t | c 18:40, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:::: It looks like you never actually completed Mission 2 properly - if you had it would have autoposted something like WP:TWA/MyTalk/2 to your TWA talk page, which it didn't. (It's intentional that TWA lets you skin missions and start Mission 3 before completing Mission 2). If you ran into specific issue with the mission, please explain what it is. {{pb}} Also, don't worry two much about what badges you get - they're mostly meaningless bling and the rest of the community won't really care as you've proven yourself as a communicator by posting here ... * Pppery * it has begun... 19:11, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::I have been trying to answer anyone’s questions or even post my own question and interact to others but it still doesn’t work. 😭 Sasolely (talk) 13:42, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::: The one thing I can say is to make sure to not publish your reply until the tour tells you to do so by pointing to the reply button. Or, if you really want, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASasolely%2FTWA&tour=twa2&step=9 skip that step and continue the tour (and earn your badge)] here. Finally, Wikipedia is not about recognition or bling, so you're caring way more than is reasonable. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:10, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Advice on journalism award page
Hello esteemed volunteers and editors! I'm awaiting a review on my submission related to a journalism award and I'd love your feedback to ensure the page gets approved. It was rejected once prior but I've since added more supporting links and context to help lend more credibility to the page. Appreciate any thoughts you have! Draft talk:Collier Prize for State Government Accountability Kapparently (talk) 14:25, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello and welcome. You have already resubmitted the draft for review after it was declined(not rejected, which would mean resubmission would not be possible). The reviewer will leave you feedback if it is not accepted. 331dot (talk) 14:45, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::Hello, {{u|Kapparently}}, your first reference that discusses the White House Correspondent's Dinner does not mention the Collier Award and therefore adds nothing of value to your draft. What is required are references to reliable sources that devote significant coverage to the Collier Award, but are entirely independent of the award, of the WHCA dinner, of the University of Florida, and of any of the publications and individual journalists who have received the award. That includes being generated by press releases that any of them have issued. The Inside Philanthropy article might qualify but it is behind a pay wall so I can't read it. None of your other references appear to be fully independent. Cullen328 (talk) 17:36, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Thank you. I understand your feedback but in comparison to other journalism awards, the citations are quite similar in nature. For example, the Pulitzer Prize wikipedia entry. I did just find an independent article tying the dinner to the award from the Hollywood Reporter and added that link. Let me know if you think that will help. Appreciate your feedback and attention. Kapparently (talk) 22:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Must non free fair use photos fall under one of the [[WP:NFCI]] examples?
Must non free fair use photos fall under one of the examples of Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images or can they be used as long as they follow the Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria? Thehistorianisaac (talk) 14:02, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Thehistorianisaac let me clarity to you that for non-free images on Wikipedia you don’t have to match the specific examples listed at Wikipedia:Non-free content § Images, because they fully comply with the non-free content criteria (NFCC). These criteria include requirements like no free alternative, minimal use, and contextual relevance. So it is important to justify each use with a proper non-free use rationale on the file page. Sasolely (talk) 14:14, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::Oh ok thank you. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 14:18, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::{{u|Thehistorianisaac}}, please pay close attention to the following language at WP:NFCI: {{tpq|The following list is not exhaustive but contains the most common cases where non-free images may be used and is subject to the restrictions listed below at unacceptable use of images}}. So, there are other possibilities but you must make a compelling case based on deep understanding of our policies, which is not an easy thing to do. Cullen328 (talk) 17:56, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
What is “LTA edit summary or editing pattern hit (Oshwah)”
I triggered this filter on Cincinnati. I know an LTA is a long-term abuser, but what does this filter do. Does it stop you from making the edit. Will it make you get blocked? 2600:100C:B05E:DD9A:E522:B53E:A047:CE2E (talk) 15:36, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello IP. I checked the edit and it looks like your edit summary was {{tq|Update}}. I assume a lot of LTAs use that edit summary which is why it was logged. The edit still went through. Tarlby (t) (c) 15:57, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Greetings. Edit filters are capable of detecting and automatically stopping certain edits identified as nonconstructive. They sometimes get false positives though, so an edit filter can't (as of writing) automatically block users. I myself once triggered an edit filter with constructive edits, and it was marked as a false positive and nothing else occurred. Have a nice day :) –The Sophocrat (talk) 19:47, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::I triggered it again on User talk:Ahecht 2600:100C:B05E:DD9A:E522:B53E:A047:CE2E (talk) 18:31, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
How can I know if someone is reviewing the draft?
:Found the button! Elliott G10 (talk) 18:11, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Reference list vanishing
Hello!
I tried to edit a Wikipedia article, but whenever I attempted to add a citation, all of the other citations in the references list vanished as soon as I created one (even if I didn't edit it at all). The citations were still visible throughout the article, but they were entirely purged from the reference list. This was in the visual editor as I'm new to Wikipedia.
Is this just a cosmetic glitch in the visual editor? How do I prevent/stop this?
Thanks! Reverosie (talk) 18:29, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:You position the references throughout the text, attached to the sentences they support. The "reflist" command makes the references appear to be in a neat list at the end, but there isn't anything actually there.
:Does that help you understand? DS (talk) 20:22, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::That’s what I was trying to do. Whenever I tried to add a citation next to a new sentence, the reference list at the bottom would vanish Reverosie (talk) 20:45, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::: Welcome to the Teahouse, {{u|Reverosie}}. Yes, this can happen when a reference contains a formatting error - I've seen this happen more than once where all or part of the references fail to be displayed. Trying to fix it with the visual editor is probably going to be tough; one would need to look at the source for the reference to see where there is a mis-matched set of brackets or something like that. An unclosed HTML comment is also a possibly reason.
::: Because of the way the references are handled, the error only affects the reference list at the end - far away from the place in the source code that is causing the problem - so these can be tricky to track down. If you pointed to the article where you experienced the problem, another editor with more experience looking at the source can probably straighten things out. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 02:11, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Hello,
::::Thank you for the detailed reply! Here's the article in question in case somebody could help: Baldwin IV of Jerusalem. I'm not sure how to use the source editor since I'm brand new to Wikipedia, so hopefully somebody else could take a look :) Reverosie (talk) 02:32, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::: {{u|Reverosie}} That article uses short citations. I don't know whether the VE even knows how to deal with those (my ignorance, I'm not a VE user nor am I expert at any of the short citation styles).
::::: Source editing is not all that hard to figure out. At least, take a look at the source to see how those citations are made and try to copy how it is done. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 03:17, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Thanks again for the reply! I'll see what I can do. Reverosie (talk) 03:35, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
I need help!!
Since I ain't a paid editor, I've a question. Is it OK to me to fix a grammar & edit a words into pages? Sparkschu Itai (talk) 12:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:Yes. Please be bold. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:04, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks! Sparkschu Itai (talk) 13:05, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Weird code issue with references at the bottom of an article
Hi, I mostly do work on the fantasy book Wundersmith: The Calling of Morrigan Crow wiki article, and I noticed something off with the references at the bottom of the page, like a structural/coding error? It says "Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: Attempt to index a boolean value". What does this mean, and how can I fix it?
Any help is much appreciated, thank you. Cornonthehunt (talk) 11:55, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hey, update to this: The code error disappeared when I went and looked at it from a non-editing page view. Still not sure what caused it however. Cornonthehunt (talk) 11:58, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::@Cornonthehunt {{A note|Clarity note:}} Upon inspection, it appears the errors are still present in the article. Cooldudeseven7 talk/contribs 12:10, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Cornonthehunt}} A purge fixed it. A used module probably had an error when the page was last rendered. Rendered pages are cached for performance reasons. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:16, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Thanks, appreciate it. Cornonthehunt (talk) 21:01, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Changes to article about Steven Knight
Hello, i have added citation and date of birth to the article about Steven Knight if this citation is not reliable please remove it, thank you. 2409:4073:218E:E86F:7123:2B34:E0A:7BEE (talk) 17:20, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Looks like your changes were reverted already - IMDb is not a reliable source. Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 21:22, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Would like to redirect a redirect
I created an article on Lenny Solomon. Currently, Lenny Solomon re-directs to Schlock Rock. I would appreciate advice on how to direct Lenny Solomon to my new article. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 23:14, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Not quite, Allthemilescombined1. Somebody created the article Lenny Solomon (American-Israeli musician), which unsurprisingly is about a musician named Lenny Solomon. We read that he's in his mid-sixties and there's no hint that he's Canadian. There's also an article titled Lenny Solomon -- and I mean an actual article, not a redirect. We read that its subject is in his early seventies and is Canadian; we don't read that he's Israeli. (The two Lenny Solomons also appear to play different kinds of music.) Now, what do you want to happen to the article that's currently titled "Lenny Solomon"? (Are you asking for the addition of Template:For at its top?) -- Hoary (talk) 23:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi Allthemilescombined1. Your post is very confusing. Lenny Solomon is an old article about another musician, not a redirect. You created Lenny Solomon (American-Israeli musician). I guess you mean Lenny solomon with lowercase s which was a redirect to Shlock Rock, not Schlock Rock with Sc which also redirects to Shlock Rock. I have changed the redirect target to Lenny Solomon. A lowercase surname should not lead to a different page. I have added a hatnote pointing to your new article to Lenny Solomon.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lenny_Solomon&diff=prev&oldid=1291396681] I don't know which of the musicians is more notable. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:57, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you @Hoary and @PrimeHunter. Could we create a disambiguation page so that searches for Lenny Solomon suggest both options? Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 00:17, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::We could indeed; but would it be a good idea? Please digest Wikipedia:Disambiguation. -- Hoary (talk) 01:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Yes, it would be a good idea. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 01:26, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Currently, somebody wanting to look up the American-Israeli musician would probably look up Lenny Solomon, whereupon they'd be told: "This article is about the Canadian musician. For the American-Israeli musician, see Lenny Solomon (American-Israeli musician)." Somebody wanting to look up the Canadian musician would probably look up Lenny Solomon and immediately arrive at the page about him. If "Lenny Solomon" were a disambiguation page, then whichever Lenny Solomon people were looking for, they'd probably have to go through the disambiguation page. How would this be more desirable? -- Hoary (talk) 05:28, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Indeed. Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Primary_topic_with_only_one_other_topic says "If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, and one is the primary topic, then a disambiguation page is not needed—it is sufficient to use a hatnote on the primary topic article, pointing to the other article." Maproom (talk) 08:24, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::They are equally notable. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 09:20, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:For what it's worth, I've moved the Canadian Lenny Solomon to Lenny Solomon (Canadian musician) so we can have disambiguation without creating a page. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 11:09, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::@PhoenixCaelestis Thank you. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 22:51, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Sandbox Title
If I create a sandbox, Can I title my page the title of my article I wish to call it like User:Breck0530/List of Other Interstate Proposals or you can only call it User:Breck0530/sandbox? Breck0530 (talk) 21:32, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Yes you can, you just need to make sure it's still in your userspace. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 22:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::ok Thanks! Breck0530 (talk) 22:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Yes, @Breck0530. The only difference between a sandbox called "sandbox" and one called something else is that there is a shortcut to "sandbox" on your user menu (in the skin I use, in the drop-down from the "person" icon at the top right). ColinFine (talk) 23:00, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
Why is removing a speedy deletion from a page you created yourself against policy?
It's not an XfD tag (where nobody is allowed to remove it when the discussion is underway), and since anybody who's not yourself is allowed to remove it Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 23:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Page creators can remove speedies from certain types of pages. For those that they cannot remove a speedy from, they can contest the speedy on the talk page. As for why... we don't want creators of clearly inappropriate material to be able to derail the uncontroversial deletion by removing the speedy themselves, whether in good faith or not. It's one shot deal, and anyone but the creator can remove the speedy request, so it's not as if we make it hard to deny a speedy. Meters (talk) 00:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
Fixing template causing spacing issues
On the page for Proprietary software, the template for "intellectual property" creates an awkward gap in spacing between the lead and the next table in the article. It's not a crucial issue, but how could I correct this? ALittleClass (talk) 01:48, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:@ALittleClassI have Fixed the issues you were experiencing.If you need more help you may post a message on my My Talk Page
:Bleeng (talk) 02:35, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::It does not show up as fixed on my screen, in fact the issue is worse now, there's a huge gap between the template and the start of the article. ALittleClass (talk) 02:41, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Could you please describe the issue deeply.wjat going wrong with you. Bleeng (talk) 02:43, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::::there is a huge gap between the title of the article and the first paragraph caused by the template. What computer are you using, or are you on mobile? ALittleClass (talk) 02:48, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Done! Now You may check there was a template which was causing problem but is is also crucial to indicate about redirects.
:::::Here is the Template. "Redirect-confused|Non-free software|Commercial software|Business software" Bleeng (talk) 02:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
[[WP:TWA]] Communicator badge
Hi everyone, this is my first time using Wikipedia. My goal is to achieve all of 15 budge. However, communicator budge is the only one I still cannot complete. I’ve been trying for many times, and it doesn’t work. Could you help me guild how to achieve? Sasolely (talk) 13:37, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi, Sasolely! I would actually advise for you to not worry about it. Those badges are pretty much meaningless. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:47, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks for your advice Writ Keeper. However, today all those budges are very important for me. As I got requirements from my instructors. They didn’t expect me to be that expert, but budges can tell whether I try to use and learn about Wikipedia or not. Since they know that I’ve never used or even heard about Wikipedia features before. Sasolely (talk) 13:53, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Have you had that budge? Sasolely (talk) 13:56, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::{{edit conflict}} Sorry for cutting in suddenly, but are you editing Wikipedia as a part of an educational course? The word "instructors" made me wonder that... or maybe there's something I don't know. Just wondering! As you were previously told, the badges are purely cosmetic and "are pretty much meaningless". I did read your user talk page, and it does look like there is a glitch preventing one badge from showing up. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 14:00, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Yes, there is one budge hasn’t shown up on my user page while it told me I already get that budge. Sasolely (talk) 14:04, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::That one is verifiability. Sasolely (talk) 14:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::But for communicator, I haven’t gained it. Sasolely (talk) 14:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Not sure what's going on, but here's some advice: if you click "source editing" you can see the raw code that generates what you see. Your user page is currently:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:So if you want to make a badge show up on your userpage, you can just write
On User talk:Sasolely, Taweetham writes "You are supposed to have 15 badges in total on your user page. I know that one is not working. We therefore expect 14 in total instead." Taweetham's most recent edit is [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kanom_2003&diff=prev&oldid=1291443321 this]: adding the identical comment to user talk:Kanom 2003. Perhaps Taweetham would care to comment here on their (plural: "we") expectations and on Sasolely's predicament. -- Hoary (talk) 22:09, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Thank you so much. Sasolely (talk) 01:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Mrfoogles|Hoary|Sasolely}} I’m an instructor for a class of approximately 40 first-year undergraduate students. As part of a course assignment, students are asked to complete two out of four available tasks, one of which is WP:TWA.
::I understand that tools which worked reliably in the past may no longer function as expected, and unfortunately I don't have the time to troubleshoot the underlying scripts. For students who are unable to earn all 15 (or 14 rather) badges, I recommend the following:
::* Use the latest version of Google Chrome on a desktop computer (not a tablet)
::* Work in source editing mode
::* Keep the additional WP:TWA window open at all times, and
::* Carefully follow the instructions provided on the WP:TWA pages.
Is it ever reasonable to conclude that an entity is defunct, or would it necessarily constitute OR to change an "is" to a "was"?
I came across our article on an institution called "Knightsbridge University", an apparent diploma mill. On its talk page, someone in 2010 has noted that Knightsbridge University appears to have no activity anywhere, and 15 years later, I find no sign of life. The article also notes that in 2009 Danish authorities ordered it to stop calling itself a "university", so that might count towards changing the "is" in the opening sentence to "was" in this particular case.
But there seems to be a more general question, namely: at what point is it reasonable to conclude that some (corporate, perhaps online) entity has become defunct, on the basis of not being able to find any sign that it is still active, or would doing so always constitute original research? After all, if the people operating it have simply folded their tents and let their domain name lapse etc., then there may be no source anywhere that could be cited to confirm that it is defunct, and saying "is" in the present tense feels funny. Any thoughts? --Rallette (talk) 09:31, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Googling "Knightsbridge University closure" I am greeted with [https://johnkersey.org/2003/12/22/my-education-knightsbridge-university-denmark/ this page] stating that it ceased activity in 2018. It is a self-published source though the author appears to be a professor and says he holds several positions, so I am unsure if this qualifies as a reliable source. I think you could say that it ceased operations in 2018 and thus referred to it in the past tense, though other editors may wish to weigh in on this issue. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 12:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:My mistake, upon a second skim the article says that the university ceased activity a decade before Denmark passed its University Act. I guess it shut down roughly in 2008. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 12:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::I found that blog post too but just skimmed it and missed that bit. Thanks! The more general question remains unanswered, but I guess the answer would be that original research is original research.--Rallette (talk) 05:43, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
File Talk FAQ pages listed on the Wikipedia FAQs Category page
Browsing :Category:Wikipedia FAQs, I came across a link that struck me as odd going to File_talk:Eurovision_winners_map.svg/FAQ.
I assume it's due to Template:FAQ page categorizing all pages under File talk as Wikipedia FAQs. There is a point to be made that as the talk page is about a file rather than an article, it should not fall under the alternative :Category:Wikipedia article FAQs, but I feel that would be an improvement over listing them under FAQs about Wikipedia generally.
Obviously not a particularly pressing issue, but caught my eye. Aksuloid (talk) 08:48, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
Academic sources
Academics means studying teaching in school, colleges. Why the teachers are interested in latest crimes? I don't understand how teachers professors are given more importance in Wikipedia in articles related to latest crime, terrorism, politics.
If media mentions something, victims mention something, but academics mention different thing, then academic sources are given more importance here?
What are academic sources? PhD research papers, prescribed syllabus in universities? Fruit Orchard (talk) 11:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Academic sources are generally peer-reviewed and ensured to make sure the information is accurate. News reports and personal accounts get stuff wrong all the time. The recent India-Pakistan border clashes are a major example of this, reports keep giving conflicting accounts and it's often hard to sift through the rubbish. One of Wikipedia's core policies is verifiability, not truth. And the truth hurts.{{citation needed}} PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 12:13, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
ccTLD codes
Two letter "Country Code Top Level Domain" can be access by typing say ".nz" for New Zealand
What are the three letter codes used for Sports called, such as "NZL" ?
And should there be links such as .NZL to access there Sports Code Top Level Domain
The two codes might be combined as a disambuguation topic?
Is there a list of these scTLD codes ?
The ccTLD are mentioned in the description of most if not all countries ! ----MountVic127 (talk) 06:44, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:"Country code top-level domain" are about Internet.
:"Sport Code Top Level Domain" aren't in existence.
:You can't create an article for something that don't exist. Anatole-berthe (talk) 08:28, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:I think you're probably looking for ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 country codes. They're similar to top level domains in that they're short sequences of letters identifying a country, but are otherwise unrelated. statisticalphil (talk) 09:06, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::It is possible you're looking for "ISO 3166-1 alpha-3" but this list is not used in all sports.
::Is this the right list ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 12:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
Hello.
How to create a forum about Tonga? B255555555 (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @B255555555, and welcome to the Teahouse.
:I'm afraid that the answer is "find somewhere that hosts forums: Wikipedia does not". Talk pages, and WikiProjects such as WikiProject Tonga are for coordination and discussion about Wikipedia articles, not about the subjects of the articles. See WP:NOTFORUM. ColinFine (talk) 13:24, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
How to spot vandalism
What are some common signs of vandalism, because I want to ensure that this encyclopedia is accurate and safe. Where are common places of vandalism, and how can I keep track of them? I want to prevent vandalism, but I do not know how to do so.
AstronomyKid1 (talk) 13:23, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @AstronomyKid1, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please have a look at WP:CVU- I think you'll find what you're looking for there. ColinFine (talk) 13:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Also take a look at Wikipedia:Vandalism. Shantavira|feed me 13:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
can someone help me find more images for Italian brainrot characters?
The Italian brainrot page is lacking multiple characters and I need images of them. MarkofGorillaTag (talk) 22:11, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi MarkofGorillaTag. Please link to the article which you are looking. I think you should make a list of characters that you believe that are missing. You can upload a images [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload here] yourself but that images must comply with the copyright policies. Fade258 (talk) 01:55, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{Courtesy link|Draft:Characters of Italian brainrot}} (probably) GoldRomean (talk) 02:42, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:As other users might have said, images must not be copyrighted. After finding a reliable source, you can upload to Commons and then add the image. Cooldudeseven7 talkcontribs 14:44, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::but how do I check if an image is copyrighted? because Google only says "image May or May not be copyrighted." MarkofGorillaTag (talk) 19:29, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:::In the United States (whose copyright laws me must follow because the servers are there) by default (generally) the creator of a piece of media owns the copyright for said media for a long time. However I'm not sure how that works with AI image generation... I would check out Commons:AI-generated media for advice. If you can't verify the copyright status of an image, {{em|do not upload it}}. For Wikipedia, it's preferable (well, mandatory) for have an article to have less images than to break our copyright policy. If you have other questions feel free to ask. The Sophocrat (talk) 19:59, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::::ok, so I wont upload the images (since its really hard to verify ai generated images made by random TikTok users) MarkofGorillaTag (talk) 20:34, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Generally, images generated by AI are not copyrighted; there only seems to be exceptions if they originate from the UK or Hong Kong (again, generally). The only exception is the situational classification of such images as derivative works due to many of them being trained on copyrighted content. The link Sophocrat sent explains this in more detail. — rae5e <talk> 13:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
Source credibility
I would like to edit the article on Dirk Schouten to give information about his current Porsche Supercup campaign. The only articles I could find that officially state that he's racing in the cup for Dinamic Motorsport is [https://racing.porsche.com/teams/pmsc-dinamic-motorsport an official publication from Porsche themselves], and [https://dinamicmotorsport.com/blogs/news/pmsc-at-imola-delli-guanti-is-on-podium-rookies this article from the team]. Would these be considered reliable enough to add, given the fact that they're both an internal news source? OntheInterwebs (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
: [A long post by User:Cooldudeseven7 was here, but has been removed by them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:29, 22 May 2025 (UTC) ]
:Yes. These are not "self published" by Schouten, but are written by a third party about him. Unfortunately, User:Cooldudeseven7 misunderstands the guidance they have cited. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:51, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::Ah, sorry, it appears I had not looked at the article thoroughly enough- I am deeply sorry for the disruption I might have caused! I have deleted my reply.Cooldudeseven7 talk/contribs 16:55, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Is a member of The National Assembly of Seychelles notable?
I am specifically talking about Hon. Kelly Samynadin. Wikipedia:POLITICIAN gave me the impression that being a member of The National Assembly of Seychelles fulfills the notability guidelines. Is that correct? I'd appreciate any help. --Rajix4 (talk) 18:21, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:Yes, she is a member of the national assembly of an independent country.
:See also :Category:Members of the National Assembly (Seychelles). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:45, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you! Rajix4 (talk) 19:10, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Renaming an article
Hi all.
The idea is here: Talk:Black_Rose_(BDSM_organization)#Renaming_proposal.
I would do it myself but it won't let me plus I'm not sure it's exactly right. Pcsela (talk) 17:26, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:Your proposal seems sound. Please follow the process at WP:RM. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:46, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::Ok. Thanks Pcsela (talk) 19:50, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Multiple target error
Hello!
I was converting the citations in an article to short references (source editor), and no matter how hard I tried, one of the sources kept coming up as a multiple target error. I spent nearly an hour making tweaks in an attempt to get rid of it and read the help message I was given, but nothing worked. If anybody here could help out, it would be greatly appreciated! The article in question: Godehilde of Tosny. You'll be able to see the faulty reference at the bottom with the other sources.
Thank you! Reverosie (talk) 03:28, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
: Hello again {{u|Reverosie}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. There were a couple of problems, but the error message was misleading because the error was in the unclosed previous citation template. Fixed. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 03:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you so much for the help! Reverosie (talk) 03:49, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Philip Low (Chemist) page
Is it allowable for a person to request changes to a page if it's about themselves? Philip Low would like to add/replace things about himself on this page that was written about him and I was wondering if I could give those edits to someone. Thanks for your help. Philip S Low (talk) 18:51, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{u|Philip S Low}} Hello and welcome. That is absolutely allowed; you should use the edit request process (click for instructions) on the talk page (Talk:Philip Low (chemist)). The edit request wizard can facilitate a request as well.
:I will note that you spoke about yourself in the third person; if you are not Dr. Low, you must change your username as soon as possible, you shouldn't use his name as your username unless you are him. (you also may not share access to the account with him or anyone) You may change your username via Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS. 331dot (talk) 19:10, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
::I am his Admin Assistant and the one that created this page after being tasked to build a Wikipedia page about him. I went in and tried to change the profile name but can't seem to figure it out. I'll just go ahead and delete this profile and start over with my own name. Philip S Low (talk) 15:03, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Philip S Low: Accounts can't be deleted for reasons of edit attribution. It's easier to just abandon the account and create a new one instead of waiting for an account rename. Either way, disclose your paid relationship with the subject, preferably on the user page of whatever account you use next.{{pb}}I also strongly suggest you read Wikipedia:When your boss tells you to edit Wikipedia. Keep in mind that the subject does not own the article about them, and should reliable sources report negatively on them, it is very possible that sort of content will stick around for a very long time, if not forever. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 08:08, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @Philip S Low. In addition to what 331dot says, please note that {{HD/WINI}} Unless any material he wishes to add is cited to a reliable source, wholly independent of him, it is unlikely to be added. ColinFine (talk) 20:27, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
External links in templates
Hello. Are external links generally allowed in templates? I just came across one in Template:Guantanamo Bay detainees, and it causes the link to appear after the template when it's used in an article, like in List of Yemeni detainees at Guantanamo Bay. It looks out of place, but I'm not sure what the correct approach is in a situation like this, so I don't know what to do. Paprikaiser (talk) 21:41, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
:Huh, I hadn't seen that before either. WP:NAVBOX states "Finally, external links should not be included in navigation templates. Sources may be included in the template documentation (a
:@Paprikaiser Just for clarity, many templates do include valid external links. So {{t|Infobox person}} may have a person's website as a link, for example. Some templates, like {{t|IMDb title}} are specifically designed to give a weblink but in that case are only supposed to be placed in the external links section of an article. As already mentioned, navboxes shouldn't have such links. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:53, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you both! Paprikaiser (talk) 19:45, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Request for Review – Draft: Wasamundi (Cameroon Startup)
Hi all, I’ve drafted a page about Wasamundi, a defunct Cameroonian tech startup from the Silicon Mountain community. I’ve disclosed my past professional connection to the project. Would someone be willing to review the draft at: Wasamundi
I’d appreciate any advice on neutrality, citations, or readiness for mainspace. MountainTechActor (talk) 01:11, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @MountainTechActor. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like the draft would pass as an article at this state. All articles on Wikipedia rely on verifiable information derived from reliable, secondary sources. You've done this the other way around; please read WP:BACKWARDS. Without these sources, the article is entirely based on original research that is impossible to verify for a reader, nor prove that the subject is notable in the first place. It is best if you find sources.
:And to clarify, are you paid in any way to write that article? Tarlby (t) (c) 01:19, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::@Tarlby Thank you for the pointers. I'll make updates based on your feedback. I’m not being paid. I worked with the founding team and the project was very notable in west Africa and Cameroon in particular. I was surprised it does not have a wiki page. I got some facts wrong like when the project shutdown; last year not 2017. Would work to improve sourcing, re-write based on independent references. Would love your second opinion when convenient. Appreciate your guidance. Thanks again. MountainTechActor (talk) 00:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Help request / feedback on a draft
Hello everyone, I am a somewhat disoriented new user. I have been trying to create a page making several mistakes and getting useful feedback from the community. I have now tidied up the draft I am working on, trying to put everything to good use and following the guidelines. Would anyone mind giving an opinion on this draft and, if it works, help me to publish it? Thank you for your help
L.
Draft:Giovanni Soldini (Italian sailor) LUDOSDM (talk) 10:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:You have no need to have bare links in your sources section, the "notes" one should be renamed to References - that's where your sources go. Also, you should have a source for every claim made in a biography of a living person. If not, the content is unsourced and should be removed. And as a minor rule of thumb: your in-text citations goes after any punctuation (commas, periods, colons, etc.), not before. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 11:17, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you so much LUDOSDM (talk) 16:17, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @LUDOSDM, and welcome to the Teahouse.
:This is not something you need to worry about now (the reviewer who accepts your draft will sort it out) but for future reference, the description in parenthesis ("Italian sailor") is something we use only to distinguish articles about different things or people with the same name. Since we have no existing article Giovanni Soldini, when this draft is accepted, that is the title it will have. As I say, you do not need to do anything about this.
:Generally, Teahouse hosts do not to pre-reviews: the way to get feedback on your draft is to submit it for review: that is what the review process is for. ColinFine (talk) 13:18, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you very much LUDOSDM (talk) 16:17, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::I see that Draft:Giovanni Soldini (Italian sailor) and Draft:Giovanni Soldini now both exist. I advise strongly against having rival draft versions for the same article. It can confuse reviewers; it can confuse the creator; and it can confuse or deter anyone who might be thinking of helping to improve the draft. I suggest that you ask to have the former version deleted, or just blank it, to avoid confusion. Maproom (talk) 20:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::::thanks for the info. i am trying to remove it. how can I delete it? LUDOSDM (talk) 20:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::@LUDOSDM you can use the {{tl|db-g7}} template on the draft you wish to delete. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 06:31, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
how to improve my wiki page
Hi advisor, I recently needed to upload a wiki page about the UN Chamber Music Society. but it keeps getting rejected, and I was hoping you could suggest some changes to make sure this page is uploadable. Rachel Zenggggg (talk) 11:06, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Welcome to the teahouse, @Rachel Zenggggg!
:You have no contributions other than your user page and the teahouse, what do you mean by "it keep getting rejected"? The content should also not be on your userpage. If you click this link, then it will create a page for the person you are writing about. From there, you can copy what's written on your userpage to that page.
:I also strongly advise you to read the above advice I gave to LUDOSDM, as well as reading this page about writing better articles. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 11:21, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::It's my second account, the first account has been blocked permanently. But right now i am working on another one's wiki page. The organization called UN Chamber Music Society. Rachel Zenggggg (talk) 11:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::So you are.. evading a block? What was the username of your first account? PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 11:40, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:I have moved the draft from the user page to User:Rachel Zenggggg/sandbox. -- Hoary (talk) 11:32, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{Ping|Rachel Zenggggg}} You should be able to see this, although you are blocked.
:Your draft needs more citations, both to verify what you say, and to show that the subject meets our criteria for inclusion. In particular, most of those citations should be published in reliable sources, independent of the orchestra.
:You also need to declare any conflict of interest or paid involvement.
:You can also read Help:Your first article.
:You can't reply here while you are blocked, but you can reply on your talk page and I (and other editors) will see what you say there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:12, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
Draft:UN Chamber Music Society was created in March by User:Stephanoccenad, who is not blocked. Another (since deleted) version was created by User:UNCMS Editor, who is only softblocked, who may be the blocked user referred to above. {{Ping|331dot}}, as the admin who blocked Rachel Zenggggg. Yet another (also deleted) seems to have been created by User:Barameeperm (also not blocked).
We seem to have one or more good-faith new editors trying to create an article about a non-profit, but not understanding our policies, not least around COI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:03, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:: Hi {{u|Rachel Zenggggg}}, I can help you do this following the rules, please email me at john.cummings at fao.org. Thanks :) John Cummings (talk) 18:15, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Thank you so much!!! I just emailed you. Please feel free to check it out!!! Thank you so much!!!! Rachel Zenggggg (talk) 07:58, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
uhhh?
Hi, I am @Shaneapickle and I have been logged out for a while now, (yes wikipedia is using my computers id for some reason) and i just have a question, how do i get back into my account on my computer, when my school is blocking Wikimedia? I am logged in on my tablet but I am bad at editing on there. I need some help here. 2606:9400:98A0:92A0:B554:36:682:91B2 (talk) 13:49, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Are you saying that your school has blocked wikipedia completely or account creation is blocked?
:If the website is blocked, we don't manage that, your school/school district manages that. Cooldudeseven7 talk/contribs 14:51, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::My school completely blocked wikimedia so i cant log back in 2606:9400:98A0:92A0:B554:36:682:91B2 (talk) 15:12, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Unfortunately, we cannot fix/change that, as your restrictions are set by your School, School District, or Internet Service Provider. Also, if you really do need to edit wikipedia for some reason, I would suggest talking to someone who can manage that to request a change to the restrictions, if possible. Cooldudeseven7 talk/contribs 15:48, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::::alsso is using ip adresses count as abusing multiple accounts or no? 2606:9400:98A0:92A0:B554:36:682:91B2 (talk) 16:31, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Not in these circumstances. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:53, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::I think they are talking about the new login domain thing, like the login page on Wikipedia and other projects share a single domain now. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 04:14, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::sorry to correct you but I am actually a boy (he/him) 2606:9400:98A0:92A0:88A2:81BC:7FFF:C49C (talk) 15:02, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::Singular they. But that's not the issue here. Did you have a further question about editing Wikipedia? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:09, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Is Modern Railways magazine a reliable source, and may I use it?
Hello! This account is new, but really I've been 'walking' along the pages of Wikipedia. Mostly spending my free time browsing about things and pages such as this.
Im a train and bus nerd, and I wish to start editing things along the UK side of these things.
Is Modern Railways a reliable source? I have recently bought a copy of the July 2025 issue, and it contains a story about the Class 455's supposed 'Life Extension' due to weary deliveries of its replacements. Which is what I wish to write as my first edit.
Another thing that begs the question, since it was released by today, which is (22/05/25), is it not allowed due to legal reasons or any other reason?
Much thanks.
SKW. SollieKW (talk) 22:28, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello and welcome. I know of no law which prevents the use of a source on Wikipedia- copyright would prevent you from posting a verbatim copy(or close paraphrasing) but it doesn't prevent you from citing it.
:If Modern Railways has a reputation of fact checking and editorial control(i.e. they don't just publish whatever their writers write), then they are probably reliable. 331dot (talk) 22:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::I was feeling since the edition was released TODAY (as of writing at GMT/BST)!
::I think there has to be some sort of gripe behind it. SollieKW (talk) 22:47, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::{{u|SollieKW}}, our articles about Modern Railways and its publisher Key Publishing do not include any indications of unreliability. The presumption would be that a specialist publication like this is probably reliable for railways topics (which are called railroads in the US). Cullen328 (talk) 03:32, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Thank you! I will soon write up an edit at British Rail Class 455 soon. SollieKW (talk) 10:53, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Hello, @SollieKW. The newness of the source is irrelevant - it is either a reliable source (for this material) or it isn't. I would advise being BOLD - if somebody disagrees, they can revert you and you can have a discussion. That's how Wikipedia works. ColinFine (talk) 09:45, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Alright, cheers! I should think you may review this edit since yourself have an intrest on trains. :) SollieKW (talk) 10:55, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello! I have finished my edits, and I did a bit of shuffling, I even added one of my photos that I took of 455868 when I got to see it.
:Mostly at the future page, and in the operations tab, my small rewrite of 5868.
:Many thanks for the teahouses help! SollieKW (talk) 02:31, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{replyto|SollieKW}} The short answer is: yes, Modern Railways is a reliable source.
::You might not be aware, but we have a discussion board at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways where people with a comprehensive knowledge of the UK's railways may be found. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:10, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Cheers, on the comment you left on the edit, I think it was the visual editor acting up, i was doing the edits around 2am. Forgive me for that! And thanks on fixing my errors, I'm learning every day. SollieKW (talk) 10:43, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Dragon in the background?
If I look at my user page (User:Dodecahedron123) and scroll down so that the grey background takes up most of the screen, I see a grey-on-grey image of a creature (a dragon?). What's up with that? What's the story behind that choice?
File:Screenshot of userpage background.png Dodecahedron123 (talk) 02:52, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Dodecahedron123 What skin are you using? Justjourney (talk | contribs) 03:57, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::I see, the timeless skin. It shows on shorter pages on my end as well. I don't know the story about this though, maybe someone else will know. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 04:04, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:That is cat.svg, the default backdrop image for Timeless. It is documented at :meta:Skin:Timeless and it's visible in the code repository. There's a MediaWiki variable to configure it, but I'm unsure whether the user can disable or override that. 2600:8800:1E8F:BE00:8DB6:9653:34F4:CB50 (talk) 07:54, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{ping|Dodecahedron123}} The documentation is at :mw:Skin:Timeless#Configuration. The image is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/skins/Timeless/resources/images/cat.svg. I don't know how the image was chosen. It's added with this:
::
- mw-content-container {
background:#eaecf0;
border-bottom:solid 4px #00af89;
background-image:url(/w/skins/Timeless/resources/images/cat.svg?558fd);
background-repeat:no-repeat;
background-position:center 10em
}
::It can be removed with this in {{yourcss}}:
::
- mw-content-container {
background-image:none !important;
}
::PrimeHunter (talk) 15:24, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Can I have a cup of tea? {Joke}
This is the Teahouse so can I have one? Therealbubb1e (talk) 04:57, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Of course we can! Here, have a cup of tea. 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 08:16, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Teahouse serving tea
Can the Teahouse serve tea? What pastries does this serve guests for? Cookies or biscuits? What kind of tea you can give me? Would you give me tea please? 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 08:18, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:You can enjoy whatever you can imagine or physically have on hand. I just finished a cup of Red Zinger and a Dark Chocolate KIND Bar. Cullen328 (talk) 08:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::@Cullen328 Cool, what kind of taste does this serve? 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 08:32, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::You can imagine whatever taste you want. Cullen328 (talk) 08:35, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::@Cullen328 Yes, that’s good. I just wanted a green tea or a honey tea, as I would like. @331dot, @Tarlby, and @Hoary, wanna join in serving tea? 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 08:55, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Anyone here? 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 18:22, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::anyone want to share a peach iced tea? xx Madilena (talk) 14:52, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Unprotected Jimbo Wales talk page
Is there a way to unprotect Jimbo Wales talk page? When will this protection expire? And why is this still protected indefinitely? Where can I leave messages, if he will never respond to me? 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 08:58, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:I hope you can realize that many people want to talk to Mr. Wales, not all of them for the right reasons. Please see his user talk page for instructions on contacting him, though. 331dot (talk) 09:19, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::When will he reply to IPs if he barely active? 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 09:53, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Jimbo responds on his own schedule when he finds the question or comment interesting. He may be the best known Wikipedian, but he is just a volunteer. Cullen328 (talk) 16:17, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Registering an account has various advantages, including the ability to post to a semi-protected talk page. Jimbo Wales talk page has been semi-protected for five years because it was a magnet for trolls. Continuing requests by unregistered editors that it is time to unprotect it indicate that it is probably a good idea to leave it semi-protected. However, asking about posting to Jimbo Wales's talk page, and then expressing irritation at being unable to do so, seems to indicate that the poster misunderstands the role of Jimbo Wales in Wikipedia in 2025. There is a myth that Jimbo Wales runs Wikipedia, which he did twenty years ago. He has turned it over to a foundation and a community of volunteers. You could do what you want to do, that is, post to his talk page, if you registered an account, and you would still just be expressing an opinion. Try doing something useful instead of complaining about the inability to post useless anonymous comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:38, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Is there a specific reason you want to speak to Jimmy Wales? You could post what you want to say to him here, and if we find it important or useful, we could post it to his talk page, quoting this thread. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:44, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::They may want him to unblock their blocked registered account. They may not know that he isn't in the business of unblocking accounts that were blocked by administrators in accordance with community process. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:22, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Advice on citing sources, and factual information that lacks "reputable" sources even if known to be true
{{atop|1=Already being discussed at WP:RD/E#Ghost (Swedish band). Please don't start duplicate discussions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC) }}
My initial grievance: here (sorry for repeating a question, I just figured it’s more likely to be answered nicely here). Sorry if this is a long one
Context: I tried to edit the "Members" section of the Ghost (Swedish band) page and it was reverted due to poor quality sources. The reverted (current) version is out of date, but due to the nature of the band (the singer is the "one constant member", musicians are just hired for touring, the musicians don’t often talk about their identities due to former anonymity) it is near impossible to get quality sources in relation to changes in the lineup. The way we, as fans, know about changes in the lineup is almost solely through observation, it’s never "announced".
And so the lineup has changed yet again and the reason we know this is because:
a) Keyboardist announced via social media that she was going to focus on her solo career, she is evidently absent from the current tour and is actively working in the US right now (Problem: can only cite social media, which is apparently discouraged and editors may disregard it without consideration)
b) Fans/concert attendees have confirmed the replacement/presence/absence of specific members (Problem: nowhere to source from/word-of-mouth, only confirmed through pictures posted by the band, again on social media)
c) Insider info (Problem: also via social media, citation was disregarded without consideration)
Sooo I tried to bring the article up to date and because of the lack of sources, it was rejected. My question is essentially: How am I meant to bring articles like this up to date without proper sources being available? Leaving them as is feels like misinformation because it’s so outdated but it’ll just be reverted if can’t back it up and idk what to do! Is.not.here (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
{{abot}}
{{Clear}}
Have I done the right thing?
Hello everyone, Hopefully, all of you are doing great. I created a page of Mario Nawfal, however, it was in my opinion, was vandalized by
:{{u|RaynorRaider}}, I see no evidence of vandalism, and encourage you to withdraw that accusation. You are in a content dispute, which is better discussed on the article's talk page, rather then here. Maproom (talk) 13:55, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::Withdrawing. Thank you for your input. RaynorRaider (talk) 02:24, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:Further to the above reply, please follow the process described at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:32, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::Ok Thank you. RaynorRaider (talk) 02:24, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Cannot cite quote
When quoting, I have to use refname to cite quotes.
I have no idea how to find the refname of my citation (On the Killing of Jean Charles de Menezes, involvement of special forces). pls help. Thanks! BillyTheConqueror (talk) 14:49, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:I don't know what you mean about "I have to use refname to cite quotes", but a "refname" is a name that you (or a tool) assigns to a particular reference for the purposes of the article. See WP:NAMEDREF.
:It's possible that what you are talking about is Harvard referencing, which I know nothing about. See WP:CEFC. ColinFine (talk) 17:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Named references are so the citation can be re-used in the same article without copy/pasting the entire citation. Will this source be cited more than once in the same article? The editor citing the resource will create an arbitrary (but helpful) name. Naming limitations can be found here. Basically your template for citation will be the citation wrapped by a ref name, and a template for the reference page(s) referenced, something like this for pages 5-6:
::@BillyTheConqueror In this case, I think an edit like this would work:
::{{blockquote|QUOTE{{r|IPCC: StockwellOne|p=28}}}}
::
::You don't need the page number mentioned before the quote. You don't need quotes in a block/indented quote, because the formatting already implies it's a quotation. Just Al (talk) 20:16, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@BillyTheConqueror I pasted in that change. See if that fixed it. Just Al (talk) 20:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Cool, thanks! BillyTheConqueror (talk) 19:15, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Bringing in German Wikipedia article into US version
{{atop| 1= OP's opinions on other Wikipedia articles, their donations, and their PhD are all irrelevant to the question asked, and do not affect the answers to it, which were correctly and politely given . Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:37, 24 May 2025 (UTC)}}
How can I add a translation of :de:Kurt Laves into the US edition? TheMongoose47 (talk) 20:40, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Wikipedia:Content translation tool can assist you in translating existing Wikipedia articles. Help:Your first article may also be of use. Further, this is the English Wikipedia it isn't exclusive to the USA. Louis (talk) (contribs) 20:49, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:@TheMongoose47 Your main problem will not be the translation but the need to show how this individual is notable in the quirky way that is defined in the English Wikipedia. The German article has very little in the way of suitable sources. Please read this essay. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:07, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::Mr. Turnbull, Thank you for your comment and I would agree that the German article is light. I have not decided whether to proceed with an English Wikipedia entry but for context, Kurt Laves was a very early astronomer in the US and was the mentor of Edwin Hubble's (space telescope); Walter Sydney Adams (Mt. Wilson Observatory); Forest Ray Moulton and others. He is also among other things, the direct descendant of Charlotte Kestner who was Lotte in Goethe's semi-autobiographical novel "The Sorrows of Young Werther" and his son Walter HC Laves was, among other things, heavily involved in the formation of the UN and was deputy director of UNESCO from 1947 to 1950. Kurt Laves was my grandfather and so I wondered how I could prepare a Wikipedia article on him but I thought that a starting point would be to import in the German Wikipedia article and add links to other related Wikipedia pages in the expectation that others would further contribute. And as a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, anything that I added would be well referenced. I do believe such a Wikipedia article would be more useful than some of the other self-serving items that I occasionally come across on Wikipedia. TheMongoose47 (talk) 21:51, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:TheMongoose47, I second Mike Turnbull's comment. Kurt Laves may or may not be notable (according to en:Wikipedia's understanding of notability): I haven't started to look. If he isn't, no article can be created. If he is, then work from the available sources for his achievements as an astronomer, of course citing these sources as you do so. (His position in a family tree does not help to make him notable.) Yes, en:Wikipedia has a lot of articles that are more or less terrible (and if you encounter them only occasionally, you're lucky). Let's not increase their number. -- Hoary (talk) 22:33, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::I was only being courteous when I used the word occasionally. Despite that, I use Wikipedia frequently and therefore feel an obligation to give moderate donations annually. On a different point, years ago I edited a truly lousy article on another academic in my field and though much of my edits were accepted, I came away feeling like the unidentified moderator was unnecessarily arrogant, judgemental and he was actually ill informed about the field. As a result that I decided not to try again. Today's experience felt better but similar. I would suggest that Wikipedia would benefit from being more welcoming and polite to contributors. TheMongoose47 (talk) 22:49, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::From your summary, it might be easier to start with {{ill|Walter Herman Carl Laves|qid=Q95336550}} as I think there will be much more published information about him. You should also read this guidance but that's no hindrance to you preparing drafts via articles for creation. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:12, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Archive bottom}}
{{Clear}}
Will I be banned?
Just a quick one. Will I be banned for having this signature? User:Sackool (usapan tayo!) 04:01, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:That one is particularly annoying, but I've seen far worse, so my answer to your question is probably not. best, Roxy the dog 04:06, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:The guidelines for signatures state "{{xt|A customised signature should make it easy to identify your username, but this is not required.}}" and "{{xt|A distracting, confusing, or otherwise unsuitable signature may adversely affect other users.}}" So it's not a santionable offence, but bear in mind that if somebody finds it confusing and asks you to change it, you should do so. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
: The purpose of your signature is to make it easy for other people to communicate with you. Yours does not do this. Please show consideration for others, and improve it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:25, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::Alright. Thanks! User:Sackool (usapan tayo!) 15:04, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::As an aside, I am dyslexic and find some signatures hard to read depending on the font. Yours I would give up on trying to work out. But, I assume I am a small percentage of the Wikipedia population with this problem. Knitsey (talk) 15:14, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Sorry, I changed it to make it less confusing for some editors. User:Sackool (usapan tayo!) 15:17, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Now I just want to tilt my screen lol. Knitsey (talk) 15:23, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Can you read my uppity sig, Knitsey? darwin bish 15:34, 24 May 2025 (UTC).
:::::::I can read yours fine. Don't change things because of me. Plus it took me about 3 hours just to work out how to change the colour on my signature, so I'm probably the wrong person to ask about this. Knitsey (talk) 15:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::It's fine. Besides, User:Pigsonthewingtold me that I should change it. User:Sackool (usapan tayo!) 03:32, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::As long as it's readable even if involving tilting screen sideways or upside down. Cwater1 (talk) 23:06, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Lao Tzu said "A man's mark [signature] is like a footprint left by a fish: only the fool can see it." Make of that what you will. Herostratus (talk) 01:46, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
New article
Hello, I have created an article in my sandbox. I now want to submit for review, and in turn for publication. What is my next move? Robson16 (talk) 10:15, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:It is an interesting article! But it needs more work before it is ready to be accepted. First, you need to fix the format of the titles. Look at existing articles to see how it is done.
:I am not sure if the references will show he is notable but they are difficult for me to review. Osa Akwamarynowa (talk) 11:09, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you for your prompt reply. I am not very technical, but will try to work out how to fix format. I can obtain further references, though the obituaries probably give more detail of his life in one place than can be found elsewhere. Does your commment "they are difficult for me to review" mean that you have limited access to check these references? Robson16 (talk) 12:41, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Yes, at the moment they seem to be to books and other offline sources. That's fine, but I don't think I can easily look at them online. Osa Akwamarynowa (talk) 18:47, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:Yes, Robson16, you have to know how to create lists, how to add internal (i.e. elsewhere within Wikipedia) links, and how to italicize. (Each is very simple.) And I quote: "Colvin was instrumental in arranging a clandestine visit to Britain by Baron von Kleist-Schmenzin". (I suppose that this is Ewald-Heinrich von Kleist-Schmenzin, which, if you prefer, you can write "Baron von Kleist-Schmenzin". Internal links!) The name/link aside, this is problematic. Somebody "was instrumental in" doing such-and-such is terribly vague. What did he do? Whatever he did, the claim for it needs a reliable, disinterested source. The currently provided source for this, however, is a book by Colvin himself. Your draft does indeed look interesting but it needs more work before submission. -- Hoary (talk) 11:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you for your reply. I need to work out how internal links etc. work. I agree a word such as instrumental is too vague. The problem is that Colvin's role would probably not have been recorded in Cabinet minutes, particularly as Chamberlain had a tendency to circumvent Cabinet discussion. There may be more in the memoirs of other ministers and active participants of that time. Robson16 (talk) 12:53, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Robson16 It probably helps that {{ill|Ian Goodhope Colvin|qid=59628798}} is in Wikidata (see that link), which should in turn link to some sources. You should read this help for how to do references properly. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:59, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::Note: Might just be me, but the Wikidata link you just provided didn't work. Here: :d:Q59628798 -- MediaKyle (talk) 12:26, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks for the tip on Wikidata and references. Robson16 (talk) 12:55, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Should "The Holocaust" be "Holocaust"?
There is a discussion on the page of The Holocaust. Since this is one of the most serious topic, should it be renamed? here talk page. Wh67890 (talk) 14:08, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:The ongoing discussion will determine if the page will be retitled. Ca talk to me! 14:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
What is the policy around using profanities in edit summaries?
Is it considered acceptable to use profanities such as the "F"-word in an edit summary? Recently encountered [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adam_Milstein&diff=prev&oldid=1291812777 this pretty brazen one.] Iljhgtn (talk) 22:48, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:See WP:Profanity and Wikipedia:Civility. Cwater1 (talk) 23:01, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:It is not ideal to use it towards someone as Wikipedians are human beings. Cwater1 (talk) 23:02, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::So what action should be taken here you think? Iljhgtn (talk) 23:07, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @Iljhgtn. I don't believe anyone takes offense to someone using "I copyedited some shit" as an edit summary, but cussing at another person would be WP:UNCIVIL. Tarlby (t) (c) 23:12, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::What would you consider this? Iljhgtn (talk) 23:20, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::A case of incivility. Tarlby (t) (c) 23:26, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::So what is the next step? Iljhgtn (talk) 23:27, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Perhaps asking them to apologize to the editor. Tarlby (t) (c) 23:29, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::The "for eff sake" did not appear to target a specific editor, but was uncivil nonetheless. Iljhgtn (talk) 23:37, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:Just an observation that all judgements of civil acceptability belong to specific cultures and can never be seen as universal. An obvious example is the word "cussing" used above. I don't think that word is used in English outside the USA. We must always be careful applying one culture's standards to the whole of Wikipedia. HiLo48 (talk) 00:18, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::For eff's sake [emoticon], {{U|HiLo48}}, just try googling {{Blue|"cussing" site:theguardian.com}}. True, the Graun includes material generated in the US, but a skimread of what Google finds in its website shows that a number of the tokens of "cussing" are in non-US contexts. {{U|Iljhgtn}}, don't worry about it. (Or if you must worry about it, just take a day off from editing Wikipedia. And after that, welcome back!) -- Hoary (talk) 01:03, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:::These ads were very popular in New Zealand and Australia. I suspect there are some parts of the English speaking world where they might raise eyebrows. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPYmtEQiG18 HiLo48 (talk) 01:14, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Help needed as user rejects reliable sources without any reasons provided!
Hey Everyone!
I feel a little helpless as I have done an edit on Josh Cahill page as new and very reliable sources have been published regarding his nationality and birthplace. I have added the changes according to wikipedia guidelines and it was also backed up by other experienced editors but one particular editor always tries to undo those without reasoning other than them not fitting his narrative, he doesn't provide any sources but just argues that the claims are wrong. I don't want to lose faith in the truth and wondering why his opinion is supposed to trump reliable sources? Thanks for your guidance. MilesMogul87 (talk) 11:02, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello. You need to discuss your concerns with the other editor involved to reach a consensus. The user has provided reasons in the edit summary. 331dot (talk) 11:05, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:Please follow the process described at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:26, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks for your advice, I have opened a thread in the talk section to find consensus. If any experienced Editor would love to contribute, that would be much appreciated: Josh Cahill - Talk Page. - Thanks! MilesMogul87 (talk) 12:34, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
What happens to the discussion initiated by a blocked user?
As the title suggests, I’m here to find out what actually happens to a discussion initiated by a blocked user on Wikipedia. Is the discussion closed indefinitely, or does it remain open for other users to continue participating? Find the related discussion here on Talk:List of chief ministers of Andhra Pradesh#Requested move 19 May 2025 456legendtalk 07:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:Because others have already participated, the discussion will run its course. The status of the person who initiated it is irrelevant. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:32, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
Requesting review of my sandbox draft.
Hi, I’m a new editor and have a declared conflict of interest (I’m the subject of the article). I’ve drafted a biography at User:Shafiur2020/sandbox and would be grateful if an uninvolved editor could take a look, advise on notability, and let me know if it’s ready for mainspace. Many thanks! Shafiur2020 (talk) 13:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Editor here, see these wikipedia essays
:WP:N
:WP:SELFCITE 2606:9400:98A0:92A0:B554:36:682:91B2 (talk) 13:59, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:The best way to solicit a review is to use the Article Wizard to submit your draft. 331dot (talk) 14:00, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:I will add that writing about yourself- while not absolutely forbidden- is inadvisable, see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 14:01, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:You can add the {{template link|User Sandbox}} template to submit it from there. Please, of course read the articles that are posted above. Please also know that autobiographies are inadvisable as said by 331dot. Happy Editing! Cooldudeseven7 talk/contribs 14:49, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::An IP added those, not me. Just FYI. 331dot (talk) 14:50, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Sorry, I read that wrong! Cooldudeseven7 talk/contribs 15:33, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Ooops sorry. I pasted the wrong reply to you. Apologies.
::::Thank you for your thoughtful reply and advice. I’ve read all the linked guidelines and am working carefully to follow them, including full COI disclosure and independent sourcing. I understand the risks and difficulties involved in drafting about oneself, which is why I’m seeking only independent review — not publication — and want to ensure the material is accurate and policy-compliant before any submission. Again, I really appreciate the guidance. Shafiur2020 (talk) 20:23, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks again for cleaning up the draft — that was really helpful.
::To better address the notability issue: I'm working on clarifying in the text how the sources show significance beyond just documenting my work.
::- The **CNN investigation** shows that my footage and survivor interviews were *central* to how they reconstructed the Tula Toli massacre; the piece is built around that material.
::- The **Spanish Ministry of Culture** PDF documents that the short film I produced (
::- The **BBC World Service Newshour** interview presents the first documentary evidence suggesting pre-planning of the Rohingya massacre, based on testimonies I gathered.
::- **CPJ** reported that I faced threats due to my journalism, highlighting both the sensitivity and impact of the work.
::- The **PEN Americal listing** shows that I am recognised as a writer at risk, effectively exiled because of my reporting. This provides additional context for the press freedom dimensions of my work.
::I’ll revise the draft to make these connections more explicit and would welcome any further suggestions on how best to frame them. Shafiur2020 (talk) 20:20, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Shafiur2020 I have edited your draft, which required extensive clean-up to make it a bit closer to our manual of style. The main issue remains to show how you are notable as defined by Wikipedia. For that you need as many fully independent sources as possible. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks again for cleaning up the draft — that was really helpful.
::To better address the notability issue: I'm working on clarifying in the text how the sources show significance beyond just documenting my work.
::- The **CNN investigation** shows that my footage and survivor interviews were *central* to how they reconstructed the Tula Toli massacre; the piece is built around that material.
::- The **Spanish Ministry of Culture** PDF documents that the short film I produced (
::- The **BBC World Service Newshour** interview presents the first documentary evidence suggesting pre-planning of the Rohingya massacre, based on testimonies I gathered.
::- **CPJ** reported that I faced threats due to my journalism, highlighting both the sensitivity and impact of the work.
::- The **PEN Americal listing** shows that I am recognised as a writer at risk, effectively exiled because of my reporting. This provides additional context for the press freedom dimensions of my work.
::I’ll revise the draft to make these connections more explicit and would welcome any further suggestions on how best to frame them. Shafiur2020 (talk) 20:20, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
When was this link made?
What year? Swcr.kmook (talk) 02:59, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:What link, please? Cremastra (u — c) 03:04, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Request for review of my draft article on Samer Habbas
Hi everyone,
I’m a new editor working on creating a Wikipedia article about Samer Habbas, a personal injury attorney based in California. I have drafted the article with multiple third-party reliable sources, including legal rankings and local news coverage, and tried to follow Wikipedia’s guidelines on neutrality and verifiability.
Could someone please review my draft and provide any feedback or suggestions on how to improve it? I want to ensure the article meets Wikipedia’s standards for notability and style before I submit it for formal review.
Here is the link to my sandbox draft: User:SamerHabbas/sandbox
Thank you very much for your time and help! Sandhya16Jan (talk) 05:49, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{u|Sandhya16Jan}}: to establish that Habbas is notable enough (in Wikipedia's idiosyncratic sense) to warrant an article about him, you'll need to find and cite several reliable independent published sources with extensive discussion of him. I see no such source in your draft. Maproom (talk) 07:27, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you for the feedback—I really appreciate your time and guidance.
::I understand that Wikipedia requires reliable, independent sources with significant coverage. I've cited some legal directories (like Avvo, Martindale-Hubbell, and Super Lawyers), as well as press coverage such as the Los Angeles Times Business Visionaries feature. I’ve also included settlement reports and recognitions listed on third-party legal ranking sites.
::That said, I’d really appreciate your suggestions:
::Are there specific types of sources you recommend I look for (e.g., newspaper features, legal news outlets)?
::Would a profile in Law360 or a news article about one of his major cases be more appropriate?
::If I find two or three such articles, would that likely establish notability?
::I'm happy to revise the draft and do more research. Thanks again for pointing me in the right direction! Sandhya16Jan (talk) 07:34, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::These things are largely not reliable, independent sources providing significant coverage. Simple database entries and basic profiles written by unknown parties are not useful and these are not editorial (and at least one is for hiring Habbas). The Los Angeles Times link is also inappropriate as "LA Times Studio" explicitly "does not involve the Los Angeles Times editorial staff," and is developed "from press releases, announcements and contributor content."
:::You seem to be concentrating on "finding" articles, but that's not how Wikipedia articles work and is an example of WP:BACKWARDS. The proper way to go about things is to start with the sources, and then write the article base on the sources. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 08:24, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Conducted Independent Research, but don't have anywhere to post it and reference for a wiki page
I made a stats page for the women's rugby world cup statistics, basically mirroring what the men's version had, but unlike the men's none of this information was in a central location, so I went through world rugby game databases, ESPN match reports, and a lovely dutch website I found saved on internet archive to get a full list of scorers over the 9 prior editions of the tournament. To create the following article:
Records and statistics of the Women's Rugby World Cup
However since this is new research (as far as I know) there's nowhere for me to reference out for it. I've sent it on to the RFU and some other sites like https://womensrugbydata.com/womens-rugby-world-cup-1991/ but they haven't formally uploaded all the data yet.
What would you recommend I do in this instance? Is there a temporary repository I could use to source out the work I've done for this project? HitchikersPie (talk) 23:00, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
: Compiling statistics in this manner does not contravene the relevant guideline (WP:OR). So long as you cite the various sources that you have used, which you can do at the end of the table rather than at each individual point, that will be fine. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:52, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Correct place to ask about notability concerns
Hi, what would be the right place to ask about notability concerns prior to nominating for deletion? Boynamedsue (talk) 05:25, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
: You can ask on the talk page of any of the WikiProjects listed on the article's talk pages. Be aware that some projects are more active than others and you may not get an answer very quickly on the inactive ones. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:54, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
My Profile writing in Wikipedia - Request for guidance - Reg.
I am VS Balajee.
I would like my Profile to be updated in Wikipedia as I am mentoring a lot of Software Firms at free of cost.
Can any one guide me in the procedss VS Balajee (talk) 09:29, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @VS Balajee, and welcome to the Teahouse.
:If Wikipedia has an article about you (which is not a "profile", as it does not belong to you and is not controlled by you) then you should not edit it, and instead you should submit edit requests for changes - noting that unless any information you wish to add is supported by reliable published sources wholly independent of you, it is unlikely to be added.
:I don't find an article with "Balajee" in the title, so I'm guessing that we do not have an article about you at present, and you mean that you want your "profile" to appear in Wikipedia. If that is the case, please understand that promotion of any kind is not permitted in Wikipedia, and Wikipedia can have an article about you only if you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability - which most of us do not.
:Your mention of "as I am mentoring a lot of Software Firms at free of cost" strongly implies that your purpose is to promote your services (Wikipedia uses "promotion" to mean "telling the world about something" and does not distinguish commercial from non-commercial purposes). Please find other outlets to tell the world about your services. ColinFine (talk) 09:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
cropping a photo posted
is it possible to crop a photo once it is posted?
thank you Guckercoalco (talk) 20:09, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Download the photo, crop it and upload under a different name. Ruslik_Zero 20:37, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::can the original photo be deleted? how? Guckercoalco (talk) 20:45, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::{{yo|Guckercoalco}} If you uploaded the original photo, you can tag it for speedy deletion by adding {{tl|db-g7}} to the original upload page. If you didn't, you probably shouldn't delete it at all, unless it's a non-free photo, in which case if you swap the photo in the article you are working on with the cropped version you can add {{tl|Orfud}} to the original photo and it will be deleted after 7 days. Worgisbor (congregate) 20:59, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::::I did upload the pictures. I had someone comment that it looked like I was not the owner of a picture but I am due to photo included the address where i have my pics. the pc needs cropped. I just want to abide by the requirements on this page but being a beginner at this... I'm learning slowly. many thanks Guckercoalco (talk) 22:14, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::::: Rather than uploading a screenshot please download ("save") the original image to your computer and then upload that image to Wikimedia Commons. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:08, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:There is a Crop tool in Commons, which I believe can be activated for other projects too: see :C:COM:CropTool. ColinFine (talk) 21:01, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::thank you! Guckercoalco (talk) 22:17, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Guckercoalco, are you referring to the image you uploaded of a computer monitor which is showing a page on Flickr which is showing a photo that someone else took which is showing a flag on a flagpole, bearing the logo to which you own the copyright as heir? DS (talk) 00:29, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Creating a Biography for an Individual
How do i publish a biography on wikipedia for a person? Silvanussa (talk) 13:40, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:See Help:Your first article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:31, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Why multiple accounts can’t be used to contribute to the same page or article in a way that suggests that they are multiple people?
After reading Wikipedia:BADSOCK, what I found interesting is “Contributing to the same page or discussion with multiple accounts: Editors may not use more than one account to contribute to the same page or discussion in a way that suggests they are multiple people.”
But can you please all explain why can’t you create multiple accounts just to pretend to be multiple people or mislead that they are different people? Why these multiple accounts should never be used to edit the same article, unless linked and disclosed each other? Why is this considered sockpuppetry? And why is this forbidden to use more than one account to pose as multiple editors? And why it is considered a policy? However, why it couldn’t be used to look like more than one editor contributing to Wikipedia? Thanks. 2600:387:F:4B16:0:0:0:9 (talk) 17:15, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Same reason why voting fraud is illegal in elections. There is no legitimate reason to lie to other editors by making them believe your socks are multiple people. It gives an unfair advantage to the sockmaster if they are not caught. It sets an atmosphere where we cannot trust each other. Why do you think this should be allowed? Tarlby (t) (c) 17:28, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::I’m only talking about using multiple accounts to edit the same article or page. 2600:387:F:4B16:0:0:0:9 (talk) 18:01, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:::There is no real reason for a constructive editor to want to edit a page using multiple accounts. GoldRomean (talk) 18:40, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:::It's still lying and can be used to pretend there is a consensus. like user:tarlby said, there isn't any reason to do so unless you had malicious intent mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 18:42, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
::::@Tarlby @Mgjertson Yeah right? I don’t think that this should be allowed. Can this be the same with help desks, when voting or consensus is not involved? 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 08:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Possible Link Rot in Domenico Veneziano article
The Domenico Veneziano entry contains a link to an external video [http://smarthistory.khanacademy.org/venezianos-st.-lucy-altarpiece.html]. This site does exist, but is at the current time a paid site, and the link does not lead one to information about this artist. This could be mentioned on the article's Talk Page, but is there a better way to handle the problem? Oldsilenus (talk) 20:41, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{a note}} I do not believe this site is paywalled, but after dismissing the donation screen it said it could not find the page. Worgisbor (congregate) 21:06, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
:Yes, this does appear to be a donation screen, not a paywall.
:This link might've been deleted, as per the message saying it cannot find the page.
:Are you sure that is the correct link? Cooldudeseven7 talk/contribs 21:17, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::Actually after asking the question I noticed that if one searches with the term "venezianos-st.-lucy-altarpiece" on the site one comes to the video. This is the way the link is given in the entry, but certainly NOT the best English grammar (one would expect "St Lucy Altarpiece" or "Veneziano's St Lucy Altarpiece" to work but they do not. Oldsilenus (talk) 03:14, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Then, after searching, it looks like the link is actually this. [https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/renaissance-reformation/early-renaissance1/painting-in-florence/v/veneziano-saint-lucy-altarpiece-1445-47] Cooldudeseven7 talk/contribs 16:08, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting in ArbCom elections
Hello there, how can I vote in ArbCom elections? But, how could I vote if the voting is not visible on wiki and from a different site? Why are these votes often scrutinized and checked? How does it work though? What is the reason on why it is not seen visibly unlike other voting processes? 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 08:13, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Please read Wikipedia:5-minute guide to ArbCom elections, which explains a lot. -- Hoary (talk) 08:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::Hello. In order to vote in ArbCom elections, you must register an account and make at least 150 edits with that account. IP editors cannot participate in ArbCom elections. The voting process is scrutinized and checked to ensure fairness and accuracy. If you register an account and make over 150 edits on a timely basis, the next election will be visible to you. Cullen328 (talk) 08:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Cullen328 @Hoary But would voting be on wiki or off wiki? I don’t see where voting takes place, since I don’t see them. 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 08:34, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::IP editor. Didn't you read the page that Hoary linked? The voting procedure is explained at Wikipedia:5-minute guide to ArbCom elections#Voting process. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:03, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Yes, I did. Is it like AfDs? 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 15:06, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::No, ArbCom elections are an entirely different process than AfDs. Arbcom elections are conducted using a special software tool called [https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/SecurePoll SecurePoll]. Cullen328 (talk) 16:23, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::You haven't seen how voting for ArbCom is done because you don't have a registered account. Voting for ArbCom is a very visible process for registered editors. Do something useful rather than wasting your time asking questions to which the answer is registering an account. Oh. I almost forgot. You probably do have a registered blocked account. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:42, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Creating a page.
I have created a page for an artist and clicked publish, is that it uploaded or is there checks? It hasn't come up on other devices Smith29127 (talk) 15:30, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Referring to Draft:Holly_Nicholson? Make sure you click publish, looks you since then have. Cwater1 (talk) 15:42, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @Smith29127. You "published" the edit to the page, but it has not actually been created as an article. Please submit the draft (with the template at the top of the page) so an experienced editor can evaluate it and choose to publish or not. They will give feedback. Tarlby (t) (c) 15:44, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::Hello, @Smith29127, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.
::A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what several people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish in reliable sources, and very little else. None of your citations is to anything resembling that description, and so, in Wikipedia's terms, your draft is unsupported by citations, and will not be accepted.
::{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}} ColinFine (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:It's a draft -- it won't show up in main article space. Mrfoogles (talk) 15:44, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:If you need to search a draft from the search bar, Just search in the following formatting:
:Draft: (draft name)
:So in your case, you would need to search Draft:Holly_Nicholson.
:Articles do not show up in the mainspace until not in the Draft space. Cooldudeseven7 talk/contribs 16:11, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Why is Social Media not a reliable source
Why isn’t social media a reliable source, and what happens if you cite them as a source? Why it needs to be from both academic and independent sources instead of just social network platforms? Examples of social media not being a reliable source. 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 09:52, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello IP user. Social media is not generally a reliable source, because anybody can say anything about anything on social media. There are certain limited cases where social media can be used - see WP:SPS ColinFine (talk) 09:59, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::Ok, what about Wikipedia and other library books? 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 15:05, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Wikipedia does not consider itself a reliable source. Books may or may not be reliable; it all depends on the book in question. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:06, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::@Writ Keeper Are physical books easy to cite, compared to online? Do Wikipedians and users read them for learning something new? I see a point in citing them for articles. 2600:387:F:6118:0:0:0:1 (talk) 19:14, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Physical books aren't difficult to cite -- just put in the title, page number, and suchlike. Although there's not necessarily an automatic citation. Re: your second question, not sure I'm understanding you right, but I probably most Wikipedians read books, yes. There are relatively more citations to online sources because they're easier to find (just use Google) but the articles that cite books tend to be good ones, as long as they're reliable books. Mrfoogles (talk) 18:04, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:For examples, see Fake news and The Disinformation Project, for starters. Shantavira|feed me 10:47, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Requesting Review and Suggestions – Draft:Information Security Education and Awareness Project
I’ve created a draft article titled (Draft:Information Security Education and Awareness Project) It’s about a public initiative focused on promoting information security awareness and education. I would appreciate it if someone could review the draft and provide feedback or suggestions on how I can improve it to meet Wikipedia’s notability and style guidelines. Thank you! Yoursfriend (talk) 10:48, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{u|Yoursfriend}}, your draft cites many sources, but the ones I've checked don't qualify as independent of the subject. Which three of the sources do most, in your opinion, to establish that the subject is wikinotable? Maproom (talk) 13:49, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you for your feedback. I agree that many sources about ISEA are official or affiliated. However, the following three sources do the most to independently establish the project's notability:
::# The Times of India
::#* [https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/government-has-a-cybersecurity-tip-of-the-day-for-citizens/articleshow/113986268.cms “Government has a cybersecurity tip of the day for citizens”]
::#* This national newspaper article discusses ISEA’s public cyber awareness campaigns and their impact, demonstrating mainstream media recognition and public relevance.
::# ECB Bikaner (Engineering College Bikaner)
::#* [https://ecb.ac.in/isea/index.html ISEA at ECB]
::#* As an independent academic institution, ECB Bikaner references ISEA’s objectives and best practices, showing the project’s adoption and influence outside its own consortium.
::# ERNET India (with International Collaboration)
::#* [https://ernet.in/projects/isea.html Information Security Education & Awareness (ISEA)]
::#* This source documents ISEA’s collaborative training programs with international partners (such as ITU and Malaysia University of Science and Technology), and lists participation from a broad range of Indian public sector organizations, demonstrating institutional and international recognition.
::These sources are independent of ISEA’s core team and directly support the project’s national impact, adoption by outside institutions, and recognition in the media and international community. Yoursfriend (talk) 14:24, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Hi, are you using an LLM such as ChatGPT in any way? If so, I strongly encourage that you don't and explain why those sources are notable in your own words. In addition, if you are using AI to write your draft as well, it is unlikely to ever be accepted. Currently, it has a very promotional tone that needs to be fixed. Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 16:28, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Thank you for your feedback. I have revised the draft to remove promotional language and ensure a neutral, fact-based tone throughout. I have also prioritized independent, secondary sources to support the article’s statements, and I have addressed challenges and limitations for balance. Please let me know if any further adjustments are needed. Yoursfriend (talk) 04:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Please address the LLM concerns. You should not be communicating using AI, and LLMs are known to hallucinate and create poor quality articles with information not supported by sources. Best, GoldRomean (talk) 00:40, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
pop ups
How do I get rid of the pop-ups when navigating over a link. I don't have an account and don't really want to create one just to get the page to display properly. 207.68.112.138 (talk) 20:34, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:This feature is called Page Previews. Does mw:Page_Previews#Logged-Out_Users help? If it doesn't work, you can also try using CSS to set display: none. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 20:40, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you Sungodtemple. This worked for me. 207.68.112.138 (talk) 18:20, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
Addition of Pakistani news broadcast channel, GTV News (Pakistan) to Wikipedia.
I want to add a Pakistani news broadcast channel, GTV News (Pakistan), to Wikipedia. Kumailabbasseo (talk) 21:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @Kumailabbasseo, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.
:In most cases, the only way to "add something to Wikipedia" is to write a well-sourced and neutral encyclopaedia article about the subject.
:This is an exciting and rewarding thing to do; but it is challenging, especially for new editors, and is probably very different from anything you've ever done before.
:{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}} ColinFine (talk) 22:49, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
SASS Where is Donation button?
While I have donated to WIKI before I am having trouble finding the "Donate" button again :-( :-( :-( ----MountVic127 (talk) 22:16, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi, it's here - https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ways_to_Give Louis (talk) (contribs) 22:22, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:@MountVic127 You might be interested to first read up on Wikipedia finances. Shantavira|feed me 08:11, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Does this article satisfy NPOV
Modifications have been made to this article. I feel it is written in NPOV, but since I wrote it, I would like to get other opinions from others. DankPedia (talk) 06:31, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:It's already at AfD. -- Hoary (talk) 07:07, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:: Speedily kept. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:26, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Crossed out edits
Why are some edits crossed out? Is it a copyright thing?
--pro-anti-air (talk) 02:22, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
: Welcome to the Teahouse, {{u|Pro-anti-air}}. STRIKEOUT markup is used on talk and discussion pages when a user needs to change what they said, but enough time has elapsed that it would be a problem to simply remove or edit over the relevant text. You would, for instance, use it when someone has already responded, so as to keep the context of what they were responding to. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 02:27, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::I mean in the View history tab, some edits are crossed out and cannot be viewed.
::--pro-anti-air (talk) 02:39, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Oh, those ones are edits/revisions that have been deleted or suppressed, generally for legal or safety reasons. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 02:46, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::: Yes, {{u|Pro-anti-air}} copyright violations are just one reason certain edits will have been made unavailable to view. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 03:06, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{od}}
Edits can be hidden (they are still there and can be seen by admins; or in severe cases only oversighters) for a number of reasons. In addition to the above-stated copyright violation, these can include:
- Defamation
- People posting others' personal information
- Individuals accidentally posting their own personal information
- Spam
- Illegal content (chiefly CSAM)
-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:13, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
One template documentation page used on multiple templates?
Hi! Template:AI-generated/doc is used on both Template:AI-generated and Template:AI-generated inline. Some of its text seems to be made to change depending on which template it's being used on, but a lot of it isn't, even where it only applies to one of the templates.
For example, the {{tqqi|"Template:ChatGPT" redirects here}} text appears on both templates, Template:AI-generated inline#How to use has incorrect instructions (saying to place it at the top of the article, rather than after the suspicious sentence), and the example in that section uses {{tl|AI-generated}} even though it's on Template:AI-generated inline.
I'm not sure what to do about it, but could someone please fix that? Thanks! 2A00:807:D3:B2CD:7445:39E3:B45E:3EE3 (talk) 19:05, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Fixed. Feel free to populate Template:AI-generated inline/doc.
:Thank you for flagging this issue. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:08, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Video links for author
In the Career section of the article on Anne Applebaum, two boxes titled "Video Links" duplicate a standard external link (to C-Span) at the end of the article. Should these video boxes be retained? Pac Veten (talk) 19:29, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Pac Veten, I suppose that the idea of the editor(s) who provided the boxes was that the boxes should appear close to the description/mention in the body text of the books/issues/whatever that Applebaum discusses in the total of three videos that are linked to in those boxes. This arrangement is unusual in Wikipedia (usually taken as a minus), though I suppose it's helpful (a plus). The three videos presumably -- I confess that I didn't check -- can be found linked to from that C-Span page (or its continuation) that's one of the external links at the foot of the article. However, that C-Span page (with its continuation) links to a lot more than three of Applebaum's videos. I can understand how you'd think that something about this isn't entirely satisfactory; however, nothing about it strikes me as worrisome. So I'm disinclined to make any change (but open-minded about changes made by others). Uh ... if you'd like to improve this article (which already is pretty good), then I suggest attending to the references currently described simply as "Blob". (Did an editor perhaps intend these descriptions as temporary placeholders but then get distracted by other matters and forget about them?) -- Hoary (talk) 07:03, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::The question is whether these video boxes are promotional? Pac Veten (talk) 14:45, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
How do you know that anything on Wikipedia is true?
"Hi, I'm new here and trying to learn more about Wikipedia. I was wondering, how do you know that anything on Wikipedia is *true*?" Bee6680213 (talk) 21:30, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @Bee6680213. It looks like you've copied and pasted your question from someone else's question. There should be answers there. Tarlby (t) (c) 21:35, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:The content is sourced with secondary sources. Sources make that we can verify. Anatole-berthe (talk) 21:51, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::Quite recently, I encountered two extremely serious errors. One error that had been added very recently provided misinformation about medication that could potentially result in death. I fixed that one. The other error gave misinformation about the law, which potentially could result in a 15-year prison sentence for someone who relied on that. An IP editor added that piece of misinformation over 10 years ago. BTW, chatgpt will provide the same misinformation if you ask it the right way. I've left that error in place. You might think they would have some process to ensure such edits get checked, but as you now know, that's not the case. Fabrickator (talk) 22:29, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Who is "they"? HiLo48 (talk) 02:45, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::: Welcome to the Teahouse, {{u|Bee6680213}}. How do you know anything is true? This is not merely a question about Wikipedia. If you ask Wikipedia users, we will readily agree that Wikipedia is not itself a reliable source, for several reasons. First, anyone can edit and you may catch an article at a time when someone with an axe to grind or simply vandalize has changed the reading to something untrue and unverified. Second, the verifiability policy means that we try to refer readers to sources that are considered reliable but often those sources fail to provide truth. This reliance on external reporting means that biases in that reporting will also show up as bias in Wikipedia articles.
::: The collective action of thousands of editors will tend to drive the content towards something resembling truth, but a reader wanting to know the real truth about a subject will still have to look at the references and make up their own mind. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 02:39, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::I don't think Wikipedia is worthless. That is the nicest way I can put it. There's a huge amount of information, there's a lot less "hype" than you might get from a straight web search. And (for better or worse) there's a certain "level" of plausibility (though this is perhaps the most dangerous aspect. ... If a random website says something is true, you might be skeptical, but if Wikipedia says it, then you're likely to accept that it's probably true.)
::::The ability to check citations is of somewhat questionable usefulness. Sources are not required to be online, and if they are online, they're not required to be free. Now if it's something that has no practical effect if it's right or wrong, then these objections are not especially valid. I identified a couple of very serious errors (in terms of potential for harm) within about a week, and I'm not going around searching for errors or even looking at more than just a handful or articles. One error had just been inserted a couple of days before I discovered it, and I fixed it. The other has been there for ten years, but I chose just to note the error on the article talk page. I would suggest that the notion that all these editors have the effect of "driving content towards the truth" is perhaps a dangerous one. Fabrickator (talk) 04:56, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Not a single source is perfect with 100% true You can click on a random guy's blog and get the same false information as you may find on Wikipedia. Obvious vandalism and disruptive editing on popular articles are almost instantly reverted, but on more niche articles, having the skills to spot misinformation can be useful DankPedia (talk) 06:34, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::The whole point is that this is not some random guy's blog ... Wikipedia is supposed to be better, because it supposedly cites reliable sources and there are other editors looking over these edits made by other members of the Wikipedia community, all in an effort to maintain its accuracy. What I'm saying is that this can be delusional. Erroneous content gets added, whether done maliciously or not, and the reality is that nobody takes responsibility for the result. Fabrickator (talk) 09:39, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Please see WP:TRUTH. We don't claim that anything presented is the truth. We're only as good as the people who choose to help and have the time to invest in poring over the millions of articles to make sure they accurately summarize the sources provided. 331dot (talk) 09:44, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::This effectively misrepresents the issue and the situation. For one thing, the Wikipedia general disclaimer (footnoted at the bottom of every article) states {{blockquote|The content of any given article may recently have been changed, vandalized, or altered by someone whose opinion does not correspond with the state of knowledge in the relevant fields.}} This rather strongly suggests that the problem is limited to content which has recently been changed, which leads us to weasel wording, described as: {{blockquote|vague, misleading, or ambiguous language intended to give the impression of meaning, truth, or authority without actually making a clear or verifiable statement}} which really challenges the legal validity of WP:TRUTH. And oh, by the way, the same policy also states (tongue in cheek):{{blockquote|Where it is inaccurate it is at least definitively inaccurate. In cases of major discrepancy it's always reality that's got it wrong.}} This being a reference to the apparent claim that everything has been checked against reliable sources, yet this is not true even if you allow for the fact that not everything will be immediately verified. Fabrickator (talk) 16:16, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::WP:NOTRIGHT: we can try to make it as good as possible, but can't guarantee anything.
:::::::::The purpose of the Teahouse is to get help with actually editing Wikipedia, not a general forum for discussion. DankPedia (talk) 19:12, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
= Ditto =
: "Hi, I'm new here and trying to learn more about Wikipedia. I was wondering, how do you know that anything on Wikipedia is *true*?"
hi Jirapatch Pruksanusak (talk) 04:11, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
: Welcome to the Teahouse, {{u|Jirapatch Pruksanusak}} This same question was asked and answered a few topics above. Please check out those answers and ask again if you have more questions. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 05:15, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
= Truth and Wikipedia =
"Hi, I'm new here and trying to learn more about Wikipedia. I was wondering, how do you know that anything on Wikipedia is *true*?" Chanarat.TRI (talk) 13:00, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:See above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:01, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
I am singer Naqi Ali Khan
{{hat|No question posed. Blatant advertising}}
Naqi Ali Khan, a distinguished South Asian Pakistani Canadian singer. Renowned for his mastery in Indian classical, Khayal Thumri, Ghazals, Film songs, Folk, Fusion, and Sufi music, Naqi Ali Khan is the son of the late Karamat Ali Khan and the grandson of the legendary Ustad Bade Ghulam Ali Khan of the Kasur Gharana.
Naqi Ali Khan's golden voice has graced stages globally, from New York City to Calcutta, earning accolades on platforms like Radio Pakistan, Canadian TV channels, and prestigious international music festivals. As a cultural ambassador, Naqi has founded the Ustad Bade Ghulam Ali Khan Music Conference in Lahore, Pakistan.
Naqi Ali Khan's enchanting performances have resonated with audiences worldwide, earning him recognition at the World Performing Arts Music Festival in Lahore. 70.50.56.155 (talk) 04:47, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
{{hab}}
{{Clear}}
i have a question
i need to know if politicians are notable for one event Asphxiation (talk) 22:02, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
: Hello @Asphxiation. That is not the case. Politicians would need to satisfy WP:POLITICIAN, WP:BIO, or WP:GNG to be notable.WP:BIO specifically notes that the subjects of biographies cannot be notable based on sources covering one event. Tarlby (t) (c) 22:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Good article assessments
Hello!
First of all, I'm sorry if this is very similar to my last question; I'm new to Wikipedia and still trying to learn as much as I can!
I was curious about the process of promoting articles from B-Class to Good Article status, and have a few questions about it:
- If an article fails a nomination, how much time do you have to wait before it can be nominated again?
- How much time do you have to fulfill requests by a reviewer before said reviewer fails you? I'm worried about this because of my own schedule
- How long does the process of review take in the first place, and how rigorous is it? How many nominated articles usually pass?
- What's the difference between a good article and an A-Class article in the first place? Which rating is "higher"?
- Most importantly of all, is the article I've been preparing ready to be nominated? Why or why not? The article is Baldwin IV of Jerusalem as I've said earlier (sorry again!)
Thank you so much in advance, and if this question is too similar to the last one, please let me know! Reverosie (talk) 18:15, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:Update: I've made some more changes to the article to make it better Reverosie (talk) 02:18, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
::I don't think there is a cooldown for resubmissions, I've had most of my GA nominations fail, but I did not have trouble renominating it after addressing the concerns that were raised by the reviewers. You should be fine unless you're like rapidly resubmitting without much improvements since last decline. Reviewers will usually wait for you (if you tell them you're busy), you don't have to worry about being failed unless you're gone for like, months. GAs aren't that strict, at least in my opinion. However, expect the process to take at least half a month, because active reviewers are always in review circles (the "I review yours and you review mine" thing), and only the backlog drive held every some time brings GA nominations by new nominators in spotlights (at least, in my opinion). According to several tools I use to assist me in editing, the A-class assessment is higher than Good Articles. I've never seen a A-class review happen close to me though. Consider requesting a WP:Peer review to get advised from editors who know about writing articles better than I do. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 03:08, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Thank you so much! This was very helpful :) Reverosie (talk) 04:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Article on a different device
I am in the making of a new page but switched to a different device. I am wondering how to access it and keep on editing it. Please help! SVSWIKIPED (talk) 17:49, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:You need to click "publish changes" to save the draft, you may then access it on any device where you log in. 331dot (talk) 18:21, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::ohh ok SVSWIKIPED (talk) 00:04, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Trying to Find Good References for a Topic with None
Saw a new state highway sign in my town and wanted to write an article on it (it is a newly resigned highway. There are no articles or sources of any kind on it. Any good ways to find sources for such a situation. Thanks! JeepLibertyIsBestCar (talk) 20:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:Subjects must meet WP:N to warrant an article here. It sounds as though the highway does not - but it might in future, so keep looking for sources. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:02, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Inquiry
Hello! :D
Do the Smithsonian magazine and New Scientist websites count as reliable sources?
Thank you! NectarLupine (talk) 04:00, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
: Hello {{u|NectarLupine}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. Questions about specific publications, as a whole, asking if they can be considered reliable are misguided. Yes, some of the articles published by those magazines or websites might be considered reliable sources for some purposes. But you always have to evaluate a source in context and that depends on more considerations than where it was published. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 04:30, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:In general, yes, though some caveats apply, such as self-publication, if the author is also the subject of the article where you wish to cite the work.
:As always, we can only comment generally, unless you provide specific example. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:35, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Wikipedia as sources
If Wikipedia isnt a reliable source since a page might be vandalized, can we use a revision of a page to cite sources?Iwillpeeonadime (talk) 07:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:No, Wikipedia is never considered a reliable source. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 07:24, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Iwillpeeonadime Any decent article will itself have sourcing for the statements it makes. Transfer these to the new article after checking they do say what you have summarised. Of course, you can WP:WIKILINK the previous article as well if that will help readers. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:32, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Can they?
I was reading WK user page guidelines and I saw something strange, "Wikipedia is not your personal homepages" and you cannot promote your social medias. But, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ZKevinTheCat this user correct me if i am not sure, does uses the promotion. I do not know this person but I just came upon his account and noticed the disorder. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wh67890 (talk • contribs) 12:25, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:Regular contributors are—reasonably—given leeway to mention their external accounts. The issue is when people are here solely or mainly to promote themselves. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:56, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::That Makes sense. Thanks Wh67890 (talk) 13:28, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Wh67890 I don't think that is a problem the relevant part of the guidance at WP:UPYES is {{tq|You are also welcome to include a simple link to your personal home page, although you should not surround it with any promotional language. However, if a link to your home page is the only thing on your userpage, this may be seen as an attempt at self-promotion.}} Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:57, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::Oh. Thanks for clarifying. Wh67890 (talk) 13:27, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:Reading the policy @Mike Turnbull linked, it says "Extensive self-promotional material, especially when not directly relevant to Wikipedia." is banned. Basically, don't put an ad for your small business. But linking to social medias is fine, I think. Mrfoogles (talk) 18:02, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Podcasts
Does Wikipedia allow the sole source of a statement in the text to be a podcast without a transcript? An example is note 19 of Abraham Lincoln and slavery. I wanted to see if the source cited in note 19 supports the statement in the text, but I will not spend time listening to a podcast to do so. With a written source, one can do a word search and quickly determine whether it supports the statement in the text. Maurice Magnus (talk) 23:09, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:I don't believe there is a requirement that to use a podcast as a source, a transcript must be available. Just as there is no requirement that sources be in English(WP:NOENG) or more generally no requirement that a source be easy or free to access. If you want to verify a source, you need to do the work needed to do so- whether it's listen to a podcast, go to the library to dig a copy of an old newspaper out of its archives, or fly to another country and learn its language. 331dot (talk) 00:39, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Listing humorous vandalism
On my user page, I was considering creating a list of funny vandalism that I've seen on Wikipedia, but I don't know if that would be allowed as it might come across as encouraging vandalism. Would this be allowed? --cheesewhisk3rs (pester) 23:13, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @Not-cheesewhisk3rs. That would probably not be allowed. (WP:BEANS) Tarlby (t) (c) 23:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::Okay then. I've seen multiple users do it though, does it get removed from their pages if they list interesting vandalism? --cheesewhisk3rs (pester) 23:45, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Opinion from other editors could be different. I've certainly seen others agree with my assessment. Tarlby (t) (c) 23:47, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{ping|Not-cheesewhisk3rs}} You might want to have a look at Wikipedia:Silly Things, especially the BadJokesAndOtherDeletedNonsense part. Lectonar (talk) 09:42, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
About article class assessments
Hello!
I was wondering how frequently articles are assessed for quality and have their classes changed. I've been making contributions to an article in an attempt to increase its score as much as possible (I don't know if I've done enough to increase it from C-Class to B-Class yet, though) and wanted to know about the process behind it.
I'm assuming that it has to be done by certain select people and can't be changed by any editor, but I'm new to Wikipedia and I'm not sure.
Thank you! Reverosie (talk) 01:48, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, {{u|Reverosie}}. There are only two class ratings that are really important and involve multiple editors and a formal process. Those are Good articles and Featured articles. To be frank, almost no active editor cares whether one specific article is rated C or B, and the distinction is highly subjective. Those decisions are made by any individual editor including you. Some editors are reluctant to upgrade articles that they have improved, but personally I have no problem with editors doing that. If you mention which article, I will take a look. Cullen328 (talk) 02:21, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you so much! The article is Baldwin IV of Jerusalem and I've been working on improving it since I made my account. I'm wondering if it would be worthy of B-Class (Good class in the future), but since I'm the one who made these edits I'm highly reluctant to change the article's status myself. Reverosie (talk) 02:23, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:::See if the article complies with Wikipedia:Content assessment/B-Class criteria. If not make changes to improve it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:36, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::::I do think that it does, but I don't want to be hasty since I made a lot of these improvements myself. I'm still new to Wikipedia and I'm therefore still learning the written and unwritten rules :) Reverosie (talk) 02:54, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Hi! Although technically not its purpose, a lot of editors post articles whom they want an independent editor to assess or do not have time to assess themselves at WP:WikiProject Wikipedia/Assessment, if you're really worried about bias (a good thing!). Personally, the article needs a copyedit for essay-like wording (such as {{tpq|During the regency, it became clear that the king was indeed affected...}} - "indeed"? "became clear"? etc. before becoming B-class. If you wish, you can request a copyedit at WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, though it may take a while. Thanks for your improvements! GoldRomean (talk) 03:08, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Thank you so much for the feedback! This is what I was wondering! I'll make these edits to the best of my ability and make the article more concise. Then, I'll see if it qualifies. Thank you so much again for clearing this up for me. Reverosie (talk) 03:12, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::It's been done! Reverosie (talk) 03:34, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::@ReverosieYou submitted it to the WikiProject Wikipedia/Assessment, I assume, because I just went to the Guild of Copy Editors current "backlog reduction drive" to check something related to your query before returning here to reply to you ... and I didn't see a request for a copy edit of Baldwin IV of Jerusalem.
:::::::So if you're all set now, I'll just wish you good luck. Augnablik (talk) 05:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::::No, I meant that I finished copyediting the article as discussed above; I'm not ready to have it assessed, but thank you for the good wishes! Reverosie (talk) 06:02, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Remove The Wikipedia Adventure from user contributions
Hi Wikipedians!
I'm fairly new to editing - today I thought it would be fun to try The Wikipedia Adventure. It was a fun set of tasks to learn more about the recommended flow for making changes to Wikipedia, but I was wondering if there is a way to remove it from my user contributions; It added tens of entries. I used to enjoy looking at my contributions to track how many I had made and where I'd made them, but now there's this huge block of automatically generated contributions that I don't really want to see.
Is there any way to remove them?
Thankyou :) KorvalYubilson (talk) 05:15, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:Yup, go to your contributions, click "Search for Contributions", change the namespace filter to "(Article)", press "Search" and it will show only contributions to article. The Wikipedia Adventure seems to only mess with talk pages. You won't see your talk edits, but you'll see everything else. Mrfoogles (talk) 05:45, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::Hello, {{u|KorvalYubilson}}. As Mrfoogles points out, you can filter your contributions. But you cannot remove any of your edits from your edit history. They will always be there. Cullen328 (talk) 06:38, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Ah I see! Thankyou to you both for your wisdom :-) KorvalYubilson (talk) 08:15, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::::{{ping|KorvalYubilson}} If the pages are in your userspace and have only been edited by you then you can request deletion of the whole page including your contributions with {{tl|db-u1}}. You will be unable to view the page afterwards. Don't do it for your main talk page. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:50, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::@KorvalYubilson. Specifically, you can navigate to User talk:KorvalYubilson/TWA by clicking on that link and adding the template at the very top, which is easiest in the source editor. Once the page is deleted by an admin, that link will go red. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:30, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Legendary! Thankyou @PrimeHunter and @Michael D. Turnbull :-) KorvalYubilson (talk) 05:26, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Need to publish sandbox article for Brandon
Hi Teahouse hosts,
I’ve written a biography draft in my sandbox and would like it moved to the Draft namespace so I can submit it for Articles for Creation review. Sandbox link: User:Zartsnarf/sandbox
Could someone please move it to Draft:Brandon Chukwuka?
Thank you! Zartsnarf (talk) 14:16, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:{{ping|Zartsnarf}} File:Yes check.svg Done You could have submitted it by putting
:@Zartsnarf You have submitted the draft for review but it will quickly be declined since it doesn't meet the policy for biographies of living people, specifically that all information (e.g. in "Early Life" and "Personal life") be cited to already-published sources. Is this an autobiogrpahy? If so, you should read that link to explain why that's a bad idea. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:31, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::... I note that you have declared a conflict of interest on your userpage, so you don't need to answer my question. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:35, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Changing profile photo
Please can you tell me how to change profile photo on someones article? MarijanaPlay (talk) 15:57, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:@MarijanaPlay: It would be helpful if you could let me know which article you are referring to. A lot of times, the image of the article is decided by consensus, so it would be helpful to see if there are any discussions on there about it. If not, feel free to go into the edit tab and under the infobox put in the image you want. Interstellarity (talk) 16:00, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello. It would help if you told which article you want to change the photo of, and how you obtained the photo you want to add. 331dot (talk) 16:00, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::@331dot @Interstellarity i am trying to change picture in Karim Rashid article
::so I wanted to put new photo which I made during our recent interview
::the existing photo is old MarijanaPlay (talk) 18:10, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:::If you made the photo, see WP:UPIMAGE for how to upload it. Once it's uploaded, then you may do as Interstellarity says. 331dot (talk) 18:20, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Need help to understand how to make my draft complaint with Wikipedia's notability guidelines
My Draft:S Anshu Dhurandhar was, after review, was said to be not complaint with Wikipedia's notability guidelines. But the I believe that the draft to the best of my understanding complaies with all of the criteria mentioned in WP:GNG. The draft has citations from 7 different news outlets (and more can be provided) showing widespread media coverage. All of the cited secondary sources are independent of the subject. The citations reliable sources including articles from "Dainik Bhasker", "Patrika", and "Hari Bhoomi", all are widely circulated major Hindi newspapers, and can be easily verified to be as such. Most of those articles are specifically about the subject of the draft and not passing mentions.
What additional criteria are need to be met to prove the subjects notability. Also if the draft is in violation of WP:NOT then any help with identifies which specific guidelines are violated and how to rectify it would be much appreciated. Work97111 (talk) 06:30, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
:User:Afstromen declined your draft; perhaps they can comment on why they thought GNG was not met, and confirm that they read the Hindi-language material cited? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:06, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
::Most of the sources cited in this draft are not considered reliable per Wikipedia's guidelines. I have also reviewed the Hindi-language sources mentioned, including Dainik Bhaskar and Haribhoomi, but they do not provide significant or in-depth coverage of the subject. As such, the article fails the General Notability Guideline (GNG). Additionally, the subject appears to have only one film credit. Therefore, this draft does not currently demonstrate that the subject is notable per Wikipedia standards.
::Afstromen (talk) 13:59, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Also The Patrika source does not provide significant coverage of the subject; it primarily discusses the film and a book, not the individual. Per the General Notability Guideline (GNG), significant coverage must be about the subject itself, not just trivial mentions or coverage of associated works. Please ensure that sources meet the GNG by offering substantial, independent, and reliable coverage specifically about the subject.
:::Afstromen (talk) Afstromen (talk) 14:17, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
::::The cited sources (Dainik Bhaskar and Haribhoomi) cover the subject’s career and works in detail and are not merely passing mentions. The articles are entirely focused on the subject. If this does not qualify as in-depth coverage, it would be greatly appreciated if you could kindly provide an example of a news article that is considered to meet the in-depth coverage standard under WP:GNG. Work97111 (talk) 14:33, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::For example, the article from Amar Ujala ("[https://www.amarujala.com/chandigarh/success-story-ambulance-man-prince-mehra-got-india-star-personality-award Link]") is specifically about the subject, providing significant coverage of his achievements and recognition. This qualifies as substantial coverage under Wikipedia’s General Notability Guideline (GNG), as the article is independent, reliable, and focuses primarily on the subject.
:::::Afstromen (talk) 15:15, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::Covering works in detail is not the same as coverage of the creator. A book, or series of books, can be notable while the author is not. I learned this when trying to write a biography of an author, and the reviewer suggested - correctly - that I should recast the article to be about his books, and that made it better because the books were clearly notable.
:::::You need multiple independent sources that provide in-depth coverage of the subject, not just one source with the rest covering his works. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:57, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::@Anachronist Thanks for explaining this.Afstromen (talk) 16:03, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Thank you to both @Anachronist @Afstromen Work97111 (talk) 16:09, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
Khasi Muslims
{{courtesy link|Khasi people#Religion}}
{{atop|1=Good advice has kindly been given, and a discussion started on the article's talk page. This is not the place to litigate the matter. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:49, 27 May 2025 (UTC)}}
senior, I remove the word "endogamous" from the section in the religion section, because just next citation don't mention(primarily focuses on food) it but it is added, so i removed that but some one [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Khasi_people&diff=prev&oldid=1292467582 revert] it with explanation "Restored sourced content removed on 25 March 2025". Plz help me, how to deal with it. Mr.work-shy (talk) 09:15, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
:Khasi muslim in religion section Mr.work-shy (talk) 09:16, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
::@Mr.work-shy I think that the other editor believes that it is one of the other citations for that paragraph that back up the "endogamous" part. The correct thing to do in such cases is to start a section on the Talk Page of the article, pinging that editor and reach a WP:Consensus about what is correct. The onus is on them to justify what goes into the article based on cited sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:43, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
:User:Mr.work-shy removed content without offering any justification in the edit summary other than the unsupported statement that it was not true. Editors are not in themselves reliable sources, and are not permitted to remove sourced content just because they disagree.
:UrielAcosta (talk) 15:09, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
{{abot}}
{{Clear}}
Battleships
Over a couple of days, I’ve worked on Thelifeofan413/Portal:Battleships. I’m wondering if it needs more work or if I should make it official. Thelifeofan413 (talk) 12:55, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
:I suggest you ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships, where the subject experts hang out. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:21, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
::I’ll do that. Thanks. Thelifeofan413 (talk) 16:36, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
Discussion page
No matter which Wikipedia I go on, I can't seem to find a page for general discussion about the Wikipedia. Are there any pages like that, since I know the Teahouse is for help. AtTheTownHouse (talk) 01:31, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:There are a lot of possible venues for discussion "about Wikipedia" – is there a specific question/issue you have in mind? ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 01:38, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::suggestions, i guess AtTheTownHouse (talk) 01:56, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:::AtTheTownHouse: Suggestions about what? Can you be more specific? — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 01:59, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::::nevermind, I'm not really sure. if possible, could you end this discussion in some way or another? AtTheTownHouse (talk) 02:01, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::AtTheTownHouse: Not a problem. It just occurred to me that the community portal might have some pointers if you have a general idea what you're looking for. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 02:08, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::{{u|AtTheTownHouse}}, there are six different Village pump pages for open discussion. They are Policy, Technical, Proposals, Idea Lab, WMF and Miscellaneous. Cullen328 (talk) 05:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
How to add outlined map to wikipedia
I want to add outlined maps from open street map like This and This one to some of the national parks and protected areas like Sariska Tiger Reserve but the outline is not showing on wikipedia. These articles have outlined maps on openstreet [https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9466769#map=9/27.378/76.389 maps]. Wikiwizardinho (talk) 05:50, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
Request for submission
Hi! I’ve created a draft article on Neeraj Jangra at User:MediaScope2025 but I’m not autoconfirmed yet. Can someone please help move it to the Draft namespace as Draft:Neeraj Jangra for submission? Thanks MediaScope2025 (talk) 06:43, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:@MediaScope2025, it's now at Draft:Neeraj Jangra. I would note two things: first, you have not cited any sources. For an article to be accepted, the topic should be notable. That is generally achieved by having at least three reliable independent sources with significant coverage of the subject. There's useful information about how to choose good sources and avoid bad sources here. Second, the draft has external sources linked from the text body, which is generally not permitted (see WP:EL). You should move them to the External links section. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 06:56, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you for the feedback, @SunloungerFrog. I appreciate the clarification. I’m currently in the process of gathering reliable, independent sources with significant coverage and will update the draft accordingly. I’ll also make sure to move all external links from the body to the “External links” section as per WP:EL guidelines. Your guidance is very helpful as I work on improving the draft. Cheers! MediaScope2025 (talk) 07:04, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:::If that's what you're doing, then you're doing it backwards. You should first gather the sources, then draft the article based on those sources. I suggest you try that next time. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 07:49, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
Want help
{{courtesy link|Kumaoni Rajput#Clans}}
I want help to add waldia caste in kumaoni rajput clans list SATENDERA72 (talk) 09:21, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
: Please be bold, and do so. You will need to cite a reliable source. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:57, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
Requesting help from a neutral editor for article on Muhammad Aman Ullah
Hello, I’m Muhammad Aman Ullah.
I am the subject of a draft Wikipedia article based entirely on reliable, independent sources such as Amnesty International, The News on Sunday, Associated Press, and others. I’ve already disclosed my conflict of interest (COI) on my user page.
Because I’m directly involved in the topic, I’m requesting assistance from a neutral editor who could either review or help create the article to ensure neutrality and compliance with Wikipedia standards.
If someone is willing to help, I can provide a complete draft and list of references.
Thank you very much in advance for your time and help. M.A.U-Mr.Human (talk) 08:11, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:Though it is inadvisable for you to write about yourself(see the autobiography policy), you may submit a draft for review using the Article Wizard. 331dot (talk) 08:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:@M.A.U-Mr.Human Welcome to the Teahouse. Please would you provide a link to the draft article to which you are referring. There is no Draft:Muhammad Aman Ullah, and the subject of Mohammed Amanullah is deceased. Shantavira|feed me 08:44, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you! I’ve created the draft here: Draft:Muhammad Aman Ullah (activist). I welcome any feedback or improvements. M.A.U-Mr.Human (talk) 09:06, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Your draft is lacking independent, reliable soruces for many of its statements. It will not be published without them.
:::See WP:FIRST for guidance. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:30, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Thank you, Andy. I’ve now revised the draft with inline citations for each key statement, referencing reliable third-party sources including Amnesty International, AP, The News on Sunday, and Free Inquiry. I appreciate any further feedback. M.A.U-Mr.Human (talk) 11:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::I've applied some fixes. The best way to get further feedback now is to submit the article for review. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:04, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::::::Thank you, Andy, for your guidance and improvements. I’ve submitted the draft for review as suggested. I appreciate your time and support throughout the process. M.A.U-Mr.Human (talk) 13:47, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::::@M.A.U-Mr.Human I've made some minor additions to your draft. At present, cites #3 to #5 don't link correctly to any webpages: they give errors. Your draft will certainly be declined if that isn't fixed. Use the template {{t|cite web}} and see also the basic help page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:25, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
Disambiguation Tool
I'm trying DisamagBot but not showing on tool option. Cwater1 (talk) 19:18, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:It is not apparent which tool you mean. Please clarify. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:55, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::I tried enabling the tool that allows me to fix disambiguation links. User:Qwertyytrewqqwerty/DisamAssist Cwater1 (talk) 16:26, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
Too overwhelming?
Trying to setup a page, (andy.tookey) but rejected due to a lack of links/citations?
Have tried going through the site but its too overwhelming!
Can I just change wording to go to a hyperlink or something?
Must be hundreds of verifiable articles on line about the topic i'm adding.
Also want to add more info with the links to make it verifiable but honestly this is all new to me and i don't know where to start! Andy.tookey (talk) 05:37, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Andy.tookey Hello. User:Andy.tookey is your WP:USERPAGE, it's meant to write a little of who you are and what you do/want to do on Wikipedia.
:Making an acceptable WP-article without knowing how to edit WP is hard. A common advice is to "just" edit for a while first, to try to get a hang of this place.
:That said, your first hurdle is "Can a WP-article about your chosen subject be written at all?" Start with reading WP:BACKWARD. If you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!", move on to WP:YFA. If your choice of topic fails WP:N, the article will not be accepted. If you decide to go ahead, you need to learn how to add references correctly, WP:TUTORIAL can help with that. This is crucial, and I can't stress that enough. Really. If you intend to write about a living person, read WP:BLP. If you intend to write about yourself (WP:COI), the short advice is "don't."
:Hope this helps some. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:31, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @Andy.tookey, and welcome to the Teahouse.
:Yes, Wikipedia can be overwhelming, and especially if you plunge straight into the deepest part of it by trying to create an article. {{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}}
:One thing I would point out: your words "Trying to setup a page" suggests to me that you are thinking of Wikipedia as like aocial media, where you set up a page "for" somebody or something, and it belongs to that somebody or something, for them to say what they want. Wikipedia is utterly different from this: the appropriate phrase is write an encyclopaedia article about somebody or something - remembering that {{HD/WINI}} ColinFine (talk) 16:33, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
request to pubblish sandbox draft
Hello! I have written a biographical draft in my user sandbox and would like help moving it to the article mainspace. Here is the draft: User:WikiMuralsNati/sandbox. Could someone please review it and help me publish it? Thank you! WikiMuralsNati (talk) 18:03, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @WikiMuralsNati. I have dropped some comments that'll help you on the draft. You may also want to review WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY for advice about writing about yourself. It is not recommended. Tarlby (t) (c) 19:02, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
How vandalism is caught
An article I recently edited got vandalized but caught by an IP user. I wanted to ask that editor how he or she caught the vandalism so quickly, unless it was just coincidence, but that editor doesn't have a functioning Talk page. So I thought to ask in the Teahouse, where others might be intrested in the answer: is there some tool that "live editors" (not bots) can use to check for vandalism? Augnablik (talk) 06:06, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
:It's not a tool, but a publicly accessible page linked to on the sidebar: Special:RecentChanges. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @Augnablik. I check Special:Recentchanges and watch as things happen. Tarlby (t) (c) 06:14, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
::@Tarlby and @Jéské Couriano, okay, I went to that page you both recommended but I can't quite picture a way to know from looking at the entries if vandalism has occurred. If you just "watch as things happen," it would seem that you'd have to sit there glued to the screen all day ... and even then, how would you know when vandalism was what any of the edits included?
::The more I think about this, the more I wonder how even a bot could determine what was vandalism and what wasn't. Maybe the way the other editor caught vandalism on the article I edited really was just coincidental. Augnablik (talk) 07:32, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@Augnablik: At Special:RecentChanges there are filters that can be edited to display what types of recent changes should be seen. Two commonly used filters are "Very likely have problems" and "Likely have problems", which I suspect CVU members use regularly to check. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 09:21, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Thanks for this clarification, @Tenryuu ... I assume the "problems" the filters look for go a bit beyond grammar and punctuation! Additional thanks for your mention of the CVU. That's great to know about! Augnablik (talk) 09:55, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
:See also WP:Counter-Vandalism Unit. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
::Yes, that was also Tenryuu's suggestion. Very impressive to learn that this unit has set up a Counter-Vandalism Academy! Augnablik (talk) 11:54, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
Archived links
Why do some pages have references with "Archived from the original on ____" links and some don't. See for instance Pope Francis, which has the majority of references archived on various dates. Is this something that ideally should be done to every reference possible? And what is the best way to use this feature? Thanks. PhilipCheesesteak (talk) 22:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi @PhilipCheesesteak, we archive links because the "host", the current website/link, may stop hosting that content or change what is at the URL. Help:Archiving a source has some great information. My preferred method is to run the InternetArchiveBot ([https://iabot.wmcloud.org/index.php?page=runbotsingle link here]) with the box ticked for "Add archives to all non-dead references". Happy editing, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 23:20, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
draft translation thing
back when i didn't have enough edits to use the translate feature on wikipedia i translated Draft:TNT (Chinese boy group) manually. it already had three languages so i translated it to english. it eventually got relegated to the draftspace due to its notability being called into question. i have enought edits to translate it normally but thats kinda weird since the manual stub got rejected. i don't really know what to do with this draft at the moment Plastixfy (talk) 20:13, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @Plastixfy, and welcome to the Teahouse.
:The different language versions of Wikipedia are independent projects with their own policies and standards. This means that just because there is an article in one Wikipedia does not necessarily mean that the subject will meet the standards for another Wikipedia. English Wikipedia is one of the strictest on citing sources and notability.
:As far as I can tell using Google Translate, none of the three sources cited in the draft meets the triple requirement of reliability, independence, and significant coverage of the group (see WP:42). Without several sources which do meet all three criteria, it is not possible to establish that the group is notable, and no article is possible in English Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::That makes a lot more sense. Thanks Plastixfy (talk) 01:03, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::@ColinFine I just added some more sources. Could you please check if meets the criteria yet? Plastixfy (talk) 02:43, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
On Tulsi Gabbard switching parties
Would Tulsi Gabbard fit on the List of United States representatives who switched parties?
Tulsi Gabbard ran as a Democrat from 2002 to 2022, then as independent from 2022 to 2024, then Republican from 2024 onwards. Would she fit on this list, or does she need to have switched parties while in the House of Representatives? ALittleClass (talk) 04:03, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @ALittleClass. The first sentence says that the individuals in the list must have switched parties "while serving in Congress". Tarlby (t) (c) 04:07, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
Draft review
Hi, I’ve been working on a draft article for Janine Hendry (Australian activist) in my sandbox:
I’d appreciate any feedback to ensure it meets Wikipedia’s notability and referencing guidelines before submission. Thanks! Shaynelle Bilbao (talk) 06:05, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello {{u|Shaynelle Bilbao}}. Please read Wikipedia:Citation overkill. Contrary to what some new editors think, reference quality is vastly more important than reference quantity. Many citations at the end of a sentence are only necessary if the assertion is both implausible and highly controversial. Cullen328 (talk) 06:24, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @Shaynelle Bilbao, and welcome to the Teahouse.
:This may not be what you want to hear, but: {{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}} ColinFine (talk) 09:28, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
How do you add links to articles?
I want to know how to add links to articles. 174.45.1.236 (talk) 00:35, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello IP. When editing the source code, surrounding text with two brackets will make it a link. For example, typing
:Do you mean "internal" links to other wiki pages, as described above; or external links, to other websites? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:47, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
How do I remove a "COI" paragraph from a wikipedia page?
Someone - NOT ME! - wrote a long biography of me on Wikipedia. With help from some terrific wikipedia editors, I added some information, and corrected some spelling and mis-information. However now there is a large paragraph at the beginning of the Bio stating: "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page." But nothing on the "talk page" deals with this issue, and I can't find out how to get rid of the COI designation... I didn't initiate or write this long biography of me - but it is very nice and I'd like it to stay but not sound as though it is not viable please??? PLEASE HELP!!!! THe site is:
THANK YOU! Barbara Bloemink (talk) 22:56, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
:@Barbarabloemink, welcome to Wikipedia. The talk page is used to communicate with other editors about that article. That tag was placed there by an editor who believes that there may be a Conflict of Interest. Another unrelated editor can remove the tag if they disagree, you may not. It is there to let others know that it may need some work. Hope that helps, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 23:15, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{u|Barbarabloemink}}, I removed the tag with the edit summary {{tpq|This article is the result of collaboration between several highly experienced independent editors with disclosed input from the article subject. See lengthy talk page discussions. The tag is not appropriate without a detailed explanation on the talk page}}. Please use formal edit requests on the talk page in the future, instead of editing the article directly. Reverting vandalism is an exception. Cullen328 (talk) 02:58, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
: Further to the above, there is advice for article subjects at WP:About you.
: Note that the documentation of {{Tl|COI}} says that anyone may remove the tag if it is added without an explanation of the issue on the article's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
Sandbox problem
William Oliver (artist, born 1823). I want to use a Sandbox for this article but when I select Sandbox I get a Sandbox for William Oliver (artist, born 1804), an article that I previously worked on. When I had this sort of problem before, I deleted the previous Sandbox script and worked on the resultant blank page. Unfortunately this results in a muddled and confused history. How do I get a Sandbox for the 1823 article? BFP1 (talk) 09:31, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hi BFP1. Assuming you mean a user sandbox, one way is to make a wikilink like User:BFP1/William Oliver (artist, born 1823) and click it. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:38, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::There are already articles at both William Oliver (artist, born 1823) that you worked on, BFP1 and at William Oliver (artist, born 1804). What are you trying to do that you can't do by editing the existing pages? Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:22, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Thank you for your comment. I am not very good at editing (I don't do it regularly) and if I work on the main article I may make mistakes and have to make a series of corrections.I prefer to copy the article onto a sandbox where I can experiment with various options. I thought the point of a sandbox was to allow less experienced editors (or those that have forgotten how to edit) become more familiar with procedures. BFP1 (talk) 11:21, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you for your reply. Yes I would like a user sandbox for William Oliver (artist, born 1823) linked to the article.I apologise for my ignorance but I am not clear about the procedure 'make a wikilink like User:BFP1/William Oliver (artist, born 1823) and click it' Do I just click 'User:BFP1/William Oliver (artist, born 1823)'? How do I make a Wikilink? BFP1 (talk) 11:06, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:::@BFP1 PrimeHunter has already provided the correct link, currently in red. Click on that and you will be able to create the page in your userspace after you have added some content. It isn't good practice to copy the whole existing article into your sandbox as there is a danger that you'll make changes to it and when you copy it back into the existing article someone else may in the meantime have made an edit that you miss. Better, IMO, just to use your sandbox to draft a new sentence/paragraph or whatever with their citations and after previewing to check everything is OK you can copy/paste your new contribution into the live article directly. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:25, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
Pronounciation mistake
In Tamil (தமிழ், Tamiḻ) it should be Thamiḻ as per pronounciation. Com.ilaven (talk) 13:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:Hello. Can you be more specific as to what article you are referring to? 331dot (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
:This is the kind of thing you should raise on the article's talk page, though Tamil is a "disambiguation" page, listing other pages with similar titles. Perhaps you meant one of them, like Tamils or Tamil language? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:05, 26 May 2025 (UTC)