Wikipedia:Teahouse



Translation of an article. Article for creation rejected.


 Courtesy link: Draft:ThrustMe

Hello, I wanted to translate the Wikipedia page of the company I work for into English. There is a nice page about the company in French Wikipedia made by an external person. I think this page is nice and was written from a neutral point of view. As I work in this company, I thought I could just translate the page into English to keep this neutral point of view. However, when I published it, it was suggested that I "write about the subject from a neutral point of view in an encyclopaedic way". I don't know how to improve it. Antoinebore (talk) 08:39, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Antoinebore! Different wikipedias are different projects with different standards, and I expect, especially with the ones like English and the French, linguistic and cultural differences would mean faithful translations would require further work.
First of all, please disclose your conflict of interest per WP:PAID. This can go a long way toward assuring reviewers that by accepting the draft, they are not enabling WP:COVERT advertising and paving the way for long term disruption on the article (high maintenance cost, not worth it, if the topic is not indispensable; also very difficult to enforce neutral point of view if there are not high quality sources aplenty). With regard to the draft, on a very brief perusal, (a) the second paragraph of the lead is not about the topic; it's a moral/economical argument for the righteousness/rightness of what the company does, immediately following an enticement for potential investors (how big the potential market is). That is what the reviewer is likely referring to by "essay". (b) Awards in Wikipedia articles are only supposed to be notable awards, i.e. those that have their own articles or those that would have by virtue of meeting WP:N if anyone had gotten around to creating them. At the very least, they should have an inline citation each (possibly not good enough anyway in case of paid articles). Also note that, because of the potential issues, including some I mentioned above, companies have stricter requirements to meet than most other topics on Wikipedia (see WP:NORG, which may be different, and likely stricter than its counterpart in the French Wikipedia). Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:58, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello @Usedtobecool. Thank you for the remarks. Firstly, I would like to say that I am not being paid to write the article, I simply work for this company and I wrote the draft in my spare time. Maybe I can add an "Connected contributor" template? The purpose of the second paragraph is to present the context of the company. I think it is important to explain why thrusters are important, otherwise the company produces useless products. Perhaps I could keep this part and delete the estimated number of launches over the next decade? Regards. Antoinebore (talk) 08:50, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
@Antoinebore, please make the disclosure in the manner you think best describes your situation. But note that for Wikipedia purposes, you are a paid editor, when you write about your employer, irrespective of what you are being paid for, and even if you are not being paid at all. No, the thrusters being important does not establish that the company is important, not unless it is the sole or the largest producer of such thrusters as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. Even then, it establishes importance, which is not the same as notability. At the end of the day, what matters is whether you have at least three strong sources that meet criteria at WP:NORG. If you do, the draft would be accepted if all it said was "ThrustMe is a company that produces space thrusters.[1][2][3]" And you would not need to worry about what to write, how to write and whether it reads like an advert to the reviewers. What's most troubling about the second paragraph is, it is propping up thrusters but doesn't even establish that ThrustMe is going to be the one at the forefront of it. It says 10K miniature satellites will be launched this decade and thrusters will be a critical part of them, but nothing about what ThrustMe will be doing in all that. Is it going to supply thrusters for all 10K of them, does it already have contracts for 6K of those, or is it just three people in a garage reading theoretical papers about thrusters, and hoping they can build a working model in the next few years and start selling them before they become obsolete? Those would be the things to know about the company. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:22, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Usedtobecool. Once again, thank you for the comments and for your time. I have updated the page and tried to be as neutral as possible. I have removed the whole "economic" part. For the rewards, I'm not sure how to do it. I have removed the less notable awards. However, I think some awards (French Tech Ticket and the CNRS innovation medal) are still notable, especially in France, even if they don't have their own article..) Antoinebore (talk) 09:13, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Two questions about notability guidelines


I'm hardly a new editor, but I tried to draft an article about the late Philippine journalist Draft:Jose Guevara and was referred to the Teahouse after a swamped reviewer during a busy review drive questioned Guevara's notability. I acknowledge the entry was only cursory -- but then the reviewers' response was even more cursory. He didn't even minimally evaluate the article based on the fact that Guevara is a journalist; he used only the most superficial tests. At least I had spent two or three hours combing the Internet for what I could find about the writer, with only partial success, and then an hour or two drafting something up. But reviewer KylieTastic appears to have spent five minutes threatening the reversal of my five hours. That's not just wrong, it's insulting and it's something that needs to be resolved.

I contribute what time I can to Wikipedia. My reach is broad and I'm not a single-subject expert. Although I've worked extensively in journalism, I don't have a special interest in journalism nor especially in Philippine journalism. I met the subject on a couple of occasions in his home in Manila, and he was and remains a well known figure among the Filipino community. I knew Mike Royko much better: in fact, after Guevara died, someone mentioned to me that he is "the Mike Royko of the Philippines," a perfectly plausible claim despite the lack of online sources, a situation that might exist for any of several good reasons.

I certainly don't have hours and hours to devote to nurturing every page I work on, and yet busy editors shouldn't be punished by having their work threatened. Among the Wikipedia editorial staff, as it were, in this case my claim based on objective experience and personal knowledge that this guy is notable should trump KylieTastic's case based on his brief look, no matter how many sources are on hand at the moment to demonstrate it. There needs to be a way to resolve this larger problem (see below re "likelihood of notability"). In the instant case, I'd like someone with time and the skill to promote the draft into something like a stub article. It should be enough for mainspace at that level, and I shouldn't have to nursemaid this project myself to keep my work and the history of the author from vanishing. That's not what Wikipedia was designed for.

The greater issue is one of generally testing notability. I see so much self-sourced puff on here that it looks like a damned carnival. It's very porous. On the other hand, for many figures and organizations you simply can't level the compass and, for example, get the material from online. Two factors that impact the Guevara article is that he's from the print era and he was a columnist. Another is that the Philippine press is not as visible outside of the Philippines and online as are Western press personalities, where for instance every idiot weather announcer is a local hero. Other issues abound, such as notability in what community of practice? Not every person or organization can be measured by whether they were on the Tonight Show or in the New York Times. How many times did Gaozi appear on those esteemed venues? And yet Alexandra Paul is not really notable for anything except that she was (once, very long ago) a periodic role on Baywatch and her brother got arrested. A test of her notability based on news sources would have a tough go of it. Yet her page is many times longer than that of Gaozi.

Then there's the case, immediately above, of Melvin Poh, who was originally not notable but just got accepted since someone frantically poured a bunch of "independent sources" in and filled the article with superscripts. The fact is that today everyone has a podcast or a blog or a webmagazine, and politicians and entrepreneurs spend at least half their time getting interviewed for these things (some spend all of their time doing this). Thus the sheer number of opportunities for Alexandra Paul and especially Melvin Poh to get so-called "earned media" on any given day is many times more today than it was 20 years ago for Jose Guevara. That's a big factor and it shouldn't be.

I really think there ought to be a rethinking of how basic notability is tested, especially for AfC or stub entryhood. There probably ought to be a measure like "likelihood of notability" that would serve to resist nominations for deletion or blocking an article's preservation. At the very least, if Wikipedia is a living object, then it shouldn't depend on my being alive and pushing for Joe Guevara's resurrection for him to survive to articlehood while people like Alexandra Paul coast right through. At present, if I die or get sick, Mr. Guevara's memory dies with me. That's just really bad policy. Zelchenko (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zelchenko: Wikipedia defines "notability" based on reliable published sources, not personal knowledge. However, those sources do not have to be online - you can use offline newspapers and magazines and books as well. See also WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. GoingBatty (talk) 14:46, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
@GoingBatty:That so superficially addresses my question that I have to reject it out of hand. If you'd even read what I wrote, you'd know that I know there are many ways to establish notability. But I don't have access to that, nor do I have the time to do it. Are you volunteering to fly to Manila and spend three weeks at a library? Be my guest! But don't try to bully me into doing it! At this point, you seem to be hinting that Mr. Guevara's notability hinges on my ability to make it happen. That's indefensible! Zelchenko (talk) 14:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
@GoingBatty:Oh wait, it's even worse than that. What happens with explanations like yours is that you achieve exactly what I predicted above: because of the proliferation and availability of Internet media sources for younger and less notable people and organizations, and the corresponding difficulty of sourcing for earlier and historical individuals and organizations, the bar for research is much, much higher for older sources. A bit actress on Baywatch for four years, or a guy who wrote political columns for the Philippine press for 80 years? Which one has a greater likelihood of surviving to articlehood, by such measures? A guy who is already a has-been entrepreneur at 28 can get articles in place like the venerable Vulcan Post, but Jose Guevara's thousands of columns over 80 years are either on a paywall or in a library, so they're unreachable. Boom, there's Wikipedia in a nutshell for you. Thanks, GoingBatty and KylieTastic! Your illustrious pseudonyms will live forever along with Baywatch stars and a billion Entrepreneurs Under 30.Zelchenko (talk) 15:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
@Zelchenko: Yes, the draft creator has to demonstrate the notability of the subject of their draft. My goal in responding was simply to provide alternative options. I'm glad you understand Wikipedia's notability requirements, and that you respect the amount of work it takes to create a Wikipedia article. I'm sure you also understand that you don't have to view his columns, but what other people have written about the importance of his work. If you don't have time to do the work, you can use WP:Requested articles to ask that someone else puts in the effort to do all the research, but there's no guarantee anyone else will want to do it, since every editor here is a volunteer who chooses what they want to work on. (Unfortunately, that means that pop culture topics get more interest than journalists.) You can also try posting a request to the Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines, in the hopes that an editor there may have the interest and access needed. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: You know, I'm trying like hell to assume good faith, but you're making it astonishingly difficult. I'll have you know that several days ago I already posted in two places, including Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines, and there has been no response. But did you read what I wrote? I assumed you're all experts in notability guidelines. Did you read my point that the reviewers didn't study the question as it relates to Notability (people)#Creative_professionals? He was a well-known journalist, writing print columns for millions of readers. Do you see that journalist Jose Guevara very likely qualifies under items 1, 3, and 4 of the creative professionals rules? Did you even look at the draft yourself to see that long ago I sourced some citations? Is Teahouse a place for you to practice psychotherapy, or to support editors in their efforts not to waste their volunteer time? I've been editing Wikipedia pages for 15 years, and GoingBatty and 331dot are very, very close to getting me to quit forever! Zelchenko (talk) 15:48, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
@Zelchenko: Thank you for assuming good faith. I'm sorry that my comments were not productive, and that I didn't check you already posted at Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines#Journalist Jose Guevara. Congratulations on having your draft accepted, and I wish you well with your future endeavors. GoingBatty (talk) 20:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: Ah, but we're not getting off that easy. Why did the page miraculously get accepted after I raised a stink? Is that the cause? Who intervened, and why? If true, why did it take shrillness and backbreaking rational persuasion to break through the anesthetic clouds of this environment? For future reference and as a corrective to this problem, people ought to know! Zelchenko (talk) 02:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
@Zelchenko: Looking at the article history (and the comments below), I see that Cullen328 moved the draft into articlespace. It seems your post here attracted more attention to your draft. GoingBatty (talk) 02:23, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
@Zelchenko: Unfortunately, as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, inappropriate and poorly sourced articles can and do get by us; this does not mean that more such articles can be created. GoingBatty quite correctly told you that notability is not based on personal knowledge, due to the need for verification. Even if you were willing to sit by a phone for as long as Wikipedia exists to take verification calls, we still need something published to verify. There are other websites with less stringent requirements, such as social media and other wikis, that may be better suited for your purposes. It's disappointing to see your reaction to the help you've been given. I get that you may be frustrated, but please don't take it out on those helping you. Thanks 331dot (talk) 15:07, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
@331dot: What in the world? Did you even READ what I wrote? Is this a dream? I've been on Wikipedia longer than you have. Stop parroting what GoingBatty and KylieTastic wrote, read my message carefully, and address the issue at hand, or step aside and let someone else do it! Zelchenko (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
@331dot: Furthermore, you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You can't first preface with an apology that this is a volunteer project and subject to slips, and then turn around and work like hell to justify how it is that a veteran Wikipedia editor -- with tenure far longer than yours -- is being told by you that an article on a well-known journalist should probably find "social media" or other places with less stringent requirements. I know what you're doing: You're chafed and laughing at me. There goes your merit badge for good faith. Among other things you might be doing, I have a better use for your time and mine: explain to me and the Philippine public why this article can't be admitted as a stub. Zelchenko (talk) 15:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
@Zelchenko: Pardon me, I did not consult your edit history to see how experienced an editor you were- as this board is for new and inexperienced users to ask questions, I don't usually check that. I think this discussion is gradually departing from the friendly nature of this area so I probably won't have much more to say- but as a longtime user you are free to create a stub if you wish, but you run the risk of it being nominated for AFD and deleted and/or draftified, especially if there is not a sourced claim to notability. But perhaps if you explained on the talk page, that would help. 331dot (talk) 17:02, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
And no, I'm not laughing. Just trying to help. Guess I didn't, sorry. I'll move on to the people who will hear me out. 331dot (talk) 17:04, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
@331dot: So sensitive! First of all, it was recommended by User:Ken_Tony that I go to the Teahouse for support. Next, where exactly did I not "hear you out"? I heard you and numerous other people (User:KylieTastic User:GoingBatty User:Worldbruce User:Ken_Tony User:Theroadislong) very clearly, and I responded more or less clearly. You, on the other hand, helped cause this problem by not hearing me out and by not digging a little deeper, only parroting policy. I can understand if you're all weary about the proliferation of vanity pages, but you did a disservice to the community and to me when you overlooked the value of Joe Guevara's entry based solely on what I had already drafted months ago. There needs to be a better way to offload putatively legitimate work from the shoulders of a single editor, by preserving it from deletion either in mainspace or in some kind of limbo by some measure like "likelihood of notability." Vacillating from mainspace to draftspace based on whims and explanations on talk pages are not enough. There needs to be policy. Zelchenko (talk) 02:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
To Zelchenko and everyone else who commented, Jose Guevara is clearly notable, not only as a journalist but as an art collector. I have moved the draft to main space, added a reference about his art collection, and expanded the article. Google Books show that he is discussed in many books although the brief snippets do not reveal if the coverage is significant. So, I was able to expand the article without traveling to Manila and spending weeks in the library there. Zelchenko, you do not need to use the AFC process and can create new articles yourself, but please try to come up with more than two sentences. This is 2021 not 2007 when the project was vastly less developed. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:01, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Cullen328 Thank you Joe for the intervention. Excellent additions and fast work. I think I put in more than two sentences, but I don't think the measure should be quantity -- that's what gets thousands of 25-year-old entrepreneurs immortalized in Wikipedia, whereafter they fast become 26-year-old nobodies. Reviewers have to drill into the content to see the totality of the claim to notability. "Likelihood of notability" is the term I've used in this discussion. The weight of the lede is still essentially based on those relatively low-value Varsitarian and Asea references that I had already mined some time ago. You visited those and saw that there was likely validity to my claim. (My claims should have nothing to do with my status as a veteran editor or with my personal familiarity with the subject; those facts also happened to get me a little longer hearing, which is largely wrong. The basis of my claims could have been seen through a simple critical glance at the key sources, which accordingly you did.) Zelchenko (talk) 02:38, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Zelchenko, my name is Jim not Joe, but that's OK. I only did with Jose Guevara what you could have done in lieu of writing your lengthy arguments above. The best way to show that Guevara is notable is by writing an informative, well-referenced biography, instead of taking cheap shots at people that you, personally, do not think are notable despite the fact that they have received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. That approach leads to unnecessary conflict and we are (or ought to be) here to expand and improve this encyclopedia instead of tearing it down and arguing. Yes, your draft was just two sentences before I started working on it. It has twelve well referenced sentences now. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:14, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Cullen328 Sorry about getting your name wrong, Jim. But I suspect that's the only thing I've gotten wrong in this situation. First of all, I had at the time reached a dead end on my search. As I mentioned, I spent two hours on it and I'm somewhat notorious for turning up things that others can't. Congratulations on going the extra mile. However, arguments that time can better be spent doing Y instead of X are not tenable. I could have sunk another two hours into searching and editing and once again turned up nothing, and yet still have to face what I think I managed to demonstrate at length was a miscarriage of procedure here. What I put up would have been sufficient for a stub. It appears Guevara is the man who introduced convicted felons Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos. Well, that's a notable accomplishment. Good find; I'd forgotten about that. As to tearing down b-list Baywatch actors and 30something has-been entrepreneurs, so sue me; but I'm entitled to fair comment, especially since they're now self-styled public figures. I strongly feel that it's vanity articles and their willing subjects that cheapen Wikipedia, certainly not I for using self-serving articles as comparisons to justify my creation of a non-self-serving one. Wikipedia has already turned into a Who's Who, and we all know how subjective those are. Zelchenko (talk) 17:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Zelchenko I'm not sensitive, just trying to help and keep things friendly but it seems you would prefer to snark at me. I didn't overlook anything and since you seem to know all about it I'm not sure why you needed to come here. Until there is a paid Wikipedia staff here I don't see how things will be different from what you claim there are, but please offer your suggestions in the appropriate forum. Sorry I didn't help you. Good day. 331dot (talk) 07:08, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
331dot I said you were sensitive because you suggested you were offended that I hadn't heard you out. Sorry if you felt that way, but it's very clear that I did hear you out, because I responded to your points. I've heard everyone out. Zelchenko (talk) 17:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@Zelchenko: If you have an issue with the reviewer that declined your submission, it's recommended you go talk to them directly, on their talk page, and explain why you disagree. If you are having difficult finding online sources about the subjects you want to write about, you can apply for individual research databases at the Wikipedia Library, or use the resource exchange project to ask for help from other editors. With regards to "probably ought to be a measure like "likelihood of notability" that would serve to resist nominations for deletion or blocking an article's preservation", not only are nominators asked to do a WP:BEFORE, but you can also ask for a WP:REFUND in certain cases. Isabelle 🔔 17:34, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@Zelchenko: Your draft article was correctly declined here (ie pushed back to you for more work) by User:KylieTastic when it was two sentences long with no indication of any notability and three sources one of which was a blog (Unreliable). It was subsequently improved by another user and accepted. I don't see what the problem is? Theroadislong (talk) 18:03, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Infobox photo doesn't show up in edit mode


Hi. There is a picture misplaced in the infobox of the article on Ubeidiya. I'm talking of [[File:Tel Ubeidiya.JPG]], a small greyish mound. It must be removed, as the archaeological site described in the article is NOT the tell in the photo. It's like placing a photo of Washington, DC in the infobox of the article on Washington state. I don't know what template has been used, because the name of the file is not appearing when I go into edit mode. It must be some automatic connection to Wiki Commons or something else i don't know. Came across the same problem on German Wiki, where the infobox photo doesn't show up in edit mode either. Anyone? Thanks! Arminden (talk) 15:30, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

The image is taken from Wikidata and should be changed there. Ruslik_Zero 18:47, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
@Ruslik0: hi and thanks! Obviously, I'm not good with that, otherwise I would have figured it out already, so could you please do it? If you have the patience to explain me how, I'd be grateful for next time; for now, removing the wrong photo is my first priority though. Thanks! Arminden (talk) 04:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
PS: I've fumbled around, have "fixed" the Wikimedia Commons name: nothing. Next I've fully removed the Wikimedia Commons line: nothing. Finally, I've added into the infobox |image=|image_size=|caption= (and left them empty), and the photo has disappeared! I don't know why, so I'm not sure if and in which situation it will work again in the future, nor if I've taken away smth. important by removing the faulty Wiki Commons line. So if you could give me at least a hint, I'd still be grateful. Arminden (talk) 04:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
On the page in Wikidata linked above, you can see the image and 'edit' link right to it. Click on it and you will be able to change the image. Ruslik_Zero 20:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Ruslik0 & everyone else: I don't know what you mean by "change the image". I do not have any image for Ubeidiye; I just don't want the Tell Ubeidiye image to show up automatically. The problem is, I don't understand the mechanism through which the image pops up by itself. If you can clarify that for a technical zero like me, fine and thanks. If not, maybe somebody else has a minute. I have no idea what the long sausage of data on the Wikidata page means. I have solved the problem on the article page by fumbling blindly, I hope I didn't remove anything otherwise useful, but now it's only about learning and understanding. But I can live without. Arminden (talk) 13:14, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, you solved your problem. The details about Wikipedia-Wikidata relationship can be found in Wikipedia:Wikidata#Infoboxes. For instance, {{Infobox_ancient_site}} fetches the default image from Wikidata if no image is specified. Since you specified "null image" by inserting the empty parameters nothing is shown currently. Ruslik_Zero 13:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Arminden Every Wikipedia article has a Wikidata entry associated with it. Wikidata is a database that can hold various bits of information, and these can be reused in articles. Certain templates (like that infobox) will load information from wikidata if you don't specify a default value. Assuming you're on the desktop site the link to get to the Wikidata item for any article in the sidebar on the left - it's the link labelled "Wikidata item" in the "tools" section. In this case the entry is https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2660882. The article is automatically loading the image from the database entry on wikidata - to fix it go to wikidata, scroll down to the image property, click the "edit" button then click "remove". 192.76.8.91 (talk) 13:33, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Ruslik0, thank you very much! Great, I can now look into that. It's not a nice feeling improvising in the dark, and it won't be the only time I'll came across this. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 13:39, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Ruslik0, hi. Your explanations were excellent, I've learned a lot. Now, the problem goes deeper. The entire connection between the Wikidata entry (item Q2660882) and the article Ubeidiya is WRONG. Q2660882 is titled "Tel Ovadia" (Hebrew for Tell Ubeidiya), and deals with a tell (archaeological mound) some 400 m away from the site dealt with in the article. The tell isn't even excavated and is of relatively little interest, is one among many Bronze & Iron Age tells in the region. Whereas Ubeidiya is the second-oldest site with traces of humans outside Africa. A difference of some 1,4 million years, 400 m, and a huge one in magnitude of scientific importance. How can we now decouple/disconnect the two? Tell Ubeidiya is only mentioned as a sideline on the Ubeidiya page, and is there just because the confusion is so common and because the tell doesn't have a page of its own as an archaeological site, although it does have one as the core location of the depopulated Palestinian village of Al-'Ubaydiyya. Maybe it should be connected to that article? Which already has the item number Q4702134... Not my field, big mess, maybe you can do something. Thanks again! Arminden (talk) 16:21, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Users on mobile inadvertently adding "tel:" in front of anything that their autocorrect thinks might be a telephone number


See this diff . This is not the first case I have seen  I have to confess to assuming IP editor vandalism first time it happened. Aradd1, can you say anything about what set-up you have that may have caused this to happen? John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:13, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@John Maynard Friedman: Sounds like phab:T116525, see also phab:T256758 AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 21:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
@AntiCompositeNumber:, yes, that looks to be it. I guess someone will have to construct a bot to search the entire project for each instance and remove it. <expletive deleted> Apple whizz kids who bought into the fatuous 'move fast and break things' mantra. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:27, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps not as serious as Excel screwing up gene names!. --ColinFine (talk) 21:59, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Excel won't screw up gene names if the user knows how to use Excel properly. By default it looks at the data being pasted in, and guesses the data type from that. People who paste data into Excel, or use Excel to open text files, need to learn how to apply the "text" format to a column or a range of columns. This is user error, although it's a frequently seen error. (I hope I put this comment in the right place.)73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
I have a hunch that the majority of Wikipedia Users--or at least the ones who visit the Teahouse--are too young to remember "expletive deleted." Full disclosure. I first heard of Nixon when my parents explained to me that Eisenhower would retire soon, and the Nixon was running against Kennedy. Uporządnicki (talk) 22:31, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
As usual, we have an article for that: Expletive deleted. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 22:39, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
@John Maynard Friedman There's a discussion on this at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Qwerfjkltalk 07:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Help!


My file is being threatened for deletion because of it being, non-free? Can someone explain and tell me how I can resolve this issue. I hope I don't look like an a**hole asking this... I don't want it deleted, it took me a while for me to edit it.
The file. -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 22:41, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Also, it might have been the license I chose for it, I want to find the correct one for my image. -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 22:49, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
@SsSsSølarRadia -75: Welcome to the Teahouse. What are you intending to do with the image? It doesn't seem to be used in any article, and Wikipedia is not a repository for images. As non-free content, it has to satisfy all 10 of the non-free criteria. {{Non-free use rationale}} is a template you can use on the image page to help explain how the image satisfies those criteria. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬  📝 ) 23:16, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
  • SsSsSølarRadia -75, no, you don't look like what you coyly spell as "a**hole". However, attempting to read up on non-free images would probably have taken you less time than you spent creating your elaborate signature; and I'll point out one comprehensible part of your summary for this graphic: "I'm sorry for hurting your eyes, if it is in any case the image breaks any rules or is too sensitive for your being, then allow yourself to contest it for deletion. This is purely made for fun and entertainment and does not serve any purpose to hate Frozen fans." This is an encyclopedia. If you want to make something for fun and entertainment, please host it elsewhere (perhaps on your own blog): doing so here wastes other people's time. -- Hoary (talk) 02:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Now that makes me look like an a**hole because you explained it! ThAnKs sO MuCh. I will put it on deletion. -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 02:42, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
SsSsSølarRadia -75 Hello SsSsSølarRadia -75, welcome to the teahouse. Just to be clear - what you've created there is called a derivative work: you've taken an image which is copyrighted by someone else (in this case Disney) and modified it slightly. This means that the copyright of the image you uploaded partly belongs to Disney (the image of Elsa) and partly belongs to you (the modifications to the image). Even if you release your part of the copyright Disney would still have a valid copyright claim on the image. Images which are copyrighted can only be used on Wikipedia under very specific sets of circumstances, as laid out in the non-free criteria - for example we can use a single low resolution screenshot of the character in the article Elsa (Frozen) to serve as a means of identifying them. To be blunt for a second - there doesn't seem to be any encyclopaedic use for your image, i.e. it doesn't seem like it could be used in any articles, in which case we cannot host it as it is copyrighted and does not fall under the fair use criteria. Generally images uploaded to Wikipedia should have some kind of plausible use on the project, we aren't a social media site and we aren't a repository for memes. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 11:13, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Need a help


Hi I have created a page and that got speedy deletion. Could you please help with that. I even cant find there that page went and no idea how to recover. Apricate your help on this.  Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdpperera (talkcontribs) 05:42, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, Mdpperera. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. (It's not a PR conduit.) Yes, Mdpperera, in User:Mdpperera/sandbox, you created an unreferenced, highly promotional piece about "Prasad Perera A.K.A. BuduMalli", from which I quote: At more than few feet, Prasad (BuduMalli) is hard to miss. And that's before he starts to speak. Get him talking on his favorite subject, influencer marketing and strategies on Social Media and you soon realize you're listening to someone who is head and shoulders above most social media experts. (I note that his photograph is your "own work"; perhaps he and you are acquainted?) The speedy deletion was entirely appropriate. What you created should not be improved; it should be abandoned. -- Hoary (talk) 06:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Could you please assist how to make a new page for that profile? That is something should be on wikipedia for people to know. Apricate you help and I am really clueless how things work here. Mdpperera (talk) 06:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Profiles are for social media websites. We want strongly-sourced encyclopaedia articles, not crap he or his associates think is most marketable. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 06:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Mdpperera Wikipedia does not have "profiles", not a single one. Wikipedia has articles. "Should be on Wikipedia for people to know" is a promotional purpose. We're not interested in what people should know. As an encyclopedia we only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Please read about the Five Pillars. As suggested, I would not proceed further in writing about this person due to the conflict of interest you seem to have. If you have additional comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. This is easier for some to do in desktop mode, even on a phone or device(the app and mobile versions do not have full functionality). 331dot (talk) 06:48, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Mdpperera, you say that an article about this man Prasad Perera "should be on wikipedia for people to know". You are free to persuade Jéské Couriano, 331dot and me that this is so. Start by specifying three reliable, published sources (each of these independent of him), that describe or discuss him in depth. (Of course, blogs, PR product, social media, infomercials, etc, don't count.) If you can do this, I (or somebody) will give you further advice. If you can't, then (like the huge majority of people) he shouldn't have an article on Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 08:07, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hoary, thank you for your professional reply I will let this go as most did not sound like helpful or agreed. I wrote about him since he himself have educated more than 10000 rural local youth on digital media and people search for this kind of characters who work in the filed to minimize the digital gap in the country.  Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdpperera (talkcontribs) 08:17, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Mdpperera, there are many people who do good work in the world, but unfortunately not all of them merit Wikipedia articles. Please see WP:NOBLE. Just as some advice, if you just want to tell the world about this person, that's exactly what social media is for, there are also other websites with less stringent inclusion requirements. If you have other contributions you are interested in making, don't hesitate to ask further questions. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Directory of alternative outlets has some alternatives. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång You seem to have linked incorrectly? I presume you meant Wikipedia:Directory of alternative outlets. Qwerfjkltalk 10:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Correct and corrected. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:39, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you all your advices. Could someone advice me how can I grab a copy of the article I published which got cancelled. I checked in my sandbox but couldn't find it. Highly appreciate this.  Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdpperera (talkcontribs) 10:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Mdpperera See Wikipedia:REFUND (it was deleted). Qwerfjkltalk 10:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hoary, is there a way which I can grab the text of the deleted article? it will be a great help  Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdpperera (talkcontribs)
@Mdpperera: As Qwerfjkl mentioned above, you can ask at WP:REFUND. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬  📝 ) 14:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you @Tenryuu and @Qwerfjkl I have made a request.

MOS


 Courtesy link: Draft:February 2021 European cold wave

Need help with a draft that needs copyediting and wp-mos ..can you help ? Pun89 (talk)

Pun89, most of the article is about the effects of the cold in Greece. But Greece is not mentioned in the title, and only briefly in the lead. You need to consider what the article is meant to be about. Maproom (talk) 14:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Debashish_Banerji


Hi, I submitted the draft of my article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Debashish_Banerji). First it was rejected because I had youtube reference. Then I removed those references and put new ones and then resubmitted. Then it was declined, questioning the scholar's notability. Then I started a conversation (on the reviewer's talk page) with that reviewer and at the end he/she asked me to point out which criteria of WP:Academic is met for this scholar and how, and I answered that. But there is no reply from the reviewer for about a week now. Please let me know what I should do. Should I resubmit? The last part of the talk which did not get a reply to, is reproduced below:

--Reviewer: Hi AgniForce, I am not finding the rest of the argument sufficient to demonstarte how it meets WP:Academic. My request to you would be to read it carefully and illustrate which of the criteria is met and how. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:24, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

--My reply: Hi Nomadicghumakkad, criteria #5 says, "The person has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research." As I mentioned in the first line that -- Debashish Banerji is the holder of the founder's chair (Haridas Chaudhuri) of a well recognized USA university California Institute of Integral Studies, San Francisco, where he is also the chair of East-West Psychology department. AgniForce 17:52, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

--My another reply: Hi Nomadicghumakkad, you might also like to look at the Foreword to his book (pg xi to xii, available for view on google books) "The Alternate Nation of Abanindranath Tagore". There the eminent art historian Partha Mitter writes: "Banerji... eschews a teleological and temporal narrative in favor of "history as performance," seeking to engage creatively with social forces in order to establish that the past was replete with immanent possibilities... This bold and imaginative approach to an alternative nationalist art history proposed by Debashish Banerji will, and must, generate intense debates on the nature of nationalism, modernity, art, class and identity." Partha Mitter is Emeritus Professor of art history at University of Sussex, England; a member of Wolfson College, Oxford University; and past fellow of Clare Hall, Cambridge University. AgniForce 4:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC) AgniForce (talk) 08:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

AgniForce, you say that "The person has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research", and that he is "the chair of [its] East-West Psychology department". It's not at all obvious to me that the California Institute of Integral Studies is "a major institution of higher education and research", and Psychology there seems particularly dubious. -- Hoary (talk) 08:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Hoary - how do you define "a major institution of higher education and research" and how do you show CIIS is not? Btw, he holds the Haridas Chaudhuri chair there which is a named (named after its founder) chair. East-West Psychology chair is a department chair, not a named chair, so two are completely separate. Not sure what you mean by "Psychology there seems particularly dubious".AgniForce (talk) 09:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
AgniForce, I don't define such institutions; I expect their fame to impress themselves on me. For California, they'd include (in no particular order), but not be limited to, the University of California (UCSC, etc), Stanford, CalTech. If I wanted to demonstrate that an institution was major, of course I wouldn't depend on my own prejudices: I'd back it up with reliable sources. The APA doesn't seem so impressed by Psychology at CIII; but OK, that's irrelevant to the fact that he's the Haridas Chaudhuri Professor -- but in a school that I hadn't heard of. -- Hoary (talk) 09:56, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

how to link another wikipedia page to the page i am creating


I am creating a Wikipedia page for my director in the sandbox and would like to link the page to other important people who already have their pages live. I tried with the function and published it, however, it is displayed in red ink. could you please help? thanks LizKurian (talk) 08:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

LizKurian Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures you must make. Regarding your question, if link is in red type, that means it goes to a nonexistent article. Check to make sure the name of the article is typed exactly correct. Your draft has many correctly done links so I suspect that may be the issue- unless you have a specific example of a problem I am missing. 331dot (talk) 09:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Courtesy: User:LizKurian/sandbox, a not-yet submitted draft with no references. David notMD (talk) 09:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
In case you meant Jacques Servier (User:LizKurian/sandbox) it's because "Doctor" is part of the wikilink, the link must be the article title, see WP:PIPE though.
Adding to what 331dot said, if your article is to have any chance of being accepted, you need to study WP:BLP and learn to include inline citations, see WP:TUTORIAL. Remove everything you can't source to a WP:RS. If you don't have sources that meets the demands of WP:BASIC, write about something else. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:39, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

remove entire external section on Antonia di Paolo di Dono?


all links refer to Antonia di Paolo di Dono father Paolo Uccello. not even one of them mention about her. should i remove entire section? Agyaanapan (talk) 09:03, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Agyaanapan Based on a quick check and WP:EL, yes you should. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:29, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Does this not beg the question of why the article exists? The refs are about her father, about the nunnery, about paintings not attributed to her, etc. David notMD (talk) 09:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång ha... we have docs about everything! yes, you are right. they must belong to article person not other persons (

Some acceptable external links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic,...

. in short time, i will delete it. @David notMD i found other women artist articles, some of them are having a just one paragraph. to answer or guess to your query is simple: they are increasing the articles about women. perhaps one day wp will have equal number of articles about woman and man. (however its offtopic and irrevelant here ;) -Agyaanapan (talk) 12:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
I am all for articles about women. Wrote one. What is lacking here are references about Antonia. David notMD (talk) 13:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Help with "References" added to page


I was reviewing my local village Article and noticed a few missing citations Aston Abbotts. I have added them but would appreciate a veteran's feedback on if I have used the markup correctly? Are the sources satisfactory? Anything I could do better.

Constructive feedback appreciated. Martynjsimpson (talk) 12:07, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I haven't examined the sources, but you have added them as bare URLs so you ought to expand them. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@Martynjsimpson Expanded here. Qwerfjkltalk 12:34, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

How to write about a person


write about

I just started with wiki. This is the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Alekz_Londos&action=history

It's a about this person Alekz Londos who have done much public work in his home town, county district and all over the world. I created a heading like this; and a sub heading:

<draft content redacted>

I get my source information from this news paper: Santa Cruz Sentinel wrote this article

Ny question is how can I do this without violation copyrights, If I copy text from that santacruzsentinel newpaper article then it violates Wiki rules and gets removed. If I make up the text myself then it's not viable because I can't prove it happened.

Another question is after the image for the article was remove: "Santa Cruz Weekly News page1.jpg", I would like to have graphics showing the actual "Car tires" and also the authentic people who where involved. The problem is I was not there to take my own images. So as a newbie on Wiki how do I add the original images without violation anything? Alekz Londos surely have images, how can I use them if he give some to me? Another thing is the "notable" Wiki rule, that a page on Wiki must have notable content. What is more notable then an article in a large newspaper like the one a link to above. ExocetKid (talk) 13:20, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

This isn't the place for draft content. That belongs in the draft. If you copy text from the newspaper article you are violating copyright; you prove it happens by giving a citation to the source. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:29, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
In your own words, then cite the Santa Cruz article as a reference. David notMD (talk) 13:33, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@ExocetKid: I suggest you don't worry about images until after the draft is accepted. Focus on gathering your independent published reliable sources that provide significant coverage of Londos, summarize and paraphrase what they say, and use those sources as references. There's lots of good information at Help:Your first article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:11, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi @ExocetKid:, you also need to be super-careful that the references say what they should. For example, a reference to Time's 25 most influential teens of 2018 would make a real impact, but unfortunately it doesn't mention Alekz Londos. If you want the article to get published successfully, you need more things like the Sentinel article. In particular, you need independent references: situations where someone unrelated to the subject has chosen to write about the subject and what they do; unsolicited newspaper articles and such like. Also, I'm a bit embarrassed to mention this, but I notice that in section 'Notable works,' you've written "Providing independent humanitarian aid in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina when I was 25, December 2018". This suggests that you might be Alekz Londos. Please, please note, that if you are him, firstly you must declare this (because it's a serious conflict of interest), and secondly, you must be super-careful. It is strongly advised that you shouldn't attempt to write an article about yourself. It's very hard to be neutral. And when you have written it, you will have no special ownership over it. In fact you will have less rights than anyone else, because you will be obliged to post any changes you'd like made on the article's talk page, and rely on others to make them! Anything that gets published about you, good or bad, may end up in that article, and there will be nothing you can do to limit the damage... it's not always desirable to have a wikipedia article about oneself, and if you're looking for a place to publish your own works under your own control, there are much better sites. Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 19:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

REFERENCING


How do I add a reference to an article Roselyn jordan (talk) 16:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

See Help:Editing#Adding references. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:32, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Bradford_Montage_2021.jpg - a petty deletion for a photo


I mean I don't know how this works but a user on Wikicommons seems to dislike a new montage for Bradford because in their own words "Because its nonsense". The user doesn't appear to be on Wikipedia but I mean I don't see how it hurts to update a lead photo every so often...I made collages for Blackburn, Dewsbury, Halifax and there have been no complaints...but for this one there is...I have commented on it and think because its nonsense as a reason to delete is quite petty and silly...would anyone on here who uses commons comment...it has been changed much still got the city hall, cathedral and skyline present just added the mosque and a well known hall...I can happily readd the other montage but I think my one is not so bad and the authors have been credited...RailwayJG (talk) 16:08, 26 July 2021 (UTC) RailwayJG (talk) 16:08, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

This is, of course, a matter for Wikicommons rather than for enwiki, but I would expect a frivolous nomination like that to be treated with the respect it deserves. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:42, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
The deletion request has been rejected and the montage kept. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:57, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Advice on reliable sources


Hello, I'm currently editing a draft for an article about the specific kinds of transphobia that are aimed at trans men. There are pages on nonbinary people's struggles and trans women's struggles, so I thought I'd add the page for trans men to complete that little trifecta. I've had the page sent back to me to edit some more and one of the reasons was unreliable sources. I had sourced from JK Rowling's transphobic essay and from scientific papers and studies about trans men, but I'm wondering if it sourcing and quoting from books by trans people about transphobia face by trans guys will be what Wikipedia is looking for? E.g. sourcing Transgender Warriors by Leslie Feinburg or from Trangender History by Susan Stryker etc. I want to make this article the best it can be so it can help other trans guys like myself! Thank you for any guidance, -Vulture /Transandrosupport Transandrosupport (talk) 16:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC) Transandrosupport (talk) 16:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Transandrosupport. I don't think the reviewers are looking for any particular type of source here (providing that the sources are reliable per WP:RS), but rather for you to reference sources for the parts of the draft that are currently lacking them. For example, you've written: "Transphobia specifically directed at trans men and transmasculine people mainly takes two forms: that which is derived from misgendering them as women and thus heavily rooted in misogyny and that which is derived from a specific predjudice towards men taken out on them and thus is heavily rooted in misandry". Is this based on a source, or is the idea of two forms of transphobia your own? If it's the latter, then I'm afraid this is original research, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Transandrosupport Hello, welcome to the teahouse! There are three main problems with your draft - firstly there are entire sections that seem to have no sources, secondly many of the sources you have used are not reliable, and thirdly you seem to be combining sources and drawing conclusions that are not explicitly stated by any of them. Looking through your draft the sections like "Medical Abuse", "Misandristic Abuse", "Abuse Denial" and "Transition pessimism" have no sources at all - these sections all need references to show where the information in them has come from. Advice on what kind of sources are considered reliable can be found at WP:Referencing for beginners and WP:Reliable sources. Social media like twitter are almost always unusable as sources. Sites like Tumblr and medium are self published blogs and are generally unusable unless the person writing them is a recognised expert in the field. Opinion pieces and personal blogs can only be used for attributed opinions, e.g. you can use JK Rowling's site as a source for JK Rowling's opinion (i.e. "Writing on her website, JK Rowling stated that ...") but cannot be used as a source for facts, and certainly cannot be used in the method you've used them where you've linked attempts to get puberty blockers banned to a specific post on a blog (see WP:Synthesis and WP:Original research - you need a reliable source that makes that specific connection, you cannot make it yourself). Hope this helps. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm a bit concerned that Transandrophobia has been prematurely published (pinging Transandrosupport and Timtrent). I don't say that because I object to the article existing, but I'm worried that without better sourcing, it might become a target for deletion nominations. I'm also slightly worried that the word transandrophobia returns zero Google Scholar results. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:04, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
On the topic of Google Scholar results, I wonder if transmisandry is actually the WP:COMMONNAME. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@Cordless Larry (edit conflict) I understand your concerns. As you can see from the article, "Transmisandry" is synonym and it might be a better title. If you feel strongly I will not stand in the way of your sending it back to Draft space. I took the view that it has a better than 50% chance of surviving immediate deletion process. As you know, that is our guidance at WP:AFC. I was as cautious as I felt necessary. I am content to be guided by you in this matter. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 20:13, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm going to call on Cullen328, who might be so kind as to give us a third opinion. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:17, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@Cordless Larry please feel free to take any action without asking me. I think it behoves me to be steadfastly neutral over this, and supportive of any consensus you determine FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 20:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Transandrosupport, please note that a statement such as "Transandrophobia was coined in 2017 by a trans man who goes by the username Saint-Dionysus on his blog" can't be sourced to the blog alone. The blog establishes that the term was used, but not that it was coined by the blog; that claim requires a secondary source. You can make original claims like this in an essay but not in a Wikipedia article, I'm afraid. Wikipedia articles can only say what can be supported by reliable sources - nothing more by way of interpretation. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

An acceptable Wikipedia article should summarize what published, reliable sources say about the topic, and should contain no original research and no content that cannot be verified. A blogger using an anonymous handle is not a reliable source. WP:NEOLOGISM is relevant to the title of the article. Currently, the article has a lot of "citation needed" tags, and either all that content should be removed or references to reliable sources that verify the content should be added. My recommendation would be to move the article back to draft space until these issues can be addressed. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:40, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, Cullen328. I've moved the article back to draft so that these issues can be resolved without the risk of deletion. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:25, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Cordless Larry Following your advice I've removed the section on the blogger. I got in a little over my head yesterday so I appreciate you preserving my work. I've sourced everything now, nearly every sentence- I hope it's alright to ask but could you give it a onceover to see if I've missed out anything vital before I submit it again? As you can probably tell, the topic means a lot to me, being a trans man. And a significant number of transmasculine people I know have expressed interest in such an article existing. The last thing I want to do is scupper the whole article. Many thanks and thank you for bearing with me (I'm still quite new to wikipedia, the last time I made an article on an old account was 2018)
The draft is getting better but there are still some original research issues where you're citing sources as examples of an argument that you're making, rather than summarising just what the source says. I've tried to explain this at Draft talk:Transandrophobia#Need for secondary sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:01, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Which edits are considered?


When I am adding my number of edits to {{Service award progress}}, which group of edits shall I consider: total edits, live edits, edits in all projects or approx edits in English Wikipedia? (edit counter) Excellenc1📞 16:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, Please see Wikipedia:Service awards#Exposition on the requirementsThe Aafī (talk) 16:52, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hungamastart/sandbox


Please can anyone help me Publish my article...  Preceding unsigned comment added by Hungamastart (talkcontribs)

Hungamastart, User:Hungamastart/sandbox will not be accepted as an article per WP:NORG, see that link. FB, Quora and what appears to be some sort of webshop is not the sources that are needed. If you read WP:NORG and conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!", then add those sources to the draft, then you can use this link: WP:SUBMIT. If you don't have those sources, write about something else. Guessing by your username you are connected to this website, and you need to follow the guidance in these links: WP:COI and WP:CORPNAME. A username like "Kim at Hungamastart" is ok if you want the corpname in there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

It is against Wikipedia policy to advertise a business or organization since the nature of Wikipedia is nonprofit and educational. I'm sorry, but if you want your article to be published, then may I suggest you try a different hosting site. Besides, Wikipedia is not a blog. New Age Quenya 996 (talk) 18:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)New Age Quenya 996

How to create fact sheets?


They appear on the right side .. A graph of a person or company PEDFYI (talk) 17:36, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@PEDFYI, Help:Infobox may be what you're after. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Clara: Database of Women Artists is archived, is there any tool to replace all at once


Clara: Database of Women Artists is archived. how to change all links at once in various articles? Agyaanapan (talk) 17:59, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Subject Experience


I have done research on the New Age for 20 years and recognize it as an Abrahamic European faith and I wonder: How could I cite my sources if I have experience in the subject? New Age Quenya 996 (talk) 18:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@New Age Quenya 996 Welcome to the Teahouse. Sadly, it’s likely your studies would be regarded as Original Research. Unless properly published, it’s unlikely that we would accept such content. Yours is not an area I know anything about, so I can only answer in general terms. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
It seems to me per WP:EXTRAORDINARY, that an on-WP claim/statement that New Age is an Abrahamic faith would require very good WP:RS. Anyway, any WP-article is supposed to be a summary of WP:RS on a topic. Anything else is outside WP:s scope. WP:EXPERT may be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:39, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Since I was conducting research to write a guidebook on "Abrahamic New Age," I just need the time. Thanks, guys! New Age Quenya 996 (talk) 18:52, 26 July 2021 (UTC)New Age Quenya 996

This is a draft-in-progress when I create my Wiki. But I can search and find the page


This is a draft-in-progress {{draft article}} when I create my Wiki page. But I can search and find the page, so what it the difference from publish?? ExocetKid (talk) 18:48, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, ExocetKid. You can search for Draft:Alekz Londos within Wikipedia, if you know to put "Draft:" on the front. If you search without "Draft:", it won't find it; and more significantly, external search engines should not find it. Does that answer your question, or have I misunderstood?--ColinFine (talk) 20:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Publishing changes for person, living.


Hello, I've been trying to add the cinematographer David Klein to the THE BOOK OF BOBA FETT page and also add this credit to the "known for" section of his page. They've been rejected because I did not provide a citation to a reliable source. The help pages are a bit confusing to me so if you could point me to a help pages for dummies, I'd really appreciate it. Thank you. Dakafett (talk) 19:00, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dakafett: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! Is WP:Referencing for beginners of any help? 192.76.8.91 (talk) 19:03, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Facebook


How do you log in to Facebook (in chrome) if you have entered the password gave your cell phone number and it still does not want to login to the account Jessica J 2009 (talk) 19:01, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jessica J 2009: Welcome to Wikipedia. This help page is for asking about how to use or edit Wikipedia. We can't help you with your facebook account. You will need to contact facebook for help. RudolfRed (talk) 19:08, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Jessica J 2009, you've asked here about Facebook before. Wikipedia isn't Facebook. -- Hoary (talk) 22:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Campaign links on pages for politicians


 Courtesy link: Beth Doglio#External links

Is linking to a campaign website a form of WP:ADV? A Thimblerigs (talk) 19:10, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@A Thimblerigs For a politician, I think it's generally considered a reasonable WP:ELOFFICIAL. Sure there's an element of advertising, but that would go for almost any "official website", bio, company, band etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång I did not think anyone was allowed to self-promote on Wikipedia, but the policy for official links certain does allow it. Now I know! Thanks for pointing that out! --A Thimblerigs (talk) 20:37, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello, A Thimblerigs. Since editing an article about yourself is strongly discouraged, this is not usually self-promotion! But you're right that linking to the subject's own or official website could be construed as promotion; but in fact it is specifically permitted, just in an infobox or an "External links" section. --ColinFine (talk) 20:50, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

How to create an article on Wikipedia


How do I create an article on Wikipedia? Americansaintinmexico (talk) 19:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Americansaintinmexico Just click on a red link and type in the edit box, then click Publish changes. I strongly recommend you read Wikipedia:Your first article. Qwerfjkltalk 19:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Americansaintinmexico Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would advise a little more caution. Creating a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. It takes much effort and practice. You will greatly increase your chances of success if you first gain experience editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Diving right in to article creation without experience often leads to disappointment and frustration as your work is mercilessly edited and deleted by others. I would advise you to use the new user tutorial.
If you do want to attempt to create an article now, please read Your first article and then visit Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review by another editor before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia. Then you find out problems first. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Americansaintinmexico, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have asked one of the most frequent questions we get here. My answer is that for a new editor to try to create an article is like getting apprenticed to a builder and immediately trying to build your own house. Everybody knows what a house looks like, right? So you just have to throw up a few walls and so on. Unfortunately, what the new apprentice probably doesn't know is all the work that has to go into a house before you throw up the walls: surveying the ground and making sure it's stable enough to build on, building the foundations, etc. If you don't do all that work your house is likely to fall down - and any work you've done on the visible part of the house will probably be wasted. A Wikipedia article is just like that - if you don't survey the ground (check WP:notability) and build the foundations {find the required independent reliably published sources), your article may fall down - not be accepted into the encyclopaedia; and if you write so much as a single word before you do that ground-work, you are very likely wasting the whole of your effort. That is why I always advise new editors to spend a few months improving some of our six million existing articles (some of them really need it!) and learning how Wikipedia works, before they try to build a house. --ColinFine (talk) 21:00, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@ColinFine You have asked one of the most frequent questions we get here maybe we should create a template: Hello, [[User:{{{1}}}|]], and welcome to the Teahouse... Qwerfjkltalk 07:51, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

sneaky vandalism


Noticed this ip range that apparently was doing sneaky vandalism for almost a year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/45.232.94.26/16
Reverted some unnoticed ones, there were that stayed unnoticed for almost a year.
Mostly changes dates of things randomly. Posting here If anyone wants to keep an eye for future edits of it. Tehonk (talk) 21:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tehonk: Thanks for the heads up. Reported at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Are article tips/suggestions OK to ask here?


Hello, I've been working on two draft articles the past couple days but I am hesitant to submit my drafts for review immediately since there are so many rules and I fear I may have missed something or did something wrong in the article creation process.

I think I'm ready to submit them for review but I wasn't sure if I could use Teahouse to get any suggestions/tips in case I missed anything important. Not sure if Teahouse is the place for that? If this is okay let me know and I will share the articles here. Thanks 22:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Ooops I forgot to sign in! Spektred (talk) 22:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@Spektred You are an employee of Draft:Tri Counties Bank, so you really ought to change your WP:COI declaration to that described at WP:PAID. You are really pushing your luck to also try to create Draft:TriCo Bancshares. Stick to one; read WP:NCORP and make sure you only use independent Reliable Sources. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:29, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip about WP:PAID, I wasn't aware that that would be better but it makes sense. I have been reading WP:NCORP among many other guidelines, and we are good as far as notability. I have found some Reliable Sources and I tried adding those to each statement, but I'm sure the community will be able to improve the article by adding many more.
Regarding "pushing my luck", I noticed that another bank on Wikipedia who is also a public company like us did this, and it didn't seem to be an issue, so I thought it made sense to do the same? Spektred (talk) 22:54, 26 July 2021 (UTC)


@Spektred: discussion started on draft talk page. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:37, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Tim, I saw your comment and responded. You guys move really fast. Spektred (talk) 22:54, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

the family name Licina


Do someone know something about the family name Licina? Whether it comes from the name Licinius? 62.4.57.114 (talk) 22:40, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

That's a question you might ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language. -- Hoary (talk) 22:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft review subsmissions


On submitting drafts for review: When a draft already looks complete and finalized, should I submit it for a review or wait for other changes? Cookiethepug (talk) 23:50, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Cookiethepug - If you have created a draft that you think is ready for review by reviewers, you should submit it. It is very rare that another editor will look at a draft that is in draft space and not submitted for review. If you don't submit your draft, the most likely result is that it will expire on 26 January 2022. If you submit it, and there is currently a backlog drive in progress to review as many drafts as possible, you are very likely to get it reviewed. Is that an answer? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Alright, got it. Thank you!  Preceding unsigned comment added by Cookiethepug (talkcontribs) 00:16, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Can someone help get the article to a "neutral" pov?


 Courtesy link: Draft:Presearch

Carrabre (talk) 23:56, 26 July 2021 (UTC)Carrabre

My article Presearch has been declined. I work on the team, would love the communities help in getting a page up! Carrabre (talk) 23:56, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Carrabre - Well, as the declining reviewer, I will say that some editors are not interested in providing free help to an editor who is editing in the course of their employment. (But another editor might help you, maybe.) Robert McClenon (talk) 00:07, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Carrabre: Conflict of interest editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. Please disclose your COI on your user page with the {{UserboxCOI}} template. GoingBatty (talk) 01:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Carrabre: Oops! It appears the {{paid}} template would be more appropriate. GoingBatty (talk) 01:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Carrabre (talk) 17:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)Carrabre understood on the not wanting to help piece, but it would probably be less work for you (albeit less fun than watching me struggle on my first article) to help get it up to wikipedia's standards.

help with proper articles to reference in /Draft:Noise_militia


i'm not sure why and which referenced source is good and what should be done in references . if they need to be deleted, then which one. very confusing please assist--thank you 613codify (talk) 01:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC) 613codify (talk) 01:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@613codify: It appears that references #2-5 are from blogs, and reference #6 is a press release by the artist. GoingBatty (talk) 01:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks GoingBatty, that was my thought process in the decline. Bkissin (talk) 12:58, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

thank you as that was helpful.but i want to ask something. references #3-5 represent music review sites of which some of the info in the article is referenced and i'm not sure if they are 'blogs' per se.perhaps i need the definition of 'blog' again please assist====

Account blocked?


Hello. Am wondering why my account suddenly appears to be blocked, or "not exist". Possibly I'm missing something. Can someone help? Thanks. -- Motke MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:11, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MotkeKhabad: Welcome to the Teahouse! Your account isn't blocked (see the block log) and still exists (as you were able to post here). What are you seeing that led you to think your account is blocked or "not exist"? GoingBatty (talk) 01:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@MotkeKhabad: Did you try to edit Wikipedia while using a VPN or similar? If so you probably got caught in an IP block. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 01:25, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
{{|192.76.8.91}} @192.76.8.91 Not that I recall, but it's possible my VPN was left on by mistake, tho I use it infrequently. If there's an IP block, what can I do about it to resolve the issue and remove it? Thanks. MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:41, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@MotkeKhabad: If you need to be able to edit from blocked VPN's (e.g. if there are firewalls wherever you're editing from that you need to get around) you can request an WP:IP block exemption, however these rare and are only granted if you have genuine need for it. If you have tried to edit the site with a VPN on by mistake then turn off your VPN and try again. If it still won't let you edit then either wait 24 hours or clear your browser's cookies. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 01:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
  • You have to tell the name of the blocked account you are talking about. Capitals00 (talk) 01:57, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty @192.76.8.91 @Capitals00 Thanks for your help, all MotkeKhabad (talk) 02:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)


Hi and thanks for your quick reply, @GoingBatty. Sorry, I'm newish to WP: how do I reply to your reply? I don't see an indication online or in WP as to how to respond. Thanks and sorry to trouble you re basic stuff. -Motke MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC) MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Just mention the name of the concerning user in your message. Capitals00 (talk) 01:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
As GoingBatty said: What are you seeing that led you to think your account is blocked or "not exist"? If you saw that the page User:MotkeKhabad says "Wikipedia does not have a user page with this exact title" then it merely means your account hasn't created an optional user page. You are not blocked and you don't need a user page to edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter Thanks for your help! MotkeKhabad (talk) 02:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@MotkeKhabad To reply to other users, use either {{ping|Example}} or [[User:Example]] to notify them. Qwerfjkltalk 07:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Deletion/ Improval of an article.


Hello Wikipedians!! So, I am here to inform any mods/admins that this California LLC has only one line and does not have any citations. Kindly let me know what I can do about this. Thanks in advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

You can expand Limited liability company instead. Capitals00 (talk) 02:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating a page on Leadership Initiative for Earth and/or the LIFEboat Flotillas


As described at http://www.jeffreygibbs.org/getting-a-life LIFE was a Vancouver environmental organization which organized several environmental conferences on tall ships. Hundreds of young people took part. Would it be suitable for me to create a page on either of these topics, relying on Gibbs' page as a reference along with others in the standard Wikipedia style? Ilnyckyj (talk) 03:11, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). This starts off by saying that "[a]n organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." The website of Gibbs's is not independent of this. If hundreds (even tens of thousands) of people took part, this doesn't contribute to notability, as the term is (perversely?) understood hereabouts. What matters is what has been written about it all, in reliable, independent, published secondary sources. -- Hoary (talk) 05:05, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for that guidance. I think the issue may be more timing than the level of journalistic interest, since not a lot of outlets have coverage from the late 1990s available. I will see if I can find anything in news databases.

Ilnyckyj (talk) 20:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

A 26 February 1997 Canada NewsWire article entitled "All Aboard! Lifeboat Flotilla" stating that it "will carry 200 youth and some four dozen educators aboard 13 large sailboats and heritage ships through the islands and waterways of BC's Gulf Islands."

A 25 June 1998 Canada NewsWire story reported: "Leadership Initiative for Earth (British Columbia) The Flotilla is a large-scale ocean expedition about sustainability combining the elements of adventure with hands-on learning for young Canadians."

A 13 March 1997 Globe and Mail article is all about the Flotilla "Vancouver Teens learn to tackle environmental problems."

Canadian Newsstream also contains 13 articles that reference the LIFEboat Flotilla: https://www.sindark.com/NonBlog/ProQuestDocuments-2021-07-27.pdf

Ilnyckyj (talk) 20:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Ilnyckyj, a quick look suggests that you have enough material for an article on the "flotilla". NB cited material does not have to be online, and a Wikipedia article (or draft) mustn't link to a web page, file or whatever that appears to violate copyright. While I don't want to judge the status of the anthology ProQuestDocuments-2021-07-27.pdf, it looks very iffy (however convenient it may be). -- Hoary (talk) 23:19, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Someone moved my incomplete draft to mainspace


I was creating a draft on Regional Council of Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur but I wasn't done completing, someone moved it to the article space. What to I do? Shall it move it back to the draft space? Excellenc1📞 03:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can keep working on the article (unless you have a conflict of interest, in which case you can use {{request edit}} on the talk page). You can also talk with the user who moved the draft on their talk page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Renaming a Wikipedia page


I just wanted help as to how do I rename a Wikipedia page I just created? Brycedsouza (talk) 04:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Renaming is "moving"; therefore, by clicking on "Move" (which is an option under "Edit"). -- Hoary (talk) 05:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I assumed that you meant an article. But perhaps you instead mean Draft:Marius Fernandes. You submit a draft as a candidate to be an article. But please don't do this. Most problematically, your draft currently describes MF as a "festival legend". Such language is vapid and promotional. According to reliable, independent, published sources, what, exactly, has he done? Please summarize and relate this straightforwardly. And then, you can think of submitting your draft for consideration as an article. -- Hoary (talk) 05:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft of translated article


I'm working on a draft of a translation from Portuguese Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Antonio_Peticov

It's been rejected again due to a lack of reliable sources. It cites, among others: the Jornal do Brasil, one of Brazil's oldest newspapers (official archive of a print copy); a recent book published by a major Brazilian publishing house; an article in VICE Magazine Brazil, which is supported by the aforementioned book; a video interview on TV Cultura, a major Brazilian network (which was conducted by the late Antônio Abujamra, a well-known actor, director, and TV personality); the official website of São Paulo's metro system; an arts and culture website created by the government of Brazil; an interview in Domingo, an arts and culture magazine published by the Jornal do Brasil; a blog entry from the University of São Paulo; the government website for the city of São Paulo... it is objectively better sourced than the PT Wikipedia version.

I'm not seeing any indication that the article was reviewed by someone who speaks Portuguese and could properly verify the sources, so at this point, I'm genuinely at a loss as to what else I can do to bring this translated article's sources up to the standards of EN Wikipedia. Whatever issues one could have with the article, I'm surprised that veracity of sources is one of them. Actionactioncut (talk) 05:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Does pt.wp have an equivalent standard to WP:Biographies of living persons? Because I get a sense that BLP sourcing requirements are part of the issue. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 05:34, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Jéské Couriano I mean, the PT version only cites the subject's website and reads like a love letter to him: "Fruit of his incessant curiosity, Antonio was discovering and learning, experiencing different scenarios and assimilating colors, aromas, flavors, sounds and putting together a balanced rational and emotional archive of all this" as just one example. While it does have an equivalent, it was not rigorously enforced in this instance. I've aggressively rewritten the EN version to remove all purple prose, maintain a neutral POV, reduce the length, make it read more like an article than a resume, and include proper citations and formatting, all of which the original lacks. Actionactioncut (talk) 05:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I do speak Portuguese and I agree that the article would very likely survive a AfD. It passes WP:GNG and easily (in my point of view) passes WP:ARTIST. Being in-depth profiled by Jornal do Brasil and by Folha de S. Paulo alone would, likely, grant him notability. His profile at Enciclopédia Itaú Cultural doesn't grant him notability per se, but it's a big indication that he is respected by his peers.--SirEd Dimmi!!! 06:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps Locomotive207 could comment here. -- Hoary (talk) 06:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Actionactioncut and Locomotive207, the section "Posters, book, and album covers" is unreferenced. It should be referenced. This section aside, the referencing is not perfect. However, this is not a "Good Article" (let alone "Featured Article") candidate; so while the referencing must be good it does not have to be perfect. I am surprised by Locomotive207's verdict, and look forward to reading their comment. -- Hoary (talk) 12:36, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Since the issues I had with the draft have been fixed and issues cleared up by other editors here, I will now go ahead and accept the draft if nobody has any objections. Sorry for the late reply.--🌀Locomotive207-talk🌀 21:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Whether and how to flag content "citation needed"


Hey, Teahouse denizens. I'm making a few minor edits to an article and found an opinion statement that isn't attributed to a source. Can you point me to info on what to do in such a case? Haven't found guidance in the MOS. Aredbee (talk) 05:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Aredbee: Welcome to the Teahouse. Without knowing which article this is to make a further judgement, if it's a statement that is blatantly an opinion, you could straight up delete it. If you want to err on the safe side, you can put {{citation needed}} right after it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬  📝 ) 05:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Tenryuu 🐲: Thanks! It's in the article on Cab Calloway, under the Music Career heading, in the third graf, the last part of the second sentence: "but they were not up to par with Cecil Scott's band." I'm thinking this is a case for a "citation needed," since if Scott's band was better it may be why the Alabamians broke up. Aredbee (talk) 06:01, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Aredbee: Another editor taking action would find a suitable reliable source as a citation, or delete it. It also lets readers visually see that a statement hasn't been properly cited, and that they should take it with a grain of salt. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬  📝 ) 06:14, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Creation of the page Veronika Matyunina and admitting it into the English Wikipedia as a page


 Courtesy link: Draft:Veronika Matyunina

Hello. I'm Adam Daniel, whom I'm known as Lyubomyr Bilyovych (Ukrainian) and Berislav Ismailović (Croatian) in Slavic sources, I'm from Malaysia and I'm 16 years old this year. Other than my native language, Malay, and English, I'm very interested in various languages such as Chinese, Ukrainian, Bulgarian, Croatian, Polish, Czech, Russian, Serbian, Macedonian, Belarusian, Persian, Arabic, Urdu, Hindi, Bengali, etc. I'm actually an editor of Wikipedia in various languages since 2018. I would like to plead to you for this thing:

I recently created a new English-language Wikipedia page titled as Veronika Matyunina, where the page is from the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia page Матюніна Вероніка, she's a Ukrainian table tennis player, whom she is born on August 10, 2006. I would like to create a page about her in English actually. Could you please admit my created page titled Veronika Matyunina into the English Wikipedia, and let the page that I created share together with the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia page Матюніна Вероніка? Thank you.

Could you also please help me how to credit the editors when I translate the page on Veronika Matyunina from Ukrainian to English?  Adamdaniel864 (talk) 06:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Adamdaniel864: Welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft has been moved to draftspace, as it has barely any information, and there are no references whatsoever. You can take material from the other wikis, but just be aware that not everything will make it over due to a difference in policies and guidelines. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬  📝 ) 06:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Note also that while the Ukrainian article on her has a number of sources, you must credit the editors there when you translate that page (if that's the approach you are taking). See WP:Translate for guidance on this, Adamdaniel864. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:16, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

WikiFauna for advanced technical editors


There is the WikiGnome, WikiDragon, WikiKnight, etc. But I would like to know what fauna in the wiki space relates to editors that are advanced and often technical, cheers 180.251.151.92 (talk) 06:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I understand your question correctly but if you wish to find editors who are knowledgeable in some technical area, then the best way is probably to go via the WP:WikiProject_Council/Directory/Science portal and click through to the topic you are interested in. These usually have lists of interested editors. Another method is to look at the category pages: for example I'm listed in Category:Wikipedians interested in chemistry. Whether people in such categories are competent in that topic is another matter! Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I worded my question incorrectly, sorry. So, for example, WikiDragons are users that edits articles in massive differentials, WikiGnomes edits in small amounts. So, the Wiki- for advanced technical users is…? 180.251.151.92 (talk) 07:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Ah, I see... you want a suitable neologism we could start to use. WP:WikiGeek perhaps? The idea is that you would write a humorous essay on that topic and then add a brief summary to the WP:WikiFauna article, as others have done. Good luck! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

This Indian Olympian article has to be updated


Hiii, C. A. Bhavani Devi is an Indian Sabre who yesterday created history by becoming the first Indian fencer, who appeared in Olympic and won first match against Spanish world number 4. Lots of arti are available on internet that can be used as source of information. And one problem is that the sportsperson's first name is Bhawani Devi and Sundararaman is her fathers name. It's Tamil , these folks don't write their surname instead they use thir father's, Grandfather's, Great Grandfather's name respectively before their first name. Isn't it strange but they do that. Paste a tag or Templet at the top of article so readers not get confused. Huge Earth (talk) 06:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Huge Earth, there are thousands of Olympics-related articles that need to be updated. This will take some time, a few months judging by past experience.
If the title needs to be changed, see WP:MOVE for guidance. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Huge Earth: Welcome to the Teahouse! You may suggest edits and provide reliable sources on the article's talk page: Talk:C. A. Bhavani Devi. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Legacy articles for our parish of Boyton, Wilshire


Could Wikipedia include in their existing article on the parish of Boyton, three articles on the parish which have legacy value, with more such articles probably to come sometime in the future? 2A00:23C7:A00D:2F00:41AC:8E2A:6DC4:CD1C (talk) 09:54, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

From Alex Saunt.

Do you mean at Boyton,_Wiltshire#External_links? If they are self-published, probably not. You can find guidance at WP:ELYES and WP:ELMAYBE. Depending on what kind of articles this is, one possibility is to add a "Further reading" section. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Sources


Hello, i'm currently working on a draft for the Italian politician Pietro Amendola. However, i couldn't find a lot of sources for Pietro Amendola. Another thing, the best one i could find was from the Associazione Nazionale Partigiani d'Italia ("National Association Partisans of Italy") but it was marked as WP:SELFPUBLISHED. Why was this the case?

The National Association Partisans of Italy is recognized as a charitable foundation. And Pietro was a member of the organization. Besides, the National Association Partisans of Italy have also been cited in several other articles.

Does anyone have any sources on Pietro?

And why is the source by National Association Partisans of Italy not valid? Khalif Ali Husain the Third (talk) 10:02, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Khalif Ali Husain the Third: Even the Italian version of Wikipedia only has one source (see it:Pietro_Amendola) which suggests to me he is a minor figure who will not pass English Wikipedia's notability requirements. I suspect the reason the NAP of Italy is not a good source for showing he is notable is exactly as you say: he is a member of that organization. The source may be valid for other articles (for example to verify some simple fact). Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:53, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Khalif Ali Husain the Third Welcome to the Teahouse! I checked the 2 sources in your Draft:Pietro Amendola (sounds like an interesting man). ANPI may not be a glaringly awful source on history in general (I can't really say), but the problem with both sources is that they are writing about their own member, which leads us to the independent part of WP:BASIC. Basically, organizations tend to write about their own members in a mostly positive way. Those sources may not be useless for some basic facts per WP:ABOUTSELF, but they don't make a case for WP:GNG.
On more sources, perhaps you can find something useful at . La famiglia Amendola looks promising. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Michael D. Turnbull: Pietro Amendola does pass Wikipedia's notability requirements. Since he was a politician who served as a deputy in parliament. And according to Wikipedia :

"The following are presumed to be notable:

Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels. This also applies to people who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them.

Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage."

An article deletion


How to remove deletion from An article that is correctly written Roselyn jordan (talk) 10:43, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Roselyn jordan (talk) 10:43, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Roselyn jordan Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer depends on what form of deletion you are talking about and what article; from your edits I assume you are referring to Khaleed which has been nominated for deletion. If you object to the deletion, please comment on the discussion, linked to in the deletion notice(and I'll put it directly; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khaleed). 331dot (talk) 10:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay thanks 331dot can you Help me remove the deletion I would love if this article I wrote to be on search engines  Preceding unsigned comment added by Roselyn jordan (talkcontribs) 10:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC):Roselyn jordan I've said what you can do about it, please comment there. 331dot (talk) 11:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Okay thanks a lot  Preceding unsigned comment added by Roselyn jordan (talkcontribs) 11:22, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Roselyn jordan, your task is to show how the article does meet Wikipedia's requirements. You may point out (coolly and politely, of course) that the reasons people are presenting for deletion are mistaken. Simply declaring that the subject of the article merits (or even needs) an article will have no effect. -- Hoary (talk) 12:24, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hoary, Okay thanks a lot so how can this be done is there any direct link that I can send an appeal to.  Preceding unsigned comment added by Roselyn jordan (talkcontribs)

Yes, you make your case at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khaleed. Note the links under New to AfD? Read these primers!, they can be helpful. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:33, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Roselyn jordan You need to go to the link you were given (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khaleed) and explain why you think the article meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The issue here is that people do not think this musician is notable - i.e. he doesn't pass the tests in WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG. You need to find substantial, reliable, independent coverage of this musician that demonstrates that he meets Wikipedia's definition of a notable person. The seeming consensus at the AfD discussion is that the only source that comes close to meeting our requirements is the vanguard piece, and even that seems to be promotional. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 12:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Roselyn jordan: Since you uploaded some of the photos as your "own work", it appears you have a conflict of interest to disclose on your user page. See the note on your talk page for more information. GoingBatty (talk) 12:58, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

No pictures on a Shinkansen when there should be?


Howdy. I'm a huge fan of the Shinkansens of Japan, and so is my girlfriend. I was researching the variants of the 700 & N700 Series when I noticed there doesn't seem to be any pictures of the new N700S-3000 variant owned by JR West. I would've tried to remedy this myself, but it appears there are no images of the N700S-3000 series anywhere on the internet, and I haven't even mentioned how I'm afraid I would screw up the formatting somehow and be made a fool of on Wikipedia. I recognize that this isn't particular to any sort of Editor, but I just wanted to bring this issue to light.

And since the tutorial says I should post the URL of the page, here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N700S_Series_Shinkansen MB-15NavalCommander (talk) 11:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MB-15NavalCommander: One issue with no images of the N700S-3000 series anywhere on the internet is that even if such images were available Wikipedia respects copyright and hence only images that are freely licensed can be uploaded to Commons for use in articles (there are a limited number of WP:NONFREE exceptions). Hence it is helpful if editors can take and upload their own photographs, as in the infobox for that article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:38, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

EDIT: Of course, I answered my own question there. Many thanks, Michael.  Preceding unsigned comment added by MB-15NavalCommander (talkcontribs) 11:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

If these new Shinkansens are being tested on regular railway lines, I'd be surprised if there weren't enthusiasts taking pictures of them. Maybe you could write a message at https://www.facebook.com/japan.shinkansen/ asking about copyright-free pictures? Maproom (talk) 12:51, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
And I assumed this was about some sort of smartphone... Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Dhorkë Orgocka


FYIAdded section header GoingBatty (talk) 13:21, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Dhorkë Orgocka

Why my article is not accepted? Wikiiiicontributor (talk) 13:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Wikiiiicontributor: Welcome to the Teahouse! At the top of your draft, it states "This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article." Hopefully you can rewrite sections such as: "her performance was qualitative. Orgocka was known for her naturalness, she was dynamic on stage, lively and full of energy with a warm word and interpreted with temperamented". Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello


FYIAdded section header GoingBatty (talk) 13:38, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I’m a writer and I have a client who would like a Wikipedia Page created for him. I would be appreciative of some assistance as to how I go about doing so for my client.

My contact details are below:

I look forward to hearing back from you most propitiously.

Kind regards

Avril Bunton-Williams 2A00:23C4:771D:8901:5C94:1B12:1602:F816 (talk) 13:35, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Avril! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially if you don't have Wikipedia experience and if you have a conflict of interest (COI). COI editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia, and requires that you disclose your conflict on your user page - see WP:DISCLOSE. You would also have to determine if your client meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, then you would put aside everything you know about him and gather independent reliable sources and summarize what they say. There's lots more information at Help:Your first article. GoingBatty (talk) 13:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Start with reading WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. Per those links, do you have 3-5 sources that are at the same time reliably published (WP:RS), independent of your client and about your client in some detail? If not, give up. If you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!" move on to WP:YFA, WP:COI and WP:PAID. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:48, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Although not an absolute requirement, creating an account is recommended. Stressing need to understand WP:PAID, and thus declare same on your User page ((Wikipedia frowns MIGHTILY on undeclared paid editing). In addition to general notability, there are additional guidelines if your client is an artist, musician, academic... Consider naming the person here, and perhaps a Teahouse host will do a quickie search on the name, and express an opinion as to potential for notability. David notMD (talk) 14:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Avril, being a writer is barely relevant. I'm not a writer, but I've created several Wikipedia articles. The difficult bit (almost impossible for inexperienced editors, it seems) is reading, understanding, and following Wikipedia's various guidelines and policies, particularly regarding notability.   Maproom (talk) 15:07, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Are museums acceptable references for articles?


I am doing research ahead of potentially creating my first new article. The subject is the GE 25 ton switcher. Hundreds of this locomotive were produced over more than 30 years, so I believe it meets requirements for notability. There are several books that cover it in detail, but I would need to order them or borrow them from a library to use them as references. However I have also found some information online. My question is, are webpages of museums considered acceptable references for articles?

I've found information on the locomotive here , here and here

The second webpage seems unlikely to be a good reference based on my understanding of the requirements, but what about the other two? One would imagine museums are a decent source; after all, not anyone can change this information. I want to make sure I have a sufficient number of good references before I create the article so it doesn't end up being deleted.

Thanks! Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Generally, museums are ok, especially large ones. The 2nd ref is more questionable (if the most detailed). If applicable, double them up where 2 say the same thing. To demonstrate notability, if challenged, books might be necessary. Johnbod (talk) 16:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the swift response! I went ahead and created a draft using the museum webpages as references, and I'll submit the draft to AFC once I have a chance to look at one of the books that covers the topic. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Can an article be replaced be another?


Can Regional Council of Pays de la Loire be replaced by Draft:Regional Council of Pays de la Loire since the draft give more citations and information? Also, the article was created today, that is, while I was making my draft. (Also, how to prevent users to create articles while another user is creating a draft on the same topic?) Excellenc1📞 17:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

It should probably be merged. Qwerfjkltalk 17:42, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
That may be too simple an answer. Jazerty268 (the same editor who earlier moved one of your drafts to mainspace without asking), created an incomplete and unreferenced article in mainspace a couple of hours before you posted your draft. A simple solution could be to copy content from your draft into the article, and then ask that your draft be deleted. Any opinions/solutions from experienced Teahouse hosts? David notMD (talk) 18:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I would copy and paste the contents of Excellenc1's draft into the article overriding the existing article, leaving an edit summary like "Replacing article with draft version, see the history of Draft:Regional Council of Pays de la Loire for attribution." then turn the draft into a redirect to the article to stop it being G13'd. Basically treat it like you would if you'd re-written the article in a user space sandbox. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 19:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I have given a merger proposal in the talk page of the article. Excellenc1📞 03:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

You might want to preserve the history of the draft. Qwerfjkltalk 07:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Is it possible for you to accept the proposal? Excellenc1📞 12:10, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 If there's no opposition, then you can be bold and do it yourself. Qwerfjkltalk 12:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Qwerfjkltalk 12:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Please check Draft:Regional Council of Pays de la Loire and Regional Council of Pays de la Loire, I have a strong feeling that I have messed up. Excellenc1📞 13:05, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 Looks fine to me. Qwerfjkltalk 13:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Archives for talk page


Hello Teahouse hosts. I return regarding assistance with archiving my talk page, this page which you can see HERE. Using a template, I added Cluebot III, and I am uncertain what happens at this point. I've read various pages of information regarding archiving but end up rather confused. I'm uncertain as to move old material into the archive at this point. I deeply appreciate any assistance one might have for me. Kind reagrds, Hu Nhu (talk) 17:22, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hu Nhu: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! It looks like you've set up the template correctly, so you don't need to do anything else at this point. The bot will start automatically archiving your talk page next time it runs (which could take up to a few days). At this point you just need to wait! 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you 192.76.8.91  Preceding unsigned comment added by Hu Nhu (talkcontribs) 19:55, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Ingeborg Kindstedt and Maria Kindberg


In 1915 Ingeborg Kindstedt and Maria Kindberg participated in the first ever cross country automobile trip for a cause; woman suffrage. Kindstedt, age 50, served as the mechanic during the 10 week trip; Kindberg, aged 55, owned and drove the car. Both were Swedish immigrants who had settled in Providence, RI. The trip was launched by Alice Paul and the Congressional Union for Woman Suffrage, and the women drove from San Francisco to Washington DC. It was covered extensively in the press at the time and in suffrage histories since. When they arrived in DC they met with Congress and also with President Wilson.

Despite their considerable contributions to this trip, Kindstedt and Kindberg have often been "othered" or even ignored entirely by historical accounts, in part because they were middle-aged, spoke English with an accent, and didn't fit the CU's mold of being young, native born, well-educated, and well-connected. There was tremendous anti-immigrant and anti-labor sentiment in the US at the time, and Kindstedt was also a member of the Industrial Workers of the World.

Full disclosure- I wrote a novel about this trip ("We Demand: The Suffrage Road Trip") in which they are the main characters. Part of my intent was to give them the credit they deserve and have never really received. I think they deserve their own Wikipedia page. Do you agree? Bluecando (talk) 17:49, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bluecando: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia's standards for inclusion, called "notability" depend on significant coverage from independent reliable sources, and not original research. Those sources don't have to be online, so press coverage from the time and suffrage histories could be used. GoingBatty (talk) 19:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Bluecando. It sounds interesting, and if you found enough material to base a novel on, then it's quite likely that they meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability and there could be an article on them. I would caution you to stop thinking in terms of "they deserve an article": nobody and nothing in the entire universe "deserves" or "merits" an article, because nobody and nothing has an article, and a Wikipedia article is not in any way for the benefit of its subject. The question is not whether they "deserve" an article, but whether Wikipedia, as a project which summarises material already reliably published, would benefit from an article about them.
If your research turned up susbtantial amounts of material about them that was both reliably published (as opposed to unpublished or self-published) independent sources (so, not based on what they said about themselves, or what their associates said about them) then you can certainly write an article about them. It's not clear whether you would be regarded as having a conflict of interest (it certainly would be if you wanted to cite you own work, but since that is fiction it seems unlikely that there will be anything suitable to cite), but I suggest it's best to be up-front about it on the article's talk page and your user page. I'm guessing that in writing your novel you made various interpretations of the sources, and perhaps theorised about the events or what people's motives were for their actions: you need to be very careful to avoid such extrapolation in the article, however convincing it appears, and stick to what the sources actually say. You shouldn't even mention any controversies about them (for example) unless there has been published discussion specifically of the controversy.
I'll add to this my standard advice for new editors considering creating an article: you are in the position of a new apprentice builder who decides to build a house. The obvious bits of building the house look within your skills, but you may not have thought about what goes on below the surface, in surveying the ground and building the foundations. (I'm aware that you are an experienced writer, so this may have less force than for other new editors; but creating a Wikipedia article is different from most other kinds of writing). I therefore always advise putting aside the project for a few months and working on improving some of our six million existing articles, and thereby learning how Wikipedia works and what we're looking for. --ColinFine (talk) 20:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Created new page but there is a version in Spanish too


Hello. I created an English Wiki page for Australian actor Luke Cook but noticed that there seems to be a Spanish version on the ES wiki site. What is the protocol here? Do they merge or stay separate? https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_Cook

Thank you Grapepinky (talk) 19:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

They stay separate. I did notice that the Spanish article cites sources that are not considered reliable here at the English Wikipedia. The English article also has an unreliable source: Amazon.com which indicates it's content comes from IMDb which is generally not a reliable source. A helpful resource when considering source reliability is Reliable source/Perennial sources explanatory supplement. Gab4gab (talk) 19:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Grapepinky Hello! I'm not quite sure I understand your question, but here goes: That several WP:s in other languages have their own article on a subject is very common, and sort of the point. Luke Cook also has articles in French, Italian and Portugese. What you can do is to check is if any of the others have any good sources you haven't used. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you bothGrapepinky (talk) 20:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Grapepinky: Speaking in general, each language's Wikipedia operates independently and each community therein has its own rules and guidelines, so what is considered acceptable on Spanish Wikipedia isn't necessarily so on English Wikipedia, and vice versa, so it is wrong to assume that any material on one wiki would transfer easily to the other. But the rules shouldn't be so divergent that a well-sourced article in one language couldn't be usable as a guide to the creation of a corresponding article on another language. --Finngall talk 22:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Restoring Autoblog's main article


Autoblog had a main article starting in 2007, along with all of the other Weblogs Inc. properties. Somewhere along the way, someone decided it would be better to redirect auto blog to spamblog and refer to autoblog.com as a subsection of the Weblogs Inc. page. Given that Autoblog.com is a top-10 automotive website, and other sister-sites such as Engadget still have a main article, it would make sense to restore the old page (removing redirects) and allow it to be edited to reflect current information about that site. 2600:4040:400A:4F00:8DAA:4809:A15C:C439 (talk) 19:39, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, the article Autoblog (website) was deleted in 2016 per this discussion, which determined that the website was not notable. Then, a separate discussion decided that "Autoblog" should be redirected to Spam blog. If you feel like after 5 years the website is now notable, you are free to create a new article for it through the same channels as creating any other brand new article. You may want to read WP:YFA for instructions about how to create such an article, and also WP:NWEBSITE for further information about the notability for websites. Also note that "other stuff exists" is almost always not a convincing argument.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 20:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I was thinking things should be as simple as creating a new page, except I'm unclear on how that new page would live under /autoblog, like the old one. 2600:4040:400A:4F00:8DAA:4809:A15C:C439 (talk) 21:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you're asking. Creating a new article is not "simple", especially for newcomers. I don't know what you mean by "/autoblog"; subpages are disabled in the article mainspace.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 21:17, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

What I should have said is /autoblog.com which refers to the wikipedia URL - which used to be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoblog.com The main article should belong there, but with redirects, I don't even know how that would be done.2600:4040:400A:4F00:4072:4BB7:85CD:C4E9 (talk) 17:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Advice on Wikipedia Article


 Courtesy link: Draft:United States Stove Company

I am trying to get an article approved, but I am hitting road blocks. I am wondering if my article has too much fluff content. It is titled "United States Stove Company." Is it better to keep articles short? Or, is it better to include as much information as possible as long as the content is reliable? ChattWiki423 (talk) 20:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Having whole sections with no independent sources isn't good. I've removed a couple. References to sources based on press releases, or on what employees have said, generally leaves a poor impression and should be avoided if possible. Maproom (talk) 21:53, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Follow-up to New Article


Moving an article out of the Sandbox

Need help to move an article out of my Sandbox and have it published.

How do I do this? Vedlagt  (talk) 21:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Vedlagt, if you mean Draft:David Provoost, it is already out of your sandbox and has been submitted. To greatly improve its chances of success, what you might do is ensure that Provoost's major claim to notability is presented in the first sentence. As it is, the first sentence is about his baptism. (Reading this, I think "Should I care?") The second paragraph starts "He was an important figure in early New Amsterdam", which is promising. I expect the rest of the paragraph to justify the claim of importance; however, it doesn't start to do so. Indeed, the entire draft currently reads like an entry in a genealogical compendium of some kind; NB this is a well-acknowledged example of what Wikipedia is not. (What Wikipedia is, is an encyclopedia.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:57, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Do my external relationships create a COI? Does any COI forbid direct editing of affected articles?


Hello,

From WP:COI:

While editing Wikipedia, an editor's primary role is to further the interests of the encyclopedia. When an external role or relationship could reasonably be said to undermine that primary role, the editor has a conflict of interest (similar to how a judge's primary role as an impartial adjudicator is undermined if they are married to the defendant.)
Any external relationship—personal, religious, political, academic, legal, or financial (including holding a cryptocurrency)—can trigger a COI. How close the relationship needs to be before it becomes a concern on Wikipedia is governed by common sense.

I have external relationships with the University of Alaska system. I am a current student at the University of Alaska Fairbanks and an alumnus of the same university. I was until the fall of 2019 an employee of the University of Alaska system.

Do these external relationships trigger a COI which prevents me from editing the article on Pat Pitney? Pitney, since the summer of 2020, has been the interim president of the University of Alaska system. I am currently the top editor on that article, as seen at https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/en.wikipedia.org/Pat_Pitney.

I chose to interpret WP:COI as saying that my external relationships created the appearance of a COI to a reasonable third party, even though my personal common sense doesn't think the relationships are close enough to be of concern on Wikipedia. Consequently I put a COI declaration for this article on my user page, but continued to edit the article directly.

Have I acted correctly? Or alternatively:

- Was I mistaken in thinking that a reasonable person would see my external relationships as a COI?

- Is my common sense mistaken in thinking that these particular external relationships are not of concern on Wikipedia, and that I can continue to edit the Pitney article directly?

Thank you. Dieter.Meinertzhagen (talk) 21:43, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dieter.Meinertzhagen, and welcome to the Teahouse. I would say that they do trigger a COI, but others may disagree. I would suggest putting an Edit request on the article's talk page, rather than editing it directly. --ColinFine (talk) 10:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating an article


Hello Teahouse hosts. I have created a number of articles, but I am uncertain if I should include categories when I submit it. I've not done so in the past and others come later to add them. May I include them when I first write the article? Kind regards to all,Hu Nhu (talk) 22:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Hu Nhu (talk) 22:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hu Nhu: Are you creating your articles in draft space or a user sandbox? If so then you can add categories as you write the article, but you should disable them by adding a colon at the start of the link (e.g. write [[:Category:Foo]] instead of [[Category:Foo]]). When the page is moved into article space the AFC script will automatically enable the categories. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 22:29, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I will do exactly that. I appreciate your continued help. Kind regards,Hu Nhu (talk) 23:36, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Article on Anna Tenney


 Courtesy link: Draft:Anna F. Tenney

Need Help getting arrticle published on Official Anna Tenney , She is a verified Amazon Influencer, TikTok Influencer, Social media influencer on all social media platforms, An Actress,and song writer. please help get my article published please Fianaarmstrong1 (talk) 00:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fianaarmstrong1: I wonder whether you used your own knowledge of Tenney to write this draft, or if you are Tenney. Per the multiple comments on your draft, you need to find multiple independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of Tinney, and summarize what they say. Delete everything that is not sourced. Carefully review the comments on your draft and click on each link to the Wikipedia guidelines, and read the guidelines completely. Continuing to submit a draft that is not adequately sourced risks having the draft rejected (instead of declined). GoingBatty (talk) 00:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Fianaarmstrong, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks as if you have a (very common) misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is: you think it is social media, where it is appropriate to tell the world about something. It is not: that is called Promotion and is strictly forbidden. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.
My advice to you is:
  1. Put Tenney aside for a few months, while you learn how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to some of our six million existing articles.
  2. Throw away the text you have written - most of it is nothing at all like an encyclopaedia article, and I doubt if it is salvagable.
  3. Read about notability, and find the (at least three) sources that are reliably published, wholly unconnected with Tenney, and contain significant coverage of her.
  4. If you can't find such sources, abandon the project. (I think people have found that it is often difficult to find adequate sources for social media influencers; but you may be lucky).
  5. If you find the sources, forget everything you know about her, and write a neutral summary of what the independent sources say. --ColinFine (talk) 10:56, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Debashish_Banerji and C5 of WP:Academic


Hello, I am struggling with determining notability of this person. Please see my existing discussion with creator here: . C5 is not a familiar criteria for me and hence bringing it here. The subject is a named chair. But C5 also says Major institutions, for these purposes, are those that have a reputation for excellence or selectivity. Named chairs at other institutions are not necessarily sufficient to establish notability. - how to determine this? Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 01:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 01:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Ah. I don't think it's major. (See here.) While most WikiProjects seem to be more or less moribund, that on Higher education is a welcome exception. Nomadicghumakkad, I suggest that you ask about this matter at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education; you're sure to get informed responses. -- Hoary (talk) 02:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
I see it's already discussed then Hoary. One way I thought one could evaluate if institute was significant or not by the amount of well cited research it was producing on the concerned subject. What do you think? Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 11:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Nomadicghumakkad, I have my own opinion about that; but again, I suggest that you ask about major-or-not at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education. -- Hoary (talk) 12:11, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Consensus on County Durham (district) article


I for one think the article has enough good stead to be a solo article from the ceremonial county and council articles for two reasons...

1. It is formed of seven former districts and boroughs which were once separate but now merged. 2. The council article doesn't really cover notable towns and Durham well in the article and as a result the article covers the wider unitary authority and it satisfies WP notable for geographical reasons...

Can we try to reach a consensus on the article...

Article is here County Durham (district) and debate is here

RailwayJG (talk) 01:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Rejected draft follow up


Draft:Geoffrey_Leonard - This article got rejected due to poor sources. I was just wondering if someone could explain what is wrong with the sources please. Thanks DreamlessGlare (talk) 02:36, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, I ended up getting help on the IRC DreamlessGlare (talk) 04:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

How reliable are magazines like L'Officiel, ELLE, Forbes etc.?


Hello, I'd like to ask about the reliability of magazines about fashion/lifestyle like L'Officiel and ELLE and a business magazine like Forbes. Are they eligible to be considered third-party sources to prove one's notability? Jchauofia (talk) 02:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Forbes is actually a special case: Articles written by staff are OK, but articles written by authors described as "contributors" are not due to not being subjected to the same editorial process staff articles are. See WP:FORBES. ELLE is considered reliable per WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard discussions. I cannot speak to L'Officiel's reliability as a source. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 03:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Based on L'Officiel I'd say it can be used, of course context matters. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:53, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Mirrors


 Eye ay en (talk) 05:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

What about mirrors, Eye ay en? -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Your edits at Jeremiah Arkhams were reverted because the editor stated that some of your references were not considered reliable sources, as they were using content sourced from Wikipedia articles (hence, "mirrors"). You have since added content ref'd to fandom and Wikis, so the question of reliable sources may occur again. David notMD (talk) 11:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Greetings and Love to all


How to Create a wiki page? Hi and greetings to eveyone. I hope that you are doing good.

Can i Create a page for myself, friends, family members, companies i have worked in or other companies? What are the things that i need to take care while i write an article? i saw people add links too as references section so what type of links are acceptable? SheilaChan83 (talk) 05:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, SheilaChan83. You have a conflict of interest about "myself, friends, family members, companies i have worked in" and are strongly discouraged from editing in those areas until you thoroughly understand Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and are fully prepared to disclose your various conflicts of interest. Are these people and companies that you want to write encyclopedia articles about truly notable, as Wikipedia defines that concept? Articles should summarize what referenced reliable, independent sources say about the topic. Plese use the Articles for Creation process to review draft articles whenever you have a significant conflict of interest. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:04, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Short version of Cullen328's answer: No you can't. Oh, and be careful while making other kinds of edit. In your very first edit (summary "Fixed Grammatical Errors in 1st Paragraph"), you fixed no grammatical errors, you introduced one grammatical error (by removing the copula "is"), and you introduced one orthographic error (changing "Its national dish is [...]" to "It's national dish is [...]"). -- Hoary (talk) 09:09, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Signature but no question


 Arun Khatauli (talk) 05:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

What is the meaning (-1) and (+3) in contributions list?


When i check my contribution than some points like (-1), (+3) or (0) are written against my edited pages. What does that mean i need to know about it. As per my assumptions it is the change in size of the file after edit done by me. Please elaborate my point of concern. Manojipandey (talk) 06:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Manojipandey:, you are correct, its the change of article size in Bytes. If you made the page bigger, it will be green, if you made it smaller, red, and if you didn't alter the size of an article, it will be a gray zero. When the size change is over 500 bytes, wether positive or negative, that number will be bold. Note that bytes aren't exactly equal to characters, while most characters like a or B only take one byte, certain special characters and in particular emojis can take up to three. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Question about a rejected article Amhara organizations vs Black-owned business


Hello on June the 2nd, a page Draft:List of Amhara organizations was rejected by a user citing Pointless list as there can be multiple Amhara organisations across the world in different sphere and they cannot be incorporated into one list. Yet here on wikipedia you have Category:Black-owned companies of the United States & Black-owned businesses. Only notable companies/organizations that made news coverage can seriously be added to the article, i don't understand this double standards towards Amhara organizations. Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 06:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 06:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Dawit S Gondaria, I'm afraid you are comparing a list article to a category, which is an entirely different thing. See WP:CATEGORY for more information.
Welcome to Wikipedia. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
@Roger (Dodger67), thank you for your response, and fair enough on the categorization. But there are also lists of companies, for countries and also in subdivisions, for example the United States. List of companies of the United States by state, Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 19:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

cash a check from Spencer strasmore vista


 2600:1700:1D21:1FAF:614F:9B01:98B4:B235 (talk) 08:58, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Exactly what problem are you encountering while attempting to edit Wikipedia? -- Hoary (talk) 09:01, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback


Hello,

I would need assistance in regards to receiving some feedback in regards to the following page:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:H.IKEUCHI_-_The_Fog_Engineers.

I have tried to improve it to implement words that are more neutral and that the article is perceived as a an encyclopedia article, however I don't have a lot of experience in this and would really need some assistance, please.

Any feedback and idea is appreciated.

Thank you. NinaMon. (talk) 10:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@NinaMon.: Your draft was immediately deleted by an administrator as it was a copied from elsewhere. I can't see the draft now it has been removed but you must not just copy material you find elsewhere on the Internet. You may use reliable sources but you must put them into your own words and add citations to show where the facts can be verified later by other readers. Writing articles on Wikipedia is quite difficult for beginners and you would be best to start out by improving some of the more than 6 million articles already here. Mike Turnbull (talk)

Rosa Glaser Reliable Sources/References


The article I have written was not yet accepted because it was said that there were not sufficient reliable sources and references added to the article. It is the first time I try to publish an article on the English Wiki. I do not understand why the mentioned sources are not reliable. You may check them out. I have published this article on the Dutch Wikipedia and it has been published in Wiki. See Dutch Wiki article Rosa Glaser In that Dutch Wiki I haven mentioned a lot of Dutch sources. ( after the story of Rosa Glaser origines in the Netherlands and Germany) If it might be helpful I will add these Dutch sources also to the English sources and references. There ar also a lot of German sources and references available. In adition I mention that a Dutch Memorial Museum of the concentration camp Vught has investigated the story and made an exhibition of it that have been shown in several Dutch cities and is touring right now in German cities. That museum also added in their museum the story of Rosa Glaser. I don't know how to proceed and what to do, so Please will you help me? Thank you very much Doberran (talk) 10:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Doberran (talk) 10:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Doberran A few points, in no particular order: You need to master the art of inline citations, WP:TUTORIAL/Help:Referencing for beginners can be of help with that. This is essential. Use "Glaser" throughout the article, not "Roosje", it's how we do it. Encyclopedic tone tends towards distant, dry, dusty and bland. Text like "Roosje grew into an emancipated woman who defied conventions with flair. ... She lost the love of her life in 1936, found consolation in the arms of another and married Leo; the wrong man." should be, well, less poetic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Link: Draft:Roosje Glaser. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:36, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Mrinal Dev Burman and Murari Lal Gupta for speedy deletion.


Hi there!,I would like to nominate Mrinal Dev Burman for speedy deletion as the subject is not notable enough and fails WP:MUSICBIO. Also, there has been no resources cited.

Also, Murari Lal Gupta has been nominated for speedy deletion by me. Pls let me know if I have made any mistakes.

I have posted the message on the article's Talk page. Thank you. Jocelin Andrea (talk) 13:37, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Jocelin Andrea, I can't see the former article anymore as it's been speedily deleted (but I guess that's strong indication that you did it correctly) and the latter article has been tagged correctly (in terms of the technical process) so far as I can see. I think you missed a signature on this talk page notification but otherwise it looks right. Thanks for your edits! — Bilorv (talk) 14:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank You then! Yea will sign them right away Jocelin Andrea (talk) 15:05, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
@Jocelin Andrea: You didn't actually tag Murari Lal Gupta for speedy deletion; you proposed it for deletion, which is a different process. If you want to tag it for speedy deletion, replace the prod template with the appropriate CSD template. Deor (talk) 17:15, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Edit removed


When I edited a page, added a new section and added references the next day my edits were removed. Can someone explain why? 2502renegate2502 (talk) 14:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC) 2502renegate2502 (talk) 14:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@2502renegate2502: Welcome to the Teahouse. Assuming you're talking about the edits made at K. Shanmugam, your edits have been reverted for [...] unsourced addition, citation placed wrongly, possible copyvio: you added material that was not sourced, the material you did source was cited improperly, and the material may have violated copyright, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬  📝 ) 14:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Ok, thanks for your answer. Now how do I find out if I did the citation correctly or if I did a copyright violation?  Preceding unsigned comment added by 2502renegate2502 (talkcontribs)

If you copy/pasted the content from another source exactly or only slightly paraphrased, then - voila! - copyright violation, even if you referenced the source. David notMD (talk) 16:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
@2502renegate2502: Check out WP:EASYREFBEGIN for how to properly cite content, and make sure you're not copypasting content, extensively close paraphrasing, or excessively using quotes to avoid copyright violations. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.)Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬  📝 ) 16:29, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Ok and how do I cite correctly? 2502renegate2502 (talk) 19:11, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Featured list


If I think a Featured List does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines should I nominate it to be delisted or should I open an AfD? TipsyElephant (talk) 15:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! I would reccomend that you start by sending the list to WP:Featured list removal candidates for delisting. While you can nominate featured content for deletion you'll find that any AFD you open will be flooded with "Keep. This is a featured list." type comments that don't actually address the notability concerns you have. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
@192.76.8.91: thank you! That's a really good point that I hadn't considered. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:13, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
@TipsyElephant: in special cases, AFDs do stand a chance of succeeding on an FL, but it would be astonishing for an article to meet the FL criteria and not be appropriate as a standalone list. So FLRC and then AFD could work. Notice that notability is not quite the same as what a list needs to have—see Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists. What is the list? I'm guessing it was promoted pre-2010 when standards were a lot lower. — Bilorv (talk) 17:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

help with Glenn Bray article


hello i am still trying to find someone to help me with Glenn Bray article, the only help i got so far has been telling me about sources, but as many times as i have reread about it, nothing makes sense, i do not work on computers, and it has been very frustrating figuring out what is wrong, having no clue of the problem presented. There is a documentary made by netflix about Glenns art collection, i am not sure how much more noteworthy the person needs to be... all the different books published with art he owns... so i am at a complete loss Sirskull (talk) 17:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Sirskull. When writing an article, the content needs to be based on what reliable sources document about the subject. Taking this on a sentence-by-sentence basis, you've written that "Bray was born in Van Nuys, California on April 1, 1948". What's the source for that statement? You need to add a reference to the source at the end of the sentence. Then you have "His father Gene Bray owned Sylmar Builders Supply, a hardware store that began business in 1959". What's the source for that? You need to reference that too (it might be the same source as his birthplace, in which case you can place the reference after the second sentence rather than the first). And so on for the whole article.... Does that make sense? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Does this rewritten draft meet the neutral POV requirement?


I first submitted this page and got a response saying it was rejected because it didn't meet the notability criteria. In trying to address that issue, I ended up making the page not have a neutral point of view. I then tried to fix the tonal problem but failed abysmally. The latest comment cites notability as an issue again, although commenters have said it does meet the notability criteria (academics). I've since gone over the guidelines with more attention and rewritten the article. I just wanted to make sure this is okay as I don't want to aggravate people even more by submitting something that's not good again.

Thank you for your help! Whatevergb (talk) 18:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Post-Move bot


I just did my first page move, and got a template listing the stuff at WP:POSTMOVE.

Honestly, most of the stuff there seems like it'd be way more efficient and not too technically challenging for a bot to do, and possibly more reliable too.

Thoughts? Intralexical (talk) 19:04, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Visual editor "1 notice" popup?


Using the visual editor, there seems to always be this popup that says "1 notice" and "Find sources:".

It is quite annoying. Is there any way to disable it from being shown by default? Intralexical (talk) 19:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)