Wikipedia:Teahouse

Hello, I was curious if there is somewhere here, or on another website where you can make private Wikipedia pages. I feel reluctant to use the sandbox since other people may be able to edit or delete it. Wastelandhero18 (talk) 16:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, that isn't possible. However, your sandbox can be semi-protected so that anonymous IP addresses cannot edit it. I have protected user-space pages by request; let me know.

If you want a truly private draft, then compose it in a document on your personal computer. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:39, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wastelandhero18, welcome to the Teahouse. There are no private pages in Wikipedia. Other users can see User:Wastelandhero18/sandbox but are unlikely to edit it unless you place article categories or illegal content like copyright violations. The content should still be Wikipedia-related, e.g. tests and article drafts. If you want full privacy while still having access to Wikipedia features like our templates then you have to save your work elsewhere and only use "Show preview" here. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you. Wastelandhero18 (talk) 17:14, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably you can start a public wiki only you can edit. [1] may have something interesting. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:15, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say the issue with a "private draft" is that unless you intend it to be a draft forever, it's eventually going to be editable. -- D'n'B-t -- 17:58, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is something I've also been wishing for. I wonder if it has come up in discussion by the senior editors before. If not, maybe, @Wastelandhero18, we could make this a proposal to post at the Village Pump, Proposals area, a place I just discovered recently. Augnablik (talk) 06:28, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not trying to rain on your parade, but I think there's pretty much zero chance of something like that ever happening, and proposing such a thing at the Village Pump will almost cerainly quickly lead to at least one if not many more replies citing WP:NOTWEBHOST. For reference, even pages in the user namespace aren't "owned" by anyone other than the Wikimedia Foundation explained in WP:UPOWN. The best advice anyone can give you if you want to retain full-editorial control over or otherwise keep your work private is to never post it on any Wikipedia page as explained in WP:REALWORLD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:38, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Raising an umbrella too. Augnablik (talk) 08:41, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Augnablik (and @Wastelandhero18), what springs to mind for me is Google Docs. It is possible to make a document there that you (and/or people you invite, and/or the entire internet) can edit to your liking, and you can also limit who can view it - just you, only people you invite, or everyone with the link. Perhaps this would be a better match with what you envision? StartGrammarTime (talk) 04:21, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That wouldn't work for me, @StartGrammarTime, because in Google Docs I couldn't use Wikipedia's various editing tools. Otherwise, it would have been a great idea.

Right now I don't really want others looking at it or making comments till I get the article as ready for prime time as possible, especially with good citations, so I'm using MS Word. But I really wish I could have a private sandbox, at least for this particular job I'm working on. Augnablik (talk) 11:34, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Augnablik - ah, my mistake! Somehow I missed that you were creating a Wiki article. In that case, what about Fandom? It seems to be built with Wikipedia's tools and functionalities, but with ads. So it might be a possibility for a private sandbox type of thing? Either way, good luck with the article! StartGrammarTime (talk) 01:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@StartGrammarTime, anything you can say about Fandom to make me and perhaps @Wastelandhero18 run out to get it? Is it really possible that it duplicates Wikipedia's ability to seamlessly prepare articles for publication?

o I'm not sure if I used a third-party application to create a Wiki article that it would convert perfectly, especially with regard to citations.

o There could be some allegedly Wiki-compliant tools not provided in a third-party application that I might wish I could make use of.

I know there are always plusses and minuses for all decisions and trade-offs to be made, but never having heard of this Fandom application you've suggested, these are certainly two questions I'd certainly want answers to before looking into using it as a workaround for not wanting my construction of an article to be visible to the public just yet. Augnablik (talk) 05:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's an easy way to do it. Start the article in your sandbox, use preview function to see how it looks, then, instead of saving it on Wiki, copy paste the text into Word or equivalent. When you're ready to work on the article again, copy paste it back into your sandbox. Repeat. Valenciano (talk) 07:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you may have solved my issue, @Valenciano. It sounds like a good possibility. But it would sure have been nice to have a simple direct way to do what @Wastelandhero18 and I were hoping to do right here in Wikipedia.

Well, we can dream … Augnablik (talk) 09:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Augnablik, I don't use Fandom myself (except as a reader when I want the silly little details that aren't suitable for en-Wiki but are fun trivia). However, in the spirit of discovery, I made an account and investigated the edit functions on the Pokemon sub-wiki. It seems overall pretty much the same as en-Wiki, which makes sense since they say they use the same base. It's a website rather than an application, and en-Wiki happily shares the coding we use here for other sites to use if they wish. When I copied some of an article (including refs) into my userspace as a test run, it displayed exactly as expected, which seems promising. It looks like Fandom is reasonably up-to-date with current en-Wiki tools.

Sorry I can't be of more help, but I do think this might be something for you to investigate further as an alternative. If nothing else it definitely has more Wiki markup etc than Word does! StartGrammarTime (talk) 07:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @StartGrammarTime … it does sound like Fandom could be of help. I’ll keep it mind after checking out the workaround @Valenciano just proposed. Augnablik (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wastelandhero18 I think you are worrying needlessly, in almost twenty years of editing here with a large number of different sandboxes I have never know another editor to mess with them. Theroadislong (talk) 09:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A stub is a article which is to short the length of which i am unsure about but what exactly is a Start and where can one find this information. thank you in advance for helping a new Wikipedian. Adriancph (talk) 22:35, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Adriancph: Welcome to the Teahouse. Does this table help? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:37, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you Adriancph (talk) 21:40, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nilesh_Jalamkar i found this Article,But It Dont Have Reference to Personal Life,I am a New Editor here...Can I add Tag

This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

to Personal Life Section as New Editor ? Steelbird1967 (talk) 02:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there... yes you can tag it, but you might also wanna consider deleting completely unsourced sections like this in a Biography. I hope this helps. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 02:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Side note: there is a specific tag for BLPs in {{BLPUnsourced}}. ✶Quxyz✶ 02:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced content in a BLP? Delete it ASAP. Cremastra (talk) 23:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am kind of new to Wikipedia. I came across Stanley Kamel#Filmography, and I tried a lot of things to fix the table, but it isnt getting fixed. Would someone kindly fix the table? —usernamekiran (talk) 13:03, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Usernamekiran. You don't appear to have edited Stanley Kamel, and it is not obvious to me what the problem is with the table (or even which table). Please clarify. ColinFine (talk) 15:09, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Usernamekiran I fixed one minor problem which is what I assume you were worried about. However, I can't find the name of the character on IMDb and given how many things Kamel appeared in, it may be better to remove that row altogether as not being notable. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

False signature?? The query is 'signed' usernamekiran, but the entry and editing to the Kamel article appear to have been made by a different account. usernamekiran is clearly not "...kind of new to Wikipedia". David notMD (talk) 16:05, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The edits were made by usernamekiran using his alt-account (note x at the end), so I don't think anything untoward is going on. It seems he was being modest about his experience! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:14, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When this question was asked the last edit to the article had been in January by an IP, so I assume they tried to fix it in preview. – 2804:F1...09:2AE4 (talk) 03:06, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi. @David notMD: Yes, I apologise for the confusion. I never edited the article, I came across the filmography's film table, and tried to fix the inaccurate boxes. Instead of saving, I checked the preview, and my attempts hadnt fix the issue. @ColinFine: the minor issue that I was talking about has been fixed by Michael D. Turnbull. Regarding the alt ac, I accidentally made the edit from that account, I was logged in to the alt ac from private/incognito window (I often do that to view Wikipedia as newly registered/auto-confirmed user), I didnt realise I had edited teahouse using the alt ac. Thanks a lot for the help, —usernamekiran (talk) 10:08, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am getting the following error when I attempt to export pages with the included templates. I am able to export them without the templates. Is there something I can do to troubleshoot? It had worked earlier in the week.

Request from 173.71.130.68 via cp1104 cp1104, Varnish XID 554392182
Upstream caches: cp1104 int
Error: 500, Internal Server Error at Fri, 10 May 2024 16:13:52 GMT

173.71.130.68 (talk) 16:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP user. (Exporting pages? That's not the sort of question I expect to find on the Teahouse!) I suggest you ask at WP:VPT. ColinFine (talk) 17:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was asked there a few hours prior, where someone noted it is a bug whose fix is scheduled to be released on Monday. See WP:VPT#special:export. DMacks (talk) 06:10, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm editing a Draft for the article Pere-Enric_de_Ferran_i_de_Rocabruna in the english Wikipedia. I'm trying to insert an infobox person using {{Infobox person/Wikidata | fetchwikidata=ALL}}, as it is sugested in the tutorials, but the box is not being automatically filled from Wikidata, eventhough a Wikidata element does exists with the same title as the article. In the draft edit page, under Tools menu, I'm not finding any link to Wikidata. Xfmol (talk) 16:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Xfmol, Welcome to the Teahouse. I am curious. Which tutorial recommends using {{Infobox person/Wikidata}} rather than {{Infobox person}}? The link to Wikidata for an article is not by name but by article link. Draft articles aren't linked to Wikidata, so you will need to wait until the article is in mainspace. Also the template will only pick up data which has references, and very few of the items at for that person have sources.

It appears you are translating the article from another language rather than writing in your own words. You must indicate this. See Help:Translation#License requirements. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In Template:Infobox person/Wikidata section Usage there are several examples using {{Infobox person/Wikidata}} Xfmol (talk) 18:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Xfmol. I was about to give you much the same response as StarryGrandma; but I want to note that infoboxes are not required in articles, so it should make no difference to the review process whether you have an infobox or not. I suggest you simply comment out the infobox for the present (put it between <!-- and --> )

However, what will make a difference to the review is that Draft:Pere-Enric de Ferran i de Rocabruna has only one source cited, and therefore does not establish that he meets the criteria for notability in English Wikipedia; and also it is written in flowery language, inappropriate for English Wikipedia.

Please note that different versions of Wikipedia have different rules and policies, so the existing of an article in another Wikipedia does not guarantee that the subject will meet the requirements for English Wikipedia. Please see WP:Translation. ColinFine (talk) 17:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help. It is a draft editing page and I am just starting to write the article; of course the article will be far more extended and will have >10 references. I'm almost a begginer editor, I've already contributed to the catalan, spanish and french Wikipedias, but this is the first time I'm contributing to the english Wikipedia. Xfmol (talk) 18:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Xfmol As others have mentioned, I don't think you can create an infobox this way until you already have an article in mainspace. But you can certainly copy the {{infobox person}} into your draft (without filled-in parameters) and then use the Wikidata entry here to copy-paste in key information. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Xfmol, it turns out you can add the Wikidata identifier to the template as {{Infobox person/Wikidata | qid=Q16190541 | fetchwikidata=ALL}} to retrieve the data while in draft space. It will only fill in two values however, since the rest of the data doesn't have sources on Wikidata. StarryGrandma (talk) 02:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I uploaded a new image and I just noticed that it had a watermark at the bottom right, and I don't know what to do now. Could someone help me? RoyalSilver (talk) 18:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @RoyalSilver. Usually watermarked images are not released under Creative Commons and are copyrighted to the author, in this case Rich Minear. Where did you get the photograph from, how do you know it's released under CC BY 2.0 DEED?

In any case it's not totally clear what you are asking. Qcne (talk) 18:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Qcne, It was from Flickr, and when I clicked on their license rights, it redirected me to CC BY 2.0 DEED website RoyalSilver (talk) 18:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, found it. Looks like it was originally a copyrighted piece, then released under CC (see License history) which I presume is why the Watermark is still there. However, the Flickr image states it is CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 DEED, not CC BY 2.0 DEED as you have stated on the file page. That means you cannot crop it to remove the watermark.

I'd suggest finding a better photograph that complies with our policies. Qcne (talk) 19:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RoyalSilver and note that Commons cannot accept any license which includes the NC / ND stipulations: Wikimedia only hosts images that can be used commercially and can be modified. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:10, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Teahouse,

I'm feeling quite stuck. I submitted an extensively researched Draft through Articles for Creation about the large Canadian-based and now global company, Klick. (After disclosing my COI in both my username and on my user page).

From the 58 total references in the article, I singled out seven significant, independent, reliable, and secondary sources from major media, business news, and leading industry publications:

1. Globe and MailAvailablel at web.archive.org
2. Yale School of Management
3. Toronto Business Daily
4. MM+M
5. Strategy
6. Campaign Canada
7. Campaign Asia

Meanwhile, I've been told the draft had too few references, too many references, references that were paywalled, and references that [prohibitively] quoted principals of the company in the context of their reporting.

Financial Post:

"[Klick] has grown into the world’s largest independent digital health agency. The award-wining company has been growing profitably for 15 years and is a Branham top 10 healthcare IT company as well as having been named by the World Economic Forum as a Global Growth Company to watch."

I'm doing everything requested, but objections seem to keep coming. Thank you very much for your help, Marisa. Marisa at Klick (talk) 19:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Marisa at Klick. I don't quite understand why you felt the need to create a new topic here instead of responding to my pretty comprehensive advice at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk#18:06,_9_May_2024_review_of_submission_by_Marisa_at_Klick.

Was there something about my latest reply you didn't understand? Qcne (talk) 21:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(I also note I specifically said that Paywalled references weren't an issue, just that I couldn't access it myself) Qcne (talk) 21:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Qcne. Thank you for your help. Because of the deep work I've done on this article and the number of objections I've already addressed, I wanted to seek a third opinion. I think I've done everything you've asked, and I appreciate your guidance. I still think the extensive sourcing about this company surpasses the notability and corporate inclusion guidelines. So, I'm looking for others to weigh in.

To offer more reasons why I am confident, here are 13 additional sources about the company and its products. They are each independent, reliable and secondary. They vary in significance of coverage but leave no doubt about notability as a whole.

1. WSJ
2. FINANCIAL POST
3. CNET
4. CNBC
5. CBC
6. GUARDIAN
7. TORONTO SUN
8. USA TODAY
9. STANDARD
10. CBC
11. MEDSCAPE
12. SCIENCE ALERT
13. CNET

Thanks again, Marisa at Klick (talk) 21:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Marisa at Klick I can understand your frustration, as you have obviously worked hard to draft an article about your company to Wikipedia's standards. My opinion is that you now have too many citations, which makes it very difficult for the reviewers to focus on the best. For example, as a professional scientist, I clicked through to #12 here to see what it said. I found an article clearly based on an interview with Kaufman at Klick, so not WP:INDEPENDENT of the company. To accept article drafts, we need to be convinced of notability based solely on sources meeting these criteria. So my advice would be to trim the text to what you can base just on these types of sources and re-submit. Once the article is accepted, you can suggest further edits (via its Talk Page in view of your COI): none of your work is lost as it will be in the history of the article and can be re-introduced later piece by piece. Good luck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Marisa at Klick, Wikipedia:Citation overkill might also help. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 00:16, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marisa at Klick, apparently you do not yet understand the importance of the indepependence of a source, which is just as important as the reliability of a source when it comes to establishing the Notability of a company. I read five of your sources, selected from both your lists. All were based heavily on quotations from company officials and one was overtly based on a Business Wire press release from the company. All showed signs of being generated by the public relations efforts of the company. All of them are of no value in establishing that the company is notable. The issue is too many mediocre sources and too few (if any) sources that are completely independent of the company, indisputably reliable, and that devote significant coverage to the company. My recommendation would be to ruthlessly remove all of the sources that are not independent and reliable and that devote significant coverage to the company, plus all the content that they support. Source quality is vastly more important than source quantity. Do not burden reviewers with reading mediocre sources. Present only excellent sources that establish notability for them to read. Cullen328 (talk) 00:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brutal cutting, to improve likelihood of being accepted. Needs more work cutting references. David notMD (talk) 02:23, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The awards list, although referenced, does not contain the types of major awards that Wikipedia values as contributing to notability. David notMD (talk) 11:36, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I signed up for a Wikipedia account yesterday and I thought I could briefly introduce myself in my user page, but I was told that what I wrote didn't comply with Wikipedia goals or something. How can I fix it? I see that some admins are able to introduce themselves without getting their page deleted, and I sort of don't understand where the problem was.

I saw this part about providing a link to the page I'm asking about, but it's completely empty anyways (my user page was labelled "speedy deletion" or something yesterday and this morning when I checked it was completely wiped blank).

Thank you so much!

Oscar talk ᎧSᏣᎪR 03:16, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pls review WP:UPNOT.....that seen have fun with Wikipedia:User page design guide Moxy🍁 03:20, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much!! talk ᎧSᏣᎪR 03:36, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone help me getting back into my old account 'Rafeh96'? 142.162.33.15 (talk) 07:24, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. If you did not have an email address attached to your account Preferences to be able to recover your password, and you cannot remember your password, there is no way to regain access. You may create a new account and identify it as a successor account on the user page(example, "I am user1234, I was previously Rafeh96 but lost access"). 331dot (talk) 07:30, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The last edits by Rafeh96 were in November 2015. Perhaps best to do as advised - start a new account and mention on your User page that you once were Rafeh96. David notMD (talk) 11:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any admin here? I'd like to ask a question. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 13:54, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolverine XI There are several admins who regularly patrol this page, but any questions here can be answered by anyone. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:18, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, may I ask: Is free speech permitted? It appears that sarcasm and other offensive language are frowned upon in Wikipedia's community, and may sometimes lead to sanctions. If my opinion is contentious, can I still express it, or should I just say what everyone wants to hear? I am aware that not everyone on Wikipedia is nice; many merely put up a nice face to comply with rules and policies. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a platform for free speech. If you want to voice personal opinions on real world topics, then there are many alternatives. If the opinion is related to Wikipedia editing, feel free to express it by seeking consensus and commenting on/opening discussions. As long as nobody on Wikipedia knows about your opinions, there is no possible damage caused. (See this section of a essay that focuses on bigotry in particular) Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:16, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ca: Have you seen the admins' noticeboard? And why are you giving me a link to hate speech? Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:25, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may find the Allegory of the long spoons instructive. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:36, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ive created it but it' still under review, can you please take a look at it and see if i've done the right thing Ohenebaprempeh (talk) 13:57, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohenebaprempeh Please see the messages on your talk page. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to fix issues regarding regarding citation error in efn like on 279? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 18:37, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ExclusiveEditor: There were two errors. One was a missing {{notelist}} to make efn footnotes display correctly. I fixed it with this edit. The second error was a harv/sfn no-target error which I fixed by adding the missing source like this. DuncanHill (talk) 18:46, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thank you for telling what was wrong and fixing it. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 18:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do I change the order of items in an infobox? On the page for C-3PO, I would like to move the "Creator" line above the "Affiliation" line. Wafflewombat (talk) 18:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. I'm not certain that you can, or even that you should, as infoboxes by design are meant to be consistent across all articles, at least for the particular topic area. 331dot (talk) 19:23, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. Thanks for the reply. Wafflewombat (talk) 20:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As 331dot said, the order of the lines is set in the infobox template; each line has a number and they're kept in strict order. See the documentation for {{Infobox}} (which is used to make infobox templates) to see how this works. Cremastra (talk) 20:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why was my article rejected? 78.211.147.147 (talk) 19:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are referring to Draft:Oh What A Goal By Cristiano Ronaldo!, and you need to ask, you need to learn more about Wikipedia and what we do here so you can take it seriously. 331dot (talk) 19:21, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because it had no resemblance to an actual encyclopedia article. You are free to liveblog elsewhere, but not on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 02:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone reach out to me on Discord (username: fly2ohare) or some other platform to help me with an article about FMC Natatorium in Westmont, Illinois? Cyao123 (talk) 20:56, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:FMC Natatorium.   Cyao123, the decline notice at the top of the draft explains why it was declined: it lacks references establishing that the subject is notable.   Maproom (talk) 21:06, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be able to reach out to help me with drafting? Cyao123 (talk) 21:07, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure: find some reliable independent published sources that discuss the Natatorium. Maproom (talk) 21:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you check the updates? Cyao123 (talk) 22:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've had another look at the draft, and I still don't see any independent sources. Maproom (talk) 06:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cyao123. The question you need to ask yourself is, Where have people who have no connection whateverer with the Natatorium or its managers or promoters, and not commissioned or fed information on its behalf, chosen to write in some depth about the Nataorium (as an enterprise as well as a place), and been pubished by a reliable source? If the answer is Nowhere, then don't waste any more time on this project. If you have some places that meet those criteria (see WP:42 for more), then forget absolutely everything you know about the Natatorium, and write a summary of what those sources say.

Your basic problen, like that of hundreds of other new editors, is that you have taken on a difficult task - creating an article - before you have acquired the necessary skills. I always advise new editors to spend a few months learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles - before even trying to create an article. Once you have an understanding of core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable sources, and notability, then is the time to read your first article and try ity. ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to make corrections to the article on the Canadian Forces Snowbirds. I cannot see the edit key. Please point me to it. Thank you. Dan Dempsey Dan Dempsey (talk) 23:10, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Dan Dempsey, there should be several conspicuous edit links visible on the page. There is one in the bar below the article title, between the "Read" and "View history" links, and there should be "edit" links next to each section header. If you're asking why you can't get to the Canadian Forces Snowbirds page itself, that's because it's a redirect to the Snowbirds (aerobatic team) page. Liu1126 (talk) 23:31, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am writing to request assistance with my draft article Draft:Vaibhav Palhade which was recently rejected by a reviewer. The reviewer stated that the sources are just passing mentions and not reputable, and that the attached articles are in an Indian language and from reputed media.I believe the sources I have provided are in fact reputable Indian media outlets and provide substantive information, not just passing mentions. However, as an Indian language article, it seems the reviewer may not have been able to fully evaluate the quality and notability of the sources.I would greatly appreciate if you could please have this draft reviewed by an Indian language reviewer who can better assess the reliability and notability of the Indian media sources I have included. I believe the article meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines and that the sources are sufficiently reputable.Thank you very much for your assistance. I look forward to having my draft re-reviewed by a more appropriate reviewer. Steelbird1967 (talk) 01:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Steelbird1967. Your draft has not been rejected. It has been declined by three different reviewers. That's an important distinction. Have you read WP:NEWSORGINDIA which explains the serious problem that many media organizations in India have regarding entertainment personalities? Pay to play coverage is worthless on the English Wikipedia. If any payments have been accepted for any of this coverage, then it does not establish notability. Your one English language source is written in a highly promotional manner and makes a big deal of his collaboration with Hollywood figure Turn up Tobi. The problem with that is that Turn up Tobi is not a well-known Hollywood figure. He is a little known rap producer from New Jersey, a continent away from Hollywood. That calls the reliability of the source into question. When I used Google Translate to look at several of your sources, it appeared that they were highly promotional and often based on interviews, so not independent. Also, much of the content is this, that and the other thing is "upcoming". Speculation about future projects does not make a person notable. Actual accomplishments do. So, which is your very best source? Which one is indisputably reliable, fully independent, and that devotes significant coverage to this person? I will translate the entire source and give you my opinion of it. As for insisting on a reviewer fluent in Hindi, that is not going to happen unless you find an experienced Hindi speaking editor who is fully familiar with the problems described in WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Cullen328 (talk) 01:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Steelbird1967 and Cullen328: I can read Hindi, as well as Marathi. I agree with the reviewers. I had nominated Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vaibhav Palhade. In current draft, Palhade started his career in 2021. The title was salted because of recreation. Only one thing, a lot of the countries think "(entire) American entertainment content = Hollywood". —usernamekiran (talk) 02:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain this Steelbird1967 (talk) 04:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That means it will be never live because of last deletion and mistakes done in past like moving page directly n all

cause every reviewer will think same by reading older history will consider this as non reliable. Steelbird1967 (talk) 04:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Steelbird1967: no. there are hundreds of articles on topics which were deleted in the past because they were not notable, but later these articles were created/accepted through AfC/draft process after the subject of the article became notable. That means, regardless the history of Palhade article, it will be accepted after Palhade passes notability criteria. In short, currently there is no significant coverage of Vaibhav Palhade in reliable source, meaning he doesnt pass notability criteria. When there is enough coverage in the reliable sources, the article will be approved. —usernamekiran (talk) 06:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey everyone

I’d like to find out which Wikipedia editors have the most people watching their user pages. Is there a way I can find this information, or ask someone really smart to find out? Tykeshay (talk) 01:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tykeshay The most-watched userpage/talkpage is likely to be for User_talk:Jimbo_Wales, at 4103 currently. It is also the most-read and probably the one with the biggest archive. You can use the "page information" tool on any userpage to see the number of watchers it has, just as you can with articles. There is probably a way to do what you want with one of the tools at Toolforge and that's where you should ask. Note that for privacy reasons you can't find out which pages any specific user is watching. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I would like to learn proper initial editing. Help me Pls. 88narayana (talk) 02:04, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

88narayana, try Help:Introduction and the pages that it links to. -- Hoary (talk) 03:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

wrote an article on upstate united FC and i cited reference, but i received an message that the article doesn't meet Wikipedia requirement. Sam goeso (talk) 02:04, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sam goeso You moved the article draft to mainspace, where it may or may not survive the new pages patrol, depending on whether these experienced ediotrs think it meets our notability requirements. However, there is another issue. You uploaded File:Upstateunitedlogo.png to Commons and stated it was your own work, which you have now licensed for anyone to use for any purpose, without attribution. If indeed you created the logo, then your association to the club will be considered for Wikipedia's purposes to be a paid relationship and under the terms and conditions here you must state that on your userpage (see the paid link for how to do so). Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Upstate United F.C.

I see that someone has registered other people's images on wikimedia commons without attribution, stating “Own work” and “I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license”.

Is there any way to remove those images and sanction the user? Of course, I am not the copyright holder of those images. Fysjsj2517 (talk) 02:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not for the plebs like you, Fysjsj2517, or me. However, we can start the process. Look at a sample image at Commons. Look at other of the uploader's "own work". Write a proposal for deletion that's general and covers all that you believe should be deleted. (I use a text editor for this.) Make notes about the particulars for any subset of these images (or any single image). Looking at any one of these images, click the option "Perform batch task". You'll be asked if you want to nominate uploads by this user. Yes you do. Check (tick) each image that should be deleted. Paste in your delete rationale, edit it, get it just right, and ... blammo. And then, do not hold your breath: deletion can take a very long time. (This one worked within a single calendar month; consider yourself lucky if this happens.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:33, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughtful response. Fysjsj2517 (talk) 03:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't quite thoughtful enough, Fysjsj2517. I should have referred you to commons:Help:VisualFileChange.js, which is more informative and better written. -- Hoary (talk) 12:04, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The more I get involved in Wiki editing and read Teahouse and Help Desk replies from senior editors, the more I’m curious if somewhere there’s a collection of stories about intriguing editing situations they’ve been been involved in over the years. I can just picture the old-timers sitting around a campfire under the stars sharing memorable tales.

Augnablik (talk) 02:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some of this may be of interest:

• WP:HOAXLIST
• WP:LAME
• WP:PRESS 24
• WP:SIGNPOST
• Depths of Wikipedia
• Wikipediocracy
• User:JPxG/Oracle/Largest AfDs

Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @Gråbergs Gråa Sång … you’ve certainly expanded my to-do list exponentially! I delved into your first suggestion, WP:HOAXLIST, and found myself alternately in laughter and horror that so many hoaxes had actually gotten through Wikipedia’s security posts — even if they amount to only something like 1% of all posts. That’s 1% too many.

I think I have my reading all cut out for me over the next week, with your suggested list. Augnablik (talk) 09:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Augnablik One more: WP:CITOGENESIS. This [2] is a favorite of mine. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Augnablik You might find some of the 'hairiest tales' being dewscribed during the week-long discussion process when an editor applies to become an administrator. Quite ofte,n the applicants are asked to describe difficult or challenging editing situations they have found themselves having to deal with. You can read mine here, and you simply have to change the url by replacing the username of the editor you're interested in hearing more from.

Sometimes the questioners tease out fascinating issues the applicant has encountered - sometimes dealing with them well; other times not. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My already long reading list provided by @Gråbergs Gråa Sång has expanded hugely with your suggestion to read “some of the ‘hairiest tales’ … during the week-long discussion process when an editor applies to become an administrator.

Actually, Nick, this is the second time I’ve read your write-up. The first was some months ago when, as has occurred with some frequency, you gave me a particularly helpful answer to one of my questions in the Teahouse. I don’t remember what that question was, but I just remember the deep resonance I felt and I decided to find out more about you. So I went to your user page and while there discovered a link to your exam-week production.

Reading it made me feel an even closer bond with you and the other senior editors as well, even those I hadn’t yet connected with, as I became aware of some of the behind-the-scenes work you’ve all had to carry on. I think it must have been through reading your write-up that I felt an unusually strong sense of commitment to the Wikipedia mission and of belonging in its editor community that brought me to a much further point than no accumulation of editor points could have.

I hope all editors get to find out about such stories from your merry band. Augnablik (talk) 10:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And for a (somewhat) fictitious cases, but based on "real" events, and also and to highlight the sometimes very pronounced hairiness of Wiki-bureaucracy, see WP:LIGHTBULB and Wikipedia:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man. Maybe also the BJAODN part of Wikipedia:Silly Things. Lectonar (talk) 11:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to submit this draft I've been working on for a while, and everything's done, but then I see this "rate limit exceeded" error when I try to submit the draft. 47.153.138.166 (talk) 03:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update: It looks like I was able to submit. 47.153.138.166 (talk) 04:30, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TrademarkedTWOrantula Please remember to log in to your account, as it appears that you have created two drafts, one via you account and one by the above IP address. David notMD (talk) 04:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I can't. I enforced a WikiBreak upon myself, so I can't log in until June 15th. 47.153.138.166 (talk) 14:55, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you refer to a user script. There are ways to bypass that, e.g. log in without JavaScript enabled in the browser, remove the script and enable JavaScript again. If the script is stored here then it may also work to log in at another wiki and make a link like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Example/common.js?action=edit&safemode=1 to the page with the script. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:28, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am creating a page under Franki Love. It says it is under "speedy deletion" because it comes of as an advertisement. Can someone please help me improve it? Jimrossen (talk) 05:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimrossen The speedy deletion seems to have been taken care of, I removed the "advert" tag since the current text didn't seem to justify it. Draft at Draft:Franki Love. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:33, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Franki Love. As the text of the draft has only ever been one sentence long, the "advertisement" tag seems inappropriate. I note that the references currently numbered "3" and "4" are to two versions of the same source. Maproom (talk) 06:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, do you have any suggestions to edit it so it will be approved. It also has a tag of speedy deletion. Do you know how to remove it? Jimrossen (talk) 06:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the admission procedure after passing 12th 2409:4081:502:3E10:E838:1C4B:9D1A:ACF3 (talk) 08:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Try the reference desk for questions not related to editing Wikipedia. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 08:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Romalo Ram

Does the Padma Shri award make a person notable according to WP:ANYBIO? I have reviewed some previous AFDs where some accept it and some do not. What is your opinion?

Some previous Afds—

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anil Kumar Bhalla

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Javed Ahmed Tak.

Grabup (talk) 08:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section ANYBIO is in starts "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included."

So, my reading is that an award like Padma Shri, a Pulitzer, or whatever, is one of those things that to some extent make it liklier there are WP:BASIC sources to be found. If those sources are not to be found, no article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@The Herald, @CNMall41, Please share your POV in this. Grabup (talk) 10:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fwiw, List of Padma Shri award recipients (2020–2029) has plenty of people with and without articles. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grabup: Exactly what was said... receiving the award makes it more likely that a person will meet the criteria for being notable, but does not of itself contribute towards meeting the notability criteria. Rather, the fact of having received the award makes it more likely that pertinent articles (i.e. those articles to which the notability criteria applies) will have been published about them. Until such articles have been published and are identified, the notability requirement will not have been met. Fabrickator (talk) 14:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, it's me Akhinesh and I have a question about Licensing.

Please explain how to get CC licence, I don't really know how to use CC licence

I wants to upload some of my work to Wikimedia Commons but unfortunately I don't know how to use CC licence. I have received the same answers for my question about CC licence but I didn't really understand Akhinesh212 (talk) 08:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Akhinesh212 Have you read the info at Upload Wizard and used that tool for uploading? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Akhinesh212: you can't "get" a CC licence. Whoever is/was the owner of the copyright in the content you're referring to must have released that content into the Creative Commons (CC) under terms which are compatible with Wikipedia. Your job is then to provide evidence of it having been so released. The vast majority of content (such as photos) in the world is not available under such provisions.

Or if you're talking about content that you own the copyright to, then you may be able to 'donate' that, see WP:DCM. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was quite well-written 78.208.222.47 (talk) 09:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission was contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia:Five pillars. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:04, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Goat debate

(edit conflict) Your draft was rejected for being contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia and will not be considered further. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:05, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CanonNi @Shantavira Why contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia it was just an analysis on Messi and Ronaldo. 78.208.222.47 (talk) 09:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NOTOPINION. Your draft is entirely your personal opinion on the two players. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:12, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP is likely the same user that popped into the Teahouse last night, see here. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 10:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place for debating or comparing with your personal views. Instead, go and create your own blog on Medium, Blogger, or Wordpress and write whatever you want. Grabup (talk) 09:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we already have Messi–Ronaldo rivalry. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HELLO,

i've been trying to edit an actor's biography, and added a lot of information that's all in his IMDB page, that is already in the external links, but all of this information was deleted by Wiki's editor. how can I add this information properly and is IMDB page isn't a good resource for an actor's biography? Asaf4545 (talk) 13:03, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Asaf4545, As per WP:IMDB IMDB is not a reliable source, and should never be used as a source in our articles. We do, however, allow one link to the IMDB article in the articles External links section - which can cause some confusion - best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 13:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Asaf4545, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can add this information (or, indeed, any information to any Wikipedia article) only by citing a reliable source that vslidates the information. User-generated sites like iMDB and almost all wikis are not regarded as a reliable. ColinFine (talk) 13:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to review new articles, is there any way I could apply, or is it invite-only? Edward Jocob Philip Smith (talk) 15:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Edward Jocob Philip Smith See WP:NPR. The standard is that patrollers need 90 days experience, with 500+ edits to articles. You haven't reached that yet but can certainly apply when you do. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An NPR candidate needs to have prior experience with CSD, AFD and other aspects of article patrolling, like identifying copyright violation and violations of the policy on biographies of living persons. Ideally, they should gain some experience with those, then apply to become an AFC reviewer and gain some experience there first. Someone with 500 article edits and 90 days of editng can qualify, but that's not the qualification criteria. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

.... yes, the page I linked has the full explanation. Sorry if I misled the OP into thinking that the 90/500 requirement was the only relevant factor. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wishing to write an article about Dirk Schouten, a motorsports driver competing in the Porsche Carrera Cup Benelux. There doesn't seem to be much publicly available information about him, so I figured that just reaching out to him to ask him more would be a good idea. However, I'm not entirely sure how that would fall under Wikipedia's rules. Is it permitted to do so? LegalizeCaruana (talk) 15:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LegalizeCaruana Probably not. Wikipedia articles are based on already-published information from reliable sources. Schouten might be able to point you to, say, newspaper articles he knew had been written about himself that you hadn't been able to find but other than that you can't base articles on information just obtained from the article subject. See WP:AUTO and WP:NOR for more. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Mike. It seems that not a lot of sources write about the Porsche cup, but I'll see what I can dig out once I get home from holiday. However I do note that there have been several publications from both himself on his LinkedIn (website is in Dutch) and from the Q1-Trackracing blog, the team he currently races at. Would these be considered 'reliable' sources or would they fall too close to the tree, so to speak? LegalizeCaruana (talk) 15:55, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they would. WP:Notability (please read) can only be shown by material that is entirely independent of the subject themself. Anything by the subject, or anyone directly associated with them (including interviews, press releases, blogs, social media etc.), can used sparingly to corroborate uncontroversial facts, but can never be used to demonstrate notability.

In this instance, Wikipedia:Notability (sports)#Motorsports is particularly relevant. It looks as if his achievements in the Porsche Carrera Cup Benelux would not meet the minimum requirements, though if he were to win the championship it would likely be another matter – apart from anything else, this would likely generate enough independent press coverage to make him notable.

Given that Schouten is only 22, it may well be that WP:Too soon apples here, and he will qualify some time in the future. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 188.220.175.176 (talk) 17:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was a good help, yes. Also not to be a nerd but Schouten is now 23 according to his website lol. It seems as if he notes various ages on his social medias. But, yes, it does seem that his individual achievements fall short of the notability. Thank you for your help :) LegalizeCaruana (talk) 00:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to complete this task?Can anyone help? SifatSharif (talk) 16:05, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SifatSharif Can you please specify what task you are talking about? ✶Quxyz✶ 19:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like SS is working through the TWA tutorials and is having trouble completing a task. David notMD (talk) 02:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, long time user, first time potentially editing. There is a wiki page for a deceased actor, however this page is fairly limited due to the lack of information for the deceased. I wanted to know what the standard is for providing source information. I was planning on having an email conversation with the surviving family but didn't know how to produce the information given. I wondered if the redacted screen grabs (sans addresses) of the emails would suffice. I was able to contact the surviving family via their YouTube page and linkedIn and the family is aware the conversation will be used to add to the deceased's wiki page. Thank you. Kmdarc (talk) 16:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No these would be entirely inappropriate. Everything in Wikipedia should come from published Reliable sources. Email (or written) correspondence with a relative does not qualify as either published or reliable, though if a biographer included it in a book from a reputable publisher (who will have fact-checked it), it might then qualify. The same would apply to unpublished correspondence of the subject themself.

A possibility would be for the relatives to point you to published material they know about: they might for example have newspaper cuttings and the like, which you could use provided their full bibliographic details were available. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 188.220.175.176 (talk) 17:45, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kmdarc 188. is correct. You can also try archive.org and, if you can get access, sites like ProQuest and Newspapers.com. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:09, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for your help. Kmdarc (talk) 18:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to make it so my signature isnt purple once you click the links? 48JCL (Talk • Contributions) 18:11, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 48JCL. Color declarations are ignored in wikilinks unless they are declared inside a piped link. That's why the text in your links is normal blue before clicking and purple after clicking. This would color everything and keep the color: 48JCL (Talk • Contributions). But it's above the 255 character limit on signatures. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Found an alternative, thanks. 48JCL (talk • contribs) 21:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed on the page for “List of Point Horror books” it is incomplete. Now, there is a YouTube channel i watch who has a near complete collection of the books. Whould it be appropriate to add the missing entries shown in the video? Blackmamba31248 (talk) 20:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Point Horror § Publications Deor (talk) 22:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? Where you answering my question? Blackmamba31248 (talk) 00:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A "Courtesy link" is made so that Teahouse Hosts know where the problem - in ths instance the incomplete list - is located. David notMD (talk) 02:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. Blackmamba31248 (talk) 03:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blackmamba31248. If a reliable publisher has published a list of the books in any form (including on their official youtube channel) we can cite it. If a random person (even a famous one) talks on YouTube or anywhere else about the list of titles, that is not a reliable published source and we cannot use it. ColinFine (talk) 14:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What’s the diffrence? I’ll cite the video and i guess that up for a Teahouse host to decide. Can’t do it now because I’m at school and YouTube is obvisouly blocked. Blackmamba31248 (talk) 14:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talking of citing "a Youtube channel", Blackmamba31248, is a little like talking of citing "something that's printed". A specific video could be excellent; it could be worthless. I suggest that you rewrite your question above, providing the links to a small number of representative examples among these videos, and that you then post the result not here but instead (and with an informative heading) to WP:RSN. -- Hoary (talk) 08:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to add internet links as credible sources Altberry65 (talk) 21:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Answered over in WP:WPAFC/HD. Qcne (talk) 21:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst detailed instructions for giving citations were linked to over at Draft:Al Berry, the fact that it appears to be an autobiography means that it is unlikely to get approved with any amount of sourcing. -- D'n'B-t -- 21:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On your creation Draft:Al Berry, you were told:

See Referencing for Beginners and the instructions on footnotes. In-line citations are required in biographies of living persons.

Within that, "See" is unfortunate; it should be "Read and digest". And of course some of what you're asked to "see" (or to read and digest) may be incomprehensible or indigestible; and we can explain those parts. So ... which parts don't seem to make sense? -- Hoary (talk) 22:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Practice making refs in your Sandbox, and only when satisfied with format, copy inti draft. David notMD (talk) 02:58, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was reading an article related to Cricket and it was showing as a stub.but the article was a full fledged one. What should to be done.
 Courtesy link: Third umpire.
--KEmel49 (talk) 01:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That article seems to have been rated back in 2010, when the article was looking like this. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 02:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for raising this @KEmel49, I've re-rated it and removed the stub template Newystats (talk) 02:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AlphaBetaGamma,@Newystats,

Thanks a lot for getting yourself into this deeply,we shall meet again with other issues too mates.

--KEmel49 (talk) 02:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to create a page for a biologist that I took some classes from in the 1970s. I believe I can be objective. Also I have a photograph that I took of the professor back then. Is it OK to use this photo? He died in 1983. Thank you. Jimpittssky (talk) 01:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please check Wikipedia's notability guidelines to see if your biologist qualifies for an article. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 02:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NACADEMIC. Did the biologist hold an endowed chair at a well-known institution? Awarded significant science awards? Written about? You photo would be OK, but does not factor into establishing notability. David notMD (talk) 03:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. The Biologist was William Clay at the University of Louisville. In addition to his work with fishes, he was also describer of a new species of water snake and documenter of the genus Natrix. He became professor emeritus with more than 35 years of teaching and research at the institution. He wrote a Field Manual of Kentucky Fishes (1962) and The Fishes of Kentucky (1976). There are no web pages dedicated to him. Opinion? Jimpittssky (talk) 03:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds far more interesting to me than the thousands of soccer players we have articles on. (Before anyone gets offended, the same applies to almost all our sports person articles.) HiLo48 (talk) 03:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your fearless encouragement! Jimpittssky (talk) 04:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest seems to have been particularly on @Jimpittssky's mind when he titled his original message, "Does having taken classes from a professor place me too close?" So aside from answering the question of the professor's notability, JimP. would also have to make a declaration of COI. Augnablik (talk) 07:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some of my lecturers/professors from back in the 1960s and 70s have Wikipedia articles. I didn't create them, but have made some edits. I don't think having been a student of a now deceased person that long ago demands a declaration. HiLo48 (talk) 07:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimpittssky As you are a newcomer here, I assume you will use the articles for creation process. Even folk with a WP:COI are allowed to create drafts using that method, so I don't think that this is an obstacle. Disclosure does no harm (e.g. on the Talk Page of the draft) but actually I agree with HiLo48 that classes 50-years ago are pretty irrelevant. Good luck: we need more articles on academics. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do all websites that run MediaWiki like Wikipedia and Fandom all have the same keyboard functions in editing articles, codes etc, are the technical ways to edit pages and articles the same for the most part? Timothyhoeller (talk) 05:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Timothyhoeller, here at the Teahouse of the English language Wikipedia, we care about only one website that uses MediaWiki. That is the English Wikipedia. Questions about other websites using similar software are out of scope here. Ask at those other websites. Cullen328 (talk) 08:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Timothyhoeller You might get an answer at the science reference desk. It isn't an unreasonable question. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing is better for this. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the topic is in the title 76.167.142.127 (talk) 06:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Teahouse is a place to ask for (and provide) help with using and editing Wikipedia, not mindreading. HiLo48 (talk) 07:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Try the reference desk for general knowledge questions. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 07:14, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the most important job in the earth 110.227.203.20 (talk) 07:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Do you have a question about using Wikipedia? (That's what this page is for.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See earthworm. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In brief, go blog elsewhere. Cullen328 (talk) 08:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I was editing Bled Strategic Forum to try and make it less promotional, before realising that the text was just copied from their own website. I remember before reading about how copyrighted text needs to be removed in the page's history but I can not find how to report the page to someone who can do that (and I'm not 100% I'm remembering correctly that it needs to be removed).

Update: I'm seen that the writer is connected with the business, and has uploaded [image from the website] that they claim to have made. Is this an issue, or have they just effectively given up the copyright of the image?

-- NotCharizard ^🗨 09:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Notcharizard For the copyright part, see WP:COPYVIO. The file link you supplied doesn't work, the correct link is File:BSF-Data-2023.png. The article Bled Strategic Forum has been around since 2020 but Draft:Bled Strategic Forum still exists as created by User:MR BSF on 25 April this year and declined today because of the duplication. MR BSF then expanded the existing article with most of the content which had been in the draft. User:DoubleGrazing has asked whether MR BSF is a paid editor (which might simplify the copyright situation if they are copying their own work from the website) but has not yet received a reply. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:23, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I updated Draft:Vue Play to not be read like an advert, but it is still not accepted. Please tell me what I have to improve as I do not find it like being and advert anymore but rather informative. Steffanhalvorsenekholt (talk) 10:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its most serious flaw is the total lack of references to reliable independent published sources that discuss the subject. Please read about notability.   Maproom (talk) 10:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

.... and another flaw is that it uses external links in the body of the text. See WP:EL. The fact that there is a "conclusion" section suggests this short article has been written by a large language model like ChatGPT. Was that what you did, @Steffanhalvorsenekholt? Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steffan Halvorsen Ekholt is an undisclosed paid editor. Theroadislong (talk) 11:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually disclosed at Draft_talk:Vue_Play#Disclosure_of_Conflict_of_Interest earlier today. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I added a disclosure in the Talk section. By the way, Made With Vue.js, Product Hunt & Awesome Vue are independent sources. I have written everything myself, but I got help from chat-gpt to create me a template / starting point. I removed the Conclusion section & sorry, I did not know about the rule of using external sources in body, I removed them now. Does it look better now? I added one reference to the official site, hope it is ok. I am new to writing something in WikiPedia, sorry for all the trouble. Steffanhalvorsenekholt (talk) 11:55, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declined several times and now Rejected by an experienced editor. Even after your edits, still had hyperlinks in the text, unreferenced content, and inadequate references. The company was launched a year ago, so very much WP:TOOSOON. My recommendation at this point is that you request the draft be deleted by putting Db-author inside double curly brackets {{ }} at the top. David notMD (talk) 12:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@David notMD ok, sorry for taking your time .. Steffanhalvorsenekholt (talk) 12:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologize. I (and others) choose to volunteer here at Teahouse. Sometimes that comes across as blunt, but ideally, the comments are about the content, not the person who posted that. David notMD (talk) 14:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could anyone help with the social history of Orpington ABC ? We have news paper articles dating back to 1912 and have researched the history dating back over 100 years. The club had produced national champions and amateurs that represented their country along with producing notable professionals. We have over 100 old photographs , news paper article and programmes. 62.31.130.183 (talk) 10:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean "help you to create a Wikipedia article" (which we can do), or "help you with researching further"? If the latter, it's not impossible, but it's likely that you are now the leading experts on the subject, and anyone helping would have to know what you already have to avoid uselessly duplicating it.

If you want to create an article, begin by reading Help:Your first article, and studying existing Wikipedia articles about similar organisations (which may not necessarily be 'good') and some Wikipedia:Good articles in general. {The poster formerly known as 87.981.230.195} 188.220.175.176 (talk) 10:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused. It is a short article about the GCC Secretary General. All the sources are reputable national news sites or the official website of the very publicly recognized organization. The organization is on Wikipedia, the person in question has an Arabic wikipedia page. I have seen other wikipedia pages with far less information make it on the website. This would not be the case if it was an EU or NATO official or a "western organization." There is clearly a double standard here. What possibly could have warranted a rejection?

It is also all just basic factual information -- it is completely neutral and factual. This is a joke right after waiting 3 months to be told that?

I don't know how to tag a page under editing but it is for Jasem Albudaiwi.

Thanks for any feedback. 37.39.175.136 (talk) 10:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link Draft:Jasem Mohamed Albudaiwi. Theroadislong (talk) 10:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has little interest in what their "official website" says. Theroadislong (talk) 10:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link, much appreciated. Sorry but EU officials use EU sources -- why is it a problem with the Gulf Cooperation Council? Especially if it is for non-biased information -- especially when it is super easy to see the person in the news. Nobody says "official" when it comes to UN or NATO websites -- the GCC is just as reputable of an international organization. 37.39.175.136 (talk) 10:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, let's see. He has also been actively involved in international conferences and negotiations, particularly focusing on humanitarian, economic, and security-related issues. "Being actively involved in XYZ" might mean something significant, or it might mean as little as "He's known to have been present during XYZ and he wasn't photographed dozing off there". I'll assume for a moment that it's the former: something significant. Then what, according to reliable sources, did he actually do in those international conferences and negotiations? -- Hoary (talk) 10:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's literally expanded upon further down, if that statement is the issue then I'm happy to remove it. Furthermore, the article is meant to be a base - I mean its meant for people to keep editing and adding. Everything else is point by point taken from reputable news sites / official organization website -- or his CV which is up there.

I literally just looked up an EU official and they use -- official EU websites for sources. Sorry but this is most definitely a double standard. So what exactly am I supposed to find? European sources for the Arab guy? 37.39.175.136 (talk) 10:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The official organization website and his CV are NOT independent sources so cannot be used to establish any notability. Theroadislong (talk) 10:55, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok again -- how are EU wikipedia pages getting accepted then? Does this only apply because it is an Arab/non-western page? I'm confused as to the reason for the double standard. So others can use their official websites and it is not a problem (this is how I approached writing this taking a diplomat and looking how they did their page) but when I utilize it its suddenly not independent?

This is basic factual information it is not subjective in anyway. You are actually telling me I cannot use the GCC official website for referencing that the Secretary General is the Secretary General. For the SG of NATO you cannot reference the NATO website or press releases that he is the SG? What? This makes absolutely no sense. So what--I'm supposed to find other sources saying he's the SG -- it really seems subjective from wikipedia's side what sources they are willing to accept.

You are certain that is the issue? So new sources and that's it? 37.39.175.136 (talk) 11:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See other stuff exists official websites can be used but they cannot be used to establish notability. Theroadislong (talk) 11:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is where the biased comes in -- the Secretary General of the GCC is not notable enough? His actions are responsible for over 56 million people. Sorry there is no way you can convince anyone that lives in the member states that the GCC and its SG are not notable. The GCC itself has a huge page. Every little regional European organization has a page. Small groups in the US have a page-- but the leader of the GCC is not notable enough? A super quick google search will prove that statement completely wrong. 37.39.175.136 (talk) 11:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor. The issue is not entirely whether Albudaiwi is notable: it is mainly whether your draft demonstrates that he is. Your view "Furthermore, the article is meant to be a base - I mean its meant for people to keep editing and adding" may have been acceptable when the English Wikipedia was started, but currently we want new articles to clearly demonstrate wikinotability by citing sources meeting all these criteria. The sources themselves do not need to be in English. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also Sshamm01 please remember to log in when posting here. Theroadislong (talk) 12:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removed 'fluffy' sentences from Lead and elsewhere. David notMD (talk) 12:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering why there are no entries for Sound Design on your Video Game entries on Wiki. There are entries for other game development roles and even and entry for Composer on each video game, but no entry for Sound Design. I recently tried to add a new Sound Design field in the credits of a video game entry, but my edit was removed with no explanation. I am confused, does anyone know how to add new entries or why Sound Design is not included in the list of credits for video games ? SoundCredit (talk) 10:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Age of Wonders 4 @SoundCredit An explanation was given. Seeing as the parameter doesn't exist, your edit was reverted as it wouldn't be shown in the infobox. As for how you could get such a parameter added, you should discuss making such a change on the infobox template's talk page. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 10:33, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks for getting back to me on this @CommissarDoggo

I have now posted this on the talk page you recommended, thanks.

For reference, I did not see any reply or explanation for the removal of this particular edit, since you said this I have looked around my profile to try and find it, but cannot find anything relating to this particluar edit.

Anyway, I will see if I can get it done using that other talk page you mentioned.

Thanks again SoundCredit (talk) 11:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SoundCredit No worries, hopefully you get the result you're after.

As for the second bit, on Wikipedia we have edit summaries, which people can add when they're publishing an edit or reverting an edit. You can see the edit summary on the the edit that reverted yours here. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 11:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ahh ok thanks for pointing that out, I did not see that, nice one.

Thanks again SoundCredit (talk) 11:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are various titles that could be used for the A9 project in Scotland including the official A9 dualling Perth to Inverness plus many others like A9 Perth to Inverness. However, I proposed to title it A9 dualling project. I am allowed to copy stuff from A9 road (Scotland) to make sure that I do not claim that I did it myself? I know I cannot use Wikipedia as sources, but what about copying it? I started my draft here. JuniperChill (talk) 10:55, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JuniperChill See WP:CWW for the guidance. The more usual case is for translations from other-language Wikipedias (WP:TRANSLATE). Note that there should be no need for massive duplication: you can always add a {{see also}} or similar to the head of one of your article's sections. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JuniperChill Welcome to the Teahouse. It's difficult at this early stage to know what sources and content you will eventually have, but my feeling is that you would be best to start off by keeping everything together, and simply create a sub-section within A9_road_(Scotland)#Upgrades. If it then becomes so expansive that it deserves its own article, then you can add a section hatnote to refer to the relevant main article.

Yes, you are permitted to copy content from one Wikipedia article to another. You should make an edit summary for that copy/paste action which gives attribution to the authors. You do this by stating what you're copying and linking to that page (see HERE). It is also possible to mirror a section of text so that any changes made to the main paragraph also appear automatically in the new article. But you'd need to think through the need for this, and why you're creating a brand new page for something that could simply be included in the original article. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was just thinking the reason why I feel as though the A9 project in Scotland deserves a page of its own is because it is not a normal road construction project. Dualling a 10 mile section of road is definitely not worth a page, but for 80 miles and £3 billion, sure. We have lots of small road projects going on, like adding cycling lanes, making residential and city streets 20 mph, and there are too many of them to be listed as a page of its own, or even included in an existing page. Plus, it is covered in many reliable sources. Not only that, but it was supposed to be complete in 2025, but only two sections (out of 11) have been done today, far from it. But will see how it goes JuniperChill (talk) 12:14, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have been discovering along Wikipedia and I want to make a new account or change a username. My friends mostly know my persona to be based around one of Alice Oseman's book characters Tori Spring, off Solitaire and the Heartstopper Universe. (I tend to see my life is as close as hers and she is one of my faves of all time! I read Solitaire loads :]) I tried making an account as tori_spring, however it seems to be taken (or its near identical!) Any help finding a solution to this conundrum? It would help lots! -tori :) (This is an old account with a username or name I no longer associate with!) Im Haymarket (talk) 13:49, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Im Haymarket, User:Tori Spring was created on 20 June 2022, and has never edited the English Wikipedia but was first created on the Spanish Wikipedia, which is deemed to be their "home wiki", as shown here, although they have never edited any Wikiproject.
In these circumstances, you cannot follow the general advice at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations although you could try Meta, as is linked on that page. I don't know how difficult that is, or if you are likely to succeed. Alternatively, I suggest you try a similar name, but not too similar e.g. not Tori Spring 1. Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 14:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consider ToriSpringFan. David notMD (talk) 14:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all! I am wanting to become better at editing and I am curious about citations, specifically about the placement of citations. I have been reading through the Wikipedia pages surrounding proper references and citations, which has caused me to be slightly confused. Perhaps I misinterpreted it, but does each paragraph require a citation at the end of it? Or do citations only go with the sentence that it is referenced by? I am sorry if this is a silly question, just want to make sure any future edits I make are properly cited. Topiguana (talk) 14:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]