How to Handle vandalism ?
A long term inactive user who has been already warned against vandalism by an administrator such asthis one has gone inactive has become active again and has vandalised the page seeman by making large content removal which has sufficient souce such as this one and this one without mentioning any reason. It is seems he is ideological adherent to NTK party run by seeman and is making this kind of POV pushing which can be inferred from his edit such as this one.In light of this how to approach this incidence? JagatRaxak (talk) 12:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi JagatRaxak, good catch there! Normally it should be pretty easy to revert vandalism, although idk if it is available on mobile. At least on desktop, there is an "undo" button you can click when checking the article's history, which will revert the edit in question. This didn't work here though because of conflicting newer edits, so I manually pasted the removed text and added it back in.
- A few notes though: Obviously, please first make sure that it is actual vandalism you are seeing. Sometimes, people edit in good faith, but in a way that their edits look like vandalism. Thus, completely undoing edits may sometimes not be optimal. Also, for articles about living persons extra care is needed, because controversial material might have been removed because it is slanderous. But you are right, in this case it was definitely a (politically motivated?) act of vandalism as the claims were sourced, and the sources seem trustworthy.
- And lastly, please note that new questions should go to the bottom of the Teahouse page, otherwise they might be overlooked! Best just use the button provided at the top of the page, that handles that automatically ;)
- --LordPeterII (talk) 19:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Request for notability guidelines
Hi, I'm a Wikipedian author who is writing about Indonesian government officials, and was thinking to divert to the viral world. I want to make an article about Muhammad Didit, an Indonesian youtuber who has gone viral as Man who did nothing for 2 hours. You could search the term on Google, and it will generate some web sources, especially the one from Phillipines, who is regarded as the Philippines' newspaper of record. Could someone review the notability of this person? Thank you. Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 02:22, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, Jeromi Mikhael, welcome to the Teahouse. If you have sufficient sources that can explain things about him, you can sure write one. You are pointing out an Indonesian YouTuber, meaning you'll write a biography. Biographies are usually hard to make, but if you can make one, sure. Only write sentences that can be backed up by sources; do not make unsourced reliable claims. Feel free to ask more things on my talk page if you have a lot more to ask. Terima kasih, dari GeraldWL 06:38, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: Do you think I should make an article about the person or the video? Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 12:16, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Jeromi Mikhael, it really depends on the notability. I suggest making the biography, just to add more to the notability of the subject. But if the video is the one notable, write the video. GeraldWL ✉ 12:23, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: Here is the draft. Could you asses the notability? Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 12:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Jeromi Mikhael, you must describe what the video is about, write the summary, as well as several other things, of course, backed up by the sources. I'll try help you with that. GeraldWL ✉ 12:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: Ehh...I mean asking you if it's worth it to make an article about the video. It won't be funny if I finished making the video and someone told me that the video is not notable.... Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 12:39, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Jeromi Mikhael, seeing the video getting international notability, I think it is decently worth having an article on it. There's little information I can render based on the sources you give, though. I suggest you do more research to the video, see if there's any interviews or other articles on the subject. That way you can add more stuff. GeraldWL ✉ 13:10, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: Eh, I think you could try searching Man who did nothing for 2 hours or 2 Jam Nggak Ngapa-Ngapain video. This particular video is weird because there's more international exposure compared to domestic exposure. Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 13:15, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Jeromi Mikhael, seeing the video getting international notability, I think it is decently worth having an article on it. There's little information I can render based on the sources you give, though. I suggest you do more research to the video, see if there's any interviews or other articles on the subject. That way you can add more stuff. GeraldWL ✉ 13:10, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: Ehh...I mean asking you if it's worth it to make an article about the video. It won't be funny if I finished making the video and someone told me that the video is not notable.... Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 12:39, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Jeromi Mikhael, you must describe what the video is about, write the summary, as well as several other things, of course, backed up by the sources. I'll try help you with that. GeraldWL ✉ 12:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
To find articles to be removed
How to delete some articles ? Iitianeditor (talk) 18:20, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
- Iitianeditor, welcome to the Teahouse. It's not clear why you wanted to delete articles, as deletion are nominated purely because it is not worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. Only administrators can delete it, but there must be a consensus. You can engage in deletion nominations at WP:AFD, but before you do so, kindly understand Wikipedia's notability, encyclopedic tone, citations, etc. guidelines as well as WP:DEL to familiarize yourself with deletion and inclusion. It's best for you to edit before participating in a nomination. GeraldWL ✉ 18:35, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)@Iitianeditor: Before looking for articles to delete, I recommend you get a good sense of what determines if an article should be kept or not. Visit the Articles for deletion page and read some of the nominations. Look how the discussions are voted on and eventually closed. When you are comfortable, you can vote yourself. Then you can look for articles that are tagged for notability and see if they can be improved or nominated for deletion. Good luck and thanks for trying to improve the encyclopedia! TimTempleton (talk) (cont)
- @Iitianeditor: We are all here to build an encyclopaedia, not to dismantle it. As a completely new editor here, finding articles to delete is above your paygrade right now. Please learn to create good content first, and understand the policies and principles that content is based upon; only in that way will you understand when other content is bad. I would also just add that we do not vote on article deletion; we justify deletion or retention in a 'Deletion discussion, based purely upon our policies of what is and is not notable. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:08, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nick Moyes I also want to help build the encyclopedia, but according to guidelines. non-encyclopedic content should be removed. I've read the guidelines and I believe I've come across a few articles that should be deleted. If I'm mistaken, I'd be happy to learn and improve.Iitianeditor (talk) 17:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hey Iitianeditor, I see you've already started some AfD discussions: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hassanikhel, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shoaib Akram and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tariq Hafeez. And it's not as if the responses were walls of "keep" vote-nots. So well done, I guess. What puzzles me is that the heading above your question is "To find articles to be removed": you should not actively go looking for articles to delete. Instead, you find deletion candidates while editing normally. Also, please make sure you have WP:alternatives to deletion in your mind: deletion is a last resort. Kind regards from PJvanMill)talk( 22:52, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- PJvanMill sure, i'll also try to handle some pages in another way.I was just sure from my side that those pages should be removed according to the wikipedia policies.Iitianeditor (talk) 17:22, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hey Iitianeditor, I see you've already started some AfD discussions: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hassanikhel, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shoaib Akram and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tariq Hafeez. And it's not as if the responses were walls of "keep" vote-nots. So well done, I guess. What puzzles me is that the heading above your question is "To find articles to be removed": you should not actively go looking for articles to delete. Instead, you find deletion candidates while editing normally. Also, please make sure you have WP:alternatives to deletion in your mind: deletion is a last resort. Kind regards from PJvanMill)talk( 22:52, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nick Moyes I also want to help build the encyclopedia, but according to guidelines. non-encyclopedic content should be removed. I've read the guidelines and I believe I've come across a few articles that should be deleted. If I'm mistaken, I'd be happy to learn and improve.Iitianeditor (talk) 17:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Becoming an admin
Could you please tell me how to become a Wikipedia administrator?OrangeCD-ROM (talk) 14:24, 20 August 2020 (UTC) OrangeCD-ROM (talk) 14:24, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, OrangeCD-ROM. You can read more about the role and requirements at Wikipedia:Administrators. It usually takes a few years of intensive editing, with many thousands of edits and a clearly demonstrated understanding of our policies and procedures. The wider community are then able to express their views on that person's suitability over a week-long period. Why do you ask? Nick Moyes (talk) 14:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to The Teahouse, The only prerequisites for adminship are having an account and being extended confirmed (having both 30 days' tenure and 500 edits) so that you can file your own nomination here Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. However, the likelihood of passing without being able to show significant positive contributions to the encyclopedia is extremly low. I’ve been editing virtually every day for 14 years with more than 100,000 edits, but even now wouldn’t consider I had what it takes to become an admin. Theroadislong (talk) 14:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- I think there's a sensible middle ground somewhere between those two extremes! and, Theroadislong, I'm sure you do! (But I'm still not sure I have what it takes to be a good admin - yet earlier this year the community trusted me enough to give me those few extra editing rights and responsibilities. The hard work and attention to detail starts from there. One can only do one's best.) Nick Moyes (talk) 15:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to The Teahouse, The only prerequisites for adminship are having an account and being extended confirmed (having both 30 days' tenure and 500 edits) so that you can file your own nomination here Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. However, the likelihood of passing without being able to show significant positive contributions to the encyclopedia is extremly low. I’ve been editing virtually every day for 14 years with more than 100,000 edits, but even now wouldn’t consider I had what it takes to become an admin. Theroadislong (talk) 14:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, OrangeCD-ROM. You can read more about the role and requirements at Wikipedia:Administrators. It usually takes a few years of intensive editing, with many thousands of edits and a clearly demonstrated understanding of our policies and procedures. The wider community are then able to express their views on that person's suitability over a week-long period. Why do you ask? Nick Moyes (talk) 14:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Just out of curiosity, does that figure of 500 edits include edits to things like user pages, talk pages, sandboxes, Teahouse questions, and the like? Or does it refer only to edits to actual articles? The reason I ask is that my own edit count seems to be creeping up (faster than I would have expected), but I would guess a lot of those are to my sandbox, which I have recently been using to draft several articles. As I say, I am only asking out of curiosity, not because of any lofty ambition on my part.
- Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:22, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Mike Marchmont, pretty much, but the area's you've edited in will be analysed and will be criticised in a RfA. And don't worry, I started in April at like 15 edits and now I'm at nearly 10,000. It does creep up fast, especially if you spend a lot of time here. Ed talk! 16:27, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Ed6767: Thanks for your reply, Ed. Your edit count is very impressive. Keep up the good work.Mike Marchmont (talk) 18:45, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Mike Marchmont, pretty much, but the area's you've edited in will be analysed and will be criticised in a RfA. And don't worry, I started in April at like 15 edits and now I'm at nearly 10,000. It does creep up fast, especially if you spend a lot of time here. Ed talk! 16:27, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
@OrangeCD-ROM: I usually answer this FAQ by first asking "Why do you want to be an admin?" This usually identifies an incorrect idea in the requester's mind about how Wikipedia works. Also, I did some research on this in July: Special:Permalink/965892924#Applying_for_admin. New users simply do not (and should not) become admins. "Out of about 1100 [current] admins, only 25 joined Wikipedia in 2013 or later. The newest of those joined 19 months ago." —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:46, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Okay, I know the following may be rather silly, over-the-top and idealistic, but anyway...
- On the off-chance that an editor with the basic 500 edits was promoted to Admin, it would not end well. It would be like sending an unprepared missonary to live with savage cannibals on some strange planet. This editor doesn't know how to hunt, or forage in the forest, or build relationships with the people. They are unacquainted with the language or local history. The editor's cries of "I mean well!" coupled with "You must respect me!" would probably lead to a bad and bloody end.
- My observation is that a good Admin is humble, not proud. They chose to wield a mop, not a sword. They seek to serve, not to garner admiration. (All of this may be somewhat idealistic, I know.) So, if a new user is determined to be an Admin, then they will chose to dedicate many years of service, and, even then, wait for their peers (all of us) to recognize their virtues. Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 05:46, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hey Tribe of Tiger I think you got that absolutely right. I remember when I started out here 10 years ago, I feared I might lose out to other, more assertive editors, and I naievely thought that being an admin would help me get my way, if ever that were needed, and if ever I could become one. That really was an utterly silly thing for me to believe back then. I waited many, many years before discovering that helping out as an admin would be a good move - not for me, but for the Project as a whole. Being an admin gives me no power over any good faith editor, but a fair bit of authority over vandals and WP:COI editors, and the tools to help maintain the encyclopaedia. I spend my time jhelping out and keeping the site clearer of vandals and POV editors, and I regret that I oftentimes find myself having to be brutally blunt - and even rude - about the reality of POV editing here to new users. I try to be fair (and not a complete bastard), and I constantly worry that I am being over-bearing to problem editors. It is a very difficult path to tread, but I, for one, am willing to be recalled as an admin if the community no longer feels that it has the confidence I can serve their needs. We really cannot have naieve or inexperienced editors as admins, but we do need committed editors like you to consider whether being an admin in the future might be something they'd like to aim for. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Dear Nick Moyes, Thanks so very much, for this kind reply! Frankly, I will never be an admin. It would take me too many years to acquire the technical skills, etc., and I am waayy too old to start. As you and I both know now, an admin actually has "less" power in an article dispute, per WP:INVOLVED, not more! New editors do not, of course, understand this. I think your confession of your own earlier misunderstanding, proves my point, regarding "humble". One of the many things I appreciate about WP is that those "in power" are held to a strict code of conduct and responsibility. There is some latitude, or course, but a jury of WP editors, all of whom may state their objections, prevents us from being ruled by "power-hungry Admins" (or editors). I am suddenly reminded of Aladdin, as voiced by Robin Williams, "Great, great power, teeny-tiny living space."
- Hey Tribe of Tiger I think you got that absolutely right. I remember when I started out here 10 years ago, I feared I might lose out to other, more assertive editors, and I naievely thought that being an admin would help me get my way, if ever that were needed, and if ever I could become one. That really was an utterly silly thing for me to believe back then. I waited many, many years before discovering that helping out as an admin would be a good move - not for me, but for the Project as a whole. Being an admin gives me no power over any good faith editor, but a fair bit of authority over vandals and WP:COI editors, and the tools to help maintain the encyclopaedia. I spend my time jhelping out and keeping the site clearer of vandals and POV editors, and I regret that I oftentimes find myself having to be brutally blunt - and even rude - about the reality of POV editing here to new users. I try to be fair (and not a complete bastard), and I constantly worry that I am being over-bearing to problem editors. It is a very difficult path to tread, but I, for one, am willing to be recalled as an admin if the community no longer feels that it has the confidence I can serve their needs. We really cannot have naieve or inexperienced editors as admins, but we do need committed editors like you to consider whether being an admin in the future might be something they'd like to aim for. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Having read your comments here at the Teahouse over the years, I was very pleased, but not at all surprised, to learn that you had become an Admin. Many thanks for the willing service work you do, by treading the difficult path, and making the hard decisions. Still, you take the time to be kind and helpful! Perhaps, within WP, you wield a mop, but when it come to POV/COI editors and vandals, Admins are like a cherubim, brandishing a fiery sword. (The Harper Collins Study Bible. HarperCollins Publishers. 2006. p. 10.) You good people, who are obviouly committed to our Project, stand as our protectors. Best wishes, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 02:34, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Is there a consensus here?
This RfC has been going on for 9 days, and it followed a discussion that went on for 12 days. Many editors have commented and many edits to the disputed part were made. Just when it seemed we can see a consensus at the end, I was informed that there is no consensus there.
I have three questions:
- Is there a consensus there?
- (if yes) How can the consensus be apparent beyond doubt?
- (if no) How can consensus be achieved here?
Thanks. Aditya(talk • contribs) 01:26, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Aditya Kabir: Have you looked at WP:RFC, which links to the various noticeboards, addresses procedural issues, etc.? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:45, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- I did. This particular RfC is quite muddled already (I happen to be partly responsible for that).
- But there was a healthy discussion that followed, where it looked like it had a consensus. Now that is has been explicitly posted that there is no consensus, I can assume only two things - there really was no consensus, or this was a denial of consensus. If the former is true then we need to solicit some mechanism to achieve a consensus. If the latter is true then we need have a mechanism to make the consensus undeniable.
- (added) As an involved participant, I am not supposed to close the RfC. But without a formal closer this dispute can't be taken to mediation. It would be even better if we can establish the existence of a consensus already. 21 days of discussion is a bit too long. Aditya(talk • contribs) 02:19, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Aditya Kabir I don't see how anyone can plausibly describe the pre-rfc discussion as having achieved consensus. I don't really think the RfC has yet achieved consensus either, but a closer might possibly call it as a "rough consensus". You could post at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure askign for a formal close by an admin or another experienced editor who is not involved. But wehat is the rush? note that WP:RFC says in the "duration" section:
An RfC should last until enough comment has been received that consensus is reached, or until it is apparent it won't be. There is no required minimum or maximum duration; however, Legobot assumes an RfC has been forgotten and automatically ends it (removes the rfc template) 30 days after it begins, to avoid a buildup of stale discussions cluttering the lists and wasting commenters' time.
This is way short of 30 days old. Yes it can be closed if consensus has been reached, but if it hasn't more discussion can be allowed. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 06:23, 21 August 2020 (UTC)- Thanks. I found out the 30 day stipulation at ANB too. That's cool. BTW, FYI, IMHO, the consensus is not in the previous discussions, it's in the solutions parts of the RfC (sorry for the acronyms, couldn't resist the chance to type a series of CAPs). darjeeling as a token of my regards. This the first nasty disupte I have come across in my 14 years of service here. A bit mystified and vexed by the labyrinth of process. Back in the earlier days it was more about building the encyclopedia and most guidelines were about content. Now, I guess, maintaining the encyclopedia is more of the task and hence the prevelance of community guidelines. One can defintely learn to live with it. Another cup? I'll pour one too. Aditya(talk • contribs) 06:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC) Let me pour you a cup of
- Aditya Kabir I don't see how anyone can plausibly describe the pre-rfc discussion as having achieved consensus. I don't really think the RfC has yet achieved consensus either, but a closer might possibly call it as a "rough consensus". You could post at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure askign for a formal close by an admin or another experienced editor who is not involved. But wehat is the rush? note that WP:RFC says in the "duration" section:
Request for guidance
Hello. I have been editing Draft:David J. Zimmerman and see that the draft is sorted as "C-class". Being a new editor, I'm not clear on how to proceed going forward with this draft in order to improve its chances of being approved as an article. Is it possible to get specific guidance, or is it simply a matter of waiting until a reviewer has an opportunity to review it? Thanks.VictorMooney (talk) 03:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC) VictorMooney (talk) 03:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi VictorMooney. It looks like Draft:David J. Zimmerman is still awaiting an WP:AFC review. I'm not sure what you mean by "Class-C", since that's an assessment that usually only applied to articles, not drafts. You can continue improving the draft even though you submitted it for review. If it turns out that the draft is reviewed and declined, the AfC reviewer who looked it over should leave a comment explaining why and suggesting things that need to be improved.I'm not an AfC reviewer, but one thing I noticed is that the draft seems a bit "bottom-heavy". What I mean is that there seems to be an excessive number of awards and exhibitions listed (almost as if you were trying to list them all like you would on a CV) when compared to actual textual content about Zimmrman himself. I'm sure that every award an artist receives or every exhbition they hold has a special meaning to the artist, but it's not clear if it has the same relevance to a typical Wikipedia reader. So, it might be better to trim out those sections to only those things which are considered to be truly major awards (possibly those which have or could have Wikipedia articles written about them) and those exhibitions which are truly major ones (like something held a well-known galleries/venues that received lots of critical coverage, perhaps venues which might have Wikipedia articles written about them). One exhbition (One Voice; Portraits from the Tibetan Diaspora) is listed eleven times; for sure, it was held at a different venue each time, but do all eleven need to be listed. The same thing could be said for some of the other entires as well. What's most likely going to determine whether the AfC reviewer feels Zimmerman meets WP:NARTIST is what's written in the "Life and work" section of the article; so, that's what you want the reviewer to be focusing on. Sometimes adding too many lists of things later on in the might seem like a good thing because "more just has to be better", but it can sometimes be seen as clutter and even a bit of WP:BOMBARD when each entry is being cited. Just is just my general opinion; if you want some more specific advice or suggestions, you can try asking for feedback at WT:VA, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Photography or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment since that's where you're likely to come across editors who are experienced in writing these types of biography articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Agreed. Perhaps you could note in the text that "One Voice" has been featured in 11 exhibitions, and then only note the most prestigious under exhibitions. Same for "Deserts", etc. etc. Same sort of thought process for Awards. Quite often, less is more! Best of luck, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 06:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, just saw that MJ made some of the same observations- points....two people now, saying the same thing...Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 06:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- VictorMooney, the draft is listed as C-class near the foot of Wikipedia:AfC sorting/Culture/Visual arts and perhaps elsewhere. I think that this means "SDZeroBot guesstimates that if the subject is notable and the sourcing good, then the bulk of this article would likely put it in C class." (SD0001 may wish to correct me.) Anyway, "C" does not mean "close to failure" or anything like it. ¶ I'm puzzled by some of Timtrent's comments: (i) "a list of his works is interesting, but almost always irrelevant." This seems to sugges that there's a list of his works. I don't notice any. (ii) "Does (eg) Worldcat hold a directory of his works?" I don't even know what this means. If "Does Worldcat show that any academic or other major library holds a directory of his works?" then surely not, because libraries don't hold directories of anyone's works -- unless these are published books, but published directories of photographers' works are vanishingly rare. (They might exist for 19th-century photographers. As for 20th-century photographers, I can't think of any photographer who has one: not Kertész, not Cartier-Bresson, not Frank.) (iii) "References to self saved pdfs are useless." Those hosted at squarespace.com? I count a total of one (1) of these for the entire article. (A quick glance may suggest that there are also a few others, but these were commented out before the draft was declined.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:42, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hoary, I guess one could quibble and be declined a lot, or one could make the improvements and be accepted. There ought to be no rating on the talk page. Fiddle Faddle 08:47, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, Timtrent, perhaps the writer of the draft should simply knuckle down and delete the list that isn't there, provide info from Worldcat that Worldcat couldn't have for anybody, and remove references that don't exist to self-saved PDFs. The rating isn't on the talk page; it's on Wikipedia:AfC sorting/Culture/Visual arts. (If I've misunderstood something, please correct me.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hoary, I guess one could quibble and be declined a lot, or one could make the improvements and be accepted. There ought to be no rating on the talk page. Fiddle Faddle 08:47, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you all for the comments. The feedback is very helpful. VictorMooney (talk) 16:16, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Hello everybody, There is a big problem out there
So, I can't edit lots of page as i am not a confirmed users. But I've been here for nearly a year and done more than 10 edits. This is the issue here, I should be the confirmed users instead of this. Also, I have obviously done 100+ edits to the wiki, and created some useful pages... Help to resolve my issue, ok. Hypersonic man11Talk Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 04:43, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Hypersonic man 11. Can you give an example of one of the pages you're unable to edit? It could be that the page has been protected for some reason which means there might be lots of editors unable to edit it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:03, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, I just found that there is a glitch, and also Egyptian Air Force is the page, nvm. But still, thanks,. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 05:14, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Hypersonic man 11: Egyptian Air Force was semi-protected due to "Addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content". However, with 300+ edits in 10 months, you are auto-confirmed and should have been able to edit it, so I don't know what "glitch" you are referring to (unless it was just that you were not logged-in when you tried). In any case, I see that you have been able to edit the page successfully. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:05, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, I just found that there is a glitch, and also Egyptian Air Force is the page, nvm. But still, thanks,. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 05:14, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Verifiable references and links
Hi there, I am trying to edit an existing page of a musician (Gayathri Girish). It is a biographic page. I need some help on: 1. identifying if some of my reference sources are acceptable for publication 2. Since the subject is a musician, much of her content appears on youtube and on sites like appleitunes, saavn etc. Is it okay for me to add these as references in the discography section? I find that I am unable to make out where this stops being a reference point and becomes an advertisement. I have noticed links to itunes on some other musician pages, so I am hopeful that this is acceptable. Thanks so much for your time Pratima.lakshmanan (talk) 06:34, 21 August 2020 (UTC) Pratima.lakshmanan (talk) 06:34, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Pratima.lakshmanan: references to youtube and other user-generated sites are sometimes acceptable and sometimes they aren't. It mainly depends on the uploading party. If the uploading party is the subject of the article, it's not acceptable due to WP:SELFPUB and WP:PRIMARY in most cases. If it's not the subject, but another party with some editorial control that would meet WP:RS then it can be acceptable. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:08, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
@Victor Schmidt -Thanks for your response on the youtube type links. That is helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pratima.lakshmanan (talk • contribs) 10:20, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Not having a article
Why doesn't YouTuber Jaiden animations have a Wikipedia page? joel —Other account was deleted (talk) 07:10, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Other account was deleted, welcome to the Teahouse. Jaiden Animations once have an article, but is deleted several times on 25 October 2019, 19 June 2019, 28 August 2018, 3 April 2018, 24 March 2018, and 28 September 2017. There is still an archive discussion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaiden Animations. Basically, he receives little to no independent reliable and reputable coverage by news, magazines, books, etc. to actually have him have an article. See WP:CCS. There is a draft on him right now, see Draft:Jaiden Animations. Before you edit it, kindly see WP:BLP, WP:GNG, WP:YFA. WP:CCS, and other relevant guidelines. Articles need reference sources which are independent, reliable, and reputable enough to cite the claims. Not all YouTubers that have tons of subscribers and views is actually notable in an encyclopedia means, bear that in mind. Let me know if you need to ask anything again. Thanks, from GeraldWL ✉ 07:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Help with Tradional Chinese Medicine page
Can I please have some help to improve the Tradional Chinese Medicine page. I am new to Wikipedia. I feel that the page needs some Ballance to put it nicely. I think it has a bit of a narrative happening Shenqijing (talk) 09:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Shenqijing Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If there are specific changes you want to see, please propose them on the article talk page. Please understand that every Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources state. This includes giving weight to viewpoints as reliable sources report them; Wikipedia does not provide equal time or equal space to all points of view. See WP:FRINGE for more information. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Like you were told at Talk:Traditional_Chinese_medicine#Critiques, If you are proposing a change to the article, please specify what it is and what sources you are citing to backup that change.. Do that at that talkpage, that's how WP works. Try starting small, say with something you want to improve in the Regulations section, and see how that goes. WP:MEDRS may be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:22, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Talk Page blanking
Is Blanking a talk page considered personal attack? 118.137.248.125 (talk) 09:17, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- I don't know the entire context of your question, but it's probably not a "personal attack" like calling someone a name. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hello, IP editor. That sounds more like vandalism if another person does it. You could leave them a warning and escalate, if it happens again. The only person who should be blanking a talkpage is the user themselves (or possibly an admin if the talk page has been used solely by that user for inappropriate purposes). Nick Moyes (talk) 09:21, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Blanking talkpages that are not yours will probably be seen as at least WP:DISRUPTIVE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:24, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: Having asked this question here, the IP editor then immediately blanked article content from the page about Spanish Wikipedia. I have therefore increased their warning notice as it was clearly intentional, and such vandalism will not be tolerated. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:52, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Ah, I get it now. This IP editor has been disruptive across other Wikipedia Projects (see here for their global contributions), and so has come here. Since the start of their editing activities a few hours ago, they've since been blocked on mediawiki.org; meta.wikimedia.org and id.wikipedia.org. If I see one further bad faith edit on en-wiki from them I will definitely be immediately blocking them here too. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Professional translator - and newbie editor on EN and NO Wikipedia - was blocked from publishing an English version of a Norwegian article - please advise and/or help with publishing
Howdy! I translated the Norwegian article https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Magnusson but was blocked when I attempted to publish the English translation. The reason given was my status as an "inexperienced" new editor on English Wikipedia. In truth, I am a newbie Wiki editor in general. My first article in Norwegian was the article about Oscar Magnusson. I am proud to say that the article is getting a decent number of views. It is also cool to see that other Wiki editors are helping out by adding supplemental info and references.
The English translation of the Norwegian article is identical to the original content, and it would be great to get some assistance with getting it published.
After my attempt to publish the English translation was blocked, I decided to use the option of publishing the English version as a DRAFT. I'm hoping that this means that it will be easy to get help with publishing it later on.
Please contact me if you are an experienced English Wiki editor who can help publish the English version or tell me how to obtain such assistance. EngelskOversetter (talk) 10:03, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- EngelskOversetter, are you blocked in the NO or EN Wikipedia? I tried looking at your talkpage in the NO Wikipedia, and found no evidence of you being blocked. If its true that you were blocked solely for translating and being a newbie, that is a discussion you can bring up at the NO Wikipedia. This is the English Wikipedia, and policies may differ here and there. GeraldWL ✉ 10:15, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- I'm confused here, Engelsk. Is it here or there? I found no evidence of you being blocked. GeraldWL ✉ 10:17, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Working on Draft:Oscar Magnusson is the right way to go. You have never been blocked on en-wiki, nor would you be simply for moving a translation into main article space too soon. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:20, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Rather than being blocked, he is probably referring to being prevented from creating an article directly in mainspace. David Biddulph (talk) 10:21, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- EngelskOversetter, Hello! I think you mean that you can not yet create an article directly because WP:AUTOCONFIRM. I see you created Draft:Oscar Magnusson (wow, no other Oscar Magnusson in en-WP?). It needs more/better sources (see WP:GNG), otherwise it will probably not be accepted. You can try to find interested editors at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Gråbergs Gråa Sång, Hello back! Firstly, thanks to you and the others who have provided feedback to my inquiry. The blocking occurred when I attempted to publish my completed English translation, which by the way, includes a translation of the descriptive text in the original references. All of the original references are relevant to the English version of the article on Magnusson. Oddly, these complete references were omitted when I opted to publish a draft version. It was not my intention to publish an English version without references. It seems quite unfair and unfortunate that the process of publishing a basic English translation of an article in Norwegian must be made so complicated. Furthermore, my understanding is that it was the English Wikipedia rules that prevented me from publishing an English translation, i.e. not the Norwegian Wikipedia. This should be more clearly stated in the notice of denial. In conclusion, the English translation remains unpublished despite the fact that it contains all the original references. EngelskOversetter (talk) 11:21, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Draft:Oscar Magnusson/Oscar Magnusson
- EngelskOversetter No it doesn't. Your draft has two refs, books by the subject. The no-WP article has several more. Anyway, what is close to demanded on en-WP are WP:Inline citations throughout the text, and your draft has none. The no-WP article has a few, but most of the text has none. Put the references you have in the draft-text where they belong. WP:TUTORIAL describes how to insert references, I mostly use RefToolbar myself. When you think your draft is ready, use the blue submit-button on the draftpage.
- About stuff being complicated (they can be, WP takes time to learn), remember that the different language WP:s "rule themselves". An article existing on no-WP does not mean it should exist on en-WP, or vice versa. It's possible that en-WP has generally stricter "rules" than many other WP:s. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:53, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @EngelskOversetter: To put it slightly differently, creating a new article on enwiki is subject to the same standards regardless of whether it is a translation of work from another wiki or a totally new original creation "from scratch". It has to pass notability guidelines, have inline citations for any statements that are not common knowledge or disputable, comply with our Manual of Style, etc. Each Wikimedia Foundation project (individual language Wikipedias, Wikisource, Wikibooks, Wiktionary, Wikidata, etc.) is a separate project, with independent policies, procedures, and administrators. Please note that blocking has a specific meaning here: an administrative action used to prevent a user from editing the project, usually after bad behavior. This has not happened to you, nor should it. That was the source of some of the mis-understanding above. Currently, your draft has not even been submitted for review – it simply has received some useful comment on its current state from experienced editors here regarding issues that would keep it from being approved. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- About stuff being complicated (they can be, WP takes time to learn), remember that the different language WP:s "rule themselves". An article existing on no-WP does not mean it should exist on en-WP, or vice versa. It's possible that en-WP has generally stricter "rules" than many other WP:s. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:53, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Making edits to page/article of employer company/brand
Hi Wikipedia Teahouse, Appreciate this platform here and its supportive purpose. What is the best way to make edits/updates to the Wikipedia article for a company/brand ones works for? It should not only more current, but factually accurate. The edits have sources/citations for added legitimacy. Orod.REC (talk) 10:11, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Orod.REC, welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to update a statistic or data, make sure to back it up with reliable source(s). If you want to edit a company on an info, make sure to back it up with source(s) too. GeraldWL ✉ 10:15, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- For a company/brand ones works for, follow the directions at WP:COI. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:19, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Orod.REC: and please make sure that you don't violate the terms of use. WP:PAID has more on this. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- WP:PAID is high priority. As an employee, you are required to declare that on your User page. Secondly, as an employee, you are enjoined from editing the article directly. Instead, you are to propose specific changes on the article's Talk page - with appropriate references - so that a non-affiliated editor can review and decide to incorporate or not. David notMD (talk) 17:31, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Orod.REC: and please make sure that you don't violate the terms of use. WP:PAID has more on this. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
in realstate If one doesnt declose to the bank that they are selling a property, wouldnt that person sell the property eligally? and without an assessment couldnt I reverse the sale of property?
Chuckified (talk) 11:07, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- This doesn't appear to be related to Wikipedia. We are only able to answer questions regarding Wikipedia and cannot give legal adivice. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Should this page be deleted?
Hello. I am new to Wikipedia and came across this page Nicholas P. Clark where some of the information seemed a bit off. I tried fixing it as best as I could and looked for additional references, but could not find much. Of the four remaining references, two are clearly associated to the subject of the article, one is from a Thrive Global (which I understand is blacklisted here), and one seems to be a trivial mention. Khwabeeda (talk) 15:50, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Khwabeeda, agreed. I'll check the sources; if it is off as you said, I'll probably have it tagged. GeraldWL ✉ 16:40, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hello, Khwabeeda and welcome to the Teahouse. Our notability criteria for cycling sports people can be found here. I'm not too familiar with all the racing terms involved (such as UCI World Tours), but at first glance he looks like he might meet them - provided his participation in major events is supported with reliable sources to confirm them. Hope this little contribution helps a bit. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:44, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nick Moyes Thanks for the welcome! I looked for references, but couldn't find any reliable ones. Shouldn't the page be moved to draft space until additional references are found and the page is fixed? ----
- @Khwabeeda: No, I don't think that would be right. The page is almost a year old, so moving to Draftspace at this late stage seems inappropriate, and then could be seen as an easy solution for every page of uncertain validity. I see various options to take this forward. a) Leave as it is; b) Put article up for a deletion discussion; contact page creator and say that's what you're thinking of doing, and ask if they can find better sources; post at WP:WikiProject Cycling to ask for input. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:07, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes: I don't see how moving it to draftspace is inappropriate; it's way better than have it flagged for deletion. I don't think leave it as it is is a good thing either; 99% of the claims in the article is unverified. GeraldWL ✉ 09:32, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: I agree the article seems based on unreliable or non-existent sources. So, if you think that's the case, then a deletion discussion is the right way to go. If you take a look at WP:DRAFTIFY, it explains that moving an article to draftspace should not be used as a backdoor to a deletion discussion. Had this article on Nicholas P. Clark been in put mainspace for just a few weeks, I might have agreed with your idea. But 10 months is a long time, so draftifying doesn't seem appropriate to me. You see, the problem with moving an extant article to draftspace is that it doesn't actually save it from deletion at all. Instead, it might then just sit there for 6 months and then be immediately deleted if nobody has worked on it, but without anyone ever being aware it was moved or having a chance to have a discussion about that deletion proposal, either. No - moving it now would be a very retrograde step, in my opinion. I should admit that I failed to suggest one other sensible option in a) above, which is to tag the article with Template:Notability, which I think I will now go and do. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:35, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- It's odd that this interview with him, published only a month ago, seems to have been taken down. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:48, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: I agree the article seems based on unreliable or non-existent sources. So, if you think that's the case, then a deletion discussion is the right way to go. If you take a look at WP:DRAFTIFY, it explains that moving an article to draftspace should not be used as a backdoor to a deletion discussion. Had this article on Nicholas P. Clark been in put mainspace for just a few weeks, I might have agreed with your idea. But 10 months is a long time, so draftifying doesn't seem appropriate to me. You see, the problem with moving an extant article to draftspace is that it doesn't actually save it from deletion at all. Instead, it might then just sit there for 6 months and then be immediately deleted if nobody has worked on it, but without anyone ever being aware it was moved or having a chance to have a discussion about that deletion proposal, either. No - moving it now would be a very retrograde step, in my opinion. I should admit that I failed to suggest one other sensible option in a) above, which is to tag the article with Template:Notability, which I think I will now go and do. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:35, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes: I don't see how moving it to draftspace is inappropriate; it's way better than have it flagged for deletion. I don't think leave it as it is is a good thing either; 99% of the claims in the article is unverified. GeraldWL ✉ 09:32, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Khwabeeda: No, I don't think that would be right. The page is almost a year old, so moving to Draftspace at this late stage seems inappropriate, and then could be seen as an easy solution for every page of uncertain validity. I see various options to take this forward. a) Leave as it is; b) Put article up for a deletion discussion; contact page creator and say that's what you're thinking of doing, and ask if they can find better sources; post at WP:WikiProject Cycling to ask for input. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:07, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Article with incorrect information
Hi. Thank you very much for inviting me to the Teahouse. What do you do if you know an article is incorrect and can prove it? The article in question is KHive. Fastred Tiller (talk) 16:52, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Talk:KHive is the place for discussion of that article. You need to support any suggested changes with references to published reliable sources independent of the subject. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Tooltips
I have been having trouble with tooltips navigation, since I accidentally disabled the click motion for it on User:Hartma9616 (my user page), and I was wondering how it worked. Thank you, Hartma9616 (talk) 18:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hartma9616, what do you mean? That you disabled tooltips altogether? (By which I assume you mean navigation popups) — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 18:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Yes, It has somehow disabled and I can't revert it. Hartma9616 (talk) 20:17, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Hartma9616: Is Navigation Popups (the 6th checkbox) checked at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for the help, does this edit count for the 'Infobox' part of it, when hovering or clicking over abbreviated text in the infobox like:
Hartma9616 (talk) 22:06, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
@Hartma9616: No, those tooltips are actually in the rendered page. I've never run across the problem. A couple more questions to help troubleshoot:
- 1. What browser, O/S, and device (e.g., Firefox/Win10/laptop, iPad, etc.)?
- 2. I'm sure you have, but have you rebooted the device?
- 3. Have you tried a different browser, if available?
- 4. Have you tried if the problem happens while not logged-in to Wikipedia?
- 5. If those don't reveal the problem, if you select the "m." in your example (double-click on it or click-drag), right-click, and choose "View Selection Source" (may be slightly different wording depending on your browser), does the result contain the following near the end?
<abbr title="married">m.</abbr>
- 6. This, too, may seem obvious, but when did the problem start? Did it coincide with installation of any browser extensions or apps that you know of?
Someone with more knowledge in this area is, of course, welcome to chime in. The user does not have a custom Wikipedia js or css file (or any sub-pages of their user page, for that matter). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:08, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Yes, the device is an iPad and my browser is Google. I am unable to switch browser(s), I will try rebooting – (a few times). Hartma9616 (talk) 15:13, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
@AlanM1: I did try your steps, can you guide me to find the "View Selection Source," as you explained? Hartma9616 (talk) 15:55, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
@AlanM1: The problem started (as I was tending to edits), the box of which it had the "tooltip controls" (a pop–up information paragraph stating controls/functions etc.... Hartma9616 (talk) 19:04, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Hartma9616: Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with the platform. I don't think it's a Wikipedia-specific thing, though. I think it's probably a browser or iPad setting (though I see nothing related in the desktop version of Google Chrome). You might find someone with expertise at WP:RD/C. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:57, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
@AlanM1: The problem was fixed, thank you for guiding me. I appreciate the help. Hartma9616 (talk) 15:29, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
I have difficulties putting up an article on Wikipedia
I have difficulties putting up an article on Wikipedia Prof. Fiofio (talk) 19:09, 21 August 2020 (UTC) The article in question is https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ridwan_K.D._Osman.jpeg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prof. Fiofio (talk • contribs) 19:10, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Prof. Fiofio: The link you posted is to an image, which was uploaded with what appears to be an attempt at posting an article in the image comments. I also see a draft you started Draft:Ambassador Ray Quarcoo which is unsourced and non-encyclopedic, and will not be accepted in its current format. Please read WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this:
~~~~
.) TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 19:56, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Finding an uninvolved RfC closer
Is there a recommended procedure for finding someone to close an RfC, instead of trying editors one by one until you find someone? --Lambiam 20:11, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Lambiam, try WP:RFCLOSE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:16, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
How to edit the title of an Article
Draft:Young Kim) I created a new Article, called it- Young Kim, and submitted it for review. However, I would like to change its Title by adding a description, in that there is already an Article under the same name. While I have the first sentence distinguishing among various Young Kims on Wikipedia, I would like to add a descriptor. How do I do that? Under Edit or Edit Source, I cannot get to the Title. Thank you, Jane Plutoplato (talk) 20:24, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Plutoplato Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Since we are talking about a draft, I would just leave a note for reviewers about the title. When and if it is accepted, the reviewer will handle the renaming. For regular articles, changing the title is done with a page move. 331dot (talk) 20:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Need help with reviewing my Wiki Draft
Hi everyone! I was was submitting a Wikipedia entry for Elizabeth Marguiles who's a known TV personality on Bravo TV - also a known art collector / heiress and daughter of Martin Margulies of the Margulies Private Collection Miami, which has its own Wiki page. Would love to for feedback on the revised draft and how I can have it improved before resubmitting. I've worked through to include more secondary sources as well of some major profiles on her in art world publications. Thank you so much! Giakuan (talk) 20:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC) Giakuan (talk) 20:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Giakuan! One thing you need to do is to get the external links like "Galerie Magazine" in the lead out of the text of the article, see WP:EL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:03, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gråbergs Gråa Sång! Thank you that's so helpful, I'll remove that now. any other edits or feedback welcome as well, newer to this. Giakuan (talk) 21:09, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Giakuan: Hi - it seems that you know Elizabeth. Many of the sources you used for her projects don't even mention her. See WP:COI and WP:PAID. If you make the necessary disclosures, I then recommend blowing up the article, and rewriting it just using the media coverage about her. Don't put in anything that isn't in the sources, and you'll find it will come across as less promotional and fawning, and will be more likely to be accepted. It will be shorter but that's often better. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia use in class projects?
Is there someone who has knowledge about issues with students/instructors editing Wikipedia as part of assignments? If so, perhaps you can contribute at Wikipedia:Help desk#class assignment using student sandboxes if necessary. It seems like there was someone among our Teahouse hosts that has dealt with this, but I can't recall who it is (maybe Nick Moyes?). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:46, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @AlanM1: By the time I woke up this murning, it looked like all the salient points have been covered. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:26, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
How do I protect a page and block a user?
How do I protect a page and block a user who edited our page with defamatory information? The protect your page resources (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_guide/Protecting) indicate the first step is to click on the "protect" button at the top of the page but I have yet to find one. Where do I submit a request to block a user? There are tons of resources on why/how but not WHERE. I have two IP addresses but no username for the person who allegedly edited our page. 204.194.207.1 (talk) 03:07, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- An IP cannot protect a page or block a user. You may request a block at WP:AIV (a complicated case may need to go to WP:AIN) and request page protection at WP:RPP. Please note that you do not own a Wikipedia page even if it is about you or your company. See WP:OWN. WP:COI may also apply.
- It's useful to actually tell us what article you are talking about. Meters (talk) 03:24, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- I am guessing Lathrop & Gage. An editor vandalized the page two days ago and you reverted that added content. This has not been repeated (yet). I suggest you check the article daily, for a while, and see if the behavior is repeated. Editing of this sort can result in the offending editor being warning in their Talk page, and only if persists, blocked. P.S. It is not "our page". Rather, it is an article about a company which, within reason, and with references, anyone can edit. David notMD (talk) 03:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- I looked at the IP's history, but the Lathrop & Gage edit was made by a named account and the IP says he or she does not have a username for the editor making the edits, only IPs. Meters (talk) 04:04, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- The IP file a protection request for Lathrop & Gage, which was denied, as the reviewer did not see persistent vandalism. As an unexpected consequence, the article has now been tagged as perhaps not meeting notability and depending on primary source references, which puts it at risk for an AfD. It survived an AfD in 2014. David notMD (talk) 09:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- This is very helpful. Thank you all! 204.194.207.1 (talk) 18:51, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- The IP file a protection request for Lathrop & Gage, which was denied, as the reviewer did not see persistent vandalism. As an unexpected consequence, the article has now been tagged as perhaps not meeting notability and depending on primary source references, which puts it at risk for an AfD. It survived an AfD in 2014. David notMD (talk) 09:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- I looked at the IP's history, but the Lathrop & Gage edit was made by a named account and the IP says he or she does not have a username for the editor making the edits, only IPs. Meters (talk) 04:04, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- I am guessing Lathrop & Gage. An editor vandalized the page two days ago and you reverted that added content. This has not been repeated (yet). I suggest you check the article daily, for a while, and see if the behavior is repeated. Editing of this sort can result in the offending editor being warning in their Talk page, and only if persists, blocked. P.S. It is not "our page". Rather, it is an article about a company which, within reason, and with references, anyone can edit. David notMD (talk) 03:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Source of funding
I was wondering that we as Wikipedia seek a donation from the users/visitors instead why not request for a token fee from companies who have Wikipedia pages. As directly or indirectly they are able to advertise their business through a respectable platform. Thoughts? Juliansekar (talk) 09:13, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Juliansekar Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This isn't really a place to propose new ideas, that would be the Village Pump. However, your idea would go against the very idea of Wikipedia, which is to summarize what independent reliable sources state about article subjects. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform and permission from a subject is not required in order to write about it here. It would be blackmail to approach companies and charge them for something that they have no control over- and removing content from companies that do not pay up would render this a non-neutral encyclopedia. Futhermore, the Wikimedia Foundation's finances are stable and there is no urgent need to change how it raises money. 331dot (talk) 09:19, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Govt. Source?
Hi, I wanted to ask you that is the documents that are released by a government is considered as a reliable source? I saw an admin denying that government papers are authoritarian and cant be considered as a reliable source. Please help? Jenos450 (talk) 09:24, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Jenos450: It depends on the context. If it is truly a govt. source that can verify the claim(s) and can be trusted, I'll say yes. if you are making more claims that the govt source does not say, you would need more sources. I have not used govt sources a lot though, so I can't say much. But at a first glance, it's no problemo. GeraldWL ✉ 09:28, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: Darn that Bart! —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:26, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
New article
I started to write a page for Jatbula Trail, a long distance walking trail in Australia's Northern Territory. I noticed there's a box that says A page with this title has previously been moved or deleted. I can't work out why the draft was deleted, and I'm not even sure how to contact the user who deleted it to ask. Is it just a case of posting on their Talk page to ask? Canberranone (talk) 09:40, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Canberranone, welcome to the Teahouse. I cannot see any deletion logs on the article you mentioned. Do you typed in the article name correctly? And I'm sure there is a reason stated at the box. GeraldWL ✉ 10:13, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Canberranone: the page Draft:Jatbula Trail was previously deleted by Sphilbrick in 2016 under CSD G13 criteria. See here. You can ask for a copy of the draft via WP:REFUND. Regards, TryKid [dubious – discuss] 10:47, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Edit not permitted
Few pages display a message stating this page is semi-protected so that only autoconfirmed users can edit it. For example, the Central Board of Secondary Education did not update the page based on a recent government notification and I am not confident if I make edits against the same will my edits be considered as one from the approved editor or not? Please advise. Juliansekar (talk) 11:07, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Juliansekar: Note I've placed double square brackets around the page name to form a link, as you should do on talk pages when referring to a specific wiki page. The article is semi-protected, and so requires confirmed/auto-confirmed privilege to edit it, which you have, having 22 edits and about 16 days tenure. Like any other edit, please be sure you cite a reliable source for your change. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:34, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
How to find old versions of articles, before deletion?
Hi there Teahouse friends! I'm trying to find what a page looked like, and what the content was, before it was deleted. The page I'm looking for is Matthew Prince, and I was looking for a link somewhere on this page:
What am I doing wrong, or where would I find this type of content? The reason I am asking is that sometimes I find pages which are redirects, or which have been deleted, and I'm curious to see what was written before. Nickgray (talk) 12:02, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Only administrators can see deleted revisions of articles. Therefore you can not find them. Ruslik_Zero 12:40, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- That's not strictly accurate. Some articles get scraped by third party sites before they're deleted. I used to visit Deletionpedia if I felt the need to try to find an old article. Sometimes I would get lucky most times I wouldn't. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
How to remove "Peacock|date=August 2020"
Please suggest me what are the steps needed to be taken if a reviewer kept Template:Peacock, I wrote the article based on the references I got. So suggest me how to improve my page Chemancheri Kunhiraman Nair, where User:Melcous added a Template:Peacock. Please tell me what are the steps needed to be taken. Rahulsoman (talk) 13:04, 22 August 2020 (UTC) Rahulsoman (talk) 13:04, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, Rahulsoman, and welcome to the Teahouse Some examples: "renowned": that is an opinion. "an inevitable part of cultural history" - that is opinion. "Unfortunately" - that is editorialising. Wikipedia articles should never contain any evaluative language, good or bad, unless they are directly quoting a reliably published source independent of the subject. Wikipedia articles should never be indicating to the reader how they should regard something: while most people would agree that it is unfortunate for a couple to lose their first child, it is the business of an encyclopaedia to say that that happened, but not to say whether it is unfortunate or not. More subtly, "he got [a] chance to learn" is putting a spin on it, again prompting the reader how to regard the events. Does that make things clearer? --ColinFine (talk) 13:53, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi ColinFine, thanks a lot for the detailed review it really helped me a lot to understand about the writing style. Now I tried to correct the Chemancheri Kunhiraman Nair and edited as you mentioned. Once again thanking you for your kind reply. If possible please go through the page and try to give some feedback. Rahulsoman (talk) 15:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Rahulsoman, {{Peacock}} means that the article uses promotional wording, and that is clearly the case in the article. The article sounds extremely promotional and some of the writing doesn't seem to maintain a neutral point of view. Aim to make the article less promotional. — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 13:56, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Berrely Thanks for your reply, I tried to remove the wordings the promotional wordings, which appears here and there in the article. ColinFine was making me clear where I am violating a neutral point of view So hope current version of article is okey. Rahulsoman (talk) 15:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Just a reminder that it is not "your page" but rather, "an article" which anyone may edit. David notMD (talk) 15:45, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Berrely Thanks for your reply, I tried to remove the wordings the promotional wordings, which appears here and there in the article. ColinFine was making me clear where I am violating a neutral point of view So hope current version of article is okey. Rahulsoman (talk) 15:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Request content advice from seniors re. AfD
I think Ghazi Hur Mujahid Faqeer Arbelo Katpar should be marked for AfD as it does not meet WP:N. There are hardly any citations/sources. The ones that are there, do not meet the 2 WP:RS standard, and only refer to the person in passing. I have made efforts to find better sourcing in RS but in vain.
However, I am a newbie and would appreciate advice from seniors, before I press the trigger.
Stefania0 (talk) 13:05, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Stefania0, I agree it does seem to fail WP:GNG, if you like I could submit it for you? — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 13:24, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Berrely Thank you! Would appreciate that. Pir of Pagaro VIII appears to have similar issues. Stefania0 (talk) 13:29, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- I agree. Giraffer (munch) 21:50, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Questions about publishing a new article
I am attempting to publish a new article. I worked on it in my talk page and then submitted it. I now notice that it looks like I submitted my talk page to become an article in wikipedia. The link is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:RedBeardBandit. Is this something I should fix by deleting and re-copying or does it happen every time you attempt to publish an article? What would be the best course of action? Or is there a simple way to rename the draft? Any help is appreciated. RedBeardBandit (talk) 15:49, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- The reviewer will create an appropriate title. Puzzled as to why the refs appear before the table. David notMD (talk) 16:03, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
It's not intentional. How do I fix it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedBeardBandit (talk • contribs) 16:06, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @RedBeardBandit: - a bit of effort has fixed your odd reference formatting. Two issues with your table were stopping it from closing (it crossed a section header and it didn't have a closing "|}"). Nosebagbear (talk) 16:44, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Nosebagbear: Thank you so much for your help. I never would have figured that out on my own — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedBeardBandit (talk • contribs) 16:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @RedBeardBandit: - a bit of effort has fixed your odd reference formatting. Two issues with your table were stopping it from closing (it crossed a section header and it didn't have a closing "|}"). Nosebagbear (talk) 16:44, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Editing
How can a Celebrity edit his own page and not allow others to edit his details? Shaheryar Shabbir (talk) 16:18, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Shaheryar Shabbir: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a platform for public relations. We do not allow the subjects of articles, nor their family or employees, to control the content. Articles are based on reliable sources; preferably, the sources should be secondary sources unrelated to the subject. —C.Fred (talk) 16:21, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- If this celebrity wants total control over what’s written about him, then perhaps he or his representatives should try another website like some of the ones listed in Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. On Wikipedia, the subjects of articles don’t have any final editorial control over article content per Wikipedia:Ownership of content. — Marchjuly (talk) 17:13, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Sources
I added information to a page. The Source i cited with Billion Dollar Whale, published by Hachette. The information was just three lines, and pretty much just cited sourse directly. The post was removed because it couldn't be "verified." What's up with this. Here's what I posted: In fact, the FBI is now looking at whether at whether a donation of $100,000 to Trump Victory in 2017 originated with Low. And The Wall Street Journal reported that at point, $75 million was offered to Elliot Broidy, a businessman and a Republican fundraiser, and his wife if the Justice Department ended its probe into 1MBD. Are trump loyalists editing these pages? BKSanDiego (talk) 17:37, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi BKSanDiego, welcome to the Teahouse, and no, I am not allowed to assume that someone with a status is editing it. Can you quote the book, where does it say such statement? And you also do not appear to be citing the "Wall Street Journal" claim. Also, "In fact" is not the right word we use here. Fun facts are subjective; we just say the facts and nothing else. GeraldWL ✉ 17:43, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for this, Gerald. How about this: Authors of Six Billion Dollar Whale write that the FBI is now looking at whether at whether a donation of $100,000 to Trump Victory in 2017 originated with Low. In their book they also state that The Wall Street Journal reported that at point, $75 million was offered to Elliot Broidy, a businessman and a Republican fundraiser, and his wife if the Justice Department ended its probe into 1MBD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BKSanDiego (talk • contribs) 18:06, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, BKSanDiego and welcome to the Teahouse. When citing a book, one should indicate exactly where in the book the statement is supported. I have restored your edit, modified a bit, with a Google Books URL link to the book, but a page number would, also help. It is important that facts stated in a Wikipedia article can be verified by readers, see our certification policy. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:47, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @BKSanDiego and DESiegel: I tweaked Jho Low a bit to add the page numbers and two targeted links in the book, but don't exactly like the result. The second sentence about the $75 million should really just be identified as a quote, I think, instead of (my) repeating it in the cite. I suppose this is an example of when it might be better to just cite the same book again instead of trying to get the one cite to do double-duty. Of course, if the WSJ article weren't paywalled, we could just eliminate the "WSJ reported", quote it directly and omit the second cite to the book. I know we could do it anyway, as supposedly the source needn't be accessible, but I hate leaving out an accessible source if there is one. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:20, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, BKSanDiego and welcome to the Teahouse. When citing a book, one should indicate exactly where in the book the statement is supported. I have restored your edit, modified a bit, with a Google Books URL link to the book, but a page number would, also help. It is important that facts stated in a Wikipedia article can be verified by readers, see our certification policy. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:47, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Using Lang codes for foreign words in etymology section -- review edit
Hello all,
I just made an edit to Water § Etymology adding Template:Lang tags to all the foreign words. I wanted to make sure this is a correct edit (tags, templates, punctuation, italics, etc) -- could someone take a look and let me know? CampWood (talk) 17:38, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- CampWood, all okay there, although if I were you, I wouldn't use it, as I see no changes in it. GeraldWL ✉ 17:46, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Draft guidance
Hi. I've been editing Draft:David J. Zimmerman and have gotten very helpful feedback here. I've addressed the issues discussed, and would appreciate any additional guidance on the draft before I resubmit. Thanks. VictorMooney (talk) 20:54, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @VictorMooney: I think it has a ways to go before being submitted again. There are many unsourced claims. Mutualart.com is not a great source, and I also see several press releases, which are generally undesirable sources. My two cents would be to not try to cover everything possible. That which is covered should be amply sourced by good references.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:05, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- The above draft also requires some revision deletion by an admin, to remove version of the draft that contained significant copyright violations. So, definitely not ready for submission. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:19, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @ThatMontrealIP thank you for the link to the Earwig's page. Many of the listed "violations" are from David J. Zimmerman's web site, and others are from published articles (TIME, "Clothing as Artifact..."). One other is flagged several times - One Voice: Portraits from the Tibetan Diaspora. How are those violations? Can you suggest a fix? VictorMooney (talk) 21:43, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- VictorMooney The problem is that you copied infomation, word for word, from the sources. We are not allowed to do that. See WP:COPYPASTE and WP:COPYVIO for info. You must use your own words. Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 22:03, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Someone else wrote the text that was the source of the violation. Directly copying it here is indeed a copyright violation. Such texts can be paraphrased, but it has to be done carefully and also has to be attributed. The source I mention just prior is also a primary source, so we would not usually paraphrase that. Perhaps some of the other editors can give you some tips on article composition and avoiding copyvio. The main thing is to write in your own words ans to attribute where appropriate.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:06, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you, ThatMontrealIP & Tribe of Tiger! I appreciate the feedback. VictorMooney (talk) 22:33, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @ThatMontrealIP, VictorMooney, and Tribe of Tiger: I have done the revision deletion (REVDEL) on Draft:David J. Zimmerman. Some of the copied text came in very early in the draft's history, so almost all of the revisions had to be removed from view. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:37, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you, ThatMontrealIP & Tribe of Tiger! I appreciate the feedback. VictorMooney (talk) 22:33, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- @ThatMontrealIP thank you for the link to the Earwig's page. Many of the listed "violations" are from David J. Zimmerman's web site, and others are from published articles (TIME, "Clothing as Artifact..."). One other is flagged several times - One Voice: Portraits from the Tibetan Diaspora. How are those violations? Can you suggest a fix? VictorMooney (talk) 21:43, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Oh, a minor mpoint of formatting, VictorMooney. Please do not leave blank space at the start of a paragraph, as if for a paragraph indent. The wiki software takes that as indicating program code or other literal text, and renders it in a mono-spaced font, which is not what you normally want on a discussion page. You can indent the whole paragraph with one or more leading colons, but we do not normally use first-line indents on text paragraphs here on Wikipedia. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:42, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
One more question. Can you explain why "One Voice: Portraits from the Tibetan Diaspora" was flagged as a copyright violation? It is the actual name of a publication as well as the name of an exhibition. Also, numerous external links were flagged. They too are the actual title of published, online articles. Thanks again. VictorMooney (talk) 22:50, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Please read the above comment, from DESiegal, in regard to formatting. I fixed the first "error" that you made on this page, but I am leaving this one for the time being, so you can see for yourself, why this is a problem. It puts your words in a Big Grey Box, in Large Letters/Text! Indent your paragraphs with colons, : , not spaces. The colon system allows us to see successive replies in an orderly fashion. Thanks so much, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 23:15, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
I'm honestly not trying to make you crazy! Just a bit of a learning curve...VictorMooney (talk) 23:25, 22 August 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by VictorMooney (talk • contribs) 23:24, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) VictorMooney If by "flagged as a copyright violation" you are referring to the out put of the "Eawig Copyvio detection tool" that tool is not as smart as a human. It will tag matching text as a possible violation, even when the text is a fact, such as the title of a work, or the name of a place. It will also flag properly quoted content, inside quote marks and with a proper citation. Any reviewing admin, and most if not all AfC reviewers, know to discount this kind of match by the tool. How3ever, text copied from a published article such as "One Voice: Portraits from the Tibetan Diaspora" is protected by copyright and is properly flagged as a violation when copied word for word. But I based the revision deletion primarily on text copied from https://www.davidzimmerman.com/about and did not need to look into other possible violations, be cause a revision that co9ntains any significant copyright violation will be deleted where other copying is acceptable or not. If you want further information about what kind of copying is acceptable, please read WP:COPYRIGHTS, and if you still have questions, please come back here, post your questions(s) and I or others will try to answer them. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:30, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you DESiegel. Since the current version of Draft:David J. Zimmerman does contain significant copyright violations, will the draft be deleted shortly? I certainly would like the opportunity to rewrite those sections which are in violation. I'm also glad to hear that humans are still smarter! VictorMooney (talk) 00:00, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- At present, VictorMooney, the only text flagged (in this draft) by the Earwig tool is a pair of quotations, both properly marked and cited, and several mentions of the titles of works. Neither of those types of text violate Wikipedia's copyright policy much less fall under the copyright speed deletion criterion. Nor am I aware of any copying not caught by the tool, nor of any other issue which would warrant deletion. So unless there is a serious problem that I am quite unaware of, which I doubt, this draft is not likely to be deleted any time soon for copyright infringement, or indeed for any other reason. I do a good deal of handling speedy deletions and copyright revision deletions here (although not nearly as much as some admins) so I think my assurance is worth something.
- The issue now to be dealt with is Notability and the relevant guidelines are WP:GNG and WP:NARTIST. Ar article that clearly meets either will generally be considered as notable, and one that meets both will pretty much always be so considered. I have not reviewed the references currently cited -- for all I know this would already pass. But if not, reviews of Zimmerman's work in reliable sources that are independent of him, and significant coverage of him in similar sources would be what is needed.
- Feel free to ask any further questions. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:53, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Need article writing help
I wrote an article about a female author, cited everything, and it was rejected because it sounded like an advertisment and the sources were not independant enough. I am not sure what I did wrong and am looking for help, thanks. WikiJSPN (talk) 02:11, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- courtesy link: Draft:Katya Cengel
- Hello, WikiJSPN and welcome to the Teahouse.
- I would say i8t is more that Draft:Katya Cengel sound rather like a resume or CV. It carefully lists every position and award, but does not go into much detail about any of them. It also doesn't report much that any third party has written about Cengel. Note that the draft was not Rejected but rather was Declined. "Declined" means "This isn't ready yet, please fix these issues and try again." "Rejected" means, "This will never be a valid article, stop wasting everyone's time by submitting it." An important difference. Perhaps DGG who did the review, would care to comment further. I have not reveiwed the references cited in detail, but quite a few of them seem to be stories written BY Cengel, not ABOUT her. The latter are much more valuable to a Wikipedia article, and should predominate.
- I hope these comments are helpful. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 02:45, 23 August 2020 (UTC) @WikiJSPN: DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 03:11, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- {{U|WikiJSPN}. As I see it I'd call it more PR than a CV, but the real point where DES and I agree, is that it was not a NPOV encyclopedia article . Consider the quotation, which would do on her web page or a publishers advertisement."On finding interesting feature stories, Cengel said "Adventure does not have to mean traveling to a different country, it is more a way of looking at things and being receptive to something entirely new and different." Rather, List her books, in full bibliographic format, inclluding refernces to 3rd party reviews in major reliable sources. Do not include minor work she may have written.
- And don't be disheartened. Some of my first work here was declined or deleted also, and that's true of most of us. DGG ( talk ) 04:02, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
User box for frontline healthcare worker?
I hope this is the right place to ask. I found the userbox gallery and looked around but I couldn’t find quite what I was looking for. I’m looking for a userbox that says something like “this user is a healthcare hero in the fight against COVID-19” - is there anything like that? And if so, where might I find it? Thanks Lungespine (talk) 02:40, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Lungespine. Thank you so much for the dangerous work you do during this horrible pandemic. Please make a request at Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/Ideas, and I am sure that a userbox programmer will help you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:01, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: Request was answered about an hour later by Diriector_Doc. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:52, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Image stacking
Is there a way to do 2X2 image stacking? The multiple image template doesn't work, and there is nothing about that in extended image syntax or image help pages. Aditya(talk • contribs) 04:44, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Aditya Kabir: Are you mean you take 4 images and arrange them in a 2x2 grid? If so, I suggest using a table without a header row or the newer display:grid css technology. For the latter, the following works more or less good:
- I hope this helps. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:42, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Victor Schmidt: This was super helpful indeed. Yayy. Let me try the table opion first. Most obliged. Let me pour you a cup of tea. It's better than beer, you know. Aditya(talk • contribs) 10:49, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Shubham Rathi
Original post apparently in Hindi
|
---|
बचपन से ही पिताजी ने अनुशासन और देशभक्ति की प्रेरणा दी तथा जिसके फलस्वरूप बचपन से ही देश के लिए कुछ करने का जुनून था और देशभक्ति की भावना थी। स्कूल के समय से ही कुछ देशभक्त व समाजसेवी राजनीतिक नेताओ के चरित्र का प्रभाव पड़ा जिसके फलस्वरूप कक्षा 10 से ही एक छात्र संघठन में जुड़ कर छात्र हित के लिए अपने युवा जोश के साथ कार्य किए। वर्ष 2010 में इंटर करने के पश्चात मुरादाबाद मंडल में सरकारी यूनिवर्सिटी बनवाने की मांग उठाई और वर्ष 2012 में हिन्दू कॉलेज में ग्रेजुएशन में एडमिशन लिया और यही से अपनी छात्र राजनीति की शुरआत करी। लगभग 6 साल एक छात्र संघठन से जुड़ा रहा और बहुत से आंदोलन छात्र हित,राष्ट्र हित व किसानों के लिए किए। मैंने 2015 में अपनी ग्रेजुएशन उत्तीर्ण की तथा 2017 में अपनी पोस्ट ग्रेजुएशन पूरी की और 2018 में लॉ (LLB) में एडमिशन लिया जिसमें कि वर्तमान में अध्ययनरत हूं। वर्ष 2017 में युवा छात्र - छात्राओं की आवाज़ को बुलंद करने के लिए एक छात्र संगठन उत्तर प्रदेश स्टूडेंट्स यूनियन का गठन किया जिसका उद्देश्य छात्रों की समस्याओं को सुलझाना , मुरादाबाद मंडल में सरकारी यूनिवर्सिटी व सरकारी मेडिकल कॉलेज बनवाना और गरीब छात्र - छात्राओं के लिए हॉस्टल बनवाना तथा पूरे उत्तर प्रदेश में युवाओं को आवाज़ को बुलंद करना है। वर्ष 2018 में संगठन का रजिस्ट्रेशन कराया और सर्वसम्मति के साथ संगठन कि बैठक में मुझे उत्तर प्रदेश स्टूडेंट्स यूनियन का प्रदेश अध्यक्ष बनाया गया। हमारा छात्र संगठन उत्तर प्रदेश के विभिन्न जिलों में कार्यरत है तथा युवाओं की आवाज़ को बुलंद कर रहा है। मैंने अब तक अनेकों आंदोलनों में हिस्सा लिया जो कि आतंकवाद के विरूद्ध आंदोलन थे,चाहे वो किसानों के हक की लड़ाई हो या और कोई सामाजिक मुद्दे हों। अनेकों किसान आंदोलनों तथा बहुत से राष्ट्र हित व युवाओं के लिए आंदोलनों को आयोजित किया और आगे भी करता रहूंगा। |
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Raghavvishnoi10 (talk • contribs) 06:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi there. Your words are Hindi, so my device cannot render it. If you want to talk something about the Hindi Wikipedia, talk it there, not here. By the way for other editors, using Google Translate, this is what it says:
Google translation of original post
|
---|
|
- Update: I went to the photo's description's website, and the "About" page is literally the whole Hindi text, see http://www.shubhamrathi.in/about. Can you clarify your intention here, Raghavvishnoi10? This is only meant for questions regarding the English Wikipedia, not a marketing place. GeraldWL ✉ 06:30, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- (Biographical content deleted) This is a help forum. What is your question? Nick Moyes (talk) 08:36, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Should this IP editor be blocked?
Every edit this IP address has made, in the last 3 days, has been reverted, by multiple editors (including one by myself), because they're all vandalism. What is it going to take to get this guy blocked? JimKaatFan (talk) 06:30, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi JimKaatFan. It's probably going to take someone to seek administrator assistance at WP:ANV or by directly contacting admin. Any administrator can block a WP:VOA (even without warning) when they come across one if they think it's necessary to stop further disruption, but only an administator can block an account. There are a number of administrators who are also Tea House hosts and "reporting" such an account here will sometimes lead to one of them stepping in and taking action; however, you might get faster results if you go to one of the administrator noticeboards, particularly after multiple warnings have been issued and the account still hasn't stopped. At this point though, the IP seems to have stopped so a block might be seen as more punitive than preventive; moreover, any block issued might simply be for a day or so which means the IP can simply wait until it expires before coming back. Maybe taking a wait and see approach is better now, and then seeking administrator assistance if the IP comes back and continues the same types of edits. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:56, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Tyhank yo9u, JimKaatFan. I have blocked the IP address for a period of 72 hours. I note edits from that IP last year that were not vandalism, so it is no doubt dynamic. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:11, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
If a blocked account was unblocked, can it's block evasions will also be unblocked?
Hello! I'm asking you for a question. If a blocked account was unblocked, can it's block evasions also be unblocked?OrangeCD-ROM (talk) 06:52, 23 August 2020 (UTC) OrangeCD-ROM (talk) 06:52, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- No, I don't think that is done. Assuming that you're talking about an account that was blocked for some reason and then the person engage in WP:SOCK to try and WP:EVADE their original block, then the blocked sock puppet accounts are almost always going to be indefinitely blocked. The primary account (i.e. the master account) may be unblocked per WP:UNBLOCK, but the other accounts pretty much never are. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:01, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Forgot Password
A fellow editor user:Taymeedeeray reached out to me as he is not able to access his account . It seems he has forgotten his password. Please how can he access his account Haryanfe (talk) 07:49, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Haryanfe. Please see Wikipedia:FAQ/Technical#How do I recover a password I have forgotten? for more information. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:01, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Haryanfe I remembered my password I can now access my account Taymeedeeray (talk) 08:05, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
How are editing disputes resolved?
You can see by the edit history that I edited the first line to read "...aerial craft..." Aerial craft includes weather balloons. But other editors want the first line to read "...balloon..."
My question: how are editing disputes resolved?
Thank you. Dannydunnontheoceanfloor (talk) 08:51, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Dannydunnontheoceanfloor Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Editing disputes are typically resolved through discussion amongst the editors involved on the article talk page. Typically such discussion will involve arguments based in Wikipedia guidelines or other logical arguments, resulting in a consensus as to how to proceed. If discussion is unable to resolve the dispute, there are avenues of dispute resolution to use. 331dot (talk) 08:55, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Dannydunnontheoceanfloor, yes, the talkpage is the first and best way to resolve any dispute. Plus, you need to be aware of WP:3RR. Very important to read this! Not observing the three revert rule can land you in trouble, much faster than a punctured weather balloon. The editors who watch the article will see that you have posted a note on the tp (talkpage) and discuss with you. Best, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 09:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
My user page
Hi, are the userboxes on my user page formatted correctly? I'm having trouble figuring this out. Am I supposed to put the word "Template" in the code? 314WPlay (talk) 09:37, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- 314WPlay, all good. GeraldWL ✉ 09:39, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: So the source code is fine? OK thanks. I'm very cautious about editing despite the 'be bold' thing because I've seen loads of edit disputes and arguments, and there are also so many rules, policies, guidelines, and other stuff that I don't make a substantive edit (I wish I could though!). 314WPlay (talk) 09:43, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- 314WPlay, you have the potential for being a great editor from your personalities. Welcome! GeraldWL ✉ 09:50, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: Thank you! 314WPlay (talk) 10:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- 314WPlay WP is like life...if you are friendly, polite and respectful of others, things should work out just fine. If you make a mistake, it can be reversed. Plenty of people have pointed out my mistakes, over the years...and I said thank you, I'm sorry, etc., just like in RL. I learned from it, and often made a wiki friend in the process. The problem, esp. for a new editor (or even an older one) is being stubborn, and unwilling to see the other person's side. Mistakes are expected and forgiven. Being an arsehole, not so much. You seem like the good sort! The talkpage of an article is the best place to work well with others if disagreements arise. So, go forth, make some edits! Gerald Waldo Luis and I believe in you. For example, the two of us, together, received some "corrective advice" recently, followed it, and emerged unscathed. :-) Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 10:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Tribe of Tiger Thank you, this is very reassuring. Yes it is like that in a way for those of us who have a life. I'm nervous about making a mistake (more of a personality thing) but I can admit them when they happen and I will go beyond fixing typos - if I don't, there wasn't much point creating an account was there. Can I ask another question here; when do I need to use the Reply to template or link a user's page if I want them to get notified and see it? Other editors haven't always, and yet I still see it. So why does it exist then? 314WPlay (talk) 19:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- 314WPlay, you have the potential for being a great editor from your personalities. Welcome! GeraldWL ✉ 09:50, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: So the source code is fine? OK thanks. I'm very cautious about editing despite the 'be bold' thing because I've seen loads of edit disputes and arguments, and there are also so many rules, policies, guidelines, and other stuff that I don't make a substantive edit (I wish I could though!). 314WPlay (talk) 09:43, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Disruptive Editing
Hi. Someone is currently changing wikipedia articles disruptively. I issued a warning but is there a board like this one where admins can look into it and block them?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/81.164.30.20 Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 09:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nevermind I found this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents
Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 10:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Julia Domna Ba'al: plain vandalism can go to WP:AIV, which is much faster than Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:46, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Request for Review of My Draft
Draft: Lockdown Ki Love Story is being under review from 5 days. Please review it and transfer to main space ASAP. I add all reliable sources. Unknownnreasonn (talk)
- @Unknownnreasonn: Your submission has been in the queue for 5 days. There are 380 submissions that are in the queue for 2 months. Please be patient. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:33, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Victor Schmidt: I am not curious but my draft is about a Indian Show that is coming in few days.So I only want to review the draft ASAP. Unknownnreasonn (talk)
- Hello, Unknownnreasonn. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a news source. Still less a vehicle for promotion. See There is no deadline. But if you want to get the draft accepted, I suggest you throw away all the material which comes from the show and its producers, and find some independent sources that talk about it. Many of your references are clearly to press releases, and so do not contribute in the slightest to establishing that the show is notable; nor do interviews. Remember that Wikipedia has basically no interest in anything said, written, or published by people close to the subject, whether directly or in interviews or press releases. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information by the subject, have chosen to publish about it in reliable sources. Please also see WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. --ColinFine (talk) 12:05, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- @ColinFine: can you tell me about the independent sources that you are talking in previous statement?I don't know about it and why I throw away the materials that comes from the show and its producers? Tell me the reason. Unknownnreasonn (talk)
- Unknownnreasonn Wikipedia does not accept as reliable what people or organizations or companies write about themselves, as grounds to confirm a topic meets Wikipedia's definition of notability. This extends to what people say about themselves in interviews. It is standard policy. Like parents answering "Because I said so." to a child's "Why?" An independent source would be published content written by a person with no connection to the topic. David notMD (talk) 13:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Also, the backlog of drafts to be reviewed is a pile, not a queue. Reviewers select what interests them (with a bit of an eye on the oldest). David notMD (talk) 13:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Unknownnreasonn Wikipedia does not accept as reliable what people or organizations or companies write about themselves, as grounds to confirm a topic meets Wikipedia's definition of notability. This extends to what people say about themselves in interviews. It is standard policy. Like parents answering "Because I said so." to a child's "Why?" An independent source would be published content written by a person with no connection to the topic. David notMD (talk) 13:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Kevin Coates
Good morning
KEVIN COATES: his current Wikipedia entry
Yesterday, Kevin Coates and myself spent all day up-dating his Wikipedia entry, with some difficulty! Eventually - after several false starts - we finally concluded our edit at around 19h00 last night.
However, devastatingly, we've just discovered that our entire new input has been "reverted" by ClueBotNG: how an earth can we get it permanently reinstated?
I'm new at this task and it seems that I should be able to revert to an earlier edit, or re-enter all the new text again, but we're concerned that it will simply be deleted again.
Kevin and I will be delighted for any assistance you might be able to provide.
Sincerely
Richard N Frost (on behalf of Kevin Coates) Richard N Frost (talk) 12:17, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Richard N Frost and welcome to the Teahouse! Cluebot did indeed revert you, you changed the article from this [1] to this [2] and the bot is supposed to revert stuff like that. You were later reverted again by Justlettersandnumbers who left an explaination here: [3].
- My advice to you, if you want to try to have some influence on the contents of that article (not impossible, but WP is a peculiar place), is to take the time to read WP:COI and WP:BLP, and then to start a discussion at Talk:Kevin Coates, suggesting what changes you would like to see, and the WP:RS that supports them. Nothing is permanently reinstated on WP. Change is one of the points of this project. Good luck. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:40, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nothing is lost. It is all there in View history. And could be copied to your Sandbox to work on before pasting into the article. HOWEVER, given several reverts (deletions) of your attempts, you are strongly advised to start a discussion on the Talk page of the article rather than editing the article directly. And as GGS wrote, read WP:COI, as it clearly applies to you. David notMD (talk) 13:10, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep in mind that an article is not a CV regurgitation, and every fact must be referenced. David notMD (talk) 13:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Another way to look at it, Richard N Frost, is to realise that, as an encyclopaedia, Wikipedia is basically not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves: it is only interested in what people wholly unconnected with the subject, and not prompted or fed information by the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If there is such independent published material, then the article should be almost entirely based on it; if there isn't, then the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article on them is possible. --ColinFine (talk) 14:43, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Richard N Frost, well done for coming here for advice; I'd meant to leave you an invitation, but see that in the event I didn't do so – sorry about that! I concur with all the advice that others have given you (my thanks to those who gave it!). For the record, I reverted your additions twice; the edit summary I left the second time was "Again remove swathes of unsourced and WP:PROMOTIONal stuff – WP:neutrality is one of the five pillars of this project; if in doubt, take to talk". Please take the time to follow those blue links and read the pages they lead to, they are both helpful and important. Note to ColinFine and anyone else who cares: I'm pretty certain that Coates is fully notable by our standards, and deserves a considerably better page than we have at the moment. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Another way to look at it, Richard N Frost, is to realise that, as an encyclopaedia, Wikipedia is basically not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves: it is only interested in what people wholly unconnected with the subject, and not prompted or fed information by the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If there is such independent published material, then the article should be almost entirely based on it; if there isn't, then the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article on them is possible. --ColinFine (talk) 14:43, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep in mind that an article is not a CV regurgitation, and every fact must be referenced. David notMD (talk) 13:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Nothing is lost. It is all there in View history. And could be copied to your Sandbox to work on before pasting into the article. HOWEVER, given several reverts (deletions) of your attempts, you are strongly advised to start a discussion on the Talk page of the article rather than editing the article directly. And as GGS wrote, read WP:COI, as it clearly applies to you. David notMD (talk) 13:10, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Can you review the draft I created for Shourya Deep
Can you please review the draft I created Shourya Deep and tell me how to get it approved. Prakash mesra (talk) 13:53, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Courtesy link: Draft:Shourya Deep
- Hello, Prakash mesra and welcome to the Teahouse. There are several things you could do that would improve this draft:
- Remove promotional language and language that expresses an opinion. Text such as
one of the finest directors of Bollywood
should not be in a draft or article unless it is a quotation, attributed to a specific person, with a citation to match. See WP:QUOTE. - Phrases such as
he showed interest in acting under the influence of his mother who herself was a theatre artist.
should be cited to a source or removed, probably removed, unless this early interest was widely noted and mentioned by independent sources. - Do not cite the IMDB. It is not generally considered reliable, although a single link to an actor's IMDB profile in the external links section is OK. Remove all such cites.
- Do not cite any wikis, including other Wikipedia articles, and including Wikiwiki and WikiBiodata.
- Always give dates (or at least years) of publication of sources if they are known.
- Always list the author(s) of sources if they are known.
- If a publication has page numbers, list the page or pages where the information cited appears.
- Always give the name of a source in a citation, not its web address. Use "Your News", not "yournews.in." in the
|website=
or|work=
parameter. - Do not provide the subject's exact birth date unless it is already widely published, or the subject has published it himself, as on his own web site. In either of these cases, provide a citation to the publication(s). See WP:DOB.
- Finally, wait patiently. There are many drafts awaiting review, and not as many reviewers as might be wished. It may take weeks or even months for a reviewer to get to your draft. Or it may be reviewed tomorrow. Reviews are not done in any particular order. There is no reliable way to get to the front of the line, in fact there is no line, just a pile. You may continue to work on the draft, or on other drafts or articles, while waiting.
- Remove promotional language and language that expresses an opinion. Text such as
- I hope those help. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:42, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, Prakash mesra and welcome to the Teahouse. There are several things you could do that would improve this draft:
Page moved to draft
I edited a wikipedia page and someone put it as a draft before I finished it. I then went to save it, and it told me that my work had to be seen first. When I looked at my changes, it reverted back to the old page. Can you delete it so I can start over again? It's titled "Now That's What I Call Music! 74 (American series)" Thank you. Trevortnidesserped (talk) 14:45, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, Trevortnidesserped, and welcome to the Teahouse.
- The page Draft:Now That's What I Call Music! 74 (American series) is by no means ready for the main article space. The move to draft space was proper, if it had not been moved to draft, it would have been deleted pretty much right away. You can work on the pager in draft space, it does not need to be deleted for this. When you think it is ready, you may submit it for review or you may move it back to the main article space. If you submit for review, you will get feedback if it is not approved, and a chance to try again. However, review can take several weeks or more because of the number of drafts waiting. If you move directly to the main article space, and the article does not meet standards, it might be deleted through any on of several processes, depending on what the problem is and who notices it. I advise going through a review, but it is not required. I advise starting new articles in draft even if you never inhtend to submit them for review -- that is what I do when I create a new article (and I've been here for 15 years now). This is because I can't create a finished or even minimal acceptable article in one edit, and neither can most editors.
- The move to draft was done by Captain Calm, an experienced editor.
- I hope,this advice is helpful. I will put some additional advice on your user talk page. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:05, 23 August 2020 (UTC) @Trevortnidesserped: DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:06, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Painting deleted- is this correct, thanks
Hi, I had recently contributed a painting (with correct license, permission from artist) to the page of Madhava the mathematician.
However the painting was removed stating that there's no way to verify that the person looked thus. As a new editor I have turned to you to ask for help in understanding :)
Would that not be true in all cases (unless a direct potrait). Furthermore, all aspects of the painting is attributable. Thanks Imagetoimageless (talk) 15:51, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, Imagetoimageless. I see you have already posted at Talk:Madhava of Sangamagrama, which is the right place to do it; and Deacon Vorbis has replied. Your next step is to discuss it with them. Many articles about historical figures are decorated with paintings that were made long after they lived, and there is no reason to suppose they are good likenesses; but generally these are pictures which are widely known to represent the person. If I understand it, you are presenting a modern painting, and Wikipedia has no way to verify that Madhava is the subject. (
- However, I'm also concerned about the licence: has the picture appeared in a public place (such as the artist's website) with an explicit statement that it has been licensed under CC-BY-SA 2.5? If not, has the artist sent an explicit release to Wikimedia Commons according to Donating copyright materials? If not, then it is not free media, and should not have been uploaded to Commons. Whether or not the artist has given permission for it to be used is irrelevant: all that matters is if the copyright owner (who is presumably the artist) has released it under a suitable licence, so that anybody may reuse it for any purpose. --ColinFine (talk) 18:28, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Accusation of copyright violation
I have been accused of having committed a copyright violation. I dispute that so I'm seeking a second opinion. The relevant discussion is at this talk page: User talk:Diannaa#Copyright. What I've done is that I have taken three sentences from a book, which I have rephrased and inserted into a wiki article and then linked to the book using the <ref> syntax. I don't think I have violated either American copyright law nor wiki policies both because the small number of rephrased sentences and because I added a reference to the source used. I think this issue is principally important because if what I've done is disallowed by policies, then I don't see how one could properly cite sources at all.ImTheIP (talk) 16:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, ImTheIP, and welcome to the Teahouse.
- Please read Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing where it days that
Close paraphrasing is the superficial modification of material from another source. Editors should generally summarize source material in their own words ...
and goes on to say thatLimited close paraphrasing is appropriate within reason, as is quoting, so long as the material is clearly attributed in the text ... Limited close paraphrasing is also appropriate if there are only a limited number of ways to say the same thing. Close paraphrasing without in-text attribution may constitute plagiarism, and when extensive (with or without in-text attribution) may also violate Wikipedia's copyright policy, ...
- Note that in this version of Students for Justice in Palestine you provided a source citation, but you did not provide in-text attribution. That would be something like "as David Feldman recounts in Boycotts Past and Present" in the article prose text, not just in a footnote. The degree and quantity of close paraphrasing permitted in an article ism something of a judgement call, and User: Diannaa is an editor very experienced in copyright issues here. Note also that Wikipedia policy on copyright and copying is intentionally stricter than US copyright law requires, or than common academic practice, to deal with the majority of editors not begin identified by legal names or identities know outside of Wikipedia. The place to discuss whether this paraphrase was too close or too long would be Talk:Students for Justice in Palestine, but it looks to ne as if a significantly less clsoe paraphrase would be possible. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:49, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- ImTheIP, I read the section on Diannaa's talk page and agree with her assessment completely. I also agree with the other editors who commented there. The majority of the content you added was identical to the source and in the same order, with only minor wording changes. Our job as Wikipedia editors is to summarize our sources in our own words, not to repeat them almost verbatim. You always have the option of directly quoting a source, although quotes should be used sparingly. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Image removed
I had added an image into an article, from the public domain archive.org, there is an overzealous administrator who reverted the changes after I had done the change because he did'nt like the language I used to reply him, albeit it was harsh, not personal.
I had not violated any copyright rules and I have not vandalized the said article.
The said image was pulled from archive.org and there is not obvious copyright assertions. Now I have reservations about the image currently used under the claims of creative common license. The said website does not own the image and there is no proof of such. How can I get a clarification on this issue of overzealous self certified administrators. Srajakumar (talk) 16:28, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, Srajakumar and welcome to the teahouse.
- This seems to be about the image File:Sridevi.jpg.jpg, which it seems that you uploaded to commons and then added to the article Sridevi. It has been tagged for deletion as a copyright violation on commons, and that is where the effective debate, if any, will take place, not here. However I can enlighten you a bit on Wikipedia copyright policy and US copyright law.
- You say above that the image is
from the public domain archive.org
. But most images on archive.org are not in the public domain, and there is no statement on your listed source page (https://archive.org/details/Sridevi53/) that this image, or any image on that page, is in the public domain or has been relased under any free license. Indeed most content on archive.org is copied from elsewhere on the wab and that site neither claims a copyright not purports to release the copyrights of others. 17 USC sec 102 saysCopyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.
17 USC sec 101 saysA work is “created” when it is fixed in a copy or phonorecord for the first time; where a work is prepared over a period of time, the portion of it that has been fixed at any particular time constitutes the work as of that time, and where the work has been prepared in different versions, each version constitutes a separate work.
No copyright notice is required for copyright protection under US law (or under the law of any country signatory to the Berne convention). See https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html for detail. Wikipedia policy is that only images (and text) created by the uploader, explicitly released under a free license by the copyright holder, or verifiably in the public domain (such as items whose copyright has expired, works of the US Federal government, etc) are considered free. Some images may be used under a claim of fair use, subject to the terms of WP:NFCC, but almost never images of living people, except possibly historic images. - I would add that under out policy against legal threats, comments such as
These kind of assertion will get thrown out in the court of law. ... Lets call the legal team in San Francisco to get involved and yall can sort this issue out.
are approaching a level that merits a block on its own. - Do understand that Wikipedia policy on copyrights is stricter than US copyright law demands. There are various reasons for that, but as a private site, Wikipedia may set its policies as it wishes, so,long as it does not violate the law. It may restrict users from posting in whatever ways it chooses. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:27, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi everyone!
Hello Wikipedia! I don’t really have a question - I just thought I would introduce myself to the community as a newbie editor before I get started (and I hope that’s OK :)
I suppose I could use some guidance about how I can help, for what it’s worth. Any any rate, hi everyone! I’m glad to be here. Anablerry (talk) 16:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi there, Anablerry. Welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse. I've left a welcome message for you on your userpage. You might also like to try out The Wikipedia Adventure - it's our interactive tour with 15 different 'badges' you can collect along the way as you learn the basics. Pop back anytime you need any help or guidance, and remember that it's often best to start slowly by making small changes to articles, rather than rushing in and getting all muddled up. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:46, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Draft
I have a draft page that hasn't been reviewed yet. Could someone take a look at it for me to see if it meets standards? It is titled "Now That's What I Call Music! 74 (American series)" Trevortnidesserped (talk) 17:44, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, I moved Now That's What I Call Music! 74 (American series) to draft, and it looks much better now, thanks, so I've moved it back to main article space. Captain Calm (talk) 17:57, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Translations
Hello! I want to thank you for the invite! I was a Wikipedia several years ago before the "Drafting process" had been implemented. My interests have grown since as well. I shave studied Portuguese for a year and a half now and enjoy the language so much that I will be pursuing college in Brazil once I get married and receive my citizenship. I went to Wikipedia while writing an article about Wiktionary accuracy for a magazine I work for. I found an article while perusing Portuguese Wikipedia called Ann Syrdal which had no equivalent on English Wikipedia yet. I decided to translate the article for fun and try to publish it to EN before realizing that there was a whole new and unfamiliar system of editing and publishing. It would get published anyway with the help of my translation but I wonder about a couple things:
1. When did the drafting process come into effect? I couldn't find any specific timeline. Although it was a little inconvenient since I had yet to understand it, I feel like it is a particularly good checks-and-balance system.
2. Where do I find lists of drafts? When I searched Ann Syrdal, I could not find my own draft but could only go there when I typed Draft:Ann Syrdal directly.
3. What issues do editors face when translating articles into English? Do different language Wikis have different policies? What should I be weary about when translation articles so as to not produce an unusable version for the main site?
4. The final copy of Ann Syrdal is missing a New York Times source and had some irrelevant information removed but other irrelevant information (such as parent names) kept. I tried to keep it as concise as possible. Was I wrong in keeping The New York Times source in the translation as per WP:OR?
5. I wish to continue doing this because of the amount of fun and good practice it is. Is there a way to see Portuguese Wikipedia articles that do not have English translations yet? Is there a masterlist? MichaelIsAlwaysreal (talk) 18:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- @MichaelIsAlwaysreal: welcome back. I can't answer all your questions, but for translations into english see WP:TRANSLATE and for translations out of english see WP:TRANSLATEUS. Each Wikipedia has its own rules and guidelines for what is needed for an article. What may be acceptable in the Portuguese Wikipedia may not be acceptable here and vice-versa. RudolfRed (talk) 18:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hello, MichaelIsAlwaysreal and welcome to the Teahouse, and back to Wikipedia.
- I will try to answer several of your questions by number below, bypassing the ones where I have too little experience or knowledge.
- 1. The draft namespace was created following the success of the proposal Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 107#Proposed new Draft namespace in late 2013. But the Articles for creation process existed for several years prior to that, using the Wikipedia talk namespace, in a rather awkward way. It was originally devised to permit IP editors to create drafts for articles even though they could no longer (after the Sigenthaler incident) create pages directly in the main article space. It was soon expanded to attempt to help inexperienced editors with creating articles. It has never been, and is not now, required. (Also, the previous use of userspace drafts was not so very different from the use of draft space.) Any autoconfirmed user may if s/he so chooses, create an article directly in the mainspace. However, I do not advise it. Indeed although i have been active here for over 15 years, I always start new articles in draft space (although I do not use AfC reviews) because I cannot create even a minimally acceptable artifice in a single edit, and it is my opinion that few editors can do so.
- 2. I don't know of any single master list of drafts, and if there were one, it would almost surely be too long to be very useful. Special:Search will find drafts provide that the draft name space is one of those listed in the "search in" pull-down. By default it is not listed. Also, if you start to create a new article, and there is a draft with the exact same name, a notice pops up informing the editor and offering the chance to work on the draft instead. That is, if Draft:Example exists, a notice will be shown if a user tries to create Example.
- 3. Different language versions of Wikipedia often ahve very different policies and customs, particularly in regard to sourcing and notability. An acceptable article on one Wikipedia may not be acceptable on another. I can't really speak to what other problems are faced by translators.
- 4. If a sources is relevant to the article I don't see how including it could ever be WP:OR. I am not sure I fully understand this question.
- 5. I don't know of any such master list, but someone else might.
- I hope all that is a bit helpful. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:50, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Issue that grinds my gears
I worked on a page last night. It was part of a discography, that for some reason, the 20 newest parts of it don't have articles. I put a tolerable amount of information, everything was in good shape. But for some reason, it looks like somebody deleted my page. It says it was "moved," but when I go to click on it, it redirects me to the discography page. It's almost as if they are planning to delete every page in the discography, I thought that until the draft of an article in the same discography was approved. I don't know if it was because I didn't protect the page, I don't know if it's because my page didn't meet standards...I don't know what's going on, and I need help.
Trevortnidesserped (talk) 18:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, Trevortnidesserped and welcome to the Teahouse.
- It would help very much if you indicated what page you were working on, or even what discography it was part of. You have worked on several different articles in the last day or two, I I can't spot any that seems to match you rather vague description. But I can assure you that no article to which you saved any edit has been deleted. I can't so easily check for moves. There are several reasons why a page might be moved, but most of them do not involve any plan to delete the page or the information on it. Please more information about what you were editing. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Trevortidesserped, I see that Velella moved Now That's What I Call Music! 75 (American series) over a redirect, saying theuy were restoring a hijacked title. You have opened a discussion on their user talk page, which is appropriate action: please wait for them to reply, and if you can't reach consensus, follow dispute resolution. --ColinFine (talk) 19:29, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Reply from User:trevortnidesserped Sorry for not ellaborating. I see that someone has already showed the page, so I don't think I need to do that anymore. Also, ColinFine, thank you for the context, I will wait for feedback.
How to cite pages from a book, but also websites in the same article
Greetings, I'm back again for another question. This time it's about citation styles, and a draft I am working on. Basically, I have two types of sources: Websites, which I can only quote in their entirety, and books, which are so large that merely quoting them without adding a page number would basically shred verifiability. Thus, I looked around how to do that without it becoming a nigh-incomprehensible mess, and stumbled about this article and its reference section: The_Level,_Brighton#References
I found that to read pretty nicely, because it managed book pages through page references + bibliography, and websites directly and just once. But after reading on it seems I would be discouraged from doing it that way (see Wikipedia:Parenthetical_referencing#Consistency), and reading up about Harvard citation style this article: Climate_change#Notes was named as an example page which uses it correctly. However, I found that section to be incredibly hard to read, as it would also link to websites as if they were books - and I can't even do that "Harvard sytle" for some of my sources, because the websites do not have a definite author!
So basically, my question is: Am I allowed to cite in the same way as is done on the "The Level, Brighton" page linked above? Because I would very much prefer that, and personally do not see how that would confuse anyone. And if not, I would need another solution on how to include both types of sources (with pages and without) in my article. LordPeterII (talk) 20:11, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, LordPeterII and welcome to the Teahouse.
- You can use any of several different citation styles in a new draft, but you should be consistent in using whatever style you choose.
- You may use footnoted, templated (CS1 or CS2) citations. In this case each reference would be inside a set of
<ref>...</ref>
tags. When citing a web site, use {{cite web}} or perhaps {{cite news}}. When citing a book, use {{cite book}}. When citing a magazine, use {{cite magazine}}. There are other specialized templates as well. For a book, or any source that has numbered pages use|page=
(or|pages=
) to indicate the page number cited. (There are also ways to handle it if you make citations to several different pages of the same book in the article, mostly using {{rp}}.) - You may use Parenthetical referencing There are several versions of this, but in general a short indicator of the source name is shown in the text of the article, and these then link to a longer fuller citation. The indicators for books and other paginated sources will include a page number, the ones for unpaginated sources do not. If you use this, you should use it for all citations, and you should in fact use the same variant of it for all citations in the draft/article.
- You may use some other style, if you choose, than either of the above.
- What you should not do is mix two or more different styles. Many find this confusing, and any editor may freely change the citations to a single consistent style. It appears that this is what the The_Level,_Brighton article does. As wp:CITEVAR says:
Generally considered helpful ... mposing one style on an article with inconsistent citation styles (e.g., some of the citations in footnotes and others as parenthetical references): an improvement because it makes the citations easier to understand and edit;
.
- You may use footnoted, templated (CS1 or CS2) citations. In this case each reference would be inside a set of
- The CS1 templated and footnoted style is probably the most commonly used style on Wikipedia. It allows for specifying the page numbers for books and other paginated sources, while not doing so for paginated sources like web sites. But if you want to use some mother consistent style, you may. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:39, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- I would add that when using "Harvard" style you may assign a website or other source where no author is known a name, and use that. I would also say that Harvard style IMO works best when all or most citations are to a book, journal article or similar source. It was invented for academic papers in which pretty much all citations would be to books or journal articles, and none would be to sources without stated authors. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:46, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks DESiegel, so as per your suggestion I will not use what was done on that Brighton article. That confirms my suspicion that it was shunned upon (although temping). I should note that I have hitherto almost exclusively used CS1 style for referencing, and had no intention of using Harvard if not necessary.
My only worry is now: When I use CS1, I can indeed specify a page within a book. However, I would have to repeat that every time I quote that book again on a different page, thus producing "inflationary" amounts of references to that book which repeat all the other information (name, author, publisher etc.) and only changes the page. I assume that could be acceptable if it only happens a few times, but if I quote the book say 20 times (on different pages), it would become a mess. There is no way around that, is there? Like by just specifying a page, and otherwise using the general named ref of the book?Whoops! I almost overlooked that at first, but that {{rp}} thing you linked to is exactly what I was looking for. I also just read that my problem is acknowledged behind the scenes and being worked on. Using refpage for now will solve the problem, and in the future I might be able to use "subpages" directly from the cite book template. That's certainly good news! So thanks again, problem solved :) --LordPeterII (talk) 21:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks DESiegel, so as per your suggestion I will not use what was done on that Brighton article. That confirms my suspicion that it was shunned upon (although temping). I should note that I have hitherto almost exclusively used CS1 style for referencing, and had no intention of using Harvard if not necessary.
- @LordPeterII: DESiegel really knows his stuff! Personally (and many others feel the same) I find our tolerance of multiple citation formats across articles both confusing and quite irritating. I frequently cite books, journals, websites and news media all within one article (e.g. Mont Blanc massif). I simply add inline citations using the big, obvious 'Cite' button provided within our editing tool. I select the relevant template to use and paste in either the DOI, ISBN or url to 'autofill' the majority of the details (by clicking the magnifying glass icon next to it), and then manually tidy up any loose ends. I prefer not to use our Visual Editor to create content, preferring the WP:Source Editor instead as it allows me to choose my own memorable 'Ref name' so its easy to reuse the same reference again and again within one article. I made my own little guide and video on this- see WP:ERB. Good luck, whatever method you choose. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:00, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
DYK
In order to nominate an article for DYK, a. do I have to review another DYK? How do I do that? b. Where do I write the hook – where it says "hook" or where it says "ALT1"? Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 20:58, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Charlie Smith FDTB, provided the article in question complies with all WP:DYKRULES and WP:DYKSG, you can nominate it at WP:DYKNOM. For more info on the DYK process, see WP:DYK and Help:How to write the perfect "Did you know" hook. Also, what article are you thinking of nominating? Giraffer (munch) 21:42, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you. I was thinking of nominating Moshe Rosenstain and Yeshivas in World War II.Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 21:45, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Charlie Smith FDTB. I think my reply to you got overwritten in an 'editing conflict', so I'm just popping it back again: You get your first 5 DYK nominations free, with no need to review another one. After the first five, you are expected to do one review for each of your own nominations. This is the QPQ - quid pro quo - you'll have seen mention of. As I recall, your hook goes where it says Hook. But if you have an idea(s) for an alternative hook(s), thet go in ALT1, then ALT2 etc. (I found the instructions for my first DYK to be harder to follow than creating my first article! Good luck. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:35, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 22:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Charlie Smith FDTB. I think my reply to you got overwritten in an 'editing conflict', so I'm just popping it back again: You get your first 5 DYK nominations free, with no need to review another one. After the first five, you are expected to do one review for each of your own nominations. This is the QPQ - quid pro quo - you'll have seen mention of. As I recall, your hook goes where it says Hook. But if you have an idea(s) for an alternative hook(s), thet go in ALT1, then ALT2 etc. (I found the instructions for my first DYK to be harder to follow than creating my first article! Good luck. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:35, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you. I was thinking of nominating Moshe Rosenstain and Yeshivas in World War II.Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 21:45, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Draft:Irene Lilienheim Angelico
Hi Editor,
Thank you for helping me.
Maurie Alioff, an academic and film reviewer, who has reviewed our films in the past, wrote three articles for submission to wikipedia. He found many references, but was aware that we had archived our old reviews on our website and asked me to fill in the gaps. i did this and then submitted the three articles under my name. This, I have since discovered, was a huge mistake. Can I send the article back to the writer and ask him to submit under his own name?
Also, the Wiki editor wrote that the submission does not show significant coverage in reliable independent sources. He/she particularly mentioned that IMDb is not reliable, so I removed all the IMDb references. But it is not possible that the other coverage is not notable or reliable. For the article on DLI Productions, for example, there are 36 article specifically about various DLI films, not just passing mentions, from newspapers and journals like the New York Times, The Globe and Mail, The Canberra Times, Macleans, the Canadian Forum, The Montreal Gazette, Film Kultura, etc. in nine different languages.
Any suggestion you have will be most welcomed.
Be well,
Irene```` Ireneangelico (talk) 21:07, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Courtesy links to drafts: Draft:Irene Lilienheim Angelico, Draft:Abbey Jack Neidik and a sandbox draft for DLI productions.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:21, 23 August 2020 (UTC)