Annoyingorange150803224 (talk | contribs) →Is the Cold War wiki project still active?: new section |
No edit summary |
||
Line 898: | Line 898: | ||
read the headline [[User:Annoyingorange150803224|Annoyingorange150803224]] ([[User talk:Annoyingorange150803224|talk]]) 16:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC) |
read the headline [[User:Annoyingorange150803224|Annoyingorange150803224]] ([[User talk:Annoyingorange150803224|talk]]) 16:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC) |
||
Pipe Major John McLellan DCM of Dunoon Composer & poet |
|||
I wrote an article in the draft page about P/M John McLellan DCM but it was deleted in the last few minutes. I added relevant citations to media sources and recieved an email ok to quote those sources but my article about this subject was speedily deleted, why? [[User:Baishan17|Baishan17]] ([[User talk:Baishan17|talk]]) 16:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:46, 3 December 2020
Delete auto-saved edit summaries in Visual Editor
The Visual Editor will save your edit summaries to save you time, which is useful, but the list can get to be cluttered. I can find no way to clean up the list, though they do seem to expire after a certain amount of time.
Is there something simple that I'm missing? If not, I'd really like to see this feature added. Thanks! 1980fast (talk) 00:47, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- This is browser-side. You should be able to clear your browser's form history from its settings. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 01:43, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Something so simple would have been nice, but, unfortunately, that is not true, for two reasons: 1.) My browser has form autofill expressly disabled. 2.) I have just verified that this behavior cannot be browser-side, by logging in to my account on a computer from which I have never logged in to Wikipedia before. Every one of my entries were there when I did an edit.
- Ideas, anyone?
- Thanks! 1980fast (talk) 04:22, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- 1980fast, I think this thread on MediaWiki may apply to you. It doesn't seem there's a way to remove them manually, but they'll be forgotten if left unused.
- WhatamIdoing, do you know if there's been any progress made on this or if someone started a Phabricator ticket for it? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping, @Tenryuu. VisualEditor (both its visual mode and the 2017 wikitext editor) checks your most recent 200 edits (at this wiki) for edit summaries. There are no plans to change this, although it may be something that the mw:Editing team will look at in future years.
- Since it only checks your most recent 200 edits, then obviously if you make 200 more edits, it won't find any older edit summaries. I'm personally not dedicated enough to make 200 edits just to clear out my edit summary suggestion list, but it would work. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
New York Food Truck Association
Need help for my article Hello, I have been seeking help for my organization's article on Wikipedia. It can be found at Draft:New York Food Truck Association. I have put all necessary disclosures as I was asked. Have ensured compliance with WP:GNG, WP:NPOV, WP:TOOMANYREF etc. Still can't seem to get through the review phase. I have tried contacting the reviewer too but I think they have been occupied in other places. Can one of the other reviewers help me out here? Thanks DavidfromNYFTA2 (talk) 11:30, 30 November 2020 (UTC) DavidfromNYFTA2 (talk) 11:30, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- I trimmed the draft (name-dropping and too many refs). Hope that helps. David notMD (talk) 12:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- @DavidfromNYFTA2: I am confused by the 'History' section in which you've used three references to simply state that this organisation approved what someone else voted to do. You also seem to be writing for a New York audience, not a world-wide one. You might know what 'posting letter grades' means - the rest of us are left totally clueless.
- The purpose of an encyclopaedia is to inform, not to befuddle or promote, and I'm afraid I don't come away with the feeling that this is an association which the world has taken special notice of, above the hundreds of thousands of other such bodies. I'm sure your members do a fine job in feeding that part of your nation at a difficult time, but I would expect to see wider national coverage from non-insider and non-local sources if I were reviewing this article for inclusion on Wikipedia. See WP:NCORP for our notability criteria for organisations. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:56, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hello @Nick Moyes:, thank you for the detailed response. I understand that a lot of the coverage has been on local sources but we have also been covered by highly reliable platforms such as NY Times, BI, and Forbes. This, I believe, has been due to our works for the food truck industry. To clear your misconception about letter grades, this is simply a mechanism to ensure food trucks in New York are adhering to the requirements by authorities such as the FDA, the Department of Health and others. Basically an attempt to ensure that there is no difference between how restaurants and food trucks in the city are being run. Food trucks are a large part of NYC's culture and economy and an association that voices the opinions of these businesses, that operates on a scale as big as ours, should be part of an encyclopedia. I have removed anything that points towards promotion for this very purpose. The goal here is to ensure that people know about this association just as they should know about United Food and Commercial Workers or the Writers Guild of American, East.DavidfromNYFTA2 (talk) 11:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
I created the page Vijilesh_Karayad
I created the page Vijilesh_Karayad. But i could not get any notification on acceptance of the page. After revision i dint even know. How it is possible. Rahul SomanDiscussions - contribs 17:47, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Rahulsoman: because the article Was manually moved into mainspace. Moving pages doesn't trigger notifications. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Is it allowed to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulsoman (talk • contribs) 20:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Rahul Soman, it is allowed to do so, but, as a new editor, you would have been better off submitting it through WP:Articles for creation. As things stand, when your article gets reviewed, that will be the first feedback you get on it, but it may get deleted at the same time. You will then have to respond to the feedback to improve the article and go through far more red tape to re-submit it.
- If, instead, you have an admin turn it into a draft and you then submit the draft, you might have the article accepted, and if it is not accepted it is far simpler to resubmit your article once you have fixed any deficiencies the reviewers have identified.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:47, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- I used to submit through WP:Articles for creation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulsoman (talk • contribs) 13:35, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Rahulsoman, Quisqualis I am concerned. The article was moved to Mainspace by editor Vzazjay, who only has 21 edits, all to this one article. Rahulsoman did not move it himself, of course. I think returning it to a draft would be safer for Rahulsoman, who has had good success with the AFC process. Thanks, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 06:13, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Tribe of Tiger, yes, turning it into a draft ASAP is the sensible thing to do at this point.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:22, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Quisqualis, thanks, I will put a note on Rahulsoman's talk, and suggest/remind him of an Admin who was helpful with a previous (accepted!) article. Best, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 06:32, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Tribe of Tiger, yes, turning it into a draft ASAP is the sensible thing to do at this point.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:22, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Welcome
Can I create a welcoming template to welcome users? Larryzhao|Talk|Contribs 17:49, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Larryzhao123: in genral, yes, though you might want to put that a bit further away on your todo list. 395 edits isn't that much and I highely suspect that you haven't seen enough of Wikipedia already to be ready to answer the newcomer's questions, should they decide to ask on your talkpage. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Ok Larryzhao|Talk|Contribs 17:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- There are already various welcome templates available at Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates.--Shantavira|feed me 18:31, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Larryzhao123: Please have a look at WP:INDENT regarding indenting on discussion pages. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:06, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Adding an image of a document for a citation refrence
I have a scanned image of Warranty Deed for an historic building that I am trying to create a page for. I need to upload it as a citation. I have managed to upload it to wikipedia files, but when I cite the information from the document it flags for a circular reference. Without it the entire article is flagged for not being cited by reliable sources. How do I need to do this properly? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Warranty_Deed_for_Barth_and_Walker_Building.jpg Mollyblew (talk) 19:42, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- A deed is not generally a useful source in the first place. Our criteria are focused on how much newspapers, etc. have written about it, not whether it exists. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 19:49, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Jéské Couriano: It establishes the names of the original commissioners of the building, the age of the building, the tenants that are referenced later in the article. As far as notability goes, many articles in the newspapers refer to the building as "the Barth and Walker building" and "The Old Eagles Hall." This document is verification that the two are one in the same along with the other business listed. The existence of the building was never in question only how to use a scanned document image as a reference. — Preceding (Mollyblew (talk) 20:08, 30 November 2020 (UTC)) comment added by Mollyblew (talk • contribs) 20:02, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Okay, knowing that you have the notability sources is better. The issue with scanned documents is that they are, unless the document is public domain, all going to be copyright violations. You would have better luck seeing if a historical society or a gov't registrar has the same information on their website. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 20:52, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Mollyblew, do I perceive correctly that your image was scanned from a bound book in a public registrar's office, which a researcher could see (as you did) to verify the deed? If so, then cite the book, page, and perhaps title that the researcher could use. Wikipedia (including your scan) is not a reliable source. —teb728 t c 11:31, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- To answer your question, Mollyblew, the link you supplied above goes to a file on English Wikipedia. That's why you get the "circular reference" error when you try to add that to an article. The actual file is stored on Wikipedia Commons. The easiest way to find it there is to go to the page you linked and then look for the part that says "Information from its description page [meaning on Commons] there is shown below". Click on that and you'll be within Commons. Now you should see a series of icons above the image that provide the correct links to download the file, use the file on the web or (as you need) to use it on Wikipedia itself. There may indeed be an issue of copyright — I'm not sure for a 1915 document — but that's another discussion. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:45, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Mollyblew, do I perceive correctly that your image was scanned from a bound book in a public registrar's office, which a researcher could see (as you did) to verify the deed? If so, then cite the book, page, and perhaps title that the researcher could use. Wikipedia (including your scan) is not a reliable source. —teb728 t c 11:31, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Okay, knowing that you have the notability sources is better. The issue with scanned documents is that they are, unless the document is public domain, all going to be copyright violations. You would have better luck seeing if a historical society or a gov't registrar has the same information on their website. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 20:52, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
From WikiBlind.org folks - Is this the Help Desk for wikipedia?
Trying to find the best group of people to refer new volunteers to.
Is anyone here blind or low vision? Anyone who can talk on the phone? DrMel (talk) 19:56, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Close - This is for new users to seek information on how Wikipedia works in general. There's also Wikipedia:Help desk. As for offers to talk on the phone, you're not likely to see anyone willingly disclosing their personal phone numbers on Wikipedia so as to limit spam calls, SWATting attempts, and any appearance of impropriety/collusion if they work in a volatile topic area. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 20:49, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, DrMel, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm shocked that I can't find anything much about support for editors with disability, or even much about editors who have disabilities. There is a category Category:Disabled Wikipedians, but only about a dozen editors have put themsleves in that category, and the couple of them I've looked at don't say anything about their disability on their user page. There is a WikiProject Disability, but that is about articles related to disability. It's possible that some of the participants are blind themselves, or experienced in helping people with visual impairment, so you might ask at WikiProject Disability. There is also a WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia which is about providing articles in spoken form. But that's all I can find. I shall go over to the Village pump and raise the topic. As the previous answer says, it is unlikely that many Wikipedians will be willing to post their phone numbers. But there may be something we could organise; for example, a list of Wikipedian's who are willing to work with editors who have visual impairment: the person seeking help could email the editor privately with their phone number. I would be willing to do that, but I have no special knowledge of the needs of people with visual impairment, or the technologies available to help them. --ColinFine (talk) 23:07, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- DrMel, I've raised this at WP:VPP#Support for editors with disabilities, and mentioned it at WT:WikiProject Disability. I don't know if you want to add anything to my post. --ColinFine (talk) 23:36, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- @DrMel: There's WP:WPACCESS and meta:WikiBlind User Group. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:23, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia’s Leftist Orientation
We are living in a time where adults in this country are looking for 1st amendment protection, and young people are learning what it means to have freedom of speech. It is critical that forums such as yours not take a political position in reporting or opining. Unfortunately, we have seen Wikipedia take very liberal positions in delivery of information by being subtly critical of Conservative positions, or overtly kind to “progressive” and deliberately articles, “science”, etc.
People really need a place to go to find not just the behaviors of calico kittens, but also fair critique of renewable energy. Please refrain from politicizing details on your website. Be neutral, really really neutral. Don’t nuke the 1st amendment by censoring speech. Don’t do it. Half the country doesn’t want to see Wikipedia compromise conservatism to further your agenda. The other half needs to see that there is truly a place to go that doesn’t always agree with their political positions, in order to truly bring neutral information to seekers. Anyone can spin data. It takes a real encyclopedia to maintain neutrality in providing it’s users with no spin, no opinion, just genuine, unadulterated information. 2600:1702:F71:4430:3017:4BE3:9AEB:87BC (talk) 20:18, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia, not one that is supposed to reflect an American perspective on the world. Please see WP:NPOV for our policy on maintaining a neutral point of view. Anyway, the Teahouse is a place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, so do you have a question? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- You may find WP:NOTNEUTRAL interesting. And WP:Content disclaimer. There is politics in this world, so it would be hard to keep all of it off WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:41, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- I would echo the above, but also add that you can contribute to articles as an IP, or create an account, and help us identify any issues you find or have found already. It is always best to provide Reliable Sources covering the content in question that covers the perspective you feel needs to also be considered. Koncorde (talk) 20:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Which "this country" are you referring to? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:35, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- A major problem in this arena is that while there's no doubt that biased left and biased right sources exists, the two "sides" are not at all equal. That is, at least in the U.S., there's a yellow journalism, conspiracy-theory-pushing, any-fact-that-doesnt-support-our-agenda-is-not-a-fact machine on the right, grown very fat over the last few years (though started quite a long time ago). They have grown slick and now present as a cross-reinforcing cadre of organizations masquerading as legitimate news sources that mix truth and fiction as a tactic ala the best of liars. Unfortunaterly, they have successly infiltrated journalism to the point where every source that reports actual facts—empirically verifiable reality—that happens to be in an area in which the right's machine has taken an interest and pushed some up-is-down perversion of reality, is smeared as leftist.
Meanwhile, the number of people who have the ability to winnow out truth from fiction for themselves from source material has always been a minority. With that unequal baseline, to far too many the two "sides" just appear as equal, disputing authorities.
It doesn't help at all that even some of the most stalwart sources of real journalism have been co-opted to some extent – for example reporting on the existence of "alternative facts" alongside reality, even when discounting the lies, when they should not be giving any lip service. Similarly, real journalists fall into the trap of thinking being unbiased is to always give the lunatic fringe a seat at the table, even if it's a small one, e.g., even though approximately 100% of scientists agree we live in a heliocentric universe, every time that topic somehow comes up directly, the unbiased thing to do is plant a flat earth creationist at the table with the adults to give the other side.
So, I absolutely agree with your conclusion, person editing from ...87BC, but since the sides are so weighted in the other direction from your post, I cannot help but wonder if you're mistaking our reportage of facts, including the existence and stance of lies masquerading as fact as pushed by those with a political agenda, as being a left bias, or whether you genuinely have come across the left bias your post regards. If you have, post to the talk page of the article, but back up any issue or change you want with a survey of proper sources.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
To quote our founder "The type of people who were drawn to writing an encyclopedia for fun tend to be pretty smart people."Educated people tend to lean left towards analytical thinking entrusting thier academic peers in different fields for information. Thus Wikipedia has an academic overtone in its writing that some see as bias by default.--Moxy 🍁 04:04, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Seeing wikilnks to subtitles on my iPhone
Seeing wikilnks to a section on my iPhone When I create a link to a section, such as sight vocabulary it works fine on my MacBook but not on my iPhone. Is there a better way? John NH (talk) 22:54, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Greetings, Jnhmunro, and welcome to the Teahouse. I did some testing, and it appears that section links work on my iPhone using Safari in both desktop and mobile modes, but within the Wikipedia app they only navigate to the top of the article. Is this your experience as well? If so, I've opened a Phabricator ticket for someone to take a look at it (T269054). CThomas3 (talk) 23:59, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Cthomas3. Yes, that is what I experience but only on my iPhone. My MacBook is fine. I always check Wikipedia on my iPhone because I believe most people access Wikipedia with a smartphone these days. Thanks for your help. John NH (talk) 11:51, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Donating without facility .
Hi - I'm O.A.P. without banking facilities but would like to make donation - What do I do ? Can I send cash or postal order to a Wikipedia address ? 79.71.10.116 (talk) 23:33, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- One way to do this donation is to find another person who can do this, perhaps with a paypal account. You give them cash, and they make the donation online. This has proven to be a working method. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- You might like to read Wikimedia_Foundation#Finances before donating.--Shantavira|feed me 08:47, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Draft:Electronics the Religion
Good day,
My Draft was deleted today by: Wildr, Jimfbleak, Nick Moyes, Maile66.
By calling the page and text Vandalism in matter of being noncorrect. By using words Hoax and "Blatan" Hoax.
My draft can not be edited by IP only anymore.
Any help? 89.205.138.183 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.205.138.183 (talk) 23:39, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Is that draft: Draft:Electronics the Religion? Wikipedia articles are based on what is previously published, not on something you made up or created. To prove something is not a hoax, supply references. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- I'm really sorry IPv4s and Orangmatter, but I think it best if you seek another internet platform to promote your ideas. Wikipedia is not the right one for you. Of course, if you can find and supply some mainstream media sources that show the world at large has taken notice of this nonsense, then we'll happily reconsider, per WP:GNG. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:27, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Tagging accounts of sockpuppeters who are temporarily blocled
Temorarily blocked sockmasters
Many times, when a sockmaster is blocked, such as Destroyeraa or 3Oh Hexelon, they aren't tagged. Sometimes though, like with Leahmerone, they are tagged. (Or CPHL, before it became an indeff). I am confused-what's the norm? To tag(using parameters like timeblocked
, or just not to even bother at all? HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 23:40, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Feel free to leave me a Teahouse talkback-it's more effective then pings. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 23:41, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- HurricaneTracker495, sometimes discretion comes into play. While the templates are for clerical reasons, and there's standard instructions for their placement, there's courtesy and etiquette that ultimately determine what happens. There's little point in tagging the user page of a productive non-LTA editor who is expected to return shortly once they've realised their mistake. The previous history will be in the block log should issues arise again, so rather than branding the editor they should be given the chance to get back into good standing. It's possible for the user to clean start but there's many reasons why they might choose not to.
- I see you've pinged several blocked editors, how do you expect them to respond to this thread? It's possible to use noping, but honestly it would have been better to ask a more general question rather than linking specific users. Zindor (talk) 02:14, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @HurricaneTracker495: In practice, we never add sock tags to temporarily blocked accounts. I'm aware there is a "timeblocked" parameter for {{sockpuppeteer}} that may have been used in the early days of Wikipedia, but nowadays the user pages of temporarily blocked accounts are left as is. I agree with Zindor that there's little point in doing so, as it amounts to nothing more than a badge of shame, and that is not the purpose of tagging. Mz7 (talk) 03:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, Mz7 and Zindor. Maybe CPHL was only tagged because it was six months? HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 12:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @HurricaneTracker495: the standard offer is six months, yes, but i dont know the exact determination used for tagging; I suspect it's less clear cut than that and requires good judgement. An indef can be lifted earlier than six months or left in place longer, depends on the user's track record and the sincerity and understanding displayed in their unblock request. You can get a good idea about whats gone on from a user's talk page and the block log, and any relevant AN discussions. Beans might apply too, especially with LTA socks, so you might not see the full picture. Mz7 will know more about this subject than I do. I mainly responded because I didn't want to leave your question sitting un-answered. Regards, Zindor (talk) 19:29, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Zindor: no, the facts are wrong.
06:47, 5 April 2020 Callanecc talk contribs blocked CPHL talk contribs with an expiration time of 6 months (account creation blocked) (Continued disruptive editing including persistent addition of unsourced content after previous blocks)
. So he was blocked previously. The indeff came in 04:21 April 21, 2020. ST47 came in and tagged them 01:52 April 21, 2020, before the indeff came in. The six month block was for copyright violations. I even quote this from ST47-Confirmed, tagged. The master is already blocked 6 months for an unrelated matter by @Callanec:, so they were evading / trolling. I'm not going to extend it, but maybe someone else will want to. Otherwise, please close. ST47 (talk) 01:51, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
. ST47 has been pinged for input. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 19:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC)- @HurricaneTracker495: I don't know the background behind those cases, but as I said before, in practice we only tag indefinitely blocked accounts. In general, sock tags should only be added by administrators or SPI clerks, so if I were you I wouldn't spend too much time worrying about this issue. Mz7 (talk) 19:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @HurricaneTracker495:, ive already read that log thanks. In my post i was speaking in general. Hashing over a specific case isn't something I'm prepared to do, especially on a highly visible board such as this. Zindor (talk) 20:07, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Zindor: no, the facts are wrong.
- @HurricaneTracker495: the standard offer is six months, yes, but i dont know the exact determination used for tagging; I suspect it's less clear cut than that and requires good judgement. An indef can be lifted earlier than six months or left in place longer, depends on the user's track record and the sincerity and understanding displayed in their unblock request. You can get a good idea about whats gone on from a user's talk page and the block log, and any relevant AN discussions. Beans might apply too, especially with LTA socks, so you might not see the full picture. Mz7 will know more about this subject than I do. I mainly responded because I didn't want to leave your question sitting un-answered. Regards, Zindor (talk) 19:29, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, Mz7 and Zindor. Maybe CPHL was only tagged because it was six months? HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 12:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Do you have a question
2001:8003:2911:9A00:AC04:8F81:8371:4868 (talk) 01:18, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- I dont have a Question. Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia that the folks here at the Teahouse can answer? Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:43, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Help in Improving Article
Help in Improving Skillhouse Article
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Skillhouse_Staffing_Solutions
Good day, I was wondering if anyone can help me improve my article, it has been declined for being read as an advertisement but every fact I have stated properly referenced to a secondary source. How can I make the article read less like an advertisement? Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Shallou Vignette (talk) 03:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Shallou Vignette, I just glanced over the page, and I don't really see any major issues with promotional language. Pinging reviewer Theroadislong—could you comment on why you declined the draft? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 05:25, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Sdkb Thank you very much for taking the time to read through my article, is there anything I can do, or should do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shallou Vignette (talk • contribs)
- @Shallou Vignette: Just wait for Theroadislong to reply here. I don't personally see any changes you need to make to the draft, but it's considered bad form to resubmit it without making changes, so it's better to just address the concerns with the initial reviewer. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- The whole draft reads like it was written by the marketing department, which I presume as you are being paid it probably was. For instance content like this which is sourced to your own website "The company operates on a four-tier fulfillment structure in which there is a specific department responsible for each aspect of the IT staffing process" and the glossy interior shots of the business mke it look more like your own website. Theroadislong (talk) 08:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Agree, with Theroadislong; there is also some poor grammar that would suggest it was written by a non-English native, duplication of content (Mark Smith is very important) and a lot of the sourcing for basic content is referring to primary sources the equivalent of domestic company registration websites, or membership / affiliation, rather than notable secondary coverage in reliable sources. Not sure the company meets notability. Koncorde (talk) 08:30, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- The whole draft reads like it was written by the marketing department, which I presume as you are being paid it probably was. For instance content like this which is sourced to your own website "The company operates on a four-tier fulfillment structure in which there is a specific department responsible for each aspect of the IT staffing process" and the glossy interior shots of the business mke it look more like your own website. Theroadislong (talk) 08:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Shallou Vignette: Just wait for Theroadislong to reply here. I don't personally see any changes you need to make to the draft, but it's considered bad form to resubmit it without making changes, so it's better to just address the concerns with the initial reviewer. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Sdkb Thank you very much for taking the time to read through my article, is there anything I can do, or should do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shallou Vignette (talk • contribs)
- @Shallou Vignette: I see from the malformatted userbox at your userpage, that you have a COI in relation to the company Skillhouse Staffing Solutions. Please note that in the case of paid editing there are are additional specific disclosure requirements that must be followed, per WMF terms of use, before any paid article can be approved at AfC. These requirements are explained in Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure#How to disclose and are most easily satisfied by the paid editor placing a filled out
{{connected contributor (paid)}}
template at their userpage. Nsk92 (talk) 09:00, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Shallou Vignette:, you asked
How can I make the article read less like an advertisement?
One key to this is that the article has to be based on what people with no connection to the company are saying about it. As an example, take the last paragraph in the draft, about the colour scheme of the offices and what the colour red and the company logo symbolise. That is promotional content presented in Wikipedia's voice, even though it is actually based entirely on what the CEO, Mark Smith, said in an interview – which, by the way, means that the source is not secondary. I can't see any secondary sources in the draft with the exception of one or two listings such as Bloomberg. The Temple University source which is supposed to support the claim that "Skillhouse is also partnered with Temple University in fostering IT education amongst its working staff and registered candidates" does not mention Skillhouse (and "fostering IT education" is another instance of promotional wording). I searched for "Skillhouse" on the university website in case the wrong URL had been added in the reference by mistake, but the only times the word appears are two editions of the university newsletter where Mark Smith is mentioned as a former MBA at the university. So in addition to the fact that it reads like advertising, it is also not adequately sourced to show notability. Have a look at this information to see what would be required. --bonadea contributions talk 09:39, 1 December 2020 (UTC) - @Shallou Vignette: There's a lot of language used here that I would expect to see in ad copy (but not in an encyclopedia). The way the sentence
Ever since coming to Japan, Mark has been involved in IT staffing and outsourcing services in Japan, US and Singapore for more than 30 years
is worded promotes Smith's achievements. Another sentence with issues isThe working staff of Skillhouse is made up of different nationalities to cater to both local and foreign clients and candidates
, which isn't noteworthy (in the broad scheme of things) and is phrased to appease potential clients or hires. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:23, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi everyone! Thank you very much for your input, I will work on fixing the article especially the promotional language! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shallou Vignette (talk • contribs) 07:29, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Creating a page about my former teacher's modality
Hi there. I'm trying to create a page on a modality. It's my former teacher's modality, which sometimes I use. I want to do it right, but wasn't sure what option to choose.
Do I need to pick "this article is about me or somebody close to me"? It is not about me. And that person is not close to me but was one of my many teachers.
What should I do?
Thank you. Gamze Cassandra Evren (talk) 08:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Gamze Cassandra Evren: What exactly do you mean by "modality"? If you're writing about your teacher, then we do consider that as conflict of interest editing. It's very hard to write about someone you know because it is very hard for you to write from a neutral point of view. Be sure that the subject fulfills the notability guideline, and refer to WP:YFA for more details. ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 10:38, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Ganbaruby: Possibly you may look at Gamze's sandbox User:Gamze Cassandra Evren/sandbox to see what they mean. --CiaPan (talk) 14:25, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Gamze Cassandra Evren: Please be aware that creating a brand new article from scratch is one of the most difficult task at Wikipedia. For a beginner it's close to impossible. Wikipedia requires us to obey many policies and guidelines, WP:N and WP:VER as most important, also WP:NPOV. It is better for newcommers to begin with minor corrections and expansions in existing articles, preferably in their area of competence, and not start new pages until they reach some basic level of proficiency. --CiaPan (talk) 14:25, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Ganbaruby, thank you very much for your comment. I saw that you referred to what was in my Sandbox. That was the old version. After receiving the comments, I realised that there is a different way to how to write things. I changed it and rewrote the whole thing according to Wikipedia guidelines in the best way I could. Now, my question is; The subject I’m writing about is a modality created by my teacher. I’m not writing about my teacher. I’m writing about a psychotherapeutic process which is in use in the world, created by her. I was just wondering if it’s still considered writing about a close person, although it’s not written about a person? Although it’s not the main modality I use,( or you can call it like an intervention technique, with it’s own rules, like Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, Hypnotherapy etc) it’s partially what I do in my profession. My main job is Clinical Hypnotherapy. So, with this in light, Which option I should pick. Article is not about me, this article is about me or somebody close to me? With appreciation, looking forward to your reply Ganbaruby. @Ganbaruby: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamze Cassandra Evren (talk • contribs)
- Gamze Cassandra Evren Please make follow up comments in this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. Thanks 331dot (talk) 09:38, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Working on stubs is fun! But what happens next?
It's quite easy to find stubs to work on, but is there a guideline for de-stubbing? Is it only the jurisdiction of affiliated Wiki-projects? Is it poor taste for the person who added refs/material to 'rank up' an article themselves? Or is removing stub notices considered a low-priority task?
Best, Estheim (talk) 09:14, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Estheim Hello and welcome. If you have improved an article and you feel that it is no longer a stub, you are allowed to remove the stub tag. It isn't something you have to wait for a WikiProject to do or anyone else. 331dot (talk) 09:16, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Personally, I feel comfortable upgrading Stub to Start, and perhaps Start to C-class after having worked to improve an article, but not C-class to B-class. If not sure, you can create a section on the Talk page to ask another editor to assess the quality of the revised article and decide to upgrade or not. David notMD (talk) 10:47, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
@Estheim: See WP:DESTUB and WP:RATER for advice and a useful tool, respectively. Don't forget to remove any stub template from the bottom of any article as well as the stub rating on the talk page (I so often forget about the article templates!) The fantastic things about improving and simultaneously removing stub templates is that not only enhances the encyclopaedia in a fast and effective way, but it also helps other people who like to work on groups of articles in WikiProjects. One good tip is to work through all the most important articles within any given WikiProject that interests you is to check that they genuinely still are Stub-rated. They might well have been improved but never upgraded. See this guidance which I wrote on using the Quality Assessment Table to help you find the most worthwhile stub articles to work on. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:16, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you 331dot, when I am ready to put on my Assessment Cap, I will wear it with confidence.
That is a good rule of thumb, David notMD. That's roughly how I feel about WP:Assess, sticking with obvious stub-to-start as I learn.
Thank you for the resource links and tips, Nick Moyes. I have been using the Project Ratings grid and indeed it makes the efforts feel more rewarding. Cheers all, Estheim (talk) 13:00, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
How to find authentic citation !
Thanks User:HostBot (talk · contribs) for the invitation, I am feeling lucky here and my greeting to all the members of The Teahouse. I Have a little doubt, please guide me if possible.
Which type of citation accepted on the wiki? I am trying to write an article the first time so a little bit nervous about it. Visit too many guidelines but can't understand the same subject. My real confusion is how do I find the citation is authenticated and real. Micromadmonkey (talk) 11:26, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, Micromadmonkey, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. You may find an answer to your question at citing sources; but I want to give you more general advice. I understand the desire to make your mark by creating a new article - I remember feeling that way myself back in 2006 - but in all honesty, creating a new article is one of the worst ways for a new editor to contribute. Creating an article is not easy, and for an editor who hasn't got used to Wikipedia's unique requirements it is often very frustrating, as other editors can seem to be cruel as they try to guide you to understanding Wikipedia's policies: you might find all your work thrown away if you haven't understood the foundations of an article. We have over six million articles, and tens of thousands of them (at least) are in a sorry state; almost all six million could be improved. I would strongly advise you to put creating an article on one side for the moment, and find some existing articles that you can improve. You might do that by finding articles in an area that interests you, or perhaps by going to the Community portal. If you haven't already, I suggest you take The Wikipedia Adventure, and that you read your first article before you try to create one. Happy editing! --ColinFine (talk) 12:00, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Question about my first submission
I believe I managed to submit my first draft for revision today, but I didn't get any confirmation which I could see. How can I know the submission was successful, and what's next? Also, I added an image to go with this submission but I didn't see it added to the draft copy. And, how do I add tags of WikiProjects, which I read it's advisable in order to speed up review? Thanks for any help you can provide. - Susan Wrote This (talk) 12:03, 1 December 2020 (UTC) Susan Wrote This (talk) 12:03, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse Susan Wrote This. You saved Draft:Danilo McGarry but did not submit it for review. You uploaded File:Danilo mcgarry-bio.jpg to Commons but did not add it to any page. Your statement that the photo is your "own work" is inconsistent with the credit to David Fernandes. —teb728 t c 12:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you so much! Indeed. I got stuck with the photo. How do I fix it? How do I submit Draft:Danilo McGarryfor review? Obviously, I wrongly thought I had submitted it. How do I add File:Danilo mcgarry-bio.jpg to Draft:Danilo McGarry? -- Susan Wrote This (talk) 13:02, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, Susan Wrote This. In answer to your first question, there is a big button near the top that says "Submit the draft for review!". But in my opinion it has very little chance of being accepted at present, because I cannot see a single source that is all three of Independent, Reliably published, and has Significant coverage of McGarry. Please understand that Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything that McGarry says or wants to say about himself, or that his associates or employees say about him: Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with him, and who have not been prompted or fed information on his behalf, have chosen to publish about him in reliable sources. Unless you can find at least three separate publications that meet this, he does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and all your work will be wasted. See also CSMN.
- On the image, I'm afraid there is bad news there, too: the image you have uploaded has been nominated for deletion, on the grounds that it does not appear to have been licensed by the copyright owner. I suggest you leave this unless and until you can demonstrate notability, and then you need the copyright holder either to upload the picture themselves, or to send the mails specified in donating copyright materials. --ColinFine (talk) 15:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
AfC
How do I submit an article? I submitted my own article twice before that didn't get deleted, but I don't know if this one would get article status a gd fan (talk) 14:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @GeometryDashFan12: you submit drafts by pasting
{{subst:submit}}
(as it appears when viewing this page) into them, and saving the page. I have fixed this instance for you. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:25, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Untitled Question
MMilanezi (talk) 14:10, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I'm doing a page biography for my teacher, I have all the text in the box, but I have a couple of questions: a) I misspelled his last name and it seems I can't change it in the title; b) it says my contribution is not submitted for review
- @MMilanezi: Draft:Vidar Halldorsson is submitted for review. However, in it's state, it is unlikely to be accepted because it fails to show that the subject is notable enough to have an article (WP:NBIO). The article must have multiple secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the subject to demonstrate notability. Right now you only have links to Halldorsson's university, which is not independent. You're draft's sourcing is also not in the correct format; see Help:Referencing for beginners for how to do it correctly. ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 14:55, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Naming
Why do you call this place the Teahouse SuperSonicPlus (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @SuperSonicPlus: From meta:Research:Teahouse: "The name Teahouse is meant to evoke the idea of a comfortable social space for meaningful personal interaction among peers. The name Teahouse is also a nod to the English Wikipedia essay a nice cup of tea and a sit down, which urges editors to acknowledge one another's good points, and is often used to nudge people towards being congenial when things get heated." It's a name that feels nice and cozy; I like it a lot. ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 14:50, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
David Ullman
I was declined on this very accomplished engineer because of 'tone.' I am not sure how I could have written this any more dry or non promotional and in compliance. I am wondering if it is because I wrote "internationally recognized expert" in the lead?
I have this issue often and have tried many times to comply with all the help articles referring to 'tone' but can never seem to satisfy. Guidance would be greatly appreciated as the subject is notable and deserves recognition.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! LassoLaneFolks (talk) 14:21, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- LassoLaneFolks Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I think the tone issue comes up because what you wrote reads like a resume or list of accomplishments, and not an encyclopedia article. I might suggest that you review other articles about people to get a sense of how they should be written; fewer lists and more prose would help
- Also please understand that Wikipedia is not a place to provide recognition for people; we're only concerned with if they meet the Wikipedia definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 14:32, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- For Draft:David Ullman, delete the list of patents, and refs to those. Delete the list of journal articles, and refs to those. A Wikipedia article is ideally about the significance of a person, not a list of their accomplishments. With a few exceptions for simple factual information, delete all refs which cite Ullman as the source of the information. Only then, see if you have at least three strong refs that are about Ullman. David notMD (talk) 15:25, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Who are you
73.128.212.50 (talk) 15:57, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- This is the Teahouse - a friendly help forum for people needing assistance in understanding how to contribute to, and edit, Wikipedia. Do you have an editing-related question for us? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Nick Moyes, No, I think they were just scared. Le Panini Talk 03:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
More than one Account?
Hi All! Quick and easy question (I hope): I currently use Wikipedia to edit on behalf of my employer, and have disclosed on my talk page as well as the pages I have been paid to edit. However, I would ALSO like to contribute as myself and to not have my edits associated with my employer.
Is it appropriate for me to simply create another account with my personal email address? I worry that my IP address will be flagged, since I access Wikipedia mainly from one location. Just want to make sure I'm doing it right. Thank you for any guidance! Jcollinsycc (talk) 16:04, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, Jcollinsycc. The use you are describing is not specifically mentioned in VALIDALT, but in my view it would be acceptable, provided you were open about it - i.e., disclosed on both user pages the fact and the reasons for having two accounts. I'm not an expert on username policy though, so others may disagree. You would need to be careful that you never edited anything remotely connected with your employer using the other account. I'm not sure what you mean about your email address. If you're talking about the address you may optionally associate with an account, nobody ever sees that address (unless they email you and you choose to reply by email from that account). --ColinFine (talk) 16:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you, ColinFine! That makes sense. I'll hold off for a bit in case someone else weighs in. I appreciate your feedback! Jcollinsycc (talk) 16:50, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Jcollinsycc: I would agree with ColinFine. I read the shortend version (WP:MULTIPLE) amd feel that declaring the link between the two accounts and you, their one user, plus the purposes of each account would be fine. The one no-no would be if you ever used both accounts to either edit one article, or to add two !votes to a discussion, as this would be seen as sockpuppetry, and both accounts would be liable to be blocked if that were detected. But for honest, open editing, I think your approach would be quite acceptable. Transparency is the key, and it seems like you already appreciate that. I run two accounts, and have declared the linkage between them and me on each of the userpages. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:45, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you Nick Moyes, for the added detail - it helps to see an example of it as well!
Is there anyone over here username taggy
SuperSonicPlus (talk) 16:57, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @SuperSonicPlus: Are you thinking of the fictitious User:Taggy McTaggerstein from The Wikipedia Adventure? TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 17:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- There is actually someone with that name on the german Wikipedia. Victor Schmidt (talk) Thanks
Traslation
I am attempting to translate the page Zhang Jike into Tagalog. I modified the translation and attempted to publish the changes, but it said it contains a total of 100% unmodified text. Why is this? D4135t 16:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @D4135t: Hmm, you might have more luck asking at the Tagalog Wikipedia help page, since that's the destination. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 19:25, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
To donate
To donate I do not have any money in my checking account so when I get some I can give a little then, if that is ok with you? I get paid on 12/ 3 / 2020 will that be ok? Debnan (talk) 18:18, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Debnan: I am pretty sure. You are by far not the only donator, I am pretty sure that Wikipedia won't run out of money to pay the server bills yust because you didn't donate. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:27, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Donating not a requirement to being an editor. Welcome to Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 19:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Debnan, as much as the Wikimedia Foundation would appreciate a donation from you, it is not required to edit or read Wikipedia or any of its sister projects. As far as I know the Foundation is doing fine from current donations so there is no rush to donate (or at all). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:28, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Archiving a section on a talk page
Hey, I am not sure if my thinking is correct, but is there a way to archive a section on a talk page? I am wondering this for my user talk page. Thanks for the help. Mulstev (talk) 19:32, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Mulstev. You can find the instructions at Help:Archiving a talk page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Editing Developing Stories
Hello! I'm new to Wikipedia. Should I wait to edit pages on developing stories or should I edit them as new information comes out? Specifically I was trying to edit the Volga Maniac article because a man just confessed to being the killer. Thanks! PGaz05 (talk) 20:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, PGaz05. That's a very sensible question, so thank you for asking it. Wikipedia only reports on what Reliable Sources have written about a subject. Developing stories, rcent deaths, major incidents are all very changeable subjects, and require considerable care and experience. (We recently indefinitely blocked a young editor for linking an American journalist to that of a child murderer with zero justification - and they or their parents were lucky not to have been pursued in the courts) Reporting on criminal accusations needs extreme care, and I see your account is just two days old. So my advice is to do yourself a favour and find less challenging areas on which to learn how to edit. You might like to read some guidance on these topics. Here are some shortcuts to them: WP:NOTNEWS and WP:BLP and WP:RS and, of course, Help:Introduction. Does this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 20:53, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yes thanks so much Nick Moyes! — Preceding unsigned comment added by PGaz05 (talk • contribs) 06:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Regarding Music Articles
Hello, Teahouse editors. I'm currently trying to create an article for a Juice Wrld song. While looking around the internet for an acceptable cover image, I found several of them that are the same (they're all for the same song, obviously). However, I'm not sure what sites are considered OK to use (I considered using the SoundCloud image, but I'm wary of doing so). Can someone help me out with this, and can anyone also give me any website recommendations? TheKingCartii (talk) 20:30, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, TheKingCartii, and welcome to the Tewahouse. Album covers are one kind of image for which it is often acceptable to use non-free content: see NFCI. If your proposed use meets all the criteria in the non-free content criteria, then you don't need any kind of permission, but may upload an image (to Wikipedia, not Commons). Note that if you're creating the article as a draft (which I would strongly recommend) then you may not use a non-free image in it, but only in an article in article space; so you should hold off uploading it until that has happened. --ColinFine (talk) 22:22, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Question by Soundcloudlegends
Photographer uploading a picture Hello, I was trying to upload a picture for the artist, Kobenz, I have done a few of his shoots. It's blocking me from uploading, any recommendations? I have also noticed there is a city of Kobenz and an artist Kobenz. I feel these two should be differenciated. Soundcloudlegends (talk) 20:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- To upload to Wikipedia, you need to have 10 edits and 4+ days' tenure at minimum. That said, Wikipedia won't accept images of living people under fair use anyway. I would go thru the process at WP:Donating copyrighted materials. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 21:31, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, Soundcloudlegends, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you own the copyright to the pictures, and you are willing to license them under CC-BY-SA (which will irrevocably allow anybody to reuse and alter them, for any purpose, commercial or not, as long as they attribute the source), then you can upload them to Wikimedia Commons, which doesn't have a restriction on new editors uploading. If you want to do that, go to Commons:Commons:Upload Wizard.
- As for the disambiguation: yes, this is a common occurrence which we have standard ways of dealing with. Unfortunately, what you did was to trash the existing article about the city. It looks as if Davidwr is sorting this out, and will put the material you tried to add into a new draft page where you can work on it, and submit it for review when it is ready. Have you read Your first article and WP:NMUSICIAN? --ColinFine (talk) 22:33, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @ColinFine:, @Soundcloudlegends: I am working with an admin to sort it out. As of a few minutes ago, the edits have been removed from Kobenz but as far as I can tell, they have not been restored yet. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:04, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Question by Peterrivington
An article of mine was nominated for speedy deletion by Rodney Araujo and Seraphimblade. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sankey_Photographs. I strongly deny any element of promotion and consider the subject to be extremely notable as it concerns photographs which are already used on Wikipedia. I have now moved the article to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Sankey_Family_Photography_Collection in order to correct the title. Neither of the deletionists has replied to my comments. Is there any way out of draft space?Peterrivington (talk) 21:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC) Peterrivington (talk) 21:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Peterrivington. Welcome to the Teahouse. Unlike Hotel California, it is quite possible to checkout and leave draftspace. I have added a button for you to submit your draft for review and feedback when you're ready. It looks to have potential, but if the collection itself is notable, it probably needs some good reliable sources that talk about it, rather than the two generations of photographers, who may well be notable themselves if they've been written about. These references really need to be inserted as inline citations- at least one per paragraph. See this guidance page for easily adding references. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:52, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Permission to publish a translated page/ issues with the Reference list/ Need of a mentor! :-) Many thanks
Hello to all! I have just translated this page from Portuguese and I am having some issues. Here is the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:International_Hub_for_Sustainable_Developmenttent%C3%A1vel The issues I am finding are in the talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:International_Hub_for_Sustainable_Development. Also, it seems I need permission to publish that from a more experienced translator. I appreciate all help! GisaPlima (talk) 21:16, 1 December 2020 (UTC)GiselaPlima GisaPlima (talk) 21:16, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Answered on the talk page Draft talk:International Hub for Sustainable Development. --ColinFine (talk) 22:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Question regarding a page I edited for someone I know
Hi, I edited the page- Alexi Lubomirski - and it has been reverted to the version before I edited. I am directly connected to him and curious why my page was reverted as everything is factual. Any chance someone can help? Azimmerman333 (talk) 21:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Azimmerman333. That can seem really annoying when you know something to be true, but another editor removes it. The problem I see with this edit you made is that there is absolutely no way for anyone else to VERIFY what you said by checking with publicly available RELIABLE SOURCES. Anything that can't be verified should not go onto Wikipedia - that's our mantra. So you will need to address this. There is guidance HERE on how our editing tool can help you easily add inline citations, but the work of finding those sources in the first place is up to you. You then ought to declare on your userpage that you have a bit of a 'conflict of interest' - we have guidance here on how to declare a CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC).
- Azimmerman333, Wikipedia depends on information from verifiable sources, not on things personally known to its contributors. Your edits not only added things based on your personal knowledge (which you might get away with in a small way), they removed statements based on cited sources, together with the references to those sources; that is not acceptable. Maproom (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Question
What is a "user sandbox"? I was reading The Signpost just now and in the section about paid editors it mentioned it. It also shows on my user page and when I click the thing in the top right corner of my screen when I put it into advanced mode. Ex-Borg Seven of Nine (talk) 23:23, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Ex-Borg Seven of Nine. In brief, your user sandbox is a place for you to develop content and test code. Please read Wikipedia:About the sandbox for complete details. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:31, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Apparently my sandbox is not created yet? And I'm having the same problem I had with my user page. Ex-Borg Seven of Nine (talk) 23:51, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Ex-Borg Seven of Nine, if there has been no content on the page it doesn't exist. Once you decide to add content to it and save, it will exist. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Your sandbox will be at User:Ex-Borg Seven of Nine/Sandbox. Just edit it and it will be created. Meters (talk) 01:02, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
That's the thing. I hit publish, and then it just loads and loads and loads and it doesn't publish. Never mind, is there a sandbox that's been created? Ex-Borg Seven of Nine (talk) 01:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Ex-Borg Seven of Nine, I wouldn't suggest going to other user sandboxes and adding stuff. I made your sandbox here. You should be able to click the link on the top left corner of your browser that says "Sandbox" to get there too. Le Panini Talk 03:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Le Panini: You created User:Ex-Borg Seven of Nine/Sandbox, but the link at the top of pages Ex-Borg Seven of Nine sees when logged in is to User:Ex-Borg Seven of Nine/sandbox (lowercase s), so that link will still be a redlink. The "Subpages" link at the bottom of the editor's contributions page can be used to find the sandbox, though. Deor (talk) 16:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Bo-Ying Lee does not show link to wikidata
Hi, I don't see Bo-Ying Lee linking to wikidata (Q102826015) on the left side of the Wikipedia page. Thanks, SWP13 (talk) 23:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Reply>>ColinFine, How did you purge the page? Awsome, it shows a wikidata link now. Thanks.SWP13 (talk) 23:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, SWP13. I picked "Purge" from the "More" menu at the top of my page. I don't know whether everybody sees that or whether it's because I have enabled a gadget. See WP:Purge (which I linked to). To reply to a message here just indent with a colon (:) - one more colon than the message you are replying to. --ColinFine (talk) 12:03, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- @SWP13 and ColinFine: Purging has to be enabled by going to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets, and then choosing "Add a "Purge" option to the top of the page, which purges the page's cache". Alternatively, you can purge using the commands at Wikipedia:Purge#Purge local browser cache (the commands depend on your web browser). Joseph2302 (talk) 12:09, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Joseph2302 ColinFine, In Gadgets tab, I added Purge and clock to personal tool bar. I do see the UTC clock on my upper-right-corner now. Will use it the next time I don't see the wikidata link. Thanks again, SWP13 (talk) 16:48, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Disclosing COI
Disclosing COI RE: Peter Petros Wiki
I have not been able to get a Wiki article through as I have been dinged for COI and copyright issues on my images.
I am wondering how I may amend this and disclose my COI? I have tried following the instructions but I cannot understand them. My relationship to Petros is that I have interviewed him in the past for work. Although in this instance I was not asked to create an article by him or anyone else, nor have I been paid to do so.
I am was extremely impressed by his CV and my interview with him in the past. I believe this man needs more exposure as a researcher in womens health and prolific academic journal article creator as currently there is little to no information on his academic and research achievements -- only newspaper articles over a past controversy that was all over the Australian news at the time making any research on Petros impossible.
The images which were used were taken from his academic articles that are open to the public and I was also given further consent and images to use when I reached out to him to tell him that I wanted to create a Wiki on him.
Please help! I am very new to this all and am eager to create more articles but I need to understand where I am going wrong and how I may disclose my COI regarding this wiki so that it may be published. GW.Pub (talk) 00:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Regarding "I believe this man needs more exposure as a researcher in womens health and prolific academic journal article creator", that is exactly the wrong reason to write a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is not concerned with spreading the word about someone; we're only concerned with summarizing what independent reliable sources say about a person, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person.
- There are formal ways to disclose a COI, but a simple statement on your user talk page will suffice. 331dot (talk) 00:23, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Courtesy: Now at Draft:Peter Petros. As stated by 331dot, add a statement to your User page that you have met and interviewed Peter Petros and decided to create an article about him, an are not being paid or otherwise compensated for the effort. David notMD (talk) 02:29, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- In my opinion the draft is far too long, large amounts of content are not referenced, large amounts are not about Petros, cut, cut, cut. David notMD (talk) 02:36, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- The comment above this one suggests that much of the article's material may be a product of the interview with the subject, and unpublished and unusable in the article. Even the published interview, as it is written by the article's creator, seems to be slightly inappropriate as a source in this instance.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:48, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- In my opinion the draft is far too long, large amounts of content are not referenced, large amounts are not about Petros, cut, cut, cut. David notMD (talk) 02:36, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Courtesy: Now at Draft:Peter Petros. As stated by 331dot, add a statement to your User page that you have met and interviewed Peter Petros and decided to create an article about him, an are not being paid or otherwise compensated for the effort. David notMD (talk) 02:29, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
20th Infantry Regiment
I dont know all the lineage but I know what is listed is wrong and/or incomplete for the 20th Infantry Regiment. My father was in this unit during WWII and Korea. I dont know how to fix it so I wanted to make you aware. 160.2.17.170 (talk) 00:44, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. We will need more information than "it is wrong" in order to be able to help you. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state, and is not based on personal knowledge, this is necessary for verification purposes. If you have independent reliable sources that say something different than the current article does, please offer them and what changes you want to make, on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 01:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi IP editor. If you are at least able to suggest key elements which you suspect might be incorrect or need some attention, you could post a list of concerns on the article's talk page in the hope it might spur other editors to investigate. But, as 330dot says, we can't change article content without having sources we can reference (cite). Your prompting on the talk page might get others to do some checking, but we can't incorporate hearsay, no matter how correct that might actually be. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:40, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Donald Trump
Would it be possible for someone else to write the bio for Donald Trump, it was obviously written by someone who is either a Democrat or someone who just Hates him !!! Could someone who is knowledgeable about how to do this and will not put in judgement like calling him a racist, a liar, accusing him of not replacing aca when pelosi stopped 3 plans and worst of all accusing him of not handling c19 properly when he did FAR more to battle this crisis than ANY president ever in american history, I mean come on the ships, the hospitals, the ppe, the ventilators, Warp speed vaccines and on and on and on. COME on the description of him doesn't give him CREDIT for anything but on the contrary does nothing but try to make him look as bad as possible. Will someone who feels neutral and will just write his bio WITHOUT injecting personal opinion please write this, if I knew how I would. If Wikipedia is going to be like the media and only allow favorable pieces to be written about Democrats then they don't deserve donations except from democrats. This should be a neutral site and only print the TRUTH not personal opinion. PLEASE someone give this the attention it deserves. Thanks; Mitchel 2601:940:4200:38F0:F414:C029:DA8:DAAD (talk) 00:57, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- If you have reliable, independent sources that say otherwise about his life, please provide them. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:59, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state; if you don't agree with what they say, you will need to take that up with them. See WP:TRUTH. Wikipedia does not deal in truth, but in what can be verified, because truth is in the eye of the beholder. If you just want to stay in your bubble and be told what you want to hear, this isn't the place for you. 331dot (talk) 01:01, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello IP. How're you doing out there in Alabama? I'm sitting here in the UK, listening to CNN live on the internet (ever since Fox News stopped letting me watch it here a couple of weeks ago for some reason). I haven't looked at the Trump article, but right now CNN is literally calling Trump a 'liar' and a 'con man' (over his $170m appeal for donations from gullible people to fight 'election fraud' with something called a PAC, whatever that is), so I imagine there are many other good and well-respected sources saying the same thing, which Wikipedia will, in due course, report. It doesn't report unsubstantiated nonsense. But you are totally and utterly correct in one thing: You said about Covid19
"he did FAR more to battle this crisis than ANY president ever in american history"
Spot on. Damn right he did. That's one statement that nobody in their right mind would argue with at this time. As you know, the virus appeared during the final 12 months of Trump's presidency, so no prior president could ever have done anything about it, as it didn't exist then. So, of course he's done more than any past president in american history! From what I'm hearing on this side of the pond, I suspect the next incoming president will be able to easily and quickly match all Trump's efforts and commitment thus far to tackle Covid-19, and I know that Wikipedia will report what other reliable sources say when those things occur. What we don't (or shouldn't) inject, is personal opinion; we base Wikipedia content on factual, verifiable, reliable sources. Thus far, a total of 6,104 different editors have contributed to the article on Donald Trump. It isn't just one person collating this information, you know! Nick Moyes (talk) 01:36, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello IP. How're you doing out there in Alabama? I'm sitting here in the UK, listening to CNN live on the internet (ever since Fox News stopped letting me watch it here a couple of weeks ago for some reason). I haven't looked at the Trump article, but right now CNN is literally calling Trump a 'liar' and a 'con man' (over his $170m appeal for donations from gullible people to fight 'election fraud' with something called a PAC, whatever that is), so I imagine there are many other good and well-respected sources saying the same thing, which Wikipedia will, in due course, report. It doesn't report unsubstantiated nonsense. But you are totally and utterly correct in one thing: You said about Covid19
- Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state; if you don't agree with what they say, you will need to take that up with them. See WP:TRUTH. Wikipedia does not deal in truth, but in what can be verified, because truth is in the eye of the beholder. If you just want to stay in your bubble and be told what you want to hear, this isn't the place for you. 331dot (talk) 01:01, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Care to mulligan on the topic area you want to get involved in? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 01:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Two comments: 1) As Nick Moyes pointed out, every article is the accrual of content added by multiple editors, so there was no "someone" who wrote the article, nor "someone else" who can place it; and 2) the Foundation accepts donations to keep the Wiki-universe operating, but that is entirely separate from the volunteer editors who create and delete and edit articles. David notMD (talk) 03:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Wow. Just wow. This is how the holocaust happened you know? The bigger the lie... Gobsmacking.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Question from Borbe64
can you please contribute to the article called borbe64 it is a motivational thing so people can feel better about their selves Borbe64 (talk) 02:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC) Borbe64 (talk) 02:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- No. We are not a substitute for therapy. Try somewhere else. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 02:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Borbe64: You have not created an article. Your User page, where you have written "hi this is a page that you can type encouraging messages below because we all need that extra light in our day in this pandemic you all are amazing" is supposed to be a place where you create content explaining your intentions as a Wikipedia editor. Other editors are not supposed to write anything on other editors' User pages. Your Talk page is for communicating, but only about Wikipedia-related stuff, like edits on articles. David notMD (talk) 03:00, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Lifting Extended confirm protection of an article
Hello,there is a certain article which's unneccessarily extended confirm protected and it's mismanaged due to lack of editors. Is there any way to lift it off?Falcon with appendix (talk) 03:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
BTW,it's current season of ISL. And I'm asking to lift it off as it's underedited due to lack of more editors and even current seasons of Premier League,La Liga,Bundesliga,Serie A and Ligue 1 don't have such unfair limitations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Falcon with appendix (talk • contribs) 04:09, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Falcon with appendix: Welcome to the Teahouse. From what I can see on the page's protection log, extended confirmed protection is set to expire on December 3, which isn't that far off. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:14, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Are legit News sources are no longer reliable sources?
I'm not sure why this draft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Len_Tepper) was cited for not having reliable sources. CBS News and AdWeek are used as sources in many wiki articles.
Thank you, Teahouse, for any information you could provide. Nynewsguy (talk) 04:02, 2 December 2020 (UTC) Nynewsguy (talk) 04:03, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Nynewsguy. Often reliability depends upon WP:RSCONTEXT and the type of information the source is being used to cite. Some of the sources your citing in the article mention Tepper only by name as part of some other story; so, they are not something which is going to be considered WP:SIGCOV of Tepper himself. Some of the other sources you've cited don't seem to mention Tepper at all, which means they have pretty much zero value in establishing his Wikipedia notability. Try to focus on content and sources that clearly establish Tepper's Wikipedia notability. Perhaps also try asking at WP:JOURNALISM for some feedback as well. It kind of seem that Tepper might meets some of the criteria given in WP:NJOURNALIST; so, perhaps focus on those things and finding sources for those things will help better clarify his Wikipedia notability. You can also try asking for clarification on the user talk page of the AfC reviewer who declined the page or WP:AFDHELP. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:58, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Rick O'Connel
I am an editor part of WP:FCHAR, as I am very interested in movies, books and fictional characters. I spotted that Rick O'Connell redirects to Mummy Franchise characters. But, he is the lead protagonist in all 3 movies of the series. So shouldn't there be an additional article. I myself have created such articles like Dr Smolder Bravestone, which was reviewed and accepted. But the Jack Dawson article was deleted. Also, Imhotep (The Mummy) is an article on the lead antagonist of the series. While Imhotep is in 3 movies and 1 Tv show, Rick is in 3 movies. As I have presented my view, please comment as you are all experienced editors. I have also put the question in Wikiproject:Fictional Characters Thank you. --Atlantis77177 (talk) 06:02, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Film characters are no different from other topics – they need to meet WP:GNG and there should be significant coverage in reliable and independent sources about the character, not the actor or the movie in general. If there is such sourcing, by all means draft an article about O'Connell and submit it for review! As for Dr Smolder Bravestone, I don't see where it was reviewed. Didn't you create that in mainspace? I don't really think there is any indication of that character being independently notable, to be honest, but that's a different issue. The character of Imhotep has appeared in one film from 1932 and a very different film from 2000, as well as the sequel to the latter film and two separate TV series. These different incarnations have different backstories, different developments, and are represented in very different ways indeed. That indicates that it is more likely to be a notable character compared to a character appearing within a single story arc, portrayed by one actor, but again, if you find the sources, go ahead and draft the article! Imhotep (The Mummy) is abysmally badly sourced, to be honest. It would surprise me if there are no sources available, but they are not in the article – so that's something that might be worth working on, as well. [edited to add: A very quick search found sources about Karloff's Imhotep: a couple of pages in Mummies around the World: An Encyclopedia of Mummies in History, Religion, and Popular Culture, an article from Journal of Evolutionary Psychology called "Tracking the sands of time: origin stories in the mummy films", and it looks like there are also several pages about it in Horror Film Directors, 1931-1990 by Dennis Fisher, though that's not a book I have access to.] --bonadea contributions talk 10:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Succession box vs infobox
I'm editing the page for John Yellow Bird Steele, who was president of the Oglala Sioux Tribe 6 different times.
Right now I have the list of dates when he was president as term_start / term_ends 1-6 in an {{Infobox officeholder}}. There's also a succession box ({{S-start}}). If I put all six terms in both, and include successor / predecessor for all 6 in the infobox, the infobox + succession box will be huge.
Should I just have one or the other?
Also, how do I find more info about {{S-start}}? I know I've seen a page with info about it but I can never figure out how to get back to it. What's the standard way of getting info about all those {{}} things I see when editing? GeorgeSonOfJohn (talk) 07:44, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- GeorgeSonOfJohn, while I'll leave someone else to talk about {{Infobox officeholder}} and {{S-start}}, I'll tell you that you can look for template help by searching for
Template:Example
in the search bar, where "Example" is the name of the template you want more information on. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Usage of preferred pronouns?
People who use pronouns such as ‘he/they’, she/they’, or are pronoun flexible only have the binary pronouns used on their page when these pronouns are supposed to be used simultaneously. Are we allowed to edit them as long as they are their preferred pronouns? Sock06 (talk) 08:33, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, User:Sock06. Welcome to the Teahouse. Are there any specific pages you are referring to? This might be an issue worth raising on the talk pages of the articles in question. The relevant guidance for pronoun use is at MOS:GENDERID.
- As your account is relatively new, it might be worth considering creating a new account with a different username. A 'sock' is a term used on Wikipedia for illegimate alternative accounts and having such a name might create possibly undue impressions about your account. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 12:44, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
AloPeyk
It's about 3 months that I was working on the draft and trying to fix the issues which were mentioned by reviewers (here and here). I provided lots of reliable sources in English, Persian, and even french to confirm the notability of the subject (AloPeyk). In comparison with Snapp!, the subject has been mentioned by more English sources such as financial tribune,bloomberglaw and daily star, meanwhile snapp! is available in Wikipedia but AloPeyk does not get the permission to published. If the submission would be accepted, other users such as copyeditors could develop the body of the article based on policies. Hispring (talk) 08:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Over-referenced. Should not take nine references to confirm it exists, or six more references to confirm it delivers stuff. Also has content about plans for future action. David notMD (talk) 09:18, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
How to give titles
I am creating a page and i want to give titles like every page has for example- early life, career etc but i am unknown to the fact how to create those headings. Ibaadat (talk) 09:19, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Ibaadat: You can surrround a text with two or more equal signs to create headings. See also Help:Wikitext. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 09:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Like this:
==Early life==
. Enjoyer of World(bother me...) 11:38, 2 December 2020 (UTC) - @Ibaadat: The more equal signs you add on each side, the smaller the
- Like this:
titles
will
get
tips on how to improve a rejected draft
Hi! I wrote the article below and sent it to be reviewed but it got rejected: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:UPDIVISION
So I wanted to ask, how can I improve it exactly? I tried to keep it as objective as possible. I'm aware several sources cited are not secondary, but what else could I do in the case of products, for instance, where the most info comes from the company's own pages? Also, are there any sections where the phrasing is too commercial-y? Thank you. Mevpeche (talk) 09:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Mevpeche Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The draft you have written about your company just tells about the company and what it does. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must almost exclusively summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company wants to say about itself, only in what others completely unconnected with the company have chosen to say about it. This does not include press releases, the company website, staff interviews, announcements of routine business activities, brief mentions, product descriptions, or other primary sources. Most of the sources you have offered seem to be those sorts of things.
- The "mission" and "vision" section would need to go completely, as it is impossible to independently verify what a business considers to be its mission and vision.
- As a company employee, in order to succeed in writing a draft about your company, you in essence need to forget everything you know about it, and only write based on the content of independent sources. Most people in your position have a difficult time doing that. 331dot (talk) 09:44, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
What is Endflatlist?
When editing (for example, the article on Friedrich Nietzsche: ) I see the word “Endflatlist” between brackets, but the list doesn’t appear as a list in the article itself. Thanks. GümsGrammatiçus (talk) 10:48, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- @GümsGrammatiçus: its a template. See Template:endflatlist. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 11:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestion that I see Template:endflatlist. So, I saw Template:endflatlist, and that page doesn't appear to explain what it is much beyond that it's a template. So I'm interested in knowing what it does? Or Why would it exist in an article? Or why would editors bother with an Endflatlist template? It doesn't seem to contribute to the general reader of Wikipedia, but it must have some purpose. Thanks.GümsGrammatiçus (talk) 04:59, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Last question, I hope (I am way overusing the Teahouse)
I'm in my sandbox, trying to make an Infobox. But when I go to publish it, it has a weird message in the preview. Something about an unknown parameter. How do I fix this? Ex-Borg Seven of Nine (talk) 12:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Templates can be super picky, and usually they don't like capital letters. Try changing "Name" to "name", "Species" to "species", and so on, and see if that helps? (I don't think "first appearance" and "last appearance" are parameters that are supported by that template, either – double-check in Template:Infobox person to see which parameters it recognises.) --bonadea contributions talk 12:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Ex-Borg Seven of Nine, I was just looking there. All the hard work has been done for you, luckily, and you can just fill out a form from pre-existing templates.
- I don't know much about Marvel, but it seems you're making an article about a character from the franchise.
- Either you're gonna want to use the Template:Infobox character template, or the Template:Infobox comics character template. You might want to use either one of these two. (and don't worry about using the Teahouse too much. Helping newcomers is our purpose.) Le Panini Talk 12:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, @Le Panini: and @Bonadea:. (normally I use the thank button but it will take forever to sort through those revisions 😺) Ex-Borg Seven of Nine (talk) 17:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
font too small
How enlarge font in which articles and edits appear? Eye strain. Thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 12:28, 2 December 2020 (UTC) TBR-qed (talk) 12:28, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- TBR-qed, Whatever you type will be set at the default font size. There is a smaller and bigger font, though.
- <small>Small text</small> :
- <big>Big text</big>
- Which looks like this and this.
- However, I wouldn't suggest using them, as Wikipedia uses the same font for every article.
faulty encyclopedia reference
My sandbox is flummoxed by a failed effort to refer to a section of an encyclopedia article, as distinct from reference to page or chapter. My section on Duhem; Stanford encyclopedia section 1.2 in article by Psillos. Thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 12:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC) TBR-qed (talk) 12:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, TBR-qed, and welcxome to the Teahouse. Your question was a bit hard to comprehend, but I did find two duff references at User:TBR-qed/sandbox which I fixed with this edit. (You had some spurious characters present in two of the references, and some curly brackets used in the wrong places.) Hope that helps? I am a bit concerned that you appear to be writing an incredibly long-winded essay on a topic about which we appear to already have an article (Problem of induction).
Is there a reason for this?Striking final question as I've just found this. It also looks like you're beginning to appreciate that we don't write opinion pages about topics in this encyclopaedia, but report what other reliable sources have written about them, and in in a neutral, non-interpretative manner, which is very different from the style encouraged in academia. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:34, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Article Declined - Why?
Why was my article declined? CreepyManMaker (talk) 12:44, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, CreepyManMaker. I'm afraid it was totally uncited and deemed as a blatant hoax so was speedily deleted once it was reviewed at Articles for Creation. In future, try to remember that this is an encyclopaedia of notable things, based upon verifiable, reliable sources. Made up stuff and non-notable nonsense simply gets deleted if it's deemed to have no merit whatsoever. I'm afraid that was the case with 'Carrot Kid', and this isn't a playground for pranksters. Regards. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:22, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Creating References I have revised the draft of my article as advised. Now: please can someone help me create the link of each of the eight references in the text of that revised article to the references list at the end of that article? Merchav1 (talk) 13:35, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome back to the Teahouse, Merchav1. You will find guidance on how you use either of your preferred editing tools to add incline citations yourself. Please either follow the instructions at WP:REFBEGIN or some notes I prepared on the same topic at WP:ERB. You can use one reference to a book at multiple places if you use the
{{rp}}
template immediately after the inline citation to show which page in the book or journal that cited statement refers to. (More details on that in this section. I would expect at the very least that each paragraph about a person would have at least one reference at the end of every paragraph, or multiple citations within it to support multiple assertions of fact. I hope this helps. If after carefully reading through the guidance pages, and giving it a try, you find you're still stuck, just pop back here and identify one precise statement and one source document that you would like to use as a citation, and someone here will possibly add it for you by way of a demonstration, and then leave you to do the rest. You might find it worth looking at the 'edit source' code of a similar article to see how inline citations appear within them. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Please review and move these articles to main space
I am a new user who created two articles. Please review them and give me feedback.
First article for review and move to main space: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kabul_Model_United_Nations Second article for review and move to main space:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Yahya_Qanie Popalzai.diana (talk) 13:55, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Popalzai.diana. We don't review new articles here, but I have added a 'submission' template to both drafts so that, when you're ready, you can submit them to the review panel at Articles for Creation. Be aware there is a huge backlog (c.3,500) and it can take some months for our reviewers to get around to checking any given article. I would add that it is not at all clear to me what a Model United Nations is. Perhaps you are a little too close to the subject? So, could you try to imagine yourself knowing nothing about the topic and start the article in a simple explanatory way which assumes no prior knowledge? Many thanks. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:12, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- As they stand, neither article is likely to be accepted. Youtube, Twitter and the organisation's own website are not considered reliable sources, which you need to provide to establish that the subject is notable enough to merit an article here. It is not the number of sources that matters so much as the fact that they should be independent of the subject. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Can a good article have a tag about references, etc.?
Joe Kennedy III is nominated as a good article, yet it has a tag regarding TMPS. Does that give the article an eligibility to have GA revoked? a gd fan (talk) 15:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- @GeometryDashFan12: Simply having a template wouldn't be grounds for removing GA status from a current GA (which that article is – it is listed as a GA, not nominated). A template might flag more or less serious issues; the template here indicates that the article relies too much on primary sources, it doesn't say anything about a general lack of sources. The Good Article criteria don't say anything about primary sources. Secondary sources are preferred (otherwise the template wouldn't exist), but that template on its own is not a sign that it would be delisted if it went through a reassessment discussion. --bonadea contributions talk 15:36, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Getting article reviewed
Help please! Getting article reviewed. Hi, I'm new to editing on Wikipedia and trying to get this article published: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Linda_Merrick
Could someone please confirm it's in the line for review. If not, could someone please submit it for review by Wikipedia editors? Thank you very much! Hal.mccollum (talk) 15:22, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Hal.mccollum: and welcome to the Teahouse. No, the article has not been resubmitted, but you can do that rather easily: simply click the blue "Resubmit" button in the pink box. However, before you do that you have to check that no part of the article text is copied straight from any of the sources. One reason it was rejected before was that it contained copyright violating text, and I see that you have rewritten some parts, but not very much, so I have to ask if you have made sure that there are no copyright violations left. --bonadea contributions talk 15:38, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- And do note, Hal.mccollum, that, currently, your article reads more like a resume. This poses a problem in that resumes do not sufficiently show notability as Wikipedia defines it. Wikipedia notability arises from in-depth coverage in reliable, published sources which are independent of their subject. Another thing to keep in mind is that, in an encyclopedia, what a person is known for is typically kept short in the lead paragraph. If a musician is a teacher, has recordings, has an academic position, etc. (which are normal for a musician), only musician should be mentioned in the lead pararaph.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:01, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your feedback @Quisqualis: & @Bonadea:. I updated the opening paragraph. I am happy it isn't violating any copyright. Could someone please confirm it's been resubmitted for review? (Sorry, still getting to grips with the submit function). Thanks a lot. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Linda_Merrick
Editing Reference
Adding .pdf to reference
I'm trying to edit a reference by adding text and two .pdf's. The .pdf's are copies of Court documents so I don't own the copyright. How do I add these references without violating some rule? Ralphwrites (talk) 16:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, Ralphwrites, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer is that you almost certainly don't. If they are public documents, then give appropriate bibliographic information in the reference (most easily by using {{cite court}}; if they are not, then they may not be used as a source. While it's obviously convenient for reviewers and readers for sources to be available online, it is not required; and if there is an online source, it is important that it be a reliable source - not a copyright infringement, and not a document that a random person has uploaded to a sharing site. --ColinFine (talk) 16:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Template isn't Collapsing by Default
I have added a template for the works of Brothers Grimm on the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hansel_and_Gretel_(2021_film). However, like other templates, it isn't hidden by default. I can't seem to find a solution to this issue. I want it to be hidden by default as all other templates. Anybody out there knowledgeable on this issue? EnshrineSnowVista (talk) 16:18, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi EnshrineSnowVista I have made the requested change per this edit. You may or may not know this already, but I'll mention that most templates have documentation explaining various aspects of their use, which is accessed by navigating to the template page itself – here Template:Hansel and Gretel – which explained how to set the template to a collapsed state upon initial view. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you so much Fuhghettaboutit and Deor for the help. So it is the state=collapsed portion.EnshrineSnowVista (talk) 16:40, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- You're most welcome--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Responding to people on your talk page
Hello, I got a question and I'm kinda new to this stuff so; How do you respond to people on your talk page?
Thanks!
Mr. Amasballs Mr. Amasballs (talk) 16:28, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you EnshrineSnowVista!
Please go to the Talk Page. Then click Edit Source button on top-right, scroll all the way down and find the last sentence. Then add a new line by clicking Enter. Then type. Then click Publish Changes.EnshrineSnowVista (talk) 16:40, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- To make the conversation more legible add a
:
to the beginning of your comment to indent it. You can find more information at WP:INDENT. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry for wasting your time because... well your nice but some people are really rude here.Mr. Amasballs (talk) 17:01, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Mr. Amasballs, It's a difference between "rude" and "passive aggressive, because they've been doing this for so long". It'll become more clear as time goes on. Le Panini Talk 17:08, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Well at lest look at my talk page I mean seriously. Mr. Amasballs (talk) 17:11, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- No, that's standard stuff (business, not personal, making a The Godfather reference). All new editors have a steep learning curve. Experienced editors with intentions to help can come across too curt. Wikipedia advises "Don't bite the newbies." but sometimes that is forgotten. The volunteer editors at Teahouse are on average a bit more diplomatic. Ask away. David notMD (talk) 21:06, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Looking at the user's talk page, perhaps Guidance for younger editors might be a recommended page to read? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:02, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Editing References
- Note: I totally screwed up this response at first—the question was entered twice; the first one got cut off, and the user below reposted with different text; I had looked at the page history and answered the first question only, not realizing the continuation in a new section, but I added an unsigned template for the wrong user from the page history; I have now refactored to combine the two posts together add nowiki tags for certain markup, and fixed the wrong attribution I introduced with the unsigned template.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:27, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Editing References (Source)
I'm trying to edit a reference in an article. When I go to edit the reference, a message comes up saying the references were done on a template and need to be edited in Source. When I click on Edit Source a blank form comes up with only— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ralphwrites (talk • contribs)
==References==
{{reflist}}
in it and gives me no way I can see to edit a single reference. It's almost like I need to recreate the entire reference list to change only one of them. The Article I'm trying to edit is "Staunton Military Academy" and the reference I'm trying to edit is #6. Ralphwrites (talk) 17:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Ralphwrites When you are reading an article and see a references section near the bottom populated by a series of numbered citations, you might think that if you edit the page, you will see those citations typed in that section and be able to edit them. However, usually what you will see is markup similar to this:
==References==
or
{{reflist}}<references />
In that case, the text of citations is actually in the body of the article, directly next to the first statements or paragraphs the citations support, using
<ref>...</ref>
tags, which display as Footnotes (e.g.[1][2]) when you are reading an article. The template code shown above in the references section collates and displays all of the citations within the article in a numbered list in which the numbers correspond to the footnote numbers in the text. By clicking on the ^ symbol next to a citation display, you can easily find exactly where in the body of the article the citation text appears in order to edit it. For more, please see Help:Referencing for beginners.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Ralphwrites: Pinging correct OP. Deor (talk) 18:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Editing
What is the best tool to find spelling and grammar mistakes in articles?Superace6 (talk) 18:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC) Superace6 (talk) 18:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse! There's an article on that and you can also volunteer for the typo team (see that page). Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
hey was "typo team (see that page)" met to link to something. Superace6 (talk) 18:42, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- No, Superace6: "article" linked to something, as you can tell because it is blue. --ColinFine (talk) 18:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Superace6: See also WP:TYPO for the Typo Team for hints and tips on finding and fixing typos. RudolfRed (talk) 18:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
How do you edit external Wikipedia tools?
https://wp1.openzim.org/#/ is an external tool used for Wikipedia. I wanted to suggest that https://wp1.openzim.org/#/project/Wildfire/articles?quality=GA-Class&importance=Top-Class should have more entries, because it is missing pages like Valley Fire, Rim Fire, Jesusita Fire, etc. How do you edit such tool? a gd fan (talk) 19:09, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi , a gd fan. You'd make such a suggestion at Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index. Afaik it's not possible to directly edit the tool. Regards, Zindor (talk) 19:18, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Black Flight eligibility
Hello,
I am in a quandary. I am interested in creating an article on B Flight, Royal Naval Squadron 10 during World War I. This flight was known as the Black Flight because they painted their Sopwith Triplanes black and gave them black-themed names. They were all Canadian flying aces and were led by Raymond Collishaw (61 aerial victories) in "Black Maria". William Melville Alexander in "Black Prince" scored 23 victories. Ellis Vair Reid in "Black Roger" scored 19 victories. John Edward Sharman, "Black Death", 8 victories. Gerald Ewart Nash, "Black Sheep", 6 victories. Distinguished Service Crosses all around, as well as some even more prestigious decorations. Collishaw went on to become an Air vice-marshal.
Looks dead-bang notable, right? Well, the difficulty comes in with Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Notability guide#Units and formations. To quote their policy: "...sub-units that exist below the level of those formations or units listed above—such as sections, platoons, troops, batteries, companies, and flights—are not intrinsically notable." A listed suggestion is incorporation into their parent unit, but Black Flight and Collishaw were the most prominent features of Naval 10.
What to do? Is Black Flight notable in and of itself? Suggestions are definitely solicited.Georgejdorner (talk) 19:50, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- If there exist multiple reliable sources discussing them in detail then they are notable. Ruslik_Zero 20:27, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- (e/c) Hi Georgejdorner. Under our main notability guideline topics are presumed notable if they have '"received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
The subject-specific notability guidelines (e.g., for books), and advice at Wikiprojects like this one for military history topics, are essentially adjuncts to that standard – usually attempts to isolate certain attributes that, if some some class of topics share, are an indication that the right types of sources are likely to exist, needed to demonstrate a topic's notability. This is essentially the opposite, an attempt to define a class for which sources are not likely to exist.
Stated another way, when the Wikiproject tells you that X is not "intrinsically notable", I would translate that as saying, in effect: "things within class X are not likely to be actually notable, because for most class-X-subjects, past experience tell us you won't be able to locate the right type, quantity and depth of sources to demonstrates their notability.
All this is to say, if the B Flight of Royal Naval Squadron 10 has actually received significant treatment in reliable, secondary and independent sources, and you demonstrate that by writing an article using those sources (i.e., properly citing them as you go), then the topic is notable, and a stand-alone article is warranted. Full stop. If those sources exist, get writing. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:50, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- (e/c) Hi Georgejdorner I would add a section 2 after history to No. 210 Squadron RAF. If you complete it and find there's enough to do a content fork, then that's the next step. You could ask on the article's talk page after you are done, to get more knowledgeable military buffs involved than you might find here. If there's not enough for the fork, then you could add a redirect to that section. Happy editing. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:57, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- I second what Tim has said above. A very good way to approach this.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- To clarify...it's not notability that bothers me. It's the policy that says they are too small a unit for their own article that I see as a block. I do not care to write an article on Black Flight, only to have it deleted.Georgejdorner (talk) 21:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Your sticking point is "intrinsically." Documenting that a small unit existed and did its job is not sufficient. Documenting that a small unit existed and did an extraordinary job likely would be. The fact that the pilots are already article topics suggests the group can qualify, too. David notMD (talk) 21:44, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- The five of them flying together were credited with 87 aerial victories, which is not exactly ordinary. And I agree with you that the flight should easily qualify--except for that darned policy.Georgejdorner (talk) 22:08, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Coverage? Let's begin with Raymond Collishaw and the Black Flight. And there's the usual Osprey and Grub Street coverage.Georgejdorner (talk) 22:30, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Your sticking point is "intrinsically." Documenting that a small unit existed and did its job is not sufficient. Documenting that a small unit existed and did an extraordinary job likely would be. The fact that the pilots are already article topics suggests the group can qualify, too. David notMD (talk) 21:44, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- To clarify...it's not notability that bothers me. It's the policy that says they are too small a unit for their own article that I see as a block. I do not care to write an article on Black Flight, only to have it deleted.Georgejdorner (talk) 21:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- I second what Tim has said above. A very good way to approach this.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
What does an appendix do?
24.18.33.20 (talk) 20:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi IP editor. Read all about it here--Quisqualis (talk) 20:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Or maybe here. There are numerous ones of this sort at the end of The Return of the King. MarnetteD|Talk 21:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Cleanup on draft
Greetings and salutations once more teahouse staff! I've been working on Draft:Jonathan Basile, and was wondering if someone could do a readthrough/checkup/readability test/etc. and also remind me of how to move a draft to the mainspace whenever it's ready. I feel like there is somewhere else I should be asking this so if that is a thing that'd be nice to know, thanks! SnazzyInfinity (talk • contribs) 21:02, 2 December 2020 (UTC) SnazzyInfinity (talk • contribs) 21:02, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi SnazzyInfinity. Please don't try to move that draft to mainspace. If you do, I will simply WP:REDIRECT it to The Library of Babel (website). You are welcome to do that to, simply by adding the following text:
#REDIRECT The Library of Babel (website) and then preview and save the page.
- You seem to be wanting 'two cracks of the whip' here by using virtually the same references in both articles - one about the man and one about the website he created. To me, the latter looks more notable, but I think you should decide which you feel is most notable, and redirect the other one to it. If you think both are, you'll need to find better references that talk in much more detail about him. Let me know what you think, and should you have a connection with this subject you might need to declare a conflict of interest on your userpage. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, I noticed a lack of unique references, perhaps I'll leave it for a while and see if anything useful as a reference appears, thanks! SnazzyInfinity (talk • contribs) 23:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- I think it would be best to merge the two pages. Would I create a section in The Library of Babel (website) for "the creator"? Is this how I would do that? SnazzyInfinity (talk • contribs) 15:22, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, I noticed a lack of unique references, perhaps I'll leave it for a while and see if anything useful as a reference appears, thanks! SnazzyInfinity (talk • contribs) 23:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- @SnazzyInfinity: I've come across that website before—it's a very cool thing to exist! I agree with Nick that you'd be better off to focus on the page for the website rather than creating a page for Basile. Have two pages rather than one will slow down the development of both by creating additional duplicative work. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:28, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, I noticed a lack of unique references, perhaps I'll leave it for a while and see if anything useful as a reference appears, thanks! SnazzyInfinity (talk • contribs) 23:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Question for someone who KNOWS this stuff...
How do we post some new definitions regarding a newly forming world industry, there are quite a few new definitions and words forming here. We likely need someone to help us write and publish too. We're NEW to this. (Redacted) 184.67.11.34 (talk) 21:11, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- You don't. See WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Perhaps Wiktionary? [1] RudolfRed (talk) 21:18, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Regarding Wiktionary, while it is a dictionary, rather than an encyclopedia, the fact that these words are described as "new" may very well mean that they are unsuitable there as well. At Wiktionary, proposed additions (to the English language version) must meet that project's criteria for inclusion – requiring 'attestation' – verified evidence of the proposed word or phrase enjoying: 1) Clearly widespread use; or 2) use in permanently recorded media, conveying meaning, in at least three independent instances spanning at least a year. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Harry Clifton
81.152.204.215 (talk) 21:17, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Unless you ask your question, there's no way for us to answer your question. We're not psychic. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 21:19, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
so what do i do since now that i am new
Thubgb (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- As a start I would suggest that you stop vandalising articles or you will be blocked very soon. Theroadislong (talk) 21:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Thubgb: Read articles. Find a WikiProject that interests you (they are listed on most articles' talk pages). Don't directly edit pages until you get used to the way things are done around here. Instead, use an article's talk page to suggest a change and ask for input. If you want to practice "technique" consider copying an article to your sandbox then editing it. If you do this, two words of advice: First read WP:Copying within Wikipedia because there are some legal issues involved, you have to maintain "attribution" somehow. Second, remove the
[[Category:...]]
lines at the bottom and remove any templates that cause the page to be put into categories, such as "stub" templates, because this can cause problems for other editors if your sandbox is "in" a category that is reserved for actual articles. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:37, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
List of youngest birth mothers
Maria Tizziano become mother (gave birth to her son) at 11 years old. It is this info eligible to be added in the page? --5.168.17.58 (talk) 21:34, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Ask this on Talk:List of youngest birth mothers. Be sure you have a reliable source to back up the claim. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:38, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Scratch that, I just looked at the list, it looks pretty long even though it's just listing mothers age 10 and under, so yeah, I would say just by eyeballing the list, 11 is too old for it. It might be different if the current list was age 6 and under and you were asking about a 7 year old, then the right thing to do would be to ask on the article's talk page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:40, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
permalinks usage for non-Wikipedia citations
OhioLINK pages contain a permalink which goes to an info page that has current links to the actual content. See http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1180454140 . In this case, is it preferred to use the permalink or to use a link that takes one to the actual content? Is there a template I should be using? Fabrickator (talk) 21:46, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Fabrickator, it's almost always better to use the permalink, as it guards against link rot. {{Cite web}} will probably work fine. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:19, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
ok I won't vandalize anymore but how do I create an article.
Thubgb (talk) 22:16, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thubgb, see Help:Your first article. Creating a new article is a tough thing to do, so you may want to try some other tasks first, or to read through the general editing tutorial if you haven't yet. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thubgb We'll let you off messing around with your first couple of edits. But if you'd really like to stay and help build this encyclopaedia, please get to learn the basics first. You can collect 15 different badges by taking our interactive introductory tour called The Wikipedia Adventure, and you can work through Help:Introduction to get a feeling of how to edit. If you let us know the kinds of things you're interested in, we might be able to suggest a few of our 6,100,000+ articles in need of some improving. Most importantly, never ever add any content purely from what you happen to know - even about your home town. We need references to support everything here (see WP:REFBEGIN for how to do that) so that someone on the other side of the world can read Wikipedia and check its accuracy. If you add or make any more silly changes, you're likely to get your editing rights withdrawn. Pop back here if you get stuck. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Expansion of Major League Soccer
Hello, i'm here to inform you that on the wikipedia page of Expansion of Major League Soccer i found that you had mistakenly put Kansas City in Kansas while it is in Missouri
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Major_League_Soccer_club_locations_2020.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:BE60:DA1:E844:2756:944B:9EC6 (talk) 22:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Note to other editors: The uploader and the editor who changed the picture haven't edited the Commons or en-Wiki in months. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- From what I can tell, the team is based in Kansas_City,_Kansas RudolfRed (talk) 22:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- The team is called Sporting Kansas City and they play at Children's Mercy Park in Kansas City, Kansas. The team's administrative offices are across the river in Kansas City, Missouri. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:40, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello!
Hello! How do I report someone who is adding unsourced additions that are false? Thank you very much Just Piping In (talk) 23:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC) Just Piping In (talk) 23:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Just Piping In You should first attempt discussion with other editors to achieve a consensus. Wikipedia does not deal in truth, but in what can be verified. 331dot (talk) 23:19, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- Just Piping In You can also put a {{citation needed}} template near the un-referenced content. If WP:Biographies of living persons applies and it is "negative/harmful" information, skip the tagging and revert it. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:57, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- davidwr and 331dot, I did revert it. Is there no way to report someone on Wikipedia? This person’s editing is very unproductive and they should not be editing. I hope there’s a way to report. Just Piping In (talk) 04:11, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- There is, but you really want to reserve WP:AN and the other notice-boards until after you've tried other options, or for obvious WP:NOTHERE or similar situations. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 04:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Well davidwr, could you give them a warning? Just Piping In (talk) 08:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not going to jump into this unless I happen to run across it through my normal editing. If the person really is doing things that warrant a warning and it's on a page that has more than just a few people paying attention to it, someone will warn him eventually unless he stops doing the "bad behavior" on his own. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 13:50, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Well davidwr, could you give them a warning? Just Piping In (talk) 08:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- There is, but you really want to reserve WP:AN and the other notice-boards until after you've tried other options, or for obvious WP:NOTHERE or similar situations. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 04:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- davidwr and 331dot, I did revert it. Is there no way to report someone on Wikipedia? This person’s editing is very unproductive and they should not be editing. I hope there’s a way to report. Just Piping In (talk) 04:11, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
look guys I am sorry for vandalizing a few articles and you changed that and I am also sorry or threatening the life of jimmy wales I'm just new because I never read the rules and guidelines.
Thubgb (talk) 00:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thubgb, I strongly suggest you stop with these before you end up getting blocked. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:02, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- There's a limit to messing around as a newbie. This child has gone way beyond what's acceptable and I have indefinitely blocked them from further editing, per WP:NOTHERE. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:12, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Good call. Whether you are 15 or 51, editors need to have some degree of maturity. The difference is the 15 year old is more likely to grow up than the "15 year old" in a 51 year old's body. I hope that when he has the maturity to do so Thubgb returns to ask for an unblock under WP:Standard offer and becomes a productive editor, whether that's in a few months or a few years. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:27, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- There's a limit to messing around as a newbie. This child has gone way beyond what's acceptable and I have indefinitely blocked them from further editing, per WP:NOTHERE. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:12, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Did my article submit
Hi there! Thanks for helping volunteer here — I appreciate the work you all do! I've previously edited articles on here years ago but with an old account I forgot the login for. I just tried to submit my first article — hoping to write a few more too! Can anyone kindly let me know if everything looks to be in order? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sky_Blossom Jdweikler (talk) 00:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Jdweikler. No, your draft was not submitted. Drafts are not automatically submitted when you click on the "Publish changes" button. I've added a template to the top of the draft; so, just click on the blue "Submit the draft for review!" button when you think it's ready for review. Before you do so, however, you might want to take a look at WP:NFILM for some general information regarding Wikipedia notability as it pertains to films.I also removed the film poster from the infobox. Although I'm sure you uploaded it to Commons in good faith, Comons doesn't accept any type of fair use content at all. You might want to take a closer look at c:Commons:Licensing for more details, but generally most images you find online are going to be considered to be protected by copyright; so, unless you're the copyright holder or can show that the copyright holder has given their WP:CONSENT for the image to be uploaded to Commons, it can't really be kept. One thing about movie poster art, however, is that it can often be uploaded a non-free content locally to English Wikipedia, and that's probably what you should do here. Non-free content though can't be used in drafts which means you should wait until the draft has been accepted before trying to upload the file again. Once the draft has been accepted, you can use WP:UPLOAD to upload the file locally to Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Jdweikler. I agree with Marchjuly's advice about the movie poster. In my opinion, your draft is strong and will probably be accepted. What would be useful is if you can add references to reviews of the film by professional film critics. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:54, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Idea: colorize the black & white photos and replace existing photos with colorized copy of it
With the recent advancement of the automated tools that will allow editors to colorize the photos in just a minute, I am thinking of an idea where to colorize the historic photos that are not in color and replace the original black and white photo in article with the colorized copy of the photo, but not sure if it's a good idea to do or not.
FYI due to copyright restrictions, only colorize the photo that are published in public domain, Creative Commons CC-BY-2.0, CC‑BY‑SA‑2.0 or Flickr "No known copyright restrictions" license. WPSamson (talk) 01:12, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi WPSamson. An intersting idea perhaps, but probably not something suited for an in-depth discussion here at the Teahouse. Perhaps WP:VPR or even c:COM:VPP would be better places to discuss this. One quick thought though and some food for thought is that colorizing an old image might be something that is deemed creative enough to establish a new copyright as a WP:Derivative work. So, essentially a colorized version of an old photo might make it eligible for copyright protection even if the original no longer is (see [[:. That could be problematic when it comes to WP:COPY#Guidelines for images and other media files and c:COM:L. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:26, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello WPSamson. Another major problem with your idea is the fact that original research is forbidden on Wikipedia. Was that old house painted white or light grey or sky blue? Was the woman's dress blue or green? Was the man's necktie red or blue? What colors were all those cars? And that horse? And so on. As I see the matter, it would be impossible to make those decisions in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:06, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia Bias Ratings
Why doesn't Wikipedia just use AllSides ratings for their bias ratings, e.g. MSNBC would be classified as left-wing, as per AllSides Evil Slug (talk) 01:57, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Evil Slug. Wikipedia editors are concerned much more with reliability than political bias. Although highly biased news sources may be less reliable than more "centrist" ones, that may not always be the case. Consider the Weekly World News, one of the least reliable widely circulated publications in U.S. history, but not one especially known for political bias. And why would a top ten website like Wikipedia farm out its assessment of sources to a much smaller and newer website? We already have a robust infrastructure for evaluating the reliability of sources. That being said, I am of the opinion that AllSides is a very worthy venture. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:31, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- See also WP:Reliable sources/Perennial. In short, the bias of a source isn't as relevant as its reliability when it comes to the subject matter. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 02:51, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Duplicate articles
I just found two articles on the exact same thing, just with different titles (Anthologise and Anthologise Poetry Competition), what should I do about this? Omniscientmoose42 (talk) 03:18, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- I WP:BOLDly redirected the slighly-newer version to the slightly-older version.[2] They were created by the same editor years ago. They started out identical or nearly so. As of earlier today, they were still almost identical. Thanks for shining light on this duplicate article.
- Had WP:CSD#A10 applied, I would've used it instead. A10 only applies to Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic though, and these were both created years ago. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:33, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- davidwr Thanks, what should I do if I see this again? Omniscientmoose42 (talk) 03:39, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Omniscientmoose42: A10s are pretty obvious. For non-A10s, it's always going to be a case by case situation. Had these been just two articles on the same topic with different text, I probably would've either boldly merged the contents on the spot and then redirected one to the other, or slapped {{merge}} templates on them and started a merge discussion. Since there wasn't anything worth merging, I just went ahead and did the redirect. The only reason I didn't nominate one for deletion is that I didn't take the time to go through the histories of both looking for things to merge OR evidence that content had been copied from one to the other. When in doubt about the need to preserve attribution history, err on the side of caution and don't delete it. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 04:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- davidwr Thanks, what should I do if I see this again? Omniscientmoose42 (talk) 03:39, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
"Indian" vs "Indigenous" - Wikipedia Standard?
Is there a standard on Wikipedia for terminology used to refer to Native Americans/indigenous people? In the following article, there are instances where "Indian" is used out of necessity, such as linking to the "Yurok Indian Reservation", but the term is also used generically several times. It is my understanding that this is a less-preferred term by the people it refers to, so would it be acceptable to swap these for "indigenous" as applicable?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klamath_River#Salmon_controversy_and_proposed_dam_removal ShepardoftheEarth (talk) 03:24, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- If you want to change it then go ahead. Omniscientmoose42 (talk) 03:27, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Be careful if you're planning on blanket search-and-replace, though. This particular naming dispute isn't settled; there are quite a few high-profile members of the communities (e.g. Russell Means) who dislike the term "Native American" and prefer "American Indian", and also numerous situations where "Indian" is used for legal reasons because something has been defined by one of the Indian Acts—make sure you carefully check the context before making any changes on this particular issue. ‑ Iridescent 08:52, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
A few questions about Sandbox and moving an article to the Wikipedia main space
I have two questions. If you partially erase Sandbox, does that remove a previous article you've submitted? I've been reluctant to erase a previous article draft for fear it might impact an entry that has been around for two years. So, I've been working on a draft of another article that I've finished and wish to move to the main Wiki page. Should I erase the old one and then move the new one? Since I have an account, does it need to be reviewed before submission? I'm also assuming I can't cut and paste as well in terms of moving the article.
Thanks for any feedback. I last created an article two years ago and it seems like the process has changed a little. Octopus69 (talk) 03:55, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Octopus69, have you thought about moving your article content into draftspace? You can get it reviewed by a reviewer to see if it's ready for articlespace with {{AfC submission}} (automatically submits for review; add
/draft
after "submission" if you're not ready yet). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:40, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, Octopus69. When a page (including a sandbox) is moved, it usually leaves a redirect behind: if you navigate to that page, the software will take you to the target page, but there will be a message at the top "Redirected from xxxx", and you can pick that link to go back to the original page. When editing, you are either on the original page (now a redirect) or on the target page; any edits you make to one will not affect the other. Once somebody has removed the
#REDIRECT
statement, the link between the pages is broken, and if the original page is a sandbox, it can be reused for a new purpose. Does that answer your question? --ColinFine (talk) 11:59, 3 December 2020 (UTC)- @Octopus69: I'll just add that what is in your sandbox now at User:Octopus69/sandbox has absolutely no impact on what is now in the article you wrote about Robert Carli. So you can delete whateveer you wish from it. And, by going to the 'View History' tab, you can look at any past saved version of that page and see long-deleted content, if you wish. You may also work with more than one sandbox. For example, you could create User:Octopus69/sandbox2 or User:Octopus69/sandbox3 if you so wished, and work on different articles in each. Moving a sandbox into mainspace takes with it all your edit history, showing how the article was assembled, which I find really useful. Just copy/pasting the latest version into a new mainspace page loses all that history. Submitting a draft through Articles for Creation means you get feedback and a chance to correct and resubmit an article. Placing a draft straight into mainspace means that, if it's not up to standard, it could be deleted through one of three routes if other editors feel it should not be there. AFC has a 2-3 month likely delay for articles about people and companies, and is a gentler process of review and feedback, with more chances it won't be deleted. The choice is yours. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:59, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Information gap
What is an information gap AngelitaDominguez (talk) 05:09, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- @AngelitaDominguez: it means missing information - information that is missing. Less commonly it could be Information gap task, but I'd need to know the context. This page is for questions about editing Wikipedia - you can ask general questions at the research desk. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 05:29, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Please visit Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard to view a discussion started by me on the reliability of Republic TV. Editor @Bonadea: advised me that my actions during this discussion and many other processes were mistaken, and they were either unnecessary or small vandalisms. I accepted his suggestion to concentrate just on normal editing at present. Could any host or member of the Teahouse do the summarizing of the discussion started by me, and then add it to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, if they feel it necessary. Thank you.--Atlantis77177 (talk) 06:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Who was the first country?
2A02:2F0E:419:6400:71C8:E4B5:564D:217F (talk) 06:31, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Ask at WP:Reference desk. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 06:32, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Special:Contributions/2601:601:9480:BE30:8882:7F4D:D92C:5E40|2601:601:9480:BE30:8882:7F4D:D92C:5E40]] (talk) 07:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Why won’t Hollywood carry Wikipedia
I was wondering why havent you all reached out to the satanic narcissistic Hollywood actors to make significant donations to Wikipedia? Or reach out to. athletes? Like LEBRON James ??? He makes millions of millions of dollars just for playing basketball why don’t you all reach out to him and his team and ask him to donate to Wikipedia to cover all your expenses for one year so that us the poor and the middle class can enjoy the benefits being being able to look up educational information while we’re on lockdown!!!!! 2600:1700:DFA0:BA00:B8CF:24DF:4B3E:A55D (talk) 08:39, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Wikipedia's finances are stable right now so you are free to use Wikipedia as you wish. If you are unable to donate yourself, that's not a problem. Please don't bring class warfare issues or personal attacks to this board. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- 2600:1700:DFA0:BA00:B8CF:24DF:4B3E:A55D, It isn't up to us. Currently there is no critical need for money. Besides that begging is not encouraged.SenatorLEVI (talk) 09:16, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- SenatorLEVI, try logging out and viewing what Wikipedia looks like to readers at the moment (see right); depending on your monitor configuration between 1⁄3 and 1⁄2 the screen is taken up by a giant begging letter. Until the appeal is taken down on New Years Day, there are going to be a lot more posts from readers who are understandably under the impression that Wikipedia is on the verge of going bust. ‑ Iridescent 10:01, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- As noted, those readers can create accounts to turn off the messages. You can try asking the Foundation to stop or change their message, but I don't think that's going to happen. 331dot (talk) 10:08, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not opposed to the appeal—I'm just explaining to SL (a new editor) that we always get a flood of confused messages at the start of December, and that there's a reason the OP is talking about begging letters. ‑ Iridescent 10:15, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- As noted, those readers can create accounts to turn off the messages. You can try asking the Foundation to stop or change their message, but I don't think that's going to happen. 331dot (talk) 10:08, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- SenatorLEVI, try logging out and viewing what Wikipedia looks like to readers at the moment (see right); depending on your monitor configuration between 1⁄3 and 1⁄2 the screen is taken up by a giant begging letter. Until the appeal is taken down on New Years Day, there are going to be a lot more posts from readers who are understandably under the impression that Wikipedia is on the verge of going bust. ‑ Iridescent 10:01, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- IP user, Wikipedia editors have no say in the placement of those banners, and nobody here knows whether you have donated or not – nor does anybody here care. This is important, because once in a while somebody comes along and thinks that their financial donations to the Wikimedia foundation should give them a say in what is and is not written in English Wikipedia, but again, nobody cares whether they have donated money or not. Also note that editors are not employed by the Wikimedia foundation or by Wikipedia, so you are talking to people whose expenses are not paid by any donations. --bonadea contributions talk 10:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- I think that the appearance of the "begging letter" depends in part on what platform you are using to view Wikipedia, and whether you have donated in the past. Right now, I am not seeing this on my desktop, possibly because I have already donated this year. But I am seeing it on my Android device, which is not logged into my account. (This is just a guess on my part; I have no inside knowledge of this.) Mike Marchmont (talk) 10:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- It can't possibly have anything to do with whether you have donated. Your editor account should not be possible to tie to a real-life identity, unless you explicitly disclose it yourself. If the donation system associated your bank account or Paypal account or however you donate with your account here, that would be a major violation of your integrity. Surely you are not asked for an editor name when you donate? --bonadea contributions talk 10:59, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- As far as I can make out, the begging letter (white text on a huge blue background as seen here in the UK) doesn't appear if you are usually logged in to your account when you open your browser on the Wikipedia main page. However, anyone not logged in — and most casual readers — will see the letter. Mine includes radio buttons to make donations and states that "the average donation is £10" (presumably Nudge theory). I'm not surprised that this makes people think that the WMF is going bust and is perhaps a little insensitive given the year we have all being experiencing. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:30, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- I wonder if ad blockers might also take care of it? I just tried checking Wikipedia from a different browser where I wasn't logged in, and didn't see it there either. I don't know why, but my guess is that my trusty adblocker is doing its stuff there. I certainly agree about it being insensitive and would avoid Wikipedia during December if I had to see that thing – and I have a lot of sympathy for the OP even though I wouldn't think soliciting donations from specific rich Americans is a good way to go. --bonadea contributions talk 12:01, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- I'll just add that I was lying back in a nice hot bath a few hours ago, minding my own business, watching the end of series 2 of Battlestar Galactica on an Android tablet, when I nipped over to Wikipedia (not logged in) to discover the bloody Cylons had taken over and had posted a big blue begging notice that virtually implied that if I didn't donate £2 immediately (like everyone else), then the whole of Wikipedia - and all my hard labours over the last 10 years - might soon be taken down. I was not impressed by the messaging. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes: If you're talking about the end of the second series of the 2004 show, then you're still in the good stuff. Please advise me when you start getting near the end of season 4, because I don't want to be anywhere near that dissapointment, and my condolences.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:58, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- LOL! Maybe I should finish watching now then, and simply cherish my unrequited love for President Roslin. (Don't tell the wife!) Nick Moyes (talk) 13:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Ha! No seriously (but don't actually read this now)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:06, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- LOL! Maybe I should finish watching now then, and simply cherish my unrequited love for President Roslin. (Don't tell the wife!) Nick Moyes (talk) 13:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes: If you're talking about the end of the second series of the 2004 show, then you're still in the good stuff. Please advise me when you start getting near the end of season 4, because I don't want to be anywhere near that dissapointment, and my condolences.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:58, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- I'll just add that I was lying back in a nice hot bath a few hours ago, minding my own business, watching the end of series 2 of Battlestar Galactica on an Android tablet, when I nipped over to Wikipedia (not logged in) to discover the bloody Cylons had taken over and had posted a big blue begging notice that virtually implied that if I didn't donate £2 immediately (like everyone else), then the whole of Wikipedia - and all my hard labours over the last 10 years - might soon be taken down. I was not impressed by the messaging. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- I wonder if ad blockers might also take care of it? I just tried checking Wikipedia from a different browser where I wasn't logged in, and didn't see it there either. I don't know why, but my guess is that my trusty adblocker is doing its stuff there. I certainly agree about it being insensitive and would avoid Wikipedia during December if I had to see that thing – and I have a lot of sympathy for the OP even though I wouldn't think soliciting donations from specific rich Americans is a good way to go. --bonadea contributions talk 12:01, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- As far as I can make out, the begging letter (white text on a huge blue background as seen here in the UK) doesn't appear if you are usually logged in to your account when you open your browser on the Wikipedia main page. However, anyone not logged in — and most casual readers — will see the letter. Mine includes radio buttons to make donations and states that "the average donation is £10" (presumably Nudge theory). I'm not surprised that this makes people think that the WMF is going bust and is perhaps a little insensitive given the year we have all being experiencing. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:30, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- It can't possibly have anything to do with whether you have donated. Your editor account should not be possible to tie to a real-life identity, unless you explicitly disclose it yourself. If the donation system associated your bank account or Paypal account or however you donate with your account here, that would be a major violation of your integrity. Surely you are not asked for an editor name when you donate? --bonadea contributions talk 10:59, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Follow-up to Expanding and correction
How do you write a draft on a novel you write, and keep it neutral? Theobliviaf (talk) 10:18, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome back to the Teahouse, Theobliviaf. I'm a little confused by your question. If you have written a novel and get it published, then after others have read it and it has been mentioned in reputable sources such as newspaper reviews it may merit an article here on Wikipedia. Until that point, it won't. The very last person who should draft such an article is you as the author of the novel, since you would find it impossible to do so in a neutral way. That's also why Wikipedia is not a place for autobiographies. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Courtesy link to draft Draft:A Curse so Dark and Lonely. Theroadislong (talk) 12:44, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia
How do you contribute to an encyclopedia? Are there rules? Admins? Bosses? Caneto (talk) 10:26, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Caneto. You can find out more about how to contribute at WP:CONTRIBUTE. As for the other part if your question, Wikipedia is owned and operated by the Wikimedia Foundation so I guess it would be the “boss” so to speak; most of the actual editing and monitoring of the site, however, is done by WP:VOLUNTEERs who are part of the Wikipedia WP:COMMUNITY. All editors are for the most part equal when it comes to editing, but there are some who have been chosen by the Wikipedia Community to be WP:ADMINISTRATORs to keep things under control and running smoothly as well as to try and sort out any problems before they get to out of control. — Marchjuly (talk) 10:45, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Caneto: Adding to above: your ideas here are equally as valid as anyone else's! This is a Wikipedia written by people like you and me, and you know things that others don't, so we would value your contributions to this project, whatever it may be. Editors are expected to treat each other with civility and respect, and you'll find that most of us are pretty nice people (I hope?) ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 10:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Caneto. Wikipedia's rules are not supposed to be treated as statutory legislation, but we have many policies, and guidlines and essays. In addition to some of the links posted above, the core policies and gudelines that govern article content – what can and should be written and what should not in articles, and what topics we should cover and what we should not, are in large part governed by just a few: Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:02, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
A question about alternate accounts
Hello, I frequently forget my password, so can I create an alternate account for that reason? More importantly, does the policy allows me to do so and if I do it would I get blocked? I can confirm that I will not use it for malicious or any bad reasons. Kajjul (talk) 11:53, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Kajjul and welcome to the Teahouse. The policy can be read at WP:VALIDALT. It is obviously OK to create a new account if you abandon an old one, although I would hope you can remember your WP password or note it down somewhere safe so that you don't need to do so. There are quite a few other valid reasons to have multiple accounts, although you should acknowledge on each User Page that there is another account in use. The only real bar is in using multiple accounts for WP:Sockpuppetry, which definitely could get you banned. It is also illegal for multiple people to share one log-on ID Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:04, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Infobox
I'm currently working on a submission, but the Infobox isn't showing all the info. Is there a size or info restriction within Infobox? Any way to increase its size to include more info? Thanks! Octopus69 (talk) 13:10, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- It depends on the infobox you're using. There are many topic-specific infoboxen which can have more information than a generic infobox will, but you'd need to read the usage notes for the infobox in question to figure out what each parameter is and what it means. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 13:20, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Octopus69. Assuming you are talking about the draft in your sandbox, that's currently using Template:Infobox writer. You may not know that this can be used as a module (or sub-template) of Template:Infobox person. The latter has many more parameters. (See writer template page for further details) Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Octopus69
{{infobox writer}}
does not have a url parameter but it does have a website parameter (and{{url}}
doesn't work with doubled brackets), so I fixed the display at your sandbox with this edit. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Help with Draft:Amina Zoubi
Hello I need help to edit this article or well known artist Amina Zoubir, it seems that the references I have added on diffreent sources to justify the recognition of the person are not taken in consideration. Can you help me to correct and edit this article, thank you for your help. best
- We are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. You need a lot more sources, cited in-line, to be able to come close to satisfying our biographical requirements. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 13:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- The user above copy-pasted a whole draft, so i'm replacing it with this comment. The article referred to was Draft:Amina Zoubir -GoatLordServant(Talk-Contribs) 13:37, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Danke. I edit-conflicted with you removing the draft chunk. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 13:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Question about blocked IPs and accounts
Hi! I've been editing as various IPs for some time now, mostly while bored at work, but a few of the (obviously shared) addresses which get randomly assigned to me there are blocked for misbehavior by coworkers. I've now (equally obviously) created an account, but I'm not sure what will happen if I log in at work and get assigned one of the blocked IPs. Will my account be autoblocked? Any advice on how to handle this? Thanks! Wikignome Wintergreen (talk) 14:26, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Wikignome Wintergreen: That depends on whether the block on the IP address is hard or soft - see WP:HARDBLOCK. If it is hard then any editing through that IP address even by registered accounts is blocked. If that happens you could apply for an IP block exemption. Nthep (talk) 14:34, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- So far so good. I guess my coworkers haven't been too troublesome, but I'll keep the block exemption thing in mind. Thanks for your help! Wikignome Wintergreen (talk) 15:10, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Should I make this page/series of pages?
I’ve recently wanted to make a page for the auctioneer Blaine Lotz, and I’ve read the notability guidelines and I think he does a somewhat good job of fitting the guidelines. Not also that but maybe I could make pages for other auctioneers, mainly pages for auctioneers who have recently won the world championship, as pretty much no other auctioneers gets coverage. Please let me know what you think about if I should make these pages. Jack Ryan Morris (talk) 15:01, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Jack Ryan Morris, and thanks for your question. Rather than making us do all the work for you, would you be so kind as to supply links to those 'Reliable Sources' that you feel would be used to prove his Notability? We'll happily take a quick look at them for you, but we're unlikely to want to delve around the internet in search of sources ourselves. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:16, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- There is an article on the World Livestock Auctioneer Championship but it's very thin on details and decent references, so you may like to start by improving it. If you can find third-party reliable sources then they also should help you for the biography to be done later. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:20, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Here are a couple of news article I found about Blaine Lotz, I’m not sure if this is enough. [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] Jack Ryan Morris (talk) 16:10, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Move stopped due to triggered automated filter
Please move the page "East Valla" to "Östra Valla". Waazzou (talk) 16:13, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- Waazzou, The correct place for move requests is WP:RMT. ─ The Aafī (talk) 16:17, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Why did HostBot ask me to come here?
??? RusherLeBFDIFan (talk) 16:14, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- RusherLeBFDIFan, you were invited to come here to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, if you had any. As a newer user, you are more likely than most to have questions. The Teahouse and the WP:Help desk are always around, should you need them.--Quisqualis (talk) 16:20, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Question
Why does ClueBot sometimes revert my edits when they’re not even vandalism? RusherLeBFDIFan (talk) 16:23, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- RusherLeBFDIFan, Cluebot makes few mistakes, but, being an automated process, not a human, it lacks certain intuitive abilities and sometimes makes silly mistakes. Still, it is faster, more detail-oriented and more tireless than any human. Please have a forgiving attitude towards the indefatigable Cluebot!--Quisqualis (talk) 16:39, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Is the Cold War wiki project still active?
read the headline Annoyingorange150803224 (talk) 16:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Pipe Major John McLellan DCM of Dunoon Composer & poet I wrote an article in the draft page about P/M John McLellan DCM but it was deleted in the last few minutes. I added relevant citations to media sources and recieved an email ok to quote those sources but my article about this subject was speedily deleted, why? Baishan17 (talk) 16:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)