Wikipedia:Teahouse

I am curious why this article was ambushed and deleted? It went through AFC and is the definition of notable since it is at the biggest tourist attraction in LA, is 100 years old and has been in several movies. Plenty of press as well.

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lobster (restaurant)

Can someone tell me how this article was ambushed and then deleted within 3 days in WP:AfC? The comments made in the discussion to justify the deletion, just are not true at all. Seems like this group has a problem with the restaurant that sits at the front of the Santa Monica Pier for 100 years.. Also, the one participant Mer-C was already suspended for being a sock, suspicious deletions and editing...

Does this look odd to you? Most deletion discussion must go at least a week and most go 2-3 weeks.. I hate to accuse people but this seems to be some sort of paid attack on an article that was submitted through afc. Just because someone who was accused of paid editing 3-4 years ago made a version which you have no idea if he was paid to do?

The World Cup, Women's World Cup and the Olympics are coming to the area and we are trying to clean up the Wikipedia for the city for these events. Is there a problem with that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 20:46, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I would not say that the article was 'ambushed'. I think it was rightfully deleted after either a self-promotion to article status or a false approval by the AfC reviewer. Do you have any proof at all that this was a "paid attack"?

I will also say that, if you are trying to clean up the city's Wikipedia pages for the Olympics, creating new articles would not be a good idea. It would be wiser to clean up any tagged articles relating to the city. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 21:53, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lobster (restaurant)

Here is an article stating its one of the top 10 most instagrammed places in the world

https://smmirror.com/2012/12/santa-monica-pier-makes-top-10-most-instagrammed-places-in-world-in-2012/

~2026-66804-1 (talk) 20:32, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Would you mind telling us what the article is? aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 20:36, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I apologize, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lobster (restaurant). ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 20:39, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/most-instagrammed-places_n_5679aee6e4b014efe0d720d3 ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 20:44, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

@MER-C @Star Mississippi Might want to take a look at this temp account. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 20:45, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @Aesurias

They also came to my Talk. GIven the concerns here and at my Talk about using this article for promotion and the multiple deletions and paid promotion and sock puppetry as well as bad faith assumptions that we have an issue with the restaurant itself, I decline to restore this article @~2026-66804-1. You're welcome to file a Deletion Review if you believe my close was incorrect, but I would not recommend that based on the case you've made here. WP:NOTTHEM is also helpful reading. Star Mississippi 02:31, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I will discuss it with a few others in the office and consider the options. I feel the press the restaurant has over 75 years in more than enough to be included. The article went through AFC and independent review, it has plenty of coverage. The photos were already on Wikipedia from different users over quite a long period.

We've submitted a request to Grokopedia for an article as well. Hopefully that will go better! ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 08:16, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

We have been going through a tough time in the downtown area and working to improve the areas image has been a goal for the current city administration.

https://www.smdp.com/city-manager-outlines-brazen-plan-to-reshape-santa-monicas-culture-economy-government-and-landscape-as-he-says-the-city-stands-at-a-crossroads-between-ruin-and-revitalization/ ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 08:17, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

There are outlets for this @~2026-66804-1, but neither Wikipedia nor Grokipedia are the best options. I tink you have a misunderstanding of AfC which does not guarantee retention, just that it has a chance of being kept if someone files for deletion. If you're going to pursue this, which I don't recommend as a new editor as it's one of the hardest things to do, please gain an understanding of how the policies apply. WP:SIRS WP:CORP are helpful. Star Mississippi 13:53, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

"The World Cup, Women's World Cup and the Olympics are coming to the area and we are trying to clean up the Wikipedia for the city for these events. Is there a problem with that?" Several problems, actually. You say "we", is this account used by anyone other than yourself? Or are you saying that there are multiple people editing in coordination? Also, you seem to be saying that you are editing articles here to drive up business for this restaurant. That is at least an admission that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. It also makes me think that you are somehow connected to this restaurant, creating a conflict of interest. You say it is at a large tourist attraction, but there are many things at or near tourist attractions that are completely unknown to the world. There was a local restaurant in my own home town that was open for 75 years, but I would not expect it to have an article here. What makes your 100 year old restaurant any different? "It has been in several movies". Really? To what extent? Lots of things can be seen in the background of movies. That doesn't make them notable. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:07, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I mean the employees of the city of Santa Monica... nothing specific to this restaurant except this is one of the properties deemed to be worthy because of the reasons stated..There was plenty of press from the LA Times to the NY Times and many more. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:12, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Are you saying that you are a city employee? And that you are doing this to increase business to things in your city? That still sounds like a conflict of interest to me. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:28, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

PS -- that "most instagrammed places" list is 14 years old. Instagram itself was only a couple years old at the time. Is this really as impressive as you think it is?--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:12, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

It is in the top 10 every year.. according to this and the other articles it was top 10 in the world for 2012, 2015, and 2016 so far.. I've heard its there every year but, with a quick search thats what I came up with. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:18, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

https://www.timeout.com/los-angeles/blog/2016s-most-instagrammed-places-in-l-a-120716 ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:19, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

That link you just posted is for most Instagrammed places in LA. That is not the same thing as most Instagrammed places in the world. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:26, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

The Santa Monica Pier was ranked in the top 10 most Instagrammed places in the world in 2012 (#10), 2015 (#8), and 2016 (#8). Ask the AI's, like Grok or ChatGPT. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:35, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

That's the pier. Not the restaurant. And why would I ask the AIs? --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:49, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

What is the point of arguing the validity of the instrgram lists as opposed to something like notability? There is plenty of press, you can use the AI's to ask them for a detailed history on The Lobster restaurant in Santa Monica and to cite each source after each sentence. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:38, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Again, why would we ask AI? Also, is that press all from the local media? There were articles about the local restaurant I mentioned, too. Doesn't mean it was notable. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:52, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

The LA Times is a reputable internationally recognized press source with editorial oversight. The restaurant is in Santa Monica, CA. Claiming the LA Times is local is like claiming the NY Times is local coverage to NY. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 22:17, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

When the location is that close by, it is local coverage no matter what paper it is in. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 23:54, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

No place in any of the notability requirements that i have reviewed is local coverage not acceptable. WP:SIRS. Virtually every article about subjects in Los Angeles use the LA Times. I am not sure why you are trying to bring the articles validation to an inconsequential article? ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 01:10, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Does any source outside the LA region say anything sbout this restaurant? No. I'm surecthere are hundreds of restsurants in Paris, London, Tokyo, NY, etc that get lots of reviews from local media. To the world at large those restaurants are of no more notability than the lost dog coveres on the local 6 o'clock news.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:34, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

You state that they aren't here to help build an encyclopedia, but ripping an article of a historic restaurant out of said encyclopedia isn't helping build one. A restaurant that is very important to the Santa Monica Pier, and a part of Historic U.S Route 66. Purdy4prez (talk) 13:49, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

The historicity of something has no bearing on its encyclopedic value; because we are an encyclopedia and not a registry of historical places. We include things because they have been written about in secondary sources, not because they are of historical value (or any other subjective measure of value). Athanelar (talk) 13:51, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I will keep that in mind as I continue on Wikipedia! Purdy4prez (talk) 14:09, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Why would anyone be using AI to prove that a topic is notable ? AI hallucination exists. Toarin (talk) 21:41, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

People use AI for the weirdest things. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 21:42, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

That is why you ask them to cite each source.. It can source relevant articles faster than going through google. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:43, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

It can also source relevant articles much less reliably than going through google, or any search engine for that matter. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 21:44, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I know the person requesting help is also under scrutiny but i was under the impression that the business only needed 2 in depth articles to meet the notability requirements. This place has articles I could find going back to the 50's if i remember.. https://latimes.newspapers.com/search/results/?_gl=1*qr48o9*_up*MQ..*_gs*MQ..&gbraid=0AAAAADtl_1DhEExDb3cEDxRIDCnpOeeYN&gclid=CjwKCAiAh5XNBhAAEiwA_Bu8FbNGK9X_cNsiTYHKFayBDxtMm5N6uyV0JDQQ3I3T2EyW_jFrD-Xf0RoCuKAQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds&keyword=1602+lobster ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:53, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

The notability requirements for corporations and organisations can be found at WP:NCORP if you wish to read it. Athanelar (talk) 02:15, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Attempts to create an article about this restaurant have been highly disruptive for years. Advertising is contrary to policy. Undisclosed paid editing is contrary to policy. Sockpuppetry is contrary to policy. Those who have attempted to create an article about this restaurant have resorted to all of those dishonest tactics. I am certainly not opposed to articles about tourist oriented seafood restaurants. I am, after all, the #1 contributor to both Joe's Stone Crab and Nick's Cove, California. I have no connection to either restaurant other than eating at each one once. It is all about the quality of the in-depth significant coverage of the restaurant (not the pier) in reliable independent sources, and neutrally summarizing those sources. The same is true of this Santa Monica restaurant. I express no opinion about its notability but I can say that coming in hot and heavy with promotional language and dark accusations of some sort of conspiracy against this restaurant is exactly the wrong way to go about it. "Ambushed"? "Some sort of paid attack"? Give me a break. Calm, competent editing in compliance with policies and guidelines is the correct course of action. That is what gets results. Cullen328 (talk) 05:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Barely any of this is true.. Looks like someone tried to create a page 3 years ago and then it was created again 5 days later.. There is no ongoing conspiracy to create a page for this restaurant that i can see but closing a deletion discussion within 3 days is out of policy unless it was listed as speedy deletion. The article also went through AFC and was approved.. Isn't that the policy for submitting articles that had issues previously? ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 18:54, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

The Lobster (restaurant) was:

• Draftified on 4 September 2023 for being 'covert advertising'
• Deleted on 9 September 2023 under WP:CSD#G5 (created in violation of a ban/block)
• Deleted on 23 February 2026 after an AfD

Draft:The Lobster (restaurant) was:

• Deleted on 5 September 2023 under CSD G5
• This means that it was deleted a day after it was draftified per above, and then seemingly recreated directly in mainspace to be deleted again on September 9.

Draft:The Lobster (Santa Monica) was:

• Moved to mainspace on 8 September 2025; the different name was almost certainly a (successful) attempt to evade scrutiny over the previous history of the draft.

So the chronology seems to be;

1. First created as The Lobster (restaurant) some time prior to 4 Sep 23, whereafter it was draftified.
2. First deleted at Draft:The Lobster (restaurant) a day later.
3. Created for the second time as TL (r) in mainspace some time between 5 and 9 September 2023
4. Deleted for the second time at TL (r)
5. Created for the third time at Draft:TL (SM) some time before 8 September 2025
6. Deleted for the third time at TL (r) on the 23 Feb 26

I wouldn't say it's a 'conspiracy,' but the page is certainly a target of persistent recreation. Athanelar (talk) 19:08, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Why haven't we just salted it already? mghackerlady (talk) (contribs) 21:01, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

It's salted in mainspace. I see no problem with submitting a new draft for review. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 19:33, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-66804-1 I'm not sure why you keep repeating three days, the discussion was opened on 16 February and closed on 23 February. The community has decided The Lobster is not notable. You're welcome to pursue a draft and AfC, but I think promotion of your city manager's goals is probably best achieved elsewhere. Star Mississippi 01:50, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-66804-1 Do you have a conflict of interest with the topic of this article?Toarin (talk) 08:17, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Just noting for the record that the accusation "Mer-C was already suspended for being a sock, suspicious deletions and editing..." is false. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:33, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Huh, I didn't notice that they accused an Admin of English Wikipedia. Toarin (talk) 17:45, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Me neither, there goes the last shred of good faith. Star Mississippi 17:53, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

• Noting there is a block impacting 2026-66804-1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)~2026-66804-1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) per their Talk. For that and myriad reasons, we're likely done here. Star Mississippi 17:53, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

  "No matching items in log"; talk page link is red. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:59, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

  apologies, it's ~2026-66804-1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Star Mississippi 18:35, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

  Aside from the talk page of this temp account, I couldn't actually see whether or not the account is blocked. Is it meant to be hidden from public view? Toarin (talk) 04:53, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

  Using technical data, the underlying IP has been blocked, so it's unnecessary to block the TA as well. IP addresses are never usually connected publicly to TAs. nil ^nz 05:23, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

  @Nil NZ Thank you very much for your answer. Toarin (talk) 13:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that this is over though. Another attempt to recreate an article about this topic could very well occur soon imho.Toarin (talk) 21:35, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm sure this has been asked before, but:

Am I allowed to remove other users' topics on my talk page if they get too old? I am worried that with time it will become cluttered and menacing for anyone who would want to post something there. I figured it was allowed, since it is my page, but can't hurt to ask. Emholt1 (talk) 19:25, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Absolutely - the only thing someone cannot remove on their own talk page is a declined unblock request. You may want to look into WP:ARCHIVING your talk page - this isn't required, but it is recommended. CoconutOctopus talk 19:28, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm happy to set up automated archiving for you, if you wish. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:03, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

That would be nice. Although, where do I go to change the settings? I’d like to know where I can turn it off if I need to. :) (talk) 21:32, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

See this diff. The parameter names and values should be self-explanatory.

A bot will do the archiving.

Nothing will be archived until there are 5 discussions; at least 4 will always remain (unless you change the settings). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:06, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

This looks good to me, thanks for the help! Ethan (Emholt1)  :) (talk) 22:19, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

@Emholt1, one more thought and I hope I'm not piling up too much information: You can always archive a thread early. You could just cut it from the live talk page and paste to the current talk page archive. The user script User:Elli/OneClickArchiver will automate this by putting a little "Archive" button next to each heading. It's really useful, but the downside is that I have accidentally archived a thread with it due to a unusually powerful sneeze. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 14:06, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey! I have seen that it says transcluded templates are not allowed in signatures, but are substituted templates allowed?

eg {{-r|subst:User:Jacksonvil/Signature}

producing Jacksonvil (talk|contribs)

Thanks, Jacksonvil (talk|contribs) 03:49, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Teahouse. I don't think you should,, as users who choose to substitute their signature are required to be highly vigilant of their signature whenever they sign. Cheers! n.h.huit, 化けの花 04:39, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't see much use in substituting a template as part of your signature instead of just modifying the signature itself, considering it is inserted in its entirety every time you type ~~~~ anyway. Athanelar (talk) 04:53, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I meant to put a subst inside of preferences>signature Jacksonvil (talk|contribs) 05:36, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

The limit for signatures, even when substituted, is 255 characters though... but again you still gotta monitor the subst signature template a lot n.h.huit, 化けの花 06:35, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Seems like asking for trouble. Only you can alter your sig in your Preferences, but if you subst it from another page, anybody could edit that page. A bad actor could replace your sig with their own, someone else's, or with an altered version of your sig that violates policy. Mathglot (talk) 10:13, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Yeah fair enough if the character limit doesn’t expand.. Jacksonvil (talk|contribs) 10:27, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Referring to this one (with the gunshot)? It says "Photo credit: social media", so I'm not sure...

Also, if I find an image of several people on commons, can I crop it so that it only includes one individual (I want to add it to this individual's article)? If so, how do I do it (technically speaking...)?

Thank you! ScottyNolan (talk) 11:27, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

The answer to your first questions is: No. For guidance on how and when we can use other people's images, see c:COM:THIRD. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:45, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

@ScottyNolan Copyright is complicated, so I'm not going to speculate on your first question, which would be better asked at c:Commons:Village_pump/Copyright. There is a good tool on Commons for cropping images: see c:Commons:CropTool. It automatically deals with the licensing. All Commons images allow so-called "derivatives", unlike some more restrictive licenses. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:46, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! ScottyNolan (talk) 11:48, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I was wondering to make Maple syrup a Semi-Protected to prevent Vandalism since its a Featured Article (Zakk😎) 12:59, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

We don't protect articles preemptively, or to prevent changes to a featured article. Even FAs can still be improved. 331dot (talk) 13:01, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Gotcha. (Zakk😎) 13:06, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Jim Carroll (futurist)

Hi folks, I'm an author.I've written 43 books - 34 of them in the 1990s that have sold over 1 million copies, all about the Internet; one was #1 in two major national newspapers in Canada. I have literally hundreds of press clippings related tom the books that came from my publisher's clipping service (Prentice Hall) that relate to the stories of the books, and which feature information on everything I was doing and saying the media through the 90s. From there, I segued into that into a new role from 2001 on, and I've spoken at hundreds of conferences all over the world, including some very high profile events. There have been TV interviews, magazine interviews, conference brochures, and all kinds of information online about these events, my observations on the world, interviews ... again, I have hundreds of items. I've hosted multiple national radio shows. I've been an expert witness in various litigations where the court record identifies me and my role within the case documents that are available online. I worked hard to create an article, and noted my conflict of interest in my ID. My first subvmission was declined and I have just reworked it to bring it down to bare minimums. I guess I am wondering - I am trying to go about this in a way that provides proof-of-work, but how can this be done when so much has disappeared into link-rot and is often only available with what I have. I can link much of it to a Proquest ID or a copy I've uploaded to the Internet archive, but I've been warned this could result in a copyright strike. I'm trying to work within the process, but am still very confused about the process. (There was an article with respect to my background up to 2015, but it was taken down for being too vague, link rot, promotional, etc) ~2026-15414-15 (talk) 13:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

A lot of people come here and say the same thing. But as an author, you'll know you often have to meet the style for a particular publication. I've marked up your draft to show you what needs changing to achieve an encyclopedic tone and to remove puffery and promotional material. But you'll also need to convert your table of publications to a bullet pointed list, suggest Chicago ADA style biblio references with your names first etc. However, I didn't even look for SIG COV which is the only way the draft will qualify for a Wikipedia article. Refer WP:42. I'm happy to look after you've made the changes I suggest. It'll be a bit stilted so you can introduce wording to make it flow (but avoid superlatives). MmeMaigret (talk) 13:42, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

You are allowed to create your own article on Wikipedia, and you have successfully declared your CoI in the header. As editor MmmeMaigret has already done, this article has uncited statements such as "known for his early work on the Canadian internet". The article also contains a lot of signs of LLM writing, such as the repeated lists of publications that the author has been named in. We expressly forbid LLMs to write entire articles on Wikipedia.

Don't let this discourage you, though! Sometimes we all make mistakes and what's important is that you learn from them. It's okay, we're not mad. If you can shape up your draft it is likely it would be accepted. Ethan (Emholt1)  :) (talk) 13:57, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-15414-15.

One of the things that makes it so difficult to successfully write an autobiography in Wikipedia is this:

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

So the question is, which of your sources meet all the requirements in golden rule? That is, they are reliably published, produced with no involvement whatever from you or your associates, and contain significant coverage of you, not just of your work? ColinFine (talk) 14:04, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

hi folks . thanks dor the insight. i have a substantial number of articles that would meet the significant coverage issue, including cover story magazine articles that were done on me. I'll spend some time accumulating a list of these some of which were referenced in my original draft and will post them here with a question as to how I can invest frame these in the draft and not run up against issues. There's also a national CBC TV interview with Peter Mansbridge, the host of the national news, that goes for an hour that is available in the CBC historical archives, as well as other references like that. Perhaps if I can provide a list here some of you might be able to provide me guidance on how to work from here I qualified for an 01 Visa dash person extra extraordinary ability with USCIS how much of this material was also included in that Visa application process. So I have lots of SIG I just don't know how to position it. Dibblethorpe (talk) 14:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

@Dibblethorpe: So, the problem I foresee you running into is the question of what constitutes a reliable source, especially as it relates to notability. First of all, please note that "notability" is a Wikipedia term of art--it's not just "fame" or "known to the public". The basic notability guideline for people, following the general notability guideline, says that "people are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." It further says that Primary sources may be used to support content in an article, but they do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject. This is the subtlety in writing an autobiographical article that many new users miss. Interviews, in particular, are primary sources, since they're the subject talking about themself, and so don't contribute towards Wikipedia notability. Similarly, a "where are they now"-type article from a subject's alma mater, for example, is not independent of the subject and cannot be used to demonstrate notability. Please keep these in mind while evaluating notability. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:34, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I've got multiple things like this:

https://archive.org/details/profit-magazine-1995-jim-carroll

https://archive.org/details/carroll-archive-2002_link_colourcopy-lr

https://archive.org/details/carroll-archive-2006businessedge

https://archive.org/details/carroll-archive-2002feb_budapest_cover_colour

https://archive.org/details/carroll-archive-2003may_camag_meet_the_experts

https://archive.org/details/carroll-archive-1997_vanc_sun_networks

https://archive.org/details/carroll-archive-1999feb_tocomputes_cover

https://archive.org/details/pga-of-america-jim-carroll-keynote/page/n3/mode/2up — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dibblethorpe (talk • contribs) 16:13, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Even a great little cover story from 1989 (I almost got fired for this one)

https://archive.org/details/oa-magazine-1989-jim-carroll

There are literally hundreds more. Independent sources, reliable publications, local and national newspapers, magazines.

There's this interview with the CBC Natiional's Peter Mansbridge:

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/video/1.3592701

Then I have literally hundreds of third party conference brochures where I'm the opening or closing keynote; some pretty high profile events. Relevant? Useless? Heck, I did an event with Jimmy Wales in St. Andrews in 2011....

So I guess my real question is - how do I package all this into a form that is acceptable to a Wikipedia article. I would love guidance as I continue to dig into this.

And I guess a key question - the draft won't disappear, correct? I have time to work with this?

I'm entirely open to working within the guidance offered here. ~2026-15414-15 (talk) 15:42, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Drafts are only deleted after 6 months of inactivity, unless they are candidates for WP:Speedy deletion, which is unlikely in your case. I suggest you don't try to include "literally hundreds" of citations but submit the draft for review after creating it with just a handful of really good sources. See WP:BACKWARDS for the pitfalls of not doing it that way. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:57, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

The Profit Magazine, Business Edge, and Office Automation articles seem to be your three best sources. MmeMaigret (talk) 21:11, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the guidance. ~2026-15414-15 (talk) 14:47, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Did you actually read WP:Golden Rule as suggested? If you had, you wouldn't be mentioning interviews.

Also, explain why, exactly, do you want an article about yourself on Wikipedia? Is it vanity? Pride? Publicity? Search engine optimization? None of those are valid reasons for an article to exist here.

If you are truly notable, someone will eventually come along and write about you. Whether that happens next week or 10 years from now or after you're long gone, shouldn't matter to you in the slightest. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 05:15, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello,

I am working on a draft article about photographer Bojan Stojanović which is currently in Articles for Creation.

The topic already has an accepted article on Serbian Wikipedia based on independent sources (including Kurir, Pančevac newspaper and TV appearances such as TV Prva and TV Pančevo). I am trying to create the English version following Wikipedia style. However, reviewers mentioned that the draft reads too much like AI-generated text.

Could someone advise what typically causes this impression and how such drafts should be rewritten to better match encyclopedic tone?

Any feedback before the next review would be greatly appreciated.

Draft: Draft:Bojan Stojanović Serbian article: sr:Bojan Stojanović

-- Rade Brdjanin (talk) 14:41, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Rade Brdjanin, and welcome to the Teahouse.

First, please note that the existence, and quite likely the content, of the article in Serbian Wikipedia, is irrelevant here. Each Wikipedia has its own policies and procedures, and English Wikipedia is said to have one of the strictest set of rules about sourcing, so the subject of an article in Serbian Wikipedia may or may not meet the requirements here.

A typical example of what LLMs love to say when they try to write a Wikipedia article is your section "Media coverage". This is the kind of promotional blather which you might find in a magazine article, but it is of zero interest to Wikipedia.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source.

If some of those examples of "coverage" are examples of that, then you can summarise what they say, citing them. But the fact that five or fifty or five thousand magazines name-checked him or printed his photos, or printed interviews with him is of no relevance to Wikipedia - unless an independent commentator then wrote about that coverage. ColinFine (talk) 15:09, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Please do not post your question in multiple places. You asked, and it was answered on WP:AFCHELP. The draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 05:10, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

this page has been edited using past tense when describing Gaza city. This needs rectifying ~2026-15433-29 (talk) 14:46, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Gaza has been evacuated and bombed per Amnesty International. It's now largely abandoned, and as can be seen on Abandoned village, these empty cities are referred to in the past tense. Also, all of the buildings are gone. Ethan (Emholt1)  :) (talk) 14:55, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

The article starts "Gaza City, often simply called Gaza, is a city in the Gaza Strip..." and continues using the present tense. If there is a specific edit or set of edits that concern you, please identify them explicitly. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:28, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh, is it not even in past tense? Oops. This can be closed then (but it should be in was, due to being largely abandoned) Ethan (Emholt1)  :) (talk) 15:29, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

After the Battle of Borodino, Napoleon entered Moscow only to find that it had been deliberately abandoned, and left so devastated that he could not winter his troops there. Nevertheless, Moscow did not remain abandoned for long. Wikipedia is not a news source, so it doesn't need to strain to keep abreast of momentary situations. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 22:14, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi hello my apologies I'm a new and trying to update the Bajuni people page.kind Gurkubondinn suggested I ask for help here. I want to update the Origins section to show that the Bajuni are a unique synthesis, not just a Bantu subgroup The 2023 Nature study (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-05754-w) proves that the DNA in the Lamu archipelago (the Bajuni heartland) is a mix of local Khoisanoid/Hunter Gatherer, Persian, and Arab lineages already established by the 11th century.also,this document (https://www.photoawards.com/winner/zoom.php?eid=8-131764-16) confirms that the Bajuni trace their origins to these ancient local groups and later Cushitic,arab and Persian .Can someone please help me make a formal Edit Request so the page reflects that Lamu and the Bajuni Islands are the true heartland of this unique maritime identity? Once more my apologies if not and Thank you Saintusmojqy (talk) Saintusmojqy (talk) 16:25, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Saintusmojqy, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm sorry, but while the Nature study is no doubt reliable, all you can take from it is the sentence you state above, which is about genetic inheritance, and not about cultural or historical origins. You could probably add that information to the paragraphs starting "The population's members trace their origins", noting that DNA evidence partly supports their traditional claims.

The Photoawards is clearly not a reliable source, as the text about the Bajuni people has no named author and no references: it cannot be used to support anything in the article. ColinFine (talk) 19:44, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi hello, ColinFine good day and Thank you so much and yes I understand what you mean about the photoawards my apologies.but I’ll like to say by the way the Bajuni are primary historical of native population in Lamu,and the medieval DNA evidenced from Manda and Shanga as you stated reflect Bajuni ancestry.and okay will do could you please fix any mistakes and errors i make I’ll added “ The bajuni members trace their origins and DNA analysis of the medieval remains from the Lamu Archipelago supports traditional Bajuni accounts of ancestral roots among local hunter gatherer populations, alongside persian and arab ancestry established by the 11th century Brielle et al., 2023”

Please Thank you Saintusmojqy (talk) Saintusmojqy (talk) 22:55, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

How do I add a user box to my user page and how do I make one Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello (talk) 18:16, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! See WP:Userboxes#Using existing userboxes and WP:Userboxes#Creating a new userbox. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 19:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm trying to add userboxes to my user page but no matter how many times I try to publish the change it just never publishes Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello (talk) 20:31, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

@Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello: If there are external links then try omitting them. If it still doesn't save then try placing the code inside <pre>...</pre> and come back here. The code will be deactivated but we will be able to see what you tried to do. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:39, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I did what you wanted me to do on my userpage please go see it Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello (talk) 20:51, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

You put nowiki there which doesn't make it save properly. I don't think pre works. OK, here's an idea. Just go into the edit of this section so that you can see the code, and copy and paste

This user is a Wikipedian.

into your userpage. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 21:05, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Copy and paste the specific code, specifically {{User wikipedia}}. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 21:05, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I JUST REALISED THIS WHOLE TIME I WAS PASTING THE USERBOX CODE IN THE VISUAL EDITOR AND NOT THE SOURCE EDITOR!!!! THAT'S WHY IT WASNT APPEARING!!!! Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello (talk) 21:12, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Glad it worked out! Nice userboxes by the way! Also, you can use {{Userbox top}} and {{Userbox bottom}} to organise the userboxes. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 21:19, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello (talk) 21:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

@Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello: You said "I try to publish the change it just never publishes". That statement means you clicked "Publish" but the edit was not recorded for some reason. My reply was based on that. Another time, please don't use that word if you never clicked "Publish". You only previewed and the preview didn't look as you wanted. PrimeHunter (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 00:23, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

No I literally clicked the publish button and it looked like was publishing but when it went back to my user page automatically it just...never changed no matter how much refreshed. Anyways its fixed so it doesn't matter Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello (talk) 06:49, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I went into the talk page for Columbo, and then into the archives for the talk page via the name discussion header, but only archive 2 seems to exist. The first archive got deleted by Twinkle under G8, which seems wrong, from reading the policy. Am I missing something, or is this a mistake? I think it's also broken the talk page header, since it refuses to display the archives at all, despite archive 2 being completely fine.

So: if this is a mistake, how could I fix it/notify an admin to fix it? If it's not a mistake, why would this be done? Thanks! Magicalus (talk) 19:09, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Magicalus. That does indeed look like an error - it was not a talk page of a deleted article, but an archive of a talk page. Perhaps @Isabelle Belato (who did the deletion: "Twinkle" was the tool she used) can comment? ColinFine (talk) 19:47, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

It technically was the talk page of a deleted article. Somebody created Columbo/Archive 1. Isabelle Belato deleted it and routinely included its talk page Talk:Columbo/Archive 1, a simple mistake to make. I have restored it. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:06, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Much obliged! For the future, is there a more proper way of reporting such oddities? Magicalus (talk) 20:12, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

@Magicalus: Clicking the red link showed the deletion log with the administrator who deleted it (like Columbo/Archive 1). The recommendation is to contact them first but they haven't edited since 14 February 2026 so coming here was OK. This page is watched by several administrators with access to examine and handle it. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:20, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I am drafting a wikipedia article page for an academic and they have at least 3 sources from news outlets that have significant coverage from independent reliable sources. But a contact of mine, who is more versed in writing wikipedia pages than I am, mentioned that the sources should not contain interview material of the academic themselves, since the articles contain too much of their own words? Is this true? I am finding it very hard to use any news article that does not contain interview material. Also, in terms of other citations can I use conference websites that establish this academic is a subject matter expert who did a panel talk on a particular academic topic, or use their peer-reviewed research papers? What about using a university commencement program to verify where they got their degree or a university directory webpage? I know web content is not a valid source but links to online research papers, university directories, and conference event panels seem more valid than general web content. They prove this person is a legitimate subject matter expert and demonstrates their credentials. Just want to have a clearer sense of what is approved for citations before submitting. Thanks! ~2026-90335-3 (talk) 20:37, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-90335-3, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Yes, it is true.

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

Almost all of the sources used should be completely independent of the subject - anything based on an interview or press release is not independent. Almost anything from their university is going to be a primary source - usable for verifying uncontroversial factual information, but not helping to establish that they meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. "Web content", on the other hand is just the delivery method, and may or may not be reliable, depending on who published it.

See WP:golden rule for the criteria that the majority of the sources should meet.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 21:23, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

"for an academic" could mean "about an academic", or "on behalf of an academic". If it's the latter, please read WP:BOSS and share that with them, and read and abide by WP:COI and WP:PAID. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:37, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

It’s annoying when it changes because your edits don’t come with your new account and nobody knows you are the same person as your previous temporary account. Is there a way to turn temporary accounts off without making a real account? ~2026-57078-1 (talk) 21:38, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

No, that is not possible; if you want your edits to be associated with a single account, you need to create a permanent account. 331dot (talk) 21:46, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh, okay. However, I might be too young for a permanent account. How old do I have to be for an account? ~2026-57078-1 (talk) 21:48, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-57078-1: There is no age requirement but see Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors for advice. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:55, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Won’t I be worse at editing compared to other editors because (redacted) ~2026-57078-1 (talk) 22:03, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors recommends to not reveal your age. Many young editors are better than many older editors. It varies. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:23, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

It's not a competition, edits are judged solely on their own merits. Going merely by your posts above, you you have a good command of English (better than many of our contributors, for whom English may be a second, third, or . . . etc. language), and you have asked intelligent and relevant questions. I'm sure many valuable contributions have been made to Wikipedia by people as young as or younger than you. Remember, "On the Internet nobody knows you're a dog". God luck and happy editing! ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 22:25, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

PrimeHunter beat me to it, but I would also suggest that you read that page with your parent/guardian/custodian. 331dot (talk) 21:59, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, it’s annoying even for an editor with an account who finds themselves editing while signed out. But temporary accounts are rather new so they might add the ability soon. Having said that, lots of us have lost edits over the years. You’ll just have to let it go. After you’ve got 500 edits, you wont care about 10 you made without an account. MmeMaigret (talk) 22:31, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

They won't be turning temp accounts off, it was done to enhance privacy. 331dot (talk) 00:57, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I think you have misunderstood my comment. The OP asked if edits can be carried over to an account once you set one up. This is a pretty common feature on other sites. I indicated that temp accounts are pretty new and they (the powers that be) may add the ability - that the OP is asking about - later. @Sam Wilson Do you know if this is something in the works? MmeMaigret (talk) 02:35, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

The only way to move edits from one account to another is to rename the account, it is not possible to merge account edit histories or reassign them. Allowing TAs to do that would defeat the "temporary" nature of temporary accounts. A TA user is free to claim in writing that they made the edits from a particular TA. 331dot (talk) 14:57, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I stumbled onto abortion industry recently. It's an ideological term, but I can't think of a neutral alternative and it does theoretically exist, so I'm not sure if it qualifies for deletion. (Maybe for lack of reliable sources or as an attack page?) Would love any input on the appropriate way to proceed. NuanceQueen (talk) 21:44, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

It's an article about the ideological term in question, so of course it's going to use the ideological term. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 22:23, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I read the article and it seems fine. It acknowledges the term’s partisan usage in two places. Was the page created for ideological reasons, possibly. But your objection to the name itself is unlikely to be enough for AfD and I can’t think what [does anyone say p.c. anymore?] term could replaced it. Honestly I think it’s a non-starter. MmeMaigret (talk) 22:40, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

@CoffeeCrumbs@Mmemaigret I guess I was thinking about it as being about the "abortion industry" itself, rather than the term. The other sections (besides terminology and usage) move away from discussing it as a term. I guess what it really needs is a good fleshing out. Thank you both for your input! NuanceQueen (talk) 22:57, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Any article about a controversial term is going to go into related areas, as is appropriate to treat the subject encyclopedically. The same situation can be found in, for example, the article about the term gay agenda. It isn't about the topic although it explores that topic as well as the term. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 05:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

That's a super helpful reference. Thank you! NuanceQueen (talk) 15:13, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi,

Today, while I was editing Clare S Spackman's page I found myself appearing as a temporary account (details below). I have know idea how it happened and I was able to continue and finish the editing.

Is it possible to delete this temporary account and assign the changes to me? If so, how do I do this? If not, it's fine. I am just pleased to have added more information about this pioneer.

Thanks, Irene

Hi,

In Raymondville Independent School District, if I am just reading it, then the first citation appears to be citation number two, and if I go to the references section, it shows ten references. Then, if I go to edit it, because the first reference is not used, the first citation actually says one, and in references, there are only nine. I double checked this, and it was still there if I left the edit mode.

Can someone explain to me why this is, and if it is possible to make it look correct?

Thanks, Ferd310 Ferd310 (talk) 00:06, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

When that happens, it’s often that the “phantom”/hidden citation is in an infobox. MmeMaigret (talk) 00:16, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

The first citation is linked three times in the infobox. SenshiSun (talk) 00:37, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

How does one make editing changes? I keep getting messages about no ending </ref>. Detailed instructions requested due to my advanced age. Sanducci (talk) 01:46, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Sanducci, welcome to the Teahouse! Those errors happened because you were adding <ref><ref></ref></ref> to the page, as you can see here. Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref has more detailed instructions on how to fix the error, and what causes it. I noticed you were using the source editor. While you are free to use the editor you want, the visual editor may be more helpful. It streamlines several processes related to editing. When editing an article, if you click the pen symbol in the top corner of the editing box, you can switch between the two modes. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 02:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

okay so basically you start one citation with <ref> and end it with </ref> n.h.huit, 化けの花 04:53, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Having problems editing. No ending <c/ref> Sanducci (talk) 02:01, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Does 45dogs' advice (above) help, Sanducci? -- Hoary (talk) 04:37, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I would like to understand whether this background meets Wikipedia’s notability requirements and how I can properly create or submit an article with reliable sources.

If there are experienced editors who can guide me or review a draft, I would greatly appreciate the help.

Thank you. ~2026-15685-02 (talk) 02:07, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, @~2026-15685-02. I appreciate your curiosity and willingness to learn, but it is highly discouraged to write an article about yourself. The reason is because Wikipedia can only summarize what reliable sources say, meaning you need to essentially ignore everything you know about the subject of your article and just say what the sources say, in your own words. As you can imagine, this is especially difficult if you’re writing an article about yourself. In addition to that, people will tend to write quite highly of themselves, which conflicts with our policy on writing in a neutral point of view.

As for your question about whether your career meets notability requirements, let me just say that what people typically mean when they say ‘notable’ is very different from what we mean when we say ‘notable.’ It doesn’t matter how much money you have or how many famous people you know personally or how famous you are. What matters is how many reliable secondary sources have written about you in detail.

If you can find enough sources to support a full article, great! You have Wikipedia notability, and an article about yourself is justified (though you’re still not supposed to write it yourself). If you can’t, you’re not notable and can’t have an article. It’s as simple as that. (And it may be worth mentioning that an article about you is not always a good idea.)

Cheers, Shadestar474 (they/he) ^(talk) 02:34, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

See WP:NATHLETE for the notability guidelines specific to athletes and sportspeople, and WP:NPERSON for broader notability standards for people. You must satisfy one of these to qualify for an article, though Shadestar474 provides excellent advice above which you should consider before deciding.SnowyRiver28 (talk) 07:51, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I had an inquiry regarding starting a new dedicated task force specifically for Category:Natural language processing and Category:Computational linguistics (which have significant overlap). I know that computational linguistics is currently covered by the Applied Linguistics Taskforce from WikiProject Linguistics, but I was thinking that a new task force under WikiProject Linguistics dedicated specifically to NLP in collaboration with WikiProject Computing (or another computationally oriented WikiProject) and potentially WikiProject Artificial Intelligence could benefit the area of computational linguistics and NLP.

I have given a quick look through many of the NLP articles (and made one or two edits) and they require a significant amount of updating due to how rapidly the field has evolved, even within the last few years (and sometimes months), especially with how interdisciplinary a field it is. I think that a new task force with editors familiar with the intersection of all these fields could really improve these articles during a time where these tools are becoming increasingly powerful and impactful.

I am a very new editor, so I may definitely be misunderstanding how new taskforces are created (I do know I need others to want to contribute), but leaving this as solely a linguistics project, especially when Applied Linguistics is already covering a wide variety of different subjects, doesn’t seem ideal. I would really love some guidance because this is a project I would love to get off the ground. Jacob Rampino (talk) 02:11, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Your best approach would be to make this same proposal over on the Wikiproject, where you would have a more focused audience than here at the Teahouse. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 04:59, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Will do. Just wanted to get a general idea of whether it seemed implausible at face value. Jacob Rampino (talk) 05:18, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I made this draft. Seeing if someone would like to review it? User:Mileymo/sandbox. This draft includes coverage from Global News, the Saskatoon StarPhoenix, and the Winnipeg Free Press. Thanks. Mileymo (talk) 03:44, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Atop Draft:Myles Morrison: "Review waiting, please be patient. / This may take 7 weeks or more". So relax and wait. -- Hoary (talk) 04:32, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Just having a quick glance, I’d say it’s probably going to be declined. The source titles don’t suggest that any of those articles have SIG COV. I’m not sure why there’s so much information about Telemiracle as if it’s trying to explain how important the event is and by implication the subject and honestly it’s also giving a little AI. Refer WP:42. MmeMaigret (talk) 05:52, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi,

I recently attempted to update the Wikipedia article for Emma Thompson regarding her divorce from Kenneth Branagh. The article currently lists 1995 as the year of their divorce, which I believe may be an error. While they did separate in 1995, Thompson mentioned in a anecdote written about in a 2025 CBS News article ( https://www.cbsnews.com/news/emma-thompson-says-president-donald-trump-once-asked-her-out/ ) that her divorce was finalized during the 1997 filming of Primary Colors (released in 1998).

However, there are a couple of complications.

1. The CBS article focuses mainly on a phone call Thompson received from Donald Trump and the divorce date is a sidenote, which I think makes it harder to cite this as a direct source for the divorce.
2. While the CBS article doesn't directly mention Branagh, it's understood that he was Thompson's only husband at the time, and she has only been divorced once. Other articles about Thompson's 2025 anecdote state Branagh was her husband, but omit the 1997 date. IMDB and Variety support that Primary Colors was filmed in 1997, but I want to avoid any original research.
3. There doesn't seem to be any online sources circa 1997 confirming their divorce date. It's likely Thompson and Branagh chose not to publicly announce that their divorce was finalized.

I'd appreciate any guidance on whether it's acceptable to cite the CBS article to support the 1997 divorce date in the Emma Thompson Wikipedia article, even though it is a sidenote in the CBS article. How should this situation be handled?

Thanks for any help! ~2026-14479-23 (talk) 05:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Bring up the matter on Talk:Emma Thompson. On Talk:Kenneth Branagh, link to the discussion on Talk:Emma Thompson and invite people to join it. (People frequenting one or other of those two talk pages are more likely to be familiar with the biographical complexities of one or both of those two actors than are people frequenting this page.) -- Hoary (talk) 06:37, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I've restored your edit, and changed the date on Branagh's article; in both cases, the 1995 date was uncited. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:16, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

When I noticed that someone accidentally removed this article from Battle for Dream Island, I readded it using the parameter <ref name="Burlingame October 2025"</ref>. The issue arose when this created a duplicate error since another article cited in the same page shares a publisher (Comics Beat) and an author. I combed through several MOS guides, but all the solutions I found did not fit my predicament; they only pertained to cases where two separate references shared a source. Giovanni Potage (talk) 08:46, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Now resolved? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:58, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing, can you clarify what you meant by "now resolved?" Giovanni Potage (talk) 10:00, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

It's a question: "is the issue now resolved?" Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:29, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh, my bad. To answer your question: no. As of writing, no one besides me has attempted to fix the duplicate error. Giovanni Potage (talk) 10:32, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Giovanni Potage, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I haven't looked at the article, but as far as I know, that error means that there are two references defined with the same name (the bit after name=), and that is not allowed.

It doesn't object to, or even notice, if there are two references with the same publisher, or date, or in fact if two separate references are actually identical: it's just the duplicate definition for the name.

So, either the two references with that name are actually the same, in which case, delete one of them, and just use the short form <ref name="..."/> for the second citation; or else the two are not the same, in which case, change one of the names to be different. Reference names can be anything: it's a useful convenience to make them the title/author/publisher and date, but that's not a requirement. ColinFine (talk) 13:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

The two articles are different, but they are written by the same author and share the same publisher. I used "Burlington 2025" for the ref names, and only distinguished them by sandwiching the month of publication between the author's name and year. I changed the second citation's ref name to "Comics Beat 2025" but according to this page, a lint error is still present. Giovanni Potage (talk) 13:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

@Giovanni Potage The lint error is most likely caused by the name ("Burlingame") being used multiple times (in this case, the cite news template) throughout the article; I think it can be safely ignored. Jolly1253 (talk) 14:55, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing, can I explain the problem in more detail? Giovanni Potage (talk) 12:50, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

You don't need to ask! Someone will help, even if I'm (or any other named editor is) not around. BlueStaticHorse (talk) 14:26, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello Wikipedians. I am new to editing here and currently editing an article in the hopes of getting it peer-reviewed.

I'm currently having problems with standardizing the citation style.

Province of Pennsylvania#CITEREFMiller2002 doesn't link directly to the citation in the Bibliography section of the article like i've seen it done on other articles. I set the citation ref as Miller2002 and it still wont work.

Can someone helo me fix this? Thanks in advance. ~2026-15418-59 (talk) 10:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-15418-59 Refer to the Template:Cite template, which helps with source formatting. If you add this from visual editor (type "{{", and then type "Cite" and press enter; alternatively, click on the big double apostrophe button on the top bar), there's a visual guide that helps you type in the fields. We also have a variety of citation templates, such as Template:Cite book, Template:Cite journal, and Template:Cite web. n.h.huit, 化けの花 11:39, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. ~2026-15418-59 (talk) 11:50, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-15418-59 Oh and the actual citation for Harvard style is Template: Harvard citation. 😞 n.h.huit, 化けの花 11:52, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-15418-59: I'm not quite sure what you're doing but I suspect the issue is consistency. When I go to source editor and search Miller, these are the results:

• Miller 2002
• Miller_2002
• Miller2002
• Miller|2002

Why don't you change them all to just "miller". MmeMaigret (talk) 11:56, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Those are the citations made automatically using the built in tool. I did try changing "Miller 2002" to "Miller 2002" because I thought that the issue was the space, to no luck.

I was going to convert the automatic citations of the book to one source but the Harvard ref template did not work. Thank you for the help ~2026-15418-59 (talk) 12:59, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I've fixed it now. The {{cite book}} has two editors and a year, so you don't need the |ref= parameter. It does mean that the in-text citation using {{sfn}} needs to mention both editors. --rchard2scout (talk) 11:22, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello. I have a conflict of interest regarding this topic and do not want to create an article directly.

Could an independent editor please advise whether these sources seem sufficient for a draft or a requested article about Aldeniz Rashidov?

Main independent sources:

• BTA, 16 February 2024 — IEEE Senior Member recognition
• BTA, 20 June 2024 — comments on reforms in education
• BTA, 9 February 2026 — public lecture on artificial intelligence
• Gabrovo News, 13 April 2020
• Digital Industry, 24 May 2023
• Selected Engineer.bg articles on AI, education, and research, including:
  • 21 June 2023 — dialogue with ChatGPT and AI in science;
  • 18 July 2024 — AI algorithms and future generations;
  • 10 September 2024 — career orientation in the technical sector

Short neutral draft: Aldeniz Rashidov is a Bulgarian scholar, professor, university lecturer, and researcher associated with the Technical University of Gabrovo. His professional work is in the fields of artificial intelligence, information systems, and engineering education. In 2024, he received IEEE Senior Member status, and in 2026 BTA reported on his public lecture on artificial intelligence. His work and public positions have also been covered in specialized and regional media.

Thank you. Georgiev1972 (talk) 10:37, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Just from these, I'd have to say no.

There are like 40,000 IEE Senior Members, so while that may be useful in an article, it doesn't really establish notability. Neither do comments or a lecture made by Rashidov. Nor do articles by Rashidov. That leaves the Gabrovo News and Digital Industry, but I can't find the content you're referring to, so I have no idea if these constitute significant cover of Rashidov.

Now, Rashidov might be notable for other reasons; that would require more research. But I think you're kind of getting notability in the Wikipedia sense not quite right. The idea isn't trying to simply find things Rashidov did or said, the goal is to find reliable sources, independent of Rashidov, that are covering, discussing, describing, or analyzing Rashidov, and not just passing mentions. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 11:23, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. That is helpful.

I understand that the current set of sources may not be enough to establish notability in the Wikipedia sense. I will look for stronger independent sources that discuss Rashidov in more substantial detail, rather than simply quoting him or reporting events. Georgiev1972 (talk) 11:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I'm trying to write an article about George Butler Sutton, who was World Billiards Champion in the early 20th century. Is there anyone who can help me? Cedricmarkus (talk) 11:47, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:George Butler Sutton

What sort of help are you looking for? Athanelar (talk) 11:51, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

The resources I've found are somewhat insufficient. There are very few written sources. Currently, only 3-4. Cedricmarkus (talk) 12:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

{{find sources}} is a very helpful template. In this case it outputs

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Athanelar (talk) 12:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

See also WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Help:Find sources also has some good tips. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:12, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Your second source is good; your first not so. You need more sources, of good quality. See WP:42. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I work with a brand that is interested in creating a Wikipedia page as they don't currently have one. I know that in order to create one, the brand needs to have significant coverage by an external source, that is not PR related. But how many external articles like this are needed? And what counts as non-PR? ~2026-15605-30 (talk) 11:56, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. See WP:42 and our policies on the notability of organizations and companies, but you should also learn how to make your first Wikipedia article too, as that's a helpful guide. Cheers! n.h.huit, 化けの花 12:00, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Firstly please read and follow WP:PAID—it's mandatory in your circumstances.

Then read WP:42 (which addresses your question) and WP:PROMO.

If you then wish to proceed, see WP:Your first article and follow this process. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:01, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Ah right I almost forgot. When you're working with a company to get an article about them on Wikipedia, or have been paid by them to do an edit/write an article, that means that you have a conflict of interest, or COI, with us. It sounds scary, but generally speaking, as long as you disclose your COI (guide: WP:DCOI, like, you have to do this) and stick with our content policies and practices (as you're seeking to write information in our site, pretty much), especially regarding neutrality and other stuff I and Pigsonthewing have linked above, you're good.

You should also note that no one on Wikipedia controls or owns articles. If Wikipedia hosts an article about you or your organization, others may add information that would otherwise remain little known.

For more details, see WP:COI. Cheers! n.h.huit, 化けの花 12:10, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

A simpler explanation is over at WP:PANDSCOI n.h.huit, 化けの花 12:15, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-15605-30. It's worth asking, Why do you want Wikipedia to have an article about your brand? (It won't be "your page", by the way, as others have said). If it's "to tell people about our brand", or "to enhance our online presence", then that is promotion, and forbidden on Wikipedia.

The only meaningful answer is "to collect in one (very visible) place what people have said about our brand"; but you do not control what people might say about you. If what they have said is not entirely favourable, then the article will not be entirely favourable to you. Is that what you want? ColinFine (talk) 14:10, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I own some material which I believe may be useful for improving the family section of Henry Ives Cobb, as well as expanding Augusta Adams under List of Brigham Young's wives. I do not believe they are available anywhere on the internet, and would like to know how I can cite them. Thank you! Buv16 (talk) 14:10, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Buv16. Sources don't need to be available online to be acceptable (see WP:SOURCEACCESS), but they do need to have been published in some form. Could you give some more detail on the nature of the source material you have in mind here? Cordless Larry (talk) 14:22, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I'll have to check when I get home, but if I'm remembering correctly it's mostly obituaries. I'm a descendant of Henry Ives Cobb, and it was all collected as part of tracing back my family tree. And yes, I know it's a COI, but I doubt anyone outside of my family is going to have all of these obituaries in one place. Buv16 (talk) 15:38, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

If you mean obituaries published in a newspaper or a magazine, those should be acceptable as sources. You can cite them using the cite news template that BlueStaticHorse mentions below. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:36, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

@Buv16 You can also consider uploading them to the Internet Archive, that way the information will be verifiable by everyone 🍅 fx (talk) 15:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! You can cite a book by inserting the {{cite book}} template, and then filling in the information. If you would like to cite a newspaper, use the {{cite news}} template. An example of how to do this is on the template page. Information does not have to be online to be cited.

BlueStaticHorse (talk) 14:25, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Now I would like to provide real truth information about those incorections , at least I know very well on what I have been activist and worked on. There is many Dedic crops renamed and cut off. Becouse I was getting it by deserve on my intelectual property. They just change surname into similiar but thez came out of this family. If you ask chatgpt the surname became from Slavenic called Grandfather in association. ~2026-15793-55 (talk) 15:06, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

This is word salad and incomprehensible. I will note the TA has been edit-warring at Ledići, replacing the name with "Dedići". —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 15:12, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Another note: There is an article for a village called Dedići, which appears to have a different set of coordinates and is in Srebrenik, not Trnovo. SenshiSun (talk) 19:45, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! On Wikipedia, ChatGPT is not a reliable source. If you ask ChatGPT for what sources it used, you can use those sources though, if they are reliable sources and meet Wikipedia's policies for sources. BlueStaticHorse (talk) 15:18, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Teahouse community!

I am a Conflict of Interest editor. I'm an employee at Dell Technologies and here on Wikipedia to make requests to update information related to the company.

I have been collaborating with English Domain editors on Wikipedia for about six months, and I've experienced challenges with IP Address blocking while on my company’s office Wi-Fi. I am able to make edit requests while on my home Wi-Fi or hotspot on my mobile device while connected to my company’s VPN, but when I try to make edit requests on my company Wi-Fi, I’m blocked. I submitted an IP block exemption ticket last week and have not been notified of any changes to the status of my account.

Now that I have global team members who will start contributing edit requests to their respective Language Domains, I want to help them out. Are there proactive steps that my global team members can take, so they don’t experience the same issues with IP address flags from Wikipedia that block me from posting requests on article Talk Pages?

Any insights or direction you have would be appreciated! TL with Dell Technologies (talk) 15:20, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

If you don't get any useful advice here, try asking at WP:Village pump (technical). Athanelar (talk) 15:28, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Do you know why your IP address is blocked? ~2026-57078-1 (talk) 20:21, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

It's difficult to look into this without knowing the IP involved. 331dot (talk) 20:31, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

When one article says something with sources, can you just copy that together with the sources, without checking them yourself? (The article about Jimmie Noone says, he inspired Ravel's composition Boléro, or that Ravel the Composer based it on Noone's improvisation. But Boléro does not mention it.) Lamadama (talk) 19:21, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I would recommend checking the sources before including them in an article, but you can use other articles to find sources. BlueStaticHorse (talk) 19:26, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

@Lamadama Well, clearly you can (with attribution, see WP:copying within Wikipedia) but as you have discovered, that is unwise in many cases. It can be especially bad if you copy from a foreign-language article or one where a chatbot has been used, owing to hallucinated references. Best to be careful! Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:26, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Lamadama, and welcome to the Teahouse.

No, you should not copy a citation without looking at the source yourself. See WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT. ColinFine (talk) 11:35, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3A2012_Sargento_200#Can_someone_edit_the_rest_of_the_things,_I'm_tired,_just_qualifying,_race_summary,_and_race_results?

Btw, this was my very first article I've created! TexasOutlawsSoccerFan (talk) 19:22, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I informed you of the same on your talk page, but unfortunately at this time I have draftified your article to Draft:2012 Sargento 200. The references currently in your article do not demonstrate that it is notable as we define that word on Wikipedia. Please find some references that show the event is notable (references like those described at the golden rule) and then submit the draft for review via Articles for Creation. I'll place a template on the draft that will allow you to do so when you're ready. Athanelar (talk) 21:07, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

• "Template:RMassist must be used on Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests." Shahrohkhanizadeh (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Shahrohkhanizadeh, and welcome to the Teahouse! There's no need to worry about moving it yourself; reviewers take care of moving articles when they approve them, and it looks like your draft was submitted successfully to the queue, so nothing for you to do on that count. (I've replaced the {{error}} template in your comment with quotation marks and left just the error message text to fix page errors.) Hope this helps, and happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 20:36, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I need help. I am fixing the section called Causes and effects on "Violence against Christians in India" because it has a notice for neutrality. Neutrality rules are saying things such as using wikivoice and I am finding many sentences that are redundant or not per the wikivoice Neutrality rules. I want to make sure I am following the rules properly before I make more improvements. Can someone help me. NicoR8 (talk) 20:35, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Courtesy article: Violence against Christians in India

See WP:NPOV and WP:VOICE, which are our policies on neutral voice and toning, and the latter in particular being about "Wikivoice". Cheers! n.h.huit, 化けの花 00:10, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi I found that and read the rules.I feel I am doing the cleanup correctly after reading the two policies you gave WP:NPOV and WP:VOICE. However, I saw that on Violence against Christians in India lots of words and sentences sounded incorrect. Would you be able to help me and check if I have done the changes correctly there? NicoR8 (talk) 14:37, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I want to ask another question. If sentences do not have reference given, am I allowed to remove the sentence? NicoR8 (talk) 15:02, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@NicoR8 That article has > 100 page watchers, so there are plenty of other editors who will notice what you are doing. Hence, if you make changes with good edit summaries you should be fine. While you can be WP:BOLD and remove unreferenced sentences, it might be better to mark then as {{cn}} for "citation needed": there may well be a source mentioned elsewhere in the article, even as close as at the end of the same paragraph, which actually does back up the part you are concerned about. Note that the WP:LEAD doesn't require references unless someone has placed information there that isn't in the body of the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:45, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

The cite template feature in the default toolbar of the source editor is currently broken. It's reported at Wikipedia talk:RefToolbar#RefToolbar is broken with a notification at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#RefToolbar is broken. There is no need for further reports. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:45, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

It's fixed already. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I'm very new to wikipedia and I've been working on my first article. I keep trying to incorporate the feedback on the page I'm working on Draft:Emilia Fart. Some feedback said I didn't have enough sources so I went and found more but now they're saying they're unreliable but they are reputable magazines like PAPER and BUST from interviews that the subject has done. At first it said that the subject met notability but there weren't enough sources so I added more sources and now I'm being told that actually she's not notable enough. I feel like I'm in this cycle and I don't know how to get past it to be able to publish the article. Especially the PAPER source provides significant, reliable and independent coverage. What more can I do to get this page to meet the guidelines. Thanks in advance!! Juliannaesmith (talk) 23:41, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

See WP:42 and WP:Notability (people). Cheers! n.h.huit, 化けの花 00:03, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Interviews don’t count towards SIG COV. Refer WP:42. MmeMaigret (talk) 00:20, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

SIGCOV means WP: Significant coverage by the way. ^^ n.h.huit, 化けの花 04:01, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Also, please be aware that Notability on living people on English Wikipedia is rather strict. An example is Kyle Hill (YouTuber), as an article about him were deleted after this discussion. Toarin (talk) 06:59, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, @Juliannaesmith! Unfortunately you have launched yourself into the most difficult task on Wikipedia: writing a new article. Writing about a living person is the hardest kind of new article to write. And since you have properly declared a COI (thank you!), you have a further problem to deal with because you need to forget everything you know about your subject and write only what is in reliable sources. There are many policies you need to know and follow when creating articles, so we always recommend spending at least a few weeks editing existing articles before trying to write something new. It's probably also a good idea to read through WP:ABOUTME and decide whether Emilia would still be okay with a Wikipedia article if there was some kind of controversy - because that would almost certainly end up in the article.

But let's assume you decide to continue working on your draft. You are looking for sources that meet all three criteria in WP:42. Interviews with or things written/created by your subject or her friends, family, colleagues, etc are not independent. Usually we need three or more WP:42-compliant sources to show that someone or something qualifies for a Wikipedia article. PAPER is not as independent as we'd like because it involves an interview - as indeed do most of your sources. Is there anything out there that was written without any input from your subject?

Make sure, as well, that everything in your draft is cited to a source and that that information is definitely present in the source - we have to be super careful with biographies of living people, and I see the draft is tagged for AI/LLM-generated text. Possibly the biggest problem with LLMs is that they will blithely cite something to a source that sounds plausible but doesn't actually contain that information. For example, in your 2017-2019 section, there's only one source given so the assumption is that all that info is in that source - but I spot-checked and the words 'mukbang' and 'story' aren't in the source. Go through your draft with a fine-tooth comb and make sure you haven't been sabotaged by the LLM!

Finally, if you want to take a break and come back to the draft later - if you want to get more editing experience first - it will remain where it is for six months after the last edit, so you can keep editing it for basically forever and the timer will keep resetting for another six months every time. If you forget and it gets deleted, that's very normal and you can get it back with no problem via the WP:REFUND process.

I know that's a lot to take in. Feel free to ask more questions or for clarification here on on my talk page. I hope some of this has been helpful, and wish you happy editing! Meadowlark (talk) 11:49, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Juliannaesmith: "Some feedback said I didn't have enough sources". I find that unlikely. In assessing notability, assuming you have at least three sources, they'll be judged on quality rather than quantity. Maybe the feedback said "not enough good sources". Maproom (talk) 23:09, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi all, I stumbled across and have been working on Bickelhaupt Arboretum. I think the article would benefit from a picture(s). I don't live there and I understand that we cannot just take any image and plop it in. Is it acceptable to contact the Foundation running the arboretum and ask them to upload an image that they release into the public domain? I also read something a few days ago about requesting images on Wikipedia but now I can't find it. Is there a policy that I can read on what the go is. Also, how do I mechanically add images into an article? As always, thank you for all your help. Itsaclarinet (talk) 02:57, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

You can, but you'd have to make it clear to them what we require in terms of copyright (namely: anyone can use the image, not just Wikipedia; for any purpose, including commercial; free; forever; without asking permission; as long as credit is given).

As for how to include an image in an article: simply add "[[File:example.jpg]]" into the article's source. DS (talk) 03:15, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Well, DragonflySixtyseven . . . no. The article Arboretum, for example, starts with [[File:arboretum.westonbirt.750pix.jpg|thumb|upright=1.4|Autumn colours at [[Westonbirt Arboretum]], [[Gloucestershire]], England]]. If one were to simplify that to [[File:arboretum.westonbirt.750pix.jpg]] the result would not be good at all. Itsaclarinet, for an explanation (actually a parallel pair of explanations), please see Help:Introduction. -- Hoary (talk) 03:53, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Itsaclarinet, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see WP:requesting copyright permission. ColinFine (talk) 11:46, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Help:Images may be of interest. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:19, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

What are the most informal welcome templates? ~2026-15797-57 (talk) 03:16, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-15797-57, you can find the welcoming templates at Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates or WP:WT on your search bar.

There is an informal one called {{subst:W-informal}} RoyalSilver 03:56, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I mean, template with the most links ~2026-15797-57 (talk) 13:29, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Do you mean informational? In any case, the page linked above contains all of them. 🍅 fx (talk) 15:29, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Graphical template with the most links ~2026-15797-57 (talk) 03:37, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Welcome graphical? ~2026-16266-66 (talk) 21:10, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-15797-57Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Almost every welcome template is informal in some ways, and it's probably Template:W-informal, but you can also reference other Welcome templates are WP:Welcome templates. Cheers! n.h.huit, 化けの花 03:59, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

at* n.h.huit, 化けの花 03:59, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello! Could someone please explain to me why the archive bot on this page has not archived the first thread on the talk page, GA Reassessment? It archived other threads recently but not that one. Thanks in advance. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 06:11, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @OrdinaryOtter. I believe the bot works by looking at the datestamp on each section. In this case, the section was transcluded from the GA reassessment subpage, so it didn't actually have a datestamp the bot could 'see' on the talk page.

I've manually archived that section so it should be all good now:) SnowyRiver28 (talk) 07:52, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Considering the current 2026 Iran war and a renewed internet blackout almost everything is unreachable here in iran. Except wikipedia (only the main site is reachable. cdns are not) Is there someone here with access and capability to setup a vpn server which can be resolved from wiki name itself? It can provide internet access here for regular people. Atleast until the islamic goverment finds this... 3nd13ssn3ss (talk) 09:49, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Keep safe man. I'm also in a crap situation because of this but no blackout yet. jolielover♥talk 10:06, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

U got access ?!

Bruh which domains can you resolve ?

Can you reach any dnses ? 3nd13ssn3ss (talk) 10:10, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Nah I'm in a GCC country, not Iran, sorry for confusing you. jolielover♥talk 10:15, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Its fine bro

Atleast your goverment tries to keep you safe

My goverment is only protecting itself not its people 3nd13ssn3ss (talk) 10:30, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @3nd13ssn3ss. The techie people hang out more on WP:VPT: I suggest asking there (if you can access here, I think you'll be able to reach that). ColinFine (talk) 11:48, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello all

I saw a user promoting a business/company in their user page. Does it violate any policy here? What is the extent of the autonomy a user can have over their talk page?

Thanks aa always! _signed, Kvinnen (talk) 11:02, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Promotion of a business is not OK. (See Wikipedia:User pages#Excessive_unrelated_content.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:13, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse! If you see a user promoting a business on their user page, that is promotional content, and it is not allowed. If you see promotional content on a user page, please let them know that they need to remove it. BlueStaticHorse (talk) 11:33, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I do not remember their user page anymore. But if I come across anyone doing so, I will let them know of this policy that restricts their promotion. Thanks @Hoaryand @BlueStaticHorse! _signed, Kvinnen (talk) 11:44, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I submitted a draft article about a professional MMA fighter. Could someone help review it or provide feedback before the formal review?

Draft: Aitana Alvarez SuperiorChallenge (talk) 11:04, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Aitana Alvarez

Hello and welcome. You are asking for a pre-review review; you have submitted it, please allow the process to play out. 331dot (talk) 11:09, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi SuperiorChallenge, welcome to the Teahouse. If it's declined then the review will give the reason and usually say you can try to improve and resubmit. But I can tell you to see Help:Referencing for beginners#Inline citations: "They are generally added either immediately following the fact that they support, or at the end of the sentence that they support." If you have trouble moving existing references in VisualEditor then try the source editor. See Help:VisualEditor#Opening VisualEditor for how to switch. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:41, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

How do I add an image when editing a Wikipedia article? Zahrazamedahmedi (talk) 13:40, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Zahrazamedahmedi: Start by reading Help:Images. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:42, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Zahrazamedahmedi Also, Images must come from Commons, if you didn't already know that Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 15:27, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

This is not true, non-free images must be uploaded directly to Wikipedia. Commons only hosts free images. Athanelar (talk) 21:54, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, so I saw some vandalism on the article Ewa Braun by the user ~2026-14994-22. He changed the bit saying Not to be confused with Eva Braun, Adolf Hitler's wife. to Not to be confused with Eva Braun, Adolf Hitler's perma-foid. So i reverted it. When I went to warn him for this vandalism I saw that he didnt have a talk page, so what do I do? Kattachira (talk) 14:24, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Kattachira You can create a talk page by clicking on the red link to that page. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:32, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Everyone has a talk page, even if it's a red link. Just send them a message. BlueStaticHorse (talk) 14:33, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

oh okk Kattachira (talk) 15:10, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

You may find the tool WP:Twinkle, which semi-automates such actions for you, useful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:51, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I have an article draft that was recently declined due to "draft references not meeting Wikipedia's criteria..." without any particular pointing at what's wrong. I did my best to make it compliant and use sources that met all criteria, but could anyone who is more experience point me out the errors and provide guidance on how to correct them? I want to get better at this : ) The article page is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Scarbo_Vintage

Thank you in advance! ~2026-15456-56 (talk) 15:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

"'draft references not meeting Wikipedia's criteria...' without any particular pointing at what's wrong"

No, that's not what was said. At the top of the draft is panel beginning:

This draft's references do not show that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for organizations and companies. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:

and which goes on to explain (with links to further explanatory pages) exactly what is needed, and is lacking in your draft.

That said, the reviewer has since been blocked as a sock-puppet, so you might reasonably ask for a second review at WP:AFCHELP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:50, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @~2026-15456-56, although the reviewer has been blocked, I would not advise asking for a second review just yet. The Product section in particular sounds exactly like the company trying to sell its products, complete with prices - this needs to be majorly toned down or removed entirely, see WP:NOTPROMO for more. Skimming through your sources I didn't see any that focused solely on Scarbo Vintage as a company; most focus on their products, which would be fine for an article about one of those products, but if the article is to be about the company then we need sources that discuss the company itself. Those sources also need to meet all three criteria of WP:42 as well as WP:NCORP, and you must avoid WP:CORPTRIV - this is very difficult because most companies are fantastic at producing endless trivial material to keep themselves in the news.

Just so you are aware, writing a new article is the hardest task on Wikipedia, especially if you're a new editor and haven't had to grapple with the many, many policies we have. It can also be extremely frustrating! Usually it's a good idea to edit other articles for a while first, so you can get an idea of how Wikipedia articles come into existence and grow. If you decide to do this, your draft will be perfectly safe for six months after the last edit made to it - so you could keep making a tiny edit every five and a half months if you liked. Even if it gets deleted for inactivity you can get it back easily at WP:REFUND. I hope this helps, and wish you happy editing. Meadowlark (talk) 00:18, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I think it would be a great idea to organize a WikiProject Intellectual Diversity, which supports very broad diversity in terms of ideology, religion, national/ethnic affinities, philosophy, intellectual (e.g., language-based, national academic) traditions, media culture, etc. But I think Wikipedia's policies have been gradually changed to be hostile to intellectual diversity in this sense, and many Wikipedians can be hostile as well, whether they mean to be or not. Without actually litigating the (admittedly highly interesting!) substantive question whether Wikipedia should support intellectual diversity, can you give me insight into how I might organize such a WikiProject without essentially painting a target on the back of participants? Larry Sanger (talk) 16:13, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Larry Sanger. Instructions on how to create a WikiProject are at WP:PROJGUIDE. I'm not knowledgeable on the functions of this kind of stuff, but I believe you will need to concoct a group of editors who are willing to collaborate and create this project with you. toby ^{(t)(c)(rw)(omo)} 16:21, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I can read basic instructions; I know all that. The question is much more specialized. Larry Sanger (talk) 16:44, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Could you clarify what you mean by not wanting to essentially [paint] a target on the back of participants? toby ^{(t)(c)(rw)(omo)} 17:46, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Sure, I will give it a try, although it’s a little tricky. In order to advocate for intellectual diversity, this would mean, among other things, pushing back hard on policies and decisions relating to “fringe theories,” NPOV, and RS. The problem is that these tend to be incendiary topics by their very nature, and partisans will often hunt for ammunition to use against the other side. If a partisan can point to a WikiProject membership that can be colored as showing bias, that “paints a target” for such editors. Worries along these lines might disincentivize people from joining such a WikiProject. Does this make sense? Larry Sanger (talk) 18:02, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I would assume that the best way to avoid such target painting and risk would be to make it clear that the WikiProject does not advocate for the breaking of any such policies. ✨ΩmegaMantis✨^(he/him) ❦blather | ☞spy on me 20:48, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

It feels a little silly for me to be giving any advice on Wikipedia procedure to its cofounder, but you asked; and welcome back, Larry. It's generally inappropriate to use WikiProjects as advocacy groups/voting blocs/pressure orgs in this way, since that sort of thing is a form of WP:CANVAS. and I don't see what else this WikiProject would be doing except, as you state, 'pushing back hard on policies and decisions.' WP:WikiProject tells us the main function of a WikiProject should be to improve a particular topic area [by] develop[ing] ideas, discuss[ing] sources, maintain[ing] various collaborative processes, and keep[ing] track of work that needs to be done. If what you're doing is essentially trying to widen the scope of what Wikipedia considers acceptable sourcing, that seems like something best done/discussed by avenues like WP:WikiProject Reliability and the WP:Village pump (policy). What I think you're likely to find, however, is that the general consensus of Wikipedia editors have no interest in broadening the scope of reliability to include what we currently consider to be fringe. The social values of Wikipedia in terms of its respect for academia and intellectualism are very well-entrenched, and I do not see any immediate future where people will be willing to accept the words of, for lack of better terms, cranks, quacks and conspiracy theorists as encyclopedic sources. Athanelar (talk) 21:12, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Wanted to point out for this discussion the currently-inactive Alternative views WikiProject. WikiMacaroons^Cinnamon? 00:45, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@Athanelar Well said! We certainly don't want to weaken NPOV, or RS. Or even FRINGE. There can be "intellectual diversity" without being FRINGE. David10244 (talk) 03:22, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

My last sentence meant, intellectual diversity is not achieved by weakening those policies. Unless we want speculation and random opinions in articles, and if we don't, then weakening those policies is not the way to go. @Larry Sanger, do you have any different way of expressing what you meant, or do you really want fringe theories and unreliable sources such as random blogs and YouTube videos to be used as sources for articles? Along with articles that "prove" that the earth is flat? David10244 (talk) 03:37, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

You should read Sanger's nine theses (or at least his overview thereof) at User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses for the answer to this question. They include such items as 2. Enable competing articles and 3. Abolish source blacklists.

You can read it in the man's own words, but his stance really does seem to be that Wikipedia should be completely impartial as to determinations of what is 'true' or 'reliable' or even 'sensible', and that no viewpoint should be excluded from summary based on considerations such as WP:FRINGE or WP:UNDUE. Athanelar (talk) 03:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

WP:FRINGE and WP:UNDUE need to be greatly weakened if not abolished. Larry Sanger (talk) 13:41, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't think you're going to get much support for dismantling basic policies & guidelines, especially when advocating for a wikiproject to promote fringe theories. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 20:41, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

HI :)

I got into the merging project, which is a lot of fun and contributes to WP in my opinion, but i have a question and im trying to understand the main differance between AFD and merge decisions, they seem to get tangled up in some cases, especially when an article is settled for merge instead of deletion... How can I learn more about this? Happypenguins82 (talk) 16:23, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Happypenguins82. It's the proposer who chooses whether to propose deleting or merging and that decides the venue for the discussion. All participants are free to make any suggestion and the discussion may close with any result. Merging can be complicated and require knowledge of the field to do well. If a discussion ends with a decision to merge then there may not be anyone willing to do it for a long time. Nobody is assigned to specific work so it waits for a volunteer. Anyone can carry out a merge unless they aren't allowed to edit the target page. Deletions require less work and happen quickly. Does that answer your question? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:27, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes it does, thank you :)

And if i noticed that the AFD/Merge conclusion/discussion template has a wrong destination on it, or a better one, is it ok to change the name of the article that appears on the final notice? (with proper edit summary of course). Happypenguins82 (talk) 18:51, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Happypenguins82: I'm not sure what you mean by the final notice but if it's a section heading of a discussion then don't change it. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:16, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I'll give you an example, this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anna Williams (Tekken) this should be redirected to a different article, I want to change the only the name of the destination in this from "Tekken" which is disambiguation, to Characters of the Tekken series.

what would you advise (these articles came from the open tasks on the merging page, because the destination is off. Happypenguins82 (talk) 19:44, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Happypenguins82: The editors who voted merge should have said instead merge with Characters of the Tekken series, it is a better merge for the article. Catfurball (talk) 20:20, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, its exactly my point, and therefor i'm intrested in correcting only the correct destination: the name of the right article, and will of course be very clear when I'll write the edit summary. Happypenguins82 (talk) 20:27, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Happypenguins82: Tekken is an article. It's not a disambiguation page just because it's about a whole franchise. Anna Williams (Tekken) was redirected to List of Tekken characters#Anna Williams at the time. The AfD has a signed and dated post from 2023 saying "The result was merge to Tekken". Don't change that and in general, don't change posts by others. You can add a signed note saying it was actually merged to List of Tekken characters#Anna Williams, or you can contact the editor and ask whether they will change it. Anna Williams (Tekken) became an article again in 2025 when a new draft was accepted. The 2023 discussion is too old to force a new merge now without a discussion. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:23, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Ok will do as you advised. thanks again Happypenguins82 (talk) 20:29, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Sorry to be a pain but im trying to figure this out, these are the instructions from open task on the project:

== Redirected ==

The following table lists pages referred to by {{afd-merge from}} are redirects to some page other than that with the {{afd-merge from}}. Please correct the {{afd-merge from}}, either by removing it (if the page was correctly merged elsewhere), undoing the incorrect redirection, or pointing it to the correct page. This table will be updated automatically.

[]

would you still advise to leave it be? Happypenguins82 (talk) 20:48, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Happypenguins82: Yes. "referred to by {{afd-merge from}}" means that template is actually used. It's not used on AfD pages. Anna Williams (Tekken) ended up in Wikipedia:WikiProject Merge#Open tasks because {{Afd-merge from|Anna Williams (Tekken)|Anna Williams (Tekken)|5 May 2023}} was placed on Talk:Tekken when the AfD closed but Anna Williams (Tekken) was redirected to another page. Editing the AfD page later would not change the code on Talk:Tekken. The code has since been removed. This was appropriate since no content was apparently merged to Tekken. Anna Williams (Tekken) can be removed from the "Deleted" part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Merge#Open tasks which says it is not updated automatically (additions are automatic but not removals). It appears from the page history that nobody actually ever removes pages so the "Deleted" list just keeps growing. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:20, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks again for the good explanation 🙏 Happypenguins82 (talk) 07:09, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Help! I created a new Wiki page in word as a draft and need to know how to submit?

Thomasmcallahan (talk) 16:24, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello. You may use the Article Wizard to create and submit your draft. 331dot (talk) 16:29, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Thomasmcallahan Note that MS Word text doesn't always copy/paste well into Wikipedia, as WP:Wikimarkup uses some different conventions, such as using two consecutive ' characters to create italic text. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:55, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Thomasmcallahan, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Also, if your draft includes any quotation marks, Word may produce curly ones, which Wikitext doesn't like; but by far the most important point is that Word will not, as far as I know, generate citations in a form that Wikipedia can use. Since citations are fundamental to any Wikipedia article, this might be a problem.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 21:19, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I have declared a conflict of interest on my user page. A draft for Smile Foundation is ready at User:SocialTanwar/sandbox. I request an editor to review the draft and consider moving it to the main article space. SocialTanwar (talk) 17:20, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I have reviewed (and declined) your draft. In the future, there is no need to request a review here at the Teahouse. When you click the 'submit' button, your article goes into a review pool and it will be reviewed eventually; be patient. Athanelar (talk) 21:01, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I'd like some help to learn about editing and working on templates. I've been around the block here on many areas, but templates would be somewhat newer for me. Can I get a mentor for just working on templates? Iljhgtn (they/them · talk) 17:48, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't know about mentoring, but I can point you towards WP:Magic words (specifically WP:Parser functions) which are super useful for making templates have conditional outcomes and that sort of thing. Athanelar (talk) 20:59, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

On my contributions, my most recent one is undoing someones talk page on accident. I accidentally pressed their " [[vandalism]] button on their contributions " Could someone revert it, I don't know how to, I'm so sorry RoyalSilver 17:58, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello @RoyalSilver. I've done this. Reverting yourself is done the same way anyone would revert a different edit. toby ^{(t)(c)(rw)(omo)} 18:02, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Alright, thank you so much RoyalSilver 18:03, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Attempted to find that template to add that to the essay i've been cooking in my sandbox, but I can't find it. Which template is that, what is it called? Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 18:39, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Starlet147: We have {{Image requested}} for articles. I don't know something suited for an essay if you want an image for the essay itself. A Commons search of man cooling down starts with three possibilities for User:Starlet147/sandbox. I see you are female but "woman cooling down" didn't give anything relevant. There may be a bad joke somewhere in that. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:02, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

how do I do that Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello (talk) 19:11, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Use ==This== on your page. Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 19:13, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

thank you Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello (talk) 19:15, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

No problem Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 19:21, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

So, I set out to create an article for the U.S. Attorney for the District of Minnesota, Daniel Rosen. I evidently did not do my due diligence, or I would have discovered that the article already existed. My bad. The original article is at Daniel N. Rosen. I created an article at Daniel Rosen (lawyer). I redirected my article to Daniel N. Rosen. Was that an ok thing to do, or should I go about getting my article deleted? Marquardtika (talk) 20:32, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

It is ok. Ruslik_Zero 20:43, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Marquardtika If your research for your version of the biography had led you to any well-sourced content that isn't in the existing article, then you should copy it over. Looking at what you had that doesn't appear to be the case. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:11, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I am jumping in on some simple editing to get my bearings and work to introduce myself to the editor community. I am working from Category:Wikipedia introduction cleanup and the guide for cleanup templates says the talk page should have some mention when the tag is added. However, it seems this is not always the case. If I feel I have sufficiently corrected the lead section issue, is it preferred to:

1. Add a topic on the article's talk page if there isn't one already
2. Add a topic on the requestor's talk page
3. Unilaterally delete the tag and mention in the change log that I have removed the tag post edit

Thank you for any advice in advance! Crims0nSamurai (talk) 21:39, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Crims0nSamurai, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Thank you for taking on a cleanup task.

All those are possible, though I think 1 is better than 2 (but ping the requestor there).

It really depends mostly one how confident you are that you have corrected the problem. There's no requirement that you consult anybody: if the requestor (or anybody else) disagrees with your removal, they can simply revert you, and then if you still think it is resolved, you can open a discussion (see WP:BRD). ColinFine (talk) 23:20, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Crims0nSamurai (talk) 01:01, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

If I am citing a scholarly journal that does not provide a full date, that is just the month and the year, what is the proper way to cite that to avoid error codes? Auðumbla (talk) 22:10, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Auðumbla and welcome to the Teahouse. See Template:Cite journal#Examples. Using "|date=March 2026" for example works just fine. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Ah, thank you! I was receiving an error due to an errant comma, not, as I suspected the lack of the day of the month. Auðumbla (talk) 01:21, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

What is the preferred Wikipedia technique for providing a gloss of a non-English sentence? If there is already a Wikipedia:something page that provides this info, I would consider a link to that page to be an answer - no need to repeat it; I searched for such a page and was unable to find it.

I'm talking about where a non-English sentence is presented in multiple sequential lines of text.

1. The original text, with words separated to line up with the grammatical breakdown
2. Literal translation or grammatical element of each element in the original text, lined up with the element it refers to
3. (optional) Transliteration of the original text
4. (optional) IPA of the original text
5. Plain English translation of the original text

Thisisnotatest (talk) 22:30, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Thisisnotatest, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I think Template:Interlinear will do most of what you want. ColinFine (talk) 23:22, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@ColinFine, yes! Thank you! Thisisnotatest (talk) 05:12, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, i am trying to add on to peoples wiki's but have got a error?? i don't know why would love some help if anybody could help me thanks! also this could be some of the reason if not the reason i don't know how to add on the pages at the very bottom for the info added to a persons wiki!! example (16) tells you about how it was done!!! Frederickishere (talk) 23:41, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Frederickishere, are you asking about this edit, or about some other edits? (Incidentally, no need for exclamation points.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:11, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

yes that edit! i don't know how to do it Frederickishere (talk) 00:13, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Frederick! Your edit was reverted -- this means that some account, either a person or a bot, edited the page to undo your edit. The bot that reverted your edit, ClueBot NG, did it because it assumed the edit was vandalism. Vandalism on Wikipedia is editing made to defeat or obstruct the project's purpose -- to be an encyclopedia and a source of accurate knowledge. ✨ΩmegaMantis✨^(he/him) ❦blather | ☞spy on me 00:29, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

so how do I stop that? Literally just want to add on stuff on people's wiki that isn't mentioned and have the articles to go with it thats the other thing I don't know how to list the articles / proof for them!? Frederickishere (talk) 00:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@Frederickishere: The edit wasn't vandalism but it was inappropriate. Wikipedia content should have a reliable source, especially in biographies of living people. See Help:Referencing for beginners. You added "Axel is close friends with long time tag parter Damo!" immediately before a reference which does not mention Damo. I assume it wasn't intentional but it meant you made a false claim about what the source says. I guess "parter" should be partner. We almost never end sentences with an exclamation point (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Terminal punctuation) and there was no reason to do it here. It doesn't suit the formal tone of an encyclopedia. Friends should rarely be mentioned at all in Wikipedia biographies unless multiple reliable sources have emphasized the friendship. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:49, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Ok thanks. I apologize for the incorrect spelling and i was just going to try to mention frienships in a few bios! i just realized i spelled parter instead of partner!! Frederickishere (talk) 01:04, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Regarding what PrimeHunter said on reliable sources, and your question on how to list proof, this is called sourcing in Wikipedia. Sourcing your statement means attributing it to a reliable source -- an information outlet trusted for factuality and reliability, like a newspaper article, for example. An easy way to source a statement is by clicking the Cite button in the toolbar in Visual Editor. ✨ΩmegaMantis✨^(he/him) ❦blather | ☞spy on me 00:50, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Ok thank you!! Frederickishere (talk) 01:05, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Frederickishere, I'd phrase OmegaMantis's comment rather differently: Sourcing your statement means attributing it to a source that verifies it, that's independent of the subject (and thus is not an interview or similar), and that is published by an information outlet trusted for factuality and reliability, for example the news section (rather than the commentary section) within one of the better newspapers or news websites. (Note that plenty of newspapers and news websites, even well-known ones such as the Daily Mail and The Times of India, do not qualify.) Once you have a reliable source for the statement, an easy way to attach this source to your addition is by clicking the Cite button in the toolbar while using the "Visual Editor". (This explanation too is much simplified, but I hope that it gives the right idea.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:02, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I understand thanks again! id like to ask its not a good thing to put who people closest friends are?? or just not spammed in peoples bios in a row!? Can @PrimeHunter clarify more on that!? Thanks again. Frederickishere (talk) 04:09, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@Frederickishere: It's rarely a good idea to mention friends. It seems too gossipy for an encyclopedia. 4% of biographies of living people contain the word "friends" and most of them probably aren't mentioning who their friends are but talking about a work with "friends" in the title or something else. It should always have a reliable source if it's mentioned but most sources aren't proper justification for mentioning it. It might be mentioned if sources indicate it has influenced what the person is known for. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:52, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

understood! Frederickishere (talk) 14:20, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Frederickishere, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Another consideration is privacy. If you were notable enough that Wikipedia had an article about you, would you want your personal information (your children's names, your friends, your favourite restaurants, for example) to be disclosed there?

Sometimes such information has already been published, in newspapers for example; and then we can use it in a Wikipedia article - though that doesn't mean we necessarily should - see the guideline page I linked to. But if it hasn't been published by a reliable source, then it certainly shouldn't be revealed in Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 14:18, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I understand. & plus now I think about it no real need if its mentioned other places like you said! Frederickishere (talk) 14:22, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I proposed the deletion of the article for Nicholas Salamis and the instructions for doing so say to notify the creator and often contributors to the article, however there hasn't been an edit to the article in over a year and the earliest edits lead to a red link, what should I do? Whyareusernamessohard? (talk) 01:03, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Whyareusernamesso never mind, I can't do this, typing usernames is too hard ! You can create the talk page of the user with the earliest edit by clicking the red link. I assume that you wouldn't need to notify often contributors as there don't seem to be much of any. ✨ΩmegaMantis✨^(he/him) ❦blather | ☞spy on me 01:29, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

In future, the best way to PROD or AfD articles is with WP:TWINKLE, which performs all the notifying for you automatically. Athanelar (talk) 01:33, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@Whyareusernamessohard?: Did you click "oldest" in the page history? User talk:Jimstam does exist and a bot has notified the user. User:Jimstam is a red link but that only means the user has not created a user page which is optional. The user account still exists but hasn't edited since 2018. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:04, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

This is more general but do you add a reference after a period or after the letter right before the period? Darrrrmilk (talk) 02:28, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Darrrrmilk. This is covered in MOS:REFPUNC: Wikipedia's manual of style advises us tp put the citation after punctuation for the most part, but there are some exceptions. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:38, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Previously the domain that was shown on mobile was: en.m.wikipedia.org instead of en.wikipedia.org . I do appreciate keeping it similar across both phone and desktop. But, is the change permanent? Should I convert my mobile bookmarks into the desktop format? Greatder (talk) 06:16, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@Greatder: It's permanent. See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 224#Mobile domains unsetting. You can switch on "Desktop view" or "Mobile view" at the bottom of a page and your choice will be remembered in that browser. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example works, maybe forever, but it redirects to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example and keeps you in desktop if you were already there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example?useformat=mobile forces the mobile version on that link but is not remembered if you click a link on that page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example?useformat=desktop forces the desktop version but is not remembered. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:31, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter this is a great change! Thanks for the information. Greatder (talk) 09:25, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Is there any policy on the books regarding something akin to fruit of the poisonous tree? In a recent deletion discussion, Ell22Moore (talk · contribs) makes a (generally convincing) argument that the nomination should be closed as Keep as it was proposed in an odd [and] illicit manner (I'm personally not convinced it is illicit, but I think it is a fair argument to make).

My question here though is whether this is actually Wikipedia policy or not. Should a nomination, which is otherwise valid but made (for example) by a sockpuppet or a paid editor or what have you, thereby be closed? I can see arguments both for and against this. wound theology◈ 08:02, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Originally, I described the nomination as “valid but illicit,” meaning the underlying argument seemed sound even though the process was done in apparent error. Later, and now, I viewed it as both invalid and illicit aa a result of the procedural issues combined with my reassessment of the argument itself. Ell22Moore (talk) 08:13, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

If a discussion is opened by a banned user, then it can be quickly deleted using the G5 criterion. But if others come in and edit, then we cannot do that. But if everyone opposes, then it can be snow closed early. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:30, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I have seen people use this as an argument to procedurally close discussions. In my opinion the discussion should be evaluated on its merits; if the article needs to be deleted then it needs to be deleted, whether a banned sockpuppet or a user in good standing points it out. Someone being a banned sock does not mean their judgement is bad in all matters. Athanelar (talk) 14:00, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

So to reiterate what you and Graeme Bartlett (talk · contribs) have said: there is not any actual policy for this? Not to be a WP:WIKILAWYER, I'm just curious and wouldn't even know how to begin to search for such a policy... wound theology◈ 15:25, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I have a (nonpolitical) quibble with how naval losses are presented in the 2026 Iran War wikibox, and don't want to make a nonobvious edit request through the form without consensus, but even the talk page is fully locked down except for extended confirmed users. Is there any way for a longtime lurker but newish editor to contribute to improving these kinds of articles? Lychniis (talk) 09:13, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello. As the Iran War is under extended-confirmed restrictions due to it relationship to the Arab-Israeli conflict(as Iran supports Hamas/Hezbollah) you can only make edit requests that do not require consensus- they need to be something that no reasonable person could possibly disagree with. As a practical matter, that is mostly grammar/spelling fixes. If you need a consensus for your edit request, you can't make it until you are extended-confirmed.

Though you seem to be aware of the restrictions already, I will post a formal notification on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Lychniis. The answer to your specific question is, No, not until you have the required number of edits. ColinFine (talk) 14:21, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Greetings Fellow Wikipedians I am seeking help to improve the page Armorial of British universities. There are two universities without a 'free to use' ie available on Wiki Commons, ecutcheon. These are the University of Sunderland and Teesside University. Indeed ecutcheons are also lacking for the University of the Built Environment and University of the Arts London. Many of the ecutcheons in use in the article have been created within Wiki Commons by 'artists', based on the heraldic descriptions or using a template. I hope there may be a volunteer or volunteers with the skills and enthusiasm for this little project, able to assist ~~hjamesberglen~~ Hjamesberglen (talk) 09:50, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@Hjamesberglen Try the WP:Graphics Lab. They help with all sorts of graphics projects. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:00, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Hjamesberglen. You could also ask at the talk page of WP:WikiProject Heraldry and Vexillology. One of the tasks listed there is creating missing images of flags and coats of arms, so there may be people skilled in doing that. ColinFine (talk) 14:24, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello! Would it be possible / appropriate for me to replace this image with a slightly higher resolution / larger version of the file? Compared to the pages for such films as Spider-Man, Avatar, Star Wars and The Amazing Spider-Man, the Wonder Woman poster image is far more blurry. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 09:56, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@OrdinaryOtter: Maybe slightly; see WP:IMAGERES. The other movie-poster images you cite were downsized by bots to about 260 × 380 pixels, so that resolution seems acceptable. Deor (talk) 10:36, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@OrdinaryOtter: This is only going to be part of the answer, but the image in the article is so blurry because something is wrong with the thumbnail. For Spider-Man, the thumbnailis almost the same size as the actual image. Same for Star Wars, and likely for the others. For Wonder Woman, the actual image is scaled down to a 120px thumbnail. This is scaling it down which increases blurriness and loses detail, and then scaling it back up which increases blurriness. You might want to ask at WP:VPT to find out why that happened before you upload a new image. Good luck, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 14:23, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Please forgive me for my English writing but I am seeking advic on how to correctyl include the resuluts of the 2023 genomic stud by brielle et al.and nature study in the Bajuni people article without getting flagged for original research or Synthessi policies.study analyze ancients dna from the lamu rachipelago Pate and Manda islnds. the paper uses the known braod term Swahili, the co senior author of the study, his name his Chapurukha Kusimba,he has has explicitl identified these specific medieval samples as the direct ancestors of modern bajuni descendants in his public summaries of the research e.g., in Science and The Conversation, 2023 the lead researcher himself has made the ethnits identification of these geographic samples, would it be acceptable to cite his professional identification to bridge the findings to the article? I want to ensure the article is scientifically up-to-date while strictly following Wikipedia's sourcing standard Saintusmojqy (talk) 15:27, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Note to Teahouse hosts: please see the existing discussions at Talk:Bajuni people and User talk:ColinFine --ColinFine (talk) 15:53, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

An acquaintance of mine who knows that I sometimes edit Wikipedia told me that a friend of his wants to get his recently written bio deleted. Could someone give me general guidance on how to handle this? Proposing article deletion might or might not be the right solution. I don’t know yet if the subject of the new bio thinks that the bio doxxes him, or is inaccurate, or is accurate but biased, or what. Thiesen (talk) 17:14, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Thiesen, and welcome to the Teahouse.

We do not delete articles just because the subject wishes us to. Articles are deleted if they do not meet our standards, specifically about notability. If the notability of a subject is borderline, we sometimes allow the subject's wish for deletion to have weight. But if the person clearly meets our criteria for notability, then the article will not usually be deleted.

I suggest you show your friend WP:about you; but that doesn't specifically cover deletion. See Deletion policy for information about that. ColinFine (talk) 17:25, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello. Generally articles are not deleted merely because the subject wishes it. If the subject wants to argue that they actually are not a notable person as Wikipedia defines one, that's something we can work with, and some consideration is given to the wishes of the subject(WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE).

If there is incorrect information in the article, we want to know what it is per policy(WP:BLP) articles about living people need to accurately summarize the provided sources. Being biased does not in and of itself prevent information from appearing on Wikipedia, as all sources of information have biases, but if the bias is so great that the source is making things up out of whole cloth, we want to know that, too. See the edit request process for subjects or their representatives to propose changes. 331dot (talk) 17:25, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I just ended up striking the request as nobody else was showing up to participate and nobody helped when I requested it multiple times. Now I'm not sure if I'll be in some kind of trouble for striking it but I have no idea what to do because nobody was willing to help me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dangrek_Incident#Requested_move_17_February_2026 MoonsMoon (talk) 18:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@MoonsMoon I closed it as no consensus, but you're not going to get into trouble for striking it, which is basically a withdrawal. I'd say the main issue there was the lack of a single proposed title, RMs like that tend to derail without a consensus. For future reference, clearly LLM-generated comments like this one can be hatted (collapsed and hidden) per WP:HATGPT. HurricaneZeta alt (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes, you're definitely right that I should have proposed an alternative title. I just thought at the time that leaving it open was the best way to avoid conflict and make everyone happy. Sure wasn't the case. Thanks again. MoonsMoon (talk) 20:17, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have been working on the Later life section of the Tommy Prince. My earlier edit was reverted with the summary "Excessive weasel words and conceptual problems/Undid revision."

I took a step back and have now redrafted the section with closer attention to wording and sourcing. Before making any further moves, I'm looking for feedback from other editors.

The draft is here: User:FallingRocksAhead/sandbox/individual6

If anyone is willing to take a look and offer suggestions, I would be very grateful.

~~~~

FallingRocksAhead (talk) 19:26, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I feel really dumb asking this compared to all the other questions on here :p Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello (talk) 19:47, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Wordsonwordsonpagesonwordshello. See Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing your signature. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:50, 14 March 2026 (UTC)