Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1128

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Archive 1125

Archive 1126

Archive 1127

→

Notability for cosmetics

Hi, I was wondering what's the notability guidelines for makeup companies? I noticed that a pretty prominent makeup company (Beauty Bakerie Cosmetics) I've been seeing on Insta a lot doesn't have a WP article yet despite me seeing multiple notable media coverage on the brand.^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4] I'd like to see an article for it but I can't find the notability guidelines for makeup brands specifically. I'm not doing this in the interest of promoting said brand or turning it into an ad per WP:COI), I'd just like to see if it's okay to create an article on said company given the notable media coverage.) Thanks! shanghai.^{talk to me} 04:30, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

References

[1]
Jackson, Danielle (2021-07-30). "How a Single Mom and Cancer Survivor Turned 1 Idea Into a Multimillion-Dollar Beauty Brand". POPSUGAR Beauty. Retrieved 2021-10-20.
[2]
"This top-rated Black-owned beauty brand is entirely inspired by baking". www.yahoo.com. Retrieved 2021-10-20.
[3]
Feldman, Amy. "How A Single Mom Battling Breast Cancer Built Beauty Bakerie To A $5M Brand, Got Unilever To Invest". Forbes. Retrieved 2021-10-20.
[4]
Freund, Tatjana (2021-07-28). "These Beauty Brands Are The Best Of The Best—And You Can Buy Them On Amazon". ELLE. Retrieved 2021-10-20.

@RogueShanghai: Welcome to the Teahouse! See Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, didn't know that existed. Just checked and said company is notable enough given the amount of sources, going to work on an article about it, thanks! shanghai.^{talk to me} 05:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

RogueShanghai, I think you'll be needing better sources than those. The first gives an error message, the second and third aren't independent of the subject, and the fourth is more like a list of advertisements than an independent discussion. Maproom (talk) 08:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Maproom: These were just the ones I found off Google, and the first source works for me fine. How is the Forbes article not a reliable source? Thanks. shanghai.^{talk to me} 08:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Forbes is reliable, but that article is not independent of Beauty Bakerie. It includes "“Cashmere’s story is a story of resilience above anything else,” says Roderick Roberts, Beauty Bakerie's chief financial officer". Maproom (talk) 09:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Also, Forbes in print is reliable, but forbes.com contains much content from "contributors" who are subject to very light if any editorial scrutiny. See WP:FORBESCON. In the case at hand, Amy Feldman is or was Forbes staff, but the article did not appear in the print edition. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Replace a redirect with a disambiguation

Official dark mode css

my Ben Cleveland photo

How do I get editors to pay attention to other legitimate sources?

The page on Vision Therapy has a lot of errors, misleading information and cites only sources that conform to one bias.

An example is the intro statement that says there is no scientific evidence supporting it. The CITT study, double blind, placebo controlled, and peer reviewed says otherwise.

I am trying to open a discussion with other editors to make the page more objective. Discuss the studies that say it is not supported, and the studies that support it too.

I’m running into a problem. Nobody wants to discuss it in the talk section, but they are happy to revert any edits made to make the page more objective.

I realize my first attempt at editing it faltered because I hadn’t read enough of the wiki rules. I am now better versed.

Looking for help on what to do. Snapdginger (talk) 05:32, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Snapdginger:

Courtesy link: Vision therapy A great way to encourage participation is to make your comments more succinct. People won't read a wall of talk page text for an article that's considered fringe by prior consensus. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 05:59, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

WP:APPNOTE can help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton:

Thank you very much! I will try that approach! Snapdginger (talk) 13:08, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Is there a specific title I should use for a talk section to try to get the editors who came to a previous consensus to open up a discussion? This is a bit of a challenging topic because ophthalmology publications are always anti-optometry and anti-vision therapy while optometry publications are often the opposite. Do I tag previous authors? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snapdginger (talk • contribs) 13:15, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Courtesy ping. GoingBatty (talk) 13:18, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Snapdginger: GGS’s suggestion above to check out WP:APPNOTE is excellent. Be careful to not canvas by inviting only people you think already agree with you. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton:, @Gråbergs Gråa Sång and Gråbergs Gråa Sång:,

Solid advice. Read WP:RS at length. I've gained a lot of respect for the WIKI process by doing this. Quick Questions: 1. What do you do if one of the previous and established editors or mods seems to be very attached to their perspective? Is there a way to pull in a third party who doesn't have attachment at some point? 2. Is there clear criteria on which peer reviewed journals meet WP:RS. For example, Optometry and Vision Science (peer reviewed)^[1]. I am having difficulty with an editor dismissing any source I cite (including peer reviewed optometric journals), while they include opinion pieces if it fits their narrative. 3. I have doctorate in Optometry, which allows me to understand the area well. I do not wish to see WP:FRIND. How do I ensure other editors of the fact that all I want to see is an actual neutral point of view that uses sources from established peer reviewed and reliable sources that both support and question something. It seems as though just asking for a more neutral point of view and citing reliable sources has caused one editor to re-write the article in an even less neutral manner that could be perceived as punishment for seeking neutrality.

All of that said, I am very open to feedback if my recent edits were not neutral or violated any wiki terms. If someone not emotionally attached to the current narrative on the page could review the edits of the past few days it would greatly help me learn the process and understand how to best proceed. Excuse the paste, I’m on mobile right now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_therapy?wprov=sfti1 Snapdginger (talk) 13:16, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Snapdginger: See WP:RFC to learn about bringing in unconnected third parties to a dispute on a talk page. You can also ask at the reliable sources noticeboard for an unbiased determination of a source’s reliability. Always be succinct and specific. Focus on one thing at a time and you’ll be more likely to get a response. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:51, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Fiesta (magazine)

Declined article

edit history

Article resubmission help

Userbox on my user page

Hi, I am bisexual and was trying to use a similar "userbox" field on my userpage as to that used by @GorillaWarfare:, she's amazing! If someone could please help me get that going on my userpage, that would be great. I may add some other details too, but just trying to get started. Thanks! Th78blue (talk) 15:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Th78blue: Thank you for the kind words! The specific userbox I use is {{User:GorillaWarfare/userbox template|[[Image:gay flag.svg|40px]]|This user identifies as '''[[queer]]'''.}}, though it's only a slight stylistic variation from {{User:UBX/queer}}. There are also a whole slew of other options at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Life/Sexuality. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:31, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! @GorillaWarfare: I also noticed you have you pronouns in your user signature!! How can I add mine automatically for when I sign with the four tilde's? Th78blue (talk) 15:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey Th78blue, I'm not GorillaWarfare but you can change your signature by going to your preferences (here) and scrolling down to Signature. You could add [[User:Th78blue|Th78blue]] (pronouns • [[User talk:Th78blue|Th78blue]]) underneath "New signature" (replacing pronouns with your pronouns), tick "Treat signature as wikitext" then press Save. Now, when you post a comment, your pronouns should appear. :) --Ferien (talk) 16:00, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much @Ferien:, I just tried that, does it work now? It should add (They/Them/Theirs) as my chosen pronouns. They/Them/Theirs (talk) 16:12, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Never mind, I botched it there. Let me try again! [[User:Th78blue|Th78blue]] (They/Them/Theirs • [[User talk:Th78blue|Th78blue]]) (talk) 16:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Th78blue, you're nearly there. All you need to do is tick the "Treat signature as wikitext" button :) --Ferien (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Sheesh! Alright, hoping I am good NOW. :-) Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • Th78blue) 17:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Th78blue, yep, it works now. Happy editing! --Ferien (talk) 17:41, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Th78blue Not quite. If you replace the last "Th78blue" in the signature (the one after "User talk:Th78blue|") with the word "talk", then you'll have it. It should look like [[User:Th78blue|Th78blue]] (They/Them/Theirs • [[User talk:Th78blue|talk]] --Verbarson (talk) 18:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Oh my, oh my! Hopefully I get it this time... Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • talk 18:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

In the interest of perfection, I am now closing the parentheses on the back side too... I noticed it missing... check one "last time" :) Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • talk) 18:30, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Controversial or disputed information

Question

just checkin The Teahouse

Graphs

Tags for every editors "Tag: tag example"

chinese wiki for "relish" feels off

Hello. I usually help in translating english wiki into chinese wiki. Recently I found this wikipage about relish (in general), though when I check the chinese page, the name and the description feels really off. In this scenario, should the page be deleted or just heavily modified? Crescentwuju (talk) 20:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Crescentwuju. If you're talking about an article in the Chinese Wikipedia, then you need to discuss it at Chinese Wikipedia, not here on English Wikipedia: they are entirely separate, and few people who look at this page can read Chinese. Try zh:维基百科:互助客栈/条目探讨. --ColinFine (talk) 20:46, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Crescentwuju, are you saying that the articles Relish and 開味小菜 aren't about the same thing? I can't read Chinese, but Google translate makes fairly good sense of the latter, and they seem to me to be about the same subject, near enough. Maproom (talk) 20:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, they seem to give it 2 meanings: "Relish (Relish), also known as hors d'oeuvres , appetizers ... sometimes it is difficult to distinguish from condiments to a certain extent ." We don't seem to have this term in Sweden, unless it's bostongurka. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:04, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Maproom: . The thing that I have with Relish translate as 開味小菜 is that it sounded as if the chinese term is a type of "small appetizer", not used as a condiment or sauce, which I think will cause confusion. Either way, I will go to the chinese teahouse equivalent and see what people think about it. Thanks for the suggestion @ColinFine:. Crescentwuju (talk) 21:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Edit: the more I think of it, the more I felt that the original chinese wiki probably is referring to hors d'oeuvres , appetizers rather than the english-term relish. Maybe the person who wrote the chinese wiki made a wrong interlink? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crescentwuju (talk • contribs) 21:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

It is an old fashioned usage, but you can find places in english language writing where 'relish' is used to mean an appetizer. If you look it up in most dictionaries it will be there as an alternate definition. MrOllie (talk) 21:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Crescentwuju: I'm a Chinese speaker, and I can confirm that Hors d'oeuvre is definitely the better target. The place to fix this is at Wikidata; I'll go ahead and do it now. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 00:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: thanks for your opinion! And I am happy that you also applied the change. Cheers from my part. Crescentwuju (talk) 20:42, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

EIT2: @Ganbaruby: apparently there is also a wiki article called 前菜. In this scenario, should the two merge and then create a brand new article for relish? Or should just revert back to how it is, but then change 開味小菜 for a more suitable name? Crescentwuju (talk) 20:56, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Crescentwuju: That's a discussion for the Chinese Wikipedia, which I don't edit. On the English Wikipedia, editors decided that Hors d'oeuvre and Appetizer are the same topic or similar enough to be in the same article, while Relish is completely different. Other languages may have come to different conclusions though: check the sitelinks for wikidata:Q1628963, wikidata:Q96749544, and wikidata:Q766777. This goes on to show that each language operates independent from each other, and that you should be discussing it over on the Chinese Wikipedia. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 00:28, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Fully-protected for Main Page

Becoming an admin etc.

Hi all,

I am certainly too new still, but one day I aspire to be an admin and help the wiki in any and all ways that I can. How does one go about that? I assume the process is "invite only"? Thank you all! Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • Th78blue) 17:56, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

That's an awesome goal. I recommend reading this page to learn all about adminship and the process. There are not really any "official" requirements, but you will be relying on the greater community to vote for your adminship once nominated by another editor or if you request adminship. But remember, it's somewhat impossible to gain adminship without a lot of editing experience and support in the community. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 18:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Th78blue I would differ from PtC above and say that a better goal to have would be to just be a good editor. You can do 95% of things here without being an administrator. All being an administrator involves is being entrusted with certain abilities that would be irresponsible to give to everyone (like deleting pages). If through being a good editor and working in areas you like, you demonstrate how having the admin tools would help the project, the community will grant them. This almost always takes years- you need to build up a good edit history, showing a good understanding of Wikipedia policies, a good temperament, and a need for the tools. 331dot (talk) 21:48, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I would agree that's a better goal. Though I think when people say that being an admin is just cleaning up garbage, thankless, etc etc they might be forgetting that many editors see admin status as an "official badge of good judgment" because that's essentially what it is, given how hard it is to get it. It's like being elected to office. Thankless work, but it carries a ton of unwritten weight and deference, not to mention power. I would imagine an admin's edits are less likely to be reverted and their input in disagreements are considered to carry more weight by many editors. I think some people see being admin as far more validating than being a good editor. But that's a weakness of human nature, probably. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 22:12, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Th78blue We do need good administrators, but we need good editors more than we need good administrators. I choose never to be an admin. I believe my editing here is helped by not being one. All the admin tasks I might do are better for being "dual key" tasks.

I commend your ambition. Even so I suggest you set the ambition aside for a substantial time to learn and hone your real skills here Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:53, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Wow! What incredible responses. Thank you all for taking the time to respond, and for the incredible insight. As I mentioned, I'm sure it is a long way off (likely 1+ years), but I plan to edit every day I can, and have already done 500+ in just a month or so. Regardless, I am fully aware that it is not the quantity that matters, but quality. Also, I loved that comment on "needing the right temperament" etc. I agree completely. I do get the very real sense that some admins see their opinions as having more weight than my own. I will put very detailed edit summaries and follow all the WP policies that I exist, but they will revert some of my points sometimes and simply say "unreasonable", or some other extremely short response. Sometimes they will even do a revert with no edit summary at all... which is very discouraging. Without having the context as to what EXACTLY I may have done wrong, I do not know how new editors are supposed to learn. I feel as if WP:BITE is not heeded very often... Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • talk) 23:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I agree that jaded editors can be overly bitey, and I hope you don't get too discouraged. Remember the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. If you're reverted, take it to the Talk Page and make your case. Reverts should have an edit summary, but if not, give them a chance to explain it there. If you still feel the revert is unwarranted, you can always try a Third Opinion. Stick with it, understand that it's a collaboration, and I think you'll have a good time in the long run. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 00:11, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Please do not create overly long edit summaries. It's enough that an ES identifies where in the text the changes were made, and a brief description of reason for change. David notMD (talk) 02:10, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Untitled

how to autoconfirm or confrim your wikipedia account?

Help with album image copyright

Is Wikipedia going to consider odd perfect numbers as "underserved"?

Trouble inserting links

Hi, there seems to have been a change to the software for inserting links, and it's no longer working for me. It used to be that if I wanted to link to a sub-part in an article, I would highlight the phrase in my draft that I wanted to link. Then I would hit the "link" button in the editing box and insert the url for that sub-part and click "insert". The software would then give a message about that being an external link, and did I want to make it an internal link? I would click "internal link" and it would insert it as an internal link. Now, when I get to that stage and click "internal link", nothing happens. It doesn't insert any link at all. Am I doing something wrong? has the software for inserting links changed? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're experiencing, but manually wikilinking to sections within pages still works: When editing the wikitext source, [[Wikipedia:Teahouse#Trouble inserting links|linktext]] generates linktext. If you're using the Wikipedia:VisualEditor, highlighting a word, hitting the link button on the toolbar, and pasting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse#Trouble_inserting_links into the "Add a link" box (within the "Wikipedia" tab, not "External site") automatically abbreviates to the internal wikilink form (alternatively, enter into the box WP:Teahouse#Trouble inserting links), and you can just hit "Done" to make a wikilink. You seem to be quite an experienced editor, but for general questions, H:WIKILINK is the first reference. – Anon423 (talk) 09:52, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

I may be an experienced editor, but I am extremely techno-deficient. :) I don't know what Visual Editor is, for example. However, since I posted this inquiry, the link box now has a new button for internal links and no longer asks if you want an internal link. I think the software has had an update over the past couple of days. Thanks for the H:WIKILINK info - I wasn't aware of it before. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 04:03, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: When you click the "Edit" tab (instead of the "Edit source" tab), you're using the VisualEditor. For more information, see Help:VisualEditor. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

really? It’s like discovering I’ve been speaking prose all my life! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 05:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft:BONAMY

Musician page

My name is Melissa Harley I’m writing regarding of well known musician artist “Lil Sporty D” Who has been mentioned in multiple news magazine and reliable source he Doesn’t have a Wikipedia page yet? I was wondering can someone please create him a WP article? MsMelissaBaby (talk) 08:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

MsMelissaBaby, merely being mentioned isn't enough. Has Lil Sporty D been written up in depth in reliable, independent, published sources (plural)? If so, then you can create the article; if not, then nobody can. But before you attempt to create your first article, be sure to get plenty of practice improving and augmenting existing articles. -- Hoary (talk) 08:23, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I am not sure what I am doing but can someone please check my article and see I did it correctly It will be appreciate it here is the link. I don’t know how to put a picture up either I’m still Learning. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lil_Sporty_D Can someone please approve it — Preceding unsigned comment added by MsMelissaBaby (talk • contribs) 16:26, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@MsMelissaBaby: Welcome to the Teahouse! If the draft ever becomes an article, you can use the Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard to upload a photo you took. However, you have many other issues to resolve first, as already noted on your draft. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Thank you very much I appreciate it I was wondering can you do my Oracle and you could take the credit for it I appreciate it I’ve been working on this for like four years and I really don’t know what I’m doing anyway — Preceding unsigned comment added by MsMelissaBaby (talk • contribs) 18:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@MsMelissaBaby: I don't know what "can you do my Oracle" means. I suggest you review Help:Introduction, Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure, and Help:Your first article before continuing your work on the draft. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 02:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I note that Draft:Lil Sporty D right now appears to be nothing more than a badly formatted copy-paste of wikitia(dot)com/wiki/Lil_Sporty_D, which is a blacklisted Wikipedia clone where editing is limited to only specialized editors who are experts in their fields – so, in practical terms, a thinly disguised advertisement / SEO site (as evident by the linked page appearing in a Google knowledge panel when one looks up the subject). As their copyright note states that everything's available under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike, I don't believe this to be a copyvio (although I see no attribution on the draft), but I feel it's still worth pointing out. AngryHarpy‍^talk 04:48, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

MsMelissaBaby, yesterday I advised you: before you attempt to create your first article, be sure to get plenty of practice improving and augmenting existing articles. I suggest that you don't ignore it; that you instead improve and augment existing articles. With that experience behind you, you might be able to create a viable article. -- Hoary (talk) 08:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Need Help with referencing my article 'Tupocracy'

Does this look bad?

The "Species" section in this article to which I have linked, had a long list of beetles so I thougght I'll rather add columns-list. But now I feel it looks congested. Is it fine? Excellenc1 (talk) 04:45, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't notice any difference, Excellenc1. Or anyway none related to congestion. (I'm using Firefox 93.0 right now.) But since you bring up the matter of looking congested, I have to say that your signature strikes me as unusually awkward, spilling as it does over other letters. Removing padding:5px; from it would be a big help. -- Hoary (talk) 05:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Hoary,

More information Padding, Signature ...


Padding	Signature
no padding	Excellenc1 (talk)
1px	Excellenc1 (talk)
2px	Excellenc1 (talk)
3px	Excellenc1 (talk)
4px	Excellenc1 (talk)
5px	Excellenc1 (talk)

Close

No padding looks the worst. Excellenc1 (talk) 06:13, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Then we differ, Excellenc1. To me, using either Firefox 93.0 or Chromium 90.0.4430.212, no padding looks the best. The more padding, the more shouty. (Worse, the more padding, the more interference with other text.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:22, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: Looking at this, from experience, the reason that you might think one looks better than another might be because of the background padding that already comes with the line height. One way to make it look better but not as bloated at the same time would be to add only padding on the left and right, since there is already a "padding" of sorts that comes with the line height. This could be achieved with padding:0px 2px 0px 2px (Excellenc1 (talk)). You could also use a border radius to make it look a little better (in my opinion) padding:0px 2px 0px 2px; border-radius: 4px (Excellenc1 (talk)) Just some suggestions for thought :) ― Levi_OP^Talk 14:49, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, why not put code like this in your personal CSS page User:Excellenc1/common.css

#bodyContent a[title="User:Excellenc1"] { background:#58111A; color:#FFA700; padding:5px; font-weight: bold; }

(See my CSS page User:Verbarson/common.css for an example.) This will highlight your signature whenever you are logged on. That way, you can leave your public signature unchanged from normal, because frankly, I don't need to see it highlighted, whereas you can make it as dramatic as you like for your own consumption. (I would credit whoever told me about this, but I didn't record their name.)--Verbarson (talk) 21:07, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Verbarson I'm sorry but I didn't understand what do you mean by "highlight" when you said "This will highlight your signature whenever you are logged on". Also, what about this signature (somewhat based on Levi_OP's suggestion: Excellenc1 (talk) But I fear this is too long in the source code. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Excellenc1 (talk • contribs) 04:40, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, my CSS page User:Verbarson/common.css is only activated when I am logged on. When you, or anyone else, or nobody (ie anonymous user), is logged on, my signature looks like "Verbarson". When I am logged on, my CSS page is active and turns my signature into "Verbarson". This makes it easier for me to pick out my contributions in a discussion like this, or on a history page or watchlist. I don't care if my signature looks mundane to everyone else.

Of course, there are many people who do like their signature to stand out to other users, which is fine as long as it doesn't affect the way the rest of the page is displayed. Your choice.--Verbarson (talk) 09:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Useful side-effect: doing it with CSS means that it also highlights (when I am signed on) the places where somebody pings me or uses {{u|Verbarson}}. As far as your signature is concerned, I wouldn't worry about the code length too much (have you ever checked the Google front page source?); what affects the text around it is the top and bottom padding, which widens the current text line and (very slightly) disrupts the flow of the paragraph.--Verbarson (talk) 09:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Verbarson: I get it now, this way people can know if I'm offline or online. But it looks the same as my signature at no padding, or like Levi_OP suggested: padding: 0px 2px 0px 2px; border-radius: 4px;. From my end I don't see any overlaps or stuff, so I don't know if I should actually change anything. Excellenc1 (talk) 04:07, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1 I'm afraid I must have communicated badly, because I have still confused you. Using the CSS route to formatting your signature will ONLY affect YOUR computer when you are LOGGED IN to Wikipedia. It will NEVER affect anyone else. It's purely a convenience for you to see your name/signature highlighted when you are using Wikipedia. I'm afraid that Wikipedia does not monitor editors in real time so that it can light up their signatures on other editors' screens whenever they are online.--Verbarson (talk) 09:12, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia page not showing up

Flags for countries

Paid Editor

Why recipe blog content can submit to wikipedia references successfully?

油條 Yóutiáo - Angel Wong's Kitchen

Why this kind of recipe blog content can be submit to wikipedia? I have seen many bloggers submit their blog content. Anyone can give me an introduction? Cherryblossomcici (talk) 07:28, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Cherryblossomcici, welcome to the Teahouse! It appears you're talking about this edit of yours to Zongzi.

Adding your own recipe from your blog to a Wikipedia article about it is considered original research and also promotional use of external links. Check out Wikipedia WP:BLOGS which states that blogs are almost always not permitted as sources. This is definitely one of those cases (the exception typically only applies for subject-matter experts).

Let us know if you have any additional questions! ––FormalDude talk 07:41, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

You say "I have seen many bloggers submit their blog content." It would be really helpful if you could provide examples.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

another example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mantou

External links Chinese Steamed Bun 饅頭

http://yireservation.com/recipes/mantou-chinese-steamed-bun/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherryblossomcici (talk • contribs) 09:17, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

That doesn't appear to be a blog, and it does provide "neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject" so it appears to meet WP:EL.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:13, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Cherryblossomcici:, there may be misuses elsewhere in Wikipedia where people have included links to personal recipes in blogs, but that's just an on-going risk of an open, collaborative encyclopaedia. Such links will be ruthlessly weeded-out over time, when they are discovered! They are not examples to follow. The essential difference is this: if a reputable source such as a cookery magazine quotes someone's recipe as a "typical recipe for Traditional Martian Greencakes", then we have reasonable grounds to believe the recipe is what it says it is. We assume that good cookery magazines select their writers as experts, and exert some quality-control on what they put into print. If a blog says the same information, all we know is that someone's grandmother told them that that's what she always did when she was a girl, and for all we know, grandma might be the only person in the world who does it that way, and grandson/daughter might have mistaken the instructions! So unfortunately, even if you're a great cook, and really well-informed, you can only include a link to your recipe if a reputable organisation/person has vetted it and published it independently (and even then, you've got a conflict of interest and should get the link included by declaring the situation on the article's talk-page and accepting other editor's evaluation of whether your recipe is the right one to use as an example). I hope this helps! Elemimele (talk) 11:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft declined

Recreating a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion

Is Tania Aidrus Notable Topic

Wiki adventure gets stuck on edit summary

New to all of this

New to all this stuff please help

Hello there, I'm a casual reader of wikipedia but i just found all this editing tools and i'm very confused. I just discovered this about 15 minutes ago so im still pretty confused with all this, i've only used wikipedia before to read some articles. What should i know about all this editing tools and communities and whatnot? I know the teahouse is for editing pages but it said its friendly to newcomers plus i dont know where else to put this. If someone could help me i have a couple questions i would like to be answered

1. What should i know about all these editing tools 2. What is the editing community here in wikipedia? I saw a page on a christianity in china work group but i'm still pretty confused 3. Whats the difference between the wikipedia website and app? Does the app have all these editing features

Thanks in advance :) Overbubble (talk) 13:48, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Overbubble: Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! The learning curve here can be a little steep, but you'll probably find the information at this introduction as good a place as any to start

The Wikipedia app is pretty good (and is getting better!), but its more geared to reading articles than editing, at least in my opinion. ~TheresNoTime ^{(to explain!)} 13:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Overbubble—Welcome and hello! Editing wikipedia can be daunting at first but like any toolbox, tools are there because they might be useful in some cases and don't always need to be used regularly. Most editing can be done very simply with plain text and if you're new to editing it's always good to start small and slow; if you see a mistake like a typo, jump right in and edit it if you like. When you're more familiar with basic editing, the other tools will fall into place more easily. As to your second question, things like work groups and wikiprojects exist as focal points for editing related articles; if you're interested in a specific field there is usually a group for it with listings of relevant articles and sometimes helpful resources and discussions too. You can usually find these listed on the talk page of articles, so if you're reading something interesting, look at its talk page to see any related projects. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 13:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Overbubble: There are multiple Wikipedia apps - see List of Wikipedia mobile applications for more information. GoingBatty (talk) 15:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

New Article

INAZUMA ELEVEN ARES

adding to the further reading section

How to make an alphabetic table of contents?

Requesting for block

Citations

Colonel Powell

I'm really puzzled by the thinking behind Colonel Powell. This is a redirect to Colin Powell (so that's what you see if you hover over the link), but there is also a disambiguation page for the various Colonel Powells, which you can only get to by first going to Colin Powell and then noticing the bit at the top of the article that points to the disambiguation. It seems to me that if a reader types "Colonel Powell" in the search box in Wikipedia, we should consider the possibility that they are intelligent humans capable of typing, who chose to type "Colonel" because they want to read about a Colonel; and that had they wanted to read about Colin, they would have typed "Colin". I suppose there's an added complication that Colin Powell, having been a four-star general, was presumably a colonel at some point in his career?? But he's notable for being Colin Powell, not for being Colonel Powell. My feeling is that the redirect shouldn't exist. Colonel Powell should go to the disambiguation page, which can happily contain a link to Colin Powell to help those who have made a mistake and misheard Colin's name as a rank. But I'm loath to mess around with such a high-profile redirect, and in any case I don't know technically how to deal with bad redirects. Any advice appreciated! Elemimele (talk) 17:48, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

It was made in 2009 by an editor who haven't edited since 2016, so we probably won't get any answer from there. I know of no reason why you shouldn't WP:PROD it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:54, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I can understand the rationale behind the redirects as these are ranks he has held, just like someone might search General MacArthur or General DeGaulle, but if you feel the primary topic should be the disambig page, I would suggest opening a discussion on Colin Powell's talk page. The good news is that the article is likely to be getting extra hits at this time so there should be plenty of eyes on the discussion to chime in. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 17:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hmm, General Powell, Major Powell, Colonel North... Perhaps there is a guideline somewhere, but Colonel Powell makes less sense to me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:10, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

thank you both; I had only just noticed the sad news of his death. I will raise it initially on the talk page of the Colin Powell article, and then consider the PROD if people agree. Elemimele (talk) 18:12, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

My understanding of disambiguation is that Colonel Powell should point to Colonel Powell (disambiguation), but no article should ever point to either except in a hatnote or see also. Perhaps ask the folks at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation pages with links Vexations (talk) 18:47, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @Gråbergs Gråa Sång:, @Grapple X:, @Vexations:, this place moves fast! Someone has agreed and done the deed in less than the time it took me to work out how to edit a redirect. Problem solved! Elemimele (talk) 20:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Next step with mildly disruptive IP editor

Can you please guide me to review my first article submission

Good day,

On my submitted article : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mikhail_Mouty

I received the following reason for rejection on Oct 19th : "Subject does not appear to pass WP:GNG or WP:NPROF. The inline citations do not confirm the sentences they are linked to"

Can you please guide me in improving my article to be accepted.

Great thanks MEF2362 (talk) 09:14, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MEF2362, and welcome to the Tehouse. In the opinion of that reviewer, Mouty (not just your draft about him) does not currently meet the requirements to be the subject of an article in Wikipedia: see WP:NOAMOUNT. Unless you can find at least three sources that are reliably published and unconnected with Mouty and have significant coverage of him, then any further effort you put into that draft will be wasting your time. --ColinFine (talk) 09:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @MEF2362 In my opinion, I think Mouty would (probably) meet our WP:NBIO/WP:NPROF criteria, but the key thing is for your citations to allow anyone to verify every statement you have made. So each citation must allow someone to check that what you wrote is correctly stated in the citation, and not based either on your own conclusions or knowledge of him (we call that original research)

I note that Mouty died only very recently, and it may be that a good, independent obituary about him will become available in time, or that you have missed one in local or regional newspapers. My commiserations to you, as I suspect you knew him personally, by the excellent photo you took of him last year. If you did know him, I would invite you to please follow our guidelines at WP:COI by simply making clear any knowledge or connection you have with him? There is nothing wrong in this, but we simply like to have clarity about who is writing about people, and their motivations.

So, don't give up, but take your time to go through everything, line by line and pretend to be an independent observer, challenging every statement and asking yourself "how can I prove that?" I have made a few small tweaks to your draft which I hope you find helpful. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:15, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Might be worth contacting a relevant university department in Syria, or the publishers of one of his more recent papers, to ask if they know of obituaries in any specialist journals, and/or of any plans to publish a posthumous Festschrift (which could take several months to a few years to come to fruition). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.128.151 (talk) 21:22, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Pls can u keep my edit temporary stayed

Draft: Charles Williams

Help with reliable sources

I am having a bug with the wikipedia adventure

Make userboxes

Inappropriate use of TW/warning

I chanced upon this situation where a registered user was wrongly criticised for a simple infobox expansion, where there is clearly prose to support with ref (at a mid-point) in the opening section. One viable ref (BBC) is extant since 2007.

I messaged the TW user at User talk:Loriendrew#Your revert at Jane Tomlinson - without any recommendation or request - but s/he has not edited since. Users of third-party utilities are responsible for their correct usage, and as I cannot find anything specific allowing me (under these particular circumstances) to remove Talk content, would an admin remove, in fairness to the initial editor? Thank you. Rocknrollmancer (talk) 23:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you be more specific as to what you are asking to be removed? Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 23:51, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't believe admin intervention is required, you are free to leave a message on the talkpage stating you believe the warning to be an error and that the addition to the infobox was ok. AS for your message about it being a lvl 2 warning being unacceptable, it is not un heard of with a user with history such as this one to no longer warrant level 1 warnings which are generally where we are still assuming good faith. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 00:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

ThanQ Pyrrho the Skeptic, Mcmatter - I've been on WP for eight years and I know there are two admins I could name at the teahouse, rather than approaching any one individual elsewhere, I thought it might be useful for Teahouse volunteers to be able to consider. I meant that the whole section (User talk:Okay,okayhshshs#October 2021) should be removed by an admin as it was wrongly applied. I couldn't find anything (ferinstance at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines) alluding to rectification of incorrect usage of speed-dialled warnings. AFAIK only admin can do that? Other than the initiater who could self-revert.

Regarding my use of "inappropriate", I didn't mean that uw-bio2 was inappropriate instead of level 1, rather the whole presumption that it was unsourced and as such needed to be knee-jerked reverted was inappropriate, being a too-shallow observation by the TW user. I can recognise that Okay,okayhshshs doesn't leave edit summaries and has a history of previous criticisms - already checked that some days ago. But that doesn't excuse the quick-fire trigger on the pop-up utility (I am also aware of the recent development RedWarn) and we should strive to correct wrongs, IMO. I often write individually-composed messages (like this one to the same user in March 2021), rather than the standard, templated messages which can be perceived as harsh.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 01:23, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

How to cite the plot?

Paperpen2824's article has been declined

Is it ok if I answer queries even if I'm not a teahouse host?

My IP has been blocked even though I don't do anything

Arbitration Committee

Why Is My Article Rejected?

New to Wikipedia, can't figure out anything at all.

Hi-hi-hello! I have two questions. Is there a way to upload images? How so? Anywho, see ya soon! Best regards, Thirstys (talk) 13:24, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Thirstys: Hi there, welcome to Wikipedia! The learning curve is a little steep, so I've left you a message on your talk page with some helpful links. I recommend reading our tutorial

As for uploading images, the file upload wizard is fairly easy to follow. Please don't upload anything that's copyrighted though! ~TheresNoTime ^{(to explain!)} 13:32, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

For information on uploading images, see Wikipedia:Uploading images. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:33, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Thirstys. I think the guidance at Wikipedia:Uploading images, including the PDF brochure, is useful here. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:34, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Thirstys, hello! Yes, BUT (and this is a big but). Basically no random images you find online can be uploaded. You can upload images you've taken yourself with your own camera though, see WP:FUW. That's the general answer. Do you have a more specific question? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:35, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Thirstys Welcome to the Teahouse. Adding images can be a complex area for a new user to start with. Firstly, is the image your copyright? If not, has it been released by its owner under a licence we can re-use? We can't just use any old photo we find on a website - it must be released for commercial re-use on a proper licence. Once you've established that an image can be legally uploaded and released for others to use, you don't add it directly into a Wikipedia article, but upload it into Wikimedia Commons, from where it can be embedded into a Wikipedia article, irrespective of what language it is written in. So - not an easy first question to answer. But you can find a range of useful links to different aspects of dealing with images at Wikipedia:Images. I hope this helps. Come back with specific questions if they don't make sense to you. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:36, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Note also that there's a big collection of WP-ok pics at Commons. If you're lucky, perhaps what you want can be found there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:46, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Osmia_Music

Hi. Hope all is well. I'm writing an article for my journalism license, about Osmia Music , a known music producer from Romania. I want to know if I need to do anything else to improve the article or its enough ? I worked very hard on this project in the last days and I want to give the best for it to get it published, will help me a lot. Besides what I know about him and his music, I've made a very deep research also in his early life and music career to put all together with all references almost for every sentences. So please be kind and let me know your feedback. With love, Joan (Fjoan (talk) 11:13, 22 October 2021 (UTC)) Fjoan (talk) 11:13, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Fjoan, and welcome to the Teahouse. I can see you have put a lot of effort on that draft, but looking quickly through the reference list, I can see that many of them are not acceptable. It may be that if you remove those, there will be enough left to ground the article: I haven't checked. You might find WP:CSMN useful. --ColinFine (talk) 11:17, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much Colin. Really appreciate your feedback. If you can help me a little bit, just to show me the numbers from references that you consider are not ok ? I read about WP:CSMN and I know that I attached in references some links like youtube for example or soundcloud or itunes from his achievements along with press releases, but in the same time I saw that almost all from artists to producers or film makers had links from personal streaming platform... sooo, I'm a little bit confused. Hehe. Thank yoooou ! means a lot Fjoan (talk) 11:27, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Fjoan, please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Just looking at the citations, without following them to read the sources, I would expect that nos 1-2, 8-12, 14-17, 21-22 are all unacceptable (I didn't go any further). I may be wrong about some of them, but I can say unequivocally that we don't use sites like iTunes for sources, and that a Google search is never acceptable (though items found by the search might be, if they are reliably published. YouTube is not intrinsically unacceptable, but not much published there is regarded as reliable, and if it is the subject's own work that is being cited, the thing to realise is that Wikipedia is basically not interested in what the subject says or creates, but only in what reliable commentators have said about the subject and their creations. --ColinFine (talk) 11:57, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Ohh, yes. Thank you so much ColinFine, I understand now almost the full picture and I will document myself more on what you sent to me right now and get back to update the article asap. Appreciate your patience and responses, because this material means a lot for my journalist license and I want to do the best for it. You are the best ! Fjoan (talk) 12:32, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi again Djoan. I'm not sure what your journalism licence involves, but you're probably already seeing that writing for Wikipedia is very different from journalism in some respects! Good luck. --ColinFine (talk) 13:05, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

It is ColinFine, because requires us to be neutral regards writing about somebody, so I found Wikipedia perfect for this, even if is a little bit complicated for me with codes, policies and stuff... Thank you again ! really appreciate Fjoan (talk) 15:28, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Score next to draft article?

Contesting 'non reliable source'

Hi there, I would very much appreciate any help from an editor, to help me get my article approved. An editor called Tol has said that the article is not mention worthy and that the sources are not reliable. I dont understand how newspapers and very mention worthy people are not deemed reliable sources, particularly when they already have pages on wikipedia. I think it may be the way I have drafted the article, I find wikipedia very difficult, particularly the layout, it must be just me, but its difficult to follow. I would so appreciate any help. Thank you. Emma Russell21 (talk) 15:23, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Emma Russell21—It's a difficult distinction until you get more accustomed to it but what is considered notable (things that have a wikipedia page) and what is considered reliable (a source we can depend upon for information) are not always the same. Amazon for example is notable, but as it is mainly filled with unvetted customer reviews, we do not use it as a reliable source; on the other side of things, a research paper published by a respected journal may have a non-notable author, but be considered reliable for its information. Looking at your draft, we have things like Amazon and YouTube being used as sources, which are considered unreliable—but if you have for example a newspaper article or a reliable website which discusses this same information, you could use that instead. If you ever have any doubt about whether a source is reliable or not, you can ask at WP:RSN for some additional opinions. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 15:31, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Emma Russell21: in the draft, I'm seeing references that don't give enough information for other editors and readers to identify the source properly. For instance, there's a link to the homepage of The National Herald, but not to the specific article in the publication that mentions Phlox. You can write reference information between <ref></ref> tags, so an example reference with enough information for another person to properly understand it might look like this:

<ref>[example.com/review-of-fuschia-phlox Review of Fuschia Phlox], Jane Doe, ''The Example Newspaper'', 1 January 2020</ref>

References don't have to be online, so if you were citing a print newspaper article then you'd still include the headline, byline, newspaper and publish date, but there'd be no URL. More complicated ways of formatting references exist, but are by no means mandatory. — Bilorv (talk) 17:20, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

CAS number for chemical compound COSTUNOLIDE

Articles needing copy-edit

Question

How to edit right the draft: draft:Ronnie_Makabai

I have practiced all skills, but why can't i create a page still!

Redirection and album cover issues

Hi, I'm currently editing Ongaku Zukan, a 1984 Japanese album by composer Ryuichi Sakamoto, and this will be my first submission to Wikipedia. Need to ask some questions:

- I would like to redirect Illustrated Musical Encyclopedia to this page's "International Release" section. How do I do that?
- I have the album cover that is from iTunes, and I'm OK for the non-free image resizer to resize the image. Do I have to upload it to Wikimedia Commons, state the source, put the album cover on the draft page and then declare the cover source? If so, how to declare the copyright stuffs?
  - For example, last time I edited Giant Steps (composition) on Wikipedia, then I put the album cover from the Wikimedia library, and then the cover is removed by the bot stating I used non-free image and has to be removed. How do I fix this?

Thanks. Weareblahs (talk) 12:29, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Weareblahs: Welcome to the Teahouse.

I would like to redirect Illustrated Musical Encyclopedia to this page's "International Release" section. How do I do that?
~~You can do it by using a wikilink to the section name that is preceded by a #. In your case, it'd be [[#International Release]].~~ I did not read; Gråbergs Gråa Sång has the right idea.
I have the album cover that is from iTunes, and I'm OK for the non-free image resizer to resize the image. Do I have to upload it to Wikimedia Commons, state the source, put the album cover on the draft page and then declare the cover source? If so, how to declare the copyright stuffs?
Since the image is non-free, you cannot upload it to Commons; it would have to be uploaded locally to the English Wikipedia. There's more info about how to satisfy the fair use criteria at WP:NFC. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:55, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Weareblahs, Hello!

Wait until your article has been approved, then see WP:MAKEREDIR and redirect to Draft:Ongaku_Zukan#International_Release (-Draft:).
No, again, after your article has been approved upload it to Wikipedia, see "Upload a non-free file" at WP:FUW.
You don't. Non-free is a harsh mistress, and the album-cover pic is only allowed on the article about the album. Annoying, yes. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:02, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Weareblahs: Welcome to the Teahouse! Your questions are all minor issues that you can address after your article is approved. Your primary goal should be to demonstrate how this album meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, listed at WP:NALBUMS. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Declined Article

How to get an Article graded

Hi there, I was wondering how to submit an article to get graded/get it a higher grade, because I recently have been working on the article Fagin and added a lot of citations which could probably get its grade up to C class at least. Kaleeb18 (talk) 14:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18, Hello! Up to "B" these gradings are informal and you can WP:BOLDly set them yourself by changing the template at Talk:Fagin. See the "quality scale" links there for guidance. You can also ask a at place like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fictional characters. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:10, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I made a few changes and upgraded the article to C-class. David notMD (talk) 14:55, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you @David notMD:. I know the gradings are informal, but since I am a newer Wikipedia editor I don’t want to be the one to change the article’s grading. I’m still looking for a page that I can submit an article to be reviewed. Kaleeb18 (talk) 15:31, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Anything up to B-class doesn't have a formal review process so there isn't really a central page for that, but you can always ask at a related wikiproject for a second opinion to have someone check the grading. The first stage of formal reviewing for article quality begins at WP:GAN, where articles are assessed for "Good" article criteria. If you want to look over the criteria for those and use that as a checklist when working on articles, you might have some joy submitting articles through that process after some work. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 15:34, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Ah, thank you @Grapple X:. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaleeb18 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Content assessment for a rough idea of what is needed. In the past, I've upgraded, but also downgraded articles. Before nominating a C-class or B-class article for "Good Article" I typically check every sentence and every reference, often deleting and adding lots of content, over weeks. For example, I did weeks of editing to Biotin before nominating, then scores more edits once the review started. David notMD (talk) 20:31, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Article Notification - General Notability Guideline

Perhaps about Draft:Philippines in the ABU TV Song Festival?

What do we do with these types of articles?

How do i use MediaWiki?

Is it okay to create a sandbox page without first creating a user page?

Screenshot of creating User:Firvqipo/sandbox, specifically showing the editnotice about the parent page not existing — Screenshot of the editnotice

Today I wanted to try using my sandbox page to test the wikilink format of Special:Diff for use in an edit summary. However, when attempting to create it I get this vague editnotice. Help:Subpages is of no help in clarifying the significance of this notice, nor is WP:USERSUBPAGE. Skimming Help:Subpages and clicking through some of the links on page, I found nothing at all about the case of creating a subpage when the parent page doesn't exist.

My assumption is that the creators of MediaWiki were competent enough that creating this sandbox page will go without a hitch. Other than the fact that the backlink will be red link. From this, I have to surmise that this editnotice is mainly for the case of creating a subpage under another's user page. Although that seems like an extremely rare occurrence, so really I have no idea what this editnotice is for.

I know very little about how editnotices work technically, but I did look through Category:Editnotice templates to try to find where this editnotice comes from to no avail.

Yes, a much simpler "fix" would have simply been to follow what the editnotice seems to imply and create my user page. But I'm a curious person, and I also don't really want to create my user page until I have something to put there. At this point all that would be is a link to my sandbox.

I've currently sidestepped this issue by simply previewing my sandbox page and never publishing it. Firvqipo (talk) 18:19, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

If you want to experiment with a sandbox without creating a subpage to a page that does not yet exist, you can use Wikipedia:Sandbox instead. Vexations (talk) 18:24, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Firvqipo: I think that message is just worded in a confusing way. It is not referring to your User Page, it is referring to the Sandbox page in your userspace. I get the same edit notice when I go to my sandbox which does not yet exist, but my user page does. RudolfRed (talk) 18:27, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Ah, that makes a lot more sense. Thank you for testing. I wonder if it's feasible to change this editnotice, as it's quite confusing. Perhaps it's a part of MediaWiki. I've wasted way too much time on this today, so I won't go researching that myself. Firvqipo (talk) 18:38, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

BTW, the help page for subpages on the mediawiki software is at mw:Help:Subpages Vexations (talk) 18:30, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Firvqipo, I think you are fine to create a sandbox, even if you don't have a user page. (If it somehow accidentally got deleted, you could just ping the deleting admin and they'd restore it.) The name of the page that creates that notice is MediaWiki:Newarticletext. It displays differently in different namespapces/situtations. Is there a particular way you'd like to see it changed when creating a userspace subpage? Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:25, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I'd like it to be reworded to make it clear that the "user page" referenced in "Wikipedia does not have a user page with this exact title" is in fact the subpage being created, and not the parent user page. Per RudolfRed's response. I can't think of a good way to rephrase it off the top of my head. Perhaps simply replacing "user page" with "user subpage" or "subpage in user space" would suffice? Firvqipo (talk) 23:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Firvqipo! The way MediaWiki handles slashes in page names is, umm … interesting. Technically, the page name is the full path as displayed "User:Firvqipo/sandbox" not just "sandbox". It's not like a file system where the containing folder must exist before you can put a file into it. If the part before the slash doesn’t exist as a page, then relative paths like "../sibling" won't point to where you might expect. If you're not creating sub-sub-pages nor using relative paths (uncommon on Wikipedia, but does happen on Wikisource) then you'll probably never notice a practical difference. The one hint may be the "breadcrumb" links at the top of the page. Hope that makes sense! ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 05:04, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Anup Ranjan Pandey

I want to discuss about this article Draft:Anup Ranjan Pandey I want to say that this person is notable because he got national and forth highest award in India and biggest newspapers and news channel of India writed article about it and see this page List of Padma Shri award recipients (2020–2029) all persons who got that award have wikipedia page because only by that award he is notable so why this person is not notable UserABCXYZ (talk) 15:52, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

The draft appears to still be in review. I would wait until you hear a response from the reviewer. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 16:46, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@UserABCXYZ: if you leave your comment ("this person is notable because ...") at the talk page of the draft then the reviewer should see it and take it into account. Either way, hundreds of drafts are submitted each day but we have only a handful of experienced volunteers who handle most reviews, so it can take a long time for a draft to be reviewed (which can be done in any order, based on reviewer subject knowledge or which drafts will be quicker to assess or other whims). No news is no news: if the draft is still in the queue, that doesn't mean anything, good or bad. — Bilorv (talk) 17:13, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@UserABCXYZ: I respectfully disagree with Bilorv. Your draft should make it very clear why the person is notable. Reviewers might not know what Padma Shri is, so you could explain what it is, and what he did to deserve it. It is also not clear what a "Baster band" is. For your references in Hindi, I suggest you add a |trans-title= parameter with an English translation of the Hindi title. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:18, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I'll try to make my point a bit clearer, GoingBatty. If you want to leave a note for a reviewer, such as by explaining why a draft is notable (if it was a draft about an album, you might say "this meets WP:NALBUM condition #2 by charting on the Norwegian national charts"), you can do so on the talk page. This isn't a substitute for including the actual information and references in the draft that demonstrate clearly why the person is notable. It can only be an additional note to help the reviewer quickly navigate to the most important references and facts. — Bilorv (talk) 20:20, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Bilorv, the creator of a draft is welcome to do as you suggest, but I doubt that most reviewers even glance at the talk page of a draft they're considering. Rather to my surprise, Anup Ranjan Pandey is now promoted to an article. It consists of a single paragraph, which in turn consists of three short sentences. If a subject is promising and such a short text is any good, a reviewer should be able to discern notability. Questions of notability aside, the article seems peculiarly uninformative. "Anup Ranjan Pandey is a musical artist who works in Baster band (a band in Bastar district)": we don't get to learn what the musical genre is (genres are), which instrument(s) ARP plays, or how long ARP has been at it. (For all we know, he could be 25 or 85.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:30, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Can i get my page reviewed .a.s.a.p.?

Not certain how to cite PDF file

Help

Why do we use Latin ipa

can we link articles from other wikipedias?

What is the difference between Draft:Sandbox and Wikipedia:Sandbox?

What is the difference between Draft:Sandbox and Wikipedia:Sandbox? 85.193.252.19 (talk) 13:09, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

@85.193.252.19, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I noticed your question has remain unanswered for a while, we apologize, whilst I’m not entirely sure i understand what you are asking, I would proceed to give you a blanket response, which is, the WP:SANDBOX, is a space where you are free to test and practice your editing skills. Celestina007 (talk) 13:48, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Sandbox and Wikipedia:Sandbox are both sandboxes, where you can practice editing, but can't expect what you do to remain there. They are different sandboxes, with (as far as I can tell) identical properties. Maproom (talk) 13:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

The main difference is how Visual Editor is not enabled, by default, for Wikipedia: pages. I don't fully get the difference, but there is one. Try Special:Edit/Draft:Sandbox and Special:Edit/Wikipedia:Sandbox in new cookie-free windows. So if VE is your thing, Draft: is the place to try it out. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:11, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

@Zzuuzz: actually, there is not realy a difference: You can deliberately activate VE in namespaces where its link in the toolbar doesn't appear by default, by adding the veaction=edit param to the URL. (link for this page) or if done properly, I don't have a way ad hoc, by using mw.libs.ve.activateVe(mode). I believe the reason why the Visual Editor is not enabled in certain namespaces is that it was mainly designed to help new users get a feeling for editing Wikipedia without having to learn the complex Wikisyntax. For pages in the Wikipedia namespace this is most often either not what new users do (as new users probbably won't create policies or essays using complex syntax), or useless (for example on this very page) as there is no support for section editing, resulting in you getting edit conflicts all over the place.Another reason for some namespaces is that the Visual Editor only support pages that are written in Wikitext, which some namespaces simply aren't. The pretty much only case where Visual Editing could be usefull in the Wikipedia namespace are AFD and related pages, which are most likely short enough to not constantly cause edit conflicts. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:38, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt I can activate visual editor on both sites. All I need is to click on "Edit page visually". So I see no difference at all.

Thank you all for such a detailed explanation, but my question was not very important. I asked out of curiosity, but I don't care which site I use. But again, thanks for your response. I am pleasantly surprised :-) 85.193.252.19 (talk) 21:41, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Factual Content was deleted. the deletionist said "wrong song" but it is confirmed 100% ?????

Becoming a confirmed user

Should I reference the same source multiple times?

Unverified/Uncited information about Ray Eberle's grandchildren on his Wikipedia page: Requesting additions and/or corrections?

Hello! I notice which a recently-deleted Wikipedia user (Rayeberlefamily) has made some inaccurate edits to the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Eberle ...The date of this edit is displayed as https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ray_Eberle&oldid=1035848025 or July 28th, 2021. Namely, he, she, or they made the following changes, which I shall quote here: Added grandchildren, fixed cause of death. The name of at least one of these grandchildren, Michael Eberle is not accurate, because ...1: There don't seem to be any sources or citations claiming him to be part of the Eberle family. 2: If by 'Michael Eberle', they refer to my Mom, Laurie's firstborn son, then his last name was never Eberle when he was born or at any time during or after his childhood. My Mom was married to her first husband, Mike DePilla during this time. Please pardon me if the spelling of his last name is incorrect. Thus, Michael's last name should not be listed as Eberle.

Furthermore, I am the second biological son of my aforementioned Mom, named Ross Eberle. I would prefer if Michael's name be removed from the article since he didn't consider himself to be related to the Eberle family. He ultimately chose to live with his father, while still a minor. This happened after my Mom divorced her husband, Mike. However, if Michael is going to be listed as one of Ray's grandchildren in this article, then I have the right to be listed on this article as well, since my Mom's last name was Eberle at the time of my birth; she was not currently married. If anyone has any questions or comments in regards to this, feel free to contact me here on Wikipedia.

P.S. I have shown this article to my Mom, Laurie with its most recent edits, before sending this message. The purpose of this was to gain her opinion and permission to contact you, the editors on my grandfather's (Ray Eberle's) talk page. Any citations in regards to my requests for these changes can be requested from me at any time. SnarkyEberle (talk) 19:00, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

SnarkyEberle, you asked about this at Talk:Ray Eberle. That was the right place to ask. Now wait for a response there. In the meantime, I suggest that the article should say nothing about its subject's grandchildren, even if the sole cited source mentions them (or any of them). (I haven't looked at the cited source.) If you do want the article to say something, then whatever that "something" is, you're going to have to present a reliable, independent, published source for it: personal knowledge is disregarded. -- Hoary (talk) 22:12, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

An editor has removed names of children and all mentions of grandchildren, which is in accord with accepted practice at Wikipedia unless the children or grandchildren are themselves notable enough to be subjects of articles. David notMD (talk) 00:33, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

When can I begin to edit locked pages?

Draft: Thomas Christiano

Account Creator

Draft:Alan Singh

article in the sandbox of my user account, but how to publish it in wikipedia?

talk page

How to add note ?

No response on a contribution I made

Translation's title

Follow-up to WikiMedia Voting

Entering content to publish

My Dear Friends and Non-Friends Alike!

new page template

proper licensing for SVG replacements of raster images

I am dipping my toe in the water of editing Wikipedia and was looking to update some rasterized images, consistent with the template: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Convert_to_SVG .

I was hoping someone could provide clarity on best practices for this as far as licensing/uploading. I had tried one, but on reflection think that I had made some inaccurate selections. Chief among them, while the reproduction is my work, on reflection, I don't think that is the most accurate choice from the perspective of the upload wizard. Ex.,

It seems like now it would be better to select/provide the following to the upload wizard:

this file is not my own work radio button
source (link to original Wikimedia file)
author (original file's author)
license (original file's license)

Additional recommendations welcome!

For reference, here is an example image that appears to be a high quality reproduction, but may be making similar licensing errors by accident.

original: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:OO_Modeling_languages_history.jpg
conversion: LBuwBsCY15V$ (talk) 17:51, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
@LBuwBsCY15V$: You will get a more comprehensive answer from the Commons:Village pump/Copyright help desk but my take is as follows. The original .png file is not licensed correctly. According to the supplied URL, although the article was open-access, the license they used was CC-BY-NC-SA 3.0. The problem is the NC ("no commercial use") and such files are NOT allowed on Commons: only files licensed for commercial use are held there, despite Wikipedia not itself being commercial. If the licensing had been CC-BY-SA 3.0 you would have been perfectly within your rights to modify the diagram to an .svg version and upload that to Commons. However, even in this case it would have been appropriate to quote the original source/authorship in the file description. You could still do so just by editing the Summary part on your file's Commons page. If my reading of the situation is correct, you should now copy both your question and my response to the Commons page I linked, where those with more expertise than I have will be able to advise what needs to be done next. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:22, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Translation

Dmitry Borisovich Volkov

Old Oak Tree

Manual for scientists on Wikipedia

So after a new page has been reviewed....

Publish

queries regarding how to edit wikipedia as a new beginner and how to create new pages and what is NPOV?

Hello,sir im john belgi.and im a new beginner to wikipedia sir.so what are the contribution and things that i need to do before editing.please help me out sir,as i want to be a developed my writing skills. John Belgi (talk) 13:08, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi @John Belgi: How goes it? Welcome to Wikipedia. Please take a look at WP:REFB. It is a small tutorial that describes how to create a reference. Every sentence needs a references, ideally. There is many area's you can work on. Improving existing articles is one way, I think is a good way of getting going, but remember to reference your content. Your best way of creating an article is the using the draft system, found at Wikipedia:Drafts. Each draft is reviewed by another person to ensure its good quality by adhering to Wikipedia policies. One such policy which is critically important is WP:NPOV. It is a core policy. It describes neutrality, the concept of keeping the article balanced, such that competing arguments are assigned to even weights in the discussion of particular subject. You don't want one side taking the whole argument. It needs to be truthful and accurate as possible. There is an adopt a editor at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user, which is really good. scope_creep^Talk 14:24, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello John Belgi, your question is addressed to "sir", which is a title given to men, so I hope you won't mind a woman writing to you. It may be that English is not the language that you know the best, so you might want to consider developing your writing skills in a language that is easier for you to understand. There are over 300 languages that have their own Wikipedia editions, and they can be found here: List of Wikipedias. There is also a Simple English Wikipedia that can be edited. Wherever you decide to work, keep in mind that Wikipedia is a place for people to find accurate information, so if you want to improve an article you need to show that the sentences you are adding contain information from reliable sources, such as newspaper articles or reference books. You can't just add information that you remember someone telling you, you have to add a reference source, so readers can know where the new information comes from. Best wishes on your future editing work. Karenthewriter (talk) 04:13, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Article rejected, advised to remove advertising content... need help implementing this advice.

Notability Standards- Music? Apollo Chamber Players

hello everyone

Move page

Accessibility - changing the default displayed font size?

resubmit declined article

A contribution in Talk, which is worth moving to main pages.

{{glossary}} doesn't seem to like complex language templates?

Unknown parameter |DUPLICATE-url

Cover Images for songs

Footnote

Untitled

Article Improvement - Tone/Primary Sources

Virat Kohli article

Subpage link not appearing

Edição de imagens na Wikipedia

Creating an Article for La Gritona Tequila

Magazine Cover

Publishing an article

An editor is constantly reverting my edit

Hi. I’m relatively new to Wikipedia, still learning how to edit. I’ve been regular updating the plot of a show I watch but for the past month, there is this one editor - Jellysandwich01 that seems experienced and is trying her best to try to revert single one my edits. First she stated I wasn’t following the rules, which I corrected. Then she kept on attacking me saying I use substandard English. I have raised this topic in her discussion page but she never responds, I even brought it up in the talk page of the article but no one responded. Then she dropped me a rather rude message on my talk page saying that I was trying to break rules again. She managed to get the article protected. I have been polite in all my interactions, have even said we can co operate but I never get a reply from her. The problem is I don’t know how to exactly register a complaint or bring the issue under an administrator’s notice because I’m still new and figuring out Wikipedia but I am highly frustrated and feel demotivated. It almost feels like her actions are because of ego issues now, checking her history she seems to do this a lot. Everyone’s edits takes time and efforts, if anyone has any above how to peacefully resolve this, please help. GrottoVilla (talk) 17:38, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry you feel you have not been treated nicely. It does appear (to me) that the issue has to do with the long length of your plot descriptions, whether in plot section or the episode list, and it appears more than one editor has pointed this out. There are avenues for dispute resolution, if necessary, but I suggest you rather focus on the objections to the content you're trying to add, try to ignore the editor's behavior, and consider if the sections would be better for the reader if they were more concise. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 18:28, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

@GrottoVilla: I looked at Yeh Hai Chahatein today and made some minor tweaks. In the list of episodes, are the paragraphs starting with "Preesha’s childhood friend Yuvraj..." and "To stop the child care department..." part of Episodes 1-141? Also, is the correct spelling "Saraansh" or "Saransh" or "Saaransh"? (The article should be consistent.) Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 19:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for responding. Yes I have no issues with focusing on bettering the content at all! Willing to work and cooperate but the editor just keeps reverting it. The list of episodes can be edited further, but I don’t understand why she just deletes the entire section. She’s the only editor whose been doing this. I don’t mind having a discussion how to make it better, but she’s just been rude about it and not willing to listen. Instead I don’t understand why I am getting warnings when she’s basically doing the same. I’ll make it more concise but hopefully it’s not reverted yet again. Thanks for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GrottoVilla (talk • contribs)

Suggestions for resubmitted article

How to not get my contributions deleted?

Can partial RfC consensus be reviewed immediately?

Disputes?

Account29 has reverted several of my changes on List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll

Account29 claims my version of the edition is unstable, and that my edits to the page make it appear unstable. Account 29 also claims that my edits do not contribute no information to the page.

I would claim: A - the sums of death tolls are useful, and are how the death tolls for Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin were derived even though information about their death tolls is already on the page. I produced the following new rows to the table, detailing each of their death tolls: - Syngman Rhee (reverted) - Massacre of poles in Volhynia and eastern Galicia (Not reverted) - Vladimir Lenin (reverted) - Hong Xiuquan (reverted) - Editing Mao's death toll based on hawaii.edu's description of death tolls, and the endurance of the laogoi system. - Adding up all the communist leader's death tolls and making a new row for them. There are other sets of titles which read "various leaders" on the page, including the Young Turks, and the leaders of communist Hungary.

- QRbot believed Account 29's actions were vandalism.

To be clear I wanted to make different death tolls on different parts of Wikipedia consistent with each other.

Is this true? I was not aware he was reverting my edits until just now. Account29 told me to come here. I would like my well cited contributions to stay up. Is there another problem?

Here is the old edit's URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll&oldid=1051849188

Hong kuslauski (talk) 23:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC) Hong kuslauski (talk) 23:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I said it was OR you put from 1917 or 1850 to 2021 communist leaders killed x amount of people . Even are page does not says that from 1850?Account29 (talk) 23:32, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I am tagging Davide King as it looks like he knows about the history of Mass killings under communist regimes maybe he can help with this.Account29 (talk) 23:36, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I have also reverted Hong kuslauski on a different page. In addition to the appearance of pushing an ideological agenda, the edits have glaring style and textual problems. I strongly encourage Hong to avoid edit-warring and to listen to advice from the regulars here. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 23:45, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Alternatively, Account29 could have told me specifically what was wrong with the 1850 to 1917 post at the time. Once more, there is a case to be made that Hong Xiquan was a proto-communist. No one up until this point has directed me to modify my contributions but has instead overridden them without detailing the reasons beyond completely subjective statements: "This does not help the lede" what is this supposed to mean? I cannot conclude anything except 力's opinion on the matter. Please detail more specifically said textual problems, otherwise I cannot avoid them.

Once more, the promotion of ideological agenda? I have added a variety of conservative massacres to the list of anthropogenic disasters by death toll, including Rhee Syngman & The massacre of Poles in Volhynia, both perpetrated by anti-communists. Why were these contributions not reverted but others were?

In order to "listen to advice from the regulars" I could be given advice to rectify this, What textual problems? Care to list a few? I would love the constructive criticism as opposed to the abrupt shut down . 力, is not made of time though as his page denotes, and people cannot be expected to both moderate and advise me on all issues when I am out of line. Which apparently I often am.

Do we have any rules on obituaries?

Hi everyone, I was looking at Richard Edmonds and clicked on the "Obituary" link at the bottom, expecting to be taken to a mainstream site such as The Guardian or similar, only to find it's a gushing tribute on a far right site here. Is this appropriate? Do we have any rules on obituary links?

Many thanks. GreebleNeeble (talk) 17:25, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

WP:RS and WP:BLP apply. Mjroots (talk) 17:38, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

That's not very helpful. The link is not being used as a source for the article, it's simply a link. As the subject is dead, I don't see how BLP applies either. Can anyone tell me if there are requirements for obituary links please? GreebleNeeble (talk) 17:49, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

@GreebleNeeble, hello! In this particular case, the guidance is at WP:EL. Per that guidance, it should be deleted yesterday. Ick. If this had been an obit in say The Guardian, it would have been ok. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:01, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict), we don't have any rules on obituaries per se. The link was an external link and so the controlling guidelineis at Wikipedia:External links. Basically, rather than referencing actual article material, external links are like "Hey, if you want further enrichment on this general subject, here's some links, take them for what they're worth, we don't guarantee the veracity neutrality or value of the material there". That said, there's a limit. We're not going to link to anything named "Heritage and Destiny - Faith, Folk, Family" because it's safe to assume that's going to have racist lies and nonsense and there's no value to the reader to read that. That's right out, and the link's been removed. You would have been welcome to do it yourself, simply on the general grounds of "No. Just... no." Herostratus (talk) 18:12, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you everyone. I have looked around to see if I could replace the link with a neutral obituary, but the only ones are from that far right site or from sites intrinsically opposed to the far right, neither of which seems appropriate due to the huge biases they have. No link at all seems the way to go. GreebleNeeble (talk) 18:17, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Subject was a member of the National Front and British National Party, two far-right organisations. The possibility of an obituary which isn't heavily influenced by this either way is slim. I'd suggest avoiding one altogether to be honest, and merely sticking to what facts of life can be sourced outside of one. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 00:37, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Pantaleón Julian Valdés page

My page

Duplicate/spoof username checker

getting my submission approved

Draft review for the article Ahsan Khan Chowdhury

Support for Article content and reference review

Help

Hello

Muhammad Aslam Butt

User talk page

Adding an image or company logo

Hi all,

I am creating a little article on this company that I came across called Underwood Ammo, I think I added enough to have it go live and I published it as my first "article" or stub, though I intend to keep working on it. The next thing that I would like to add is the company logo, but this brings me to a question that I have on logo's on companies both big and small generally. Do I need to try and reach out to someone at the company, or can I take a screenshot of their logo and upload it? We are not using their logo here for any commercial interests of our own on wikipedia or in any way that I feel would conflict with their interests, but I am no lawyer, and certainly no expert on copyright law etc. I know that we are pretty strict on copyrights here on the wiki, and I've had pictures that I've even taken with my own phone removed before, so I figured I should just as the good 'ole Teahouse and see if you all could help me with something like this, and then I'll know what to do for the future. Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • talk) 02:35, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

For information on logos, see Wikipedia:Logos. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:09, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

@Th78blue In short and in general, you can add a logo. Screenshot is fine. Go to WP:FUW, chose "Upload a non-free file" > "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use." > "This is a logo of an organization, company, brand, etc." and follow instructions. Size will be made "legal" automatically by a bot. However you must wait to do this until the article is in mainspace. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:45, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

So what about when you are uploading a picture in the wikimarkup space and then before you can add it, there is something that says "I own this picture" or something to that effect? You can't proceed without clicking it. Also, where would I include the "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use." text? Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • talk) 19:23, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Did you choose the wrong option from WP:FUW? You need "Upload a non-free file", not "Upload your own or a freely licenced file". --David Biddulph (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Hmm.. maybe that is part of the issue. I don't see that option when I go upload a picture. I use the older wikimarkup style when doing all of my editing, and I just click the "Images and Media" button (located to the right of "Link" for hyperlinks, and "Reference" (for adding <ref></ref>). Where should I click/go to just add screenshots and such for learning purposes? I don't think I should have to add a screenshot each and every time I have a question and would like to provide visual evidence for my own learning sake? Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • talk) 13:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Did you see my question?

Fair-use Image

I added sources but page does not show

girl help read my page

help for page

I am having trouble trying to get a change made.

RPGA 989 should redirect to a disambiguation page that in turn has links to Socket G2 and Socket G1.

As un unregistered editor I can't create it, so I followed the instructions that I got when I tried to edit RPGA 989. ("The page "RPGA 989" does not exist. You can ask for it to be created...")

Here is where I did that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:RPGA_989

OK, so a nice person told me on that page that it wasn't the right place, so I followed the new instructions they gave me.

Here is where I did that: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Redirects_and_categories#Redirect_request:_RPGA_989

It turns out that this isn't the right place to ask either. This time there were no instructions for an IP editor to follow, just a page about the rules for creating a disambiguation page that I am not allowed to create anyhow.

I give up. All I wanted to do was to make Wikipedia better, not be given the runaround and told to go to more places and jump through more hoops.

It kind of feels like Wikipedia doesn't want any suggestions from IPs when they suggest a change that they can't make themselves. I just wanted to make Wikipedia a little bit better by making the link to RPGA 989 go to the correct page(s). I don't want to go to Wikipedia College and get a masters degree in Wikipedia editing just to suggest something that could probably be done in two minutes by someone who already knows how. 2600:1700:D0A0:21B0:2507:52B6:D594:2D17 (talk) 10:45, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry that you have had difficulty. Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is a volunteer project, where people do what they can when they can, and work in the areas that they want to work in. This sometimes means that the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing. The first advice you got was correct in that Draft space is for creating drafts, not requesting redirects. I'm not certain of the proper place to actually request what you want to do so I won't send you somewhere else(maybe others know) but I will say that the best way to see an edit made is to do it yourself. Creating an account and doing it yourself would mean that it would get done. 331dot (talk) 10:55, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I looked at doing this for you. I fell at the hurdle of not having enough information to achieve it in the way I think you want. I am happy to do this for you if you come to my talk page (linked in my signature) and give me blow by blow instructions

I need to know what the content of the disambiguation page ought to be, and, really, why it is required. The topic area is unfamiliar to me.

"RPGA 989 may refer to Socket G1 (also known as RPGA 989) or to Socket G2 (also known as RPGA 988A)". That's all the disambiguation page needs. The redirect you can copy from RPGA 988A with a different target. --2600:1700:D0A0:21B0:4813:DCA6:DCA9:6BF4 (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Or you could register for an account? Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 11:15, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Are you willing to change the page that IPs see to say "you can't do that without registering and we don't allow you to request that somebody else do it" rather than having it imply that an IP is allowed to request a change? 2600:1700:D0A0:21B0:4813:DCA6:DCA9:6BF4 (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Timtrent There are already redirect pages for RPGA 988A and RPGA 988B, both created in 2018 and linking to the respective article about the Intel sockets. I don't think that a further disambiguation page for RGPA 988 is needed, since anyone searching for that will find these two alternatives offered in the search box. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

You appear to have confused RPGA 988 with RPGA 989. Most people will realize that a 988A is a kind of 988. Most people will not realize that a 989 accepts 988 CPUs.

RPGA 988 is a 988-hole socket with has two variants, A and B. RPGA 989 is a 989-hole socket that accepts 988-pin CPUs designed for either variant of RPGA 988 but also works with 989-pin CPUs designed for use in RPGA 989 only. You can put a 988-pin CPU in a 989-hole socket with one of the holes not filled. A 989-pin CPU won't go in a 988-hole socket because the extra pin has no hole to go into. It just hits plastic and stops you from inserting the CPU. 2600:1700:D0A0:21B0:4813:DCA6:DCA9:6BF4 (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

The IP's post on AFCRC was
Please create a redirect called RPGA 989 (like the one at RPGA 988B) to Socket G2 or Socket G1 (or maybe a disambiguation page? The RPGA 989 is compatible with both).

From Socket G2: "rPGA 989 (as shown on the left) is a socket that can take Socket Socket G1 (rPGA988A) or Socket socket G2 (rPGA988B) processors."

From Socket G1: "there are Socket G/rPGA 989 sockets that can take Socket G1/rPGA 988A or Socket G2/rPGA 988B packaged processors[citation needed]"

BTW, here is a citation for the above citation needed: https://www.cpu-world.com/Sockets/Socket%20G2%20(rPGA988B).html (it is in the "Compatible sockets" section of that page. ― Qwerfjkl talk 13:26, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl @Michael D. Turnbull Thank you both. I saw the AFCRC request, but admit I failed to understand it sufficiently to create an article. I'm leaning towards not required, but have no strong feelings Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 13:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

RPGA 989 is a very common CPU socket for laptops. Wikipedia already has two pages that cover it, but no redirect from RPGA 989. Given how popular it is a redirect should be created. 2600:1700:D0A0:21B0:4813:DCA6:DCA9:6BF4 (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

OK, IP editor. Apologies that I did confuse RPGA 988 and RPGA 989. I've now created the redirect from RPGA 989 to Socket G1. You should now be able to edit that page to make it more explanatory (as a disambiguation page) if you think this is needed. Please also add your useful sources to the relevant articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:33, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

To know the quality of the article worthy of publish

Important Question

Let’s Go Brandon (Loza Alexander song)

Correction

Why did he remove this

Colors

waiting for review

Coordinate problem

Follow-up to Article Notification - General Notability Guideline

To know the quality of the article worthy of publish II

FYI

– changed section header, to distinguish from previous section --Maresa63 ^Talk 18:02, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I recently created an article to create the present, which is available here. This article was deleted in 2019 with a comment, and now I have prepared it with its sources. In your opinion, the authors of this article are not worthy of publication, despite the fact that someone works in a famous group.--Modeling ^(talk) 16:58, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

The fact that the group, Zarbofoot, is subject of an article does not mean that every musician in the group is article-worthy. Note that the article about the group and the articles about two of the members have all been criticized for insufficient referencing. David notMD (talk) 17:40, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Please also understand, مدلینگ ایرانی, that Wikipedia does not accept or decline an article based on the subject's "Worthiness". The criterion is the subject's "Notability", which in Wikipedia jargon means "how extensively the subject has been written about by people and in sources unconnected to the subject." All articles have to be based on the contents of such sources, so if too little has been written about, say, a band member as an individual rather than about their activity within Band X, there is insufficient material on which an article can be based. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.65.29 (talk) 18:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

You are right But take a look at the article in my article.I have included the most sources that all Rajab has spoken about and most importantly he has won two prestigious awards in Iran.--Modeling ^(talk) 18:17, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Please take a look at the article and check its sources.--Modeling ^(talk) 18:18, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

As you can see in the previous poll, this article has been removed with a soft comment. I used the most resources in writing the article and tried to improve the article as much as possible. Can you tell me the main reason for rejecting the article?Ashshan is a member of a group Zarbofoot This group has a good reputation and its members are like Dariush Salehpur They have an article with much less sources than Reza Tajbakhsh I did not understand exactly the forms of the article.--Modeling ^(talk) 18:23, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

He has also performed as an artist in the performances of the TTehran Symphony Orchestra.Source.--Modeling ^(talk) 19:27, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

My own opinion is to create the article and leave a second Afd for it.--Modeling ^(talk) 21:01, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

UUUUUUHHHHHH....

Hey there, Drew here, I have a very very bad feeling about that due to guy who loves Eurovision so much. I am searching all of the Eurovision contests, last years are getting bored as well. The next contest were held on 2022, in Italy (nowadays Turin is hosted), this article was bored with the same thing for the others, because Michele creating first to prepare the article about that. I am frustrating, and I try to editing that will you words, and grammar was better. The next day, I saw that it reverting the article by that guy. I started to anger, I'll just revert back it better! Another next day, I am shocked that guy undo the changes by me. I have crippling depression... so, what now?

note: wait, I think that guy loves Eurovision, Michele1999 and IvanScrooge98- *gasp* COINCIDENCE???!!!?!?!?!?!?! FRIENDS???!!?!???!?!?!!!?? DrewWill2021 (talk) 13:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

DrewWill2021, from what you say above, you have been edit-warring somewhere, instead of discussing the issue at the article's talk page as you should. But as you haven't told us what article this is about, it's hard to tell. Maproom (talk) 14:45, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I am confused too. I didn’t get what’s going on. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 17:15, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Not that I can make sense of this, but you have created User:DrewWill2021/sandbox3 which describes the Eurovision Song Contest 2022 as the 67th, to take place in Germany. Meanwhile, Eurovision Song Contest 2022 exists as an article describing the 66th, taking place in Italy. So what is your question? David notMD (talk) 17:21, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes, this is in my opinion, that the 2019 contest real winner was Netherlands, to me, I predict the winning Czech Republic, then right to host is Prague. Due to pandemic, I decided to prevailed the shows, finally, that Russia was the winner of Eurovision 2020. Sergey Lazarev, one of the Russian most fan-favorite artist ever. Then right to host though is Moscow. Now then, Voxxclub from Germany is the winner of Eurovision 2021, right Frankfurt as the host for 2022. My opinion, but it's my world, my prediction. Oh, I am a fan of Friday Night Funkin' and Eddsworld, I am made some two different movies that I am very excited. Do you agree??? DrewWill2021 (talk) 22:40, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Dr. Hell - disambiguation? How to go about?

Hi all - I am new (well, back after a loong time) to Wikipedia - I am entering some data about a local band and I would like to add the band-members. I have a ton of questions - but first: How do I go about creating an entry? Second, since the band mamber's names are common, they might need disambiguation. How do I go about that? Xumbrega1974 (talk) 17:29, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

First of all, does the band meet WP:NBAND? Mjroots (talk) 17:37, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

@Xumbrega1974: You are talking about the band Dr Hell, and not the singer for Evil Scarecrow, right? So... it doesn't look like the band is notable enough for an article. See WP:GNG and WP:NBAND. As you might a imagine, we get lots of attempts to make articles for bands. To simplify, WP:NBAND wants to see two albums an a major label or notable indy label, or a national tour of a major country..

If they did rate an article, and suppose that your guess is that the band and the anime character are roughly equally notable, within an order of magnitude. So, you would

1) Create your article under the name "Dr. Hell (band)", then

2) Edit the page "Dr. Hell" to, instead of being a redirect to "List of Mazinger characters#Dr. Hell", instead be a disambiguation page that says like "Dr. Hell can refer to: 1) Dr. Hell (band), 2) Dr. Hell (anime character)" -- look at an existing disambiguation page and copy the format, then

3) Create a new page "Dr. Hell (anime character)" with the content of "#REDIRECT List of Mazinger characters#Dr. Hell".

As to the band members, they're only going to get articles if they're notable by themselves (meet WP:BIO basically). If not, you're not going to have to worry about disambiguation for them. But you'd follow the same basic process. Herostratus (talk) 18:34, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the info - I guess they will have to wait to meet the WP:NBAND criteria. In the meantime, it is a good exercise for me to play in sandbox etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xumbrega1974 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes, and welcome aboard! Herostratus (talk) 23:28, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

why is kataese deleted?

It is just like any other fictional language and you say it is a hoax so other fictional languages are hoaxes? Please correct if I'm wrong fine i will put it on some other website of something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keranique-Kaara (talk • contribs) 00:28, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Kataese (fictional language) was speedy deleted by user:Liz as a blatant hoax. I can't see the deleted content but perhaps Liz will comment. Meters (talk) 00:34, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Should have read the above more closely, since the OP states that it is a fictional language. Is this a fictional language that appears in any reliable sources, or is it something you made up? Meters (talk) 00:36, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Ok but I made a youtube channel and I put that language in one of my videos — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keranique-Kaara (talk • contribs) 00:42, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Kataese is a fictional language like every one else's fictional like Klingon, That is a fictional language and that can stay but when someone else made a fictional language (me) It get deleted and I get made because that was my hard work wasted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keranique-Kaara (talk • contribs) 00:40, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Keranique-Kaara Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedi is not a place to merely tell the world about something that you created one day. It is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Klingon merits an article because many independent sources have written about it and its use. 331dot (talk) 00:45, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Please don't create multiple threads about the same topic. I have merged them. The fact that you mentioned your made up language on your own YouTube channel is not going to help. Meters (talk) 00:49, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Keranique-Kaara: The language needs to be notable as Wikipedia defines the term. As this is a personal creation of yours, it's better to let someone make an article for it if it ever gets significantly covered in reliable secondary sources. As it is right now it's of no encyclopedic value to anyone. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:15, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

When Tolkien invents a language (Elvish languages (Middle-earth)) it is article-worthy. You, no so much. David notMD (talk) 03:24, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

The article was deleted due to self-promotion of YouTube channel. Equine-man (talk) 23:32, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Repeated non-acceptance of a Wiki Page

Fixing Citations and Re-verifying My Page

Uploading gif image to mood ring site

Editors who are not logged in uses IP address

Finding proper category.

Editing Soomra

new article--living person biography

Can I write a new Wikipedia article even if I haven't ever made edits to other Wikipedia articles? Piacerebbe (talk) 22:14, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello Piacerebbe! Technically, you are allowed to do so, but it's very unlikely that you have the necessary expertise to do so successfully, yet! Creating a new article from scratch is the most difficult task on Wikipedia there is; you need a good working knowledge of how the mechanics of Wikipedia work, what the rules are governing what your text should, may and may not say (especially if its a Biography of a living person), and the general skill of crafting an appropriate non-fiction article (which you may already have if you've written non-fiction to a publishable standard elsewhere). Editing existing articles is one of the best ways to learn a lot of this.

Some editors liken creating an article to building a house (which needs good foundations, a good structural plan, the right materials and the skills to put them together), others to playing a concerto (where you need to be able to read music, play an instrument, and co-ordinate with the other musicians).

Other editors here have more expertise in guiding you to various policies, essays, exercises and other advice that will help you (there's a lot), so I'll leave that to them. Best of luck. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.65.29 (talk) 22:55, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Piacerebbe: No, from a technical standpoint, you must be autoconfirmed to create new pages. Even if you were, I highly suggest that you don't write an article right away, but rather, gain experience by editing existing articles first. Writing brand new articles is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia that requires a large amount of knowledge about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I suggest you to first complete The Wikipedia Adventure first, which is a tutorial about how things work around here. Then, after you gain more experience, read WP:YFA and proceed from there. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 22:59, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I certainly agree that writing an acceptable Wikipedia article is not as easy as many eager new editors imagine, but in my opinion, it is nowhere near as difficult as building a house or playing a concerto. I wrote my first Wikipedia article Dirk van Erp in 2009, about a month after I had registered my Wikipedia account, and had only made 15 previous edits. On the other hand, I had spent months reading Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and had been a published freelance writer for over 30 years. Preparation is very important. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:50, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Obviously no-one assets that it is as difficult. The point is that as with those activities, one needs a grasp of the complexity of the task, and of the appropriate skills, knowledge and required procedures involved. I myself have professional experience of researching for and editing others' non-fiction MSS, but am less adept at writing my own material from scratch, which is why I stick to copyediting and answering queries rather than creating new articles. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.65.29 (talk) 08:12, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Question about meter/metre throughout wikipedia articles

Hello, I was just wondering if there is a guideline recommending the use of metre v.s. meter thoughout articles. I have seen that some articles, such as freestyle swimming use "meter", while others such as 100 metres freestyle use "metre". Thanks!

Sincerely,
Rafaelmanman (talk) 18:07, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Rafaelmanman: The relevant guideline is WP:ENGVAR. In short, there is no requirement for uniformity within Wikipedia as a whole, but each article should use a consistent spelling. Deor (talk) 18:30, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I have noticed that for a while. It reminds me of this one thing in the article Athenian Democracy, where it referred to the size of the quorum as 6000 people, but the courts as up to 6,000 people; notice how one has a comma, and the other doesn't. Also, maybe on the front of the page can be a thing saying wherever it is used by a British or American person using the article (Or something like that, I don't know)? And what if it like autocorrected the language to you, so it would auto-translate (so like if you marked yourself as "American", and you were reading an article that included the word "metre", then it could be corrected to "meter", but only in your view. And it shouldn't be like the 'white to harmless' thing; it should stay as "metre" if there is something signifying that it should not be corrected) and therefore you would see the translation. This would maybe evolve into people using one central Wikipedia, instead of language differed ones. This could also do stuff like changing "mile" to "kilometer" or "kilometre", and I'm American, but I use "kilometer". So it would do stuff like that. This is all very complex and probably will be very hard to insert into Wikipedia, but it could significantly help people. Pikiwedia98461 (talk) 18:19, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Pikiwedia98461: Please refrain from creating a new question when responding, and click on the "edit source" link next to the heading of the section you want to reply to. Also remember to sign by adding ~~~~ at the end of your posts.
Articles with obvious national ties will use the appropriate variant, while others usually have {{Use American English}} or similar displayed when editing. Changing variants dependent on user would require Javascript or similar scripts, which is, in my opinion, wholly unnecessary and needlessly complicated. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:34, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for telling me that. Pikiwedia98461 (talk) 18:53, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Changing variants dependent on user would require Javascript or similar scripts, which is, in my opinion, wholly unnecessary and needlessly complicated. If some people feel strongly enough about English varieties to care, it would be helpful to them to have an "automated translation" switcher (as long as the default is to not alter the actual text of the articles), similar to how we give instructions in Talk:Muhammad/FAQ Q3 as to how to hide images. It would be quite easy to script wholesale word replacements, but the problem is that an automated tool is going to fail on certain cases; for instance, you do not want the Aerial Lift Bridge to appear as the "aerial elevator bridge" to a GB reader.

For that reason, changing spelling variants is explicitly listed as something that should not be done by a bot in WP:SPELLBOT. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:59, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Featured article

Adding Photos

Putting link in both infobox and first use or mention in article

addition to Wiki article "List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft"

Tense in captions

Is there a preferred tense when captioning depictions of, broadly speaking, the past? Some examples to illustrate:

(from World Trade Center (1973–2001))

The original complex in March 2001. The tower on the left, with antenna spire, was 1 WTC. The tower on the right was 2 WTC. All seven buildings of the WTC complex are partially visible. The red granite-clad building left of the Twin Towers was the original 7 World Trade Center. In the background is the East River.

A fireball rises in the immediate aftermath of United Airlines Flight 175 hitting the South Tower during the September 11 attacks.

(from Arecibo Telescope)

A detailed view of the beam-steering mechanism. The triangular platform at the top was fixed, and the azimuth arm rotated beneath it. To the right was the Gregorian sub-reflector, and to the left was the remains of the 96-foot-long (29 m) line feed tuned to 430 MHz (destroyed by Hurricane Maria). Also to the right was the catwalk and part of the rectangular waveguide that brought the 2.5 MW 430 MHz radar transmitter's signal up to the focal region.

Panoramic view of the Arecibo radio telescope primary dish. The radar transmitters can be seen at the base of the dish.

"The tower was" versus "a fireball rises", "the platform was" versus "transmitters can be seen". I looked at the style manual, but WP:CAPTION doesn't mention tenses and WP:TENSE doesn't mention captions, so no immediate help there.

Of course, captions don't really need verbs in the first place: "The original complex in March 2001." So the question need not come up at all. But while that works well for individual sentences, it doesn't hold up as well when applied throughout a paragraph. And a past tense is of course required when referring to something that happened before the photograph was taken, like the "destroyed by Hurricane Maria" parenthetical.

I like present tense elsewhere, though. On the one hand, this can simply be considered a case of historical present, especially when it is natural to think of the subject matter as an event rather than an entity, like "a fireball rises". On the other hand, the choice of tense entails a choice of frame of reference: Using the past suggests we're talking about the thing; using the present suggests we're talking about the picture. And that we're typically doing the latter is shown by the use of directional terms, which have meaning only in that context: The "right" in "to the right was the catwalk" is about its location in the picture, not its location in reality. And as the picture exists in the present, saying that "the catwalk is to the right" is arguably sounder than that it "was to the right".

Granted, a similar argument can be made vice versa: "In the background was the East River" could be justified by noting that even though the East River exists in the present, "in the background" establishes the frame of reference as the picture, not reality, and the picture was taken in the past. Unless the taking of the picture was somehow a notable event in and of itself, though, that perspective would be a rather peculiar one to adopt, surely.

Thoughts?

- 2A02:560:42A1:700:E8EB:87DF:3948:D496 (talk) 13:20, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Interesting points to mull over there! I think there is no single answer as to which is the correct tense to use in any caption - so much depends on context. Regarding the beam-steering mechanism photo of the radio telescope, my take-away impression from the tense used is that the device no longer exists or can be seen in that form, and thus the past tense is acceptable there. It would equally be OK to caption an image as "Beam steering mechanism prior to its destruction in the storm of 1980. The beam sits upon the widget which is mounted on the flange-bracket" i.e. having set the context (the past), it's then OK to describe the image using the present tense.

I'm also happy with the present tense being used in the fireball photo, as a date context is given, not only in the caption itself, but no doubt within the article about the event. We know something happened in 2001, and the photo caption describes what is happening at that point back in time. We, the viewers, are being taken back in time to that point by means of the caption text, and thus we are now being invited to look at those events as they are happening by means of the present tense. And I'm fine with that in these examples you've shown us. Good photos and well-worded captions can, and should, give life, interest and relevance to an article. Obviously all photos show a past moment in time, and objects different in their permanence, so I think judgement has to be used, as well as an understanding of how the photo is being deployed and interpreted within the article. The key test in all cases, I feel, is whether your mind jars as you read a caption or an article. If it doesn't, and if it makes sense, then it will have probably been using the correct tense. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:46, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Nick Moyes, and I think that the captions above are fine. If I really wanted to be pedantic, I'd write "Also to the right were the catwalk and part of the rectangular waveguide". Maproom (talk) 14:58, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Employing an untensed opening like "beam steering mechanism prior to its destruction" to re-frame the tensed remainder of the description may well be the most elegant solution available in English. Nice! :)

- 2A02:560:42A1:700:E8EB:87DF:3948:D496 (talk) 15:13, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

The word "white"

Hello, everyone. I replaced the word "white" with "harmless" in an article, but it was reverted. Does English Wikipedia currently see no problem with using the word "white" to mean "trustworthy", "do no harm", etc.? Kj4bFan (talk) 12:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I think in the article you edited "white" refers to skin colour, so it makes zero sense for you to replace with the word "harmless" unless you are intentionally being racist, in which case you will be blocked. Polyamorph (talk) 12:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

There is no way that edit is racist. And that's the problem with any idea of blocking racists. In this day and age, more and more people are being labeled as racists (and ruined for it) for being genuinely NOT racist; their "crime" is, they seek to treat everyone the same way. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry what now? The edit made no sense. And neither does your rant on not blocking racists. Polyamorph (talk) 21:10, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Far more useful would be blocking people who throw around accusations of "racist" willy-nilly, and accompany them with blanket threats. Sense or no sense, racism didn't enter into it until you brought it in. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:35, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I presume this was the diff. The sentence could/should be rephrased, but your way made no sense. Johnbod (talk) 12:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Kj4bFan: If you haven't done so already, I suggest you follow the reference and read pages 448-451 of Reynolds' book, and then ensure that the Wikipedia article accurately summarizes what is stated in the book. If (like me) you don't have access to the book, then I suggest you don't change the wording. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you all for your comments. I have read the chapter in question in the source before, using DeepL, but I didn't find it natural in the context that the word appeared in the sense of "of the white race," and I thought it was used to indicate that they had no dangerous objects. I have a lot to learn about the English language, so I'll avoid getting involved in this part of the article any further. My apologies, and thank you again.--Kj4bFan (talk) 13:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Kj4bFan—If you have the source to hand, what is the specific wording they use? It might be that the sentence should be re-written to be clearer; as it originally stood I understood as it caucasian and would not have read it as "harmless" (like in the sense of "a white lie"), but if you saw this as the interpretation it does leave open the possibility that our wording is not clear enough. If you have the original quote we can work out whether anything could be improved. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 14:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. It seems that another person has since changed the expression to a new one, so I have nothing more to say. But just in case, I will post the relevant chapter for your reference. Please note that the source is from the 2008 edition, while the one shown here is from the 2013 edition, like the one I have. https://books.google.com/books/about/Energy_Flash.html?hl=en&id=CXPZyYHLd-kC --Kj4bFan (talk) 12:03, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, the relevant chapter starts here. 20 TWO STEPS BEYOND --Kj4bFan (talk) 11:54, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Previews are unavailable, unfortunately, tMay be a regional difference. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 15:37, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your confirmation and report. Okay, so I'll just quote one paragraph, although it may not be sufficient.

Like most UK garage clubs, Twice as Nice bans trainers, jeans, baseball caps. Scene outsiders often criticize the dress code as elitist. Defenders of the policy argue that it’s good to encourage people to make an effort, and that the dress code keeps trouble out. Actually, the only people deterred by the garage veto on trainers and jeans are scruffy but harmless white college kids. And everybody knows that gangstas like to dress expensive – which is why there are metal detectors on Twice as Nice’s doors.
—Simon Reynolds in Energy Flash

--Kj4bFan (talk) 13:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia Teahouse! For future purposes, what I would suggest is to mention something along the line "Sorry for any mistakes, English is not my first language" to prevent any confusions/incorrect assumptions. Also I won't say "Do not eveer edit that article in your life" as you may have thought as always, be careful.--LostCitrationHunter (talk) 15:47, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Question related to WP:BLPCRIME

In the article Sameer Wankhede a recent arrest of one actor's son is mentioned. Is it violating WP:BLPCRIME? Eevee01^(talk) 14:52, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Eevee01: Good question, and welcome to the Teahouse. I think probably 'yes' is the answer. There is no date to give context to the article. It simply states:

He is leading the investigation of Cordelia drug case involving Joe Bloggs, son of [wikilinked] Bollywood actor Fred Bloggs.[ref]

Fred Bloggs is wikilinked to an existing article, so I might rephrase it as:

In 2021 he led an investigation of the Cordelia drug case^{[clarification needed]} involving a member of the family of [wikilinked] Bollywood actor Fred Bloggs.[ref]

However, if this unexplained "Cordelia case" is just some minor event, and not a major investigation with good news coverage, I might have thought it best to simply remove the sentence and ref entirely from the article. Context, as always, is important. Assuming the article is not deleted, this could be discussed further on the talk page, and consensus reached. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:12, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes Thank you for your quick response. He was arrested on 3 October 2021. It is not that huge event. I have already started a new discussion in the talk page of the said article. If no one replies or objects, then I'll remove it. Eevee01^(talk) 15:24, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Eevee01 OK. Feel free to copy my comment over from here if it helps, or supply a diff, if you prefer. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:44, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@User:Eevee01, yes, good question, and I agree completely, so I've taken the liberty of truncating the sentence, to say that the subject of the article is involved in the Cordelia drugs case. Yes, the statement was referenced, but we have no idea whether this drugs case will ever be notable. WP is not a newspaper, and we don't have to be hot on the trail of the story. We are writing truth about notable things for posterity, not hot celebrity gossip. The accused is actually rather far removed from the article; he's a defendant nicked by the subject, and the subject's article is being discussed for deletion anyway. The accused is only notable for being the offspring of someone notable. All in all, it's far too soon to know if any of this lot is worthy of an article in WP, and until then, you're quite right, we have to be careful about BLP. The story may be true, but it may be disproportionate to advertise the alleged offence here, now. So let's wait and see. Elemimele (talk) 16:05, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft: Muddy (film)

Constructive edits

Editing

New here

Hi! I was wondering how to add categories to a page.

Fotos hochladen in Wikipedia.: Hallo und grüß Gott, kann ich einfach Fotos von mir gemacht zb der Antonskirche in 1100 Wien auf der dazugehörigen Seite von Wikipedia hochladen, damit sich meine Menschen ein umfangreicheres Bild selbst machen können dazu? Danje und 🧡 Gruß aus Wien

2A02:8388:15C0:9800:28BD:8FE3:F980:6BAF (talk) 10:53, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

If you intend to edit German WP, you should ask there, this is English WP, and you are expected to communicate in English. If you have photos of the church that you have taken with your own camera, you can upload them on Wikimedia Commons, and then they can be used on WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:06, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Fragen zur deutsche Wikipedia sind hier. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:06, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Fotos, die du selbst gemacht hast, solltest du hier bei Wikimedia Commons hochladen (das ist das gemeinsame Medien-Repository für alle Wikipedia-Projekte). Dazu benötigst du allerdings ein kostenloses Benutzerkonto (die Angabe einer Email-Adresse ist freiwillig). Hochgeladene Bilder kannst du anschließend dann in passenden Artikeln einbinden. Wie das geht, finderst du hier erklärt. Grüße ⌘_hugarheimur 04:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

There's no German wikipedia teahouse. This is the previous one but it was terminated... so i suggest using google translation--LostCitrationHunter (talk) 16:37, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@LostCitrationHunter: The German Wikipedia has a help desk at de:Wikipedia:Fragen zur Wikipedia, and Commons has a German help page at commons:Help:Contents/de. GoingBatty (talk) 19:45, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

2A02:8388:15C0:9800:28BD:8FE3:F980:6BAF Guten Morgen!

1)Gehe zur Seite und klicken Sie zuerst auf "Bearbeiten" oder "Edit" oben in der Mitte der Seite.

2)Klicken Sie dann auf "Einfügen" oder "Insert", die sich ebenfalls oben in der Mitte der Seite befindet.

3)Klicken Sie auf "Bilder und Medien" oder "Photos and Media"

4)Klicken Sie auf "Hochladen" oder "Upload".

5)Klicken Sie abschließend auf "Datei hochladen“ oder "Upload file“ und wählen Sie Ihr Kirchenfoto aus. Vergessen Sie nicht, auf "Das ist meine Arbeit" oder "This is my work" zu klicken. Liebe Vereinigte Arabische Emirate--LostCitrationHunter (talk) 16:37, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Help with establishing notability

I have been working on this entry on an important public historian: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Peter_Benes&action=submit. As you'll see from the Talk, one editor (much to my surprise) dismissed Notability outright; another has engaged in a more thoughtful exchange, but the conversation still seems to be distracted, I think, with questions about whether the "best book" awards cited are themselves "notable," etc. But the central premise for Notability here not the publication record per se, but rather that the subject of this entry is the founder of an important scholarly organization that itself already has an entry (the person is also a highly-respected historian whose publications have consistently won awards, so that is part of the entry, but it's not the basis for Notability in and of itself), so I'm just puzzled about these questions. The entry to me looks completely consistent with other entries on prominent historians. I'd love to bring this work to a close--and would welcome any help that could be offered here! Mrmedit (talk) 15:44, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mrmedit: Welcome to the Teahouse! There are many articles that do not meet Wikipedia's current guidelines (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS), and you're welcome to improve them. Regarding Draft:Peter Benes, per WP:BASIC, which are the three best independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of Benes? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Mrmedit. A reference that says "Boston Globe, Sept 30, 1982" is of almost no value. The reference should contain the title of the article and the name of the author, and if the content is not available online, the page number. You have a lot of URLs in your references, which should not be visible. Please take a close look at Referencing for beginners. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:08, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks to you both for your quick replies! I added author/title to the Globe references (and will look at the referencing guide re: the URLs when I have more time). On "significant coverage," do you mean other biographical entries already online elsewhere? I do not know of any other in-depth career overviews already in print or online; the career achievement awards (Bay State Legacy Award and AASLH) include brief citations that articulate why the recognition (one statewide, one national) was given, which is what I thought would be most relevant to the Notability question, but they don't (alas) provide a career overview. There are several publications that speak to one element or another (book reviews that describe impact on scholarship, awards that attest to significance) but not a summary, that I know of. Mrmedit (talk) 16:55, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mrmedit: For more information of "significant coverage", see WP:SIGCOV. GoingBatty (talk) 19:49, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Citing newspaper article found on NewsBank

Hello,

What is the proper way to cite a newspaper article that I found using NewsBank (access to NewsBank from public library)? A template and example would be very helpful.

Thanks! Trillkat (talk) 15:39, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Trillkat: Welcome to the Teahouse! You could use the {{cite news}} template. Template:Cite news mentions NewsBank in the description of the |via= parameter. I quick search for "NewsBank" shows that the Sam Quek article has several examples of references to articles on NewsBank. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:47, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: thank you for the reply. The Quek article was very helpful since I was also wondering about the url-access bit with regards to NewsBank. How does the 'quick search' feature work that you were able to find an article with NewsBank sources? Thanks again!Trillkat (talk) 17:03, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Trillkat: At the top of any Wikipedia page, type "NewsBank" and Wikipedia will suggest several articles. Instead, click on the last entry: "Search for pages containing NewsBank". GoingBatty (talk) 19:48, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Oh, smart... Thanks for the tip! Trillkat (talk) 19:56, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Trillkat. It might have helped had you given us a url to a news article you wanted to cite. But either of our two editing tools have a 'Cite' button and a 'News template' built into them, including the ability to paste in a url and get it to automatically populate most of the fields. You just fill in the rest. I have just used Source Editor to reply to you, and there's a Cite button which lets me select the relevant template template (book, website, news, journal). You can do the same with WP:Visual Editor, though the template buttons are laid out differently. Either way, you might make a statement and support it with a reference, thus:

Nick Moyes said that he had some sympathy for Mr Hatton's concerns, but rejected the logic of his argument.^[2]

Just don't do what I did when I first started here many years ago, and simply tried to manually complete all the cite fields from scratch by copying another reference and editing it to fit. Just use the cite button to make your life simple and quick. Does that address your question? Nick Moyes (talk) 15:58, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

References

[1]
https://journals.lww.com/optvissci/pages/default.aspx
[2]
"Pigeon fancier slams peregrines". BBC. 7 September 2010. Retrieved 27 October 2021.

Hi, Nick Moyes. Thanks for your quick response. I will try and use the cite button when I make my edit, sounds a lot easier than using wordpad lol. Thanks again!Trillkat (talk) 17:03, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Trillkat You’re most welcome. See WP:REFBEGIN for more help in this area. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:15, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

correcting wrong information

publishing articles

Copy-Edit and rephrasing

Marriage certificates??

Ana Marinovic appears to have got married, and an IP address and GavinReed2021 have attempted to modify the article about her to reflect her married name. These changes have been consistently reverted, presumably as unreferenced. On the Talk page, GavinReed2021 has suggested that he could produce her marriage certificate. This is, I think, a good-faith offer. I've made him aware that if he's close enough to her to have her marriage certificate he almost certainly has a conflict of interest that he must declare. But the problem remains: a marriage certificate is a primary source and I'd have no idea how to cite it anyway. What are we supposed to do in circumstances like this? Do we accept an inaccurate encyclopaedia because we can't prove she's married, or do we accept primary evidence? Elemimele (talk) 20:37, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

My initial reaction is that the issue isn't so much that a marriage certificate is a primary source, Elemimele, but that it's not a published source, which is a requirement of WP:VERIFY. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:39, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Good point. He's also mentioned that they're going to update her website, but my worry there is that her website is what she says about herself, so I don't know if we'd accept that either? This must surely happen fairly often? There are loads of people who have at some point been notable enough to get an article, but who are not now notable enough for independent news sources to rush to their weddings. Elemimele (talk) 20:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Per WP:PRIMARY, we accept primary sources for straightforward statements as fact, and I think a marriage would qualify as that (I'm more familiar with the case of dates of birth, for which a primary source is fine; marriages strike me as similar). Cordless Larry (talk) 20:47, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

If it is of encyclopaedic interest it will have been reported in independent reliable sources; until and unless those are cited it should not be in the page. People are strongly discouraged from sending in personal documents, partly because anyone can make one in Photoshop in about six minutes, and partly because it puts us in the position of having violated their privacy (even more so if the person providing the document is not the subject). And no, Cordless Larry, I don't think a primary source should ever be used for a date of birth, as we know that's something that people routinely lie about; it's an area where independent sources should always be provided – isn't it? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:29, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

People do indeed lie about it, Justlettersandnumbers, but I think that we nonetheless accept self-published sources for dates of birth - see the final paragraph at WP:DOB. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:39, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Based on the above, I've updated the article to use her married name, but stating her maiden name clearly (it remains with her maiden name as the title, which is probably appropriate as her main claim to notability is probably her sporting career under her maiden name); I have used her website as the (primary) reference. Not sure if I've inserted it in the right place! I honestly think this is the best that can be done. Thank you for the advice above. Elemimele (talk) 07:01, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Tangential comment: I was interested to discover that marriage certificates include the married names of the bride(s) and groom(s) in some jurisdictions! I never knew that. --bonadea contributions talk 07:09, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Elemimele a marriage certificate is a local government document, usually kept at a courthouse, and a copy is accessible to all, not just someone with close ties to the married couple. (Births, deaths and marriage records are considered public records, and accessible by the public.) When I was editing the article about actor Jack Orrison I wanted his 1937 marriage license (which had his marriage certification attached to it) as a backup source to verify published references I'd obtained. I went to the county courthouse website and ordered a copy of the marriage license to be mailed to me. I referenced it as: Westmoreland Co., PA Marriage License Docket No. 56, page 125, the docketing location listed on the license. I hope this is of help to you, if you obtain a copy of a marriage certificate. Karenthewriter (talk) 15:07, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Karenthewriter, thanks, that's well worth knowing. In this instance, since the subject's personal web-page has now been updated to include her married name, I've used that as a primary-source-supporting-straightforward-fact, and no one has reverted it yet. Editing WP is educational! Elemimele (talk) 15:12, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele,that looks ok to me per WP:ABOUTSELF. If she wrote, "btw, I'm married", that'd be fine too (but per same policy not name of spouse). The marriage certificate, however, falls on WP:BLPPRIMARY. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:43, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Daunted by First Contribution

I would like to contribute a page on an important artist who died in 1981 and who is not mentioned in Wikipedia. I have two questions which I hope people will be able to help me with.

The first is: I have written the proposed content in collaboration with another person, and all facts, information and quotes etc have their sources in original published material which is cited. However, much (not all) of this published material was written by me or quotes me. Is this a conflict of interest and a big no-no with Wikipedia, or is it acceptable? What if my collaborator submits it instead of me?

Secondly, do we have to format the content in the wikipedia style? I have looked at how to do this with the formatting marks/coding needed to create larger font sizes and bold lettering etc, but feel it would be much easier for someone who is already familiar with doing this. We would prefer to submit the content with sub-headings, images and citations if possible, but will do it ourselves if necessary.

This artist is an 'outsider artist' of some importance. There has been quite some interest in his work both in his country of origin, new Zealand, and internationally, but there is no place where the public information about him is gathered comprehensively in summary. I feel Wikipedia is the place to do this.

Thanks for any help. Featurefax (talk) 20:33, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Featurefax: Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. To learn the Wikipedia style, you might be interested in Help:Introduction and The Wikipedia Adventure. Editing other articles where you do not have a conflict of interest (COI) is a great way to learn as well. Since you have a COI pertaining to this artist, you should declare it on your user page and then follow the instructions at Help:Your first article. If the article is accepted, you will not be able to edit the article directly, but could make suggestions on the article's talk page. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:58, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Featurefax In addition to what @GoingBatty has helpfully suggested, please be aware that there are many interpretations of the word "published". Research posted on a personal blog is 'published', but is not acceptable here as it has no editorial control/oversight. It would just be Original Reserach, which we do not accept. Equally, a self-published (vanity) book would also not be regarded as a Reliable Source, whereas a properly published book is more likely to be. A museum or academic institution supporting such published material would give it a lot more sway. Without knowing more about the subject and the precise sources you've produced, it is hard to give a specific answer. Please assess this person against our notability criteria to see if they stand a chance of having an article here. These are at WP:NARTIST and WP:NBIO.

It matters much less if your layout is poor. Providing the content and sources are good, the article will be likely to be approved. Someone else will probably be happy to fix layout or style issues after that. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:48, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

How to become an Editor and Administrator

What are the requirements for one to become a verified editor and/or administrator so that they can decline or rather accept Drafts, and also earn badges? Motlatlaneo (talk) 01:21, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Motlatlaneo: There's several different topics you've mentioned here, so I'll do my best to disambiguate them.

You are an editor already! Anyone who registers an account could be seen as a "verified" editor (as compared to those who edit without registering an account), but there is technically no such thing as a "verified" editor in the way that there is on Twitter, for example.
An administrator has tools like being able to block other users, and it takes quite some time and effort to become one. An editor does need to become an administrator in order to decline or accept drafts–they only need to become an AFC reviewer.
You may be referring to badges that you've seen Teahouse hosts earn. These are Wikipedia:Awards that can be given by anyone to anyone.

Let us know if you have any additional questions! ––FormalDude talk 01:28, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Reviewers accept or decline (or reject) drafts. AfC reviewers must have:

a Wikipedia account at least 90 days old.
a minimum of 500 undeleted edits to articles (this is not the same as total number of edits).
thoroughly read and understood the reviewing instructions.
a demonstrated understanding of the policies and guidelines mentioned in the reviewing instructions, including the various notability guidelines.
reasonable evidence of understanding the deletion policy (experience in areas such as CSD/AfD/PROD or page curation, while not mandatory, are beneficial).
a willingness and ability to respond in a timely manner to questions about their reviews.
- This in answer to your Draft question. David notMD (talk) 02:18, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

You probably don't need to worry about becoming an administrator, Motlatlaneo; but if you're interested, you might look at a recent example. Here, we see Blablubbs' trial by questions on Blablubbs' way to becoming an administrator. (If you're like me, you'll have difficulty understanding a number of the questions, let alone knowing how best to answer them.) Aside from having done a lot of excellent administrative work, Blablubbs did most of what we now see in the article Wolfdietrich Schnurre. -- Hoary (talk) 04:02, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary: If you meant to link to Blablubbs' RFA, you didn't.

@Motlatlaneo: Your account is 4 years old but you have only 9 edits. Becoming an administrator requires proof of a wide diversity of experience in your contribution history, which typically requires thousands of edits in many different areas of the Wikipedia project (such as deletion discussions, vandalism reporting, dispute resolution, article protection, good article reviews, and so forth). Then you go through a week-long trial by the community, which I personally found to be a stressful experience that I wouldn't care to repeat, especially since all of this is unpaid volunteer work. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:14, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Anachronist, I didn't? (It looks to me like that RfA.) My own "trial by the community" was pretty painless, but that was before the process became oddly farcical. If I were to undergo it now, its demands for stamina and solemnity would be too much; my responses would probably be desultory and irreverent. -- Hoary (talk) 05:22, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary: Ah, you did. I didn't see the link before Blablubbs' username in your message.

Yeah, I looked at your RFA, which predates mine by about 5 years. Yours looked pretty straightforward, short and sweet. In mine, I got fed up with the "deletionist" label baselessly being bandied about, and tried to express my displeasure politely. I think few people are willing to run for bureaucrat now because of all the drama one would go through to get a fairly innocuous user right. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:32, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Help with creating new page

I want to create at least a stub on the Pokemon Sirfetch'd but I'm not very good at editing. I can get the info down and organize it well but everything else I'll need help with. Tips are helpful. Thanks! UB Blacephalon (talk) 02:04, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Blacephalon! I'm not sure if a new article on that would be warranted by our policies on what qualifies for a stand-alone page. We even have WP:Pokémon test, an essay that speaks specifically to this. Regards, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:35, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

But what about all the other stand alone pages? Like Wooloo and that? Plus Sirfetch'd is quite popular now... UB Blacephalon (talk) 03:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Blacephalon: Generally Pokemon need to have made a significant impact outside of the games and shows to the point that reliable sources report on them. Pikachu gets one because of its fame as the series' mascot, and Wooloo gets one because of the intense fan response. Sirfetch'd might be able to have its own standalone if it can be demonstrated that its reception is elevated beyond other species. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 10:50, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Well there's plushes, the anime, I think a couple people taking about it online, the long awaited hype, and more. I see no reason why it wouldn't be able to get its own page. I just need help at least trying to do it... UB Blacephalon (talk) 16:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Pretty sure other Pokemon like Bulbasaur, Cyndaquil, and Mareep also have merchandise and appear in related media. Sirfetch'd would need to be more notable than that. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:02, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Does youtube count? What sites can count as notable? UB Blacephalon (talk) 03:36, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Blacephalon: For YouTube, see WP:RSPYT. For examples of other discussions about reliable sources, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. GoingBatty (talk) 04:05, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Alright! Next, how do I edit a sandbox to here it looks like an article? UB Blacephalon (talk) 23:07, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Blacephalon: Hi there! Help:Your first article has a lot of good resources for you. GoingBatty (talk) 03:26, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Kachwaha

Clarity on why my article is rejected

My article draft is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Self_Insert and someone said that my article fails musician notability guidelines. I am confused because rule 1 of those guidelines states "Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself", and I have listed two reliable published secondary sources on this band both with notable mention in my draft. Is the issue that I need more sources, or are my existing sources bad? If so why? Jimfish000 (talk) 04:19, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Aside from sourcing, the article also needs to indicate WHY the subject is important. It says the band released their EP, but doesn't say the importance of it. How is this band different from other garage bands that their friends say is cool? That's what the article should also have. I'm sure there are other things it should have that the notability gurus here can add onto. WhoAteMyButter (📨_talk│📝^contribs) 04:55, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

I based my article on this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glocca_Morra_(band) which is another underground band I like. That article doesn't really mention why the group is important, just lists their releases and basic info. The only reason the band I am writing about is important is because they have a sizeable underground fanbase. How would I convey that?Jimfish000 (talk) 05:14, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Jimfish000, perhaps Glocca Morra (band) should be deleted. Thanks for bringing that to our attention. English Wikipedia currently has 6,401,222 articles , and I estimate that at least one million of them should either be deleted or completely rewritten. The existence of one poor quality article is not a justication for writing more poor quality articles. Instead, those older articles should either be improved or deleted, but that is a lot of work and takes some time. We work on that 24/7/365. The only relevant question is whether this specific band meets the notability Criteria for musicians and ensembles. To demonstrate that this band has a "sizeable underground fanbase", you need to provide a reference to a reliable, independent source that makes that specific assertion. You cannot make thst claim based on you own study of social media posts and the like. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:59, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

keeping track of copyright permission requests

I asked about this at the village pump (edited by Pikiwedia98461 (talk) 18:55, 26 October 2021 (UTC)) a while ago but didn't get a response. So my question is: do we have a place where we keep track of copyright permission requests?

c:Commons:WikiProject Permission requests only shows a handful of entries. This suggests either 1) people don't really bother to ask authors for a release of rights or 2) most of those requests are not publicly recorded. If someone else has requested permission to publish a work under a free license and the copyright holder declines, then it would be useful for others to know so that they don't waste time trying to contact the same author. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:21, 26 October 2021 (UTC) Ixfd64 (talk) 18:21, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Ixfd64: Welcome to the Teahouse! Since your question is about Commons, I suggest you ask it on Commons. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 18:54, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thanks for the response. However, this wasn't a Commons-specific question. I was wondering if we had a local page for keeping track of permission requests because we would need to prove a file is free or get permission to publish it under a free license before it could be transferred to Commons. For example, if the author of a book cover agrees to release it under a free license, then we would need ~~OTRS~~ VRT permission before Commons will accept that file. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:58, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Ixfd64: I believe most explicit copyright permission are received by directly contacting c:Commons:Volunteer Response Team (often via release generator) instead of going through the Wikiproject. Images with a permission are marked with c:Template:PermissionTicket, and there are more than one million: c:Category:Items with OTRS permission confirmed. MKFI (talk) 06:40, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I figured most of the requests aren't public. It would certainly be nice to have a public record of such requests. If someone has already contacted the copyright holder of a non-free image, then I'd hate to bother them with a second request while the first one is in progress. I've seen users document such requests on talk pages, but not everyone does this. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:36, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Ixfd64: Images with a request in progress should be marked with c:Template:OTRS pending. MKFI (talk) 06:05, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Uploading an image for a novel drug

Confusion over certain policies on WikiProjects, Portals and YouTube referencing

Hi Teahouse,

How do WikiProjects work in terms of media, popular culture et al? Editors and visitors alike are confused by how they work! The same goes for Portals. Can I create portals for Barbie and Mattel, since they are the less popularly pressed subjects, bubbling under "hot"/popular portals like Disney, Anime/Manga and Cartoon. Is YouTube-only referencing welcome on WP articles? Barbie: Dreamtopia is one such example as all its media/components apart from the eponymous film/movie is YouTube-based. Fooliard (talk) 21:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Fooliard: For the first question, if the info at WP:PORTALS isn't sufficient, try asking at Wikipedia talk:Portal/Guidelines. Likewise for WP:WikiProjects and its related talk page, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. The folks watching that page will be more versed on the nuances of creating categories. For the second, YouTube can be used to show that something exists, but doesn't show notability, since anyone can upload anything to the site. See WP:YOUTUBE. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:25, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I disagree somewhat with Timtempleton about YouTube although a large majority of YouTube content is unreliable and unfit for use on Wikipedia. Do not think of YouTube as a "source" but rather a means of communication like a printing press, a TV station, a fax machine or a text based internet page. In all such cases, most of what those means of communication produce is unreliable junk but some of it is produced by publishing organizations that are completely reliable. Consider a TV station that broadcasts soap operas and sitcoms at certain hours and highly respected news programs at other hours. The news shows are reliable sources but the other stuff is not. Accordingly, a YouTube video on the official YouTube channel of a reliable source like a newspaper, magazine, or academic organization or expert is a reliable source. Some random loudmouth spouting off from their family room on YouTube is not a reliable source. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:11, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: You’re right - I don’t spend enough time on YouTube but mostly see self-promoting videos cited here. I’ll defer to your greater experience with the site. Context is key. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 05:27, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Timtempleton, I spend a negligible amount of time on YouTube although occasionally my wife will ask me to watch a cute Boston Terrier video in her quest for a new puppy. I am highly skeptical of that site in general but there is a little bit of reliable content hosted there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:41, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Awhile back I used a YT video as ref at Barack Obama and nobody has removed it yet.. "Can I use YT as a source" is similar to "Can I use the internet as a source", WP:RSPYT has good guidance. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:46, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

iOS version History

Are you allowed to make an Edit request whilst being Extended-Confirmed or Auto-Confirmed?

Follow-up to Follow-up to WikiMedia Voting

Question on notability

Post a new Artist page on Wikipedia

Draft review Maya Lasker-Wallfisch

Draft:Maya Lasker-Wallfisch ... I struggle to understand the issues with this article, as it cites several independent newspaper articles (naming the authors) plus public radio broadcasts and the event section of institutions like the Jewish museum and a holocaust center.... any ideas? Draft:Maya Lasker-Wallfisch Fu-Lank (talk) 08:33, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Fu-Lank, to establish that the subject is notable, the draft will need to cite several reliable independent published sources with extensive discussion of her. Which three of the sources currently cited, in your opinion, best fulfil those criteria? Maproom (talk) 09:20, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Maproom #1 a radio feature on Deutschlandfunk Kultur (https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/maya-lasker-wallfisch-briefe-nach-breslau-die-grausame.950.de.html?dram:article_id=478394) (Germany's aequivalent of the BBC), #2 an article in weekly newspaper Der Freitag (https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/maya-lasker-wallfisch-briefe-nach-breslau-die-grausame.950.de.html?dram:article_id=478394) and #3 a review by MARTA KIJOWSKA on Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (25.07.2020), reprint here (https://www.buecher.de/shop/drittes-reich/briefe-nach-breslau/lasker-wallfisch-maya/products_products/detail/prod_id/57912916/ look for REZENSIONEN (=reviews), then click on 'mehr') Fu-Lank (talk) 10:20, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

reports what the subject has said, and so is not independent.
(assuming you meant to link to https://www.freitag.de/autoren/der-freitag/arbeit-am-trauma-1) reports what she has written, and so is not independent.
is a review of a book she has written. It does tell us about her, but only what the reviewer has learned from the book, so I don't think that counts as independent either. Maproom (talk) 14:45, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Maproom Thanks for finding the correct link and reading into the sources, but I still think there's a misunderstranding: The notability of the subject in my view is based on her being the author of a bestselling book (not based on the biographical details in that book). A book that was reviewed at length by at least two of the biggest german national newspapers (circulation/readers over 800,000), plus a weekly magazine, plus a radio feature on a public broadcast... all of these sources and the journalists behind the articles have no economic advantage from reporting (and certainly do a fair amount of fact checking according to the press code), so I still really struggle to classify these sources as "not independent". Plus the book was picked "book of the month" by a government institution (again without economic benefits, hence independent)... so the general question would be if the author of a book (biography or fictional) that was reviewed and recommended to well more than a million readers and radio listeners (by reputable media, not tabloid) does not qualifiy for a wp article? Is there a chance to get a few more people's opinion on that, as it would be the case with an article for deletion? Preferably admins who are familiar with German media and press landscape. I'd really appreciate that, thanks. Fu-Lank (talk) 08:42, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Two thoughts:

de:Wikipedia has an article de:Maya Lasker-Wallfisch. en:Wikiedia has a higher barrier to getting an article accepted than de:Wikipedia; but you maybe be able to find some useful sources, and other material, there.

Maybe her book Briefe nach Breslau is notable, even if by en:Wikipedia standards she isn't.

But I can't read German, so I can't really help you with this. Maproom (talk) 10:15, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I just looked up the notability guidelines and found these guidelines about Creative professionals:

Authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals: The person has created […] a significant or well-known work […]. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of […] multiple independent periodical articles or reviews; ... ... As the article fulfills the above mentioned criteria, I still think it doesnt deserve being deleted. Fu-Lank (talk) 12:57, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm fluent in German, so I had not trouble reading the sources. I have accepted the article. Vexations (talk) 14:34, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Find a Grave

In looking through the archived discussions on Find a Grave, I understand that the content is not a reliable source for images, locations, dates, etc; and is frowned upon for inclusion as such. However, I've noticed countless listings under External Links along side IMDB, IBDB, etc. Is there a WP policy against including this here; or is it OK? Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 05:04, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Maineartists: Welcome to the Teahouse! The documentation at Template:Find a Grave has some helpful information. GoingBatty (talk) 05:08, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Find a Grave is not considered a reliable source because it had no rigorous editorial control, contains user donated content, and many people with similar dates of birth and death share very similar names. Accordingly, it is both easy and incorrect to link to a John Jones Find a Grave listing for a man born in 1895 who died in 1957 because countless men with similar names died in that year and were born that year. On the other hand, some people have far more distinctive names and the information in the Find a Grave listing may identify the person decisively. This is a case where the source cannot be used to establish notability but, based on good editorial judgment, the source can be linked to with great caution. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:18, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Pinging Maineartists. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:19, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

For the usability or not of Find a Grave, see WP:Perennial_sources#Find_a_Grave; for ditto of IMDb, see WP:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#IMDb; for ditto of any other source of material that many editors are (rightly or wrongly) likely to cite, see the same page, WP:Perennial_sources, which lists the good, the bad and the execrable in alphabetical order. -- Hoary (talk) 06:52, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Hm. Not sure my question was understood. I understand Find a Grave should not be used as a source. I am simply asking: is there anything against placing it under External Links; as many WP articles do? Maineartists (talk) 11:31, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Per WP:EL content that is not suitable for inclusion can be added to an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy. I read that as; don't add external links to sites with known accuracy poblems. Vexations (talk) 11:45, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

I read that entirely differently. For instance, an article that claims a certain birth date that is questionable will explain in length all the sources that cite different birth dates, including Find a Grave because there is an image of the gravestone. When referenced correctly, it is supported by the above: "content that is not suitable for inclusion can be added to an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy. I'm merely asking whether it is permissible to add it under External Links as so many articles on BPs do. It has nothing to do with sourcing, citing, reliability, etc within the article itself. Maineartists (talk) 12:15, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

WP:Perennial_sources#Find_a_Grave, to which I pointed you, Maineartists, says Links to Find a Grave may sometimes be included in the external links section of articles, when the site offers valuable additional content, such as images not permitted for use on Wikipedia. (But please read that in the original context.) What remains unclear? -- Hoary (talk) 12:53, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Pretty much everything. There is just too much gray area in this allowance. This basically opens up anyone to simply include it in the external links based on this offering. What image could possibly be not allowed on WP except the head / grave stone? Here: WP:FINDAGRAVE-EL it states: rarely - "Sometimes, a link is acceptable because of a specific, unique feature or information that is not available elsewhere, such as valuable images of a grave". When is a grave a valuable image? It would seem this allowance has several loopholes that are not clear and can easily be misinterpreted. Allowing most anyone to simply include it in the external link section under this allowance. Maineartists (talk) 14:27, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Pinging Maineartists If I read your latest puzzlement correctly, I think the answer would be something like this. You can go and take a picture of a grave, upload it (properly annotated) to Wikimedia, then include it in an article where it's relevant. But a photograph on Find a Grave is probably not one you took (or you would just upload your photograph). So adding it to Wikipedia would be a copyright violation. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:36, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

WP:Academic and my draft

Hello everyone. I had created a draft which was moved to draft because it didn't have reliable sources. Drafts is this Draft:B Unnikrishnan (Academic). I was also asked to check criteria for academics. One of that is highly cited academic work. Check work here . There are many pages of academics that are short and don't have reliable sources. So why not this one? The person has papers that have even more than 500 citations. Why this discrimination? Mtpos (talk) 14:49, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mtpos: Welcome to the Teahouse! There are many articles that do not meet Wikipedia's current guidelines (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS), and you're welcome to improve them. It's possible to demonstrate that a person meets Wikipedia's notability criteria for academics in a short article (e.g. member/fellow of a prestigious scholarly society, named chair). Which of the criteria does Unnikrishnan meet? Also, could you please fix the link in reference #1? Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:41, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

You listed four journal articles for which he is one of scores of co-authors. That does nothing to confirm his notability. There need to be references that have content at length about him. David notMD (talk) 17:39, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

GoingBatty, The guidelines is saying (a) The most typical way of satisfying Criterion 1 is to show that the academic has been an author of highly cited academic work – either several extremely highly cited scholarly publications or a substantial number of scholarly publications with significant citation rates. As seen from their google scholar, they have been cited for around 6000 times. The top two articles are cited more than 500 times! See here No where in this academic guideline it is written that there should be in length content about the academic. Anyhow, if everyone feel it is not sufficient, let's just delete it. I can not keep working on just one article and worrying about it all the time. There is so much more that I can do here. Mtpos (talk) 14:20, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mtpos: Thank you! Your draft doesn't seem to show that his work has been highly cited, but I'm confident you could add it and then submit the draft for review. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:02, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Factual changes to the BDR Thermea page

BG colour

How to create project page for an editathon?

Hi, I’m a new user but have been asked to create a Wiki project page for a local editathon event at my university. Despite looking at the existing resources, it’s not clear to me how to create a project page. Could anyone offer clear steps or give instructions on how to get it started? 2600:6C44:1A3F:E5D9:11A1:64D7:51B5:B90F (talk) 13:12, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't have pages, for it is not a social media platform, it is an encyclopedia of articles about notable events that would be of interest to those outside of a local area. Please read WP:FIRST for help in creating your first article, WP:COI about declaring a conflict of interest, and WP:NOT for information on what Wikipedia is not. Then decide if the editathon is a notable event with at least 3 good references not associated with your University. Newspaper articles that aren't press releases would be good.

Start writing the article draft, adding a reference for every fact you include, and submit the draft for review. You'll need to be patient during the review process, for it can take a couple of months for a volunteer reviewer to get to your article. Best wishes on your first Wikipedia article draft. Karenthewriter (talk) 14:48, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

I think you've misunderstood the request here. They're asking about creating a project, not an article. I'm assuming they mean a WikiProject, in which case the guidance for creating one is found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Creating a WikiProject. I hope that helps. -- Fyrael (talk) 15:10, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Also just feel it's worth pointing out that Wikipedia in fact has many pages of many varieties. We're on a page right now. Articles are one type of page, but many others exist. -- Fyrael (talk) 15:22, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

There's lots of good information at Wikipedia:How to run an edit-a-thon. It appears that you would create a page in the "Wikipedia" space, not a new WikiProject. Happy editing!

GoingBatty (talk) 15:26, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

What should be the title?

How do I qualify, what is the criteria to have a song I wrote added to or included on the Wikipedia page for; 'Lists of Songs that Reference Elvis Presley'?