Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1144

 Courtesy link: Amber Fort

Amber Fort built by Meena dynasty.^[1] -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 17:15, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

@Karsan Chanda, welcome to the Teahouse. You may, then, discuss it on the talk page of the article. Regards. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk💬 Contribs✏️) 17:33, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

You appear to have answered your own question. Do you have another question? David notMD (talk) 17:31, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD Isn't this a reliable source? -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 02:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Not me area of knowledge/ David notMD (talk) 04:24, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Resolved

On July 19 2021, he released his first single, פחדן (IPA: [paχˈdan]; lit. 'Coward').

or

On July 19 2021, he released his first single, פחדן. (IPA: [paχˈdan]; lit. 'Coward')

 QuickQuokka ^[talk]

The first. Not the second. Danidamiobi (talk) 07:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Danidamiobi: Thanks! QuickQuokka ^[talk] 07:55, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Is there a possibility that on Facebook with the name "Danexit" with about 11,000 members find the withdrawal from the European Union good to show on the (English) "Danish withdrawal from the European Union" wikipedia page? Wname1 (talk) 08:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

See Talk:Danish_withdrawal_from_the_European_Union#Facebook_group. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I know RtL and LtR text together is super annoying and buggy, but can someone please help me fix citations #12 and #15?

I've opened it in Chromium, and the glitch isn't there. QuickQuokka ^[talk] 08:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello QuickQuokka! In citation 12 & 15 change website=אידיבי from the Hebrew text to website=www.edb.co.il & the citations will render properly. Hope this is of help! LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 09:32, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@LooksGreatInATurtleNeck: Thanks so much! I'll go try it out! QuickQuokka ^[talk] 09:35, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

As an experienced editor, I would have simply created the article for Draft:Filastine, but chose to go through the AfC process this time. Unfortunately, it was quickly [declined] by user User:HitroMilanese claiming lack of notability. I wonder if Hitro actually read the draft? Filastine exceeds the criteria at WP:NMUSICIAN, with the exception of chart positions, as it is not pop music. Filastine as a musician has a 25-year career, a dozen releases on multiple record labels, cultural significance in relation to the 1999 Seattle WTO protests, multiple international tours, and a large amount of independent press coverage from XLR8R, Vice, Pitchfork, New Internationalist, NPR and the BBC. Two of Filastine older projects even have articles already (¡Tchkung! and Infernal Noise Brigade). Furthermore, Filastine is not simply a musician, but also notable as an activist and video artist, all of which is well-supported by quality references. He is also "one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style", in this case Industrial hip hop, in which he has been mentioned for many years. This is far, far in excess of the WP:MUSICIAN criteria.

I could simply ignore Hitro and create the article myself, but in the interest of community process, I'd appreciate hearing from other experienced editors first. Ben (talk) 20:29, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

@Bdiscoe:, I don't understand what you meant by highly notable and exceeding the notability criteria of musicians. If you believe that the subject is meeting any of the criteria of WP:NMUSICIAN then simply state the number of that criterion. Hitro talk 21:01, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

THAT criteriON, or THOSE criteriA. Uporządnicki (talk) 21:03, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Grammar Police.:p Hitro talk 21:12, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

At a practical level, which three (or more) references do you identify as reliable source and about Filastine at some length, not just a short name mention? And the draft was Declined, not Rejected, which is more severe. Work on it and resubmit. Skipping AfC still means that all new articles get looked at by New Pages Patrol people, who could accept, kick back to draft, or even start an AfD. David notMD (talk) 21:13, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Refs 2, 9 and 10 look good. Third paragraph of career has a lot of event name dropping, but none of that is referenced. David notMD (talk) 21:25, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

2, 9 and 10 don't look good to me. They are all based on what Filastine has said to the journalist, and so not independent. Bdiscoe, to get this article accepted (or not deleted if you choose to move it to article space yourself), you're going to need to find several reliable independent published sources with extensive discussion of him. Writing here about what a great guy you think he is will do nothing to help. I'm not saying he isn't notable, in Wikipedia's sense; just that you're going to need to prove it. Maproom (talk) 23:03, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

• Generally (speaking) I’d like to add that WP:MUSICBIO is not a criteria per se in the sense most editors think it is, MUSICBIO serves as a (pointer) in the sense that meeting a criterion there is an indication of notability, and not that meeting any criterion there means automatic notability. Celestina007 (talk) 22:00, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Parts of refs 2, 9 an 10 are interview content and parts not. David notMD (talk) 04:35, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

• Hitro asked me to "state the number of that criterion" from WP:NMUSICIAN, which I thought was already clear as I quoted from it, but here goes, in bullet point form.

• 1. "subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works", this is well covered by prominent news coverage, which as pointed out, are more than just interviews.
• 4. "non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour", many of the refs concern Arka Kinari, which is exactly an international concert tour.
• 5. "two or more albums on a major [] or on one of the more important indie labels", discogs cited for these facts.
• 6. "reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles", as noted, both ¡Tchkung! and Infernal Noise Brigade are notable enough to be wiki articles.
• 7. "Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style", as noted above, Industrial hip hop over the course of 15 years.
• 10. "Has performed music for a work of media that is notable", the draft includes 5 works, one of which is notable enough to have a wiki article at ca:Idrissa. Crònica d'una mort qualsevol.

That's *six* points of criteria from the list which says "may be notable if they meet at least one". Furthermore, I'd like to point out again, which people seem to be missing, is that this isn't just a musician, as supported by the fact that only some of the references bother to talk about his music at all. This is an activist / video-multimedia artist, who is also a musician; his notability may cumulatively include music, but is not limited to it. I mean, his projects have won awards including from the bloody United Nations, already. I am open to any ways the article could be improved, but notability is clearly not the issue.

Frankly speaking, except criterion #1 which is highly debatable in this case, the subject does not appear to meet any of the listed criteria. The labels are not major. I am not sure whether ¡Tchkung! or Infernal Noise Brigade will survive an AfD. ¡Tchkung! is already tagged for notability concerns. Prominent representative of a notable style is not proven within the article. None of their works has received reviews. Since, you claim that you are an experienced editor, you must know that an article on Catalan Wikipedia does not make something automatic notable.

They were stranded in mid-pacific which has received coverage from Pitchfork and BBC. Now, these coverage make them notable then you should resubmit the draft and wait for a fresh pair of eyes to review it. Large portion of the draft is talking about their music career so they will be treated as a musician. However, I am still not convinced that this meets notability guidelines. Hitro talk 08:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I did some Google searches about the award that Filastine has received from the bloody United Nations, I found nothing reliable. To be frank, I found nothing at all. You have not cited the claims either.Hitro talk 09:14, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

What I recommend at this point in time is to work on improving the draft, and then resubmit. Reviewers rarely review the same draft a second time, and given the strong statements made here by hitroMilanese - the declining Reviewer - I suggest that HitoMilanese not review again. The next reviewer may accept the draft. That does not make the resulting article bulletproof. hitroMilanese or other editors with experience with music-related articles might initiate the Articles for Deletion process. There, after 7-10 days of comments, an Administrator makes a decision to keep, delete or kick back to draft. David notMD (talk)

I totally agree with the measures suggested by David notMD. Hitro talk 14:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I came across about 50 biographies which an editor had added names and minor details of the subject's siblings, who were generally not notable themselves. In some cases, there were other comments about the relationship (e.g. got along with the sibling or didn't). Here's an example: Walter Mirisch revision of 11 February 2022. Is it appropriate to revert such changes (retaining any actual improvements to the article)? Fabrickator (talk) 01:33, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

@Fabrickator Non-notable relatives are not named, their exitence may be noted if relevant... "<Subject> has a brother and two sisters." More than that will need to be justified. The example you pointed out is ok because the brothers are themselves notable. If there are no article about the siblings remove their names and any other irrelevant details.

BTW the referencing in that article is a mess. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 01:54, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Spouse(s) named, but children not named unless articles about them exist. David notMD (talk) 09:26, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

For policy reference when the article is about a living or recently-deceased person, see WP:BLPNAME. DMacks (talk) 15:59, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I have a question about citing a document that you have to download and extract as a zip file. ScientistBuilder (talk) 03:26, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder, that's not ideal, but if you have a URL you downloaded the file from, then cite it. If you got the file from somewhere that isn't public, it might be original research, which is not allowed. Do you have a more specific question? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:19, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder I think the statement above about OR misses the point, or is at least confusing. Maybe it depends on what you mean by public ... it can be behind a paywall, it cam be restricted to subscribers, etc. But as described, the file was downloaded, the issue would be downloaded from where. If it actually can be downloaded from the public net without any special credentials, then it's surely public. That it's in a recognizable format, preferably with some readily available application to decode it, that's not a problem, though we could perhaps ask about the provenance of the zip file.

Did somebody take a legitimate source file, modify it, then zip it up so it's actually a counterfeit of the original, of course that's not valid. But a source does not become invalid because the sole copy is sitting in some "personal collection" in a university library with restricted access. The fact that you traveled to that library doesn't turn your source into OR. Fabrickator (talk) 08:57, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

The file is available to the public. ScientistBuilder (talk) 15:07, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree with others that being a compressed or archive filetype does not itself affect its potential usability, neither in terms of reliability nor citeability. If it's an archive that contains multiple files, the |at= field of {{cite web}} could be useful for noting the specific filename. If you'd like to tell us the specific link in question, you might get some more-specific feedback about reliability, citing-style, or alternate sources of it. DMacks (talk) 16:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello fellow wikipedians,

I usually edit articles using my smartphone. In addition, I would like to fight vandalism using Twinkle and I'm aware there is an article on it. However the article uses a lot of technical terms and it's a bit difficult to get the process. Can someone advise if it's possible to install it on my browser or Wikipedia app and what is the way to go around it in a less technical manner? Thank you Volten0001 (talk) 11:49, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Volten0001: welcome to Wikipedia! Unfortunately, it is not possible to use Twinkle on the mobile app or the mobile web interface. However, it can be used on the Desktop interface. To install Twinkle, go to the Gadgets section of your preferences, go to the "Browsing" section (which is at the top) and click on the box next to "Twinkle". Then click on "Save". JavaHurricane 14:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Volten0001 Just to say that I use Twinkle on my tiny iPhone. As JavaHurricane says, it's one simple click in Preferences to enable it nowadays. I simply use Safari and open Wikipedia in 'desktop' view via the very small link at the very bottom of every page. I do, however, find it moderately awkward to access the Twinkle window on a small screen. For that reason, I do most vandal fighting and warning on a laptop or PC, not my mobile. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:54, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@JavaHurricane:

@Nick Moyes:

Thanks a lot for the insight and advice. I managed to modify my preferences and enable Twinkle. I guess since I have a laptop I will utilize it when trying to combat vandalism. Thanks again. Volten0001 (talk) 16:35, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Could I please be blacklisted? I want nothing to do with this group because you asshats deleted my article for no reason. SonicNASCARfan9 (talk) 16:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Always happy to oblige. Indeffed for unacceptable language used towards others. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Dealt with by Nick Moyes. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I have been editing from time to time and I have been working on one particular topic about music artist Qeuyl however every time I write about him I am being deleted over and over again, please help me write about Qeuyl. Fnf1044 (talk) 16:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Fnf1044 Welcome! Per WP:BASIC, what are the 3-5 best sources you know that are at the same time reliably published (WP:RS), independent of the topic and about the topic in some detail? As you can see at User_talk:Fnf1044#Concern_regarding_Draft:Qeuyl, that draft was deleted because you didn't do anything with it for 6 months. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång yes I have found 3-5 sources from blogs, magazines and news interviews as well as mentions in other wiki articles is this sufficient? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fnf1044 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Fnf1044, blogs are almost never reliable sources, and interviews are not independent sources. Therefore, such sources do not help establish the notability of the topic. Cullen328 (talk) 17:33, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Fnf1044 For WP:BASIC, blogs are no good, see WP:BLOG, wikis are no good, see WP:USERG, interviews can be problematic, see WP:Interviews. I can't have an opinion on if a source helps with WP:BASIC if I haven't seen it. Assuming Qeuyl is a living person, you should also take the time to read WP:Biographies of living persons, the "rules" here are quite strict. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Based on it doesn't look hopeful, but of course google doesn't know all. This may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:51, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

In a article, click “view history”, click “prev” on someone’s edit, and at the top of the page, it says “browse history interactively”. I don’t know what that means. Can someone help? 2603:8000:F400:FCEA:1C42:EDB0:EA70:1511 (talk) 17:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

If you click on those words, you get to see a timeline, which you can hover on and see info on past edits. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:56, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Asking as a parent, is editing in Wikipedia safe for my 14 yrs old child? Is it beneficial or harmful for him? 202.142.81.21 (talk) 10:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

All users, including children, are permitted to edit Wikipedia anonymously and without creating an account. All users are also permitted (and encouraged) to edit Wikipedia without disclosing or adding any kind of personal or identifying information about themselves anywhere on the project. For some more relevant information, please see Wikipedia:Protecting children's privacy.

Wikipedia is not censored, which in practice means that in relevant areas throughout the site, you will find possibly distressing or offensive content and pictures showing subjects like violence, nudity, sexual activity or controversial topics. Such material is present in a small percentage of articles. Editors range widely both in age and in cultural background, and as such, profanity is also prevalent in some areas of content and discussions. See Wikipedia:Uncensored and Wikipedia:Offensive material for more information.

It is possible to configure Wikipedia to not display images if you would like to – there are many ways to do so. However, written content cannot be hidden with conventional software. Wikipedia:Advice for parents is a helpful guide. ––FormalDude talk 10:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude: Correction: I would not say IP contributions are "anonymous", as they reveal your IP address publicly. QuickQuokka ^[talk] 12:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

It is a continuing source of bafflement to me that some people think that editing without an account is somehow more anonymous and/or secure than using an account. It is quite the reverse. Editing without an account exposes your IP address, which allows anyone to easily discover your geographic location, possibly connect your identity to activity on other websites besides Wikipedia, and even access your computer directly, if you are using a faulty firewall (although nowadays the latter is not likely). A minor should absolutely create an account, as should anyone who is the least bit concerned about anonymity. CodeTalker (talk) 19:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello 202, and welcome to the Teahouse! I recommend reading Wikipedia:Advice for parents and Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

The best bit of advice I can give is for him to never reveal his age or even mention that he is a minor. Wikipedians reputations are entirely based on their behaviour and the contribution they add to the site, nothing else matters. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, 1. For this image: File:Claremont Fan Court School from the air.jpg, now that it has permission and a license, is it my responsibility to remove the AntiCompositeBot tag or is it an administrators task? 2. I added File:Captain's chair green test.jpg as a dummy file to test how the process works of uploading an image. I can delete it right away. Is that something that I'm responsible for or will a computer bot do that for me? Thanks! Archivingperson (talk) 19:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Archivingperson: For 1, You can remove the tag if it truly isnt copyrighted anymore. For 2, A bot can delete it but it does not look like it says it will be deleted. You cannot delete it as only administrators can delete pages on Wikipedia. Hope this helps. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 19:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Archivingperson: (edit conflict) I have taken the liberty of removing it for you and pinging the Commons Volunteer Response Team editor who approved the licence. I think they simply forgot. Regarding the latter image, as you didn't specify a licence for the test chair, you could simply leave it there for a week and after that time it will be deleted. Alternatively, you could click the 'Nominate for Deletion' link on the left side of the page and recommend it's deletion, but I'm not sure it's worth the effort for you. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Philipp Hochmair

Hello I have made the necessary changes and added sources in "Early life". Does this now comply with Wikipedia guidelines? Thank you for the support and best regardsEmmy1707 (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC) Emmy1707 (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Emmy1707: I would unfortunately say no, because the references are not reliable sources. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 19:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, How to change your color of the username on the talk pages? LockzZ (talk) 20:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC) LockzZ (talk) 20:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@NanoLock66 WP:CUSTOMSIG may be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I had an assignment to write an article on here for a class last semester, and it was a stub when I started on it. I worked on it for several months, and am pretty sure it is no longer a stub, but am still new here so want to ask. The article is Echinothrips americanus Pteridaceae (talk) 20:33, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Pteridaceae: take a look at WP:ASSESS. This lists various different levels of quality standards. WP:STUBDEF takes a look at the "stub" rating specifically, and gives a few length thresholds that work as a rule of thumb. But in general, determining which rating matches an article best is more art than science, and different editors have slightly different opinions. I'm no subject matter expert so someone could correct me, but the article looks at least C-class to me (could be B-class), so I've re-rated it as that and removed the stub tag. In future cases feel free to do these types of things yourself, as there are generally no objections to a person re-assessing an article that they created or have recently worked on. — Bilorv (talk) 21:43, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm just going to get straight to the point: I'm editing Nicki Minaj, and I'm quite confused as to who to attribute this source to.

Source: https://www.npr.org/2018/10/03/651761719/nicki-minaj-is-the-21st-centurys-insatiable-hip-hop-monarch

Should this source be attributed to NPR Music or NPR in the citation/reference? I really don't know where else to ask this so some comments would be useful. Thank you! shanghai.^{talk to me} 18:52, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I would think just NPR as the external link on the NPR Music article just takes you to NPR.com when you click on official site. I am just confused as to why these are two separate articles that are not just under the article NPR ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 19:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I would say either is fine. Here's the case for NPR Music: the article is published under the logo "NPR Music" and in the "music" tab of the website, having been produced by the music division of the company. And for NPR: it's unambiguous and makes the publisher clear. The external links section of NPR Music needs a bit of cleaning up, but that's neither here nor there. — Bilorv (talk) 21:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

On a page at "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuwa-chan" that I created recently, the following notice appeared:

"This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles;"

I do not understand why the orphan notice is there. I have linked this English page to the Japanese page. What am I missing? One category link that does not see to be working correctly is the "Births in Hachiōji" catagory link. I am attempting to link to this URL:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Births_in_Births_in_Hachiōji

However, when I click on the link from the "../wiki/Fuwa-chan" article, it does not work. (How can I make a category link from "en.wikipedia.org" "commons.wikimedia.org"? The root directories differ.)

TNewfields (talk) 05:32, 27 February 2022 (UTC)TNewfields TNewfields (talk) 05:32, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

The orphan notice is because there are no links to this articles from other English Wikipedia articles. Links from other projects are not considered. Category links are for categories in the English Wikipedia. Category:Births in Hachiōji does not exist here, so it is a redlink and should be removed. MB 07:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@TNewfields An article is an orphan when when no other article in the English Wikipedia links to it.

Commons categories are used only for media files that are in Commons. The Category: Births in Hachiōji simply does not exist. It is quite unusual to categorize birthplace all the way down to suburb level so rather use the city category. Hope this helps Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:24, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@TNewfields Use Category:People from Hachiōji, Tokyo instead. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@TNewfields: I deorphaned the article and fixed the category. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

My name is Stace Darden and I'm the Director of Communications and a singer for the group so I do have "a close connection with the subject". I thought we at least met #9 of the notability criteria at WP:NBAND. (which is: Has won first, second or third place in a major music competition) when we won the Chicago Harmony A Capella Sweepstakes in 2011. I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong or leaving out so that the WIKI would be approved but I would love to have some help. I apologize for resubmitting so quickly after the last modifications I made (which were to remove hyperlinks from the body of the message and add References). We are an Independent group that has been singing for over 34 years with 5 CD's. Page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Northern_Kentucky_Brotherhood_Singers

Thank you,

Stace Darden Nkybrotherhood (talk) 20:43, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Nkybrotherhood: I would be surprised if a specialised competition in a U.S. state is sufficient for WP:NBAND#9, but moreover this guideline attempts to communicate when a group are likely to be notable rather than when they are. In my opinion, and apparently those of several reviewers, the sources in the draft do not show notability.

If the band is not notable, then you are not doing anything wrong—nobody could write a draft on this topic that would be accepted, as only notable topics are accepted. Being "notable" is not the same as being important or having achieved great things. It is jargon for "within the scope of Wikipedia", and we determine our scope based on a number of pragmatic factors, such as having an encyclopedia small enough for our core volunteer community to maintain at least a bare minimum of quality standards on. — Bilorv (talk) 21:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Nkybrotherhood. The Chicago version of Harmony Sweepstakes A Cappella Festival is one of seven regional events leading up to the national event in San Rafael, California, so I do not think that regional event is a "major music competition". However, the biggest problem is the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. The Richmond Folk Festival source is not independent because it is promoting a performance. Same for the Chicago Harmony source - it is promoting the competition. The Russia Tour source includes just two sentences about your group, which is buried very deep. That is not significant coverage. The Kentucky Governor source just announces an award, and has no discussion of your group. In conclusion, none of your references meets the required standard of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 21:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you all for your comments. Independent Reliable sources....would something like this fit? https://www.nkytribune.com/2022/02/governor-honors-recipients-of-award-in-the-arts-includes-northern-kentucky-brotherhood-singers/#:~:text=The%20Northern%20Kentucky%20Brotherhood%20Singers%20are%20champions.%20It,Award.%E2%80%9D%20And%20you%20might%20call%20this%20a%20re-peat. ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nkybrotherhood (talk • contribs) 21:59, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Nkybrotherhood, that source is not independent because the substantive content comes from Stace Darden, namely you. Cullen328 (talk) 23:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I’m editing Template:WikiProject Pakistan Super League and I’m trying to make the Quetta taskforce visible but it’s not working. How can I fix this?  Hamza Ali Shah  ^Talk 08:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Hamza Ali Shah: Template:WPBannerMeta#Task forces states "WPBannerMeta can accommodate up to five task forces, each with its own image, links and importance scale, if desired. (More than five task forces can be supported through the use of hooks.)" GoingBatty (talk) 23:08, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Hamza Ali Shah: Please check my edit to Template:WikiProject Pakistan Super League/sandbox. GoingBatty (talk) 23:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Pageview Analysis I have recently been getting a strange page with I check pageviews on any page when using FireFox browser. I have check the same pages with Google Chrome and I get the old analysis that I was expecting. Is this a problem that Wikipedia could correct or should I report it to Firefox? BuffaloBob (talk) 00:30, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@BuffaloBob: You're not the only one - see meta:Talk:Pageviews_Analysis#Not_working. GoingBatty (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, that appears to be the problem BuffaloBob (talk) 01:11, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I need help with something. I recently created the page Černí baroni (TV series). There is also the book and the film. Currently, the default (undisambiguated) title is the film, and "Černí baroni (film)" simply redirects there. I feel that, since the book precedes both the film and the series, it should hold the default title, and the film should be disambiguated. I don't know how to do this, however. Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:32, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Revirvlkodlaku: Welcome to the Teahouse! First, you'd have to determine if one of these works is the primary topic - see WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. If there is no primary topic, then Černí baroni could move to Černí baroni (film), and Černí baroni would be a dismabiguation page. However, it seems you're suggesting moving Černí baroni → Černí baroni (film) and Černí baroni (book) → Černí baroni. If that's how you want to proceed, I suggest following the instructions at WP:RMPM and post the requested move template on Talk:Černí baroni. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:11, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I am working on the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sukhvir_Sanghal Please assist me with the citations, do the citations look OK now?

Thanks. Priyamchandra (talk) 07:48, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't think so, Priyamchandra, because a number of the references are to sukhvirsanghal.com, which isn't a disinterested source as it sells Sukhvir Sanghal's works. Additionally, it's clear that you have a conflict of interest; please state this on Draft talk:Sukhvir Sanghal. -- Hoary (talk) 08:08, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Icosium

I ask my previous question differently : do you think the 14 th Source "Diocese of Icosium" in the Icosium article is correct ? There is the word "Suppressed" on the web page. Thank you to verify.

--Joisy78 (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Joisy78--Joisy78 (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC) Joisy78 (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Joisy78: The source says the diocese was suppressed. See also Icosium#Religion. The source itself is not suppressed and appears to be valid. 108.52.196.8 (talk) 22:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

The source may be valid, but it does not support the statement about bishops of Iconium in Roman times. It's about a diocese that was established in the 18th century and suppressed in 1838. I have removed it the reference. Maproom (talk) 09:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much.

Sincerely yours. Joisy78 (talk) 19:41, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

The movie is scheduled to release on March 4, 2022 in US, and on 3 March 2022 in Bangladesh's Star Cineplex, 1 day before US. If I add the Bangladesh release date to the article's infobox and release section, will it be disruptive editing? Cottonseed (talk) 10:25, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cottonseed Providing you do not get into an edit war with other users, and that you can cite a reliable source to show that its release date is one day earlier, then I would not interpret that sort of contribution as disruptive. If in doubt, discuss your source on the article's talk page. Thank you for your question. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:42, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: kindly see my edit. Are the sources reliable? Cottonseed (talk) 11:06, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cottonseed Yes, the sources seem quite reliable. But that is not really the point. Yes, they support your edit which stated that a film will be released on day earlier, not across an entire country, but within one chain in one individual city. That is not relevant to the article, which has a world-wide scope. As such, I agree with Rupturestriker, who reverted it.

So, my answer to your original question is that your initial edit was not at all disruptive when you made it, but I really do not see it is relevant to the Release section of the article, and adding it again without proper discussion would then start to become disruptive. I don't see that discussion siding with your point of view unless you can show that release across an entire country or continent is different to the worldwide date. I'm sorry that's not what you wanted to hear from me, but that is my interpretation of your good faith edit. So thank you for wanting to improve the article even if maybe it was not exactly what's needed. I would have said the same had you wanted to show that one cinema chain in one city in the US was releasing it a day earlier, too. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:45, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Cottonseed Bangladesh is not the only country where the film is releasing on March 3, there are many more regions in SEA, and Australia included, where the film will release. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupturestriker (talk • contribs) 11:59, February 28, 2022 (UTC)

Browser or Wikipedia apple app?

I am an IPad OS user, currently using Safari for Editing. The Wikipedia app is in my IPad. I wanted to know whether the app would allow me editing? Waiting for a response from experienced here. --Nang Nandini (talk) 06:23, 26 February 2022 (UTC) Nang Nandini (talk) 06:23, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

hi Nang Nandini and welcome to the teahouse! I believe the app allows you to edit pages just as they can in desktop or mobile safari, although some templates may not display due to the app supporting them like navboxes. happy editing!  melecie  t - 06:29, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt reply. I can try the app. --Nang Nandini (talk) 06:31, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Nang Nandini: I use exactly what you do. I tried out the Wikipedia app for editing, but I ended up disliking it because I think it makes it harder to edit. I found the most helpful view of Wikipedia on an iPad to be the desktop view, which you can get by scrolling down and clicking on desktop view at the bottom of any wiki page or by removing the m in the url. Hope this helps! ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 13:06, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

@Nang Nandini I totally agree with @Kaleeb18. I have a small iPhone and a while back I installed the Wikipedia app out pof interest, but soon abandoned it. It's fine for viewing articles, but absolutely rubbish for editing them. I also believe there are still issues that if another user tries to notify you of something - even issuing warnings - you simply don't see them. Then one day you wake up blocked because you appeared to be ignoring communications , when, in reality, you didn't see them in the first instance. With Safari or Chrome as your browser in iOs, you can choose mobile view for easy reading and very short edits, of use the tiny link right at the bottom of the page to switch to desktop view, where you get full editing functionality. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:51, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

@Nang Nandini - be aware of WP:THEYCANTHEARYOU casualdejekyll 22:08, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh hell, I am really getting issues with editing in IPad as the browser needs tabs and the Apple’s app created a mess. I must consider installing other browser than Safari. --Nang Nandini (talk) 08:39, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Nang Nandini: I use Safari and it work just fine to me, but that might be because I use the desktop view. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 12:36, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: I am in stack with my iPad. I need to open/back/reopen for citation editing. --Nang Nandini (talk) 12:44, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Nang Nandini: Ahh yes, adding citations on an iPad is a pain as it is hard to copy and paste the title and url usually and sometimes while I’m copying the title from an article Wikipedia refreshes and I have to start all over with my edit. That is why I add in citations using a laptop. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 12:48, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

This has turned into me and Mztourist arguing, which is not even remotely productive. My recommendation is that any discussion continues on Talk:Nguyễn_Viết_Thanh, and that everyone remembers to WP:AGF and comment on content, not on contributors. casualdejekyll 14:34, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

How do I check if I have autoconfirmed role yet? Mazzua24 (talk) 13:47, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

You are confirmed.You are not confirmed. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 14:05, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Your account is less than 4 days old, so you are not autoconfirmed. You can check at Special:UserRights. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:11, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mazzua24: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can access Special:UserRights by going to your user page and clicking "View user groups" in the toolbar on the left side of the screen. GoingBatty (talk) 14:35, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Full disclosure: I have a stake in this question. I have published several papers and now a Jupyter Book that talk about "Bohemian Matrices". There are also at least three papers by people not in my research group that have been published. There have been workshops at various places, and minisymposia at major meetings (SIAM and ICIAM) on the subject, with famous (well, math/CS-famous) speakers. I will give some links below.

A "Bohemian matrix family" is a family of matrices all of whose entries are drawn from a finite population, usually integers. The name comes from "BOunded HEight Matrix of Integers" but has been extended to other quantities (Gaussian integers, for instance).

The idea makes sense: it is a specialization in the sense of Polya, and the notion has already been productive. See www.bohemianmatrices.com for more. In particular, the eigenvalues make fabulous pictures. I made a calendar for this year (you can find it at my website rcorless.github.io) and this will be discussed in the upcoming MAA Focus Newsletter.

So *I* think the subject is notable enough for an article. Any seconders?

Here is a list of some external sources:

https://computational-discovery-on-jupyter.github.io/Computational-Discovery-on-Jupyter/index.html (see Chapter 4)

A search by Google Scholar brings up several papers (mostly by me and my co-authors, and many on the arXiv still, it's true). But for instance

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2020.03.037

is a paper in the very well-regarded journal Linear Algebra and its Applications. There are several others, and at least two PhD theses (by Steven Thornton and by Eunice Chan).

As for workshops, the first was the 2018 workshop in Manchester, organized by Nick Higham (FRS) and me; the second was the ICIAM minisymposium at Valencia in 2019 (Cleve Moler was a speaker at that minisymposium); the third at SIAM Annual Meeting 2021 (Gil Strang was a speaker at that minisymposium).

Nick Higham's column in SIAM News (his last one as SIAM president) was on the topic.

https://sinews.siam.org/Details-Page/rhapsodizing-about-bohemian-matrices

So I'm pretty sure that the topic *does* meet the normal standards for notability. But as I said I have a stake in this and so it might be better if someone would volunteer to write the article for me (I'm a total newbie here on Wikipedia anyway; just made my tenth edit today, whee!)

But if no-one else wants to do it, but at least one person other than me thinks this meets the criteria for notability, I am happy to invoke the Article Wizard and have a go.

Comments anyone? Rob.Corless (talk) 01:45, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rob.Corless,

Welcome to the Teahouse! This is a noticeboard for general questions about editing on Wikipedia. So, your explanation of your sources goes beyond what most of us can evaluate. My suggestion to you is that we have WikiProjects where editors with specific interests can collaborate together. You are more likely to find like-minded people who could make sense of the sources you describe than the experienced editors who help out at the Teahouse. I'm so in the dark about what you are describing that I'm not sure which WikiProject this would fall under...maybe WikiProject Mathematics? But that's just a guess. You might browse through Category:Active WikiProjects and see if there is a more appropriate WikiProject that is listed as being active. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:33, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Liz! I shall go lurk on the Mathematics Project for a bit to see if that's the right place (I suspect that it is; that's the way I think of it, although there are some people who think of it more as Mathematics and Art). Rob.Corless (talk) 15:03, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

have a draft which was recently declined and needed help reviewing it, also i would like to change the draft title if its possible https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Babayo_Ardo from Babayo Ardo - to Babayo Ardo Kumo Kabirbapson (talk) 13:30, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kabirbapson:  Done! GoingBatty (talk) 14:32, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Declining reviewers of Draft:Babayo Ardo Kumo state that needs references to support text. It is also possible that even with more references, his government roles as appointed (not elected) may not justify an article. David notMD (talk) 15:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

There is a German Wikipedia article on the painter Christian Sell ( https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Sell ) which can be translated into English ( https://de-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/Christian_Sell?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc). The artist seems to pass the notability test and many of his paintings are on Wikimedia Commons. Is it possible to move the translation onto the English vesion of Wikipedia where editing can be more easily be done by non-German speakers? BFP1 (talk) 14:34, 28 February 2022 (UTC) BFP1 (talk) 14:34, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@BFP1: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can find some helpful information at Help:Translation. GoingBatty (talk) 14:39, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

hi BFP1! there also seems to be an essay dedicated to translations from the German Wikipedia specifically which you may also want to read. happy editing!  melecie  t - 14:43, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you both. As there is no English Wikipedia article on this subject, it will have to be submitted as a new article whilst crediting the source article. Another complication is that although the photos are on Wikimedia Commons, the titles are in German. These would have to be changed in the English version. I won't rush into this! BFP1 (talk) 16:12, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

In the first paragraph there seems to be an error. For services rendered, Huffman received $24 and 324 acres (1.31 km2) of land in 1838. Along with his father Abe, Huffman and a group from Louisiana settled in the area north of FM 1960 and east of FM 2100 in 1840. Location: Lakewood Heights, FM 1960, 734 Fall Creek Drive Huffman Texas 77336 settled in the area north of FM 1960 and east of FM2100, but the Location: 734 Fall Creek Drive is west of 2100. Jadusa (talk) 14:50, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Jadusa Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may want to raise this at the talk page associated with that article, Talk:Huffman, Texas, so that editors that follow that article will see it. 331dot (talk) 14:56, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Or just fix it. The article gets only 20 views per day, and Page views states that the number of Watchers is Unknown. Making a note of what you did on the Talk page is a good idea. David notMD (talk) 16:15, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I just removed the information. It had no source, and when I checked the sources already cited in the article, I could find nothing to confirm the information. Unreferenced information of this kind, which is already of questionable veracity, can safely be removed from articles without further discussion, unless sources are provided. --Jayron32 17:51, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Всем доброго времени суток! Подскажите пожалуйста, при оформлении статьи возникла такая проблема, фотографии без авторских прав (ну точнее на них никто не заявлял, фото сделанные коллегой) были выложены на викисклад и успешно использованы в статье. Через две недели фото были удалены, по причине авторских прав и недостаточности аргументов, что их можно использовать, в итоге статья "облысела". Как можно исправить этот конфуз и загрузить фото на викисклад правильно 31.173.86.126 (talk) 16:14, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse on the English Wikipedia, where we would like conversations to be in the English language. Pasting your post into Google Translate, I see you have a question about images uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Your colleague can donate photos by following the steps at commons:Commons:First steps/Uploading files/ru. If you need further assistance with Commons, please see commons:Help:Contents/ru. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:33, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Rough Russian translation of GoingBatty's message for the IP who does not appear to understand English: Добро пожаловать в Чайхану на английской Википедии, где мы хотели бы, чтобы разговоры велись на английском языке. Вставив свой пост в Google Translate, я вижу, у вас есть вопрос об изображениях, загруженных на Викисклад. Ваш коллега может пожертвовать фотографии, выполнив действия, описанные в commons:Commons:First steps/Uploading files/ru. Если вам нужна дополнительная помощь с Commons, см commons:Help:Contents/ru. Translated into Russian with Google Translate ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, can an admin please tell me who proposed for deletion the article List of largest California cities by land area. The information is needed for a sockpuppet investigation where the suspected sockpuppet's first edit was to template the article creator with a prod notification, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 19:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: Pinging the deleting admin. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:32, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Atlantic306, Sikonmina (talk · contribs) nominated for PROD. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:36, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

thanks for your help, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 19:38, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

According to the article that was posted on your platform, Raye Montague viewed the inside of a captured German U Boat. This information is incorrect. It was a captured Japanese Midget Submarine from the attack on Pearl Harbor on 12/07/1941, that was toured around the country. It was the same vessel that Raye Montague paid one dollar to gain entrance and peaked her interest in becoming an engineer. 76.79.124.106 (talk) 19:40, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Raye Montague

Hello IP! Do you have a reliable source supporting this claim? If so you should suggest this change on the article's talk page. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

(ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please raise this on the article talk page, Talk:Raye Montague, so that the editors that follow that article will see it. Please also offer any independent reliable sources you have to support that claim, for verification purposes; unfortunately we can't just take your word for it. 331dot (talk) 19:42, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Actually, looking at the article, it says nothing about Raye viewing the inside of a captured U-Boat or viewing the inside of anything. Did you possibly get the wrong person? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:43, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

In fact, it only says this: "after seeing a German submarine that had been captured by the Americans". It says nothing about her viewing the inside of the sub. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:45, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

So, there's this article (Byrd Dickens) but the inserted photo shows up as a thumbnail. When I remove the thumb formatting, the image becomes giant and takes up half the page! 😱😱😱 I've seen other articles on notable figures, and they never have a thumbnail picture. It's always properly formatted. I was just wondering if any more experienced editors know how to properly format this image. Any help would be really great. PetSematary182 (talk) 20:48, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@PetSematary182: Hello PetSematary! I've added a size parameter (250px short for pixels) to the image and removed the thumb param. I'm fairly sure the infobox should automatically adjust the size of the image but I could be wrong. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:53, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Blaze Wolf! I really appreciate the assistance. PetSematary182 (talk) 20:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)PetSematary182

@PetSematary182: No problem! Technically the thumbnail adjusts the size to a thumbnail (-ish) size automatically, however it adds a border around the image and is usually meant to be used outside of an infobox. Edit: While typing this I think what's causing it is that it's a link to the actual file. Infoboxes automatically add the file when you type the name of the file without brackets or the File: part. I'll make the adjustment when I finish this reply. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:57, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I added information regarding the acquisition of a company (Teach Away) along with a couple of sources. The sources were external. Yet my edits were declined and now the page has been put into review for deletion. Can someone please let me know what did I miss? Also, if the person who recommended the deletion can let me know where I went wrong that would be helpful. I am new to wikipedia editing but my understanding was to include as many external sources as possible.  Starkbruce574 (talk) 20:46, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Starkbruce574: Third-party sources with editorial oversight and identifiable authors that aren't just routine news and have no connexion to the company, its officers, or its surrogates. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 21:37, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Starkbruce574, Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 23:00, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

You added content sourced to the Teach Away website and content with hyperlinks to the company that acquired Teach Away (and its website). Thus, NOT external. If you remove the hyperlinks and finds indepdendent refs, the article may survive the AfD. If not, not. David notMD (talk) 23:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I have a question. I just finished the article John M. Whitehead (soldier) and I would like to link it to his section of List of American Civil War Medal of Honor recipients: T–Z. The link redirects to the wrong person so I would like to replace with a link to the correct article mentioned above. I cannot figure out how to do this so any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance. Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 23:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Gandalf the Groovy: Like this? ––FormalDude talk 23:34, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude talk Exactly like that, thank you!

Hey guys, I am writing for a company based out of Toronto that has had media coverage. How do I come up with more sources or find those existing sources credible for my article. This company has a long list of reputable work. 207.148.176.143 (talk) 23:21, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

You have a conflict of interest and per the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use, you need to disclose it. As for finding reliable sources, take a look at WP:Finding sources. ––FormalDude talk 23:37, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

See also WP:NCORP. The requirements for companies and corporations are stricter then the usual requirements. casualdejekyll 23:43, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I recently edited the article Chapin School (New Jersey) and a citation error for the enrollment error appeared. It says Cite error: The named reference https://www.univstats.com/k-12/new-jersey/princeton/chapin-school was invoked but never defined (see the help page). Can anybody help? (I'm a new Wikipedian, this is literally my first edit. Mr Reading Turtle (talk) 22:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mr Reading Turtle, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. I'm afraid you have misunderstood how references work. The "name=" part, which is optional, is for naming a reference in case there should be more than one citation of the same reference in an article. The content of a reference goes between <ref> and </ref> (the short form you used <ref name="..." /> is for when you're providing no content specifically because you're citing an already-named reference again). The content could be just a URL, but there is a strong preference for a formatted reference that separates out the important bibliographic information such as the title, date, author and publisher. This is most easily done by a template such as {{cite web}}. Please see referencing for beginners. ColinFine (talk) 23:10, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mr Reading Turtle I changed the reference formatting. I hope this helps. Karenthewriter (talk) 23:24, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Mr Reading Turtle (talk) 00:15, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I read the article. Mr Reading Turtle (talk) 00:15, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

If we have disagreement with other editor, how can we have consensus to get dispute resolution, esp. when the disputed content is in low-traffic article as almost no-one notice discussion on it's talk page. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:16, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey! Have you taken a look at Third opinion? Seems like exactly what you're after here. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 03:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I have tried that but rarely result to consensus, RfC works better. but again barely anyone put comment. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:32, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

With just three people I'd assume you'd rarely get a definitive consensus, but from what I've seen RFCs are usually pretty active. If those don't work you could head to the dispute resolution noticeboard. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 03:48, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

You can also try putting a neutral notice pointing to the discussion on any relevant wikiproject talk pages. (Like this notice, for instance). You can find relevant wikiprojects by looking at what WikiProject banners are at the top of the article's talkpage. Note that some projects are more active than others, so this may be more or less effective depending on the topic. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 11:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ckfasdf: I assume this is about  Courtesy link: Polish Air Force. For your benefit (and for others that advise new editors here) apparently there's a certain threshold of dispute that has to be met before an RfC should be opened. I was summoned by the feedback response service bot to Talk:A Discovery of Witches (TV series)#RFC and commented, thinking nothing of it, and the initiator was subsequently scolded for starting the RfC prematurely. Apparently going to a Wikiproject page and asking for help first is the preferred path. I see you started a discussion over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#List of equipment of the Polish Land Forces and got some help there, so that's good. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:45, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Actually, it was not on that page ☺. If we really need to be specific it was on Talk:Belize Defence Force#RFC on usage of image2 parameter on infobox. I did ask related wikiproject first, but still no comments and then open RfC and notify related wikiproject. Ckfasdf (talk) 01:00, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I am wondering, as I added a Wordpress source that is the official Survivalcraft WordPress and wondering if that is reliable. 2601:CE:4002:A0A0:A029:C9A9:B866:298B (talk) 02:30, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP! No it is not a reliable source as it is a blog. See Wordpress' entry at WP:RSP. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 02:40, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Wordpress is an example of a website building utility used by (often enthusiastic) amateurs to produce their own personal websites (WP:SPS); some of these look very convincing, but will have an annotation footer, something like 'Powered by Wordpress'.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 03:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I'd like to default order a list I've made but don't know how. Where can I find that info? Dutchy45 (talk) 03:18, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Dutchy45! Currently, the only way to set a default order for a table is to list out the items in the order you want in the wikitext. For more general help on sorting, see Help:Sorting. If you tell us which page you're working on and which sort order you want, we might be able to help further. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:21, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Sdkb, I made this list over a year ago and just looked at the talk page and saw User:SuperJew comment. I remember wanting to fix it back then, but real life got in the way and I just forgot about it.--Dutchy45 (talk) 03:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Dutchy45 It looks like you're using {{Sortname}} for the names, which is excellent. If sorting for other columns isn't working as expected, you may want to specify the sort data type (see Help:Sorting again). Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:36, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Sdkb Ok, thanks for your help. Dutchy45 (talk) 03:40, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I have asked this question twice and didn't get any proper reply. So, I am here.

Rana Ayyub wrote this in March 2015.-Nun rape and church vandalism: The fringe is now mainstream

Her article ends, stating that Bangladeshis were not responsible and the accused are local demons(possibly implying local criminals belonging to ruling party). After the arrests of the Bangladeshi accused, who were convicted by the local court, an editor's note was added at the end, that the article was written before the arrest.

The editor's note was added after the conviction, initially, it was not there.

Contrary to what she wrote, actually, most accused were Bangladeshis. That was the reason, why the editor had to leave a note at the end of the article, after the conviction of real rapists.

She promoted her article twice through her Twitter account and did not delete or gave any updates, in spite of the court verdict.

https://twitter.com/ranaayyub/status/577862190906011648

https://twitter.com/ranaayyub/status/577805661460795392

Can this be inserted in the controversy section of Rana Ayyub, as she gave wrong information and didn't clarify afterward, in spite of the editor adding a note at the end of the article? Knight Skywalker (talk) 05:53, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Knight Skywalker, if you'd like to make a suggestion for the article Rana Ayyub, please do so on Talk:Rana Ayyub. (If possible, make a precise suggestion, as a "semi-protected edit request".) -- Hoary (talk) 07:30, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Its at 2900+ for a couple of days now and doesn't seem to be decreasing. WillsEdtior777 (talk) 03:20, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @WillsEdtior777! There are no backlog drives currently scheduled, but they appear to happen regularly, so you could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation. I know the backlog in that area is chronically long; there's just a lot of pages to go through. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:24, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hey! FYI, these backlog drives don't happen very often at all, and the most recent one started with over 4,000 pending submissions. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

WillsEdtior777 Normally the backlog is double of the above number indicated and there is no first come first serve basic for AfC for reviewers would choose the articles which they are comfortable or familiar with the subject to review at their own time for all of them are volunteers. Backlog drive will only done from time to time basic when the backlog volume is extremely high. Kindly be patient if your articles have yet to be reviewed. If you have any question regarding your draft article, you can post your questions at WP:AFCHD. Be safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 03:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I see,thanks everyone. WillsEdtior777 (talk)

Last drive was July 2021. It reduced the number from over 4,000 to zero. Three of the Reviewers were responsible for 3,000 reviews!!! David notMD (talk) 08:42, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello Teahouse-visitors, My article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Caspar_Berger was rejected again because it is not supported by reliable sources. This seems strange to me, because it is a 1:1 translation of an existing Dutch article on this sculptor with the same references. - Are English editors more strict (nothing wrong with that)? - What can I do when there are no reliable sources to be found on the internet? Some pages with information about past exhibitions are no longer online and also references to his teachers are hard to find. - Is it OK to link to the website of Casper Berger himself? BregtjeV (talk) 10:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@BregtjeV: Each Wikipedia language edition is a seperate project with seperate, albeit similar, rules and policies and mostly different editors, which means that what is acceptable on one project is not nessesarely acceptable on a different project. Historically, the english Wikipedia is one of the more strict projects. Sources do not need to be online. The subject's homepage is sometimes acceptable, and sometimes not. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:11, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Create Page for Isaiah Brown Music/Musician Can we please create a page for artist 'Isaiah Brown?' His music is found on all platforms and the story behind his music will inspire millions, especially during these crazy times. There is lots of press available to read by searching on google: "Isaiah Brown Musician," and it is time for his art to be recognized by this community so his listeners can find more info on him seamlessly.

Thank you kindly for your time. IsaiahBrownMusic (talk) 06:01, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

With a username like that, you'll find it difficult to be taken seriously doktorb _words^deeds 06:03, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

IsaiahBrownMusic, if Isaiah Brown would like "his listeners [to be able to] find more info on him seamlessly", he can alter and augment his website accordingly. -- Hoary (talk) 07:41, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@IsaiahBrownMusic: Wikipedia is not for the up-and-coming; they must have already "arrived". And telling us to look at Google is like giving us a magnet and telling us to look for a bone needle in a barn stuffed to the gills with hay. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 08:06, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

You are on the steep end of the learning curve. Your User name is not allowed, as it suggests a business rather than an individual. Stop using this account and start a new one, or else use the name change process. You attempted to create an article on your User page, which is forbidden, so deleted. You attempted to create a draft in your Sandbox by copy-pasting copyright protected content, so it was deleted. Last, Teahouse hosts are here to advise, not author drafts. David notMD (talk) 08:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IsaiahBrownMusic. I'm afraid that you have a (very common) misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is: Wikipedia has nothing whatever to do with promotion of any kind. If you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (and only if you do), then there could be an article about you - you are discouraged from trying to create it yourself, but not forbidden. Whoever created it, the article would not belong to you, would not be controlled by you, would not be for your benefit except incidentally, would not necessarily say what you wanted it to say, and should be based almost 100% onwhat people unconnected with you had published about you, not on what you or your associates say or want to say. ColinFine (talk) 10:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

What is edit summary for every single editor? 2001:44B8:41C6:F700:CDB1:E760:9B90:B9E9 (talk) 10:34, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

You can read about edit summaries at WP:ES, hope that helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I am Billapartygang123, a new user on Wikipedia. For a few days, I have been trying to get permission for approval of my draft 'The Walking Zombie 2' but earlier It wasn't meeting Wikipedia's rules but now I have done extensive changes to it but now no one is even seeing it. Please see and approve my draft. Billapartygang123 (talk) 11:06, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Billapartygang123. I'm afraid you have done a common thing, and plunged straight into the most difficult task there is in editing Wikipedia. It's not that writing an article is particularly difficult: it's that by far the most important, and often the most challenging, part of creating an article is assembling the reliable independent sources on which every article should be based. It's like saying "I want to build a house: I can see what houses look like, and I'll make something that looks like them" without surveying the land to check it is stable, or inquiring into local building laws. Draft:The Walking Zombie 2 was declined by three different reviewers, and then finally rejected by Liance on 25th. Liance has said explicitly This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. In order to have any chance of getting a draft on this subject accepted, you will need to persuade a reviewer that there are sufficient sources of sufficient quality to establish that it is indeed notable in Wikipedia's sense. ColinFine (talk) 11:27, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi there! I'm asking because I re-submitted my draft 2 days ago, and I want to know how long the average wait time is.

I don't mean to be impatient, or rush. QuickQuokka ^[talk] 19:45, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: Hello Quokka! If you looked at the review template, it says this, "This may take 3 months or more". AfC can take a few days, or many months or years (I wouldn't know since I haven't created any drafts and submitted them via AFC) ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:48, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Hi! I noticed that, but I want to know, usually, about how much time it takes. Up to isn't what it usually is. QuickQuokka ^[talk] 19:52, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: I'm not sure if that's a question that can be answered since there's a huge variation in how long it can take. However if it is able to be answered I wouldn't be able to since I've only ever created 1 article, and that wasn't even through AFC. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: There really isn't a way to give you a definite answer. The category of drafts awaiting review is not a queue- reviewers choose what to review, when they have time to conduct one. It could be reviewed in the next five minutes, or six months from now if it slipped through the cracks. Typically, it will be what the message on your draft says or less. Do you have a particular need for a speedy review? 331dot (talk) 19:58, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@331dot: No, just wondering. QuickQuokka ^[talk] 20:02, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: I just took a look at the draft and you don't have enough sourcing to demonstrate notability. I looked at all the sources but didn't translate them all. Most of them look like simple cast directories, where the subject's name is just listed. Only 2 seem to be articles about the subject. I did translate those, and there's not very much info in them. This may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. See WP:NACTOR to read about the notability standard for actor articles, particularly the info about having multiple, significant roles.. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:33, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Well, I translated it from the Hebrew aticle. It originally only had 3 sources. I plan on adding more content and sources. QuickQuokka ^[talk] 20:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Don't worry about content until you have found reliable sources: before that point, there is literally nothing that you can legitimately put into the draft, and if you don't find adequate sources then all your work will be wasted. ColinFine (talk) 22:58, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

QuickQuokka, here's what seems to be a widely shared notion about Wikipedia: I've found an article in the XYZ-language Wikipedia that looks worthwhile. There's no matching article in English-language Wikipedia. Because the original article doesn't carry any major warning template or similar, it has clearly been judged suitable for Wikipedia. So if I do a decent job of translating it into English, the result will obviously merit inclusion in English-language Wikipedia. This is at least doubly false. First, inclusion of an article in XYZ-language Wikipedia doesn't mean it merits inclusion there. (It might remain there because nobody has got around to radical revision, or deletion.) Secondly, even if an article does merit inclusion in the Wikipedia of one language, this doesn't necessarily mean that an article on the same subject merits inclusion in the Wikipedia of another language, let alone that a translation (even a good one) does. (There are additional problems, e.g. the naive belief among some "translators" that Google Translate and the like can substitute for proficiency in both languages.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:46, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary: Oh, I apologize! I genuinely meant to make Wikipedia better, I didn't mean it like that. Also, I didn't use Google Translate/any other machine translation service. QuickQuokka ^[talk] 04:26, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Expect around a month. Dege31 (talk) 20:40, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

A few wrong answers here. What is correct is that the backlog is not a queue, so could be hours, days, weeks, months. Reviewers pick what they want to review (with a bit of an extra look at the oldest drafts). Teahouse hosts may also be reviewers, but asking at Teahouse does not prioritize. David notMD (talk) 23:15, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

There is no analysis posted at AfC as to whether previously declined drafts get a faster or slower review when resubmitted. David notMD (talk) 11:49, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Daviddayag (talk) 11:46, 1 March 2022 (UTC) can we have a chat-like ux here so people can actually be notified when someone answers them? i've asked / replied many times and those just got lost. Daviddayag (talk) 11:46, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Daviddayag, welcome! For discussions on WP-talkpages, try this. Go here: Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. Activate "Discussion tools". Now you will see a "reply" link at the end of every comment, and the reply-field has a button (little guy with a +) that makes it easy to WP:PING people. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:55, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

thank you!

Can I ask another question?

I keep getting "you have to have consensus to edit this" when I try to add a video to the Sun page. Do you know what this means?

BTW at first I got "you have to have copyrights to the video to post it" but it's my video, I have full copyrights to it. Daviddayag (talk) 11:58, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Daviddayag I'll reply at your talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:15, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Daviddayag - You should check out Wikipedia:Convenient Discussions! casualdejekyll 12:38, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi all! Recently I've been editing collected edition books into pages on comic book characters or a specific series, and I have noticed there is an inconsistency in publication date. For example, all of my current edits I've used the publisher of the books as the only reference, but I have noticed other websites (Amazon, Goodreads, Open Library, Booktopia, etc) have a different date, or worse several dates across these same websites. I've noticed from several books no third-party website has had the same date as the publishers' website, from what I've seen at least, which is really obscure to me. So far its only been off by a few days to a week, but that's significant when using the day/month/year dating system. Should I just stick to the publisher as the one reliable source? I don't really know if this is even worth getting worked up over. RadiganSupreme (talk) 12:59, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@RadiganSupreme Welcome to the Teahouse. You're right that it probably isn't worth getting too worked up about. However, my view would be to use the publisher's own website. All the other sites have probably accessed some third part book database which contains errors. I can't comment about comics, but I note that many monthly magazine are physically printed and on the bookshelves with a month one ahead of the one we're in. That could be the same with comics, albeit on a weekly basis - I honestly don't know. Perhaps you could ask at WP:WikiProject Comics. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, RadiganSupreme! As a former bookseller and editor I concur with Nick Moyes. Because of the logistics of distribution, physical books, comics etc. are (or were) routinely delivered to retailers up to several weeks before the official publication date, and some unscrupulous or uncaring retailers sell copies early, leading buyers to think the work is already "published."

Moreover, the same works, even when printed in one location and distributed internationally, are routinely released on different publication dates in different countries. There are also "international editions", typically sold in airport departure malls of a country before the work is officially published in that country.

Finally, intended publications can be postponed by various legal or other factors even after distribution. Reputable review journals are sent review copies, sometimes as bound uncorrected proofs, many months before intended publication so that reviewers can read and write articles about the work that will appear shortly before or after publication, and the journal may then print the intended date before some delay occurs.

As Nick observes, monthly magazines did and do usually go on sale before the month printed on them: in some markets, the first of that month is or was intended as when that issue should be taken off the shelves to make room for other publications and for that one's next issue. A more recent phenomenon is monthly magazines printing 13 issues a year, twelve named plus a "Winter" or "Christmas" issue: to spread their appearances evenly, the month-dated issues progressively have to appear earlier and earlier in the previous months.

Thus, third parties can be honestly misled about publication dates, or be unwittingly talking about different releases. The most nearly reliable publication dates are statements by the publishers themselves made after publication, or by other industry professionals such as an author's agent. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.121.1 (talk) 19:14, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for responding Nick Moyes and 90.209. Your responses have been so helpful I've screenshotted them for future reference just in case I forget. I particularly appreciate the detailed response 90.209, as you've explained why the publisher of a particular book is objectively the most reliable source and that resolves any doubt in my head. Thank you again to both of you so much! RadiganSupreme (talk) 14:03, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

The Constitution of the United States: is it pro-slavery or anti-slavery refers to a speech by Frederick Douglass, not to the question it asks. The title of the speech has a question mark (as indicated in the first line of the entry) and should be in quotation marks. But "edit source" does not appear to include the title of the article. Maurice Magnus (talk) 14:34, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Speech names in article titles aren't supposed to be in quotations (I Have a Dream, for instance). To fix the issue with the question mark, you would have to submit a move request (see WP:RM). ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 14:39, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Can someone please add Judge Scovel Richardson (appointed by Dwight D. Eisenhower) in the list of "other courts" for African American Federal Judges. Please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scovel_Richardson Thank You. 68.132.199.37 (talk) 13:58, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Done. Ruslik_Zero 14:40, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

One of the sources I use a lot and was going to request be updated a few months ago, I noticed was updated a month or two ago with it's new name which changed early last year, albeit the link for the website itself is still the same as it's always been, so still contains the name for the old website.

Here's a few that I want to get changed:

• - Rename collections-search.bfi.org.uk for this website to BFI Collections Search^[1]
• - Rename to old.bfi.org.uk for this website to Old BFI Sight & Sound or Old BFI Sight and Sound as there's a new version which doesn't contain the same stuff as the old version ^[2]
• - Rename BFI for this website to BFI Sight & Sound or BFI Sight and Sound^[3]
• - Rename filmography.bfi.org.uk. for this website to BFI Filmography^[4]
• - Rename player.bfi.org.uk for this website to BFI Player^[5]
• - Rename www.screenonline.org.uk. for this website to BFI Screen Online or BFI Screenonline or even better BFI ScreenOnline^[6] Danstarr69 (talk) 04:01, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I assume you're asking for citations using those sites to be updated throughout Wikipedia, yes? I think bot requests might be the way to go. By the way, please don't use bold in that way: it screams "look at me! I'm important!" with no justification. ColinFine (talk) 10:22, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Danstarr69 And if you are asking about the sources for a specific article (it's not at all clear to me what you are asking) then the best place to make a suggestion would be on that article's talk page.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:31, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ohconfucius: Could you please consider adding these changes to your Fix SOURCES script? GoingBatty (talk) 16:44, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

How do I add a reference with a link? Jadusa (talk) 17:39, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Jadusa. Please read Referencing for beginners. Cullen328 (talk) 18:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

the weekly mail has also been an Indian newspaper. Therefore, do not try to connect it to any one place. Also, keeping in mind its current perspective, play a role in its contribution. Source : Library of congress https://www.loc.gov/item/sn88063725/ 2409:4052:4E93:2704:0:0:96CB:E408 (talk) 18:33, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! While the Wikipedia article called The Weekly Mail is about a newspaper in Wales, there have been other newspapers with the same name. Editors should be careful to only add links when the text is referencing the Wales newspaper. If articles are created about other newspapers with the same name, then we'll have to consider which (if any) would be the primary topic and potentially create a disambiguation page. GoingBatty (talk) 18:58, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I confirmed that the seven articles that link to The Weekly Mail article are all referring to the Welsh newspaper. GoingBatty (talk) 19:02, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

There is a note on Talk:The Weekly Mail telling the OP how to request a new article. The OP has chosen to ignore it. DuncanHill (talk) 19:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I represent Peter Criss and am the webmaster of petercriss.net. I have been trying to make authorized changes, IE correcting his name and removing a photo but my changes keep being undone. Please help. Andrew sgambati (talk) 19:50, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

DISCLOSE FIRST, then we'll talk. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:54, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Andrew sgambati! Take the time to read these pages: WP:OWN, WP:COI and WP:BLP. Then you are welcome to make suggestions to improve the article at Talk:Peter Criss. You (or he) don't control the article, but it's possible you can have influence. If you are interested in giving WP access more usable pics of Peter Criss (we are really strict about copyright), check this link. And please tell him I liked his book. And music, I still have LP:s somewhere. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:04, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

How do I add written text to the article entitled Hammelberg Bavaria a large German training camp established 1893 and a section used as a POW camp called Merseburg 1916 named Stalag x111-c Alliston39 (talk) 19:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Alliston39, I can't tell what article you're referring to. Can you link to the article, with the name of the article title in double brackets, [[Like this?]] casualdejekyll 19:41, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm guessing it's Hammelburg, which is badly lacking in sources. Princess Persnickety (talk) 20:41, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

How do I change the color of my user name FelixAnon (talk) 21:52, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@FelixAnon Try Wikipedia:Signature tutorial. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:27, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I just created a main page for the Texas Tech University Libraries. However, either due to the category system or some other thing, it is still hidden in the search engines. I just want to clean up the category page for Texas Tech and have the library page easily seen for people searching for the page. TTULibrary (talk) 21:02, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@TTULibrary, indexing is covered at WP:Search engine indexing, but your article was draftified and is now at Draft:Texas Tech University Libraries (TTU). As a paid editor, you shouldn't have created it directly in mainspace in the firstplace, and your username is in violation of our policies as well. Please review WP:Conflict of interest. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:38, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Template:Did you know nominations/Sallie House

I know I'm not a newcomer to Wikipedia, but I am to the DYK process. Last Monday I nominated an article for DYK and it was accepted two days later. However, I noticed that when a DYK is accepted, the hook is moved to a prep area shortly afterwards (e.g. Template:Did you know nominations/Catatos). Mine was not. My question has two parts: 1) How long does it normally take for the hook to be moved to a prep area? 2) It's been eight days since I created the article. Is the accepted hook still eligible to be promoted (since it was accepted when the article was under a week old)? Thanks, Helen(💬📖) 23:39, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi HelenDegenerate, it's all good. Your DYK nomination has been moved to the list of approved nominations, and it will be promoted by a prep builder at some point. This can take a few days or a few weeks – the prep builders need to ensure a diversity of hooks within a given prep set so it just depends. Your hook has already been reviewed for eligibility, which is calculated based on the time of nomination, so the amount of time it takes to be promoted doesn't matter. DanCherek (talk) 00:00, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I incorporated some CC BY-SA 4.0 text into an article, and someone just chewed me out saying that CC BY-SA 4.0 wasn't an allowed license for source material. I just read everything I could find, and nearly all of the references say CC BY-SA is the correct license, and a very few mention 3.0 as being ok specifically, but I can't find any mention at all of 4.0. Is there something toxic about 4.0? Is there a reference to that somewhere, so I can understand the issue? Thanks. BurritoTunnelMaintenance (talk) 23:26, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Found it with a bit more searching.BurritoTunnelMaintenance (talk) 23:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

This lists the difference between the two, although as far as I can see these are more differences in explicit wording than in intended meaning. The "human readable" versions provided are the same (word for word) for both 3.0 and 4.0. What the differences in the legalese are, and what exactly the ever so transparent WMF legal team thinks makes the newer version is more restrictive than the earlier (although, supposedly, the only thing it does make some more explicit waivers and definitions) is beyond me. Somebody on the legal team) might be able to clarify, although you should probably contact them directly via email and ask them to provide a clarification somewhere on Wiki. Attempt: @AKeton (WMF): in case somebody on the legal team wishes to elucidate here. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@BurritoTunnelMaintenance, the issue with CC BY-SA 4.0 for Wikipedia is not with the copyright parts. 4.0 adds sui generis database rights, something which Europeans have but Americans don't, to the license. This would affect reusing facts from Wikipedia in some ways. (Facts themselves are not covered by copyright in the US). WMF proposed switching to 4.0 with a waiver of database rights, but Creative Commons said that was not possible. CC BY 4.0 is fine even with database rights because it doesn't have the share-alike clause for downstream use. CC BY-SA 4.0 is fine for images. This is original research on my part. As far as I know there isn't a WMF explanation available to serve as a reference for this. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:37, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

That link there isn't right - you're meaning to type Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources, not Copying text from other sources. See the page WP:Namespace for a technical explanation why.. casualdejekyll 23:52, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

It looks like 4.0 is fixes to this problem. "Everywhere CC licensed works are hosted, the pre-4.0 versions of the Creative Commons licenses — the ones without the “cure” provision — should be disfavored." BurritoTunnelMaintenance (talk) 23:56, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

IANAL, but to me it looks like 4.0 is explicitly not compatible with 3.0 and before to try to motivate people to switch to 4.0. Somebody at the WMF got the exact opposite effect. casualdejekyll 00:20, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello Teahouse! I am trying to edit the history of film article up to at least Good Article standards due to its status as a vital article but I've recently been struggling with tying a cohesive encyclopedic format to the structure of such a broad topic. It seems some time ago the page was split into the history of film Does anyone have any experience editing on such broad overviews of wide spans of historical information that could offer any tips? Thank you so much for your help in advance! Windyshadow32 (talk) 21:16, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Windyshadow32, getting an article like History of film to GA will definitely be a challenge. WP:BROADCONCEPT has some general information about big articles like that. Regarding structure, I'd look at the tables of contents for history textbooks on film—see how they structure themselves, and then build your article sectioning based on that. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:43, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Sdkb Thank you! Windyshadow32 (talk) 00:46, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

There is SO MUCH content without references. You may need to be brutal to remove content that is true but not moving the article forward in a significant way. David notMD (talk) 01:49, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I was just recently editing [States] and then some of the original details got deleted. Because of that, I went and redid it. However, I realised that something was missing. So, I had to go back and add the missing parts. Because of this, I felt like I was Doing some type of vandalism, and that's why some articles have Semi-Protection, to prevent vandalism on popular articles. If there is something I could to to prevent "spam editing", please tell me. Thank you. Mod creator (talk) 01:51, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mod creator: Hello Mod creator! Please read WP:BRD. If someone reverts your edit, discuss it with them instead of just redoing your edit. This can help prevent "spam editing". ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Muninnbot: Ji. -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 01:50, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Karsan Chanda: Hello Karsan! This isn't an appropriate question for the Teahouse. Amer Fort has your answer. Also, you pinged Muninnbot, however you notified no one since that is a robot operated by a computer. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:51, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

One thing strikes me more on Wikipedia! If one has the psalms of a wrong idea, then the wrong can also be considered right. -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 02:18, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I- ok...? Please remember that Wikipedia and it's talk pages (including the Teahouse) are not forums. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 02:19, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

What is Visual Editor? 2001:44B8:41C6:F700:B0C7:33DA:F24:29E0 (talk) 01:06, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

It's the WYSIWYG option for editing; see WP:VisualEditor for more details. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 01:32, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia, Visual editor is when you edit an article normally and not in source code like this Wikipedia. Hope this helps 2603:8000:F400:FCEA:941:D958:336A:B896 (talk) 01:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

For many editors, clicking the "Edit source" tab and using the source editor is normal - like we do on this Teahouse page. Other editors enjoy clicking the "Edit" tab to use the VisualEditor. GoingBatty (talk) 04:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello i am new wikipedian. I trying to improve this article Tanjib Sarowar. Its now deletion mod Mksabbir (talk) 03:22, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mksabbir: Hello and welcome to Wikipedia, to improve the article you must look for independent reliable sources to back up the text in the article so that it can pass the notability guideline and not be deleted. Sadly if you cannot find an reliable sources the article will most likely get deleted. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 04:11, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Mksabbir: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest you review WP:MUSICBIO, determine if Sarowar meets any of the criteria, and then post your thoughts on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tanjib Sarowar (2nd nomination). If you can find any additional published reliable sources that provide significant coverage of Sarowar, please provide those as well. GoingBatty (talk) 04:14, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Why is my draft [] marked as "This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view."? I'm not working for the company or far anyone related to them. It's my first full draft and I'm trying to do something clean and neutral. ReneRam63 (talk) 08:03, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Theroadislong, You added it , do you have a comment? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:14, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

It appeared rather unusual, in that User:Jsorrentino1972 started the draft and then ReneRam63 took over for their very first edits on Wikipedia, if there is no conflict of interest then the warning can be removed. Theroadislong (talk) 08:35, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

At the bottom of your Talk page there is a query as to whether your relationship to Consap is paid or other wise compensated (PAID), or if you have any personal connection to th company (COI). This is often posted when a new-to-Wikipedia editor appears who is working on only one draft about either a company or a person, such as an actor or musician. If not, reply there, confirming no connection. David notMD (talk) 09:42, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Resolved

Hello, I was taught how to add a newly translated page to the Wikimedia topic so as to easily find it in other languages (hoping the terms I'm using are specific enough...).
My question is: is it acceptable to do so with my user page, as I have it in multiple languages? Or should I just leave the links leading to the foreign ones in the section where they already are?
Thanks
Llaaww (talk) 14:16, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Llaaww! You may have success at your userpage at Metawiki, which is used as your userpage for any wikimedia site without an already-existing userpage. I don't know if adding inter-language links works on languages, so it may be worth a try! I don't think there is anything prohibiting you either way :) Sennecaster (Chat) 18:13, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

You cannot link user pages using Wikidata (see d:Help:Items#Notable items) but WP:ILL#Local links explicitly mentions using local links for user pages. ColinFine (talk) 18:33, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks to both! I'll see what I can do!

Llaaww (talk•contribs) 21:33, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

ColinFine, thank you! I managed exactly how you suggested! Llaaww (talk•contribs) 09:44, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

The Eyes of Tammy Faye (2021 film) - wrong preview of BAFTA I was reading the The Eyes of Tammy Faye (2021 film) page , and found that if you go to the awards section the preview of British Academy Film Awards is a text on Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie--clearly a troll post. The link itself is fine, I have no idea how to change that preview. Thanks. 181.65.25.237 (talk) 20:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC). 181.65.25.237 (talk) 20:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello 181.65.25.237! Thanks for reporting the issue, it appears that the British Academy Film Awards article was briefly vandalised earlier today (looking at the History). Though it was very quickly corrected, it appears that the previews for the page have yet to return to normal. Currently any preview for that page shows the vandalism instead. Probably takes a little while for the changes to filter down through the database. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 21:00, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

For anyone interested, the preview for British Academy Film Awards remained showing the vandalised version when I checked today. So I edited the lead to add the word "Test", this fixed the preview showing the vandal nonsense text. I then removed my "Test" word & it all appears back to normal. Seems like the preview does not update until something is added again? Anyway all is fine with it now. :) Hope this is of use! LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 09:47, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Do I need approval from volunteers to edit a page? As I want to update a page that contained template messages, I studied the explanation article that even I update the citation needed, I could not remove the tags by myself? And the COI issue, is someone else (not related and neutral) editing the page afterwards, the volunteers will remove the tags, or he/she can remove by themselves? Patriziatan (talk) 08:20, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Patriziatan Hello and welcome. If you have a conflict of interest, you should not directly edit any articles related to your conflict of interest, but you may make edit requests(click for instructions) on the article talk page(in this case, Talk:Tong Bing Yu) detailing changes you feel are needed. Please understand that Wikipedia articles primarily summarize what independent reliable sources state about a topic. Once independent editors have examined the article, they will remove any tags if they feel those issues are addressed. 331dot (talk) 08:24, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Patriziatan Theere is the concept of Wikipedia:Consensus which is always present. Unless you are a WP:PAID editor or have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest there is no obstacle to your making any edits to any article (not page, article). If you make an edit where consensus goes against you then do not seek to force your will own the community. See Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle.

So you neither need consent, nor do you need approval. What you must do is to behave within the community's requirements. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 08:25, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Patriziatan That was a general answer. However, I see you have gone against community consensus with your edits to Tong Bing Yu. This is an error, the more so since it appears you have been advised against your actions. Time to stop away form editing the article (you also appear to have a COI) and to seek to build consensus for what you believe should happen on Talk:Tong Bing Yu. If you fail, step away with good grace. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 08:33, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the replies, I have one more thing to confirm, is it forbidden to translate wikipedia page to another language? As I was told not to translate article/page from ZH wiki to EN wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriziatan (talk • contribs)

It is not forbidden, but it has to be done right. If you want to translate a zh-WP article to en-WP, first, determine if the article you want to translate meets the demands of en-WP:s WP:GNG. If it doesn't, stop. If it does, follow the guidance at Help:Translation. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:05, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I want it to be <span style="border-radius:9em;padding:0 7px;background:#414548">[[User:QuickQuokka|<span style="color: #00C3E3">Quick</span><span style="color: #FF4554">Quokka</span>]]</span> <sup>{{bracket}}[[User talk:QuickQuokka|talk]] • [[Special:Contribs/QuickQuokka|contribs]]]</sup>, which looks like QuickQuokka ^{[talk • contribs]}, however it is too long. Does anyone have ideas to simplify? QuickQuokka ^[talk] 18:30, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Levi OP: Pinging since i know he would know how to fix it. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:37, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

First, the spaces in css, you don't need. Second, hex colors can be approximated and shortened using the first hexidecimal digit of the red, green, and blue (e.g. #414548   –> #444   they look very similar). Third, open and close brackets can be escaped using HTML codes ([ –> [). The last thing you can do is to use the css unit q instead of pixels (px). These are about the same size, and might look a little different, so you might have to mess around with their values. Combining these tactics results in code like this:

<span style="border-radius:9q;padding:0 7q;background:#444">[[User:QuickQuokka|<span style="color:#0CE">Quick</span><span style="color:#F45">Quokka</span>]]</span> <sup>&#91;[[User talk:QuickQuokka|talk]] • [[Special:Contribs/QuickQuokka|contribs]]]</sup>

Which looks like this:

QuickQuokka ^{[talk • contribs]}

Luckily for you, this puts you right at the 255 character limit. If you have any questions, let me know. Thanks, ― Levi_OP^Talk 19:41, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Levi OP: Damn, that's crazy. Thanks! QuickQuokka ^[talk] 19:47, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Levi OP: It's not just crazy, it's art! BurritoTunnelMaintenance (talk) 00:04, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Levi OP: Nice work. Sorry to be a curmudgeon but unmatched source brackets can cause confusion, and we get bracket matching in two weeks. Maybe change &#91; to a normal bracket followed by a non-displayed character. That would also save three characters. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:34, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Thanks for letting me know about bracket matching, I had no clue! (Finally!) I hadn't really thought about the problem very much and just used the first solution that came to mind. One thing though, is there a non-displayed character that is kind of "standard" that should be used? ― Levi_OP^Talk 03:41, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Levi OP: We usually avoid non-displayed characters, and for code separation we usually use nowiki or comments which are too long here, so we have no applicable standard. https://invisible-characters.com has some possibilities, e.g. word joiner. I don't know whether some tools or user scripts may replace it with an encoding but it would merely mean the signature becomes a few characters longer. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:40, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I think I'll go with the word joiner, as it would probably cause the least problems when it comes to things like screen readers for the visually impaired, because would kind of be used the way it's intended. Taking that into consideration, @QuickQuokka, here is some new and improved code that will be future proofed, and four characters less:

<span style="border-radius:9q;padding:0 7q;background:#444">[[User:QuickQuokka|<span style="color:#0CE">Quick</span><span style="color:#F45">Quokka</span>]]</span> <sup>[⁠[[User talk:QuickQuokka|talk]] • [[Special:Contribs/QuickQuokka|contribs]]]</sup>

Which appears like this (shouldn't be any different):

QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]}

The code you're copying might not appear any different, but there is now an invisible character in-between the first and second brackets that will stop it becoming a wikilink. ― Levi_OP^Talk 13:50, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

THX!!! QuickQuokka ^{[talk • contribs]} 13:51, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I hope you are having a great day. I was wondering what in this draft is wrongly written. Can you please help me to improve the content? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:VCX_Forum

Best regards, Benjamin Pak (talk) 11:55, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Where have independent sources (not connected with VCX-Forum, or with any of its members, written extensively about the forum? If the answer is "nowhere", then it does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Your sources all appear to be either from the forum, or about issues with which the foirum is concerned, but not about the forum. (I have not looked at the sources: I'm assuming from their titles, so it is possible that I am wrong). ColinFine (talk) 12:11, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

In the feedback which you have received, the words in blue are wikilinks to further advice. Those are what you need to read. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:15, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment, ColinFine, All the references below are independent sources, not produced/conducted by the Forum.

Bucher, François-Xavier; Park, Jaeyoung; Partinen, Ari (13 January 2019). "Issues reproducing handshake on mobile phone cameras". Society for Imaging Science and Technology. doi:10.2352/ISSN.2470-1173.2019.4.PMII-586.
Jonathan B., Phillips & Henrik, Eliasson (January 1, 2001) [1st pub. November 17, 2017]. "Chapter 9.4.3". Camera 
Image Quality Benchmarking. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-05449-8.
Sebastian, Sonntag (June 2020). "Smartphone Kameras im test - Smarte Kameras". p. 22-29.

Would it be okay?--Benjamin Pak (talk) 13:36, 2 March 2022 (CET)

Hello again, Benjamin Pak. Yes, those articles appear from the information you've given to be independent of VCX-Forum. But they also appear to be about subjects which aren't VCX-Forum. Do any of them contain a significant discussion of the forum, or is it just mentioned in passing? I don't understand your last comment at all: a title is a title. --ColinFine (talk) 13:57, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your prompt comment, ColinFine. The following articles contain a significant discussion of the VCX Forum standard:

1) Jonathan B., Phillips & Henrik, Eliasson (January 1, 2001) [1st pub. November 17, 2017]. "Chapter 9.4.3". Camera Image Quality Benchmarking. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-05449-8. 

Chapter 9, describes the benchmarks and A number of camera benchmark examples (including the VCX-Forum standards) are provided. Also detailed is the possible evolution to move even closer to the ideal benchmark and highlight the technologies that remain to be developed to achieve this goal.

2) Sebastian, Sonntag (June 2020). "Smartphone Kameras im test - Smarte Kameras". p. 22-29.

The article, in one set of eight pages, includes a comparative analysis of the VCX assessment standards with the magazine group's tests.Benjamin Pak (talk) 15:48, 2 March 2022 (CET)

Benjamin Pak, your draft is about the organisation VCX-Forum, not about its standards. Which are the reliable independent sources that contain significant material about the organisation?

I don't intend to engage further in this discussion, (which should in any case be on Draft talk:VCX Forum, not here). --ColinFine (talk) 15:23, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

 Buckaroo36 (talk) 14:08, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Buckaroo36: Hello Buckaroo! I'm not sure what you mean by "bad websites of other people". Would you mind elaborating? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:09, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Thankfully, no one can easily delete other people's websites. You might be interested to read our article on Security hacker.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Buckaroo36. If you mean, can you nominate for deletion Wikipedia articles that do not meet Wikipedia's standards, the answer is Yes. But you need to do some work to ensure that the article is not salvageable, or your deletion will be rejected, and if you make too many deletion nominations without doing this work, that is likely to be regarded as disrupvie: see WP:BEFORE. ColinFine (talk) 15:28, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rankin_(photographer) Hi, I work mostly in Visual Editor at the moment. I noticed a while ago that this page was inaccurate (wrong birthplace) and seemed quite short and clunky, although a lot of articles appear online which describe biographical details, these were not reflected on the page. There were lists of music videos and books published by the artist on there at that time. I made additions to the bio, and I think as I was a new user and still learning to use Wikipedia, I made too many tiny edits, usually just a comma here or there.

I noticed that this was attracting attention to the page, as other edits started popping up, including a list of commercials directed and a list of exhibitions. After that, not only were the new lists deleted, the old lists of his work were, too.

The biography has been stripped back to a bare minimum despite citations for all the additions. Attempts to replace the artists work have been questioned as they were not "notable" enough, although publishing books and directing videos seems valid enough to me? The Talk page has become contentious, with a lot of emotionally charged and quite rude comments.

I have asked for help on there, and have been ignored or dismissed. Apart from trying to fix a couple of citations which I have done, I am afraid to do anything else as it seems the editors who control the page will not just delete anything I try to do now, but delete still more of the bio "while they are in there" - it looks to me at the moment completely slashed and much clunkier than when I first tried to "improve" it!

I feel really guilty that all mention of the artists work has been deleted, and the page ruined. All the collaborators who used to be named in the projects which were listed would feel pretty bad if they saw their contribution was wiped, I'm sure - I pointed this out, and was immediately accused of being affiliated with them in some way. I was trying to bring it into line with pages like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herb_Ritts or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bailey, who both have extensive biographical sections and lists of their work.

Does anyone have any suggestions? the birthdate was removed. His studying accountancy was removed. His starting a student magazine was removed. The box stating issues with the citations in the opening paragraph has been in place for some time, despite my efforts to remove it - it doesn't seem to have any validity now, but it remains there.I'd appreciate any help, just to get it into decent shape::--CujoJnr (talk) 20:09, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I have added the year of birth with a source, the citation template was removed yesterday. If you think that creating a student magazine is notable enough to mention, you are free to add that, with a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 20:31, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Please don't feel guilty for starting a process whereby a Wikipedia article has been improved. CujoJnr. I get that you don't think it has been improved, because you have the (common) misapprehensionn that a Wikipedia is in some way for the benefit of its subject, or of other people mentioned in it: this is not the case, except incidentally. A Wikipedia article should be a neutrally written summary of what independent reliable sources say about the subject, nothing more. An article which contains a lot of unsourced or badly sourced material is a bad article, and should be improved. ColinFine (talk) 23:22, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

thank you for replying to me. I am trying to improve the article, and to reply to Theroadislong , no, I do not think that starting a student magazine is a notable act in itself. I have included Justlettersandnumbers and MBhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MB here as they are active on the page.

The very basic and fully citated biographic details I added were simply to show which 3 colleges he attended, and that he met a future colleague at the last one, that they then started a college magazine together, all of which is factual and verifiable - and was mentioned by me because he and the colleague shortly afterwards started a magazine which would become very successful.

It seems viable to mention this as the subject is one of the leading photographers in the country according to independent sources, and has since published a number of magazines. Showing how he got to a place where he was able to launch his own non-student magazines seems to me to be worthy of inclusion.

For young people who would like to become photographers, this article may be a valuable source of basic information, as they too can attend college and start student magazines, and to remove these details from the already extremely short early life/bio section seems unnecessary.

If I will be allowed to restore this line of information to his bio without it immediately having my edit deleted, please let me know, and I will try again::CujoJnr (talk) 09:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

ColinFine (talk) 23:22, 1 March 2022 (UTC) thank you for getting back to me - I agree the article needs improving, which was my original intention, and I may not have done a good job, as I am learning as I go. Are books published by a subject, for instance, not usually included on their Wiki articles? - if I tried to restore the list of books with publishers details and ISBN numbers as verifiable proof that they were actually published, would that be appropriate, do you think?::CujoJnr (talk) 09:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi again CujoJnr. (I haven't looked at the article: I'm just answering your questions as posed). A selected list of a subject's works is appropriate, but not an indiscriminate list: as with anything else in Wikipedia proof of existence is not enough. Preference should be given to works which have been discussed independently. It is not usually appropriate to give a citation for an author's works; ideally, the mention will be based on an independent review or discussion, which can be cited; or if there is a comprehensive bibliography available, that may be cited in a "Further information" section. If a book is hard to locate, it might be appropriate to give an ISBN or WorldCat identifier; but we do not accept links to commercial sites such as Amazon. By the way, your reply has come out in a courier font because you began it with a space. If you want to indent a reply, begin it with one or more colons ColinFine (talk) 11:00, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

like this? (talk)- so I'm a bit confused by your answer, I understand it's better if it's been discussed elsewhere, but that seems to contradict itself if citations aren't usual - is a list of say, selected books published, with ISBN numbers & publishers details, appropriate to add?::CujoJnr (talk) 16:02, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello! I'm in Marketing with Thompson Coburn LLP. See the Talk section on the page about our New York office. Could a sentence like this one be added to the end of the "History" section on the page to mention New York? "In July 2021, Thompson Coburn combined with Hahn & Hessen and opened a new office in New York."

Also, I previously asked in the Teahouse if the "Notable Cases" and "Recognitions" sections could be removed because they contain outdated information. I understand old information can't be removed, but if it's no longer correct, is there any other avenue to have the information removed? Many thanks! Spencecomms (talk) 15:50, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Spencecomms: Hi there! The place to suggest improvements to the article is Talk:Thompson Coburn, not here. In the Removing old information section, I suggest you add the {{edit request}} template to get people to notice your request. You can also open a new request for the History section, or reopen the request in the New office in New York section and add the request about the History section. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 16:55, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

How do you differentiate between someone with a red username font and someone with no account page? is there an easier way to do this? PerryPerryD (talk) 16:16, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I would just avoid putting red in a signature at all. I think doing so is a bad idea for accessibility reasons. I'm unfortunately not aware of any way that doesn't involve clicking on the username and seeing if the page exists. casualdejekyll 16:18, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I see, I've seen this happen around wikipedia so thanks for letting me know. Have a good day. PerryPerryD (talk) 16:19, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@PerryPerryD, there is a way if you're on desktop. If you hover your mouse over a redlinked userpage (or any other redlink, for that matter), it should say (page does not exist) in the tooltip if the page actually doesn't exist. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:36, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Useful! thank you! PerryPerryD (talk) 16:38, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@PerryPerryD: If you mean a user name displayed in a standard signature and you use a desktop computer web browser, then you can hover the pointer (mouse cursor) over the name and see the 'tooltip' popping up, as well as (usually) the pointed link contents in the window's status bar. If the user page exists, like User:Example in red, the tooltip shows just the destination page name and the link is a standard URL to the page. OTOH, when the page does not exist, like User:NoSuchUserPage, the tooltip contains an information '(page does not exist)', just like for any non-existent wiki page, and the URL contains action=edit command and redlink=1 information.
If you use a mobile device, however, there is no hovering pointer and I'm afraid you can't test a link without clicking (i.e., touching) it. --CiaPan (talk) 16:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help! PerryPerryD (talk) 16:59, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Could I get some help handling a COI editor?

I conducted some rewrites over at Christianbook which got reverted, and I've left a comment over on that user's talk page about COI editing, the proper steps, and how to go about disclosure. I got a response, but honestly, I'm too tired and busy to have the proper discussion this deserves; I've also not really handled COI editors outside the realm of 'obstinately not going to change' before.

I'd really appreciate someone else's help; I hope this doesn't sound lazy(!). Thank you! --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 19:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ineffablebookkeeper: Hello Ineffable! I left them a warning on their talk page for undisclosed paid editing because they have stated in an edit summary that they are affiliated with the company which means they are being paid (in some way) by the company. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:01, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: - Thank you! I really appreciate it.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 21:06, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ineffablebookkeeper: No problem! They seem to be cooperating so I've told them to read WP:BRD. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:09, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: In the meantime, what should I do about the article? I'm not sure if I should reinstate my edits or wait until they've responded to take action.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 22:12, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I clicked on a single reference (from 2012) and found the way it was cited highly misleading. Here's my fix to that. (The source, incidentally, does not impress me.) Elsewhere in the article: "Christian Book Distributors was started in 1978 by Stephen Hendrickson, 19 years old and a sophomore at Central Bible College in Springfield, Missouri, out of his parents’ home in Lynn, Massachusetts", flagged "non-primary source needed". But the 2012 source I mentioned previously, says that "Christian Book Distributors was started in 1978 by two brothers who were 19 and 14 years old at the time out of their parent's [sic] home in Lynn, MA" (my emphasis). My quick impression from what I see here is that the sourcing is shaky, and perhaps that the company just doesn't meet WP's standard for notability. -- Hoary (talk) 23:02, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello Wikipedia teahouse members it is my pleasure to meet you I need insistence in a page that I have Reliable Sources for the Journal of Astrophysics Journal Letters 956 page , except that there is a "No need unaccepted reliable" source is it ok or not thank you! --Gekkotan (talk) 11:31, 2 March 2022 (UTC) Gekkotan (talk) 11:31, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Gekkotan, I have read this three times, but I still don't understand it. (For one thing, by "insistence", do you perhaps mean "assistance"? And if so, then what kind of assistance?) I imagine that it's related to Draft:PKS 2131-021; but how, I know not. -- Hoary (talk) 11:54, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I am talking about kindly that if I published it as an Article even though there is a half - cut reliable source? Gekkotan (talk) 11:57, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

If I understand your question correctly: no, a single source is rarely enough to establish notability. Furthermore, where the source is a scholarly paper, it is often an idea or a hypothesis advanced by the writer of that paper, so it is not an independent source. ColinFine (talk) 12:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I made a (failed) attempt to turn all of the run-on sentence of Draft:PKS 2131-021 into sense. Needs work on the English and the referencing before submitting. David notMD (talk) 14:09, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Wondering

FYI

 – Added section header. GoingBatty (talk) 22:51, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

FYI

 – Combined sections. GoingBatty (talk) 23:30, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I was wondering about my recent article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:PKS_2131-021 or PKS 2131 - 021. Gekkotan (talk) 22:39, 2 March 2022 (UTC) Gekkotan (talk) 22:39, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Gekkotan: Welcome to the Teahouse! What are you wondering? While you're patiently waiting for your draft to be reviewed, please consider fixing the third sentence, which I don't know how to fix: "according to astrophysical journals published an article about the blackhole, currently no hypothesis supports that these colossal black holes will collide, the twin quasars would ripplespace time and change brightness on occasional years, Later Aalto University spots movement in stars considering them a 'black hole' soon after teams of scientist later see if it is a black hole, New York LIGO detected it an astrophysicist named Chiara Mingarelli." Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:58, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Gekkotan, you asked about this only a little earlier, at "Question from Gekkotan", above. Frankly, I don't understand your writing, and I don't think that other editors do either. Additionally, responsible editors avoid subjects that they don't understand; and, like the great majority of people frequenting this page, I have no understanding of astrophysics. (You might get help if you asked at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy.) Wherever you ask, first make sure that the sentences constituting your draft can be parsed. -- Hoary (talk) 23:12, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

What is pending changes? 2603:8000:F400:FCEA:896C:F18A:C3F7:CFE5 (talk) 23:40, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Welcome to the Teahouse. Pending changes protection is a tool used to suppress vandalism and certain other recurrent nuisances on Wikipedia while allowing a good-faith user to submit an edit for review. Intended for infrequently edited articles that are experiencing high levels of such troublesome edits from new or unregistered users, pending changes protection can be used as an alternative to semi-protection and full protection to allow unregistered and new users to edit pages while keeping the edits hidden to most readers until they are accepted by a pending changes reviewer (also called a "reviewer"). There are relatively few articles on Wikipedia with this type of protection.

You can learn more about it here. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:43, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi, can someone please help me with my article? SteveJClay (talk) 18:49, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:SteveJClay/sandbox ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 19:26, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@SteveJClay The key for having an article accepted is that the subject must meet our notability criteria. In this case, WP:NMUSIC. Please read that and come back with just three (no more) of the best references that demonstrate he meets those criteria. If they cannot, then there is no chance for an article.

In addition, you have broken one of our key rules, int hat you have stolen copyrighted text from another source and unlawfully claimed you have the right to release it as your own. (see here). I will now delete the offending content, and you must never do that again, or you will face being blocked from editing. You must always write content in your own words, and not be lazy and copy/paste highly promotional text from other sites. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:52, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello I was wondering about punctuation after inline citations; do I put a period before the citation(s) or after? I looked in the MOS but I couldn't find anything (maybe I didn't look hard enough though)

Thanks! Champ9642358 (talk) 23:48, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hey, Champ9642358! Punctuation should always be before citations, per MOS:CITEPUNCT. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 00:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Champ9642358 Welcome to the Teahouse. Place inline citations immediately after the punctuation, and do not include a space between them. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, both of you; this really helps me out. Champ9642358 (talk) 00:38, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

No problem! Feel free to come back here if you ever have any other questions. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 00:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

BWI Airport cleanup Hello. Attempting to update the BWI Airport and update the inbox data, I messed up the opening text of the article. Please clean up and tell me how to correct in the future. Thank you.Theairportman33531 (talk) 01:52, 3 March 2022 (UTC) Theairportman33531 (talk) 01:52, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

DONE. Your edit removed the }} from the end of the infobox of the article Baltimore/Washington International Airport David notMD (talk) 02:20, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the help and advice.Theairportman33531 (talk) 02:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I just tried to edit in en wikipedia using my account, but got a message saying there was a global lock on my IP address. "The IP address or range 58.152.200.242 has been globally blocked (disabled) by Green Giant for the following reason(s):"

It only seems to happen when I log in through my WiFi(I am currently logged in through a mobile hotspot, and see no issues editing)

I have never edited as an IP myself(only with my account, and even then, quite rarely).

Can you kindly advice what I should do in this case? I would ideally prefer not to have to always use my mobile internet account when i want to edit. Assassin (talk) 06:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

hi Assassinx.x! it seems like the ip address assigned to your wifi has been hit by an ip block. it doesn't mean you have done anything wrong, don't worry. you can request an exemption to this through the unblock ticket request system. happy editing!  melecie  t - 07:05, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that comment. I went to the page you linked and hit "Submit an unblock request", however the only options there are "If you have a user account" - Appeal My Block and "If you DO NOT have a user account" - Appeal my IP Block.

In this case, I have an account, but I want to appeal/get an exemption on an IP Block...so neither seems the correct option? Assassin (talk) 07:20, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Please see meta:Global blocks for more information about these types of blocks. Usally, global IP blocks don't mean that you did something wrong. The (global) user right to edit through a gblocked IP is called "global IP-Block excempt" and can only be assigned by Stewards. You can request it at Steward requests/Global permissions#Requests for global IP block exemption on meta (Global IP Blocks don't affect meta) Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:32, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I have made a request at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Global_permissions&diff=prev&oldid=22923860

FYI I had to use my mobile hotspot to create a report at meta. It wouldn't let me create a report with the blocked IP. Assassin (talk) 07:52, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

(from m:SRGP) That means your IP was also locally blocked at Meta. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 08:00, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I was editing a politician's infobox and wanted help regarding the ordering of the offices he held. Should the most important office be inserted first (top-most) followed by offices in descending order of importance, or should I insert them in reverse chronological order? Or is there a third way? Toofllab (talk) 19:20, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi, it seems that the order should be chronological, so whatever their most recent held office is should be at the top. I'm not sure if there is an official ruling on this, but it seems that every politician article lists them chronologically. ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 21:17, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Tunakanski what you describe is commonly called "reverse chronological order"; most recent at the top. This order is used in the infobox, but in the article text events are reported in proper chronological order; birth to death. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:11, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Not sure what the standard approach is, but William Howard Taft seems to be ordered by most notable (given that it goes President, SC Chief Justice, etc etc), despite Taft having served as President before being on the SC. Jakoats02 (talk) 10:30, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I had made one revert here, as an editor had removed a "who" notice without making any changes. The concerned editor warned me on my talk page to not edit war, and to start a talk page discussion (He had posted the warning while I was in the process of writing the talk page message). I wanted to know if the revert does count as edit warring. Thanks, Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 08:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• @CapnJackSp: This edit was the second time Venkat TL removed the {{who}} template. Possibly they thought it had been reinstated by the same editor who put it in the first place.

More generally, the red line for edit-warring is WP:3RR, although reverts at a lower frequency can still qualify. One or two reverts in five days with useful edit summaries (so far) does not qualify in my book. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:50, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 10:54, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Responding to ping. @Tigraan is right in his assumption. The tag was added without any talk page thread elaborating the problem. It was re-added again without starting any talk page thread. Next time start a talk page thread first. Discuss and add the tag only after making clear that the tag is justified. This will prevent future edit war. A single revert without discussing first is indeed edit warring. Please read WP:EDITWAR and WP:BRD for details. Venkat TL (talk) 10:01, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Venkat, I think you need to re read the message to get what the editor said.Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 10:54, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

If you want to make it clear that you are edit-warring, leave messages like this edit of 07:41, 3 March 2022, falsely accusing the other editor of leaving misleading edit summaries.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:19, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

There are times when it's best just to forget it and move on. I would normally reckon that Venkat TL was swimming against the tide of consensus by insisting on removing the tag when two separate editors had, independently, reverted it back in. Venkat's edit summary was definitely not correct. But the mistake was innocent, it's easy to assume that the same person has reverted twice. Further, Venkat's removal of the "who" tag is clearly correct. The person is referred to as a disgruntled ex-employee turned whistle-blower, so it's blatantly obvious what role they fulfil and that they're almost certainly anonymous. This description is also supported by the source; there's nothing more to be said. Being accused of edit-warring hurts, but it doesn't have any consequences; no one gets in trouble for being accused, only for being guilty! This is the rich pageant of life... Elemimele (talk) 14:19, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Please kindly help me check out this article. Does it looks promotional?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pickwood_Magazine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maybreed09 (talk • contribs) 12:17, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello Maybreed09, I do not think the article is promotional, but instead you should be looking at the references. Information on Wikipedia must be backed with independent, reliable sources. It seems as though the article is not backed with reliable sources making it not notable. I suggest reading WP:GNG to see if your article is notable or not. Also there are some minor grammar problems. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 13:47, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

WP:TOOSOON in my opinion. Magazine has been in operation less than three months. David notMD (talk) 14:28, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I wanted to see the Wikipedia article on the the avant-garde arts group the Situationists, and I punched "Situationism" into my search engine. It came up with a blurb about a psychological theory above a Wikipedia link, with a heading of "Situationism" and a subheading of "Psychology." Clicking on the link leads to the Wikipedia article entitled "Situationism (psychology)." Under the title it says "for other uses, see Situationism (disambiguation)." Clicking on that leads to the disambiguation page, where one of the choices IS "A term incorrectly applied to the ideas of the Situationist International..." with "Situationist International" highlighted in blue. Clicking on that gave me the page I was looking for. I've never heard of a "controversy" over the word, and I'm sure "Situationism" is the word in common usage, and I'm sure that's what people search on. I don't think your average punter knows of disambiguation, and I don't think they'd stick around when the only thing that comes up in their seArch refers only to Psychology. I don't understand the intricacies of disambiguation or article movement, but is there a more efficient and logical way to access the arts group page while using "Situationsism" as the search term? Pete Best Beatles (talk) 06:00, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles: Hi there! Here on Wikipedia, if you search for "Situationism" or "Situationists", you are redirected to Situationist International. Unfortunately, we can't control how search engines present Wikipedia data. However, if you'd like to change the hatnote on Situationism (psychology) so people coming from the search engine see a link to Situationist International, then be bold and do so. Another option is to post your concerns or suggestions on one of the article's talk pages. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 06:23, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: I guess I want to know if there's a way to bypass the "Situationist (psychology)" page altogether by either 1) adding "Situationist International" to the clickable list People also search for that appears below the initial Wikipedia link, 2) adding something like "Situationism - art's group"" to that list and link to the "Situationist International" article, or 3) retitle the "Situation International" article based on common usage despite the controversy over the name. (My guess is you'll say choices 1 and 2 are parts you say we can't control). -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 11:42, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles - we simply don't own Google, and can't change what they say. As for 3, that sounds like something to bring up on Talk:Situationist International. casualdejekyll 12:37, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll:Thanks, I think that's what I need to know. (I guess I'll think about changing the hatnote, but that's not really the issue.} -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 14:25, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles: We can't change search engines, but you can choose to change your behavior. The next time you want to see the Wikipedia article on the the avant-garde arts group the Situationists, go to Wikipedia (not your search engine) and search for "Situationism" or "Situationists". GoingBatty (talk) 14:56, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § Changing inaccurate information with no reference

 – —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:05, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

If some inaccurate information is reported as true and then it can find its way onto Wikipedia and then reported as truth in secondary sources even though it is not the case. How can these be corrected?

For example, a person was announced to be on the board of a certain, however this was never the case. There are no sources to say they have left the board as they never joined it in the first place. The absence of them from the board list on their own website isn't enough to overturn the existing information in Wikipedia. How is is possible to get these types of situations corrected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Occasionalpedestrian (talk • contribs) 11:40, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Occasionalpedestrian This is the talk page for the Teahouse, not the Teahouse itself. Questions should be posted to the main Teahouse page(Wikipedia:Teahouse). That said, if the sources in an article are summarized accurately, but the sources are incorrect, you must either contact those sources directly and request a correction, or offer more current independent reliable sources that have more current information. If the sources are not being summarized accurately, please describe the nature of the corrections needed to more accurately summarize them on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 11:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

My mistake, thanks 331dot this makes more sense now Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 12:18, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Occasionalpedestrian: If this is a COI edit for another company via the organization that you work for - like the Heineken COI declaration - you need to follow WP:DISCLOSE again for each company. - X201 (talk) 12:42, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Gibson C. Armstrong

Dear Wikipedia, The page on myself, Gibson C. Armstrong had "This biographical article is written like a résumé. Please help improve it by revising it to be neutral and encyclopedic" posted at the top. So I removed content that I thought might seem biased and added some sources. Instead of removing the tag, it added another: "This article is an autobiography or has been extensively edited by the subject or by someone connected to the subject. It may need editing to conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. There may be relevant discussion on the talk page. (February 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)" I think the content is neutral and, again, I added sources. Could someone therefore remove the tags, or let me know what more I need to do? Thank you for your help. Gib/Gibson Armstrong GibsonArmstrong (talk) 12:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@GibsonArmstrong: Welcome to the Teahouse! here is the problem, since the article is about you that is considered COI (conflict of interest) editing. It is highly suggested that you do not edit articles of yourself or someone you know. I suggest following the steps at WP:COIEDIT. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 13:37, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@GibsonArmstrong: Hello Gibson! In addition to the above, since you are the subject of the article (which has been confirmed according to your userpage) it's highly recommended that you don't edit the article directly yourself, but instead request changes be made to the article by submitting an edit request. That way you can still contribute to the encyclopedia while not having any issues with a COI. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@GibsonArmstrong: Maybe you could suggest a change to the "Political career" section, which states "Armstrong was elected to the Pennsylvania House of Representatives in 2006, defeating John Barley. When Barley resigned, he was elected in a special election on July 16, 2002." You were elected in 2006, and served until November 30, 2006? It would be better for this section to be in chronological order. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:08, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I have completed my draft and I now need to add my references. It was rejected due to there being no references. I want to edit the page in Visual Editor. How do I call up my Draft in Visual Editor, as it currently sits in Source Editor? Mysky2blue1 (talk) 14:54, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mysky2blue1: are you from a mobile device or from the app?

If you are using the app, the Visual Editor is not available. I suggest you scroll down to the very bottom of the page and click on "view on browser" or similar.

Otherwise, if you are not editing from the app, in the top right corner of the source editor, you should see the pencil symbol; by clicking on it you will call up a menu which will permit you to use said editor.

--Llaaww (💬|📝) 15:16, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mysky2blue1: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you are unable to use the visual editor, ensure that Preferences → Editing → Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta is unchecked. I would suggest changing Editing mode beneath that to Show me both editor tabs, so that when you're at the top of an article, you can click on Edit this page (which is right next to Edit source) to open the visual editor. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:17, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mysky2blue1: See also WP:VISUALEDITOR, and if you need help on on how to add references see WP:REFB. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 15:20, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mysky2blue1: Drafts and articles do not "sit" in the source editor or VisualEditor. The editor you choose depends upon your device and the preferences you set in Wikipedia. In the browser, there are "Edit" and "Edit source" tabs, so you can choose which editor to use for each edit. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:24, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Why does my page keep being declined. It is supported by Wikipedia Information. I tried citing it but it appears as a red link Theavengerssalacia (talk) 17:50, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

The content is already here on Wikipedia at Elizabeth_II#Issue you are welcome to add to it. Theroadislong (talk) 17:53, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I am trying to link to a concept described in a section of a longer article. How do you link to a section without using the exact name of the section and the section link symbol? Jaireeodell (talk) 18:42, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Jaireeodell. if I understand you correctly, examples

• [[Wikipedia:Teahouse#how_to_"pipe"_the_name_of_a_section_link?|This thread]] =This thread
• [[Wikipedia:Teahouse#how to "pipe" the name of a section link?|This thread]] =This thread

The first is copypasted from the url. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa SångThanks! That worked. I was overthinking it and using a section link template. Jaireeodell (talk) 19:34, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I am researching a future article, and wanted to see if there was an article about the children's religious magazine Golden Hours. I found Golden Hours (magazine) which seems to contain information about the children's magazine The Golden Argosy, which later became the adult periodical Argosy (magazine). My main source of reference for the magazine contents is the respected reference book Children's Periodicals of the United States by R. Gordon Kelly, published by Greenwood Press. I also have other reference sources. My plan is to move the current contents of the Golden Hours (magazine) to Argosy (magazine) and revise Golden Hours (magazine) to show the actual contents of the periodical. I checked the Golden Hour history and wrote the creator on his Talk page, asking if he had any objections to this. I also wrote on the Golden Hours (magazine) Talk page to let anyone following this article know that I plan to radically change it. I will wait a couple of weeks to see if there is any objections, and then make sure I have at least three good references for the revised article. Is there anything else I need to do before totally deleting a current article, and rewriting it? Karenthewriter (talk) 18:37, 2 March 2022 (UTC) Karenthewriter (talk) 18:37, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

P.S. – I wasn't planning on working on this magazine, but I am researching an old book series, written by someone who was once on the staff of Golden Hours. That's when I fell down the rabbit hole of wanting to fix an inaccurate article, so I can have good links for my new article. Karenthewriter (talk) 18:42, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Karenthewriter. I see no evidence either in Golden Hours (magazine) or in the sources it cites that it is the same magazine as The Golden Argosy. Ashley mentions Golden Hours in a footnote to the section about Golden Argosy, talking about the way that "golden" became fashionable - if Golden Argosy had been the same magazine as Golden Hours, surely he would have said so? ColinFine (talk) 19:21, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Whatever happens, you should add a WP:HATNOTE in the article The Golden Argosy (an unrelated book). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:57, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine I apologize for posting here, I messed up big time. The opening line of the article is "Golden Hours was first published in January 1888." The reference, The History of the Science Fiction Magazine, states "he began publication of a children’s weekly story-paper, The Golden Argosy, first issue dated 9 December 1882 .... He decided to shift towards an adult audience, and his first move was to disassociate The Golden Argosy from the 'golden' name, shortening its title to The Argosy... That made me believe that the two magazines were being confused. But I now see that there is a footnote mentioning Golden Hours, and the date of its first issue. I didn’t take the time to read the footnote – I thought that the main body of the page was being referenced.

I learned a hard lesson – read every line of a reference before assuming there's a problem. Karenthewriter (talk) 16:31, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, Karenthewriter. We all make mistakes, and I've certainly been guilty of not reading something carefully enough when responding to it. ColinFine (talk) 19:42, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, i was wondering if there was any way to get a new username that doesnt require logging out? i like Xephrax but i want my username to be Slice565. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xephrax (talk • contribs) 18:58, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Xephrax: Please see WP:CHUS, however, since you only have 4 edits gobally, it might just be better to log off and create a new account with the new username, since changing the name is almost not worth the effort. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:02, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Xephrax I agree with what @Victor Schmidt says. Simply forget the username of your current account, never use it again, and simply create a new account with the name of your choice. Far less work for everyone. Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:42, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello I need help with making articles and by the way my username is Xephrax. I have attempted getting ideas but everything I can think of already exists. Should i help edit articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xephrax (talk • contribs) 17:24, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Xephrax Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for your enthusiasm. It's not required that you create new articles- which is extremely challenging without experience and knowledge. Many editors do lots of work here without creating a single new article. There are over 6 million articles to maintain here. Please contribute to those that interest you. You may want to use the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 17:40, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Xephrax, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. I remember when I started editing Wikipedia, I was desperately trying to find something I could make an article on. More than fifteen years later, with 20 thousand edits, I've only ever created about a dozen articles. If you try to create an article before you have understood how Wikipedia works - most particularly, how we require that a subject meet our definition of notable - you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing time. You can add much much much much more value to Wikipedia by making small improvements (especially finding and citing sources) to many existing articles than by trying to create a new article before you are ready. ColinFine (talk) 20:12, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I've been studying at berklee college of music for three years, at the end of december my single is on the market and I still can't create my wikipedia page, can you please help me to create my personal wikipedia page? Dilara Ç. Tanır (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello Dilara Ç. Tanır, unfortunately it is highley suggest that you do know create an article about your self as that would be considered a conflict of interest (COI). Secondly you would need to be considered notable and have independent, reliable sources covering you to pass the general notability guideline. Im sorry to say, but please do not create an article on yourself. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 21:36, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dilara. I'm afraid that, like many people, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. Promotion of any kind is forbidden in Wikipedia. If at some point you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then somebody (preferably not you) could create an encyclopaedia article about you. This article would not belong to you, would not be under your control, would not be for your benefit except incidentally, would not necessarily say what you wanted to say, and should be based nearly 100% on what people unconnected with you had published about you in reliable places, not on what you or your associates say or want to say. ColinFine (talk) 22:02, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

No references = no article David notMD (talk) 22:29, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Disregard

 – User indefinitely blocked

Please add Dmam6 to the article list. --RandomGiratto127 (talk) 22:40, 3 March 2022 (UTC) RandomGiratto127 (talk) 22:40, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

RandomGiratto127 Hello. Could you please clarify your request? Holduptheredawg (talk) 22:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Don't worry - user since blocked for disruptive editing. Nothing to see here... Nick Moyes (talk) 23:10, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I represent an academic journal publisher that has legacy URLs appearing as external links on at least 80,000 Wikipedia pages. Due to a change in both domain name and URL structure, all of these URLs are now deprecated but the citation is still valid and the content is still available. Most URLs result in a 301 or 302 redirect to the correct page. However, redirects are not a permanent solution and may fail in the future.

The affected pages include the most trafficked and most influential pages on Wikipedia including, for example:

• Artificial intelligence - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence
• Africa - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africa
• Cororonavirus - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus
• Internet - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet
• Vietnam War - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

What is the best way to inventory and update these external links en masse? SibeliusHicks (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, SibeliusHicks. You can request they be updated at WP:URLREQ. ColinFine (talk) 20:18, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, ColinFine. SibeliusHicks (talk) 23:25, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I can't afford to log in or create an account, because it's the password thing. I tried every password I can find, but it does not work. I might stay unregistered forever. Someone help me. 2603:8000:F400:FCEA:6CF5:AACE:D8CC:C5CB (talk) 00:23, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP! What is the specific issue you're having? Tell us any error messages you're receiving if you can. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:26, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

I sent you a welcome notice on your talk page that has a button called create an account if that helps you. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 00:42, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I'm in Marketing with Thompson Coburn LLP. We have "multiple issues" flags at the top of our page from years ago when we were less knowledgeable about how to request outside help with edits to our page. We've since shifted to addressing requested edits on the Talk page. Could someone provide me some actionable tips for how to move toward having those those flags removed from our page? Anything else we can do to address/improve those issues? Many thanks! Spencecomms (talk) 22:27, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Spencecomms Welcome. I have copy-edited the article and removed a load of trivia, uncited material and other content sourced to the company's own press releases. As a result, I think it's OK for me to have also removed the templated messages about "multiple issues" you refer to. I hope this meets your wish to see a properly encyclopaedic and non-promotional article. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:12, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I was wondering if there is a way to import CSS from a Common.css page in another language Wikipedia or wiki into my own common.css page. Is there any code for me to write in my CSS page?

Thanks!

Leejordan9 ^talk
_sandbox 01:28, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

You could just copy it. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 02:17, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Leejordan9. Please be specific in questions, e.g. linking a page you want to import. You can import a CSS page with code like this: