Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1249

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 1245←Archive 1247Archive 1248Archive 1249Archive 1250Archive 1251→Archive 1255

Question regarding content assessment appearing in see also sections.

Recently, while editing, I noticed that some articles, such as Valle Alto Formation and Arcabuco Formation, have an articles content assessment ranking in the see also sections. I removed it, but decided to revert my edit once I saw it happening again. Is it normal for an article to have content assessment rankings in the see also section? Gaismagorm (talk) 13:53, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

I have never seen that before. Since any change in content assessment would necessitate editing all the articles that link to it I can't see this as being a useful thing to do. Reconrabbit 15:23, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
@Gaismagorm The guidance at MOS:ALSO doesn't mention it and I've never noticed such icons before. It is clear that they would not automatically update if the target article's assessment were to change, so there is a maintenance overhead in having them. I'd be inclined to remove them and let anyone who disagrees provide a reason for keeping them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:24, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
alright, I'll remove the marks on the two pages. Gaismagorm (talk) 15:30, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
It appears to be a quirk of Tisquesusa (talk · contribs)'s article writing style; they were very active in the paleontology projects prior to being blocked in 2021. Reconrabbit 15:30, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

XDefiant

XDefiant is shutting down, so shouldn't everything be former (Like was instead of is)? RoyalSilver 17:54, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Yep, but not until the full server shutdown occurs in June. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:22, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

People's Organizaton for Progress

Hi all! I have been making various pages lately so I may have lost track...

I was hoping to check whether I created a page for civil rights group People's Organization for Progress and it was deleted; or if I hadn't had a chance to make it at all and falsely remember.

Seems like only admins can check a deleted page's history, but I'm not sure.

In the case it was deleted, can I contest that by bringing it back, adding more references, and making sure it meets WP:Notability?

Thanks! Evedawn99 (talk) 17:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Evedawn99. Not an admin, but you're given a noticed when trying to create a deleted page. When doing so for this one, it says that an admin had speedy deleted the page (WP:CSD) under the criteria of G11, meaning that the article was "blatant advertising, used only to promote someone or something." Tarlby (t) (c) 17:14, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
I see and thank you so much! Thanks for reminding me how to find it. It looks like I never did edit! And it seems it was deleted in 2008: perhaps it was written in a biased way. I would be interested in seeing the deleted page if possible, but I assume that's not possible for a non-admin.
In any case, I will continue to add POP history to the article of its founder (Larry Hamm) entertain the idea of gathering sources and restarting an article that is written in an encyclopedic and nonbiased manner (like I did with the Jim Bray article). Thanks for the help! Evedawn99 (talk) 17:57, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Evedawn99, I am an administrator and looked at the deleted article. All it consisted of was an external link to the organization's website, with not a single word of prose. Cullen328 (talk) 20:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Help with sourcing

I'm trying to work on citations for Cisco NX-OS and I did find this webpage that discusses NX-OS and Cisco IOS pretty in-depth, but I'm having trouble finding reliable information on the website itself. This is already from trying to sort through the Cisco.com forums and the webpages and forum posts discussing this. I would appreciate a second opinion on whether this source is usable and, if possible, some other sources to use as well. guninvalid (talk) 19:20, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

@Guninvalid Thanks for asking. I would keep looking. Firewall.cx does not have an editorial policy on its site and the article you've linked is unbylined -- the two of those together make it hard to assess as reliable. I did find a page that confirms Firewall.cx is an "official media review partner of Cisco Press," which indicates to me that it fails the test of being a WP:INDEPENDENT source and thus is unusable for establishing notability. Hope this helps! Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
@Guninvalid Chris Partsenidis is the chief editor for the site. Here's more about the team. Not sure why it's claimed not to be independent of Cisco. The volume of practitioners who frequented and contributed to the site are what made it a reference for product info and troubleshooting. Just my opinion, but the site is not a shill. It is recommended by Cisco for their content, and was given priority to review Cisco's material when released. The site and forums discuss more than just Cisco information. Just Al (talk) 20:25, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
@GuninvalidI have some experience with 5K and 2K, so maybe I can help with citations. The article is a bit sparse. Just Al (talk) 20:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

How to put a picture that isn't on commons?

Hello, I'm working on a new article about the famous Bengali cinematographer "Kamrul Hasan Khosru" in my sandbox for draft submission later. And I want to put up a picture of him. But there's no pictures or anything close about him on commons, the site where I'm supposed to get all my free to use pictures from. What am I supposed to do in this situation?Yelps (talk) 17:35, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

So this is a tricky situation. All media on Wikipedia needs to be in the public domain or fall under fair-use laws. Now usually if the photo is from 100 years ago or 70 years after the death of the photographer's death, where it automatically falls into the public domain. Now, a photographer can give their media a Creative Common license, where they waive their copyrights and we can use it. This can be tricky and may take a long time or might no be possible at all. In that case we just have to leave it for now. If you do happen to find a freely licensed photo you can upload it to commons yourself or keep local here, depending on the image. Commons has more information on licensing here, and the the Creative Commons organization also does here. Also check out the the Department of the Interior for some info on the public domain. Sophisticatedevening (talk) 18:29, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Yelps, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia.
The first thing I will say is that new editors who plunge into the challenging task of creating a new article before they have learnt how Wikipedia works often have a frustrating and disappointing time. I advise you to leave that aside while you carry on improving existing articles, and learn more about notability, verifiability and reliable sources.
The second is that you appear to be writing User:Yelps/sandbox backwards - you have only one citation, and that is to iMDB, which Wikipedia does not regard as a reliable source because it is user-generated. Writing an article without first finding several independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject is like building a house without first building foundations or even surveying the building site.
The third thing is that while pictures are very welcome in an article, they are not essential, and they play no part in getting a draft accepted: I advise you to forget about a until you have got the draft to a point where you submit it for review and it gets accepted into the encyclopaedia.
And, finally, to answer your question: it is unlikely that you will find a photo of a living subject that is acceptable to Commons, and therefore to Wikipedia, unless either you 1) take a picture yourself at some public event, or 2) contact the photographer who took a particular picture, and ask them if they would be willing to go through the process described in donating copyright materials.ColinFine (talk) 20:21, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Yelps, another serious problem with your draft is that it is written in an overtly promotional tone. The Neutral point of view is a mandatory core content policy. Any evaluative statements must be verified by a reference to a reliable, published source that is independent of the director. A picture is the last thing that you should be thinking about. Cullen328 (talk) 20:45, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
IMDb is not a Wikipedia-accepted reference because anyone can edit it without editorial oversight. See WP:42 for reference quality. David notMD (talk) 22:57, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for your replies. What I'm doing collecting sources to stash in my sandbox for organisation and article-building later. It is true I'm still learning. But I'm totally aware that my "article" basically breaks all the rules and that's because I'm not actually planning to create an article right away. I'm just stashing up all the sources for later use. I hope you can understand that, and thanks.Yelps (talk) 08:25, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Yes, Your Sandbox is a right way to start work on a draft, also to store information or content you may want to use at several articles or drafts. David notMD (talk) 20:33, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Help for page creation

Good morning

Yesterday I submitted the page I am creating for review

Draft:Gianni Lora Lamia

But it was declined telling me to make some corrections before submitting it for review again.

I am a new editor and I kindly ask if you can help me correct this page


Thank you very Much Phx-Racing (talk) 17:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Can you tell what specific help you are seeking? 331dot (talk) 17:59, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
I would like to know what I have to do to correct the page, what are the things I should correct or modify
Thank you very much again Phx-Racing (talk) 18:14, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Phx-Racing. Most of your citations are bare URLs. These are unsatisactory, because they make it harder for reviewers to evaluate the reliability and independence of the sources. Your citation should include title, author (if available), publisher, date, and page number, at the very least.
I haven't looked closely at your draft, but it looks to me as if far too much of it is not about Lamia. A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what reliable independent sources say about the subject (in this case Lamia) and very little else. ColinFine (talk) 18:17, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
@Phx-Racing I ran citation bot on the draft, which helped a bit but there's still a lot of work to be done. See Help:Referencing for beginners. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:33, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello, I try to create esxternal links for example https://www.ewrc-results.com/profile/370301-gianni-lora-lamia/, with the Template:Sports links/doc, but for me it's quite difficult and I can't create it right, could you please help me with this ? Thank you very much Phx-Racing (talk) 16:08, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your help, I have already made several corrections, inserting more reliable citations as well. I know this, but in any case I wanted to say that even if several resources cited are links, but they are links to the official website of the Dakar Rally, where you can check the entry list of the participants, the results of the stages and the final classification of the race, I think that this is an irrefutable proof of the driver's participation in the race. I kindly ask you if you can continue to help me, as I have already said I am new as an editor
Thank you again Phx-Racing (talk) 19:04, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
You have a few sentences/paragraphs without sources. In a biography, every piece of information needs to be sourced. I think you could probably slim down each section too, they're all quite wordy in prose. Try and be concise. qcne (talk) 19:53, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
(I've also filled in most of the bare references for you.) qcne (talk) 19:54, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
Phx-Racing, the infobox for your draft says that Gianni Lora Lamia was born in 1965 in the Kingdom of Italy but that kingdom did not exist in 1965 because it was abolished by a vote of the Italian people in 1946. You need to do a much better job with accuracy. Cullen328 (talk) 21:48, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your precious help,I have fixed this error Phx-Racing (talk) 20:18, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
These sources must be reliable sources. Whatever shows up as the first result on google (which you have referenced) is not a reliable source. Ultraodan (talk) 03:08, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
Phx-Racing, the section "Range Rover No Stop Record 1989" has no stops (periods, ".") until its very end. It would benefit from more stops. It mentions "the fearsome Sahara desert"; why is the reader being told that it's "fearsome"? ¶ That section isn't unusual. Consider this single sentence: After only three stages he found himself 16th overall fighting for the top ten until halfway through the race where in the stage that reaches Niamey in Niger for the rest day, an electrical problem sent him far back in the general classification, after, the rest day the race is somewhat disturbed by terrorist threats and the organizers, anxious to ensure the safety of the competitors, decide following information received from the French Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defence, a huge airlift is taking place to transport hundreds of drivers and vehicles of the Dakar rally across the desert between Niamey and Sabha in Libya, after reports of a planned rebel attack. And why is the reader told that an airlift of hundreds of drivers and vehicles is "huge"? ¶ Also, the photo captions are most puzzling: I don't know how to start to parse Gianni Lora Lamia and Emilio Giletti Technical Cars Check Paris Dakar Cairo 2000 Paris Parc floral du bois de Vincennes. -- Hoary (talk) 22:26, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for you help, I have already made some corrections and shortened the descriptions trying to make them as short as possible, also regarding the photo captions, I ask you if you could please check every now and then and suggest me what could be the things to correct Phx-Racing (talk) 18:58, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
Phx-Racing, the most conspicuous photo is captioned "Gianni Lora Lamia Nissan Motorsport Team Dessoude at the 21st 1999 Granada–Dakar Rally". First, if I take this literally I infer that there were many Granada–Dakar rallies in 1999, and this was the 21st of them. As this would of course mean that Granada–Dakar rallies occurred more often than once a month (hard to believe), I guess that you instead mean "the 21st Granada–Dakar Rally (1999)". Secondly, "Gianni Lora Lamia Nissan Motorsport Team Dessoude" hardly conforms to the patterns of English noun phrases: the simplest fix would be to simplify it to "Gianni Lora Lamia" (deleting "Nissan Motorsport Team Dessoude"). -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello again,
I have made several corrections, and added more reliable resources, would it be possible please, to have your opinion on this, and further help for further corrections or changes if necessary
Thank you very much Phx-Racing (talk) 17:21, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Phx-Racing Too many of the references are URLs. There are still some hyperlinks to remove. Of much greater importance, there is far, far too much detail about each race. See WP:UNDUE. And too many images. If you go to Dakar Rally and from there to articles about the winning drivers, most (but not all) are much more concise in reporting race results. David notMD (talk) 13:24, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help, could you specify for example which hyperlinks should be removed, as I have already explained I am a new editor and I still don't understand many things well
Thank you Phx-Racing (talk) 13:45, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
There were instances where you had inte4nded to create references but forgot to put the ref at beginning and /ref at end, so they looked like hyperlinks. I fixed those. David notMD (talk) 21:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your help, I will also try to make all the descriptions shorter and reduce the number of images, as you suggested. Phx-Racing (talk) 22:33, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia page Indexing

If a Wikipedia article has been in the user space or draft space for more than 90 days, and then get moved to the main space is it automatically indexed by search engines since the old history has been moved to main space and it is more than 90 days old. Sign them in (talk) 21:09, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Sign them in. Welcome to the Teahouse. You did ask this question before and have already received an answer. See here. I believe that means "no". The 90 day counter starts ticking once a page is moved into MAINSPACE. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:51, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

My redirect got reviewed

I got a notification saying that a redirect I created, Deep fried shrimp, got reviewed. What does this mean exactly? Justjourney (talk) 20:17, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Justjourney. When a new page is created, it's cued to the New Pages Patrol for New Page Reviewers to review. When a page is reviewed, it's allowed to be indexed by search engines, so now it shows up when you Google it. When I searched for "Deep fried shrimp Wikipedia", the "Fried shrimp" article is now what comes up. Tarlby (t) (c) 20:27, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
@Justjourney In summary: your redirect has been accepted! Thank you. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:53, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Subscriptions to newspapers

After passing 6 months as an editor, I believe I can now access additional databases which include newspaper subscriptions; please remind me how to do this. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 00:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library. -- Hoary (talk) 00:46, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Thanks! Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 00:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

I do not believe editors are acting in good faith.

I have had a very disappointing day today interacting with the editors from wikipedia. I do not believe the few editors I interacted with today are "acting in good faith" when responding to my comments. Most of the replies to me today were pure obfuscation, fixation on minor errors, moving the goal post, or reiteration of previous points by the editor. Most of my initial comments were not adequately addressed.

I have edited scientific papers as a professional for the last thirty years, and I can recognize snarky comments when I see them. If interested, I can provide references to my professional publications and citations.

In summary, I am disappointed by my interactions here today. I would welcome any feedback to my responses, and to the editor responses I have gotten, if a 3rd party is willing and interested to review the discussion. Until then, I have to concede that perhaps wikipedia is no longer a place to discuss ideas in good faith. Troy Kelley Tdkelley1 01:51, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

I suggest you don't spam several posts about the same issue, as that will just annoy third parties. I agree it's unfortunate that these conversations have taken the tone that they have, but this is already being discussed in the sections you created above. Note that part of Wikipedia's ethos is that anyone can edit, so no special deference is given to editors who have published works. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:24, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
I understand my edits were not minor edits, and the editors critiqued me for not understanding that distinction, but really offered no recourse for further edits. I am beginning to understand now I need to do all these edits myself, using the wikipedia html-like formatting, but I am not sure I want to waste the time, if the edits will be just be ignored or rejected out of hand.
I have been a reviewer of scientific journal articles for 30 years as my profession, and the comments I received here today from the editors, especially one in particular, are not acceptable. Now I have been blocked from the page I would like to thoughtfully edit, with respectable references, using the most current science, but is not allowed because the a particular editor disagreed with me. I made a few simple mistakes with reference numbers, and the editor used that mistake to discount my entire argument. This is not acceptable.
My main point for today, that was never addressed by a particular editor, was that a blog post, from approximately 20 years ago, should not be used as the main reference to refute an scientific article. This is basic academic publishing 101. I am sorry that my reiteration of this fact, has now led to the important subject matter not being discussed. It is disheartening that there is so much pushback to discussing scientific theories by the editors of wikipedia. I have tried to be cordial and professional the entire time. I repeatedly apologized for any mistakes I made, but the end result was a ban, and ultimately the discounting of a scientific theory. Troy Kelley Tdkelley1 02:51, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello @Tdkelley1. I've searched through your edits (also, I noticed you removed the link in your signature that leads to your talk page. Why?) and believe you are talking about interactions at Talk:Aquatic ape hypothesis. From just a quick skim, I personally feel that the other editors were not uncivil at all. I also feel that some of your comments were pretty snarky and a little condescending, and accusing someone of not acting in good faith without clear evidence and examples is a personal attack (see WP:NPA#WHATIS). WP:BLUDGEONING is also bad practice. Tarlby (t) (c) 02:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
I did not intentionally remove remove the signature that leads to my talk page. So I am unclear what you are talking about.
Can you please be specific about what comments you disagree with? As I have mentioned before, I have thirty years of editing scientific articles, and I do not believe the interactions I have had today were in good faith. Again, can you please be specific? Troy Kelley Tdkelley1 02:36, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Just for reference, custom signatures that link to a user page, user talk page, or a user contribution's page are OK; a direct link to one's user talk page isn't required per WP:SIGLINK. An uncustomized signature will provide a link to both the user page and user talk page by default along the lines of Username (talk) time stamp, but this isn't required. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:53, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the information, but I really have no idea what you are talking about. I have spent most of my time editing a specific page with no results to point to, signatures are not something I was paying attention to. Troy Kelley Tdkelley1 02:58, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
I was just pointing out that a user's signature isn't required to have a visible direct link to their user talk page, as what someone above seems to have asked you about. The standard way of signing one's posts (i.e. using four tildes) should look like "Tdkelley1 (talk)" (the syntax is [[User:Tdkelley1|Tdkelley1]] ([[User talk:Tdkelley1|talk]]) which looks like Tdkelley1 (talk) to to others) in which "Tdkelley1" links to your user page and "talk" links to your user talk page. Since your signature only shows the "Tdkelley1" part, the other person is assuming that you've customized your signature in a way that got rid of the "talk" part. If you did such a thing, that's OK as long as your signature still contains a direct link to your user page. If you didn't customize your signature and just add ~~~~ to the end of your posts, then perhaps it's bug or something. If you want to find out why that's happening, you can probably find someone who can help you WP:VPT; if you don't care either way, then don't worry about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:22, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the helpful comments. As long as I am not breaking any rules, I guess I am OK with the signature. Thanks again. Troy Kelley Tdkelley1 14:21, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Additionally, I did provide evidence of why the editor was not acting in good faith. For example, he was using the "move the goal post" technique, which I said, which is not a valid argument technique. For example, when I addressed one comment, he just switched to another comment, or moved the goal post to something else that needed addressing. This was specifically referencing his argument technique, from a debate perspective, and is no way a personal attack, but rather a critique of the debate technique, which is not acceptable in scientific circles. You cannot "move the goal post" in response to a rebuttal of a fact in a scientific article. Troy Kelley Tdkelley1 03:19, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
wp:ani is the place to go if you think editors are acting in bad faith, I would advise against it (as your recent block should demonstrate). Slatersteven (talk) 10:01, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Interesting that I was blocked for editing the article, when, in fact, I did not edit the article after I was told not to. I was blocked for discussing with the editor MrOllie, the merits of certain references. Or at least that is why I believe I was blocked. Basically the block came after my discussions, not after any edits I made. Troy Kelley Tdkelley1 12:34, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing the article in question and the Talk page of the article."Due to your ongoing disruptive editing, I have blocked you from the pages Aquatic ape hypothesis and Talk:Aquatic ape hypothesis with an expiration time of indefinite. This is a contentious topic restriction: Disruptive editing in a contentious topic area - pseudoscience and fringe science. Please read the Guide to appealing blocks. Cullen328 (talk) 02:20, 18 February 2025 (UTC)" Creating a discussion here at Teahouse is not part of the process of appealing the blocks. David notMD (talk) 13:47, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I understand that. Thanks for the information. I am unclear as to how my editing was disruptive though, when I only made edits to a few sentences, and those edits were not even excepted. How can this be considered disruptive? Troy Kelley Tdkelley1 14:02, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Best to ask the Admin who blocked you, or else pursue the appeal process. Teahosue Hosts are generalists. David notMD (talk) 16:58, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Wow. I am surprised I am even allowed to still post here. I have been banned almost everywhere.
I have spent a lot of time here, and I am not happy with my experience here. The level of snarky-ness is extremely high here. I have posted my interactions with MrOllie which were not professional at all.
I have a sub on reddit were we can discuss AAH in nauseating detail if you would like. Please join me there and we can discuss this all you want. I welcome any critique. Perhaps iron out actual changes to the Wiki article.
Reddit sub r/AquaticApeHypothesis
Also I would like to respond to the critique given here of the four articles I posted for review, but I am unable to answer the criticism! IMHO, that is crazy. Troy Kelley Tdkelley1 18:22, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
You've been page blocked on Aquatic ape hypothesis and its talk page only, not anywhere else. There are millions of other articles that you can edit, most of them not being a contentious topic. Sorry for being busy earlier, but rhetorical questions like What? Do you even understand what AAH is about... Are you an anthropologist? You don't seem to understand the theory don't give me a good impression.
It's also bad etiquette to type in ALL CAPS as doing so is the equivalent to yelling in a discussion. When emphasizing something, italicize. Tarlby (t) (c) 18:38, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Perhaps I was a little upset at that point. If you look at my interactions with Mr. Ollie they were quite frustrating and he was completely rude and unprofessional. He was not understanding the theory correctly, and frankly, I was at a loss as to why I should explain to an editor, a theory, that they don't understand. Is that my responsibility, to explain theories that editors don't understand?
Regardless, I would love to be more specific on this topic if you want to entertain me.
We can also discuss on Reddit at r/AquaticApeHypothesis. I will not ban you simply because you disagree with me! Troy Kelley Tdkelley1 20:21, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It's not a place for general discussions of concepts or a place to advertise your Subreddit which it appears you're attempting to do here. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 21:20, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
@Tdkelley1: Two people can look at the same thing and see two different things. When I look at the article talk page being discussed here, I don't see anyone being completely rude and unprofessional to you, but I do see people on both sides perhaps getting frustrated. All WP:WIKIPEDIANs are WP:VOLUNTEERs who are free to come and go as they please; in other words, it's not anyone's job or profession to discuss things with you. Wikipedians with specialized knowledge in a particular subject area such as yourself might have a hard to adjusting to Wikipedia talk pages because such pages are probably not the type of venues they're used to, which is why such Wikipedians are often advised to take a look at WP:EXPERT.
As long discussions are WP:CIVIL and move towards establishing a WP:CONSENUS, things tend to be OK; however, people are people and it's very easy to get frustrated when others don't see things the same way you (= collective you) do. When that happens, taking a step back to reassess or even just to breath can sometimes allow things to cool down and perhaps even provide a bit of perspective, even WP:DOGGY can be a good idea in such cases in both figurative and literal sense. Trying to keep the pot boiling by starting multiple threads here at the Teahouse with provocative section headings implying others are doing something inappropriate is a move in the wrong direction that is unlikely going to garner you any sympathy. Wikipedia is less about winning than it is about consensus-building, and the fact the an administrator felt the need to step in and place editing restrictions on your account isn't really a good sign.
Sometimes no matter how hard we try, consensus just doesn't go our way. When that happens we can either try to understand why and modify our approach accordingly or just move on to something else. Continuing to go on and on about how others just don't get what we're saying isn't going to get us very far at all. Your account is a little more than a week old and you've made a bit more than 100 edits. There's a learning curve associated with Wikipedia pretty much like there is with anything else. There are over six million Wikipedia articles and many are in need of improvement; so, perhaps taking some time doing other things (even things like the WP:GUILD) will not only help you become more familiar with things Wikipedia, but also perhaps show others that you're really more interested in being WP:HERE than WP:NOTHERE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:24, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Help & ask for advanced review for Draft:Winston Utomo because of looks like an advertisement

Hello from Indonesia, recently I've resubmitted the Draft:Winston Utomo and declined again. The reason was read more like an advertisement. I've also read the regulation and want to ask some suggestions how to fix and improve this draft to become better & not recognized as promotion article. Happy to receive suggestions & improvement, please help & guide me about this, thank you. Rachael Adrino (talk) 02:21, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Sample: This significant investment solidifies IDN’s position as one of the largest and most influential media technology companies in Southeast Asia. Under Winston’s leadership, IDN has transformed to become the leading consumer technology company with four main pillars: digital media, livestreaming, creator economy, and entertainment. Yes, this is more like an advertisement. If, even after being prodded about it, you don't see the promotional language or won't remove it, I really wonder if editing en:Wikipedia is for you. -- Hoary (talk) 02:48, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Got it, I'll read & crosscheck it again, and do several changes for the promotional language one as soon as possible. Thank you. Rachael Adrino (talk) 03:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
I removed some of the promotional wording, more needed. David notMD (talk) 18:21, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Many thanks to you too for your help. Rachael Adrino (talk) 03:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
@Rachael Adrino Do you need more help ? If so , how can we help you ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 14:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
@Anatole-berthe Please help me for checking again the Draft:Winston Utomo, after several edits from me & several editors previously to prevent the promotional phrases. From me, I think that's enough for now, but if there are still several promotional phrases, please inform & suggest me which one need to fix. Thank you. Rachael Adrino (talk) 03:08, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Catching other editors attention

I'm in a disagreement with another editor, to avoid an edit war, I created a Talk Page post on the article to discuss what the dispute is over. When I made the initial reversion, I left a message on their talk page which was not responded to before they reverted my revert. How do I make sure they see either of these, and at what point do I escalate, and if so how? Sircheezball (talk) 19:14, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

They should have gotten a notification for both so it's nothing on your end. I would wait a little bit longer and if you feel it is necessary to escalate you can read WP:Dispute resolution to look for the next move. Sophisticatedevening (talk) 19:20, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
@Sircheezball Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle is the way to go! Side-note, I agree with your revision, being familiar with RCP. And would recommend {{Diff2}} when you need to link diffs in the future. Happy resolving! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:19, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for your support! Sircheezball (talk) 04:30, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Subjective article with Self authored sources?

I was suggested to edit the Alexander Woodman article due to it being flagged for promoting the subject in a subjective manner.

And while the article is certainly guilty of this, my question is about its sources. At least 14 of its 38 sources are articles authored by Alexander Woodman himself. These articles are used as the citations for some of the most egregious subjective sentences in the article.

How do I proceed from here? Do I straight-out delete the dubious parts of the article? Bruebach (talk) 12:59, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

For now, I have added coi and notability tags- The article mght be a candidate for WP:AFD. Lectonar (talk) 13:04, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you. I will try to see if there is anything salvageable in this article. Bruebach (talk) 13:14, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
The article was created by User:AlexWoodman, burnished by User:ShoushanA. Huge amounts need to be removed. You can decide if I cut too deep. Also, you started with "I was suggested..." By whom? If you have a paid or unpaid connection to Woodman you have a conflict of interest. David notMD (talk) 14:09, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
It was suggested by the "Suggested Edits" function of the user homepage. Due to it being tagged for copyediting due to promoting the subject in a subjective manner. Bruebach (talk) 14:43, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Ah. The simple note you put on your Talk page absolves you of any suspicion of an undeclared COI. David notMD (talk) 17:02, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for this feedback. ShoushanA (talk) 06:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Case Sensitive Search

Hello! I am pretty new to editing and wanted to begin with some copy editing tasks to get familiar with the syntax and expectations of Wikipedia.

I was looking into cases of "the its" in articles, and many results turned up were not relevant to the issue, as they referenced ITS as an acronym, which is not an error. I was able to regex a search that was case sensitive (insource:/" the its "/), but it only turned up one result before the regex timed out.

I'm not super familiar with regex so I don't know if there's a better way to execute a search like that, or a different way to make searches case sensitive. If this isn't a viable option for searching I understand, but wanted to ask in case I was missing something obvious Screechout (talk) 06:18, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

@Screechout: you could try to combine the regex search with normal search: {" the its " insource:/" the its "/}. It should find all instances of phrase regardless of case and then the regex will filter out only the lowercase results. MKFI (talk) 08:18, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
That did the trick! Thanks for your advice. Screechout (talk) 09:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Orphan article

Hello, I have added a link to Tamatem Games with the help of the find link tool leading me to Nanobit, which had a sentence about Tamatem. This means Tamatem Games is no longer an orphan article. If anyone is able to remove the orphan article notice please do! PLBF61371 (talk) 04:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

@PLBF61371 The orphan tag is near the top of the source code. If you look at this editing page you will readily see what needs to be removed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:49, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Help Needed: Improving References for Draft:DC Wine & Spirits

Hi,

I’m trying to create a Wikipedia page for 'Draft:DC Wine & Spirits' but it was rejected due to insufficient references. The feedback mentioned that my references are not considered reliable, independent, and in-depth enough.

I included sources like WineBusiness.com, Benzinga, APNews, and MSN.com, but they seem to be insufficient. Could someone please guide me on:

**What type of references would be acceptable?

**How can I find better sources that meet Wikipedia's standards?

**Any other improvements needed for approval?

I appreciate any advice. Thanks in advance!

Tom Tomgera (talk) 05:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Sources ought to be reliable, independent of the subject, and provide significant coverage of the subject.
  • The link to APNews is to paid content, a press release from KISS PR. Press releases are absolutely worthless in this context.
  • The WineBusiness citation is inappropriate as not only is it a simple description of a normal business activity that is explicitly listed as trivial at WP:CORPTRIV, it's written by DC Wine and Spirits.
  • The Benzinga link is also a paid press release.
  • The MSN link is clearly paid content, written by DC Wine and Spirits.
None of these are reliable, none of these are independent, and none of these provide significant coverage about the subject.
The sources are so blatantly promotional, that I have to ask if you have an undisclosed link to this company. If so, you need to explicitly disclose the relationship as noted in WP:COI or WP:PAID, depending on the exact nature, should a relationship exist. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 06:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Declined twice, and requested on your Talk page that you address the COI/PAID question before any further editing. Having COI/PAID does not forbid you from creating a draft, but must be declared. Also, see Help:Referencing for beginners on how to make in-line citations. David notMD (talk) 12:14, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Citing a Newspaper Article in PDF (Not Online)

Hello! I have a newspaper article relevant to a person I am writing about. The article is not available online. 1) How should I cite it correctly? 2) Should it be placed in the References section or the External links section? Advokat2024 (talk) 12:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

@Advokat2024 Many newspaper sources are not available online, although there are websites specializing in scanning them into archives: e.g. newspapers.com. Wikipedia is happy to use WP:Offline sources (see link for details) provided that full information is given so that a reader could, in principle, find the newspaper in a library which had copies. If you use our template {{cite news}}, you'll see how to format the citation into the references. Don't link as an external link: if you personally provided the .pdf in some accessible online repository you would be likely to be infringing the copyright of the newspaper. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:50, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Very helpful, thank you Mike! Advokat2024 (talk) 13:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Nota bene: However, in the event it happens to be a copy of an old article (very roughly, pre-1930) whose copyright is expired, you can then upload it to Wikimedia Commons (and link the cite to that uploaded copy). For details see commons:Help:Public domain.--Slowking Man (talk) 16:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Appreciated. Advokat2024 (talk) 18:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Extended-Confirmed

To get extended-confirmed, do I have to make 100 edits in the main namespace (wait 30 days), or is it the total edits like when I was autoconfirmed? Justjourney (talk) 03:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

@Justjourney: Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. The extended confirmed policy is here, but it basically states you need to make a total of 500 edits in any namespace and with an account age of at least 30 days. cyberdog958Talk 03:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Justjourney, please be aware that they must be 500 productive edits over a period of at least 30 days. There is an editor being discussed at the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents right now for "gaming the system". They added and removed a period 331 times in an hour and 35 minutes just to get extended confirmed and make edits to an article related to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Behavior like that is not permitted. Cullen328 (talk) 18:02, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Record high and low in climate

Hi. I want to suggest the climate table to be changed a little.

For example, look at the climate table of fhe city of Gwangju: Climate table

Here, the record highs and lows for each month are stated. But we don't know when has this record extreme reported in history. We only know the timeline from the table (here 1991-2020)

So, I want to suggest the times the record highs and lows have been reported be present too in all climate tables. Whether by referencing them or adding notes below the table. Aminabzz (talk) 16:17, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Aminabzz. To ask for some change in how the information is presented in a particular article, the best place to ask is on that article's talk page. But for a more general request like this, I would suggest a WikiProject talk page - perhaps WT:WikiProject Weather or WT:WikiProject Cities. The people who watch those talk pages are more likely to engage in a discussion with you, and perhaps can point you to existing recommendations, or previous discussions. ColinFine (talk) 17:25, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Thanks Aminabzz (talk) 21:16, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Questions after moving a page

I moved a page for the first time (from List of Trump administration dismissals and resignations to List of dismissals and resignations in the first Trump administration), along with its talk page. But the Moving a page instructions say "check 'Move all subpages, if applicable' during the move process," and there was no box to check for this. (And FWIW, the simplified How to move a page article doesn't alert you to the need to attend to subpages at all. Should it?) There's one archived talk page that wasn't moved. The Moving a page instructions say "If subpages were not moved, they will show as redlinks on the new talk page," but I don't see any redlinks on the new talk page or any reference at all on the new talk page to the existence of an archived talk page. Do I now move the archive page in the same way and then link to it from the new talk page, and if so, are there instructions for the specific text that I should add to the new talk page re: the archived page (or should I just look at the text on a random talk page with archives to see how this is worded / where it appears)? Or is this something that I should ask an admin for help with? Also, the Cleaning up after a move article says "the bot settings need to be updated ... In some circumstances, this will involve updating (moving) a hard-coded bot subpage." I think I understand the instructions about the bot settings (if I've understood correctly, I shouldn't update this until I've taken care of the talk page archive), but I don't understand how to determine if I need to update "a hard-coded bot subpage." Thanks, FactOrOpinion (talk) 15:12, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

@FactOrOpinion: Moving the subpages of pages automatically is an option only available to admins and page movers. If there is a talk page with more than a couple subpages (which you can check for with Special:PrefixIndex), it is better to request the move through WP:RM/TR. Also, the archiving bot needs to be updated when moving a page with automatic archiving. I have moved the page and fixed the bot for you. cyberdog958Talk 23:32, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
@Cyberdog958, thank you for your help. FactOrOpinion (talk) 01:00, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Change an edit summary

I really wish there was a way to edit or amend an edit summary. This is an example where I accidentally selected the wrong edit summary from my drop-down selection of edit summaries. I do not think I can fix it now. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:03, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

When I want to write a better Edit summary, I will go back in, add or remove an unnecessary space, or something similar, and write a better summary, often with a quick explanation of my error. HiLo48 (talk) 02:11, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
I could do that, is that what I should do? Iljhgtn (talk) 02:14, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
@Iljhgtn: Yes; see Wikipedia:Dummy. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:46, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Wrong wikidata item for article

More information Editor is blocked. ...
Close

How to check if an article was previously PROD?

I tried looking in the archives to find an answer, and I'm sure it's been asked before, but I couldn't find it.

I'm trying to check if a page has previously been tagged for proposed deletion, but it's not showing up in the tag filter on the page history. Does that mean nobody's done it on this page or is there something I'm missing? Thanks! EllieDellie (talk) 23:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

I did realize that the page in question had very few edits, making it very easy to check manually, but would still like to know for the future. EllieDellie (talk) 00:38, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
@EllieDellie, I asked that same question not that long ago, and here's what people said. FactOrOpinion (talk) 01:51, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Much appreciated! EllieDellie (talk) 01:53, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
An existing article which was PRODed in the past, but de-PRODed, is supposed to have an {{Old prod}} message on its talk page. This to my knowledge isn't "enforced" automatically by anything though; it requires someone to have done that (ideally the person who PRODed). But, the takeaway is if a page had that neglected for whatever reason and doesn't have the template, no one is going to blame you for unknowingly re-PRODing. Don't worry about it and let an admin handle it if you wind up sometime stumbling on such an article.
(The only way to 100% for-certain check is to use a tool like Wikiblame and do a linear search through the entire page history, seeing whether the prod template was ever added. For an article with a big history this is likely to take some time.) --Slowking Man (talk) 02:10, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Thanks, this really helped! Glad to know I won't have to do it manually every time EllieDellie (talk) 04:53, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Issue with factually incorrect edits to Page

Hi There. I've been contributing to a number of pages related to Australia and cities/towns there.

One of these is the article Springfield, Queensland, which is for a Suburb within the city of Ipswich, Queensland.

This Suburb is demonstrably part of the city of Ipswich, Queensland for Local Government Purposes, and not the immediately adjacent city of Brisbane. Here are three official Government Sources:

The issue I've seen is that there are other editors (all anonymous / unregistered) that keep editing the page, only editing the sections related to which city it is part of, to makeit read that it is part of Brisbane instead. This is factually incorrect, as proved by the above three sources.

I have been trying to follow the Principle of Assuming Good Faith (WP:FAITH), by reverting the edits and leaving messsages on the Talk Pages. But as the edits are being made by anonymous users, I feel it's likely that they are never seeing these.

I don't want to get into an Edit War (WP:WAR), but to me this is an open-and-shut thing.

Is there anything I can do here, other than just checking the page every so often, and reverting these edits and leaving more Talk Page messages, as I have been doing? (See edit history of the Suburb Page.) Thedwan (talk) 01:07, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

@Thedwan: I get it - it's tough especially if people aren't seeing your attempts to discuss. But when I look at it, I'm kind of confused too. Because to me, based on the geography, both Springfield and Ipswich are suburbs of Brisbane. So while yes, it's technically correct that the administrative status of Springfield is that it's a suburb in the City of Ipswich... that doesn't matter to the vast majority of people. As evidence of that, it's in the planning for Brisbane's mass transit/commuter transit networks, for example. I would be curious personally what sources not affiliated with the government say about it - when they refer to Springfield in, for example, national news, do they say it's a suburb of Brisbane or a suburb of Ipswich?
The solution here may not simply be to enforce the current wording of Springfield is a suburb in the City of Ipswich, Queensland, Australia. and Springfield is in proximity of the nearby suburbs Springfield Lakes and Springfield Central. - the solution may be to find a way to reword the whole lead to point out that it's administratively in Ipswich City but that it is, for layperson purposes, just another suburb of Brisbane. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 02:28, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
@Berchanhimez: Thanks for responding. I think I understand what you're saying, but Ipswich is definitely currently a different city. It wouldn't surprise me if in the next 50 years or so that there might talks to merge/amalgamate the two cities, but right now I don't believe there's anyone seriously proposing that. On your transport point: Other Mass transport systems in major cities in Australia - e.g. Sydney and Melbourne - do have public transport links out to other nearby cities as well, but that doesn't make them the same thing. I'm hesitant at present to change the wording, only because currently it conforms with the same setup on all other pages for the suburbs of the city. See the list here: City_of_Ipswich#Suburbs. I might try the solution that Graeme Bartlett has proposed here in the first instance. Thedwan (talk) 04:59, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
@Thedwan: I wasn't trying to say they're the same city by any means. But the layperson definition of a "suburb" tends to be "an area where people tend to commute to work in the bigger city from". By that definition, it seems that maybe most people would consider both Springfield and Ipswich suburbs of Brisbane, regardless of how it's handled administratively. I recommend starting a discussion on the talk page for the article about how it may be improved, so people can contribute there - or you can just be bold and change the wording of the first few sentences to clarify that, while in "popular terms" it's an outer suburb of Brisbane, it's administratively a suburb of Ipswich. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 06:44, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Well if you are correct in what you say, you can put a wikitext comment in front of the city name telling editors not the change it. eg <!--Do not change as this is part of the city of Ipswich. Use the talk page to discuss -->. If this kind of change by anons becomes too frequent that it is causing problems, the page can be protected to prevent anonymous changes. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:30, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
@Graeme Bartlett: Thanks for responding. I didn't know that this was a thing that could be done, so I'll definitely give this a try now. Thedwan (talk) 04:59, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Help with a table

Hi - I've been tidying up List of contemporary epistolary novels, and I have somehow given the table an extra vertical line on the right. Could someone please fix this... or tell me how to do it. Many thanks. Blackballnz (talk) 06:28, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi Blackballnz, I've fixed the table as requested. In the future it might be worth switching to visual editor, I understand tables are quite the pain to deal with. Best — 🪫Volatile 📲T | ⌨️C 07:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, yes they are difficult. Blackballnz (talk) 07:43, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

draft page help

Draft:Leo Hatton

Hello can you help me. Is this article now likely to be admitted? I have removed and added more reputable sources. thank you EmmaElves (talk) 12:27, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello. You have resubmitted it for review, the reviewer will leave you feedback if they do not accept it. 331dot (talk) 12:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
@EmmaElves I made the minor edit of swapping your external link to IMDb to a templated one. I'd be interested to know where you learned that the syntax Leo Hatton on IMDb would work, as we are trying to discourage editors from using that method in articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
@331dot@EmmaElves@Michael D. Turnbull
Hi - I'm a Teahouse lurker, always keen to learn more about Wikipedia. Having looked at this draft, is it OK to have in the lead, as someone's main point of notability "best known for her upcoming role". There is also a large paragraph about the upcoming TV series, which wouldn't usually appear in a BLP. It appears very promotional of this show. Am I right about this? Blackballnz (talk) 06:34, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Yes, it seems unlikely that an actor could be best known for something that has not yet aired and you are correct that the topic should be the biography, not the show. I'm sure that the reviewer will comment on that and if you can improve the draft, please do so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:09, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Hello! I have a question about the article: Draft:New Breath Recovery. The thing is that I am the director of this rehab, and I was told that it is necessary to specify somewhere about conflict of interest, and then the attitude to the article will be different. Can you please tell me where to do this? Sober and recovered (talk) 09:53, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Sober and recovered Hello and welcome. It's a draft, not an article(at least not yet). As the director, you need to make a formal paid editing disclosure(click for instructions). You should do this on your user page, User:Sober and recovered. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Sober and recovered, and welcome to the Teahouse.
I'm afraid that you have done what many new editors do, and taken on a task which is difficult even without a conflict of interest: that of writing an article without having spent time learning how Wikipedia works. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia.
More specifically about your draft: Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything which the Center or its staff say or want to say about it. The article should be almost entirely a neutrally written summary of what people wholly unconnected with the Center (and not prompted or briefed by the Center) have chosen to publish about it via reliable publishers. See WP:42 for a guide to the kinds of source that should be used (and that must be used in order to establish that the organisation is notable). ColinFine (talk) 11:08, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
@Sober and recovered All your sources are from your own website, except one endorsement from a patient which obviously is not independent. A brief Google search shows me that there are basically no usable sources that would demonstrate wikinotability, so you are wasting your time trying to draft an article. There are also reasons your facility may not want one. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:17, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

maintenance templates question

Hi everyone, I have been doing some editing in my spare time and really enjoy fixing grammar mistakes and that kind of thing. Wikipedia recommends me articles on my user page but I would like to know if it's possible to specifically seek pages out based on the maintenance templates they have. Is there a list of pages that have maintenance templates on them?

Thank you for your help! Rainmirage (talk) 01:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

I think every maintenance template has an associated category—but maint categories are hidden, not displayed by default. If you wish to see them you're in luck: just do as directed by WP:HIDDENCAT! Another fun thing of sorts can be to go to random pages and see if anything needs doing. For more on that see WP:Random, which in fact has a user script to pull up random pages in a given category, in § See also. WP:MAINT has even more resources for those looking to do maintenance work. And thanks so much for your interest in improving Wikipedia! 😁 --Slowking Man (talk) 02:00, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
@Rainmirage, welcome to the Teahouse! You might be interested in the Task Center, which helps editors find pages in need of improvement. You can choose the kind of editing that most interests you. Sounds like the copy editing section might be of most interest. FactOrOpinion (talk) 02:02, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
I recommend Wikipedia:Typo Team/moss for fixing spelling errors (or adding valid entries to Wiktionary). Or you can do a custom search for an error eg search for "they gives" to find that one kind of grammar error. Or search for "she" insource:/[^.]\. she / to find sentences that start with lower case "she". But they do tend to get boring if you fix dozens, so just do it while you enjoy the work. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:22, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
@Graeme Bartlett, may I piggyback a quick question onto your reply to @Rainmirage about the Typo Team: if you join it, are you ever expected to do assignments or do you always get to choose what to work on? Augnablik (talk) 04:55, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
@Augnablik: you just do what you want. So you don't have to add to Wiktionary, or mark up non-English. You can do as little as one comma-splice fix. Fix easy spelling errors. Fix difficult technical words. Or as much as fixing every time CO2 is put in as CO2. Any project you set yourself is up to you, as no one is paying you. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:15, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
@Rainmirage There is a very comprehensive list based on maintenance templates available for WikiProject "cleanup". This is available here and allows you to find articles within areas that might interest you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:48, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Ioan cuza

Ioan Cuza rediretcs to ionita cuza but why ? shouldn't it redirect to Alexandru Ioan Cuza? keeping in mind that ionita cuza makes no mention of "also known as ioan cuza" and the name doesn't even contain ioan cuza. i feel like 2nd one is also more well known. any inputs??

☢️SCR@TCH!NGH3@D (talk) 08:18, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

The redirect was created in 2017 by User:Dahn, who is still active, so I suggest you take this up with him to agree a way forward. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:22, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
I'm not aware to what degree Alexandru Ioan was known as just Ioan (as opposed to just Alexandru), whereas Ioniță was clearly also known as Ion, with Ioan being a variant of Ion (any Ion). But I would not oppose a move or a disambig if anyone feels strongly about this and has some evidence to back up the claim. Dahn (talk) 11:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Got my Draft Rejected for references so I searched similar article...

Hello guys!!! I am new here. I have following questions :

1) Yesterday, I stumbled upon the article, Bimalendra Kumar which contained no independent references but got approved. My article, Draft:Ramesh Prasad (professor) on the other hand failed the review despite having Ministry of Education (Government of India) as a source in it. Additionally, it also contained Independent News Journal, Hindustan Samachar [english] as a source which covered the subject (Prof. Prasad) independently. But, why my article is not going through?

2) Is there anything like if an experienced and upper-level editor writes an article with little to no references, it gets approved.(or he approves it him/herself)

3) Why the article gets refused when any one of the editor refuses it. Is there any biasness or racial discrimination to it? If a person is from India then for him/her Government backed references are also not enough?

Please help me understand it moving forward in this platform. Praty0p (talk) 07:46, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Praty0p:
There are nearly 7m articles in the English-language Wikipedia. They have come about in a variety of ways, and many pre-date our review processes and current notability etc. policies. Not all were "approved". Nowadays, new articles must meet our various requirements, and to ascertain that, we evaluate drafts by reference to the applicable policies and guidelines, not by comparison to existing articles. Your draft was declined because it is very poorly referenced, with entire sections without a single citation, and the sources are all primary and thus insufficient for establishing notability. It may be that this person is eventually deemed notable, but we need to see reliable evidence in support of that, and we need to be able to verify more or less every statement in the draft.
To answer your second question, yes, editors with sufficient permissions may publish articles directly into the encyclopaedia. But if these do not meet our standards, the articles are unlikely to remain published very long. The point isn't, therefore, to publish an article, but rather to publish an article which complies with the various policies and guidelines, and can remain in the encyclopaedia.
As for your final point, you are accusing, at least in a veiled manner, the reviewer(s) of racism. Please do not go there, as baseless aspersions are unacceptable. We have countless articles on persons of Indian, and just about every other, origin in the encyclopaedia. This issue has no bearing whatsoever on why your draft was declined. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:20, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
To add to this, looking into the article history for Bimalendra Kumar proves somewhat interesting. It was previously tagged for a lack of notability under WP:NACADEMIC and for being an orphan, however both tags were removed by the creator of the article later with no real improvements and no edit summary.
All but one of the citations on the article did not have any reference to the subject, so I've removed them and added a tag for a WP:BLP lack of sources seeing as I could barely find a source including him, let alone about him. How it passed review last year and not in 2010 is anyone's guess. I'll check back on it in a week to see whether improvements have been made. CommissarDoggoTalk? 13:57, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
@Praty0p Your draft was "declined", not rejected, which means you can continue to work on it. A brief look shows that, at present, it does not conform to our important policy on biographies of living people, namely that every fact be backed up by an inline citation to allow readers to verify the information. For example, the whole section on his early life and much of the section on his current research is uncited. We have specific guidance for how to establish that an academic is wikinotable and you should ensure your draft shows how Prasad meets at least one of these criteria. (You can add a comment at the top of the draft for a future reviewer.) Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:38, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Draft:Ramesh Prasad (professor) may qualify for his being a Dean. What is required is better references. The draft was Declined, not Rejected, which in Wikipedia terms means no potential to succeed. David notMD (talk) 12:47, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Publishing a translation

Hello, I would like to publish a translation of this page: https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jana_Martincov%C3%A1 However, the page says I'm not allowed to publish it, I can only save a draft - which I did, but also, I clicked the "Publish" button and the draft got published under a wrong name (not as a translation of the original page, though): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jana_Martincov%C3%A1; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ComposeAdela/Jana_Martincov%C3%A1 How can I publish the actual translation? And how can I get rid of those 2 pages that I created by mistake? Thank you! (The translation I inserted should be correct as it was done and proofread by a professional.) ComposeAdela (talk) 15:05, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

@ComposeAdela Welcome to the Teahouse. In this context, the word "publish" just means "save my page": into draft space in this case, or into your sandbox. So, I suggest you stick with Draft:Jana Martincová and when you are ready, submit it for review. What you have in your sandbox can just be WP:BLANKed when you want to re-use your sandbox. Be aware that the standards on en:Wikipedia are strict, so ensure your draft conforms to our biography of living people policy. After submission, experienced reviewers will accept it into mainspace or give you feedback for improvements. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:03, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @ComposeAdela. Have you read translation? What makes translating into English Wikipedia difficult is that most other Wikipedias have lower standards for sourcing than English, so in many cases a translation, however faithful, is not adequate. I haven't looked in detail at the citations in Draft:Jana Martincová (which I think is the same as User:ComposeAdela/Jana Martincová: you can request deletion of the latter by adding {{db-author}} to the top), but I see that a lot of them are by Martincová. That is not what we want to see in the reference list: we want to see mainly sources which are completely indepedent of the subject (not written, published, or commissioned by the subject or by their associates or institutions), talking about the subject - see WP:42 for more detail. ColinFine (talk) 16:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Help—need an encompassing subject descriptor for disambiguation

When confusion is possible among identical or very similar personal names, disambiguation is required. I've got a disambiguation-related challenge, and here's my quandary:

How do I come up with a good descriptor for a person who is essentially a practical idea person — someone whose career has consisted of acting on his ideas? In this case, by being a land-use designer, an entrepreneur, a mentor, an organizer, and at times a funder of the projects of others? “Polymath” or “renaissance man” are common terms, but are maybe too vague, therefore likely inappropriate for Wikipedia.

Suggestions welcomed and appreciated.Joel Russ (talk) 01:47, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Joel Russ. It would be helpful to know which specific person you are talking about. Hypothticals are difficult to answer helpfully. Cullen328 (talk) 02:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Thanks Cullen328. Bio article here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Raymond_(publisher) Joel Russ (talk) 02:52, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Being Richard Raymond (publisher) should suffice. David notMD (talk) 04:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
@Joel Russ I've added him to the disambiguation page. You can tweak that if you think of a better short descriptor there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, Mike. Joel Russ (talk) 14:16, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
WP:Disambiguation: The fundamental thing is, it "doesn't really matter" what the disambiguator is—as long as it's not misleading of course. It just has to be something. And random characters/symbols/etc. would be a little reader‐hostile. Publishing publications was something they were "known for" so "publisher" is fine. If people decide it needs to be changed at some point for whatever reason, they can do so. There is no deadline.
Compare and contrast Wikidata which does just use arbitrary numerical identifiers, since the, well, data are intended primarily for consumption by computers and programs being executed by said computers, and not for humans to go through and read "directly". For instance here is Raymond's very own Wikidata entry: Q131442980 ta-daa! --Slowking Man (talk) 16:24, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
I have owned several books that Raymond published going back over half a century. "Publisher" is just fine as a disambiguator. Cullen328 (talk) 17:52, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for expressing your opinion. Joel Russ (talk) 16:38, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Advanced automatic reference creation

Q: I've been using the "automatic" option in the "cite" button, but I've noticed its limitations. For instance, it doesn't generate references from links to PDF files. Are there more effective ways to automatically create references from links? EntropyReducingGuy (talk) 08:40, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

I would try using Visual Editor as it lets you add information without having to know all the wikitext. I have used it many times to edit references. Sheriff U3 | Talk | Con 09:30, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
10x. I already use the Visual Editor. My issue was that in the case of links to PDF files you need to put everything manually which is a lot of work. There is also no way to control the format of the reference. EntropyReducingGuy (talk) 11:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, unfortunately there's not really a way to speed up PDF references as far as I know, but so long as you fill in all the parameters the formatting should work itself out. You can try Easybib to gather the information faster or anything similar online. Sophisticatedevening (talk) 13:42, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
10x. I now found this Help:Citation tools maybe this would help. EntropyReducingGuy (talk) 16:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

how to make a disambiguation page

how exaclty do I make a disambiguation page, is there a different "wizard" or any tags or template I nned Skeletons are the axiom (talk) 16:42, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

It's actually quite simple! Most important thing is to familiarize yourself with WP:Disambiguation, to know the general conventions to follow. Then when you make it just put {{dab}} at the bottom (for "disambiguation"; {{disam}} or the full {{disambiguation}} work too). Really, that's it!
If you wish you can create it in your user sandbox to work on it at your leisure, then when ready just move it into the mainspace. And of course feel free to ask for assistance here! --Slowking Man (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Asking for help

Can you help find citations for Draft:Pressure (video game) 1250metersdeep (talk) 16:24, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Onus on sourcing is generally on those who want the content, not on noticeboard readers. That said, I did a search (string: pressure video game) and am coming up with pretty much nothing we can use as a source - no articles about the game, no reviews of it, no nothing. (Indeed, the only review that showed up was for an unrelated tabletop RPG of that name.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
@1250metersdeep: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1249. Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games might have some resources that may be of use to you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:15, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
You may want to merge this article into the one for list of Roblox games, although the patrollers there would have to ensure the article meets notability. I don't think an individual Roblox game warrants enough notability for its own article, minus something such as Adopt Me! or Dress to Impress (both for which have substantial outside coverage to qualify for their own, larger, articles). -Emily (PhoenixCaelestis) (talk) 13:44, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
I’ve been working on finding sources for a bit 1250metersdeep (talk) 18:15, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Is there a list of closing templates?

I've seen Template:hat and Template:atop used for different purposes when closing discussions. Is there a full list of templates for closing discussions? guninvalid (talk) 18:32, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

@Guninvalid, we have both the navbox at the bottom of the page ({{Templates for archiving}}) and Category:Wikipedia archived wrapper templates, if that helps. If you mean "closing discussions" in general, e.g. including miscellaneous templates (such as {{NAC}}), then afaik there is no singular page listing them all. – Isochrone (talk) 18:52, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Creating a map.

Hello! I am currently creating a page about a historical Arab kingdom and would like to input a map showing its historical territory. While I know the size/territory of the kingdom, I do not know how to make a map. Please help! Middle-easternfactcheck (talk) 18:16, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

@Middle-easternfactcheck you might benefit from posting your request at the graphics lab with reliable sources to request others create a map for you. – Isochrone (talk) 18:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, I'll give it a go Middle-easternfactcheck (talk) 19:23, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Choosing the correct copyright tag

I hope this is a simple question. I have done this only once before and because it was such a long time ago I have forgotten which tag and where I should upload it (here or Wikicommons). It is for an image that is most likely still within copyright but will only be used to represent the painting for which the article talks about and for no other use or article page. I know there is a proper tag but it has slipped my mind. Any direction (and correct verbiage to attach when uploading) would be appreciated. TIA. Maineartists (talk) 20:00, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

@Maineartists you shall have to populate the fields in {{Non-free use rationale}} and {{Non-free fair use}}, as (surprisingly) there is no dedicated template for artworks. The best way to do this is through the File upload wizard, pressing "upload a non-free file". – Isochrone (talk) 20:08, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, Isochrone. I think I did it correctly. I appreciate your help. Maineartists (talk) 20:42, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello, I've been contacted by a Jason Bennett who has invited me to contribute a wikipaedia page for a price? He's sent a link with a range of pricing options. How do I know this is genuine?

I'm happy to contribute but want to ensure that this is not a scam....

Grateful for any advice!

C Kelly FRCP MD 5.151.214.229 (talk) 08:00, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

This is indeed a scam. Delete that message. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 08:11, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Just to add you should probably report it to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org (see Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning) — 🪫Volatile 📲T | ⌨️C 08:13, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Don’t ever accept payment for WP stuff. It ain’t big and it ain’t clever! Pablothepenguin (talk) 00:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Help with an image

I uploaded an image in Wikimedia Commons that i thought was copyright free but it's not. Is there a way to delete it?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Satellite_picture_of_Banna,_Bangladesh.png 97188 shamiulhk (talk) 01:25, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

@97188 shamiulhk you can file for speedy deletion. See c:Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion. G7 and F1 would be applicable. – robertsky (talk) 01:36, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
@97188 shamiulhk: As it's been less than 7 days since upload it would qualify for speedy deletion per your request. I've tagged it as such with a link to your request here. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 02:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Promtional language, brochure, and very messy.

I need help with this article: Eudes Assis

Hello all Wikipedians! I found this article, which I believe does not meet much of Wikipedia's standards. I made this draft, to try to correct some writing errors and cut the promotion value. My question is, is this better than the original? How would I do a mass reformat like that? Does the draft itself meet standards (expect for citations, I am working on those)? C809 (talk) 21:31, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

@C809: Your tone in Draft:Eudes Assis is better. But references are required. And you can use the images too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Far better to edit the existing article section by section versus deleting the existing content and replacing it with your own. David notMD (talk) 03:45, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

What to do with someone reverting all your changes.

Hello,

There is one person reverting all my changes. What can be done regarding this? Wandtess (talk) 03:11, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

If someone has reverted all of your changes, the first step is to discuss why that is. In this case, you appear to be adding "Persian" to any mention of the Gulf, even where this does not fit. Such changed are likely to be reverted, as they are seen as disruptive rather than improvements. CMD (talk) 03:33, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Wandtess. Here is what you should do: Stop edit warring. Stop vandalizing. Stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced content. Heed the advice and warnings given to you by more experienced editors. Cullen328 (talk) 03:36, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
A high percentage of your edits have been reverted by several well-experienced editors. Your Talk page shows you were warned several times of a possibility of being blocked, and most recently you have been blocked for 24 hours. The problem is not other people. David notMD (talk) 03:57, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Draft not yet reviewed

Question

Incorrect "x years ago" and "x days ago" in Vulkan's Infobox?

Question about reporting repeated vandalism

Hatnote

The significance of a person

MOS for Family names

Requirements to edit wikipedia

Draft in progress

Kobi Arad COI Tag AGAIN

Accidently made a redirect with a wrong name

Incorrect species taxonomy

need help understanding citations

Question

Can we bring back List of country subdivision flags in Africa

Reusing the citation for a source that's been updated since original publication date, access date change

Draft page help - sufficient notoriety?

Puzzling redirect

Inverting logo color

Where to discuss a page facing legal trouble

Teahouse blocked

Resubmitting an article

Editing others drafts

Copyright question

How to edit the phrase that appears below article names in the "Add a link" box?

ccTLD codes

Feedback on re-doing list article

Citing a two part interview

Is their a way to make it so only I can edit my articles

Quick question about OR & notability

Limit on submissions

How do I edit named references?

Any ideas about why this article draft would be flagged?

Decline article

What is meaning of Original research according to Wikipedia policy

Userboxes

Please help

User boxes

Not sure what to do in this situation, regarding Portugal’s article page

Religion based Articles

Trying to be my the best editor I can be.

Copyright to use for images I've been given permission to use?

Question About A Submission

A Page I Created Weeks Ago Is Not Indexed On Google

"Minimal Usage"

Clarifying copyright tags for an image

Edit quality control: capture cards

Yay! It's now a free to unregistered and new users!

Brand Caprinos Pizza attempting to promote on their respective page

Hi there!

Hi

I'm trying to find that template which I can use to directly quote from the primary source as an explicatory footnote.

Interest in creation of an Article from a redirection

Check % a person has contributed

Suspecting vandalism

Help with harvnb refs

Userboxes

is there a way to make a hatnote only appear when you get to a page though a certain redirect?

Need help with draft

Accidentally changed Wikipedia's mobile appearance, any ideas how to get it back?

What needs to be done if most of the sources are from "non-Wikipedia approved" sources?

On WP:BLOGS

Concrete List of reliable sources?

Redirect templates

My recent article wasn't approved.

Lost or misplaced Wikipedia Article

Infobox doubts

Article needs serious help

yet another copyright issue

editing sandbox post move

How to annotate a source that contains an error?

Seeking Guidance on Draft Review for Verónica Cheja

Need help making article meet notability guidelines

Need an univolved editor to review a speedyDeletion

The word "machine translation" on my user page

How should I improve this article

Square brackets around wikilink

Regarding sources from books that aren't available online

uploading images, maps, graphics

Help getting a successful publishment of a martial arts pioneer from the late 1800s-early 1900s

Page Review Request Sunny Kumar Singh

Am I headed in the right direction with my draft?

Private messages

Feedback​ on my draft from experience editors.

Another logo question

Project or Template for documenting local active transportation infrastructure projects

Please help, advanced actions for Draft:Winston Utomo

Patrolling recent changes

Hi! (Draft Help Request)

Help with First Article

Possible hoax articles

Change of the mentor

How to tag a requested move on a page?

Draft:Finiteness Follow up

How can I motion to replace a newly created page with a pre-existing draft that is far more comprehensive?

ROM Downloads as RS

Direct COI edits

Moving a page to a redirect

Can I use these images for a draft?

Article to improve

Is arbitration enforcement really strict about who can edit the talk page?

Uploading logos

Propose essay for deletion?

How specific is too specific

Interest in starting a new WikiProject Cybersecurity

Good article nomination

Reopen an answered edit request?

Notify User

Would this fall under public domain?

Request for review of the page Illyrian invasion of Macedonia (360 BC)

Delete redirect

Wikibook as a source

The Simpsons

Ignoring notifications from users

Confused about BankSathi Drafts - Seeking Guidance

Hey

Nothing to write about

Infoboxes

Request for Approval: Cyusa Ian Berulo Wikipedia Article

Image / copyright question

What is a healthy WP schedule?

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI