Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1290

Hello, I am looking for some help with inserting a boxed quote in the Blanche Lazzell article. I saw that there was already one near the end of the article, and thought to use the same format. I am clearly missing something in my formatting, which I copied from the existing box, changing just the placement from the right to the left margin (or close to the margin). When I insert this, using source mode:

it doesn't just format the quote in the box, but the list of references following it. When I placed it one paragraph earlier, it grabbed and formatted that last paragraph. Clearly, something is wrong with my coding, but I just can't figure out what.

I appreciate the help anyone can give me! TrudiJ (talk) 15:43, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

TrudiJ (talk) 15:39, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

You have to format it as {{blockquote|Example text|Author<ref>Reference</ref>}}, which generates:

Example text

For your quote, you have to format it as

{{blockquote|When we moderns paint a realistic object we get beneath the surface and give you the very spiritual substance of it.|Blanche Lazzell, 1927<ref>{{Cite book |last=Albany Institute of History & Art |title=Blanche Lazzell: Becoming an American Modernist |publisher=Albany Institute of History & Art |year=2026 |location=Albany, NY |pages=[4] |language=en}}</ref>}}

which generates:

When we moderns paint a realistic object we get beneath the surface and give you the very spiritual substance of it.

Cheers, Versions111 (talk • contribs) 23:25, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you @Versions111 for this help. This style gives a different look to the quotes, but I worked on the context so that this approach works best.

TrudiJ (talk) 10:17, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi guys, newbie here!

I was looking at recent edits and I noticed that Wilmington General Hospital was getting edited a lot by a temp user. The edits they made were seemingly good faith, I checked it out, reformatted the page, added some categories, ya know the spiel.

However, when I looked at the edit history, it appears that the temp user in question has complained on this page using a different temp account, and changed the page from a redirect to a full-fledged page, removing the redirect and adding information.

I wanted to know if I should be telling someone about this on a different part of Wikipedia or doing anything to remedy the fact. I know that there is probably a process to making the article an actual article, and from what I've learned so far the temp user in question, @~2026-20934-20, is acting very boldly.

If I should just ignore and carry on with my not-so busy day, also let me know

JanManisijun (talk) 20:11, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

There is no specific process to make the article an actual article. If this new article is well referenced and well written then nothing should be done. Ruslik_Zero 20:21, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay thank you ! JanManisijun (talk) 20:23, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

@JanManisijun the article in it's current state, however, is not well-referenced. If you're interested, you can look for additional sourced to check if the hospital meets the notability guidelines. If it doesn't, you can submit the page for deletion (the easiest way to do this is to use Twinkle, which is explained at the top of WP:AFDHOWTO). 🍅 fx (talk) 01:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

@JanManisijun Yes, I can see what you mean. The user has declared the redirect to be incorrect - which we only have their word for - and has now written a short article that ordinarily would have had to go through AfC. MmeMaigret (talk) 12:14, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I am trying to submit a new article about Ragu Esaki (an Indian film actor) for Wikipedia. I've been trying to publish it through the Articles for Creation process, but every time I click "Publish page" on the draft, nothing happens, the page just stays the same and doesn't publish.

I've tried:

• Using the sandbox
• Using the draft article creation form
• Removing templates
• Using different browsers

But I keep getting stuck at the publish step. Can someone help me submit this article? The article is at: Draft:Ragu Esaki

Thank you for your help! Priya122001 (talk) 06:16, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Priya122001: there's no record of you having tried to edit Draft:Ragu Esaki. However, you do have content on that subject in your sandbox User:Priya122001/sandbox. I'll move it into the draft space, you can then take it from there. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:23, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Done. It's now at Draft:Ragu Esaki. I also added the AfC template which you can use to submit the draf for a review, when you feel it's ready. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:25, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi thank you so much for your assistance but I am still unable to publish it. Could you please guide me? Priya122001 (talk) 10:12, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

As a new account, you can't publish it into the encyclopedia yourself, you need to submit it for a review by clicking the blue "Submit your draft for review!" button in the box at the top of the draft. 331dot (talk) 10:15, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Also keep in mind that this article is not very well sourced, sourced only to an interview with Esaki and quotes by a co-star, and if you submitted at this point, it would almost certainly be declined. Wikipedia is mostly interested in how reliable sources, independent of subjects, describe those subjects. Wikipedia is not very interested in what a subject or their colleagues say about the person. All disputable facts ought to be cited to a reliable, supporting source. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 10:11, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

AHH thank you so much for your advice, I understand. But I just want to give it a shot by publishing. Could you please guide me? Priya122001 (talk) 10:20, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Priya122001, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I will offer you some advice, though it may not be what you want to hear:.

Successfully writing an article starts by finding independent, reliable, substantial sources about the the subject - each of them meeting all the criteria in WP:42. Doing anything else on the article before you have done that is quite likely to be time wasted, because if you cannot find those sources, then no article is possible. Writing a draft before looking for those sources is like building a house without first surveying the land to make sure it is fit to build on, or making foundations for the house: it's probably going to fall down and waste your effort.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 10:59, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

@Priya122001 For example, the draft says in WP:Wikivoice "his performances proved that he is a strong character actor who can handle serious and meaningful roles.. Says who? You? We don't allow such comments unless attributed, as they violate the neutrality and verifiability policies. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:01, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

"Giving it a shot by publishing" is a poor approach that is unlikely to be successful. Wikipedia's main constraint isn't money, but time, and reviewing articles takes the time of volunteers, so unless you have a good faith belief that the article meets Wikipedia's standards, it should not be submitted. AFC is not a slot machine where you keep getting to crank the handle as long as you keep putting coins in. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 11:15, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

GOT IT! Thank you so muchhhhh! i understand. I appreciate your honesty and patience.

I have a few more doubts, my apologies. The person I'm creating the wikipedia for is not a famous actor, hence they do not have multiple articles written about them. So my doubt is...can only people who have multiple articles or news or blogs written about them have a wikipedia page? like someone famous? Priya122001 (talk) 12:13, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

It's not about "fame" per se, it's about what Wikipedia calls notability, but proving notability does generally require proving that somebody else has already written about the person first. Athanelar (talk) 13:50, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Generally speaking, yes, the vast majority of people who are notable for Wikipedia's purposes will have multiple, independent articles/studies/commentaries about them. After all, since we source content primarily from those independent sources with a history of factchecking, if these sources don't exist, we would have very little content. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 14:49, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

@Priya122001 When you said "the person I'm creating the Wikipedia for" does that mean you are doing it on behalf of him? In which case you need to declare a conflict of interest. ~2026-20856-07 (talk) 19:44, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you!

And yes, I am doing it on behalf of that person. He is a friend of mine. So all the information I've provided is true. And what does declaring a conflict of interest mean? Priya122001 (talk) 07:28, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

@Priya122001 See WP:DISCLOSE for how to do this into the talk page of your draft. Wikipedia can't take your word that things are "true": we rely on published reliable sources that verify all the statements. See also the policy for biographies of living people. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:13, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

and defend ~2026-21596-17 (talk) 13:10, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

It's not clear what you're asking—how can we help? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:27, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

I’ve been working on a draft article for some time and have had trouble getting the style and references right. I think the latest draft is finally neutral in tone and bolstered with appropriate references but would truly appreciate input. Being new to the environment here, I don’t know how best to ask for input on the draft - if folks have access or do I need to paste here? Carvlin7 (talk) 16:27, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Are you referring to Draft:Lauri Stallings, American Choreographer or something else? 331dot (talk) 16:30, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

You've also asked this at the AFC Help Desk, please only use one forum at a time to seek assistance, to avoid duplicating effort. 331dot (talk) 16:30, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, its me again. Working on my table (User:Vicccqh7/sandbox), I wanted to ask if what I did with the notes and references is correct and understandable? For context: Note 1 is supported by source 1 since thats where I got the names from (source 2 doesnt add numbers to names and source 1 does). In row 6, the name Linda is taken from source 1 and the note points to source 2, I reversed the order because the note is not directly supported by source 1 but rather points to another source. In row 10, the death claim is taken from source 1, and the note points to source 1 and 2 having different data. From what I understand, adding a citation BEFORE the note means that the claim is supported by the source, and the note is an explanation of another source having different info (like note 2 and 3), and if its AFTER the note it directly supports what the note says (like note 1), is that right? I want to know if my logic is clear to a reader, I dont want to confuse people... Vicccqh7 (talk) 14:42, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Well, There is an article on the topic. see Soviet space dogs. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 16:49, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

I know there is. In fact thats where I want the table to go - Im updating the article and asking for feedback before I do any live changes Vicccqh7 (talk) 16:55, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

so I'm actually curious why are there so many person name bots here and I don't think LLMs are allows right? Yiotro1 (talk) 15:08, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

@Yiotro1, can you clarify what users you're referring to? toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 15:22, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

@Yiotro1 Please see Wikipedia:Bots and Wikipedia:LLM. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:37, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Bots are automated scripts that perform repetitive and/or time-consuming tasks for humans (such as: delivering "message archived" notifications, fixing dead links, etc.) As far as I know, none of the currently running bots are powered by LLMs and only perform the tasks they're supposed to. The Bot policy and the Bot Approvals Group prevent any malicious/harmful bots from being created. Hi, I'm Max!|Talk to me here.|See what I've done here. 18:20, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I'm KPremaswini. I've recently started editing and I'm focusing on improving clarity and sourcing in articles. Looking forward to learning from the community. (talk) 06:17, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

@KPremaswini Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! To get started, you should take a look at the introductory guide to Wikipedia first, alongside everything you need to know. Since you're looking to improve clarity and sourcing in articles, you should look at guides such at WP:Verifiability, WP:Reliable sources, and the Manual of Style :3 Hope you enjoy your stay here! nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 08:31, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

I had a good start by going on The Wikipedia Adventure, it's a really helpful and interactive guide to editing! Hi, I'm Max!|Talk to me here.|See what I've done here. 18:34, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello,

I was looking at Template:Service awards when I noticed that the template doesn't automatically calculate the number of edits that a user has, making it a bit tedious to keep up-to-date as edits are made. I also couldn't find a way of calculating this number in Help:Magic_words.

Does a bot exist to aid in this process? Or would it be best if I made a bot that works with mw:OAuth/Owner-only consumers to update the field for me? FocusedInsignia (talk) 18:36, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

The answer regarding bots or templates which automatically update an edit count is usually that it doesn't exist because it's too computationally expensive while offering no benefit except for ego. You can imagine the implications of any large number of users using a bot or template which has to request their edit count from the server on any regular basis.

Also, this is something that really becomes a non-issue once you've got any significant number of edits. Sure, you're at 73 edits right now, so milestones like 10, 50, 100 and 250 fly by pretty quickly; but once you pass the 1000 mark, I promise you're not going to have any interest in checking anymore. Athanelar (talk) 18:54, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Athanelar, auto-updating edit count templates do exist, though they are dependent on page refresh. One can put {{Special:Impact/(username)}} to put their Special:Impact page on their userpage, which includes an edit counter. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 19:04, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Guangzhou

I think we might need to explain to the new editor, Kbaiko, here about the consensus-forming process, OR and WP:RS, and probably peer review / 3rd opinion / etc.., and just in general how to collaborate with the others, along with some welcoming to new this new user and recognition / gratitude of their dedication, but I'm too tired_lazy to do so. So here are the links. Thanks, fellas.

Article history | Guangzhou_{Note that the editor's not being agreed with by multiple editors.} Article talk. 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk} posted 12:48, edited 14:01 utc. 12:48, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Please follow the dispute resolution process described at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:43, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I have 2 citations of 2 different webpages from the same website here: Siméon-Prosper Hardy. I'm trying to find examples of how to make those consecutive entries look prettier and more purposeful, because, at first glance, they look like a mistake (which I would like to avoid). Chao Garden 🌱 (hi) 14:41, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

They look fine as they are, to me. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! Maybe I'm just overthinking this. Chao Garden 🌱 (hi) 19:59, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi. I'm 19 and for many years I have been willing to start contributing to Wikipedia. I have always been scared to get shut down from writing here. I would like to know where I might find a good place to start and how to do things around here properly. I am interested in certain niche parts of history and I could honestly spend hours researching subjects.

Or is this something I am expected to learn on my own?

Much thanks, Sincerely, nonentities37 Nonentities37 (talk) 00:46, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, and welcome to Wikipedia!

First of all, you’re definitely not alone, many of us felt nervous when we started editing. The good news is that you’re absolutely not expected to learn everything on your own. The Teahouse exists exactly for this reason, to help new editors get comfortable.

A great place to start is by making small edits. You could fix typos, improve wording, or add reliable sources to articles you’re interested in. Since you enjoy niche history topics, you can edit on topics related to niche history. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 00:58, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Nonentities37 and welcome!

First of all, don't worry about being "shut down from writing". Wikipedia policy is to always assume good faith and let people learn. You don't have to memorize dozens of guideline pages just to get started—if you accidentally do something wrong, your edit will just get reverted or fixed and you'll be told about what you should've done. You will not get banned unless you repeatedly do the same thing over and over despite many warnings, which, if you're genuinely interested in contributing, you're probably not likely to do.

I agree with @TheGreatEditor024 that the best way to get started is to make small improvements to topics that you like. You should have a "beginner homepage" here, on which you can choose topics you're interested in and it will suggest you articles you can improve.

If you need help with the basics of editing, check out Introduction to Wikipedia. There's also a great interactive tutorial called The Wikipedia Adventure (note that it only works on desktop).

Lastly, since you're interested in history, you may want to join a WikiProject, which is a group of editors working on some topic. For example, consider WikiProject History or WikiProject Military History.

Good luck with editing! Feel free to ask any other questions if you have any! 🍅 fx (talk) 01:10, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Ricardo, a new editor based in Portugal. My background is in entrepreneurship, business, and technology. I've just joined WikiProject Business and WikiProject Companies and am looking to contribute to articles in those areas — improving citations, expanding stubs, and fixing unsourced claims. Looking forward to being part of this community :)

RicardoCosta Ed (talk) 01:52, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello @RicardoCosta Ed! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions, get help, and learn how Wikipedia works. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 03:19, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

How do I begin a discussion about multiple pages at once? I see some pages about similar subjects (see the list of people on Template:Princesses of Savoy) but lack consistency with their titles and I want the opinion of other editors. Thank you, OliviaRigby (talk) 02:31, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@OliviaRigby WP:RMPM is what you're looking for. Twinkle can start RMs (both with single and multiple pages), it's hidden under the "XFD" module. HurricaneZeta^C 02:55, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Would it be in 'Preferences'? OliviaRigby (talk) 03:03, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I think I got it now, thank you so much. OliviaRigby (talk) 04:43, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I'd like to improve on John Trapp's heroic effort to write up islands in the Aleutian Chain. Some of these, as satellite islands named by drive-by cartographers, seem to stretch the bounds of notability (Examples [1][2][3]) and may be more valuable in tables or lists in other articles. For example, the islands I linked earlier could be included in a new (sub)section on satellites of Attu Island where they are currently unacknowledged. The AfD pages are intimidating for a newer editor, but I'm interested in exploring Wikipedia's architecture beyond MOS edits and sourcing; what's the best way to proceed? Gebble (talk) 18:59, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

You can merge the smaller articles into the main article. See WP:MERGE for more information. InfernoHues (talk) 05:26, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Can somebody please help me? As long-time anonymous user, refusing to register any accounts, there are tasks I cannot perform, but yet need to be done to make Wikimedia and Wikipedia better. I found an error that needs to be corrected. Can I please be lazy and copy-paste the short form I tried to fill into a form that got refused by a bot? Sure, I can write long form prose, but your eyes would be tired, before you find the problem I need your help with! ;-)

Latvian A12 is not motorway, but Wikimedia files correction attempt under abuse

• Road signs in Latvia
• File:Latvia road sign 741 (Motorway).svg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Abuse_filter/Error_reporting&withJS=MediaWiki:ABFeasySubmit.js

Trying to add English caption "Latvian primary road number 12 - NOT motorway"

Trying to explain that A12 is Latvian primary road - File on Wikimedia Commons has wrong name – Confusingly, A-numbers are almost only motorways in many countries in western Europe, but not in Latvia - Please check definition of Motorway and errors in article Road signs in Latvia that are difficult to correct when underlying file has misleading name - Motorway has 2x2 lanes, hard shoulders, non-level-crossings with bridges and junctions, and so on - Latvian A12 does not match motorway standards at all! As far as I know European motorway sign is not (yet) in use in Latvia as they have just started to build dual carriageways below motorway standards.

Error while creating the report: This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: LTA 257 ~2026-21323-31 (talk) 22:30, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-21323-31 You appear to have now corrected this. I suspect you may have experienced a problem because of the SHOUTY nature of your proposed caption. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:49, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I was inactive for a long period of time, and I somehow think that my talk page archival has got messed up. Can anyone experienced in this matter look into it? My talk page header says that it has been archived for 2021 and 2022. Does that mean that the archives of 2023 aren't available? I can see that they are available, so why isn't it being recorded?

How do I actually make sure that whatever had been posted on my talk page is actually there in the archive? I hope it hasn't been non-functional for some time, because I don't find many months for a particular year, let's say 2023 or 2022. Can anyone look into this? Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 08:00, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Itcouldbepossible. FormalDude made some changes to your archives in December 2022. I don't know why. All months in 2022 and 2023 have a linked archive. The links to 2022 were not sorted chronologically. I fixed that but don't know whether the bot will overwrite it. You use monthly archives. The top of your talk page confusingly transcludes {{archived annually}}. I suggest you remove it. It looks for archives with only a year in the name and that's only 2021 and 2022, both made by FormalDude (2021 with a move ) and not the bot. They are also linked in the big archives box so you don't need the links made by {{archived annually}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:11, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I am actually quite confused, and it would be really kind of you, if you kindly make the required changes on my behalf. Thanks for devoting your time in helping me out. Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 09:13, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@Itcouldbepossible:: I have removed {{archived annually}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:26, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

The article Irene of Alania speculates about almost everything pertaining to the subject. From her royal titles to lineage. In my humble opinion, there is no place here for such an article that does not impart any useful definitive fact but only speculates what is likely to have happened or what could have been. I'm here to ask for opinions from more seasoned editors. Please provide your thoughts. Thanks! _signed, Kvinnen (talk) 05:25, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

The first port of call would be the talk-page of said article; just make your thoughts known there, and see if there's feedback. If you think the article should be deleted, we have the process at articles for deletion. Lectonar (talk) 08:28, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I just wanted to ask for a few opinions before I consider an AfD. _signed, Kvinnen (talk) 10:18, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

There are only two speculative statements in the article, not in Wikipedia's voice, and both of them are cited to an apparently reliable source. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:43, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Andy! Let me review the article again. _signed, Kvinnen (talk) 10:19, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi all, I've come across an edit that updates demographic numbers, but doesn't provide a (new) source. I did some cursory googling and didn't find anything. Could someone direct me to places I can find data on demographics and religion like this? Thanks.

Holzklöppel (talk) 03:56, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@Holzklöppel I think that the Pew website, which was the original source, may have done an update. I found this 2025 report from them, for example. I haven't drilled down to find the figure that was updated in the edit you linked. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:40, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

HI.

I AM LOOKING FOR A COMPLETE ALPHABETICAL LIST OF ACTORS AND ACTRESSES AND ANOTHER COMPLETE ALPHABETICAL LIST OF TELEVISION SHOWS. ISABELLE1966 (talk) 02:56, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

List of actors and List of television shows? nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 03:16, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

yes. television actors and actresses. i can only find lists for actresses but not for actors and television shows in the united states ISABELLE1966 (talk) 03:20, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

@ISABELLE1966 you got linked both of those things in the above comment 🍅 fx (talk) 11:47, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @ISABELLE1966, and welcome to the Teahouse.

nhals8 pointed you at a couple of lists that we have.

But note that it is rare for Wikipedia to have a complete list of anything, because Wikipedia is in most cases only interested in subjects that meet its own definition of notability. Many actors and many TV shows do not meet those criteria, and so should not be listed by Wikipedia.

So I doubt if you will find what you are looking for in Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 09:48, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Try the database which we describe at IMDb. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:33, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @ISABELLE1966, and welcome to the Teahouse!

There's a lot of actors and actresses out there, and there's a lot of television shows out there. Only a small portion of each have Wikipedia articles.

Try the following link: for an alphabetically sorted list of (hopefully) every actor and actress who has a Wikipedia article.

That list is nearly 75,000 entries long, so I'll also provide these two links: , . It's the same list, but narrowed down to the articles which are classified as featured articles and good articles respectively, meaning they meet Wikipedia's quality standards.

For television shows, the same sort of thing: . Narrowed to featured articles and good articles: , .

Unfortunately, to my knowledge Wikipedia doesn't really have a better way to present this sort of data. It might be more helpful if you explained the purpose of having such lists. Regardless, I hope I was able to help. MEN KISSING (she/they) Talk to me, I don't bite! - See my edits 22:48, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

@ISABELLE1966 The nearest Wikipedia will have to a full list should be in Wikidata. There is a property Q2259451 for "stage actor", for example, and someone with the correct search skills could find all the names of people listed in Wikidata who are linked to that property, as is Judi Dench. Wikidata includes many more people than have biographical articles in the main encyclopaedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:03, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Might be a wierd question, but i am creating the draft article Draft:Palanquins of the Soul, and i dont know how to use references.

Could someone please explain it to me? Balintkaistryingediting (Balint's Info, Talk, Balint's Edits) 12:48, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Help:Referencing for beginners. Athanelar (talk) 13:05, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm curious about the formatting of short descriptions. Where would I find guidance on best practices there? Tioaeu8943 (talk) 00:26, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi and nice to meet you! We have an information section about short description formatting at WP:SDFORMAT.

In short, a description should usually:

• Be less than 40 characters
• Start with a capital letter but not end with a full stop/period
• Not start with the word the, a or an
• Not use markup such as bold or italics

enbi [they/them] • [talk] 00:34, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Use Template:Short description. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 07:18, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, that helps. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 14:36, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

So, this guy named Spaceshuttle88 kept changing Earth to show The Blue Marble instead of the higher-quality Meteosat-12 image (which the people had wanted) and we got into a war reverting each other's edits. We both got a warning. Last night, I had tried to select a new photo for Earth because Hello, World was being debated at the time, and it was probably because I really wanted to change something. I'll regret this in a few years 🤦 Epicazowski (talk) 13:01, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Added consensus disclaimer next to the image field in Earth's infobox regarding the consensus of the image (i mean tbf you got a warning anyway so rip dude) nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 15:09, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I try to edit a page, but every time I try to publish my changes, it doesn't do anything, for a couple minutes, and finally, after a good long while there's a red error message saying: There was an error while loading the form. To continue, you will need to reload the page."

This happens with the source editor only, if I switch to the visual editor, I can publish normally.

It happens on both my heavily modded Firefox, and pristine clean install chrome.

There's no sign of my account being blocked in "Contributions", only the fact that there are so few of them, the last one being 3 years ago. Nor of the page being edited by someone else in the history of the page (last change yesterday at 3am.

It's not that big a change tbh, I'm just sad I couldn't do it. :S Alefith (talk) 13:43, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

you may refer to this phabricator bug report. check if you're blocking *hcaptcha.wikimedia.org. :3 nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 14:09, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Since It'd tied to the type editor, I don't think that's it. But if it can still be the case, tell me how I cann test if I block the capcha thing. In fact I'd be interested in any case. Alefith (talk) 14:48, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

It seems I can reproduce the bug on the test server.

But, switching to it, I discovered the bug only happens with the source editor, not the visual editor. Alefith (talk) 14:47, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I can confirm that I worked around the issue one the true server by switching to the visual editor before publishing.

I'll know this for the future, but I don't know if/where I should report this happened. Alefith (talk) 14:52, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

more technical bug reports go to phabricator ^^ nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 15:12, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello,

I need some help with editing an article without a source. The article about Kontum Airfield describes an attack on the airfield that occurs on April 21, 1972.

"On 21 April PAVN artillery fire damaged an Air Vietnam plane, killing a flight attendant.[8]: 378 "

However, I know that the event actually took place on April 22, and the "flight attendant" that was killed was not a flight attendant, rather an employee of Air Vietnam. And I know this because she was my grandmother. I only recently heard the story for the first time from my father. I would really like to include her name in the article, Nguyen thi Ngan Thanh. I understand that personal anecdotes are not a legitimate source but it is important to me that her name is included. Is there any way to edit this article to include her name even though I don't have a source? Or does anyone know how I might find a source for something like this? Asianangler (talk) 12:44, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, all information in an article must be verifiable in something that is published and publicly accessible. We cannot use the personal knowledge of editors for article content.

You could track down the existing sources provided in the article to see if they would be willing and able to talk with you. 331dot (talk) 12:51, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Have a read at WP:PRIMARY...it will be difficult to source this me thinks. Lectonar (talk) 12:52, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Remember that sources do not have to be online; nor in English. Perhaps you can find an old newspaper report in your local library? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:26, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

@Asianangler Your best bet is probably newspapers.com. I found The Huntsville Times Wed, May 17, 1972 ·Page 1 there with a large article about the airfield. It was referring to an attack that day but a bit more digging should find a report about the April attack. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:13, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

... yes, The Patriot-News Sun, Apr 23, 1972 ·Page 43 says "yesterday, wounding four civilians and damaging one airliner". That doesn't give the name of your grandmother nor state that a death occurred. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:21, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the newspaper.com suggestion. I appreciate the help! ~2026-21942-74 (talk) 15:19, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I am attempting to turn the list of books in the Railway Series page into a table to clean up fancruft and eventually get it to FL. How do I make it like the James Bond one, where only some are sortable? 🚂ThatTrainGuy1945 ^{Peep peep!} 13:09, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@ThatTrainGuy1945 yeah so you basically just add class="unsortable" next to the scope thingy to the table's code. the table code in the james bond article thingy for reference:

{| class="wikitable plainrowheaders sortable" style="margin-right: 0;"
:|-
:! scope="col" | Title
:! scope="col" | Author
:! scope="col" | Publisher
:! scope="col" | Date
:! scope="col" | Length (first edition)
:! scope="col" class="unsortable" | Plot <!-- sort disabled -->
:! scope="col" class="unsortable" | {{Tooltip|Ref.|Reference}} <!-- sort disabled -->
:|-
:

nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 14:06, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Alright. So, I did that, and now it looks like this. What am I doing wrong?

(If there's an easier way to do it visually, which I usually use, let me know). 🚂ThatTrainGuy1945 ^{Peep peep!} 14:53, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@ThatTrainGuy1945 okay so um here's the fixed one. idk how but maybe an automation script in the visual reply tool that auto added : thingy. :urm:

{| class="wikitable plainrowheaders sortable" style="margin-right: 0;"
|-
! scope="col" | Title
! scope="col" | Stories <!-- sort disabled -->
! scope="col" | Author
! scope="col" | Publisher
! scope="col" | Date
! scope="col" | Length (first edition)
! scope="col" class="unsortable" | Plot <!-- sort disabled -->
! scope="col" class="unsortable" | {{Tooltip|Ref.|Reference}} <!-- sort disabled -->
|-
! scope="row" | ''The Three Railway Engines''
|
* "Edward's Day Out"
* "Edward and Gordon"
* "The Sad Story of Henry"
* "Edward, Gordon, and Henry"
|[[Wilbert Awdry]]
|William Middleton (1945)
[[C. Reginald Dalby]] (1949)
|12 May 1945
|put ur length here
|Edward, an older engine, is let out of the sheds and later helps Gordon up a hill. Henry is shut up in a tunnel after refusing to come out in the rain, but is later let out after helping Edward pull Gordon's train.
|your ref
|}

outputs

nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 15:06, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Alright, thanks nhals8. (why are there rats?) 🚂ThatTrainGuy1945 ^{Peep peep!} 15:26, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

rats in the house of the dead nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 15:36, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Peer support is required regarding the verifiability of the respective claim on a living persons biography:

"As an academic, Dr. Valeri earned a Bachelor of Arts in Applied psychology, a Master of Arts in Clinical-Community Psychology, and a PhD in Critical Psychology at Point Park University.^{[citation needed]}"

What we have: The claim exists. The subject is real and verifiable in the public sphere through athletic and professional channels. The university is an accredited institution with verifiable psychology programs.

What we do not yet have: A reliable, published source to directly confirm all three degrees. The institution itself has confirmed it cannot provide a linkable webpage — what are some examples of other reliable citations to verify the claim? RealRobRossi (talk) 11:36, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello. Where does the information come from, if not from university websites? 331dot (talk) 11:39, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @RealRobRossi, and welcome to the Teahouse.

While text from an LLM is not forbidden in talk and discussion pages (as it is in articles), it is not what we want to see here. We want to hear from you, not your robot.

That somebody has a particular degree usually falls within the range of information that a primary source can be used to verify, so in this case a source from the respective universities, for example, would be acceptable. ColinFine (talk) 15:53, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I am seeking assistance with Draft:Lean Back. A reviewer (Gryllida) suggested that the first paragraph should explicitly state the notability criteria (WP:GNG) and highlight independent sources.

I have updated the first paragraph accordingly, providing specific printed sources with ISBN and ISSN numbers to prove in-depth coverage. Could someone please take a look and see if it is now ready for publication? I have already messaged the reviewer on their talk page but would appreciate any further guidance to avoid further delays.

Thank you!  JonekX (talk) 12:23, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

JonekX Hello. You have resubmitted the draft, Draft:Lean Back (band) and it is pending; asking for a review does not speed this entirely volunteer driven process. It will be reviewed in due course. Do you have a particular need for a speedy review? 331dot (talk) 12:26, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@JonekX These appear to be the same sources you were relying on the previous times the article was declined. If you don't have any new sources compared to what reviewers have seen before, what different outcome do you expect? AfC is not a slot machine where you pull the lever hoping you eventually get a favourable reviewer. Athanelar (talk) 13:11, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I just did what user Gryllida told me to do.

ISBN and ISSN numbers I provided refer to independent, printed encyclopedia and professional press. According to WP:GNG, these are the gold standard for reliable secondary sources.

The fact that the same sources were sufficient for the German and Czech versions suggests they meet general reliability standards. Could you please clarify why specifically these indexed, printed sources are being questioned? If these are not enough for a historical band, what other type of verification is expected for an inactive group from that period? JonekX (talk) 13:41, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

The German and Czech Wikipedias are separate projects with their own policies as to what they deem acceptable; what is acceptable there is not neccesarily acceptable here. The English Wikipedia tends to be stricter than others. 331dot (talk) 13:43, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I can't speak to that as I don't have the time to review the sources properly myself at the minute, but the fact the draft has been declined five times by five separate reviewers (plus theroadislong's comment from just now) indicates that the sources you have are obviously not satisfying the reviewers, and if you don't have any additional sources then it might just be time to drop the stick and move on. Athanelar (talk) 13:57, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @JonekX.

ISBN and ISSN numbers are completely irrelevant. Anybody who publishes a book can buy an ISBN, so an ISBN is no guarantee of reliability.

In any case, reliability of sources is only one criterion. Nearly as important is independence. If the most reliable source you can think of publishes an article by the subject or the subject's associate, or based on an interview by one of these, or based on a press release (all of which they may reasonably do), that is not an independent source, and does nothing to establish that the subject is notable. ColinFine (talk) 16:03, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus. 🍅 fx (talk) 16:42, 9 April 2026 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hello. I am requesting a second opinion on Draft:Lean Back (band), which was rejected as "cannot be resubmitted" by reviewer Thilio. I believe this decision is an error based on a failure to evaluate physical, printed sources. The draft provides: Marek Jakubowski; Mariusz Szalbierz (1997). Encyklopedia Muzyki Popularnej. Blues w Polsce (in Polish). p. 130. ISBN 83-85414-92-4. Barbara Kołodziej (1999). "10 lat z Lean Back". Wiadomości Rudzkie (in Polish). No. 48(380). p. 4. ISSN 1232-0560. "Historia ODK Jowisz" (in Polish). RSM. Archived from the original on 2009-08-16. Retrieved 2026-01-09. Krzysztof Nowakowski. "Uniwersytet dzieci" (in Polish). Retrieved 2010-03-25. "25 Głogowskie Spotkania Jazzowe". Archived from the original on 2010-06-01. Retrieved 2026-01-23. "33 studencki festiwal piosenki - uczestnicy". Archived from the original on 2008-10-09. Retrieved 2026-01-23. "Editorial Board – Tomasz Tomi Kupka". Journal of Dentistry. Retrieved 2026-02-10. These sources meet WP:GNG and WP:NBAND (Criterion 1 and 12). I would like to ask why these indexed, printed publications are being treated as unreliable while similar articles, such as [[Tie Break (jazz ensemble)]], are accepted with comparable evidence. This feels like a disproportionate barrier for historical art documentation from the pre-digital era. I request a review from a different set of eyes. JonekX (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

See other stuff exists for that argument and as for a different set of eyes you have had 5 declines before the final rejection. Theroadislong (talk) 15:36, 9 April 2026 (UTC). Theroadislong (talk) 15:34, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Why have you ("you") bolded parts of your text randomly? 🚂ThatTrainGuy1945 ^{Peep peep!} 15:49, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Is the content (not the images) in Military Images Digital suitable to use for a citation in Wikipedia? I would never use it as the only source cited in a Wikipedia article. The article I am interested in using for a citation is located here. The citation style would be cite journal. TwoScars (talk) 20:56, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @TwoScars, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The article you link to has a named author, which is a good sign; and cites references, which is another good sign.

But I can't see anything on the "About" page that mentions an editorial team, and that's not so good.

I am unclear whether the submissions published here are checked and edited by a robust editorial team, or whether it is effectively a shared blog site, where anybody (or maybe just members) can submit their thoughts.

If the author is a recognised, published, authority on the subject, then it might be acceptable, see the second paragraph of WP:BLOG

I suggest asking at WP:RSN. ColinFine (talk) 22:00, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I have now asked at WP:RSN. If it helps, I also found the article in the Wikipedia Library in JSTOR (here). Thanks again. TwoScars (talk) 18:29, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi - I've tried to create a wiki article about a band named Calling All Captains but have been rejected a few times before due to lack of references. However - I believe they now have enough credible sources that warrant creating a wiki page.

I created the the article in my sandbox and now I am unsure how to submit it for review to be public. I believe I havent made enough edits to other articles to allow me to move the page to Wiki.

Any insight on how I can get this done would be greatly appreciated!

Link to page is HERE Cambirchill (talk) 18:09, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I have moved your draft to Draft:Calling All Captains and added a template at the top of the page which will allow you to submit it for review when you're ready.

However, I doubt at this time that it will be accepted. Your references seem to have a lack of independent WP:SIGCOV. All of your sources are based on interviews, which cannot be used to establish notability. The only one which isn't is a very brief review of one of their albums.

Please take a look at WP:NBAND and familiarise yourself with our notability requirement for bands. Athanelar (talk) 19:34, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I recently submitted a draft for review (Draft:DOZA MC). I would appreciate any feedback on whether the sources and notability are sufficient, and if there’s anything I can improve while waiting for review. Thank you! Riomazado (talk) 19:06, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Like many people who first set out to create a Wikipedia article, you have fundamentally misunderstood what the purpose of a Wikipedia article is.

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

Well over half of your references are links to this artist's music. It would seem that the purpose of your draft is to promote the artist, which is WP:NOPROMO not allowed.

Indeed, if you are affiliated with this artist personally or professionally in any way, please also be sure to disclose as much on your userpage; see WP:COI. Athanelar (talk) 19:30, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. I understand the concern regarding primary sources. I will work on adding more independent reliable sources and improving the draft accordingly. Riomazado (talk) 20:08, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I’m currently working on editing the article about the Churchill Club, a Danish resistance group active during World War II. I noticed that the article is labelled as "low importance" under the Denmark tag. What can I do while editing this article to potentially change this and move it up in importance? Looking for any helpful suggestions as to what I can do.  Giorgiachristiansen (talk) 18:37, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Anyone can change the importance (and anyone can undo changes to importance, in that case discuss). The userscript RATER helps with this. msk 19:06, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

"Low importance" isn't a judgement on the quality of the topic, just a priority rating when it comes to selecting articles: "What are the most important articles about Denmark, that someone who is learning about the country should read first?" Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:16, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I've discovered that the pages of Chapter 3 of British Journalism by Richard Long on the National Council for the Training of Journalists published by Bibliotex in 2022 are identical to the sections of National Council for the Training of Journalists most of whose text is from earlier than 2022.

Similarly with the its pages on the BBC Academy and BBC Academy, the Birmingham School of Media and Birmingham School of Media, the Broadcast Journalism Training Council and Broadcast Journalism Training Council. The same is probably true for other pages relating to articles listed at Category:Journalism schools in the United Kingdom. Mcljlm (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Mcljlm, if you're asking a question, what's the question? And if you're appealing for help, what help? -- Hoary (talk) 21:59, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm wondering if this casts doubt on Bibliotex's reliability as a reliable source and use of WP without acknowledgment. Mcljlm (talk) 22:08, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I can't tell what it even is. Sesquilinear (talk) 23:12, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Mcljlm, if you doubt the reliability of a publisher whose products are often cited in Wikipedia, or if you wonder about the reliability of a particular publication and wonder if you should cite it for a particular purpose, the best place to ask is WP:RSN. (As for unacknowledged recycling of material from Wikipedia, I hope that somebody else can address this.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:30, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, i need to know what's the page in commons for unregistered users requesting free images to get uploaded (kinda like WP:FFU) if there's no one, can you request free images in the aforementioned page? ~2026-16179-68 (talk) 16:54, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-16179-68: Here at the English Wikipedia an account must be autoconfirmed (four days and ten edits) to upload files. Commons doesn't require that so anyone can create an account and upload right away. They have no process like WP:FFU. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:15, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

yea, but i'm an unrigestered user that as of now, doesn't want to make an account ~2026-16179-68 (talk) 18:32, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-16179-68: I guess Commons has deliberately chosen to not allow this. It's easy to create an account and they have 138 million files. The same account will work at other Wikimedia wikis like Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:22, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

ok so they allow rquesting free images in WP:FFU, sorry for interrupting you ~2026-16179-68 (talk) 22:30, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-16179-68: I think they only allow it if you specify an English Wikipedia article for the image and they think the image would be suitable there, and they cannot find a suitable alternative image which is already uploaded. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:19, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Is it allowed like, a new logo (if the article has an outdated logo)? ~2026-16179-68 (talk) 01:19, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-16179-68: A logo would probably be allowed at WP:FFU but often with an upload at the English Wikipedia with a fair use claim for the article. Logos are generally non-free and disallowed at Commons unless they are very simple. See more at Wikipedia:Logos. I suggest you stop asking questions and just make a request. If you had posted a link to the logo and article here then somebody might already have uploaded it with no need to go to WP:FFU. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:39, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Olson Aluminum Castings

I thought I followed all the protocols when submitting my draft for my family business. I received that message that it was denied. Where in the submission process do I disclose I am involved with this company/ conflict of interest? Cmolson96 (talk) 15:42, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

You need more sources to prove the notabiltiy of your company. Also the language is promotional. See here for notability. 🚂ThatTrainGuy1945 ^{Peep peep!} 15:47, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Cmolson96 Hello. Please see WP:PAID for how to disclose your connection to your business.

Wikipedia is not a place for a company to tell about itself and what it views as its own history; you need to summarize what independent reliable sources have chosen on their own to say about your company, showing how it is a notable company as Wikipedia defines one. 331dot (talk) 15:49, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, @Cmolson96

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source. Athanelar (talk) 16:00, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Cmolson96, I see you've disclosed your COI on your user page now – thank you. Before you think about submitting this draft a third time, you really need to carefully read all the advice and feedback you have been given in this thread and in the pink decline notices on your draft. It is extremely difficult (if not impossible) for someone to write a well-sourced, neutral-point-of-view article about their own company, which is why we discourage this practice. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a business directory or free advertising platform. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 02:57, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I am making my first article about The Palanquins of the Soul, and editing it in my sandbox. Should i switch to writing in a Draft article, or should i write the whole article in my sandbox and copy it over to the draft? Balintkaistryingediting (Balint's Info, Talk, Balint's Edits) 10:42, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@Balintkaistryingediting It's better to create it in the Draft namespace; if you've already started it in your sandbox, you should be able to move it to a draft. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 11:25, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Note that gradually as you get more used to Wikipedia (specifically creating articles) and you get autoconfirmed, you can create straight in the mainspace. nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 14:01, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I do know that, because when I moved my article from my sandbox I accidentally moved it to the mainspace, I just thought it would be appropriate to get it reviewed. Balintkaistryingediting (Balint's Info, Talk, Balint's Edits) 15:20, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Good thinking, @Balintkaistryingediting. While any autoconfirmed editor can technically create an article directly, it really does take a lot more than four days and ten edits to become familiar with Wikipedia's content policies, so submitting drafts for review is a good idea for your first couple of months here. Also note that Articles for creation isn't a queue; reviewers work on drafts according to our interests, expertise, and energy. The notice about a two-month wait is only a rough indication of how many drafts are waiting to be reviewed. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 03:04, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Balintkaistryingediting. While, yes, you can directly create an article right now, I would recommend starting off with copyediting and wikilinking. You can also try citations too. I'd recommend doing some easy tasks, some medium tasks, and a few hard tasks before making an article. Purple, the Maker (Your welcome to say something!) 03:10, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I asked about the Article Heading. Kesavaraja M (talk) 06:30, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

@Kesavaraja M Please see Teahouse. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:02, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Kesavaraja M, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you're asking what the Wikipedia Teahouse is, please see the text at the top of this page. ColinFine (talk) 10:00, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi!I wanted to known why some of my article such as Vajra,Vijaya bank layout and Udupi International Airport is not revived even if it has taken longer time and what is this point system for article? Shaymmm (talk) 10:05, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Shaymmm, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I don't understand what you are asking. What do you mean by "revived"? What are you expecting?

All three articles are there, though Vajra does not seem to have been edited by you, so it may be a different article from the one you're talking about.

Vijaya bank layout is there still, and Udupi International Airport as well, though the latter has been tagged as possibly not meeting the notability requirements. ColinFine (talk) 10:32, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Vajra Bus,BMTC is edited by me.I meant by Reviews.It means if a person Reviews the article is visble in google as a wikipedia article Shaymmm (talk) 10:35, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

New Page Patrol is a volunteer process. The draft will be marked as reviewed after 90 days if it is not manually reviewed sooner. Do you have a particular need for these articles to appear in search results quickly? 331dot (talk) 10:46, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

what happened to my editor i was visiting wikipedia a few days ago and it changed into the source editor MOBMAN61 (talk) 04:40, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

You have to click the pencil icon to change source to visual. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 05:22, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi MOBMAN61, welcome to the Teahouse. Check that "Enable the visual editor" is enabled at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing and see the "Editing mode" options below it. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:32, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

In general, when adding a reference to an article, am I supposed to use the current date in my local timezone or UTC? I am on mobile right now, but I can see the clock when I’m on my laptop editing, and I was wondering if that’s what I should’ve been going by this whole time. Xx rapunzel xx (talk) 12:04, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

If the access-date parameter is off by a day, it doesn't really matter. I tend to use whatever date is my time zone. Or I omit the parameter entirely. The point of that parameter is mostly just to show readers when was the last time somebody recorded the fact that the citation was accessed. If the access-date was many years ago, then the citation may be subject to link rot and it should be checked again, and fixed with a link to archive.org if necessary and possible. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 12:09, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Article: American Musical Supply

Hi there!

I was suggested to revise the tone of this article by my dashboard. However, it seems the whole article is promotional (see the sections, it really reads like an ad) and it looks LLM generated, especially with the writing style and section titles. What should I do now? TheAuroraBorealis (talk) 04:14, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, TheAuroraBorealis. I agree that this article is basically an advertisement for the company. Please read WP:DELETION for the various options for getting rid of it. Cullen328 (talk) 04:21, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

It's now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Musical Supply. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 12:23, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Checking the page history, the TA ~2026-17050-06 was the one who made it so promotional here. I've reverted it to the last good version. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 04:27, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Maybe it's a good idea to let them know to not do this again? TheAuroraBorealis (talk) 04:33, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Its probably not needed, due to it being fairly old at this point. Most accounts edit once and then never again, and I doubt this one will be different. If they return and do more promo then a warning can be given. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 04:42, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I’m fairly sure that you can use public domain images on Wikipedia, but I just wanted to check since some images I need aren’t in the Wikimedia Commons database yet. I-like-Arm64 (talk) 03:55, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Generally, public-domain images are uploaded to Commons first. If an image link pointing to a file that exists on Commons but doesn't exist locally, the software automagically defaults to the file on Commons. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 04:05, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I-like-Arm64, do we agree on the meaning of "public domain"? For many people, "This photo of the then-Prince is in the public domain" would mean that the photo is easy to find on the web, or that its existence is public knowledge, or both (or similar). That is not what it means here. Here, an image that's in the public domain in [territory] is one that is not copyright in [territory]. -- Hoary (talk) 06:44, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

@I-like-Arm64 More detail at Public domain and Creative Commons (the licenses that Wikimedia Commons uses). Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:32, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I noticed another editor make edits to existing references, and they removed the language parameter on a couple of them, stating that it’s not necessary to use if the source is in English (implying that it’s unnecessary if the source and article language is the same). Is this true? What if the article is being read in a different language? Wouldn’t it be easier for transcribers to use the same reference, knowing it’s already in English?

The second language question I have is American vs. British English. I’m in American currently editing an article about a band from London. Should I be using the British spelling of certain words as well as the date format? Should editors come to some sort of agreement on which English to use? Or is there a specific rule regarding this?

This is the article I’m referring to with both questions: Even in Arcadia

 Xx rapunzel xx (talk) 12:43, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Xx rapunzel xx. lang=en is ignored by citation templates here at the English Wikipedia but Template:Citation#csdoc language says:

Because cs1|2 templates are often copied from en.wiki to other wikis, the use of language codes is preferred so that language names render in the correct language and form, e.g. espagnol at a French-language wiki instead of the English word "Spanish".

This is also an argument for including lang=en but I don't know a more official recommendation. See MOS:TIES and MOS:DATETIES for your second question. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:01, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

At the top of an article's wikitext, there should be a templete about which you should use ("Use British English" or "Use American English"). However, MOS:TIES says that you should use british english for this article/topic. BSH (talk) - (they/them) 13:04, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Dear Sir/Madam

I made an edit to

Atlantic 85-class lifeboat re the SIMS system on the Atlantic 85 in Skerries. It was made by former crew member and used by numerous crew both in this station and other stations. I was informed by BlueStaticHorse the edit "did not appear constructive" . I am seeking clarity on what is needed considered to appear constructive?

After asking that question , the reply is now that the video has not been cited properly, with no direct reply to the originial query as to what is considered to "appear constructive"?

Yours sincerely

Stephen Campion (talk) 16:02, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

The statement that your edit "did not appear constructive" is simply the wording used by the stock warning template that many automated tools use when reverting an edit. Don't get bogged down in that wording, focus on the more specific feedback, which is that you did not provide a reliable citation for the information you wanted to add. That said, this was an inappropriate warning for this user to give you in response to this edit, and I will inform them of such. Athanelar (talk) 16:10, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Dear Athanelar

Thank you for your reply and clarification .

The issue that I was confused about is that the feedback was not specific, constructive and turns out neither accurate or precise . I sought clarification . "Don't get bogged down in the wording" is not helpful and to my understanding the reason why you, and others give of their time to keep Wikipedia accurate , precise and constructive.

Thank you for your time on this .

Kind regards Stephen Campion (talk) 16:36, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, you already asked this on your talk page and got a reply. Your edit was reverted for not citing the source correctly; "did not appear constructive" was just the default warning message used by the anti-vandalism tool of the person who reverted it.

P.S. Wikipedia is not email, there's no need to use phrases like Dear Sir/Madam or Yours sincerely on talk pages. 🍅 fx (talk) 16:10, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

I agree that Wikipedia is not email, but I do think that nobody has ever been justly reprimanded for politeness, and many for the converse. Wikipedian12512 (talk) 03:33, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

The reason I reverted the edit was because the video was linked directly, not cited as it should have been. The generic, good faith, level 1 warning was placed on your talk page. You asked for clarification, and I responded with the proper ways to cite a video. If you need help further or still have questions, please specify what you need. I'm sorry if I don't understand your query. BlueStaticHorse (talk)(they/them) 16:10, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

"The reason I reverted the edit was because the video was linked directly, not cited as it should have been."-In that case, why didn't you convert it to a citation?

The reason we are here now is apparently because you used a vandalism template for an edit that was not vandalism. Please don't do that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:11, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

I recommend seeing this page for a list of other templates that you could insert into talk pages.--DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 13:11, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

We don't use external links in the body of an article so it was removed. Theroadislong (talk) 16:11, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

At talk page of Lori Hoxha article, i made an reply to an editor about an website reference that was removed/replaced , telling my opinion and my point of view.The editor as response sayed this : Dont make me go open a discussion/request to blacklist teksteshqip wiki-wide as a source. Please! ‎G. , this behaviour is not acceptable and as i see this user is kind of conflictual with agressive tendence also at other wikis/metas specially at sq wiki. Could please someone an experienced editor/autoritative respond on this?.Thank you ~2026-21329-72 (talk) 21:27, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

If TexteShqip is, as @GLOBALIST LIBERTARIAN says, a user-generated site, then it is not a reliable source, and should not be cited in an article. See Verifiability for the policy.

Your comment about a "practical reality" is irrelevant: Wikipedia is not going to drop its standards because there are no reliable sources in one region or industry. Unfortunately, that means that some groups of people are underrepresented in Wikipedia, but that is the policy.

Having said all that, it's not clear to me whether anybody can edit information on TexteShqip, or if only the person that posted it can do so. If the latter is the case, then it possibly counts as a self-published source, which may be used for limited uncontroversial factual information. I think it would be worth soliciting opinions at the WP:RSN. ColinFine (talk) 21:51, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

as website is kind of "database" of artists mostly musicants, when a person submit info-s about certain artist example an x singer bio,birthday and birthdate, that website has staff that verifies info-s and if are correct infos, than published, saying this its not as editor sayed at talk page, also his behaviour that saying : Dont make me go open a discussion/request to blacklist teksteshqip wiki-wide as a source. Please! ‎G. , this is not correct and good way. ~2026-21329-72 (talk) 21:58, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Nobody is making @GLOBALIST LIBERTARIAN do anything. But if there is doubt as to whether a source is reliable or not, then a discussion at WP:RSN is the most appropriate thing to do. ColinFine (talk) 22:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi 21329,

I think I agree that G. L.'s comment was a bit strange and defensive. I hope they see this thread and explain their point of view to you in a more amicable way. However, as explained by ColinFine, their actual concerns about using TexteShqip as a source are very valid. MEN KISSING (she/they) Talk to me, I don't bite! - See my edits 22:34, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

@MEN KISSING @ColinFine I have been having a discussion with an admin (and one user who supports the abusive actions of the admin) on the local sq.wiki about a certain article, and I suspect this temp IP user is one of them (I dont want to name him, this is my explanation for my tone.). They (admin) have been deleting a well sourced article without giving warning, without discussing, without offering advice for improvements. This I think is an attempt to "dirty" my reputation on the en.wiki, because I challanged one of them to go and try delete the en.wiki equivalent like they did with the sq.wiki article. The article they have deleted abusively on sq.wiki without discussion, has an en.wiki equivalent, which currently remains unchallanged to improvements or other sort of discussions.

Regarding teksteshqip, I stand by what I said there. They are widely using in on the sq.wiki to open articles about BigBrother partecipants who are imo singers in name only (no noticability). They can force their hand on sq.wiki because that is the nature of adminship abuse on small wikis. I dont have time to do it myself, but I strongly recommend blacklisting that source especially for use on biographies. ‎G. L. Talk 11:52, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Nobody has a "reputation" to "dirty" on en.Wikipedia: Users are judged solely by the quality of their edits and conduct. With several tens of thousands of long-term regular editors, and over 100,000 different editors in any month-long period, there is little scope for personalised vendettas unless they have been brought here from off-Wiki (including from other-language Wikipedias such as the Albanian you mention), and they are not relevant or welcome here.

About 'teksteshqip' I have no opinion: you may be right about its non-Reliability, but in any case, even if it were deprecated on en.Wikipedia by listing it as such in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, this would not be 'global' or 'wiki-wide', and I suspect it would have to be much worse that appears from the above to merit a global ban.

(In case you wonder, I am not one of your nefarious enemies hiding under a TA: I care so little about "reputation" that in over 20 years editing en.Wikipedia I have just never bothered to open an account.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 14:17, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey, FYI, if you're referring to a single object, use the word 'a' if the next word DOES NOT start with a vowel (e.g. 'a reply'), and use the word 'an' if the next word DOES start with a vowel (e.g. 'an editor').--DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 13:17, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello. I have a declared conflict of interest regarding this biographical article. I've prepared a fully sourced draft at User:Rforzoni/sandbox using only independent secondary sources including The Guardian, The Times, The Sunday Times, The Observer, The Scotsman, ESPN, The Psychologist (British Psychological Society) and Carter-Ruck solicitors.

Previous submissions were declined for reliance on the subject's own website and use of The Daily Mail. This new version contains zero self-published sources and no Daily Mail references. Every factual claim is supported by at least one independent third-party source with editorial oversight.

I would be grateful if an uninvolved editor could review the draft and advise whether it meets notability and sourcing requirements for submission through Articles for Creation. Thank you. ~~~~

Rforzoni (talk) 17:47, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Are you independent of the subject?

Just asking Sillcosisgogol (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

OP's first words here were "I have a declared conflict of interest regarding this biographical article". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:00, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Ok SillG (talk) 22:37, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Given that you are still asking an AI to write for you, which is not allowed per WP:NEWLLM, the answer is no, it will not be accepted. Do not use AI to edit or communicate on Wikipedia. Why are you creating a new page instead of editing Draft:Roberto Forzoni? Helpful Raccoon (talk) 18:33, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Gonna be honest... seeing that edit you linked was hilarious. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 13:13, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for you feedback! Very constructive Rforzoni (talk) 13:18, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi how do I submit a draft for review? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 12:24, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

If you're referring to Draft:Kyunki Rishton Ke Bhi Roop Badalte Hain, I have added a template that will allow you to submit it for review when you're ready. Athanelar (talk) 13:20, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay thank you ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 13:24, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

@Athanelar side note, what's the proper way to add the AfC draft template? I recently had to do it and I just did it manually, but then that doesn't fill in all the parameters that yours has. 🍅 fx (talk) 13:43, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

{{subst:AfC draft}} Athanelar (talk) 13:53, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi. I made a small edit/update to a page, but it was quickly "reverted" by another user. The user who reverted sent a friendly and helpful note (referred me to the sandbox and other resources) but I don't understand why the edit was reverted. It's no big deal (in fact it's a very small revision) but I'm confident the edit is correct. Any advice? Pinarello–Q36.5 Pro Cycling Team. Wyopinotfan (talk) 14:14, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Wyopinotfan, and welcome to the Teahouse. I presume your edit was reverted due to a lack of sourcing. Since you provided no sources and changed it on a whim, one patrolling edits would (and did) assume that it could be vandalism and reverted. I have redone your edit with sourcing, make sure to source next time. Cheers :), kline / talk / contribs 14:20, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Wyopinotfan (talk) 14:38, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, @Wyopinotfan. Verifiability is a core content policy on Wikipedia. Any factual claim in an article that could potentially be challenged should be cited to a reliable source. Athanelar (talk) 14:23, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Wyopinotfan (talk) 14:38, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

@Create2share has an article as their user page, which is not allowed (WP:FAKEARTICLE). I'd normally delete the content or move it into their userspace (can't draftify, because they already made a draft). However, in this case, the user page is transcluded from MetaWiki, so I have no idea how to deal with this. Could someone please help here? 🍅 fx (talk) 15:19, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Flexagoon. I have nominated meta:User:Create2share for speedy deletion per meta:Meta:Deletion policy#G7. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:41, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

After putting in so much effort I later saw that someone removed my edit Please help me🥲 Mexico's Claudia (talk) 22:27, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Can you be more specific about which edit you mean? DS (talk) 22:39, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I was referring to an edit where I added a link to another related article (it appeared in the suggestions as well). After I added it the edit was later undone ould you please check if there was any issue with that link? Mexico's Claudia (talk) 22:56, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Your list of edits, Mexico's Claudia. Which edits among these? -- Hoary (talk) 23:27, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@Mexico's Claudia I presume you are referring to your edit at Late antiquity which @Discospinster reverted.

While Disco didn't explain their revert with an edit summary, my assumption is that it's because you created a piped link from the word "throughout" to the page Victorialand, which is a link to an album that has nothing to do with the context.

Also, I notice that you responded to this by going and reverting one of Discospinster's recent edits with the edit summaries "Why my edit revert" and "I will also revert" Please don't engage in this kind of petty retaliation. Athanelar (talk) 00:39, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

In addition, in the same edit, you also:

• Wikilinked the verb "grew" to the surname Grew
• Wikilinked "late antiquity" as a reference to the same article it was in
• Wikilinked the word "suggests"

It's totally understandable why this edit was reverted rather than the mistakes being edited out. Your edit was very sloppy work, and I would have reverted it too. The piped link to that Cocteau Twins album was utterly bizarre. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 02:00, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Your other edits are incredibly sloppy too.

• I'm definitely not a fan of linking a song to the redirect for the song to the same article you started on .
• You linked a Belanova tour to an album by Jo Stafford .
• You also added an award for Belanova which butchered the table, you added "not sure" as the category the award was in, and it was an award that according to the article for the award, that Belanova doesn't appear to have won anyway .
• Bizarrely linked words like "included" and "authority" in List of Byzantine emperors
• Linked "shot Jackson" in a sentence describing the murder of Jimmie Lee Jackson with a link to country guitarist Shot Jackson.
• Linked phrases in a prose to unrelated articles that make no sense. For example, in a description of a plot that involves someone hiding in a bedroom, you linked to a film titled In the Bedroom, which has nothing to do with anything oin the article.

You need to start focusing on why your edits are being reverted and fix the underlying problems with your editing, not focusing on the fact that there are edits being reverted. Pretty much every edit you have made has at least one significant problem. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 02:20, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

@CoffeeCrumbs, since almost all of the edits this user has made have been links, I'm going to go out on a whim and assume that they are using the Newcomer tasks, specifically the linking feature.

@Mexico's Claudia, please note that when doing these tasks, the link suggestions are just that: suggestions. They can often be wrong, as they are machine-generated. When doing this task in the future, please check before you link!

Best, PolarClimates (talk) 17:01, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello. I was looking at the Twinkle options on the teahouse out of curiosity and I managed to submit a deletion request for the Teahouse. Could someone close that request? I'm not sure how to do that..

Sorry! PolarClimates (talk) 16:57, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

@PolarClimates I nominated it for deletion with {{Db-error}} HurricaneZeta^C 17:00, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! PolarClimates (talk) 17:02, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I have a distinguished background of over 45 years as an Electrical Engineer and Computer Scientist with 9 patents and 100s of innovations. ~2026-22163-87 (talk) 17:10, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Please see WP:NOTABILITY. However many patents you have is irrelevant if there is no significant coverage of you (and a cursory Google search didn't find any). In addition, if you are considering writing an article about yourself, you should know that is strongly discouraged: please see WP:ABOUTME. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 17:23, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Also, please be mindful of scams offering to create an article about you in exchange for payment. Athanelar (talk) 17:52, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

The specific notability guideline for people is WP:PERSON. Richard Hooker, there are countless people with long, successful careers who are not eligible for a Wikipedia biography. To summarize briefly, an acceptable Wikipedia biography summarizes the significant, in depth coverage that multiple, independent reliable sources have published about that person. If that coverage does not exist, it is not possible to write an acceptable Wikipedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 19:24, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I received a request on my talkpage here to replace the image on the Leading Company article with a higher resolution one found on internet archive. I don't think this is permitted but double-checking, please advise, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:53, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Atlantic306,

Since the cover art is a copyrighted work of art, its inclusion in the article would be subject to point 3b of WP:NFCCP. So, no, the higher resolution picture should not be uploaded. I would explain this to the user by saying that lower resolution images are often preferred so as to comply with copyright law. MEN KISSING (she/they) Talk to me, I don't bite! - See my edits 02:08, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Recently, an editor has been adding animated illustrations, possibly self-drawn, to the infoboxes of articles on historical figures from WP:MYANMAR (for example, this, this, and this). Although MOS:LEADIMAGE says that lead images should be natural, I also believe this may go against MOS:IMAGEREL, which says that images should be encyclopedic in nature. First, I would like to know whether my understanding is correct that these animated illustrations should be removed from infoboxes. Second, if this editor’s actions do go against the guidelines, where should I ask for help to prevent further additions of this kind, given that they have already added them to more than ten articles? TIA. Htanaungg (talk) 17:03, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Those don't look animated to me, they just look hand-drawn. They are jpg files, which don't support animation (if they did, they'd have an extension ajpg or mjpg).

If no other illustration is available under an acceptable free license, then it's fair game to use a user-generated portrait of the article subject. We show user-created artwork as lead images in many other articles, particularly ones about sexual practices. Whether these particular drawings are appropriate is something to be determined on the talk page. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 02:19, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

but there is already a redirect with the title of the document.

In this case, is it correct to remove the redirect and create a document, or is it correct to keep it by adding (horse racing)?

The document I want to create is Korean Derby. This is a document related to Korean horse racing, but it overlaps with the redirect. Usually, when we say Korean derby in Korea, we mean a match between Korean soccer players (like Son Heung-min vs. Kim Min-jae) and not South Korea vs. North Korea (in Korea, we call it the North-South Korean Derby, not the Korean Derby), so it's surprising that it was redirected. Coperacchio (talk) 02:47, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

It's likely that some people (especially non-Koreans) will still search on "Korean Derby" looking for the football topic, and some will search on it for the horse race. You could turn the redirect into a WP:Disambiguation page, though that's not usual for only 2 alternatives, when a WP:Hatnote on each article is preferred.

If you create your proposed new article as a WP:Draft, and submit it for review, it will be the job of the reviewer, if they accept it as an article, to choose the most suitable name, WP:Move the draft to that, and also resolve any other naming conflicts (which you can alert them to on the Draft's Talk page). Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 03:19, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

....Betelgeuse. When will this star blow up, and can anything found on this star be used in the article about this star? I have seen all manner of rumors on this all over the place, and I have heard that IF one of its poles is facing Earth, Earth will be destroyed by a Gamma Ray Burst when it blows up. ~2026-16963-29 (talk) 04:26, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I assume you read Betelgeuse#2019–2020_fading. If you want to suggest sources and content for the article. go to Talk:Betelgeuse. If you want to ask "When will this star blow up", you can try Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:42, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-16963-29 It may already have blown up. As it is over 400 light-years away, we wouldn't know until the "burst" arrives here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:29, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I've seen various discussions on whether Betelgeuse will destroy Earth and what it will do.

From what I've seen, most scientists appear to agree that it is not close enough to destroy Earth (it's about 450 light years away, as Mike mentioned above), but it is close enough to be very bright. Estimates range from the explosion's brightness to be greater than that of Sirius (the current brightest star in the sky) at the low end and that of the sun during the day at the high end.

In conclusion, Betelgeuse probably won't destroy Earth, but it might destroy our sleep schedules. Remember that this is all speculative, and that we won't know what will happen until it happens, but it's fun to think about.--DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 13:34, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

What will the explosion of Betelgeuse look like from Earth, and if it blew up now, can that and any illustrations be used in any articles? This is all over the place like YouTube. ~2026-16963-29 (talk) 23:16, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps these sources have something you find interesting:

If you find a WP:RS, like, say, NASA, that says the star just blew up, that can probably be used on WP somewhere. The rule of thumb is that any random pic/vid you find online is under copyright and can't be used on WP or Commons. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:28, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

IF one of its poles is facing Earth, will it destroy the planet in some kind of "Gamma Ray Burst, as shown on YouTube, TikTok, other places?~2026-16963-29 (talk) 07:59, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Again, Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. Or, you know, google. See if you find answers you think plausible. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:05, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Realised I now have two registrations, under 2 email accounts, plus an email account for donations. Perhaps I should combine them? If so how?

Can I change the user name as it appears publicly? Norrette (talk) 08:37, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse!

Unfortunately, you cannot combine accounts, nor can you change your username. However you can make one of those accounts the main, and make the other one your alternate account, you can do this by publicly displaying it on your user page. If you really want to change your username consider creating a new account for it. Balintkaistryingediting (Balint's Info, Talk, Balint's Edits) 09:20, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Norrette. Balintkaistryingediting is correct that you can't combine the accounts, but wrong about changing your username, which can be done by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Changing username. For transparency purposes, I suggest picking one of your accounts, abandoning the other, and placing a note on the user page of the account you'll continue to use, telling people what your other account was. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:27, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting that, I didn't search deeply, since another official Wikipedia page said that i couldn't (maybe I just understood it wrong🤔) Balintkaistryingediting (Balint's Info, Talk, Balint's Edits) 09:31, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

I'll add that the donation process is completely separate from Wikipedia accounts and editing; the donation process is conducted by the Wikimedia Foundation, and donation records are not linked to accounts for privacy reasons(it's also not required to have a Wikipedia account to donate to the Foundation). The only way we know that a Wikipedia editor/user has donated is if they say so, there's no way by third parties to confirm or deny it. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Balintkaistryingediting Perhaps you read WP:SOCK, which deals with the incorrect use of alternate accounts, not WP:VALIDALT, which deals with the correct use of alternate accounts. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes! Exactly! The Username violations part made me think that i needed a new account to change my username. Balintkaistryingediting (Balint's Info, Talk, Balint's Edits) 10:08, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@Norrette You have only made two edits globally with your "Norette" account. That means it would be a waste of time to change its name. Just abandon it and use your other account from now on, unless, of course, that other account has even fewer edits, or for some reason you prefer to be known as "Norette". Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:34, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, SomeRandomGuy3523 here, i need some advice and possibly some assistance regarding the article I've made about the 1st Missouri State Militia Cavalry, to see what i got wrong, would be of great help, Thanks. (i use Visual editor btw) SomeRandomGuy3523 (talk) 13:16, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Looks good to me. I would be inclined to expand the caption of your image to explain that it is a painting from 1911, (and thus not contemporary). Your "Battle of Independence" link is to a disambiguation page; please fix that.

You should add categories to the page. I have added relevant WikiProject templates to the talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:34, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

hello how to write an article about an artist so that it doesn't get rejected? thanks Chungquanh (talk) 14:30, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

First review WP:NMUSIC and make sure the article subject meets that requirement before you go any further, and that you have sources to demonstrate that fact. Then you can read and follow the instructions at Help:Your first article. Athanelar (talk) 14:36, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Further to the above, you need to cite sources that meet the requrements noted at WP:42. You can use the WP:AfC process to draft it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:37, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Demographics of Sudan - Wikipedia

I am bringing this awareness to this page because as a Sudanese, I found something wrong. Check the page because it showed that the sections of Migration and Emigration are empty which is not good for Wikipedia pages.

I wanted to bring this to Teahouse for awareness. Talk:Demographics of Sudan - Wikipedia

Sudanese Diaspora Populations Around the World - The Sudanist ~2026-81618-8 (talk) 21:46, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-81618-8 Thanks for finding a reliable source on migration. There are only 44 editors who watch that article, so it may be some time before anyone works to put the numbers into the article. I would encourage you to be bold and update the article yourself, as it is open for editing by everyone. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:14, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

...failing that, you might want to lave a note at WT:WikiProject Sudan or WT:WikiProject Africa. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:44, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing, Good thinking! ~2026-81618-8 (talk) 16:27, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello!

On this page, you will notice that I've bundled many citations using an "efn" template. However, on this page that system will not work, because "efn" notes end up in an existing note list under a table, instead of at the end of the article. If you look at my last few edits on that page, you'll see that I tried another system, but I couldn't figure out how to put named references into that type of bundle. If someone could show me the best way to bundle citations on the second page, that would be very helpful. Thanks. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 07:20, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@OrdinaryOtter I think that you can achieve what you want by using the grouping feature described at {{efn}}. You could create a new group with {{efn|group=lower-roman|Footnote 1}} and then {{notelist|group=lower-roman}} where you want your new notes to appear. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:04, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, it worked! OrdinaryOtter (talk) 16:44, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I wrote an article about Latvian watercolor painter Zigmunds Šnore and I need help publishing it. My account is too new to create pages. Can someone help me submit it? Snorerenars (talk) 19:34, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

It looks like your draft is in Latvian; the English Wikipedia doesn't publish articles in languages other than English. You can try on the the Latvian Wikipedia if you like. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 19:40, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

In addition, you may wish to review WP:COI; by your username I assume you have a connection to this person. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 19:44, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

(btw, external links are only separated with a space, not a pipe |, else they won't work) HyperAnd [talk] 00:39, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Oh, thank you! 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 00:43, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Snorerenars You can create Draft:Zigmunds Šnore and then submit that for review. However it will be an instant fail as it's not in English. Also it needs to be supported by WP:Reliable sources which is doesn't currently have. Have a read of Help:Your first article to find out what the minimum standards are. Nthep (talk) 19:41, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

how can add videos ? Yoginiswatijain (talk) 04:19, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Are you, Yoginiswatijain, asking about how to add videos (either in the public domain or acceptably copyleft) to Wikimedia Commons, or about how to add videos that are already at Wikimedia Commons to Wikipedia articles? -- Hoary (talk) 04:54, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

I want to make an article about Ownage pranks, you know the prank channel But the problem is that i dont know what credbile soruces are there and the ones i see is facebook fandom some website named fabcelelife Dommer simpson (talk) 06:58, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

It's unlikely that anyone else is going to look for sources. If you can't cite sources that are independent of the subject and each other, that go into depth on the subject, and that are reliable, then no article can be created. -- Hoary (talk) 07:36, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi I noticed the “Advanced mode” option in my settings but I m not sure what its benefits are or how it helps with editing. Could someone please explain what it does and when I should use it? Mexico's Claudia (talk) 09:53, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

i dont know 😂 ~2026-22456-78 (talk) 10:04, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Mexico's Claudia, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Like the TA, I didn't know, but I used the useful trick of searching for the phrase with "WP:" in front of it, and it showed me WP:advanced mode, which actually redirects to mw:Reading/Web/Advanced mobile contributions, which explains the mode. ColinFine (talk) 10:13, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Mexico's Claudia. It has a link on "Learn more". You use the mobile version of the site which has a reduced interface due to small mobile screens. "Advanced mode" adds some of the features from the desktop version. You can get the desktop version by clicking "Desktop view" at the bottom of a page. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:16, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

cool thanks both of you🤍 Mexico's Claudia (talk) 11:17, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

but the process seems too complicated

I started reading about AfD, but wow, there's a lot there. This article is short, poorly written, and could be merged into the author's article: The Mighty and the Almighty by Madeleine Albright. I wouldn't think this would be controversial but you never know. Any thought? Start with talk page and come back in a week if no one responds? Regards, Seananony (talk) 14:20, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

WP:Deletion is not cleanup is worth reading. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:26, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

"short and poorly written" are not necessarily reasons to delete an article. Have a read through WP:DELREASON and see if any apply.

If AfD does end up being appropriate, you may want to enable WP:TWINKLE which, among many other things, makes creating AfD nominations a two-click process. Athanelar (talk) 14:38, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@Seananony You shouldn't do AfD manually, just use WP:TWINKLE instead.

Also note that merging articles is a different (and somewhat easier) procedure from proposing deletion. See WP:MERGE. 🍅 fx (talk) 15:07, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@Flexagoon Actually, last month it was decided that page mergers should go through AfD. HurricaneZeta^C 15:09, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@HurricaneZeta oh nice, I didn't know that, thanks for telling! Do you have rhe RFC link by any chance? 🍅 fx (talk) 15:12, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Merging merge discussions with AfD HurricaneZeta^C 15:13, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@HurricaneZeta Thanks for that link. It appears that WP:MERGE is completely out-of-date and needs extensive work to explain the new process. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:02, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

if she never said she has identical or fraternal or ever dna tested how Wikipedia know she has identical twin sister. Is Wikipedia use guessing if that true should i do not use Wikipedia for research? ~2026-22560-62 (talk) 15:40, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

okay so can we not invade their privacy by demanding a DNA test or something? and I doubt that DNA tests are supposed to be cited if Hyo-young and Hwa-young just say they're twins. In fact, per this Seoul Economic Daily article, Ryu Hyo-young, who recently displayed endless evil deeds driven by an obsession with love and honor in the TV Chosun drama ‘Grand Prince: Drawing Love’ [...], spoke about the differences between herself and her twin sister, Ryu Hwa-young. Of course, she continued speaking while jokingly adding, “Both our appearances and personalities are completely different.” nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 15:54, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

But also, per this Daum article, Ryu Hwa-young is an identical twin sister and the younger sister of Ryu Hyo-young (whose stage name at the time was Hanbit Hyo-young), a former member of the groups Coed School and Five Dolls. Ryu Hwa-young was born one minute later, and the older sister is Ryu Hyo-young, who has a mole under her right eye. nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 15:58, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

yea just say they are twin sister and appearances and personality doesn't scientific and accurate I hope Wikipedia have accurate information ~2026-22560-62 (talk) 16:04, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

that's like saying that you're disregarding Eminem was born from his mom just because no source would talk about the journey of getting the exact sperm that creates Eminem into his momma's womb

not every single citation in Wikipedia has to be scientific or biological dude nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 16:09, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-22560-62, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The information is not cited to a source in the article Ryu Hyo-young. But in Ryu Hwa-young, it is cited to an article in Naver.

So this information appears to be supported by three different sources (I don't know which if any of these are reliable sources). It would be a good idea if somebody would add one of these citations to the article. ColinFine (talk) 16:01, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

if it's citing namu (basically Naver's version of Wikipedia/Fandom) then replace it with other sources per WP:UGC

anyways the citation about the twin in the Ryu Hwa-young article is linked to OSEN tho, the Naver one is for her birth date and place nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 16:04, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

agree if we have solid proof then use the original statement and i believe that Wikipedia is pure information for spreading. ~2026-22560-62 (talk) 16:07, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

but if not just lets use twin sister and when we get the right information that we need we will just add identical or faternal on the article ~2026-22560-62 (talk) 16:11, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

we'd rather keep it as just "twins" ... nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 16:14, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

yea if they if there statement or we get any solid proof we will change the statement again so our information will stay accurate ~2026-22560-62 (talk) 16:19, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

so if you guys give me permission may i change the article identical twin to twin ~2026-22560-62 (talk) 16:23, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

go ahead. oh and remember to cite sources regarding their twinhood (the Daum article i gave above is one) nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 16:24, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

do i need to add that article? ~2026-22560-62 (talk) 16:35, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

You should not be using Wikipedia for research purposes. Some of the cites in an article may be useful for research, however. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 16:35, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Spiderone declined my Draft,Draft:Razer Phone 2. How will I fix it? Computerchocolate (talk) 14:43, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@Computerchocolate: No sources, no article, no debate. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 14:45, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Main source: Computerchocolate (talk) 16:41, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

That's simply basic information from a database. Why is the Razer Phone 2 notable? It may very well be, but you've just shown that it exists, and Wikipedia is not simply an indiscriminate collection of information. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 16:37, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Main source: Computerchocolate (talk) 06:57, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Did you read the comments in the box at the top of the draft? They give the precise answer to your question. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:47, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello Computerchocolate,

The "draft declined" notice that Spiderone put at the top of your draft explains to you why your draft was declined, and what you will need to fix in order for the draft to be accepted. There's also plenty of helpful links listed in the same notice for how you can improve your draft. MEN KISSING (she/they) Talk to me, I don't bite! - See my edits 23:49, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I want to add an image of Akira Otani to the Development section of the video game series article Mario & Luigi, of which he is currently the producer, but I'm worried that there isn't a way of doing so that complies with fair-use, in particular the possibility of a free equivalent.

Would I be able to argue that the image I currently have in mind came from an interview that took place just before the release of the latest (2024) game in the series, hence no free equivalent is available since the interview already took place, and the game has already been released? Thanks! Squitor (talk) 17:36, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

If no free image is available, then in order for it to be fair use you also need to argue that the image is necessary to further the understanding of the subject in some way. A photo of one of the developers isn't really necessary to help us understand the video game series, so I doubt you'll get away with that one. Athanelar (talk) 17:38, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Athanelar That makes sense, I assumed it would be fine since The Last of Us uses many images of the people behind it, but I'm now realising they aren't non-free. Forgot to consider that, whoops. Appreciate the quick help! Squitor (talk) 17:46, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Squitor Sorry, but we can't use fair use images of living people. The replaceability criterion also applies for works that could be taken, so someone could theoretically take a free image of him right now. Fair use is only permitted for deceased people, or people that have disappeared/unknown whereabouts and the like. HurricaneZeta^C 17:38, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Right, this is what I feared. Oh well, thanks for the quick response and help! Squitor (talk) 17:42, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

On the article ekuser gaan, there is a lyrics section with the lyrics, phonetic lyrics and translation. The problem with this is that all three of these lyrics are side by side so that the table actually overflows on the wikipedia sidebar (problem only on desktop). How to fix this problem, anyone know? Nextrin (talk) 03:36, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Fixed This is caused by the white-space:nowrap; tag, and is removed. though it does have the unintended side effect of being sorta shoved inwards, unfortunately. nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 05:08, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

hello , when I try to translate pages from a language to another the bots give me a starter paragraph that only needs couple of words to change maybe spelling mistakes but all of the info is correct , my problem is I can't publish It because it says "88% not changed"for example , do I have to word everything differently? Deffozendaya1 (talk) 20:45, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Deffozendaya1 You can click on "Mark as resolved" and the error message goes away for you to publish, and it's not necessarily a 'reword-everything' case. ^^ nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 05:17, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Where is the correct place for discussion about Wikipedia per se? I tried to find it myself but got lost in the web of ten bajillion "Wikipedia:____" pages. I'm an avid reader and occasional typo editor and I'm very interested in the perspectives of contributors on topics like who, in their opinion, is Wikipedia for (also I have some unanswered questions as a long-time spectator of the Great Composer Infobox War). Idaresay (talk) 05:53, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I would say the village pump is the best place for that sort of thing.

Are you saying you're a lurker, by the way? Before I decided to make an account, I was also a lurker for a good while, haha! MEN KISSING (she/they) Talk to me, I don't bite! - See my edits 07:06, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Oops, forgot to ping: Idaresay

And if you're looking for a particular editor's perspective on Wikipedia, or even for some interesting Wikipedia community history, I'd be happy to share what I know! MEN KISSING (she/they) Talk to me, I don't bite! - See my edits 07:21, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Idaresay, for Infobox questions, you should probably start at WP:WikiProject Infoboxes. Mathglot (talk) 07:57, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

hi I want to add cover page photo of Humare Ram page pls guide Hindiedits (talk) 18:22, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Hindiedits Refer to Help:Creation and usage of media files. The page has an image section which should hopefully have the information you need, or otherwise will link to another page that does. If you have any further questions about the process, use the "Ask a question" button at the top of this page, as I personally don't have the experience to guide you effectively on specifics. In case you didn't realise, you left your question as a reply to mine, which may not get as much attention from other (more experienced) editors compared to a standalone topic. Good luck! Squitor (talk) 18:35, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Correction: I don't believe you did reply to my question, but nevertheless using the button at the top of this page, along with an appropriate query title, will be more helpful in the future. Squitor (talk) 18:37, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Hindiedits.

I have added a header to separate your question from the preceding discussion. Please use "Add topic" to ask new questions here.

You may only add a picture if you have one that meets Wikipedia's copyright rules - specifically, that it is licensed in a way that anybody may reuse for any purpose. Most pictures that you find on the internet (and elsewhere) do not meet this criterion.

If you have a picture that you took yourself, you may upload it to Commons using the Upload wizard, and then add it to an article.

But if you did not take the picture yourself, you probably cannot use it, unless the copyright owner (who is usually the photographer, not the subject) agrees to license it appropriately: see WP:donating copyright materials. More generally, see image use policy. ColinFine (talk) 19:45, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Please see Help:Introduction to images. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:40, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I updated the Wikipedia page by expanding history/background and adding citations. In the process, I used Grammarly to restate 2 sentences and now I can't publish. Please help. I am a new user and have put many hours into this and inadvertently used Grammarly not knowing it would knock out my submission. It was a very minor edit. What can I do?? Thank you in advance. Sparksperl (talk) 18:32, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

I don't think a +2,767 bytes edit can be considered as a minor edit. And about Grammarly, Don’t worry, this is a pretty common situation, especially for new editors.

If you ask me, You can use tools like Grammarly to correct spelling errors and minor grammar mistakes. But, It's better to avoid Grammarly to rewrite sentences. Because, even small rewordings can sometimes be flagged as AI generated. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 19:41, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

@Sparksperl Grammarly incorporates AI functionality now. If you used Grammarly to restate 2 sentences, that means you had AI write two sentences for you; and AI-generated content is not allowed in Wikipedia articles nowadays. Athanelar (talk) 21:36, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Please advise what I can do to rectify. Here are the changes made by Grammarly: 1) first paragraph under BACKGROUND, second sentence, "She was inspired to become politically active and was deeply affected.....". The word "was" was removed. 2) second paragraph under BACKGROUND, second sentence, "In late 1969, she was picked to become one of the first women trainees at Saul Alinsky's School of Community Organizing in Chicago." The word "picked" was replaced by the word "selected" and the apostrophe "s" was removed from "Alinsky".

Please help me with this. Thank you. Sparksperl (talk) 14:20, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

What can I do to get this approved? I am sorry that I have trouble understanding what I must do to be published.

thank you in advance for your help on my behalf. Sparksperl (talk) 15:17, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

My suggestion would be to make the edits that you're trying to make in smaller chunks rather than all at once, that way if there's any further issues it's easier to remove small pieces at a time. Athanelar (talk) 15:39, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

So do I start from scratch by using the existing page and "edit"? Maybe just do the Background section first? How long do I wait until doing another chunk? Thank you! ~2026-22344-85 (talk) 15:50, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, that is normally how editing articles works; you work from what's already there, adding missing information etc.

There's no hard limit on how long you should wait; provided you're making constructive edits and providing reliable sources for any factual information you add, you'll be fine. Athanelar (talk) 15:57, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Sparksperl I would:

• put the first "was" back in
• actually check if it's "Saul Alinsky's School" or the "Saul Alinsky School" but Saul Alinskys School doesn't make sense
• go back to picked.

Honestly, Grammarly was of questionable help to you. (But I'm also surprised that was enough to get you flagged.) However, if that's the level of language mistakes you're worried about, don't. Your article isn't going to get declined for that and there are editors on Wikipedia who would love nothing more than to fix your grammatical mistakes. So let them. Mme Maigret (talk) 14:03, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi all, hoping someone can help or point me in the right direction.

I submitted a COI edit request on the talk page of Amadeus IT Group on 2 February 2026. I'm a PR professional and Amadeus is a paying client, so I've followed WP:COI and WP:PAID and requested the change via the talk page rather than editing directly.

The request is a factual update to the company's office locations and employee count, supported by four published sources (including the company's own 2024 Global Report and its public locations page).

The talk page notes there are 480 requests in the backlog, and it has now been two months without a response. I completely understand volunteers are stretched, but I wanted to ask:

• Is there anything I can do to improve the chances of the request being reviewed?
• Is the request formatted correctly, or is there anything that might be causing it to be deprioritised?
• Is there a more appropriate noticeboard or WikiProject I should flag it to?

The talk page request is here: Talk:Amadeus IT Group#c-DJMCwiki-20260202153400-Edit request: update employee count and key sites / regional offices

Thanks very much for any guidance. DJMCwiki (talk) 14:14, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Your request is open, visible, and pending. There really isn't anything that you can do to speed it up. To be very frank, for which I apologize, the rest of us who are here for free have little interest in helping you make money. 331dot (talk) 14:26, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @331dot, thanks for taking the time to respond - and no need to apologise for the frankness, it's appreciated.

I completely understand the sentiment. I hope my following of WP:COI and WP:PAID protocols goes to show I am being fully transparent and following the process that brands and their representatives should.

I'll keep waiting. Thanks again. DJMCwiki (talk) 14:37, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I'll tell you a secret: the better formatted your request is, the quicker it will be answered. See, for example, Talk:Georges Elhedery. You need to make it as easy as possible for volunteers to evaluate your suggestions. Good luck, MediaKyle (talk) 14:42, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @MediaKyle, thanks so much - that's really helpful. I've had a look at the Georges Elhedery talk page and can see exactly what you mean. I'm going to revise and resubmit my request in a cleaner format. I also have some follow-up feedback from Andy Mabbett to incorporate first. Much appreciated. DJMCwiki (talk) 14:58, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I uploaded an iMac G3 advertisement, but I didn't realize it was POTENTIAL COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. Especially since I'm already (pretty) experienced already, I feel terrible. I need help Epicazowski (talk) 15:35, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Epicazowski. Don't worry about it. It'll be deleted soon. We all make mistakes. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 15:44, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks - Epicazowski (talk) 15:45, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

After several days of vandalism - warring on the follow primary candidate page: David Pascoe I bring the issue here.

Several editors have had to revert unnecessary edits. I posted something on the talk page about it. I would advice page protection - see if that helps, if any administrators or editors here can make that happen.

ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 16:14, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

You can request page protection via WP:RFPP. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 16:26, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

im really new to wikipedia and 3 of my articles have been rejected and only 1 accepted. i feel really discouraged since if i try to write about a more common thing, the article already exists. if i try to write about something obscure, theres almost no info anywhere. is this common or is wikipedia not for me. ive spent days researching things and still found only a few things to cite. BabyJerryISking (talk) 19:36, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

There are numerous ways to contribute to Wikipedia except creating articles. Athanelar (talk) 20:18, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

other than Polygnotus (talk) 02:56, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @BabyJerryISking, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.

Please don't get discouraged.

I think you've fallen into the same mindset that I did when I started twenty years ago: "I've got to make new articles! That's how to make my mark!"

But now, I realise that creating new articles is not the only way, or necessarily the best way, to made Wikipedia better. I have only ever created about a dozen articles.

We have seven million articles: how many of those do you think cannot be improved? Ten? A hundred? Maybe even a thousand, but I doubt it.

That leaves millions and millions of articles which aren't as good as they might be if somebody chose to spend some time and effort improving them. There are probably also millions of articles that are really really bad - usually because they are inadquately sourced. Some of those should certainly be deleted, because satisfactory sources don't exist; others could be improved and turned into decent articles. ColinFine (talk) 20:18, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Writing an article is the hardest job on Wikipedia, and nearly impossible for a new editor to do successfully until becoming intimately familiar with all of the linked policies and guidelines found in WP:Golden rule. You get that knowledge by improving existing articles and engaging with the community on talk pages. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 20:52, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

thank you so much.

i guess i got caught up in trying to be immediately great at everything that i thought i could make a bunch of articles.

ill just sdit and help till i get better. :D BabyJerryISking (talk) 16:52, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello! i attempted editing articles and found it much easier. thanks! BabyJerryISking (talk) 17:17, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Please how to get access to an article that was deleted but a part of it included in another article? I need the part that is now absent altogether. Or is it impossible? Ev292 (talk) 05:31, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Ask the deleting administrator if they'll email you a copy of the article text as it was at the last revision before deletion. (Note that it's highly unlikely they will give you the text of articles deleted as patent nonsense, vandalism, attack pages, plagiarism, straight chatbot output, non-sequiturs, or effectively blank.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 05:36, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. But, I see, I'll have too few chances after many attempts to get to know things I don't know now and trying to find out who that administrator is. By the way, the part I need was the list of the NYMR diesel locomotives. Maybe Google search will appear more easy and efficient. Ev292 (talk) 06:44, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Ev292: Please always be specific and name pages you want help with. I guess it's List of rolling stock preserved on the North Yorkshire Moors Railway. It wasn't actually deleted but just redirected when some of the content was merged. If you click "(Redirected from List of rolling stock preserved on the North Yorkshire Moors Railway)" at top of the page then you get to the redirect page where you can click the "View history" tab and find the old content in former revisions like . PrimeHunter (talk) 10:29, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Ev292 (talk) 18:09, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Ev292, one last note, if you are merging or copying within Wikipedia, the edit summary should include something like, "Merged content from List of rolling stock preserved on the North Yorkshire Moors Railway (10 March 2026); see that page's history for attribution." to credit the original authors. Good luck, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 03:09, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, but I'm not so good at editing to merge or do any big work here. Commas, spelling, a bit of stylistics - those are my editing, and not in the English Wikipedia. Ev292 (talk) 17:27, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I was looking at the programming paradigms page and I was wondering if the citation superscript for the chart on the overview section is meant to be like that or if that's a formatting error? I would assume it should look like SENTENCE[5][6] instead of there being a :5 in there. PestoAstro (talk) 17:15, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

That's using {{rp}} to indicate that it's page 5 of the attached reference. ScalarFactor (talk) 17:34, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I am adding citations to the article Archduchess Elisabeth Marie of Austria and came across a newspaper clipping which would be useful. However, I cant seem to find the original article, especially seeing as the actual title and name of newspaper have been cut out. The only information I am given is an annotation saying "1953 Nov. 13 Wash News". Is it acceptable to just reference this? and if so how? To make matters worse the address I got it from is https://ekonyvtar.sk-szeged.hu/JaDoX_Portlets/displayContent?docId=51033&secId=50828&cast=pdf which just immediately downloads the pdf. Freddieh9 (talk) 23:47, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Freddieh9 probably not. You can't really verify the reliability of an anonymous PDF scan of an unmarked newspaper, so I wouldn't consider it a reliable source.

I also spent some time myself trying to find the source through The Wikipedia Library, but unfortunately wasn't able to find anything. Searching for the author's name gave no clues either, because they wrote for a lot of different newspapers. 🍅 fx (talk) 01:41, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

@Freddieh9, give me just a bit, and I'll get you a working URL and full citation for this. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 02:50, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

@Freddieh9, okay how's this:

• Byng, Edward J. (13 November 1953). "Archduchess, 70, Last Link With 'Mayerling', Lives on in Tiny Vienna Bungalow". The Washington Daily News. Washington, D.C. p. 43. PDF scan.

• <ref name=Byng-1953>{{cite news |last=Byng |first=Edward J. |title=Archduchess, 70, Last Link With 'Mayerling', Lives on in Tiny Vienna Bungalow |url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-washington-daily-news-archduchess-7/195450502/ |work=The Washington Daily News |date=13 November 1953 |pages=43 |location=Washington, D.C.}} [https://ekonyvtar.sk-szeged.hu/JaDoX_Portlets/displayContent?docId=51033&secId=50828&cast=pdf PDF scan].</ref>
  

That low resolution is all Newspapers.com allows for a public clipping, but if it's too blurry, I can clip a specific column of text, just let me know, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 03:00, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

@Rjjiii how did you find this? I tried searching on newspapers.com for the first sentence of the article and it found no results. 🍅 fx (talk) 09:55, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you that's amazing! Freddieh9 (talk) 11:15, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome, glad it helped. Also, a staircase thought but if you run into this kind of issue in the future, you might check out WP:RX. Other editors have found some really obscure sources for me on there before. @Flexagoon, I searched for the date with "Archduchess", and then ctrl+F for "Washington". When it's a print source, the text can get scrambled from columns, punctuation, hyphenation, bad OCR, limited OCR, etc., so you can sometimes use a single uncommon keyword and then narrow it down with other factors. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 19:08, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I noticed that a lot of changes were made to Helmut Krcmar by a temporary account, some of which was referenced but a lot wasn't. I've since added a template suggesting citations are needed through the BLP article and I think it could be helpful to ping them on the article talk page, to ask them if they could provide further sources. Am I doing it wrong, or is there no way to ping temporary accounts? Or should I instead contact them through the account's talk page?

As a side note, is this the right call/procedure (i.e. the template and pinging them)? Thanks! Squitor (talk) 15:08, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

@Squitor I'm able to ping TAs just fine by typing the @ symbol and then their temporary account name.

Note that since this article is a WP:BLP, the best option is just to remove all unsourced content on your own without asking, and maybe place a {{subst:uw-biog1}} on the contributor's User talk page. 🍅 fx (talk) 18:13, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Weird, I'll have to look into the TA pinging later. I've gone ahead and removed everything with poor citing and everything unreferenced, and I've contacted them with the template. Thanks for the advice! Squitor (talk) 19:31, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello. When i click on "publish page", it doesn't respond, other than this button, all other works. Abhinavnotes (talk) 17:02, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Abhinavnotes. I'm not sure why this is happening. I just created a blank userpage for you, can you edit it now? Cheers, MediaKyle (talk) 19:31, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

The page on Shannon Denton has existed since 2005 and is completely unsourced - would this be grounds for removal? If so, how would one begin that process? MissRedwood (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Is there a reason you want to have the article deleted? We would usually rather see it improved. I did a quick search and turned up several good sources, I think it would be kept in a deletion discussion personally. MediaKyle (talk) 21:54, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Nope! Just seemed like an issue that it's been up so long without sourcing. Was also just curious for future reference. Thanks! MissRedwood (talk) 22:01, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@MissRedwood If it fails GNG, there's no reason to retain it. The normal course is to propose it be deleted first, and if someone objects, you can nominate it for deletion. Although if you think someone will likely object, you should skip PROD as PROD is only for deletions you think are uncontroversial. Mme Maigret (talk) 14:50, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

What would one do about a deletion they thought might be controversial? Discuss on the talk page first? Edit: Never mind, didn't realize there was a difference between proposing and nominating. Thanks for the info! MissRedwood (talk) 20:27, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

MediaKyle, could you share those sources? I stubified the page and adding some more sources would be good. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 23:57, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Seems like a bit of an overreaction... Would have been better to just prod it than have an article that insults the subject through brevity. Yet another victim of the Teahouse I suppose. I have no interest in the subject matter personally. MediaKyle (talk) 00:15, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I was planning on expanding it a bit further, and was asking for those sources for the purpose of expanding it. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 00:18, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

WP:RSBIAS mentions Bias may make in-text attribution appropriate. What is an example where a source being biased would make attribution necessary where an source identical except unbiased would not? Whonting (talk) 00:20, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

@Whonting I'd imagine, for example, it can be useful to know if a statement in an article about the Arab-Israeli conflict comes from Times of Israel or Al Jazeera rather than something more neutral on the topic. 🍅 fx (talk) 01:01, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Is the point of attribution there being that the statement should be taken with a pinch of salt for coming from a biased source? Whonting (talk) 01:04, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

@Whonting yeah, essentially. WP:RSBIAS also includes a few examples:

"The feminist Betty Friedan wrote that..."; "According to the Marxist economist Harry Magdoff..."; or "The conservative Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater believed that..."

A Marxist economist is more likely to say something that supports Marxist theories. That doesn't necessarily make their statement wrong or unreliable, but mentioning their beliefs can provide useful context for interpreting the statement. 🍅 fx (talk) 01:32, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Ta - this arose after an editor stated bias isn't a relevant factor in reliability citing WP:RSBIAS. While I agree that just because a source is biased it doesn't automatically render it unreliable, it does seem quite straightforward that for the example you gave, all else equal a sources being biased may mean we need to take it's opinion with a pinch of salt. To me, that's the same thing as saying bias is a relevant factor in reliability. Does that seem fair to you? Whonting (talk) 02:08, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Whonting, not necessarily, no. Reliability is one thing, and applies to one, individual source. Neutral point of view is another, and applies to the balance of the article's statements on the article topic (or on subtopics within the body of the article). An article which summarizes all significant viewpoints in due proportion to their appearance in reliable, secondary sources is neutral, even if every single reliable source in the article is biased (but presented in the correct proportion). Does that help? Mathglot (talk) 08:55, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

In my understanding of WP:RSCONTEXT, we can draw a distinction between a source being relying for attribution, and reliable for wikivoice: e.g. "Tim denied the claims" vs "Tim didn't do it". In the example you give of a biased source being used, it seems to me you are saying it is being treated as reliable for expressing a viewpoint but not putting for putting its claims in wikivoice. Does that sound about right? Whonting (talk) 09:25, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Mostly, yes, but it is hard to talk about entirely in the abstract. Have a look at an article about some contentious topic like Abortion debate and see how they do it. That is a topic with so many sources that it is easy to find unbiased secondary sources that report on the biased ones at the extremes, so we obviously choose the former. You might have to find an example where there are widely divergent views due to bias, but not a whole lot of views altogether, perhaps because it's a very niche topic with little coverage. Mathglot (talk) 09:45, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

The abortion debate article is a good example of biased sources being reliable for their attributed views, but not wikivoice. I see discussion of mainly the latter at WP:RSN. Maybe a concrete example: Reason is a libertarian magazine that RSP has rated GUNREL. If they were to publish an article discussing the political dynamics of marijuana legalisation legislation and it gave some facts as background, we may consider this as framing and analysis in need of attribution, in a way we would may not if it were the NYT reporting on the legislation and giving facts as background. Whonting (talk) 10:13, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Whonting, you're doing a great job of taking a serious look at different policies and guidelines, and there are a lot of subtleties involved and even apparent conflicts or tensions between different ones. In the case of your last comment, be careful to distinguish between an unreliable source, which we do not use in Wikipedia, and a biased source, which we do. Note that the unstated or missing word in the expression, biased source is biased reliable source (as opposed to biased unreliable source). The point being, that if Reason is unreliable, then we would not use it at all, rather than use it with attribution.

You raise a lot of great points, but I think we are bumping up against the boundaries of what the Teahouse is for, as these are more than just basic questions about editing Wikipedia. If you want to just finish up a last question or two, that's probably fine, but if you would like to continue more in depth along these lines, then imho it would be better to move the discussion to the WP:Help desk which is generally (but not always) for more in-depth questions, or perhaps better to the Talk page of a relevant policy/guideline, such as WT:Reliable sources (which includes WP:RSBIASED), WP:Citing sources (which includes WP:INTEXT), WT:Neutral point of view or wherever you think the most appropriate venue would be. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 19:03, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @Mathglot. Wasn't sure if this was the right place but had it recommended for such questions. And thanks for your clarification above on reliable, I realise I wrote Reason was classified as GUNREL when I meant to write GREL. Whonting (talk) 22:14, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I was just at the RFC closure request board and noticed there’s quite a backlog. I’m happy to assist with non-admin closures. In cases where participation is limited (for example, five or fewer participants), is there guidance on closing while suggesting alternatives like a third opinion? What are the recommended best practices in these situations? Coffeeurbanite (talk) 16:23, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

If there's no clear consensus, then you close it as no consensus. Sometimes there just isn't enough participation in an RfC to establish a good consensus. Athanelar (talk) 22:52, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Qantas flight 943 was a scheduled domestic flight from Brisbane Airport to Perth. 13 minutes after takeoff Qantas flight 943 received a malfunction in the engine and a pilot error Crew:6 Aircraft:Boeing 737 Fatalities:0 Survivors:97 Injuries:14 This is real Ryanhagan1( (talk) 00:04, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Ryanhagan1(, The ATSB reports about 25 to 35 serious incidents in commercial aviation per year. This incident involved no passenger injuries, and is highly unlikely ever to become an article due to lack of WP:Notability. It might rate a brief bullet entry in a list article, like List of serious incidents in Australian aviation, if someone decides to writes such an article, but that's about it. You could start it. Mathglot (talk) 01:00, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I think Ryanhagan1 is referring to this flight. The article doesn't mention any injuries, and the plane landed safely. I don't know that it's worth even a mention anywhere. It's just a defective speed dial on the plane. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:30, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Is the NK-9 (rocket engine) even notable? I made a draft for it in user:AZenit3/sandbox, but I'm not sure if it's notable. AZenit3 (talk) 02:16, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I had a look. Definitely not notable yet. Try to find a couple of strong, independent sources. 𝓛𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓣𝓗𝓔 (talk) 02:45, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I'm a new editor. I've come across what appears to be a factual discrepancy. A current Wikipedia article attributes the title of "first Pakistani female drifter" to a person whose first documented drift event was in November 2025. However, multiple independent reliable sources identify a different person, Laiba Khan Lodhi, as holding that title, with coverage dating back to March 2024:

• Social Diary Pakistan (March 2024)
• Pakistan Observer
• Sunday Times Pakistan (January 2026)
• UAE Stories (January 2026)

What is the proper way to address this? Should I raise it on the article's Talk page, or is there another process for correcting factual claims in biographies of living persons? I want to make sure I follow the right steps. Thank you. Motorsports1337 (talk) 16:06, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Courtesy article: Dina Patel (note that I'm going to bed so you're gonna wait a bit for another editor to assist u ;;} nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 16:27, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm also a new editor, but I believe especially when it comes to biographies of living persons, if you come across a discrepancy, you should be bold and make the changes yourself. Do take care and be sure that the sources are indeed reliable, properly cite them, and if you deem necessary, explain your reasoning for the change in the edit summary! Squitor (talk) 17:08, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Motorsports1337, and welcome to the Teahouse.

If you have sources that say incompatible things about the subject, and they all appear to be reliable sources, then the article should say so: "source A says X and source B says Y". What you should not do is try to resolve the disagreement, as that would be original research. (If you have a third reliable source that discusses the disagreement, and tries to resolve it, you can of course say what that source concludes). ColinFine (talk) 18:21, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Motorsports1337, this appears to be a case where specific claims in separate articles contradict each other, or at least, cannot both be true at the same time. If the claims in the article are specific and occur at a particular sentence (or sentences) in the article, then you can tag them with template {{Contradictory inline}} in each article, linking the other. If it is more the whole outlook or view of the article contradicts another one, then place template {{Contradicts others}} at the top of the articles. Mathglot (talk) 03:54, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Teahouse. I'm looking at Blake (band) and wondering if there is a guideline about the amount of BLP information that is appropriate to include in a band article for the band's members. Four members / ex-members of Blake have fairly detailed biographical information not related to their time in the band in this article. What is the consensus about what is useful to readers and what is WP:UNDUE? Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 20:46, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

I would guess that for a band article, it should probably just say details about their time in the band, like when they joined or left. The rest is probably unnecessary. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 21:18, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Tacyarg The information on the Baines and Berney are an okay length. I would suggest you cut Bowman in half and see if you can reduce Tighe by about 3 lines. Mme Maigret (talk) 09:30, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Tacyarg I've gone ahead and trimmed them. Mme Maigret (talk) 09:40, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I tried once, but I think I did it wrong because it didn't render. Any tips on how to do this? I had to revert it. Dandasohhhh (talk) 06:17, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Dandasohhhh, welcome to the Teahouse! I just had a look in your edit history, and it looks like you tried to use the Visual Editor, which meant it was pasted in as text rather than a template. If you switch to source editor and try again it should work (noting that you won't need [[ ]] around the page name), or if you stay in Visual Editor, typing {{ should make a box pop up, that you can then search up templates in, including "Main". nil ^nz 06:41, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

There is documentation at Template:Main. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:44, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I need some help regarding citations. In my sandbox (User:Vicccqh7/sandbox) I have the table that Im planning to publish when its finished (its still lacking a lot of entries, Im planning for it to have around 24 rows), but I have an issue with citations. Thing is, source 1 explicitly describes fates of the dogs mentioned in the table ("recovered safely/survuved"), while source 2 uses a star system where star equals death, but it does not say that lack of star explicitly means "survived", it only implies it, but you have to assume it, its not stated. So my original plan was to just cite both at the end like it is now, since all other details like dates and names are consistent between the two, but it feels like Im extending one source slightly beyond its scope, so I added a note in the Summary column (and added some more notes when the 2 sources state different things). I feel like its kinda messy now and I dont know how to wrap my head around it... should I just use both at the end for the other details, and cite source 1 for the dogs survival? Id have to do it in almost every row, since source 1 is more detailed and source 2 only fully aligns when 2 dogs are dead. That sounds messy as well, I dont want to clutter the table. Maybe its okay to just cite both at the end and let source 1 "fill the gaps" in source 2? Should I leave the notes the way they are, change them or maybe remove them? I really dont know what to do, feedback would be very welcome. - Vicccqh7 (talk) 15:05, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I would say that source 2 feels somewhat more ambiguous than source 1, which as you've said, source 1 explicitly describes fates of the dogs mentioned in the table [...] while source 2 uses a star system where star equals death, but it does not say that lack of star explicitly means "survived" nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 16:02, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

like lowkey which one looks better to u...

More information Seller name, Source 1 ...

Seller name	Source 1	Source 2
Daniel	Grapes
Marie	Bananas
Joe	Bananas
Car	Laptop
James	Apples
Alex	Bananas
Lina	Sells NOTHING

Close

nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 16:02, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Yeah that's the issue, says banana but the lack of the symbol could be anything, I only know its apples etc. from source 1. So there's that, but how do I reflect it in the table? Both sources agree (unless otherwise notet) in the other details, same names, same date, it's just the survival that's ambiguous in source 2 specifically. Does my table reflect that or is it misleading as is? Vicccqh7 (talk) 16:09, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I would remove source 2, partially since source 2 is too ambiguous regarding the status of the dogs to draw conclusions from, and partially as I'm seeing that both Note 1 and Note 2 are assuming that both [1] and [2] are exhaustive and explicit enough to note such... ;-; nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 16:14, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

The 2 references - [1][2] are the source 1 and 2 I was talking about. [2] is the ambiguous one. Maybe I can just stick to citing both when dogs are dead and citing only [1] when the dogs survived even if [2] supports the other cells except survival, and remove the note in the Summary column? Vicccqh7 (talk) 16:24, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi I just want to know how can I become a draft reviewer and if I become one can review my own drafts? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 03:53, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, if you're interested in reviewing Articles for creation drafts, see the requirements at WP:AFC/P.

Articles for creation is (generally) an optional process for autoconfirmed editors, except for users with a WP:COI or other editing restriction. However, if drafts are getting declined, it's a good sign the reviewer thinks it would be deleted if it became a normal article as-is. ScalarFactor (talk) 04:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Okk thank you. ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 05:10, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

And in this case, the drafts you're submitting, if you passed them through yourself, would almost certainly be deleted in the WP:AFD process, not just declined. Bypassing WP:AFC isn't an effective workaround for getting poor articles published on English Wikipedia. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 06:08, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I see so that means I can't review my own drafts right? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 06:10, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

There is no point as you could just create the page without using a draft. To become a reviewer you would have to show the skill to recognize suitable pages. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:11, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Alright. So it is better for me to directly create articles right? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 16:19, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Only if you're trying to avoid them being reviewed before Article-space entry by another, doubtless more experienced reviewer. Why would you want to do that?

Draft reviewers offer helpful advice if a draft is not quite good enough yet; other editors, if you ask them or do not reject their help, can also collaborate on improving a draft; a draft can be resubmitted multiple times without penalty or rancour provided that incremental improvements are evident.

By contrast, directly created articles are judged far more stringently by the New Pages Patrol, and often deleted, though sometimes 'draftified'. Since, judging from your previous half-dozen declines, you aren't yet at the stage of being reliably able to create an acceptable en.Wikipedia article, it would be far better for you to continue with using AfC. It is likely to take you at least weeks or months of practice to be able to create an article that meets the standards here (which are more stringent than most if not all other Wikipedias).

In particular, note that use of an LLM or "chatbot" to directly write all or part of an article is a Big Red Flag here, which will completely disqalify a draft or new article – see Wikipedia:Writing articles with large language models. Hope this helps, and good luck with your future editing! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 16:53, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Okk thank you so much for the advice ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 17:08, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi as my username suggests I am someone who is interested in Indian television shows, actors and actresses. So how can I explore more of them in Wikipedia? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 06:27, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Like for example how will I know which are the new television shows and actors and actresses whose pages I can create in Wikipedia? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 06:32, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I think this link might help you.

Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Requested articles#Cinema TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 07:26, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

ITVStoryWeaver, a new television show, an actor, or an actress [old-fashioned term!] is just like just almost any other imaginable article subject (a car, a dish, a hairstyle, a political party, an earthquake, a letter, a video game, etc): if plenty of material has been published about it/him/her that's independent of the subject and comes from reliable sources, then the resulting draft can summarize and cite this, and thereby will be able to demonstrate the notability of the subject. And therefore an article will be possible. (Approval won't be automatic: the draft will also have to observe various other guidelines.) However, your user talk page shows that you have been repeatedly reminded (by template) of the need to demonstrate the notability of your subject. What does the template say that you do not understand? -- Hoary (talk) 07:32, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

It's not like I don't understand but I find it weird that many actors' articles in wikipedia do not have enough resources like I have given in my drafts and many actors are not notable like the actors Draft:Abhishek Verma and Draft:Priyanshi Yadav because these two have done so many notable shows in prominent roles but still their drafts got declined for just one reason "Not enough reliable sources, not notable".

I am not saying Bonadea was wrong but I don't know I find some of the rules of wikipedia delusional. ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 16:31, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Our criteria for actors are at WP:NACTOR, if you want to see what people are assessing against. Athanelar (talk) 16:38, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I already had a look at it which is why I was saying Abhishek Verma and Priyanshi Yadav are notable according to WP:NACTOR ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 16:41, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

A "notable movie" or "notable television show" means a movie or show which is itself worthy of a Wikipedia article; i.e., meets WP:NFILM. Is that the case for these actors? Athanelar (talk) 16:44, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes it is ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 16:46, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Just check what I have given in the drafts and correct me if I am wrong ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 16:45, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

The person to ask is @Bonadea since they most recently declined these. Athanelar (talk) 17:17, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

No it's okay. I don't want to drag anyone here and I believe they will say the same things which is why I said some of the Wikipedia rules are delusional. ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 17:23, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I think it's better for you to create the articles requested in Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Requested articles#Cinema TheGreatEditor024. You might find a lot of sources for them. (talk) 07:49, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@TheGreatEditor024 Requested articles are just articles somebody has asked for. It's not necessarily evidence they are more likely to be notable. Athanelar (talk) 13:06, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I know, That is why I added "You might find a lot of sources for them." (might, not will) TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 13:08, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay thank you ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 16:21, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Where on Wikipedia can I ask whether some specific publications are reliable or not? And if they can be used for a future good article candidate? Babin Mew (talk) 17:16, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Try here for a list of sources, and here for sources not already in the list. Toast1454_TC 17:58, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. I will try the latter as I am looking to see if a book is reliable and I already know about the former. Babin Mew (talk) 18:03, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

hi, my Draft:EgonZippel/Lawson vanished ... i last worked on it on march 18, 2026 >> not even a month ago... why? what happend?

thank you, egon Egonwikinyc (talk) 14:56, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Looks like Diannaa removed some copyrighted content and replaced it with a redirect to an existing article. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 15:01, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

i mean it's a draft!? copyrighted content would have been removed/reformulated/modified according to guidelines by myself... why this early interference? Egonwikinyc (talk) 16:17, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Because copyright violations are removed on discovery, regardless of where it is. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:19, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Egonwikinyc it's illegal for Wikipedia to serve copyrighted content anywhere on the website, so it has to be removed even if it's in a draft 🍅 fx (talk) 16:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

We already have an article on this topic, at H. Blaine Lawson. You are welcome to improve it or add sourced content.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:12, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I'm a new mentor, and my mentor dashboard says I have four mentees right now. I got a message on my talk page from someone who isn't one of those four, but it's formatted like a question from a mentee ("Question from Example, Timestamp"). If I'm this user's mentor, why do they not appear on my mentor dashboard? Thanks. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 15:19, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello! In my experience, that is because another mentor put themselves on pause (or was blocked), and mentee questions are redistributed to others. GGOTCC 19:10, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. Thank you! 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 19:15, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

JohnLaurens333, are you referring to Owlyguylol's message of 13:59, 13 April? When someone's mentor is away and you get a question forwarded to you by the system from one of their mentees, then their question will be topped with a hatnote showing the name of their mentor, not the case here. (You can see an example of that here.) In addition, if you do {{#mentor:Owlyguylol}} it yields ⟶ JohnLaurens333, so they *are* your mentee. The reason you may not have seen their name is that there is a delay filling the dashboard, that can be several hours long. I see that several hours have passed since you first wrote, and probably if you refresh the dashboard, you will see them listed now. See Wikipedia:Mentorship. Mathglot (talk) 02:12, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, they are listed now; sorry, I didn't see that page. Thank you! 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 12:26, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

JohnLaurens333, I have to thank you, for your question. Until you asked it, the Wikipedia:Mentorship page did not have a section dealing with this issue, and now it does. So, thanks! And if you ever run into other mentorship questions that don't seem to have answers there, please raise them; either here, or better, at Wikipedia talk:Mentorship; at both (one via wikilink to the other) is ideal. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 18:04, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Haha, thank you! I'm glad I accidentally helped :) 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 19:53, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I'm new here and trying to learn more about Wikipedia. I was wondering, how do you know that anything on Wikipedia is *true*? Tamanpreet Kaur (talk) 13:13, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Well, you can't trust anything but Wikipedia is checked constantly by editors. Balintkaistryingediting (Balint's Info, Talk, Balint's Edits) 13:15, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

You follow the references and see if they support what the article is saying and then decide if the publisher of said reference is reliable. Wikipedia doesn't guarantee its reader with absolute truth, it just makes the offer of the best volunteered effort to aggregate all the trusted sources. 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk} 13:17, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Tamanpreet Kaur You don't, see WP:TRUTH. You need to examine the sources provided in an article and decide for yourself. 331dot (talk) 13:18, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@Tamanpreet Kaur, @Balintkaistryingediting See WP:Truth. David10244 (talk) 00:02, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi folks. I created an article recently on a, in my view, notable Bengali concept / emotional state / word called Lyadh (similar to concepts/words like niksen, dolce far niente, hygge, hiraeth, etc), which as far as I'm aware, is still in the New Pages Feed and remains unreviewed. I obviously understand that reviews are random and can take upto weeks or months, and that I can't and shouldn't request/rush reviews. However, I wanted to ask if someone could take a look at the article or review it? Any feedback too would be highly appreciated :) Thank you, Dissoxciate (talk) 19:36, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

New page reviewing is more of a backend thing, there's no need to worry about it. Someone will get to it eventually, and it will be indexed automatically in 90 days anyways if it isn't reviewed by then. Best, MediaKyle (talk) 19:39, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

That makes sense. Thanks for letting me know! Dissoxciate (talk) 05:22, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

You seem to understand it may not be patrolled quickly, but are asking anyway. Do you have a particular need for the article to appear in search results quickly? 331dot (talk) 20:46, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @331dot, thanks for asking! No, of course not - there's no such need! I may seem occasionally impatient indeed, but that is because I just want to make sure the article is in good shape and meets notability and sourcing expectations, primarily since it's on a relatively niche concept (I have created several articles prior to this one, so I understand notability guidelines on Wikipedia quite well - however the subject of this is markedly removed from the kind of stuff I usually write about). If it does happen to get reviewed sooner, that'd of course be great; but no particular urgency as such from my end. Thanks for checking, Dissoxciate (talk) 05:32, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I glanced at it, Dissoxciate. A sample: In 2020, Lyaad, a musical short film based on the concept was released. It was directed by Pradipta Bhattacharyya and stars Ritwick Chakraborty. With four references, a surprisingly high number for backing such a simple assertion. One of the four is in a language that I cannot read; I shan't attempt to comment on it. One is The Times of India; please read WP:TIMESOFINDIA. One is IMDb; please read WP:IMDB. And one is in somewhat tortured English and appears on the website "Animation Xpress", which describes itself as "News Hub for Indian Animation VFX Comics Gaming Merchandising Applications. Ecosystem". How about removing from the article any material that can only be verified by dubious sources? -- Hoary (talk) 21:38, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Hoary, thanks for all the inputs. I read through the pages you linked. A few things that I'd like to mention: I removed the IMDb source, given it's user-generated (and frankly, even prior to this, I hadn't actually used it to "support" any claim — just link the IMDb page for the short film). There were also two blog-like sources that had been used, which I removed (albeit they hadn't been used to support any new claims/materials that the other sources weren't already supporting, hence didn't warrant removal of any such material). Animation Xpress has also been removed — there are 3 other sources that support the short-film claim anyway. As for The Times of India, I read the entry on it on the reliable sources page; while I understand the risks associated with using TOI as a source, I believe in this case, an exception can be made, given the (type of) subject. It isn't visibly political or controversial, and doesn't carry any undertones that could raise eyebrows. Hence, I've kept the TOI source still. As for the other source that has been used to support the short-film claim, it's in Bengali - Anandabazar Patrika, a Bengali daily. Another Bengali daily has been used as a source for the Etymology section, which is Ei Samay. Both these dailies are generally reliable (except for the former when it concerns Bangladesh, due to its perceived biased coverage of the country). Can you take a look now? Thanks! Dissoxciate (talk) 09:13, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Dissoxciate, I hope I didn't give the impression that I have a low opinion of sources that don't happen to be in English. I'm reluctant to evaluate them, that's all. And the problem, or potential problem, with TofI that could be relevant here is (to quote WP:TIMESOFINDIA): Editors should ensure that they do not use paid advertorials—which were first published in TOI in 1950 at the earliest—to verify information or establish notability. Paid advertorials may be of particular concern in topics such as entertainment. But now that I belatedly look at the article in question, I don't think that it's an advertorial: the sole photograph at its head bespeaks unpaid amateurishness. -- Hoary (talk) 00:16, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I want to create articles Starhexxx (talk) 21:39, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

See Help:Your first article. That being said, immediately writing an article as a very new user is not recommended because there is a bunch of rules you need to be very familiar with. It would be a much better idea to start contributing by editing existing articles first. You can of course still try to write a new one, but it has a pretty high chance of not being accepted. 🍅 fx (talk) 21:42, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Elsewhere, Starhexxx, you've written that you want to write about "cool things" that have happened. But what matters is not "coolness" but instead demonstrable notability. (That is, "notability" as defined by and for English-language Wikipedia.) Please see WP:42. -- Hoary (talk) 00:25, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Someone declined my draft article for not having sources, but it is just a list of drug names. What to do? U1user1U (talk) 19:20, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Get some sources for each name. - Walter Who mentioned Pearl Harbour? Ego 19:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @U1user1U! Your draft was declined because of WP:NOTDIRECTORY, not because of "lack of sources". The reviewer even linked this in their comment. LG --Maresa63 ^Talk 20:26, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

oh thx U1user1U (talk) 00:45, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I added something in my sanbox but I am not sure if I did it right or what should I do??? I need guidance Falcivar1 (talk) 04:06, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I don't notice any problem with User:Falcivar1/sandbox, Falcivar1. But if you don't like what you've added, you can simply delete it. -- Hoary (talk) 05:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Pardon my crude language since im not a native speaker.

The wiki page on the subject of 'Legality of child pornography' has its edit status 'locked' so i have to ask the moderators here (hopefully im in the right place to do such) to correct an outdated information on the sub-section of fhe Wiki page of 'status by country' specifically the "Russia" section , it says and i quote "simple posession of child pornography is legal" and that information is incorrect and here is the source for it: https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_10699/23ac064057d5bca235050872f65b23a1a1db092a/?ysclid=mnzlnohsru175312527

Hit 'translate page' it clearly states that even posessing child pornography is illegal under russian law ~2026-23004-50 (talk) 05:58, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I think the false translation is an error due to the use of ai translation tools which sometimes can mislead to incorrect information. Laurunia2002 (talk) 06:11, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

The correct place to propose changes is on the article's talk page: Talk:Legality of child pornography. You can use WP:Edit Request Wizard to guide you through the process. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 06:35, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

WP:Crystal is also called "crystal ball". I understand it to mean that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball speculating the future. However, I believe if there are reliable sources reporting about the future, this is not really crystal ball. By the English language, it is a crystal ball, sort of, but by Wikipedia standards, the Wikipedia editors are not the crystal ball, rather the Wikipedia editors are reporters of reliable sources.

I quote the WP:Crystal: It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced.

This got my attention because several sources are writing that a car company is going to make an updated model of a car. While it is predictive of the future, I am not the one making the prediction. The reports are that the car will be released next year so it is not so far into the future that it is speculative. In fact, if the company headquarters were ransanked (and I urge Wikipedians to AVOID criminal activity), then I wouldn't be surprised that contracts have already been signed with suppliers and suppliers have already developed components for the car, like the windshield, wheels, brake lines, etc.

What do you think of the interpretation of WP:Crystal ball? I ask for your general interpretation, not a specific opinion of an edit or article. Vanguard10 (talk) 21:26, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Vanguard10 - IMHO it almost totally depends how you phrase the inclusion - if you state "X will be released on Y", that contravenes WP:Crystal. If you state "the company has announced that X is due to be released on Y", and cite a reference, that is not WP:Crystal, it is fair reportage of a companies statement. - Arjayay (talk) 21:36, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

The crux of WP:CRYSTAL is "what information is appropriate to include in an encyclopedia?" Note the key line which comes right before the quote you gave; the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred.

Point 1 repeats this; Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Emphasis mine.

So, that immediately eliminates a lot of future events - and for good reason. We're an encyclopedia, not, for example, a car magazine; so we don't need to exhaustively report on future car models, to use your example. Even if that information is reliably sourced, it might not be appropriate to include.

Certainly, though, an encyclopedia is not the place to engage in speculation and gossip; and that's really what CRYSTAL is about; even if an event would be notable were it to happen, unless it's definitely going to happen we shouldn't write about it. Athanelar (talk) 03:02, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Vanguard10, it applies to anything in the future, even to tomorrow. You cannot say that a sports match will take place on 15 April if it is 14 April when you save your edit, but you can always write, the sports match is scheduled to take place on 15 April" because the scheduling itself took place in the past and you can report that today. Maybe the arena will burn down an hour before the match and it gets canceled, but that doesn't affect the fact that it was scheduled, whether the match actually happens or not. There is a kind of exception where uncertainty is essentially zero and humans are not involved, such as for cosmological events which depend on physical laws not on human activity, so at Solar eclipse of August 12, 2026 you can safely say for example:

A total solar eclipse will occur at the Moon's descending node of orbit on Wednesday, August 12, 2026

So the general trick is to avoid future tense, and wherever you see "will occur on <date>", just change it to read, "is scheduled for <date>", and then you are fine. Mathglot (talk) 09:22, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

As a follow up, Vanguard interpreted this as agreeing with him re-adding magazine speculation (based on back door reports from undisclosed company insiders). He declared this at Talk:Chevrolet_Camaro#7th_Generation.

I'm also disappointed that he had this discussion without inviting me (the primary opponent) or contacting me in any way whatsoever. Hardly an unbiased way to resolve things.  Stepho  talk  06:24, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Teahouse may reply. In fact, please do. Vanguard10 (talk) 01:04, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

When the question becomes one of source reliability rather than verb tense and wording, that is a different question and is source- and content-dependent. The proper venue for the content dispute is Talk:Chevrolet Camaro, at least for starters, and WP:RSNB if there are disagreements about sources. The WikiProject Automobiles should be notified to take part at the article TP. Even a section header like ==Seventh generation== is subject to WP:Verifiability, and a heading like that may well run afoul of WP:NOTCRYSTAL if it appears to be giving Wikipedia's imprimatur to something that is not fully sourced, or that it will be called that if/when it appears. (As a tangential issue: please use full citations to avoid the problems occasioned by WP:BAREURLs when adding content.)

This is beyond basic editing questions now, and the Teahouse is not really geared towards resolving content disputes. Imho further discussion should continue at article Talk. I'm involved, but would encourage hatting this with status=moved. Mathglot (talk) 01:46, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

An RFC has been raised by Vanguard10 at Talk:Chevrolet_Camaro#Request_for_Comment_on_whether_a_WikiProject_guideline_takes_precedence_over_Wikipedia_Policy.  Stepho  talk  07:32, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

does wikipedia have any auto-updating userboxes, or is there any way to automate them? such as those for number of contributions, number of edits, number of articles created, number of thanks received, etc. thanks, Dissoxciate (talk) 21:04, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Dissoxciate There are some magic words for global Wikipedia stats like total number of pages on Wikipedia or in a specific category, etc. Other than that, the only way is to make a bot that regularly updates your page/template with the correct values. 🍅 fx (talk) 21:51, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Dissoxciate: Bots require approval. Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/EditCountBot was not successful. That was in 2010 but I don't think the sentiment has changed. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:14, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Dissoxciate, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The things you are asking about could use a lot of processing power, if many editors made use of them. Anything that could take a lot of server resources, but is of no direct value to the encyclopaedia, is unlikely to be provided or supported. ColinFine (talk) 10:43, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello there! I am a new editor and a big fan of the game elden ring. I've been working on a draft for the character Melina in my sandbox (User:Shabriri-frenzy/sandbox).

My draft was declined and flagged as LLM/AI generated. I was honestly really gutted and angry because I've been doing the research manually. I have since completely overhauled the page to include a proper infobox, voice actor history, and specific gameplay details (like her role as an NPC summon) to prove it's a manual effort.

Could a human editor please take a look at the current version? I’m really trying to learn the Manual of Style and would appreciate some guidance on how to move forward without being mistaken for a bot. Thanks! Shabriri-frenzy (talk) 00:17, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Shabriri-frenzy, your submission was declined by a human editor, Hammersoft. Bots may tag articles as possibly AI-generated, but they don't review AFC submissions.

@Hammersoft, are you please able to provide a little context or advice? Blue Sonnet (talk) 02:49, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

In this state of the draft, four different LLM checkers concluded the text was either completely or majority written by an LLM. Others are free to confirm what I saw. The editor has since modified the text of the draft. I understand the frustration. We too have frustrations that people attempt to write drafts using LLMs. --Hammersoft (talk) 03:16, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Oh yep, I see plenty of Wikipedia:AISIGNS there.

Even if it wasn't AI-generated, it reads more like a Fandom wiki than an encyclopedia article so it definitely needed revision. Blue Sonnet (talk) 06:40, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Not only do they attempt to write drafts using LLMs, but then they lie about it, insisting they didn't use an LLM when the draft includes prompts, conversation with the AI, or AI-coded citations. That is frustrating. I'm not saying that happened here.

@Shabriri-frenzy, your last two sentences in Reception make some assertions in Wikipedia's voice but don't cite any sources at all. AIs tend to do that too. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 06:41, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Shabriri-frenzy, and welcome to the Teahouse.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 10:48, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

You know the blue button? Thanks,

Here is the article Draft:International Arena League. TexasOutlawsSoccerFan (talk) 12:32, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

 Done. I’m afraid that Instagram and YouTube aren’t reliable, because they are a self-published source. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 13:07, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi I had recently submitted Shivam Khajuria's draft and it got accepted today but I did not receive any notification why? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 12:58, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

It seems like the reviewer, User:Niaki101 forgot to leave a talk message for you. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 13:11, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

It's my draft — why are you getting so involved in it? Niaki101 (talk) 13:19, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay I am sorry ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 13:32, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@Niaki101: It's not your draft; anyone can edit articles, even in draft space. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:24, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

What if I have a very good source I want to add to my wikipedia talk pag but I do not have the proof from the internet but from the person itself. If I am a licensed Journalist can I use myself as a valid source? Laurunia2002 (talk) 06:10, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Generally speaking we prefer secondary sources, but will accept primary, published, sources by the subject, about the subject if it is non-contentious information that is very unlikely to be challenged such as what city they were born in or if they have a pet. If, as a journalist, you have published something that could then be used as a source on Wikipedia - citing yourself is okay within reason okay within reason. There is no requirement that sources be online but they do need to be published. Citing a conversation you had with someone is not acceptable, I'm not too sure what a licensed journalist is but that wouldn't make any difference. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 06:24, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

The published source would also need to qualify as a reliable source - so an interview published on a blog, for example, wouldn't be acceptable. Blue Sonnet (talk) 10:56, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

You don't need to cite what you put on your own talk page (but remember that your user pages and all talk pages are subject to policies like WP:BLP and WP:NPA). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, i just made significant changes to the 1st Missouri State Militia Cavalry, and i need help with an editor with reviewing it, incase i got something wrong, would be of great help. SomeRandomGuy3523 (talk) 11:14, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @SomeRandomGuy3523. I recommend asking at one of the WikiProjects linked on the article's talk page, as the people there are more likely to have interest and knowledge in the subject than people here. ColinFine (talk) 14:31, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

i did the write up myself and just few part were refind by Ai but it was rejected

here is the link to the submsision, please help. Draft:Olubunmi Onabanjo-Kuku. Kingdavid1994 (talk) 13:42, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Using AI to rewrite articles and drafts is no longer allowed. This was put into effect a little under a month ago, so it's understandable if you didn't know about that.

To fix the draft, it should probably be completely rewritten by a human. Toast1454_TC 14:37, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@Kingdavid1994: do not use LLM at all. (Also, both GPTZero and ZeroGPT think the draft is entirely AI-generated.)

Do not also resubmit declined drafts without any improvement. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Are there any tools that can easily remove select duplicate citations? Handling duplicate citations in infoboxes and the like are extremely hassling. Thank you! Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 12:12, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Here are some options: Help:Citation tools#Duplicate reference finders. I've never used any of them, so I can't comment further. DMacks (talk) 13:26, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for the look there. I have seen this excerpt before and these concern finding dupe citations. I am running one of those gadgets already, so finding them is no trouble. But my gripe is whether or not there is a tool that can automatically merge citations it is not duplicated. Thank you, Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 13:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

WP:ReFill. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:27, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Will definitely be installed by time I can get my own computer :) Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 14:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

You don't need to install anything on your computer. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:35, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

You're right. Just saw GitHub and noped. Apologies. Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 14:38, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay, so I installed the script and ran it on Clarity (Zedd song). Despite having two duplicate citations, it did not merge them. The duplicated refs are 33, 68 and 69, 70. Manual time. Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 14:43, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Those sources are not in the article directly, but are transcluded as part of template, {{single chart}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:01, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

So those kind of hits must be errors from the script User:Polygnotus/DuplicateReferences, I suppose. All is well than, Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 15:04, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, quick question; what's the proper process for renaming a page when the new name is already "taken"? It's either something that requires a 'request' on the proposed pages "Talk:" section, or something I can just do myself. And I'm not quite sure which.

(specifically, it's over Talk:Máscara Dorada, a masked wrestler who replaced a previous wrestler with the same name/gimmick - whoever made that last move in March 2025 failed to consider all the other pages that linked to the original guy for his own achievements, and the pre-existing Wikipedia policy of simply adding a "II" to a luchador's page name when this happens.) BlackerLesnar (talk) 13:08, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

You could WP:MERGE the page. If you think it would be controversial, you could propose it at Articles for Deletion first. For more information, read the linked page. Cheers! BSH (talk) - (they/them) 13:20, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

The problem with that is that they are indeed two individuals with their own lives, careers, accomplishments etc. (and are still wholly presented as such). Both independently warrant their own pages for sure, so no merging or deletion is necessary; I'm just asking what the process is for giving the OG his countless hyperlinks back, since the edit history refers to "technical request" and "Special:Permalinks" and "consensus discussions" whilst the Moving A Page FAQ seems to say 'just do it yourself lol'.

Alternatively, maybe a Mascara Dorada "disambiguation" page would solve it all? BlackerLesnar (talk) 13:32, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

If you think a disambiguation page would be necessary, you could create it. BSH (talk) - (they/them) 15:15, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I've been interacting with User:Rachelwillings and suspect that they might be Wikipedia:YOUNG. I've linked that and Wikipedia:Advice for parents on their talk page, is there anything else I should do? Realtent (talk) 04:05, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Let me know if I should delete this as I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, or if I should've sought help publicly for this. Realtent (talk) 04:25, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Unless there's a problem with their behavior, there's nothing further to do. I think your repeated pushing the advice-to-parents was excessive. DMacks (talk) 06:44, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I would agree, so should I strike myself or just remove it? Or just leave it and learn for next time. Realtent (talk) 06:47, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure the best path forward. You could follow up to express sympathy for her situation and a quick sentence offering general help getting started? Definitely don't just strike or remove, since it's part of a dialog in which they are an equal participant. DMacks (talk) 11:51, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

uhm hi I'm 19 actually Rachelwillings (talk) 15:55, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Greetings all! I am attempting to have an article published and would appreciate input and edits to aid in its publication. Any advice or contribution would be gratefully recieved as I am keen to learn how to contribute to Wikipedia in future. Here is my current submission Draft:Natasha Saunders SRTteam (talk) 13:19, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

It looks like the reason that this draft was declined was because it was not reliably sourced. If you have re-submitted the draft for review after fixing some of these issues, someone should review it in a few months. BSH (talk) - (they/them) 13:25, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @SRTteam, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Thank you for declaring that you are a paid editor. However your username suggests that yours might be a role account, which is forbidden. I appreciate that you are saying "I", not "we", which suggests that you are the sole user of the account; but a name which suggests that it might be a role account is also not allowed.

I strongly suggest you change your user name straight away. You don't have to use your real name (I do, but most do not), and a name like "John at SRT", would be acceptable, as that would be clear that it was a single person's account. ColinFine (talk) 15:06, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Colin! Thank you for your useful tip. I can see how it could get confused. I have immediately applied via the global account name change to have it amended to SarahatSRT for clarity. Do you have any tips for the article? I have supplied third party and independent news links I could supply more if it would help and not overcrowd the article? SRTteam (talk) 15:59, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

For what seems like several weeks now, many pages appear with empty rectangles where I normally expect to see image thumbnails. Captions under the rectangles look normal. Clicking in a rectangle takes me to a media page as expected. Refreshing the page sometimes brings some of the thumbnails into view; images I have clicked and viewed in the same session usually appear on the page after such a refresh. Device is an iPad Air 2 running IOS 15.8.7 that matters. Is this a known WP issue? Should I be asking my ISP or Apple support about it? cheers, Just plain Bill (talk) 22:51, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

It's more likely to be a browser issue, not a Wikipedia issue. Older iOS/WebKit browsers can sometimes struggle with loading thumbnails properly. So, I think you should seek help from Apple Support. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 03:12, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Or you could install an alternative browser. -- Hoary (talk) 06:18, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, all! A newer IOS tablet's Safari browser renders images just fine. Still puzzled that the old one changed its behavior after so many years of unremarkably doing its job. Meh, I can work around that now. cheers, Just plain Bill (talk) 17:55, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Congrats... TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 18:02, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, why are Wikipedia's articles on sample libraries performance-sampling based singing synthesizers dubbed as "software"? Some examples in these lists:

List of Vocaloid products

Category:Singing software synthesizers

Most singing synthesis systems are based on performance-sampling techniques. Basically, they use a library of recordings of singing and process those recordings to produce their synthesis. An overview of this and a practical example is shown in this paper by one of the pre-eminent figures in the field: https://repositori.upf.edu/items/e5fd582d-da51-4b24-a376-44289967d116?locale=en (unfortunately this it seems to be down right, so I have uploaded a copy here: https://smallpdf.com/file#s=d72ae8f3-2328-4b4d-8c5f-183f04c5c54d)

I don't think these libraries differs significantly from other types of audio sampling libraries, and I think it is comparable to things like brush packs for drawing programs. Usually, software is considered to be executable code or at least that controls a given system in an expressive enough way within a given domain.

Wikipedia's own definition of software: Software "Software consists of computer programsthat instruct the execution of a computer.Software also includes design documents and specifications."

I feel that these articles should instead describe them as something along the lines of "singing synthesis sample libraries" or "vocal synthesis libraries". ~2026-23200-23 (talk) 05:43, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

You could raise this issue at WT:Categorization, and perhaps post pointers to that discussion on WT:WikiProject Categories and WT:WikiProject Computing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:32, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello Mr. Mabbett, I have done as you request and posted it there and links to it on the other places.

Wikipedia talk:Categorization#Should singing synthesis sample libraries be considered "software"

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories#Should singing synthesis sample libraries be considered "software"

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing#Should singing synthesis sample libraries be considered "software" ~2026-23457-68 (talk) 18:32, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

The title is my question. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 17:06, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@VidanaliK Because then someone else can't register that username. Essentially it prevents someone from taking a username like VinadaliK and impersonate you due to the similarity of the usernames. HurricaneZeta^C 17:08, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@HurricaneZeta Right, but it's impossible to register all possible accounts that could be used to impersonate someone. So if you registered HruricaneZeta someone could still register HrruicaneZeta, or perhaps just change their signature. So how does that help? VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 17:13, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Well, if you try to make an account whose username is too similar to an existing username, then it doesn't let you, and you have to go through WP:ACC to make an account. That's how I had to make my account, actually! There was already a user named "Menkissing", who made their account in 2010 and appears to have never contributed. Their username being too similar to my desired username prevented me from manually creating this account.

So, by default, you actually have a pretty wide net for what usernames people can't register to impersonate you. I expect that making doppelganger accounts widens that net. Maybe. I don't actually know how the username similarity filter works. MEN KISSING (she/they) Talk to me, I don't bite! - See my edits 18:52, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hello Teahouse. I filed a COI-disclosed edit request on Talk:Anyma#Edit request: Expand coverage of visual creative team per reliable sources on 17 February 2026 using the {{edit COI}} template. It has been in Category:Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests for 8 weeks without review. I added supplementary sources on 4 April 2026. Disclosure: I am Alessio De Vecchi, Visual Co-Creative Director of Anyma. I have declared COI on the talk page and have not edited the article directly. The request uses only WP:RS sources, several already cited in the article (Variety is ref #18). The proposed changes are three specific before/after edits that bring the article in line with what its own cited sources say about the visual creative team. Additional context: Anyma's AEDEN World Tour launches at Coachella on 17 April 2026, which will drive significant traffic to this article. Accurate attribution of the visual creative team before a major public performance is in the spirit of WP:BLP's "get it right" principle. Question: given the COI-request queue has a substantial backlog (~12,000 pending requests), is there an appropriate way to ask for review of a specific well-formed request that has been pending 8 weeks? I don't want to be seen as pressuring any editor. I've also posted at WikiProject Electronic music and intend to post at BLPN — standard multi-venue outreach, disclosed here per WP:CANVASSING. Thank you for any guidance. AlessioDeVecchi (talk) 18:36, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I've accepted the edit request at Talk:Anyma#Edit request: Expand coverage of visual creative team per reliable sources. BSH (talk) - (they/them) 18:56, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@AlessioDeVecchi: Also, as an aside, it is highly recommended not to use LLMs to communicate on Wikipedia talk pages; we want to hear from you in your own words, not from your pet chatbot. Please do not continue to use LLMs in this way. Thanks! Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} -⃝⃤ (they/he) 19:42, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

abundant sourcing in established publications, mostly offline print. Need experienced eyes.

Hi, I’m hoping to find an experienced editor willing to help shepherd a draft article through the AfC process.

The article is about Dirty Pictures, a Czech punk rock band formed in Prague in 1992. The draft was submitted recently and declined on notability grounds, but the sourcing is genuinely strong — the band received coverage in major Czech national newspapers (Lidové Noviny, Blesk, Český Deník), cover stories and features in Czech music magazines Bang! and Rock & Pop, as well as coverage outside the ČR: Badische Zeitung, NME (a 1994 piece covering Joe Strummer’s appearance at a benefit concert the band organized in Prague), and MTV.

The core challenge is that most of these sources are pre-internet print publications with no online presence. The sources are all cited in the draft & I have scans of every clipping but the initial reviewer appears to have been unfamiliar with the Czech music press of the era.

Would any experienced editor be willing to take a look at the draft and advise, or potentially help with resubmission? Happy to provide all source material.

Full disclosure: I created this draft on behalf of a founding member of the band, who provided all the sources.

Draft:Dirty Pictures. Griffinbunny (talk) 01:21, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Hellom I fixed your link to the draft, the whole url is not needed.

Please review the conflict of interest rules to learn how to formally disclose your conflict of interest.

Sources do not need to be online, as long as they are reliable sources and they are publicly available; books or magazines available in a library are fine. Documents purely in private hands, however, are not. 331dot (talk) 01:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your response and for fixing the link and for the guidance on sources. Regarding verifiability, these are all published journalism from established Czech publications including major national newspapers and the leading music magazines of the era. I would expect all of them to be available in Czech library archives, though I haven't personally confirmed this. Griffinbunny (talk) 23:55, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

That's fine, sources do not need to be free or easy to access. Any reader is free to travel to Czechia to go to a library there to verify information.. 331dot (talk) 00:11, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Griffinbunny. To add to what 331dot says: the sources also have to be independent of the subject. I have not attempted to look at your sources, but very often newspaper pieces on bands turn out to be mostly based on an interview with the band or their associates, and such sources do not contribute to establishing notability.

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 09:08, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! Noted on source independence. The vast majority of citations are reviews, news coverage, and feature journalism, not interview-based pieces. The sources speak about the band independently rather than quoting the band about themselves. Griffinbunny (talk) 23:57, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@Griffinbunny To help reviewers verify your sources, you could complete the citations, add translated titles, and try to find links (at the very least) for the sig cov sources that you want to rely on, refer WP:42. Is there an article for this band on Czech Wikipedia? MmeMaigret (talk) 13:39, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much — this is very helpful. I can add translated titles to the citations. Regarding links, whatever links exist are already built into the citations. Almost all sources are pre-internet print -- I have access to the actual clippings for all of them, and they are all published journalism from established publications but they do not, to my knowledge, exist online (maybe they're on microfilm at a library somewhere?). Re Czech Wikipedia — no article exists yet, though the band is referenced on the Lukáš Vincour and Joe Strummer pages. I feel like a big part of the problem is that I am a 100% newbie here on Wikipedia. I am hoping to find an experienced editor to help shepherd the re-submission. Griffinbunny (talk) 23:49, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

@Griffinbunny You might find it hard to find an editor to help you because everyones has got their own list of articles they want to write. Plus you're looking for someone who speaks Czech, has an interest in music etc. I would suggest:

1. Pause and try to create the page on Czech Wikipedia first. Their criteria for inclusion are likely to be different from English Wikpedia but a lot more people will assist you and/or edit the page.
2. Meanwhile on English Wikipedia:
   • you can try asking your mentor;
   • you might ask someone in your local WP Embassy for help.

cc:@Itsyoungrapper @Mormegil

- Mme Maigret (talk) 13:56, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much! This is exactly the kind of guidance I was hoping for. I'll look into Czech Wikipedia seriously and also explore the Embassy route. I'm also going to check on the mentor option for my account. I really appreciate you taking the time to engage with this so carefully, it means a lot. I see you tagged a couple of people -- should I reach out to them? Griffinbunny (talk) 17:06, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

@Griffinbunny:

• Itsyoungrapper is the Czech ambassador on English Wikipedia; and
• Mormegil is an ambassador on Czech Wikipedia (who also edits on English Wikipedia).

Mme Maigret (talk) 09:15, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks so much, once again. I will reach out to both and circle back if needed 🙏 Griffinbunny (talk) 18:09, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Maybe if you added a chart of album releases (if you can find any), then put them in, usually if some music hasn't put in on the charts, I usually look on Spotify, but if they don't have it, then I don't know. I do think that this article looks good but could use more words in the beginning part. TexasOutlawsSoccerFan (talk) 12:34, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you!! Griffinbunny (talk) 21:03, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Hoping someone can help me with this. This morning (NZ time) I did some editing on the Wairarapa article. Part of my work involved removing paragraph that had been cut and pasted from https://teara.govt.nz/en/wairarapa-region and replacing it with a paragraph I wrote myself. Almost immediately after publishing my last edit, another editor reverted the article right back to before I started. They claimed to disagree with "my edit", however, I couldn't see why they reverted everything I had done when their comment focussed on one issue. Shortly afterwards they posted on my talk page, accusing me of copyright violation. I asked them to identify the text they objected to. They offered no explanation so I reverted my edits, with some changes to address the issue they had raised. They reverted my edits again. This time they explained that they objected to a sentence which I had not touched. (Someone had cut and pasted it from https://teara.govt.nz/en/wairarapa-region) I am not happy about having an unjustified accusation of copyright violation on my talk page. Should I ask an admin to delete it? How do I go about doing that? Kbwc56 (talk) 14:03, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@Kbwc56: you're free to remove the notification from your talk page yourself, there's no need to involve an admin. In fact, you can remove most things, per WP:UOWN. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:40, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks DoubleGrazing my concern is that the accusation remains in the talk history. Although unsubstantiated it feels like an inappropriate blot on my record. I'm the first to admit I'm not perfect, however, I've been able to maintain a high standard of work on Wikipedia and this bugs me. That written I've decided to take your advice and delete the comment. Kbwc56 (talk) 20:47, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

You did readd copyvio into the article after it was removed and revdel'd, so they were right. Please make sure that you aren't doing that. Tenshi! (Talk page) 21:00, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

This would not be feasible. They did not edit the article, they reverted all changes including my edits and made no attempt to identify the copyright material (one very small paragraph). I initially thought the copy vio related to the paragraph I removed. Had they explained their action (in a comment) there would have been no problem Kbwc56 (talk) 21:24, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

They initially made two edits with edit summaries, first reverting your edits for Manual of Style reasons, the second being copyvio. You were able to check the second revert's diff before it was revdel'd, however that's no longer an option since it has been revdel'd now. Tenshi! (Talk page) 21:37, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Their "manual of style reasons" were questionable at best. The article's introduction was poor. i suspect most editors would prefer my intro, which follows a structure established in numerous Wikipedia articles: I identified the region, and then very briefly described its boundaries. One could perhaps add another sentence to the intro as it currently stands. I'll admit the other editor's repeated nuclear reversion made it difficult to work. Checking the diff did not help. The text they later identified was not something I had ever worked on. I did not realise it was cut and pasted until they identified the sentence. I think it's bad form to revert edits with no or inadequate explanation as to why those edits are being reverted. For example, when reverting Wairarapa the other editor reverted a whole lot of essential structural work. Kbwc56 (talk) 21:51, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I am wondering if anyone would be willing to take a look at my first published article and provide any feedback or editing. This would be much appreciated, thanks so much! Dressing by body type in women. Handumont (talk) 04:59, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@Handumont congrats on your published article! At the moment, no article links to Dressing by body type in women which you can change by searching other articles or templates and adding them there, for example in William Herbert Sheldon psychology article. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:36, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Awesome, will do! Thank you so much for the feedback :) Handumont (talk) 22:15, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I want to follow MOS:GENDERID in the Moi Renée article.

When I wrote it, I followed the model of a Village Voice article about Renée, written during Renée's life, and it used he/him pronouns (excerpted here):

"a loudmouthed Jamaican androgyne named Moi Renée is swinging his head to and fro, cocking his ass and twisting his hips with the grace of a Yoruban priestess possessed by an Orisha. He is wearing a body-fitted Emilio Pucci dress, black lace stockings held in place by garters, and Calvin Klein black suede pumps." (emphasis added)

Since creating the article, 2 sources, both of which use she/her pronouns, have been on my mind:

• The trailer for Miss Honey: The Catsuit in which designer Douglas Says, who knew Renée, uses she/her pronouns when referring to Renée: "She was really, really, really a character. She was fresh, young."
• The song "Curtains for You", a tribute to Renée, which includes the line, "To those of you who knew her, she'd always say, 'I'm Jamaican, y'know?'"

I want to follow the policy, and, more importantly, I want to do right by the article's subject. The Village Voice is a RS; a movie trailer and song lyrics are not. For all the digging I've done, I've never found Renée saying anything that answers this one way or the other.

What is the proper path here?

– RosePickfair 🌹 (talk) 21:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I would leave it as is. The note that is currently on the page should be sufficient. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 21:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @RosePickfair,

For this, I think it wouldn't hurt to ask the folks over at WT:LGBTQ+. MEN KISSING (she/they) Talk to me, I don't bite! - See my edits 22:27, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll do that now. – RosePickfair 🌹 (talk) 22:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I have seen this on YouTube. Can this be used in any articles presentations such as articles on Magic, other articles? One "prank" has a guy approaching a Hamburger Ad on a local resteraunt, then he puts his hands on it, and a real hamburger appears in his hands. Input YouTube, then Telekinesis Prank. You would NOT believe what is going on. Thought I bring this here instead of being reverted by someone who may object to this if I placed it myself. ~2026-16963-29 (talk) 17:51, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @~2026-16963-29, the page you've linked to is a disambiguation page, which lists all the different articles that the term "magic" might be used for.

At Wikipedia, articles summarise what reliable sources say about a subject rather than listing examples of the subject itself. If an article is missing important information about a specific trick, and you can find a reliable source that talks about that particular magic trick and it's impact/effect on the medium of magic, then you could probably include the reliable source in an article.

If you look at the Magic (illusion) article, you'll see that it doesn't list every possible type of magic trick - the article would be far too long for anyone to read if we did that!

So for this trick to be included when others aren't, it would have to be very, very important to the history of illusion magic and have affected the way that magicians perform their tricks. I don't think that's the case with the hamburger illusion trick, so it probably shouldn't be included.

That's also the question of copyright, since images and videos on Wikipedia need to be added with the consent of the copyright holder on a specific free-use license.

If you want to learn more about what should be included in articles and how to update them yourself, please give The Wikipedia Adventure a try! Blue Sonnet (talk) 22:59, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-16963-29: There is a section at Telekinesis#Magic and special effects. "Prank" magic on YouTube sounds like a combination of Street magic#Guerrilla magic and Hidden camera#In media, but some of it is probably staged with "random spectators" being in on it to give entertaining reactions. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:58, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi there - looking for some assistance formulating an edit request for Rathbones Investment Bank wiki page. Full disclosure that I am being paid to provide this edit (laid out on my own talk page), and therefore I am going through all appropriate channels (of which my next step is to submit an edit request!). This edits purpose is to provide a significant increase in breadth of current information and also to ensure that everything is 'up to date'.

Usually, as a volunteer editor, would go directly onto the "Edit source" page, however this edit is lengthy, and of course paid! I had a few questions which the Edit Requests page didn't explicitly clear up for me, so wanted to ask them here. Firstly, can I submit the entire edit in one edit request? I could potentially also upload it section by section but am aware that this would increase the feedback timeframe. Secondly, for my updated 'historical' section, I have primarily used two books (unavailable online, but available in libraries) that were written about the Rathbones history. I would assume that this is fine to reference as a legitimate secondary source. Moreover, the updated 'governance' section is not readily available with secondary references - but with primary (neutral) references. Would this also be acceptable?

Lastly, I would be very grateful if anyone could provide some feedback on my edit request before I submit it, primarily to ensure that I stick to all laid-out guidelines, or perhaps to idiot check my work! If not, then an answer to my questions above would be much appreciated.

Thanks. Kranken145 (talk) 10:51, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

To your first question; you can, but you're more likely to have success by submitting multiple smaller requests. The COI edit request process ia, like everything else, entirely voluntary; and to be frank, the number of people who actually work on COI edit requests is quite small, because those of us who work on this for free out of passion are not eager to help paid editors make sure corporate articles are up to date so they can cash a paycheck. Smaller requests are easier for a volunteer to verify before implementation, so they're more likely to get done in a reasonable timeframe.

It is still entirely possible that your edit request could languish in the queue for weeks or months; both you and your employer should be aware of this.

For your second question; yes, offline sources are just fine, provided you give enough information in your citation that a person could theoretically locate the source to verify the information.

Also, please be aware that when people ask questions like this I have a tendency to double-check these articles for notability. Most companies in the world do not meet our criteria for inclusion, and a great many corporate articles on Wikipedia are based on routine business activity reporting which does not substantiate an article here. If my check comes up lacking, I may create a deletion discussion about the article. If that happens, please don't hold a grudge, nor take it as some kind of retaliatory action. of Athanelar (talk) 12:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I'd like to note right away that notability does seem to be present here; but all of the best sources for that are languishing in the "Further reading" section rather than actually being used to provide material to the article. Either way, disregard the point about deletion as it doesn't seem like it'll go that way. Athanelar (talk) 12:49, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments, I will keep that all in mind. Glad to know that it does meet notability guidelines, and I do recognise how reviewers may be less willing to look at those edit requests that paid editors do, so quickly. Kranken145 (talk) 11:09, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Gonna be honest, having never submitted an edit request before I'm not exactly sure how to help (it seems like Athanelar above has you covered). I just want to compliment you: most COI editors think they can just directly edit the page to turn it into an advertisement without any sources and expect it to be kept. They then get confused when the edit is inevitably reverted. Thanks for taking the time to go through all the procedures and do things the right way! If everybody did that, Wikipedia would be a much easier thing to moderate (you would not believe the amount of COI edits people make on here). --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 14:39, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

FYI the best thing to do is suggest they use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard, which has COI request and paid edit request options. Blue Sonnet (talk) 02:56, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for suggesting this. I have had a look at the page - and at the paid edit request option. However, the paid edit request option is for if the page 'does not currently exist', and my page already does! However, above, it states that " Instead, these editors are encouraged to submit an edit request on the article's talk page using the designated form below."

So, should I be submitting a form in the 'article does not exist' category or not - I am a little confused. Alternatively, I can go straight to the article's talk page, but I am worried that this will not get through. Kranken145 (talk) 11:07, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

That section expands to give different instructions for non-existent pages (click on "show" to see it), you can continue to use the wizard if the page does already exist. Blue Sonnet (talk) 02:15, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! I truly believe that if we all followed guidelines, it would indeed be a far more efficient process! Kranken145 (talk) 11:10, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I just want to know how to add cast in the episode table for example the episode table in my Draft:Jabb Zodiacs Met? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 17:07, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@ITVStoryWeaver: I have used aux2 from the documentation of {{Episode table}} and {{Episode list}} to add a Cast column. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay thank you so much ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 02:32, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1290#Reliable Source Inquiry

Given the issue in the previous thread needs resolution, see the respective page in question: Josie Valeri. What are some ways to provide a citation when the University does not currently have a reliable source to support the claim? RealRobRossi (talk) 02:11, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

How about an earlier, subsequently deleted, page on the university's website? (Have you tried using the Wayback Machine?) -- Hoary (talk) 02:40, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

The issue is now resolved with an up-to-date, reliable source. RealRobRossi (talk) 03:02, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! @Shoot for the Stars seems to have a habit of uploading very low quality images of celebrities to replace reasonably high-quality infobox pictures, and then edit warring to make sure that their version stays on the page. See:

• Talk:Trippie_Redd#Photo
• Eric Trump
• Cardi B
• Talk:Jason Bateman

Their favorite technique seems to be to upload a new, low quality image, and then force other people to "start an RFC" if they want to change it back. I am not familiar with every nook and cranny of Wikipedia's consensus policy, but I don't think this is how things work.

They also make unnecessarily threatening comments to random people who bring up that the pictures are bad ("If you change the photo one more time without a consensus then I will report you for starting an edit war."), and also have a history of extreme incivility/edit warring on other topics (for example Talk:Elliot_Rodger/Archive_1#Images).

What is the best move here? I am not clear on whether WP:ANI is appropriate here, but it would be nice for someone to gently tell this person that this is not how things work. Thanks! ~2026-16034-49 (talk) 16:25, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I have to second what @~2026-16034-49 says, and incur my chat with a noted admin (User talk:Black Kite#Appealing to you for advice). Also, @Shoot for the Stars is attempting to delete the other (which is unlikely to succeed for reasons provided on the previously cited chat also), better, Trippie Redd photo in order to upload their low-quality one. Scientelensia (talk) 17:47, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Just to add this has been a problem on more pages, including Karen Fukuhara. Scientelensia (talk) 18:03, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

How bizzare. I would say this is appropriate for WP:ANI since it's happening over many pages and wont get resolved on any one article's talk page. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 19:02, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Also forcing other people to start an RFC sounds like gaming the system. Mme Maigret (talk) 11:28, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

This is very strange and seems like basic trolling to me. Sentimental Dork (talk) 05:21, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Im fairly new to being an editor. I added a request in the page for "Chola empire" that they should change the language mentioned in a picture of a coin from tamil to sanskrit. I also added a proper citation. Yet, nothing has happened and the incorrect information remains. Can someone with a sufficient level of clearance fix this issue? It's been annoying me. TarvastOfParneth (talk) 12:40, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

You didn't submit your edit request correctly, so nobody patrolling the edit request queue would see it. Use the Edit request wizard to help you. Athanelar (talk) 12:52, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

really? But I received a reply from a mod (I think) who said I needed to provide a source. I then provided an appropriate source. (This is all in the talk page of chola Empire) I also made another talk topic wherein I provided the source directly, using the format they asked me to. Can someone please check what I have already written and see if I had gone wrong? TarvastOfParneth (talk) 14:32, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Tbh, I kinda feel like the coin shows Sanskrit and not Tamil. But the source claims that its Tamil. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:40, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

im pretty sure the source might be wrong on that detail TarvastOfParneth (talk) 13:09, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia can only report what reliable sources state; if you think that source is wrong then you need to find a source that says something different. Athanelar (talk) 14:18, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't see your comment earlier TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:28, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

How is the sourcei provided unreliable? It's the Chennai Egmore museum, numismatics division. TarvastOfParneth (talk) 15:39, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I haven't said anything about the source you provided. Athanelar (talk) 16:15, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

If you meant this, the link does not say anything about the particular coin. All it says is that "The legend on most of the coin types is in Sanskrit." which does not prove that the particular coin is in Sanskrit as it uses the word "most" and not "all". TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 16:19, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I've found another source. https://www.scribd.com/document/729307203/TVA-BOK-0013144-Coins-of-the-Chola (page 16) "Coins of the Cholas" by C.H. Biddulph. TarvastOfParneth (talk) 11:35, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

But Scribd is a self publishing platform, not a WP:Reliable source. Please see WP:RSPSOURCES. - Arjayay (talk) 12:08, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, but I can't find the book pdf online anywhere other than scribd. Can I just provide the book title and page, without the scribd link? The book itself as a source is from 1968. TarvastOfParneth (talk) 12:48, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

I too feel like the source is wrong but you can only edit if there is source that proves the statement. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:26, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Again, the only people who can see your request are those who specifically go looking for it, because you did not submit it correctly, so people checking the edit request queue will not see it. Use the WP:Edit request wizard. Athanelar (talk) 16:14, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, how to move the target of an existing redirect in visual editor? Is it possible at all? Cause I want to change where one article redirects to. Thanks. Brickguy276 (talk) 12:52, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

See the tutorial at Help:Redirect#Using VisualEditor ^^ nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 12:57, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I was looking at pages in Category:Proposed deletions needing attention and I left a note on the page of a user who directly used {{proposed deletion/dated}} instead of subst'ing {{prod}}. The user then replied to me asking how to do this, and I realized that I have not used the visual editor and have no idea how to subst a template myself. How does one do that? Thanks! Casablanca 🪨^(T) 20:36, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Some templates are auto-substituted, for example {{THYFA}}, but others can be substitutes by prefixing subst: before the name of the template. See Wikipedia:Substitution ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:39, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@Casablanca Rock pinging for visibility ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:39, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@Casablanca Rock: Help:VisualEditor#Substituting templates has an alleged method but it doesn't work for me. File:VisualEditor - Template editing 7.png is from 2015. I see no "Add template" button now and I haven't found a way to subst in VisualEditor. subst: disappears without substituting when I try. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:16, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi all. Thanks for your help. I was unable to do subst in the visual editor. It works fine in the source editor, but it doesn't seem to work in the visual editor for me. I have been experiencing exactly what PrimeHunter is mentioning. I primarily use the source editor, but it seems that this could be an issue because it essentially precludes visual editor users from using {{prod}} in the way listed in the documentation. Is it worth opening up a phabricator ticket? Casablanca 🪨^(T) 14:04, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

thank you. ᱠᱩᱸᱫᱨᱩᱞᱟᱴᱟ (talk) 15:39, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

hello I'm trying to make a page on the subject that I'm researching that I basically hold the most information on in the world. It's a very niche subject about a man who created this gallery of art and a canyon in Southeastern Colorado I've been researching him for 9 months now I have a plethora of articles I have US census I've immigration records I have ancestry records I don't know how to make my page not be declined. They said I need more secondary resources I don't know what secondary resources mean. I really need help doing this can somebody please help me? I have level three autism and I'm dyslexic and I am completely frustrated with this process but I gave a dead man an oath but I would bring him to the world and I am desperately trying to do so. Also I tried to take articles that I had found and take the words and rearrange them so that I wasn't plagiarizing the article and it says I'm using AI while I did use AI on some of it I spent hours writing these paragraphs and I don't know how to rearrange them to be acceptable. This is a really important subject to me and to the world I believe if somebody needs to find information on Martin Bowden I'm the one that has it. How do I get it into Wikipedia? Thank you in advance to anybody that can help me I really appreciate it TheBluflame (talk) 08:56, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello TheBluflame and thanks for asking at The Teahouse.

This is explained in more detail at WP:PSTS but in short, a primary source is created by the subject (it would include his marriage record, draft registration his own writings, posters for his shows). A secondary source is created about the subject by someone else. (it would include newspaper articles, journal articles, books). I can see that a couple of newspaper articles have already been suggested on your talk page. Remember that Wikipedia is not the place for original research, we only document what other people have already said. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 09:14, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. I must disappoint you- I don't think Wikipedia is the place to do what it is that you are trying to do. That's best done on a personal website or social media. Wikipedia is not a place to memorialize someone.

Things like census records and draft cards are primary sources that don't establish that someone is a notable person or notable artist. That requires significant coverage in independent reliable sources. "Significant coverage" is critical analysis and commentary as to what is viewed as important/significant/influential about the topic.

Mr. Bowden passed in 1958, surely your oath was not specifically to create a Wikipedia article? If you have a condition that affects how you perceive or use Wikipedia, perhaps you could work with someone on your end(who would need their own account) to help you? 331dot (talk) 09:15, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

my oath includes getting him his rightful place in history. It's strange how things are picked and choose to be remembered and put into print. I believe that there was enough coverage about this man enough people visited him and his artwork affected a time period so greatly that he deserves to be rightfully written about. The problem of the location of Trinidad Colorado is a lot of records were lost between fires and floods because I'm the one that tracked everything down gum shoe detective style. Sometimes people really do just get lost and they need somebody to pick up the torch and move forward to get them their spot he's dead he can't speak for himself and I'm not the first person to try to get this done. I'm just doing it in a more modern age which includes being able to make him a Facebook page and use Wikipedia so that more people can learn about him at lightning speed so yes. The answer to your question is yes my oath includes Wikipedia. It's called doing the most that I can do. I've also written to the governor of Colorado I've gone to multiple historical societies and set in their meetings trying to figure out how to get his work preserved and I'm working with history Colorado trying to update their records because they're very sparse to say the least compared to what I've collected in the Bowden Bible.

I don't really know anybody where I live I recently moved to a small town in New Mexico there's nobody to help me I'm a 48-year-old widow that homeschools my 12 year old daughter. That's how this whole thing started as I just wanted to teach her about interesting history around where we lived and it really confused me that in the age of information there was no information about Martin Bowden so we made it our project to go seek out the information and now I need something to do with that information to bring it to the world.

Thank you for listening. TheBluflame (talk) 15:34, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

one of my strong traits of my condition is that I don't let things go. And tell everything is filed in its place properly and everything has been discovered about it and this is one of those fixations to Martin Bowden's betterment. In other words I might not have anybody to help me and I'll be asking a lot of questions but what am I strong traits is that I'm very persistent and I will continue to be so in this case. I'll just keep asking questions and submitting drafts until something finally goes through because there's nobody else to do it but me. TheBluflame (talk) 15:36, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

@TheBluflame The first thing you need to establish is whether he is "Wikipedia notable". There are two ways to qualify: "presumed notability" or two or more pieces of significant coverage in reliable sources (which has its own Wikipedia definition). If you don't have two pieces of sig cov, you should write about him somewhere else, like Medium or Substack or Linkedin. Have a look at WP:42 and WP:GNG. (ps neurodivergents are more likely to be accused of writing like AI; don't worry about it.) Mme Maigret (talk) 09:21, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@331dot and Mmemaigret: I think TheBluflame is saying that they do have a number of newspaper articles already collected - but they didn't realise they have to cite them. Based on things like this I think there probably is a case for notability. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 09:31, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Martin Bowden. I was the decliner here and suggested the editor come to the Teahouse. I agree there is potential notability, but the Denver Gazette is geolocked to me and I didn't think of looking for an archive - thanks, DandelionAndBurdock. Tacyarg (talk) 10:08, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @DandelionAndBurdock. I agree, it seems like there's sig cov.

@TheBluflame I've cleaned up your article. You just need to insert more sources now. Mme Maigret (talk) 10:53, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Maybe someone at WP:ART or WP:BIOG would be willing to co-edit here and get this draft into shape. Athanelar (talk) 12:56, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

okay

First off a big thank you to all of you people for helping me because this is overwhelming and hard for me to carry by myself and I'm just doing my best. Second off yes I have 22 articles that have been published in newspapers or magazines or books that were written about this man starting from the 50s all the way up until 2013. I'm going to just keep trying to edit this and get it into shape because this man deserves his spot in history. It also said something about secondary sources I have US census records of ancestry records that I've dug up I have local records from libraries which ones are the strongest how can I do this the best?

I want to take just a minute to deeply thank you for cleaning up my article this is so overwhelming for me that I can only do it in sports because it causes me to emotionally short out because it's so much and he's an important figure so thank you thank you thank you TheBluflame (talk) 14:21, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm going to spend the next couple of hours citing all the sources I have I want everybody in the world to know about this man he deserves to be known he was known at one time and somehow history has chosen to overlook or forget him and I have spent the past 7 months on an autistic fixation of finding everything I can about him he is worthy I will work on that right now I will be back with more questions no doubt because this is incredibly confusing for me but also I just can't stop I can't let it go it has to be done.

I'm literally almost in tears thank you all so much for helping me with this!!! TheBluflame (talk) 14:23, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Post Empire Magazine (1954)

Detroit News Pictorial Magazine (Feb 27, 1955)

Sunday News – “Mountain Art” (March 13, 1955)

Cleveland Plain Dealer (1955)

Richmond Times-Dispatch (1955)

Inez Hunt "To Colorados Restless Ghost" (1960)

Pueblo Star Journal (1964)

La Junta Tribune-Democrat (1965)

The Denver Post (1966)

Security Advertiser & Fountain Valley News (1967)

Pueblo Chieftain (1970)

Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph (1972)

The Denver Post Magazine (1981 – Bob Leasure)

The Denver Post Empire Magazine (1983)

RockArtBlog (2015)

Denver Gazette (2026)

I just want to explain myself that with my autism I tend to over explain things and so I've learned to try to hold back because I scare people off. Unfortunately that did not work for me in this situation because y'all needed to see all the things that I had up front. I'm still learning what's considered a strong source and acceptable I guess the rock art blog wouldn't be but that's okay because what I have right now is nationally dispersed media documenting multiple decades, including posthumous recognition.

I'm going to get back to working on my draft I just wanted to thank you all for your patience life is difficult navigating the rules sometimes especially in something like this.

I'm doing this for Martin.

Because he's dead and he can't do it for himself and he deserves it. TheBluflame (talk) 15:30, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

thank you a thousand times over! TheBluflame (talk) 15:40, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

yes thank you

That's exactly what I was trying to say

I'm trying to get them listed and update my draft

Thank you for being able to translate what I was saying TheBluflame (talk) 15:39, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

The article page for Operation Safed Sagar contains several issues as well as beign a curtailed view and has a relativly limited scope. However, content can be shifted from the page of the Kargil War as well as older varaints of the the Page Kargil Air war (that was merged into the articl with signifiant data loss) to build a more comprehensive and more robust page.

ref oldid is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kargil_Air_War&oldid=1257421301

I would like to know if It is possible for me to do so, and if not, should i consider other alternatives such as merging Safed sagar into Kargill? 4-RΔ𝚉🌑R-01𝕏 (talk) 15:39, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

My recommendation is ask on the article's talk page. I would say you could, just remember to never merge without a discussion. Cheers! Robloxguest3 (talk) 16:12, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

thanks ! 4-RΔ𝚉🌑R-01𝕏 (talk) 16:18, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

np!Robloxguest3 (talk) 16:24, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello. @Graham87 suggested I reach out with questions. This page is titled "Central School" but the info box says "High School" and the body copy refers to the high school, middle school and elementary school. I'm thinking this page should be titled Sherburne-Earlville Central School District and cover that. But I don't want to rework the opening unless you guys agree. ChrisH7006 (talk) 21:57, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Sherburne-Earlville Central School.

' . . . Central School' is the name of the overall establishment that contains an Elementary School in one building, and a Middle and a High School in another building. The Infobox shows the location and address (13 School St.) of that second building. It may be that the Elementary school has a different street address (say, 11 School St., just as the Offices are said to be at 15 School St.), and a slightly different map location.

Personally, I don't have a problem with the very minor discrepancy, but if the Article is to be renamed and repurposed as being about the School District, someone is going to have to find and insert material about the District (and I note that three references linked to the District's website are not working properly).

I think a more obvious question is whether this School (or District) is actually Notable (per Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Schools). Apart from its involvement in the Odyssey of the Mind program (which takes up 6 of the article's 13 references), I can see nothing that would distinguish the School from many thousands of other equivalent establishments nation- and world-wide, and information from the School's website (which cannot contribute to Notability) makes up a good deal of the rest of the article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 01:56, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

I generally agree with this. Re its notability: unfortunately that ship has long since sailed and I'd say it'd be difficult/impossible to get that page deleted now. See WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES; I'm not aware of much movement in this area in the last little while, despite the 2017 RFC noted at that link. Graham87 (talk) 04:33, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

OK. I'll see if I can clean up some of the references and out of date info. thanks. ChrisH7006 (talk) 18:06, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I need help. I was trying to add references in the section where it has the “sources needed” tag, but whenever I try to open the section, it shows a template and I get confused about where to add references. On other pages, it was easy to add citations and simple, but I’m stuck here and need your help. This is the page I was talking about. (Miss Venezuela 1962) Joshuafrandi (talk) 00:46, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

In this section i was trying to add sources - (Contestants) Joshuafrandi (talk) 00:47, 16 April 2026 (UTC)