Wikipedia:Teahouse

Welcome to the Teahouse!
A friendly place where you can ask questions
to get help with using and editing Wikipedia

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 3 days.
Please remember to sign your posts by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.

To read the newest questions, skip to bottom
About the Teahouse

Most recent archives
1059, 1060, 1061, 1062, 1063, 1064, 1065, 1066, 1067, 1068, 1069, 1070, 1071, 1072, 1073, 1074, 1075, 1076, 1077, 1078

Mikenicholson.com[edit]

Hi, I have been told l need to pay a status tax to get on wikipedia. Is this so? I am a film maker since 1976, and was a Director of DW Thorpe book publishers. Both my Mother, Joyce Thorpe Nicholson, and brother, Peter Nicholson cartoonist are in it. www.mikenicholson.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael John Nicholson (talk • contribs) 04:13, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Mike, Getting into Wikipedia wasn’t easy, had to send $1000 “status tax” to Canberra authorities. But think of the status connected with belonging to the Thorpe / Nicholson publishing empire. Nigel. 03:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)~ 2001:8003:58D6:AC00:212F:805E:1C38:8649 (talk) 03:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

No payment is necessary to get an article on Wikipedia. RudolfRed (talk) 04:40, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Could you be so kind as to tell us who told you such? Or where you got such information from? It probably may be internet scam artists trying to swindle you, as you do not need to pay a dime to obtain a biographical article on Wikipedia.Celestina007 (talk) 05:04, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Michael John Nicholson. Are you aware that Wikipedia is not the place to tell the world about yourself?--Quisqualis (talk) 04:49, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

So how do l get started? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael John Nicholson (talk • contribs) 07:01, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@Michael John Nicholson: To "get on Wikipedia" as an editor is easy. In fact you have done it already by posting here and by registering for a free account. Just follow Help:Introduction or try out The Wikipedia Adventure to learn more about the basics of editing, and of the importance of adding references (See WP:REFBEGIN for that). You could then say a few (non-promotional) things on your userpage about yourself and your interests in editing Wikipedia - but avoid using it as if it were a LinkedIn page to promote yourself or your website (such pages get quickly removed). Like driving a car for the first time, make small. careful edits at first - perhaps fixing typos, improving grammar, adding references etc to articles that interest you. (See the Help Out' section at Wikipedia:Community portal for a list of ideas to get you started. Never add stuff you happen to know - only ever add content that can be verified by referring to the citations that you will add alongside them.)

However, if by "get on Wikipedia" you mean how do you get an article about yourself in this encyclopaedia, the simple answer is that you don't. Unless you have been written about in detail and in depth by various independent mainstream sources you join the remaining 7,000,000 human beings, and millions of businesses who simply do not meet our Notability Criteria - which is the essential bar for allowing a page here. Does that help? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 07:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Please also see the answers you received at the help desk back in March, Michael John Nicholson, now archived at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2020 March 22#Michael John Nicholson. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Apropos of payments, I hope that you didn't pay any money to "Jaan.raadik", who created a draft about you in January 2016 (subsequently deleted) or to "RashillGopee", who did the same three years later. Each time, an editor appeared merely in order to create such a draft (a curious editing pattern); and each time, submission of the draft got the response "Declining submission: bio - Submission is about a person not yet shown to meet notability guidelines." -- Hoary (talk) 07:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, why can you say l did nothing of 'notibility'? I set up 'Rubbery Figures' [political puppets like Spitting Image] with my brother and they were run for 6 years on Aust national tv? I did scripts, filming, animation, editing and sound. And then there are all my other films l made that were shown on Aust tv, and my books and art exhibitions. And was director of D.W. Thorpe Pty Ltd, publishers. You can see all my work on my website, www.mikenicholson.com so why would you not have me on it? I dont understand this, I seem to be getting mixed messages from a lot of different people at Wikipedia. - Mike. Michael John Nicholson (talk) 08:36, 30 September 2020 (UTC) Michael John Nicholson (talk) 08:36, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Notability, as that term is used on Wikipedia, is judged not by what you've done, Michael John Nicholson, but by whether people independent of you have written about you in reliable, published sources. See WP:GOLDENRULE for a simple explanation. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:43, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Mike, I don't see any mixed messages coming from the registered editors here. As was said above, whoever suggested paying a status tax to get an article published here was scamming you, and the first response from the IP address 2001...8649 was at best a poor attempt at a joke by an anonymous poster.

As was written above and on your talk page this time and six months ago, the word notable has a specific meaning here, with specific criteria. If you can provide at least three in-depth, independent, reliable sources (all three criteria must be satisfied as described at notable), please provide links to them. If so, we can then discuss how to get an article written.

Note none of this has anything to do with the quality or volume of your work – we don't make value judgements. It's all about those sources having written about you so we can summarize what they said, since that's what we do here as an encyclopedia, a tertiary source.

There are likely many thousands of creative people with man-decades of work who just don't meet the notability criteria and therefore don't qualify for an article. (We acknowledge that there are many such articles that were put here illegitimately in the past; they are slowly being removed if found to be so by this all-volunteer team.)

It's unfortunate that there's this idea out there, especially in the creative world, that not having an article about you on Wikipedia makes one "less-than" or illegitimate. We volunteers do what we can, every day, to try to explain that just isn't so. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

The best point you raised appears to be your involvement in Rubbery figures. However, that article has no references (putting it at risk for deletion), and also, the sentence "The Rubbery Figures programs were made in the Melbourne film studio of Peter Nicholson, who also made the puppets themselves." gives all the credit to your brother, Peter Nicholson (cartoonist). If you were truly equally involved, you may consider adding references to that article, including references that mention you, and then add a description of your contributions to the text of the article. As a general note, millions of people are successful in doing creative things (film, books, art exhibitions, publishing), but unless those people are written about by others who have no personal connection to the subject, do not meet Wikipedia's encyclopaedic definition of notability. David notMD (talk) 11:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Michael John Nicholson AND, under unintended consequences, Rubbery figures is now nominated for deletion for no references in support of notability. If you choose to add references, you should declare on your User page your relationship to the article. David notMD (talk) 22:11, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

A slightly more positive unintended consequence: the article Rubbery Figures has now been improved somewhat and saved from deletion. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:51, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Help. New editor being harassed while trying to learn how to positively contribute.[edit]

I am a new editor and am working on making positive grammar improvements to pages. I am an aspiring editor professionally. In searching for pages related to my interests in artificial intelligence I found a page of a biography of Joanne Pransky. The page's notability had been challenged multiple times by another editor. I attempted to strengthen the page's notability, The page was obscure and had an average of 5 visitors a day. After my edits were erased, I placed a discussion on the talk page if the page should be questioned for factual information. Immediately, I was attacked and now threatened with being blocked and informed my grammar contributions to pages are a waste of time.

Perhaps, I am not a cultural fit for Wiki? I thought asking questions and posting on talk pages was the correct way to conduct myself. Will veteran editors look at my contribution page and talk page and let me know what I am doing wrong or if I am being unfairly attacked by two other editors? I appreciate the help and feedback.

I put down the stick on the Joanne Pransky page because I was threatened to be blocked. I read the best action is to back away and I have run away from the page.

RobotDaneellives (talk) 00:04, 1 October 2020 (UTC) RobotDaneellives (talk) 00:04, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello RobotDaneellives. You asked for opinions and so I will give you mine. You say that your main goal is to make "positive grammar improvements to pages". However, when I review your contributions, I see a two week campaign to belittle and chip away at the reputation of Joanne Pransky. Over and over and over again, you make contentious edits about Pransky with lengthy repetitive edit summaries that make it clear to me that you are negatively obsessed with Pransky for some strange reason. So, this has nothing to do with "grammar". You say that you have dropped the stick and I hope that you are telling the truth because otherwise you are on a glide path toward a block. On another matter, you say "I am an aspiring editor professionally". Well, I think you need to do a lot of work on your spelling in particular, but more generally on your ability to express yourself concisely and clearly. Your edit summaries are really quite strange to me. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:54, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Pinging David notMD, who will know more about this. In the meantime, one little question for you, RobotDaneellives. In one of your edit summaries, you write "we are having a difficult time editing the page even with the help of some great help from an editor on this page who we have thanked". Why "we" rather than "I"? -- Hoary (talk) 01:56, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both for your feedback. David notMD informed that working with others support is fine but bad form to saw we on Wiki editing. I am a university student and we were assigned to edit pages and show that we improved the validity, reliability, and grammar of multiple pages. In retrospect, it appears I pulled the short straw getting this page. I was assigned to seek truth and fact and to journal how I experienced support and success in improving the Wiki project by being a positive contributor. Based on the feedback, I have much to improve and will work on improving. I am the only editor and have a group of critical friends in the class who discuss my edits and assess the feedback I receive from other editors. I know that using the term we is not good form and I stopped using this term in my edits. Hoary I hope this answers your question and thank you for your patience. I tried based on the feedback to contribute a webpage of this individual as a positive contribution as the father of robotics is quoted on the site praising her greatness. This is my last edit of the page. I surrender! I hope my last contribution is a positive entry. I also included it on the talk page.

--RobotDaneellives (talk) 07:39, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Early on in these exchanges, I had advised RobotDaneellives to cease with the "we" and that the function of Edit summaries was to provide a SHORT description of what was edited. Success on the first, not so much the second. I continue to believe that R's edits were in good faith, not vandalism, and not edit warring, but also believe that there was a focus, verging on obsession, with attacking the Joanne Pransky article and all mentions of her at various lists, over whether she can be described as "expert." Hence my monitoring R's contributions. David notMD (talk) 08:02, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Comment. I believe that RobotDaneellives has indeed pulled a short straw here. It must be hard to improve an article on a self-proclaimed expert while not noticing that her reputation is unwarranted. Maproom (talk) 08:14, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

RobotDaneellives If you are still reading...One way to enrich and improve an article is to read the sources already provided. There appears to be additional information in TechRepublic which is not reflected in the article, and TR seems to be the best source for the article. Adding this (positive, “supportive”) information would be a benefit. Hope this helps, for future editing. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 22:23, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Maproom Our comments (or at least mine) were too late, blocked at 20:42, 1 October 2020 (UTC). Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 06:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

/* Very Cool People */ info about the band musicians[edit]

Could anybody help me and check my article about the Latvian band Very Cool People https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Very_Cool_People and give me comment on improvement. Why isn't the musical notability criteria is satisfied? I guess I have met all the criteria. Help me, please! Thank you in advance.

Aiga Aiga Liva (talk) 09:26, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Aiga Liva Which of the musical notability criteria do you claim this band meets? 331dot (talk) 09:33, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Aiga Liva (talk) Hey! Thank you for the question, in my opinion, they meet 5 notable criteria:

4.Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.[note 4] - They are one of the most active Latvian concert bands also outside the country. They have represented Latvia in several international important events that I have mentioned also in the article

6.Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles.[note 5] This should be adapted appropriately for the musical genre; for example, having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. Note that this criterion needs to be interpreted with caution, as there have been instances where this criterion was cited in a circular manner to create a self-fulfilling notability loop (e.g. musicians who were "notable" only for having been in two bands, of which one or both were "notable" only because those musicians had been in them.)

7. Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.

11. Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.

12. Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or television network. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aiga Liva (talk • contribs) 06:58, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping 331dot. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:04, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Aiga Liva If that's the case, then you need independent reliable sources with significant coverage that demonstrate that. The draft currently just lists the year-to-year things the band did, and the sources(while I cannot read Latvian) don't seem to show the notability that you are asserting. Even if the band technically meets the criteria for notability, they still need to have the coverage in the sources. 331dot (talk) 15:50, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Templates[edit]

how do i use templates? Gaharnomo3 (talk) 00:39, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Gaharnomo3, to use a template, you type the name of the template between nested curly braces like this: {{TemplateName}}. You can find any template's description and usage instructions at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:TemplateName. For example, the template for requesting edits to a semi-protected article is at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Edit%20semi-protected and it also contains detailed instructions on how to use it. Within wikipedia, you may find the same template page linked as a bluelinked template name with the "template:" prefix, e.g. Template:Edit semi-protected, or better yet with the bluelinked template name between two curly braces just as it is used, e.g. {{Edit semi-protected}}. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:59, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Notification that and article was successful submitted?[edit]

I have written and submitted my first article using the article wizard. When at the end of the wizard, I added "submit" (with the brackets and subst:submit) at the beginning of the article and then clicked "publish". However I never re=eived a notification that it was successful submitted. I am guessing that it is in the public drafting area, but how can I be sure? And if so, how, and how long will it take to find out if the article is successful? Desmond123x (talk) 02:10, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Desmond113x Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. "Publish changes" should be understood to mean simply "save changes", it does not actually submit your draft for review. I have added the appropriate information to allow you to do so. 331dot (talk) 02:16, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Noob/. Grammaraguy52761 (talk) 03:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Desmond123x (talk) 04:41, 2 October 2020 (UTC) 331dot

Hi, I hope that I am writing this correctly. Thanks for your links. I have been thought the beginning intro and I have been practicing the last few weeks using visual editor with a friend - who is also a beginner (but a bit more seasoned). I have also spent the last weeks writing the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Desmond123x/sandbox. I have been looking at a number of good YouTube videos on how to proceed. They have been enormously helpful: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyK-hzYYPfg&frags=wn&ab_channel=WikimedianinResidenceUniversityofEdinburgh and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJooaYYQveY&ab_channel=WritingforWikipedia%28w4w%29.

I have tried to submit our article several times using the methods spelled out in these videos. The "move" tab appears to be missing, so I have gone through the "article wizard" and hit "publish". (with subst:submit on top)

What do I do next to submit my draft for review?

I have submitted Draft:Brit Bunkley draft of your behalf this time. The next time you can simply put {{subst:submit}} on the draft and hit the publish button. If you copy it from here, please copy it as it appears when viewing the page. Reviewing is a slow process, it may take a few weeks or more, but if you are lucky you will hear back a lot earlier. Note that the move button will appear earlier or later on itself when you are WP:AUTOCONFIRMED, though I strongely recommend using the review process, at least until you get the hang of the things. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much! (I thought that I put {{subst:submit}} in the submission, but I may have put it in the wrong place or spelled it incorrectly. And I put it in a later edit after hitting the publish button.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Desmond123x (talk • contribs) 23:41, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Message from new user[edit]

Noob/. Grammaraguy52761 (talk) 03:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia Grammaraguy52761. The Teahouse is a good place for new users like you to learn how to use Wikipedia. Do you have a question? —teb728 t c 04:30, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

User Indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 15:18, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Merge request advice?[edit]

Hello, I'm not very good at editing articles and stuff. Does anyone have any advice about the conditions where a merge request would be advisable? I very recently (today) submitted a request to merge [[Adapter (computing) with Adapter, but I am not sure if this is something that should be done or whatever. Yeah, does anyone have any helps or advices? Vedvod (talk) 03:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

PostScript: the template didn't work? or did I just not use it properly?

@Vedvod: You've put up the {{Merge to}} on Adapter (computing), but you forgot the {{Merge from}} on Adapter, which will give the proposal more visibility. You also should also specify a |discuss= parameter in both templates to make sure the link in the template goes to the same discussion. I've done both for you; other than that, you followed all the steps #1 and #2 at WP:MERGE, good job! It would help to give a little more reasoning as to why the two pages should be merged other than it "seems unnecessary", but if there's consensus to merge or no opposition after a while, be bold and perform the merge (steps are outlined at WP:PROMERGE). ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:47, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Thank you for your help with this. I will attempt to keep this in mind in future. I have amended the reasoning provided. Sorry if the ping was a bad decision –––[Vedvod | My (bad) contributions to this site | Talk] 09:20, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@Vedvod: No worries! It's very good practice to ping whoever you're replying to, even if it's just a thank you. Happy editing! ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:47, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Wolfman[edit]

Gojiej (talk) 04:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Gojiej and welcome to the Teahouse. This page is for questions regarding how to edit Wikipedia. Do you have a specific question in mind? ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:31, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

as a transgender person, i ask what is the basis to ask the aliens questions, should not we be asking you questions?[edit]

Rachel Vanderthorne (talk) 04:31, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Rachel Vanderthorne and welcome to the Teahouse. This page is for questions regarding how to edit Wikipedia. Do you have a specific question in mind? ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:31, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Unreasonable requests for sourcing[edit]

Sometimes during edit disputes users make unreasonable requests for sourcing and I don't know how to best handle it. Below are examples.

Sample 1: There is a story inside a textbook. Many reliable sources confirm this story is in the textbook, it is not disputed. So I post a recent edition of the textbook in the article. A user complains there is no source that confirms the story exists in that particular edition. I am unable to find a source to confirm edition information, only sources say it is in the book generally. There is no reason given for the doubt, just a made-up theory it is not in every edition.

Sample 2: There is a boat called "Goat" owned by Mr. Hinderson of NY registered in 1855, according to state records and linked in the article about Mr. Hinderson. Other sources confirm Mr. Hinderson did own a boat of this name, it is not disputed. A user complains how do we know there is not a second Mr. Hinderson from NY with a boat called "Goat" registered in 1855? It might not be the same Hinderson, there could be two. They request a source confirming this is the person of our article, without providing evidence of another Mr. Hinderson with a boat named "Goat".

These 'disputes' hinge on WP:V which states "any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material." My response has been their requests are unreasonable and not credible and to basically WP:IAR. Their response is V is policy and they can dispute anything at any time. It is sort of wikilawyering, but I would like some guidance on how to deal with non-credible sourcing requests. -- GreenC 04:39, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

GreenC I would tend to agree with you and side with you in both examples. If the other editor was repeatedly doing this pointedly and in an unreasonable manner, I would suggest to them that their constant wiki-lawyering was disruptive to the Project- and would collate diffs to evidence that disruption (probably best done off-wiki), and would report them to WP:ANI. If you have cited good sources and another editor repeatedly removes them with the excuse that "oh, you can't be sure if it's a different edition", I might regard that as a content dispute where WP:3RR applies, and you might be exempt from edit warring for reverting 'masked vandalism' - but it depends on circumstances, as always. The only way we can be sure that Mr Hinderson owned that boat is to find his grave, exhume him, bring him back to life and ask him in person. Until we have the technology to do that, we have to act in a reasonable manner in accepting proper sources, and ignore the small-minded idiots who say "oh, but what if...?" I make that comment only in response to you're hypothetical examples here, with no insight into any past disputes you might have entered in to, or any worries over any past competence in citing good sources. Reasonable challenges to sources are, just that: reasonable. Unreasonable ones are, well, you know where I'm going. Keeping discussions on an article's talk page is often the best way to ensure disputes over sources can be readily found by everyone interested in that article. For disruptive editors, keeping the conversations on their talk pages is useful to admins who might want to assess their competence or any disruptive editing they've undertaken, and whether they ask out of good faith, or are simply WP:NOTHERE. Does this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 09:46, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes: Yes thank you Nick. There's nothing in policy about a "reasonable" challenge of a source, that I know of, it's sort of unwritten. Maybe there is an essay? In both cases there is an undercurrent of disruption in a wear them down sort of way because they were previously thwarted in other content disputes, but they would of course deny that and these are experienced editors who are not normally behavior problems. I guess RfC or ANI if it continues. -- GreenC 13:55, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Afc: Jair Burgos is declined[edit]

Submission of Jair Burgos is declined with comments - Sources are not reliable. Before submission of this draft for review, I had searched on wiki. To make sure each and every source which I am mentioning in Jair Burgos must be used in other already published bio on wikipedia. I am considering since these sites are one of reliable sources thats why these pages are listed on wiki. These sites are used in various published pages. Many of them has their own wiki page as well.

Adding search links for your reference.
1. backstage.com - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=backstage.com&title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=1&ns0=1
2. patch.com - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=patch.com&title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=1&ns0=1
3. digitaljournal.com - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=digitaljournal.com&title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=1&ns0=1
4. issuu.com - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=issuu.com&title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=1&ns0=1

Please guide to fix the mistake and include this page for listing.

I am accepting my mistake to use image. Thank you so much for correcting my mistake and removing from draft. Vsp.manu (talk) 04:51, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Vsp.manu, I tried to see your draft and have same concerns. IMDB is not reliable and others may not. Backstage is definitely not reliable because it doesn't meet the WP:RS criteria. Same goes the case with Issuu. Digital journal report is not reliable because it is a PR. Please see WP:42 for more help. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:12, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Vsp.manu While it may be a starting point in evaluating a source's reliability, the presence of a source elsewhere on enwiki is not, in itself, a guarantee that it is reliable in general, or for the particular claim you are using it to cite. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 10:17, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Please make me administrator[edit]

Tamilreporter123 (talk) 05:35, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

If this is a serious question, WP:Requests_for_adminship may help you

Vedvod (talk) 05:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Tamilreporter123, You joined the Wikipedia a day before yesterday and today you want to be an administrator. Wow! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:06, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey! A ~~man~~ sentient being can dream... It also may help them in future? idk

Vedvod (talk) 06:17, 2 October 2020 (UTC) why do i sign like this?

Tamilreporter123, there is a very low chance of you becoming an administrator, least of all because you don't pass the requirements. Administrators are users with special tools that allow them to delete pages, block user, etc, and for almost everything you need to do on Wikipedia, you wouldn't need those tools. The administrator right is given to experienced users in good standing, and I'm sad to say you currently don't qualify for it. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 07:01, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Berrely,

Technically, as stated here,

"The English Wikipedia has no official requirements to become an administrator. Any registered user can request adminship ("RFA") from the community, regardless of their Wikipedia experience."

but yes, it would be very hard, especially since there is is a discrepancy here, where

"The...prerequisites for adminship are having an account and being extended confirmed (having both 30 days' tenure and 500 edits) so that you can file your own nomination."

The result is that according to one article, the user can in fact register and just is unlikely to be accepted, but the other article states that they are unable to register. So you are half-correct in saying that they currently don't qualify for it, though I'd trust the information on WP:RFA over WP:MOP.

I'm sorry about this unnecessariness, I just felt like pointing it out –––[Vedvod | My (bad) contributions to this site | Talk] 09:17, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Berrely was quite correct, and you would be wise to heed their advice. While you are correct that those are the formal requirements of being an administrator, you would need to pass a community discussion at Requests for Adminship. As stated there, "However, the likelihood of passing without being able to show significant positive contributions to the encyclopedia is low." Each participant in RFA discussions has their own personal criteria for evaluating if someone merits being given the toolset, but as a new user you lack a good edit history that shows things like good judgement, temperament, a cool head, good contributions to the encyclopedia, and a need for the tools. As Berrely noted, but I'll reiterate, you can do 95% of things on Wikipedia without being an administrator. Being an administrator carries no special status, you would just have buttons that would be irresponsible for everyone to have(like deleting articles). If you really want the toolset at some point, I would actually forget about it for awhile and concentrate on being a good editor. If you spend enough time doing that(likely years), other editors will see your contributions and any need you might have for the toolset and nominate you. In the short term, though, your chances of being given the tools are just about zero. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

I misread the signatures above; apologies to Vedvod. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@Vedvod and Tamilreporter123: I want to point out that spurious RfAs can be regarded as disruptive. As to the question itself, realistically, you need to be here and do good work (thousands of edits) in many areas of the project for at least a couple of years to acquire and refine the skills needed to be an admin, and for others to be able to see that in your contributions in order to vouch for you in an RfA. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 10:30, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Tags[edit]

What WikiProject tags should I add for an article about a programming language and how should these tags be spelled/capitalized? 84.238.45.164 (talk) 08:10, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

If this is about Draft:Flix (programming language), then probably {{WikiProject Computing}} and {{WikiProject Computer science}}. Since it's a draft, you don't have to assign it a quality rating as "Draft" will automatically be chosen, and importance-wise I would rate it "Low". Do note that this isn't essential until the draft gets approved, and adding this doesn't improve your chances. ◢ Ganbaruby!

 (Say hi!) 08:31, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! JorKadeen (talk) 08:36, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Photos in Wikipedia[edit]

Hello,

Are accepted photos from Instagram, Twitter, Flicker or facebook to be added in Wikipedia pages?

Forever Jose () (talk) 09:25, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Forever Jose. Usually no. Photos need to be under a free license in their source. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 09:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@Forever Jose: Whilst Instagram and Facebook don't really give the user the option of releasing their images under an appropriate licence, Flickr does offer that. The default position is that every image on Flickr is copyright of the author, and thus unusable. But look for the licencing icon on a Flickr image page and you can determine whether that person has altered it to make it reusable here. It categorically MUST be released under a licence which permits commercial reuse. Just non-commercial reuse it definitely not acceptable - so CC-BY-SA is the abbreviation you'll be hoping to see. In the upload process you would link to the page it came from so that one of the volunteer checking team can verify if it was properly licenced at the time. I've once or twice contacted photographers on Flickr and asked if they'd consider changing the licence of on particular image so that it can be used on Wikimedia Commons or elsewhere - and usually with good results. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:58, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Modifying the title while on draft[edit]

Hello, I am working on a draft that by mistake I placed the title wrong It should say Ignacio Pena Del Rio but it says Ignacio Peña Del Rio This is the draft: Draft:Ignacio Peña Del Rio Anyone knows how to accomplish this? Angie Lynn Anderson (talk) 09:45, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Angie Lynn Anderson Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If there is an issue with the title, I would leave a note on the article talk page that the reviewers will see; if they accept your draft, they will handle moving it into the main encyclopedia and what title it is at. (I've fixed the link to your draft, you don't need the whole web address). 331dot (talk) 09:48, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Oops - Whilst I was considering suggesting that, too, I thought it quicker to change the draft article's title - which I've just done. Sorry for the clash, 331dot. regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:51, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angie Lynn Anderson (talk • contribs) 09:55, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes That's certainly fine too- it just saves a step in case the draft is not accepted. But there is no problem in doing so. :) 331dot (talk) 09:58, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

How to edit a protected page[edit]

The page I want to edit is protected so what can I do know? 2409:4043:2099:1AC9:0:0:2AAA:28AC (talk) 10:03, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may post on the article talk page detailing the edit you wish to make. To increase the chances it will be seen by another editor who could potentially carry out your request, you may make it as a formal edit request(click for instructions). 331dot (talk) 10:08, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

I go to the talk page but I can't write anything because there is not any option for me. Is that because I'm a anonymous user?If yes than what can I do.please tell me 2409:4043:2099:1AC9:0:0:2AAA:28AC (talk) 10:31, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Please add follow up comments to this existing section instead of creating a new section. There should be a tab that says "edit" at the top of the talk page, if you are using the full desktop version(even on a phone). I'm not sure how to edit it with the app or mobile version(though I'm sure others here do). Personally I find using the full version easier(even on a phone). If it does not say "edit" at the top, it is possible that the talk page is protected(though this is highly unusual); we can tell you more if you let us know which page you want to edit. 331dot (talk) 10:39, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

I want to edit a page called Banafar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4043:2099:1AC9:0:0:2AAA:28AC (talk) 11:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

There isn't a page called Banafar. There is a page called Banaphar which is semi-protected, but Talk:Banaphar is not protected so you can make your edit request there. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

IP: Please read the earlier posts on that page, in case your requested change was previously proposed (and declined, usually for lack of a reliable source). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:21, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

How to write an article about a website?[edit]

Hi everyone,

I'm relatively new to wikipedia editing and I wrote an article on the Human Journey Website but it got rejected. https://humanjourney.us/

The problem is that I need to find better sources aparently. Here is my draft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Human_Journey

Now, just to be clear, I have written several scientific papers in international journals and I know how citing sources is usually done in the academic world, but here I feel things are a bit different.

I have a list of websites that link back to the Human Journey website but the best thing I could see as a source so far was a mention in a magazine's blog. So I have several ideas, please let me know if these make sense. I could include more information about the authors of the website, who include authors with books and articles I could cite. Or I could look for web statistics and include that information about the website maybe? If not, I guess a third route would be getting an article about the website published by some source that is considered reliable and then citing that in the wikipedia article?

Another doubt I have is about the content, so say if I want to summarize the content of the website, do I really need an external citation for that? For example, if one of the guiding ideas of the website is: "Discover who we are, how we evolved, what we might become", and it has four main sections with different names which I explain, and this is taken literaly from the website itself, do I need a citation to state something which is self-evident like that? It seems to me sort of like how articles about movies summarize the plot without needing to include citations for that.

Any suggestions are welcome!

Pau PA Packard (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

HelloItalic text there @PA Packard:. Wikipedia's inclusion standards can be found several places at Wikipedia. WP:42 is probably the most concise statement, and WP:GNG contains more details. The basic principle is that, since Wikipedia articles should only be based on the highest quality source texts, we need good source texts before an article about a subject can be created. Wikipedia needs more than just confirmation that a subject exists, it needs evidence that there is 'enough' reliable source text that exists out there that can be used as sources for writing a good encyclopedia article about the subject. Not everything in the universe that exists has existing source text written about it, if something, such as the website in question, does not have substantial independent writing about it already, it probably doesn't qualify for a Wikipedia article. Of course, I may be wrong, and if the significant, independent, and reliable source texts do exist, you can use those to establish sufficient notability. But if the sources don't exist, we don't have anything to use to research and write an article from. I hope that helps! --Jayron 32 12:14, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Hi Jayron32 and thanks for answering. I'm not sure if this is how I'm supposed to reply here. I hope you don't mind me following up on your answer, and I do realize you are simply citing wikipedia's rules and trying to explain the basic idea. I understand the ideal, but it seems to me like a lot of wikipedia pages about media and publications don't really seem to adhere to those high standards. I've been reading wikipedia for years so I've seen quite a few pages but I will name a few concrete examples for clarity. I was looking at the page for the Journal of Neuroscience for example. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Journal_of_Neuroscience

It basically summarises some of the key aspects of the journal's structure and content. It includes two citations, one citing itself, and the other cites a statistic about its Impact Factor. That hardly seems to me to be substantial independent writing, and I assume the situation for other scientific journals and other types of media is the same.

References:

The Journal of Neuroscience". 2013 Journal Citation Reports. Web of Science (Science ed.). Thomson Reuters. 2014. Maunsell, John (2013). "New Journal Sections". The Journal of Neuroscience. 33 (1): 1. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5529-12.2012.

I've also seen movies that only cite online movie databases, or games that cite their own advertisments and press releases, or simply a couple of online databases.

Pau, 2 October 2020 PA Packard (talk) 16:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC) (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PA Packard (talk • contribs) 15:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Other stuff exists is not a valid position. There are thousands of articles that are not adequately or correctly referenced. David notMD (talk) 15:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey, @PA Packard:, thanks for following up. I'm aware that sometimes Wikipedia is not up to the highest quality standards. All we can do as individuals is make sure our own work is held to the highest standards, and fix what we can when we find it in a poor state. Wikipedia is a work in progress, and if you (or I or anyone) finds something that does not meet the highest standards, it can always be fixed, and that can include deleting inappropriate articles as needed. Simply put, the fact that someone else has done something that does not meet Wikipedia standards does not give license to everyone to violate those standards. I appreciate that you've come here asking for the right way to do it; all I can do is advise you on that correct method. I cannot, by myself, police all of Wikipedia for every instance where someone else hasn't been as conscientious as you are. --Jayron 32 15:35, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Sorry if I seemed to be too bold David notMD, I was just asking and offering some personal observations for further comment and explanations, didn't mean to take any position really. Ok, well thanks for the answers then. I guess what I was looking for would be a kind of established minimum requirements, and looking through wikipedia at other webpages for current procedure is misleading for sure. Basically, before I put more work into it, I want to have an idea if its possible for the webpage to meet the minimum requirements as is or not. Obviously it won't be the example of the best cited article, but just wanted to know whether it could be possible at all or not, if I added web statistics and if I find some data about it in a database online for example, or a review somewhere. Maybe writing a wikipedia article about a webpage of this kind is just not possible. Alternatively, I can add the section I wrote to the pre-existing wikipedia article about the institution behind the website. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_the_Study_of_Human_Knowledge — Preceding unsigned comment added by PA Packard (talk • contribs) 15:50, 2 October 2020 (UTC) PA Packard (talk) 16:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Adding map image created in Google Earth[edit]

Will Wikipedia accept a map image for an article that was created in Google Earth? How

How do I add a map overlay image created in Google Earth to the Wikipedia article I wrote? I have attempted to add the image, but it is not being accepted. 2nd ABG (talk) 12:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@2nd ABG: No – they are copyrighted as evidenced (at least) by the (usually many) copyright notices at the bottom. Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2015/June#Google Earth Images is a previous answer from MCQ. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Google indicates that I may use a Google Earth map image provided I attribute it to them. I would like to add the map overly image to the Wikipedia article I wrote. Would you please inform me of the instructions to enter the image? When I attempt to add it, it is being rejected.

From Google: "Generally speaking, as long as you're following our Terms of Service, these guidelines, and you're attributing properly, you can use our maps and imagery. In fact, we love seeing creative applications of Google Maps, Google Earth, and Street View." https://www.google.com/permissions/geoguidelines/ But we know you're looking for more specifics to ensure you're using our maps and imagery correctly. We suggest starting with the general guidelines below as these will apply to all projects. Feel free to click directly to the section that applies to your use" 2nd ABG (talk) 13:49, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@2nd ABG:. Whilst it isn't hugely clear what you are not allowed to do on their guidelines, I'm pretty sure that you cannot take aerial photos from Google Earth/Google maps and make them available here (for non-commercial and commercial reuse). I think those permissions related to use of image within their API, and not just lifting images to add to post on Wikimedia Commons or on Wikipedia. I think that Open Street Map might be more 'up your street' if you pardon the pun, though it does not provide aerial photos. Like Wikipedia, Open Street Maps is user-generated and can be updated by any interested person with a love of mapping and (presumably) a GPS device. See Wikipedia:Maps for Wikipedia for more links to using maps. (Please don't reply by starting a totally new thread - just edit this one and reply beneath, adding in one extra colon at the start of a paragraph than the person you're replying to use - this indents it one step further in. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:46, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@2nd ABG: The problem is:

These guidelines are for non-commercial use, except for the limited use cases described below. If you want to use Google Maps, Google Earth, or Street View for other commercial purposes – meaning “for sale or revenue-generating purposes” – please contact the Google Cloud Customer Team. [emphasis mine]

This is not an acceptable license for Wikimedia Commons, which only accept content that is freely licensed, including for commercial use. The primary problem is the imagery, which Google does not own, and is licensed to them by many different providers. Technically, if you can make an acceptable fair-use case, per WP:NFCC (which is very picky), that may allow you to upload it here locally (to English Wikipedia). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:12, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Articles[edit]

I want to know how many articles are there on WIKIPEDIA and who created them and I also wanna know how to create an article. Acdor (talk) 13:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Acdor, and welcome to the teahouse. There are currently 6,168,591 articles on Wikipedia. You can see who created and wrote the pages them by clicking on the tab called 'view history', where there is a list of all the past edits to a page. The oldest (last) revision is who created the page. For statistics on prolific page creators, you can see WP:MOSTARTICLES. To create a page, you may want to go through The article wizard. This will guide you through the basic steps of creating an article. Also see WP:1st for help on writing your first article. Best, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:02, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Article creation and Draft problems[edit]

Hello. I have created my sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:F.Alexsandr/sandbox and It is said that I can use it to create drafts of articles that I can later submit for review. However upon creation of sandbox I can no longer write an article there that I can submit for review. Is it intended that way, being used as a sort of a Notebook, or am I missing something? F.Alexsandr (talk) 14:00, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, F.Alexsandr, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. You can create as many sandboxes as you like, called more or less anything you like. You have User:F.Alexsandr/sandbox; you can create User:F.Alexsandr/sandbox2, or User:F.Alexsandr/Some other title. (The only thing special about the one called "sandbox" is that if you use the standard skin on the desktop, there is a link to it automatically at the top). I'm not sure what you mean about you "can no longer write an article there" - you can edit it just as you already have.

But I recommend creating articles in Draft space (rather than in a sandbox) using the article wizard. Have you read Your first article? --ColinFine (talk) 14:49, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

That's good advice but note that your sandbox works like any other Wikipedia page. You can save successive versions of it, each containing a draft article or any other content you wish. Then, if you look click on the "View history" tab, you'll see each version is stored with the date and time you saved ("publish changes" in Wiki-speak) it. To return to any individual earlier version of the sandbox, just click on the timestamp associated with it. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 14:57, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: @ColinFine: Thank you for responce. What I mean is, if I will write an article in my sandbox, will I be able to submit it from there (If yes, how can I do it) or I will have to manually copy-paste it into an Article Wizard? F.Alexsandr (talk) 15:11, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Sandboxes are most helpful if they have {{User sandbox}} as the first line. Then you'll see there is a permanent instruction about moving from your sandbox into article review.

I've added that template for you - apologies if that was a bit cheeky: it's your area, not mine! Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 15:36, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Incidentally, I use my sandbox nearly every day I'm active on WP but hardly ever save my work there (you can take a look at my edit history "here".). Instead, I just use "Show preview" to see how my article-building is getting on and in particular I have the Citation button active (see WP:Citation expander) so that I can use it to generate the full references for some source where I only have the ISBN or the DOI. If I do this in a separate browser tab from the page I intend to place the citation on, I can play around with the new text I propose to add to an article and preview that independently of the perhaps much larger full article itself. Then I copy-paste into the article I'm editing. I'd recommend getting some practise editing existing articles before you rush to build a new one. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 15:20, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Hello, I am a bit new here and I dont understand how WikiPedia works. I am a member of wikiHow and I understand it, but WikiPedia is harder than wikiHow (in terms of editing and structure). If i could have a bit of understanding on how this works. I'll be glad to know. Thanks. Valtries (talk) 15:46, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Valtries! You can try WP:TUTORIAL and/or WP:ADVENTURE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:24, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello from Toxicfox3170[edit]

Hello everyone. I have recently joined Wikipedia. I look forward to working with you to improve our FREE encyclopedia. Toxicfox3170 (talk) 16:05, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome Toxicfox3170. The advice below by Gråbergs Gråa Sång to read WP:TUTORIAL and WP:ADVENTURE may come in handy. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:21, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

How do I?[edit]

How do I edit like the Other pages? Severe Weather Lover (talk) 16:40, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome Severe Weather Lover! Not quite sure what you mean, but WP:TUTORIAL and WP:ADVENTURE may help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:46, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, Hello[edit]

I just wanted to say hello, because I just made an account yesterday. Severe Weather Lover (talk) 16:42, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia! As a note, this page is for asking questions, and if you have any feel free to ask! — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Talk page code breaking viewability[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rose_City_Antifa&oldid=981497340 What is happening here? I added a response, then it caused the vast majority of the page to become invisible after the edit was completed and I can't figure out where things went wrong. So I had to do the citation like this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rose_City_Antifa&oldid=981498270 to make it work. I'm quite experienced in Wiki, but this one stumps me as to why a good chunk of page goes missing after using <ref> as well as talk page reflist-talk. I've never had issues with it in all the other times I used them. Graywalls (talk) 17:51, 2 October 2020 (UTC) Graywalls (talk) 17:51, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

There was an unterminated ref tag higher up the page. I think that this edit has cleared it. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:11, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Resolved

@David Biddulph:, thank you. Graywalls (talk) 00:56, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

How do I create a list of references--that is, put the ones on an article to inText?[edit]

ChupaRosaAmorcito (talk) 18:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

ChupaRosaAmorcito, please read WP:Referencing for beginners. After you have made an inline reference, you can use {{reflist}} to make a reference list at the bottom of the article. Hope this helps! — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 18:40, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Edit[edit]

I'm new but wondering why I can't edit anything Theonewhomadeitall (talk) 19:32, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Theonewhomadeitall Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It would help to know which page you attempted to edit; some pages have various restrictions on editing. 331dot (talk) 19:39, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

How many people?[edit]

How many people use Wikipedia?2601:444:200:BAA0:6091:2157:CFB5:6C0A (talk) 20:00, 2 October 2020 (UTC) 2601:444:200:BAA0:6091:2157:CFB5:6C0A (talk) 20:00, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

According to the article Wikipedia, "1.5 billion unique visitors per month". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:11, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

You might like to take a look at WP:Signpost. Each month one of its articles reveals the pages on Wikipedia which have received the most hits that month. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 13:00, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

uploading an image[edit]

When uploading an image for my very first time editing Wikipedia, I uploaded the wrong picture. How can I delete the image and/or upload the correct image? Thank you greatly Wi11iams (talk) 21:08, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Wi11iams, it seems that you uploaded the image [1] to Wikimedia Commons. If the new image is similar and you would like to use the same title, you could just upload another revision with the "Upload a new version of this file" button in the "File history" section, which will override the old one. If you want to permanently delete the old one, copy and paste the following text in the box onto the top of the page: {{SD|G7}}. An administrator will delete the image soon, and you can upload the new one under a new title. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 22:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Adding a Public Domain tag to an image[edit]

I am a newbie and uploaded an excerpt from an 1884 map, which is at: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:1884_map_between_N_%26_S_Platte.png&oldid=981419308

To address the copyright issue, I included the following: "Published in 1885. All US works published before January 1, 1923 are in the public domain. https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ15a.pdf"

I received a notice as follows: "The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like

I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. This applies worldwide.

If this is not legally possible:

I grant any entity the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

(to release all rights),

I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license:

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License.

This template should only be used on file pages.

(to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those."

How do I add a Public Domain tag that will satisfy the requirement? Does that mean adding "Public Domain" as the only content in a line of text?

Elkhornmn (talk) 22:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC) Elkhornmn (talk) 22:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Elkhornmn. The message is asking you to use a template such as {{PD-because}}, which will be rendered as a box similar to the one you've added above. If you look at that page, it gives an example of what you need to put in the File description page File:1884 map between N & S Platte.png. --ColinFine (talk) 23:26, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, ColinFine. I added a PD-US-expired tag and hope that addresses it. Elkhornmn (talk) 19:58, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Elkhornmn:, I've fixed the template for you on the file page. Cheers. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 20:38, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

ENGLISH,PHILLIPINES[edit]

JAMESSAN123 (talk) 00:42, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

JAMESSAN123, Hello and welcome to Teahouse. It is not clear that what kind of question you have? Teahouse is a place where new editors seek help from experienced editors. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 00:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Redirecting a song link to the album page[edit]

How do I redirect a song title, which doesn't have an article, to its album's article? Countrymusic75 (talk) 00:53, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Countrymusic75, Wikipedia:Article wizard/version1/Ready for submission may help. Best ─ The Aafī (^talk) 01:07, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Countrymusic75. The magic way to get good advice on many things is to type "WP:" followed by a plausible keyword into the search box. In this specific case, WP:REDIRECT will take you to the main page that explains redirects. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:22, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Online article also published in print and digital magazine format - What to include in reference?[edit]

My question concerns the citation for the 2nd sentence of Prison Sex. I used {{Cite web}} to format the reference. The reference is a web page article about Tool's song, which appears on the Metal Hammer magazine website (https://www.loudersound.com/metal-hammer). On that web page the publisher notes, "Published in Metal Hammer #326", i.e., the article was published in Metal Hammer, issue number 326. Metal Hammer is available as a print and digital magazine. I wrote the reference as follows.

Wiederhorn, Jon (July 10, 2020). "The Story Behind The Song: Tool's Prison Sex". Metal Hammer Magazine (published in Metal Hammer #326). Retrieved October 3, 2020.

Based on the principle, "give the reader what they need in order to locate the cited source", I am thinking I actually do not need to include "(published in Metal Hammer #326)". But before I remove it, I wanted to see what you all recommend. Thanks! Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 01:13, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Markworthen: If you have a direct link to the article on the loudersound.com website included in your citation, then it’s fine to leave out that bit of information. However, it also doesn’t hurt to have it as well. What’s important is that you give future readers enough information so that they can find the exact article, so more can't hurt. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:33, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Ah, excellent point. Thank you so much Ganbaruby! Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 02:57, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Tagging Confusion[edit]

Hi, brand new. Very interested in 'prettying' up pages. Interested in joining the WP:GOCE and helping with the backlog of articles needing attention. Also planning to join the WPFILMS project. I have been going on the Getting Started page and am tempted to edit the random pages, but I want to make sure I start properly so I don't give someone else work to clean up after me.

I completed the Wikipedia Adventure, but I am still confused about how to remove tags from the page once editing has been completed. I am also confused about how to add a tag. Also if I am editing an article and I notice that something needs to be cited, do I get to make that call and add a 'citation needed' tag or is that for more advanced editors to decide? Not trying to ruffle feathers! Thank you. SleepyAthena (talk) 01:23, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello @SleepyAthena:, a tag is automatically added by the servers, but it can also be added by users. If you mean marking things as requiring citation and such, a tag is created simply by adding the appropriate template, like: {{Citation needed|date={{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}}, or category. The reason that hasn't become a tag, and that a message at the top (hatnote, I believe it's called?) saying that WP:TH needs more citation hasn't been added is because it's been put in between two nowiki formatting tags. If you were to type that text into a page, it would make a note at the top that notified editors that citation was required. If you want to tag different stuff, you can add different templates and such to send different messages: this is an example of^{[original research?]} or {{Original research|date={{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}}. Apologies if this is very confusing or something. If you also meant adding pages to categories, you do that with a [[category:mycategoryhere]] text added anywhere, though adding it to the top or bottom helps organise such things. Once again, I'm not very good at this thing, but this is my understanding of this. You may find more help at H:CATS and WP:TAGGING. Sorry,

––– [ Vedvod | My (bad) contributions to this site | Talk ] 02:42, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Realised I forgot to answer the other question. @SleepyAthena:, you can tag anything you want if you feel it requires such, and, if you think a tag should be removed, ask on the talk page, and, after a consensus is reached, or after a sufficient time, proceed with removing the tag. WP:BB explains this better, sorry

––– [ Vedvod | My (bad) contributions to this site | Talk ] 02:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

As for citation needed, if one or two factual statements are lacking references, tag them. An autobot will come by later and date the cn's. But don't overload articles with cn's. There are section tags and whole-article tags. And in a better world, you would see a ref needed, find an appropriate ref, and add it. And even check existing refs to see if those are valid reliable sources. Reffing is a never-ending chore. David notMD (talk) 07:57, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Please publish my article[edit]

Hai, I am subramanian. I want to write a bio page for a IPS Officer (SR Jangid IPS), but unfortunely I am not able to publish it. please help, what and how I have to do Subramaniantdr (talk) 03:15, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Subramaniantdr, as explained on your talk page, the subject you are writing about in User:Subramaniantdr/sandbox is not notable enough to appear in Wikipedia. Reliable sources have yet to cover him in depth, and are unlikely to ever do so. Please consider Wikia, as an alternative to Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:00, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

How can I write an email?[edit]

mɛzliɲ 41.115.51.17 (talk) 06:28, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse is a place to ask questions about how to edit Wikipedia articles. Are you asking how to contact an editor? Editors have Talk pages where you can leave a message. It is not a private system. Anyone else visiting the Talk page will see it. David notMD (talk) 08:00, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Some editors use the template {{User email}} on their user page (myself included, so if you click on my name you'll see what it looks like on my own page). If so, they can be contacted externally to Wikipedia, and in confidence, using a form that appears when you invoke the link. Note that you must have a registered account on Wikipedia and its associated e-mail address will be passed to the recipient when you use that contact method. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 12:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Tables at South Asia[edit]

I have created three new tables for the article, replacing five old ones. They are looking okay. But I am unhappy with column widths and text alignments. Since I made them with Visual Editors, I am having trouble fixing column widths and alignments. Can someone optimise column widths and alignments in those tables? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 07:24, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Aditya Kabir: VisualEditor is good for creating the table and inputting data, but you'll have to go to source editing mode to change the CSS styling of the table to change its appearance. The way to do so is outlined at Help:Table. It's a hefty page, so here's a little table where I've tinkered around with width and text alignment that might help:

150px wide, left	200px wide, center	250px wide

Line breaks with <br> may also help you make sure the words are going to a new line where you want. I'd suggest you play around with tables in your sandbox page until you've created a table that you like, then copy that into the article, just in case you break something. Hope this helps! ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:02, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Ganbaruby Thanks a lot.

Here, let me pour you a cup of hot darjeeling. I have two more questions though: (1) If I understand correctly, I will have to do this individually for each column. Shall I put the codes in the header row? (2) Can I use percentage values instead of "px" values? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 13:01, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

sips... @Aditya Kabir: (1) Yes, its preferable to specify widths in the header row as that's where future editors are expecting them to be. (2) Yes, percentage and em values both work as well. In fact, I just found out that Help:Table#Setting column widths says that setting pixel sizes is deprecated and percentages or em values are preferred. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 14:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

German template[edit]

Hello, could someone please tell me if it possible to turn this template {{Navigationsleiste Hanns-Eisler-Preisträger}} into English ?

Thanks in advance. LouisAlain (talk) 09:30, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@LouisAlain: The template at de:Vorlage:Navigationsleiste Hanns-Eisler-Preisträger is known as a Navbox in English, and as far as I can tell they work very similarly. You can refer to the documentation at Template:Navbox and create it yourself! ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 11:44, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!). I'll try to make it, that would be quite useful. LouisAlain (talk) 14:11, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

New page for existing wikidata item[edit]

I would like to create a wikipedia page for St Paul's Church Cambridge.

There is already a wikimedia category: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:St_Paul%27s_Church,_Cambridge

And also a wikidata item: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q26632397

Ideally I'd like to be able to pull facts from wikidata, for an infobox, but I'm unsure how to do that in a draft page. I have seen example markup like: {{Wikidata Infobox}} which seems to use the wikidata item associated with a page. How could I do that in a draft page, which I don't think would have a wikidata item associated with it.

Thanks for your help. AndyGordon (talk) 09:56, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

As you will see from Template:Wikidata Infobox, that is for categories, rather than articles. There are templates for various types of articles, listed at Category:Infobox templates using Wikidata, but I can't see anything immediately obvious for churches, or even for buildings in general. Many editors here in enwiki are reluctant to rely very much on Wikidata. One reason is because of its fundamental problems in being limited to one-to-one mapping whereas the structures vary from one language to another hence the mapping isn't one-to-one. Another reason is that the information in Wikidata is not within the control of enwiki editors. Other editors may have different views. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:10, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

David, thanks for your help! AndyGordon (talk) 11:08, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@AndyGordon: The alternative is to look at Template:Infobox church for the standard infobox used in mainspace. Then copy/paste the parameters into your draft article and start filling them out from Wikidata or elsewhere. I took a look at a few existing articles on smaller UK churches to get a feel for the sorts of things normally included. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 13:40, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@AndyGordon: If this Grade II listed church is your topic, you can find some information (date of construction, etc.) on the Historic England page I've linked useful for filling in parameters of {{Infobox church}}. If you can access a copy, the Pevsner volume cited there under "SOURCES" might also be useful. For the geographic coodinates, you can use {{coord|52.1976|0.1294|type:landmark_region:GB|display=inline,title}}. Deor (talk) 19:25, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Michael, Deor: thank you for your help! I will try to track down that Pevsner volume.

I've created a draft page here: Draft:St Paul's, Cambridge Not using Wikidata at present. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndyGordon (talk • contribs) 11:14, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

The page is now accepted. Fantastic. How do I link it to the Wikidata item mentioned above? Maybe I add a link to the enwiki page from Wikidata? AndyGordon (talk) 11:57, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Reverting my edits[edit]

Hello, Recently I have done some edits on few pages with valid source but it get remove by a person with biased views. I don't know why he is reverting my edits with his own perspective and biased views because I am very familiar with the topics .So please warn him to follow the Wikipedia policy and not to mention his own opinion in the article. Eroberar (talk) 11:10, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

This Teahouse post is the first edit you've made using this account, Eroberar. Did you make these edits without logging in? Which articles were they to? Cordless Larry (talk) 11:12, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Puzzled, because E's Talk page has a note from Theroadislong about a contribution being reverted for not being NPOV, yet as Cordless noted, E's Contributions shows only the Teahouse query. David notMD (talk) 12:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Although Theroadislong placed that there after I made my comment here. I wonder if it was a mistake? Cordless Larry (talk) 13:03, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Cordless Larry and David notMD I believe that Eroberar is talking about his/her contributions to other wikis within the MediaWiki scope, not just the English Wikipedia, though I may be wrong about that.

––– [ Vedvod | My (bad) contributions to this site | Talk ] 12:57, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Specifically the Hindi wikipedia?

––– [ Vedvod | My (bad) contributions to this site | Talk ] 12:58, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

My apologies I seem to have muddied the waters by adding a standard welcome message for someone "whose initial efforts are unsourced" Theroadislong (talk) 13:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I'm talking about about my edits in hindi Wikipedia and there is a person who is continuously reverting my edits with his own perspective and he is not an administrator,So I request to warn him to not to remove my edits. If there is any problem in my edits let the administrator do it not himEroberar (talk) 13:11, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

You'll have to take this up on the Hindi Wikipedia, Eroberar. Each Wikipedia is a separate project, with its own policies and administrators. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:15, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

So how I can contact with them? Please tell meEroberar (talk) 13:55, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Assuming you know the language (I don't), you can try to start here: [2] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:13, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Adding ping Eroberar Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:14, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Orphan[edit]

Hello. How does one go to De-orphan a Motion Picture or Television show article? - Wzth Regvrds, Ghxstee | Dzscussixn 13:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ghxstee, and welcome to the Teahouse. You de-orphan any kind of article the same way: by inserting links to that article from other suitable articles. See orphan, --ColinFine (talk) 13:16, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes but what I was asking is how to find related article. - Wzth Regvrds, Ghxstee | Dzscussixn 13:35, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ghxstee: See WP:DE-ORPHAN. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 14:05, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

External links to an illegal content[edit]

These edits ([3],[4], and [5]) link to the content of a private phone call (of a former French minister). Making public such a private phone call is illegal in France, and, in any case must be considered as a copyvio. I have reverted the two first edits (this is not the only reason of my reverts). I have not found in WP page whether such a link addition must be rev-deleted. If they should, please do it. The last edit is a post in a talk page. It is easy to rev-delete it, as, up to now, nobody answered it. Also, the IP user that authored the post is clearly a sockpuppet of the editor of the two first edits, and probably also of the subject of the article who has a long history of sockpuppetry, mainly in French Wikipedia (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Brancojuan/Archive and Juan Branco#Self-promotion on Wikipedia). So, there is no problem to delete this post. D.Lazard (talk) 13:42, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

D.Lazard If content on Wikipedia violates a law, probably the Foundation should be contacted as well though here. 331dot (talk) 14:15, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Can a user delete his own talk page?[edit]

Hi Everyone,

I am curious to know: Can a user who is the creator of the articles, is liable to delete XFD notices from his own talk page? like this. Priyanjali singh (talk) 15:00, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Priyanjali singh, welcome to the Teahouse. If it's their own talk page then yes that's fine, and is usually seen as an indication that they've read the messages. Regards, Zindor (talk) 15:15, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Zindor:, Thank you for your quick response. Priyanjali singh (talk) 15:17, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I need help from an admin/someone who knows how to help[edit]

I know I've made a post here before, but I think I'm gonna need some real help now, I've been debating on the interracial marriage wiki and its clear to me that someone is here to abuse report, but I'm not sure what to do because I also suspect them of sock puppeting, but I might be wrong and I might just have to take it to a Dispute Resolution, I don't wanna do something thats going to get me into trouble because I love editing wiki and I'm so glad I'm part of this community which I have trust in, I just want some help on this situation because I think its way over my head -- Toby Mitches (talk) 15:33, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Is there a way to report disrespectful language[edit]

This seems over the line: "As I said earlier, Colin, you're talking out of your backside. --RexxS (talk) 12:53, 3 October 2020 (UTC)" from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine#Vitamin_D_and_COVID-19 Jaredroach (talk) 15:39, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Jaredroach. I believe I take a pretty intolerant view of bad language and aggressive behaviour towards other editors on Wikipedia, but I do not find that anything other than blunt, plain speaking when arguing a point. ColinFine is a long-standing Host here, and I think if he felt there was ever anything inappropriate in what RexxS said, he would tell him directly. A balance has to be struck between forceful argument on the one hand and harassment/abuse/aggression/obscenity on the other. This was nowhere near the latter and just robust discussion. That said, if you do ever encounter one editor directly abusing another editor - or both abusively exchanging insults - you can, if you feel so minded warn one or both of them using a standard template, although I've found simply going to the editor(s) talk page(s) and directly expressing disappointment that one person has felt the need to abuse another is itself a sensible way to raise an issue. Were it to continue, then reporting one or both editors (with WP:DIFFS) to WP:ANI might be appropriate. It is important that we work to maintain and enhance standards of editor interaction - especially where minority groups are concerned - so your concern is appreciated, if perhaps misplaced on this occasion.. See WP:HARASS for more information. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:36, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Er ... I wasn't involved in this discussion, Nick. I think you meant to ping Colin But FWIW I agree with you. --ColinFine (talk) 16:52, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Jaredroach, I also agree with Nick Moyes, that's great advice for you to follow. Earlier i left a gentle note on the UTP of the admin in question, but I give my opinion more freely than would be advisable. I'd just add that on some occasions it's sensible to give an established editor some time to come back and correct themselves, without any intervention. It does happen and it's great when it does. Zindor (talk) 17:36, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Oh dear. Must have totally read one thing and thought of another. (You're the only Colin in my world - that must be it! LOL) Nick Moyes (talk) 19:54, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Translation[edit]

Hi there. I am new as a user here.

I have done a translation of a page in Spanish using SDL Trados Studio 2019 software and would like to submit it. I had a look at the Translating into English page but would like some help as I find it a bit confusing. The translation has saved with the original format and is saved as a Chrome HTML document.

Thanks in advance. Click-Interpreting (talk) 15:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

You'll need to save your draft in Wikipedia format, see Help:Your first article, taking note of the other advice at WP:Translation. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:55, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

image question[edit]

I'm new in this Wikipedia Family. I just wanted to know, how to add the celebrity's Main Image in Wikipedia ? Ken Tony Peter (talk) 17:26, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Ken Tony Peter, Have you uploaded the image through WP:FUW or at the Commons. If not, then you need to upload the image first (taking care of its copyright related issues and licenses) and then you may add it in any article. See WP:UPIMAGE to see how to add images in any article. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 18:13, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Starting a new article[edit]

Hello,

I am a new user. I wish to start a new article about an Israeli poet named "Shlomo Laufer" I understand that there is something wrong with the way i posted my references. The user "TheAafi" have declined my submission. This article is merely a translation for the standing article about the same person in Wikipedia Hebrew. I added a link to that article. Since the person at hand have published his work in Hebrew newspapers and journals, together with the fact that he has no affiliation with the Academia, i don't have any English peer reviewed work to show for his behalf. His Hebrew Wikipedia article has many references and external links, to serve for the credibility of his work.

What should i do differently in the references? Can i use Word referencing tool and convert the file for use into Wikipedia?

Thanks, --Akarniel (talk) 18:43, 3 October 2020 (UTC) Akarniel (talk) 18:43, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Akarniel, Dear friend, you need to add inline citations which help to verify whether each statement is rightly verifiable or not. Citing Wikipedia articles is not fine. See WP:REFB as I suggested while declining the submission, and then fix the citations in the draft and click "resubmit" and it would be reviewed again by any AfC reviewer. Regards. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 18:57, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Be aware that each language Wiki has its own criteria for what qualifies as notability.It is possible that Shlomo Laufer does not meet the standard for English Wikipedia even though an article exists in Hebrew. David notMD (talk) 21:43, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

how to deal with false accusations in deletion suggestion page?[edit]

My edits have been struck here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Srila_Bhaktivedanta_Narayana_Gosvami_Maharaja

I understand that repetitive comments are not useful; but the third strike through does not make sense to me.

In my view it seems like it is acceptable to make false accusations of socket puppetry and to repeat the suggestion for deletion as Berrely appears to have done, but I can not counteract false accusations by commenting? Is it because it was labeled **Keep** and I should have labeled it **comment**? Can I comment on the false accusation? And Eddie891 says I should focus on content and not contributors...well, I am. I commenting on content of the deletion suggestions. I guess Eddie891 means focus on the content of the wiki page itself? Source-of-inspiration (talk) 18:53, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Source-of-inspiration:, As, Eddie891 noted here that they Struck and un-bolded four duplicate !votes. You should remember that in AfDs we only vote once and if we change our opinion, we struck our earlier vote by adding <s> and </s> at the start and end of our earlier vote. You are right that, these got struck because they were labelled as "Keep" while they should've been labelled as "Comment". ─ The Aafī (^talk) 19:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

OH! they should have been labeled as comment? That makes sense. Eddie891 just struck all three today. One more question, am I allowed to label them as comment now? Thanks for your support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:D40F:7000:25E1:D526:4931:569C (talk) 19:12, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Source-of-inspiration:, 2605:E000:D40F:7000:25E1:D526:4931:569C You may do so, but I would suggest to leave them as they are now because the comment hasn't been strucked and is rightly there. I would advice you to read the COAL essay, which I regard as one of most helpful essays over here. Once you vote you an AfD, just leave the room. That's it until you think it is necessary to enter the room again. You can look my similar "insisting behavior" here. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 19:29, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

That AfD is a mess, and it's entirely the fault of "keep" !voters who want to argue after having WP:GNG and WP:RS explained to them. If I cared more, I would !vote "delete" just to spite the people making a mess of that page. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:02, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@TheAafi: Please also see WP:NOTVOTE. XfD discussions are not a vote. Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:26, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

This article looks like it can be deleted[edit]

It looks like this article qualifies for deletion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_with_unsourced_statements_from_October_2005, can you help me delete it? Mariaramgon (talk) 19:51, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Mariaramgon, hello & welcome, what precisely would you like to know? Celestina007 (talk) 19:53, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Update: Category now deleted by another admin. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:57, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Where can I report a user not using the edit summary?[edit]

Where can I report a user not using the edit summary? This is his/her chronic behavior already.
Special:Contributions/Sea29
It is very annoying that he is not responding to any messages left on his/her talk page. HiwilmsTalk 20:36, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Hiwilms:, I guess we do not have any procedural guidelines about this? Once I gave same warning to someone and they happily removed it from their talk page saying that they're highly contributing to the encyclopedia and continued using no edit summaries. WP:FIES doesn't say anything such either. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 20:51, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Hiwilms. Ideally, every edit should have an edit summary that explains why it was made, but the reality is that many don’t. Sometimes it might be obvious as to why an edit was made, but other times it won’t. Not providing an edit summary might be the kind of thing that is brought up as part of a broader discussion about an editor when there are other more serious problems with there edits, but I don’t think your going to have much success at a place like WP:ANI if that’s the only problem.

If you come across edits that you think are clearly problems per some Wikipedia policy and guideline and you can fix them, then feel free to be WP:BOLD and do so; just make sure you leave an edit summary explaining why. If you’re not sure, then you can ask for clarification about the edit on the concerned article’s talk page and see what others think. Whether the editor who made the edit decides to participate in any such discussion is up to them, but they won’t be able to ignore a WP:CONSENSUS established by such a discussion.

Editors aren’t required to respond to posts you leave on their user talk pages; of course, it’s often helpful when they do, but they’re not obligated to do so. If, however, they’re “notified” about something, choosing not to respond doesn’t mean they’re not responsible for their edits. If you find they keeping repeating the same problems over and over again, you can seek input from an administrator, either by posting on an administrator’s user talk page or at one of the administrator noticeboards. — Marchjuly (talk) 21:44, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

While there is no designated place to report someone for this, as shown by above responses, there are user warnings for it. They are: {{subst:Uw-editsummary}} (for newer users) and {{subst:Summary2}}. When you put these on a user talkpage, remember to take the parts out of it in the source code that says "nowiki." Ghinga7 (talk) 23:17, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Hiwilms: I can see your point about the "chronic" lack of edit summaries by Sea29. Of their 7,300+ contributions, c.94% have no edit summary (check here), and I see that over the years this has been raised with them on half a dozen occasions. As an administrator, I do find this a little concerning, though they do now seem to be editing in good faith. However, I don't think you were at all fair in leaving your latest request for them to use edit summaries and then coming here just 11 minutes later to complain they have not responded. It is respectful to give people a bit more time than that! I was pleased to see that they did attempt to improve the use of edit summaries after being rather firmly reminded by another editor last May, though their performance has rather dropped off again since, which is a shame. Edit summaries really are helpful - both for other editors and for oneself when trying to differentiate between past edits. You know, they may not even be aware that it is possible to change their Preferences here so that they are prompted whenever they forget to include one. Nobody seems to have ever told them that. (I have this option ticked, and I find it really useful.) I will, however, keep an eye on their edits and their talk page and see if things improve in the future, before perhaps giving them a slightly firmer reminder, as it's clear a number of other editors have found the lack of summaries quite irritating. Let's hope things improve. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:23, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Soul Button Page[edit]

I want to get an article published about a Berlin-based DJ, but I was only able to create it as a draft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Soul_Button) and it looks like it will take a while before anything happens with it. What can I do to speed it up? Monwiki1001 (talk) 23:07, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Monwiki1001. There is nothing you can do to hasten our team of volunteers, except perhaps ensure that their job is made easier. Some articles get reviewed very quickly, but with a 3,500+ backlog, others can take 2 months or more. To be frank, when revewiers encounter promotional, non-encyclopaedic waffle like "After deepening his knowledge and now having gained a vast array of experience in the music industry, it was only natural for the culmination of his own label." or "Having cemented himself firmly in the scene, Soul Button maintains focus on the continuous growth and development of his labels as well as his own personal career" they're liable either to move on to something easier, or simply glance at the sources and reject it on the basis of failing to meet our notability criteria (see WP:NMUSIC), and lack of any independent, in-depth sources. So, you should look at our notability criteria for musicians and assess whether or not Soul Button meets them. Your task is to ensure sources show that he does. Work on that and perhaps then cut out the waffle - that way you might stand a chance of speeding things up. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:35, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@Monwiki1001: You submitted before the draft was ready for review. How do I know? Because the sources are all either "first party" sources, sources which are designed to promote the subject you are writing about, or sources that only give minor coverage to the subject. Please read WP:Notability, WP:Notability (people), WP:Notability (music), WP:Independent sources, WP:Reliable sources, WP:Biographies of living persons, WP:Citing sources, and at least skim WP:What Wikipedia is not before continuing. Also, as others have noted, remove anything that sounds "promotional." davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:47, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Nothing. However, if you do nothing, it's going to fail, and for two reasons. First, it's almost completely unsourced. Secondly, it doesn't resemble an encyclopedia article; it's instead like a publicity release. Random quote: Christian’s passion and love for electronic music started when he first listened to Kraftwerk. Growing up in a country [Italy] where everyone only listened to Italian pop music, Christian stayed true to his taste in music. Not just passion, not just love, but passion and love. And if everyone in Italy (tens of millions of them) only listened to Italian pop music, then -- choosing a name at random: Luigi Nono -- is Nono's work "pop music", or is this website merely addressing readers of Italian outside Italy, or what? Therefore: (i) remove all the hyperbole, (ii) back up with reliable, independent sources everything that can be backed up, (iii) remove the rest, (iv) be patient. -- Hoary (talk) 00:45, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Rejected and nominated for Speedy deletion. David notMD (talk) 08:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

I added Intext citations: How can I get someone to look at the edited site?[edit]

I added intext citations to the following: How can I get someone to look at the edited site and remove the alert that it needs them? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Miriam_Herrera

Thank you! ChupaRosaAmorcito (talk) 00:42, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, I could; but if I did then I'd add some other template about how independent sources are needed. Moreover, the page worries me. I see who she is and what she has done; what I don't see is what impact it has had -- and it's a reliably sourced description of impact that a biographical article needs in order to demonstrate notability. -- Hoary (talk) 00:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

How do you add a picture to a Wikipedia page?[edit]

Hello, I wanted to know how to add a picture to a wikipedia page. I would like to add images to two different pages. Can you help/advise? Amyatinfinitymoguls (talk) 04:32, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

If an image isn't already in either Wikimedia Commons or English-language Wikipedia, then if it's either in the public domain (with its legal meaning, which doesn't correspond to what various dictionaries say) or copyleft via one of the licenses that Wikimedia Commons recognizes, upload it to Wikimedia Commons; if on the other hand you want to use it by a claim of "fair use", check in Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline to see if this really applies, and if it does, then upload it to English-language Wikipedia. Once the picture is at either Wikimedia Commons or English-language Wikipedia, then please see Help:Pictures. -- Hoary (talk) 04:44, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi protected[edit]

Please tell me how to edit semi protected pages Eroberar (talk) 06:44, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Eroberar. You have two choices. You can wait until your account is autoconfirmed, or you can file a properly formatted edit request on the article's talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:50, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

To edit semiprotected pages you must become autoconfirmed, which means your account is 4 days old and you have made 10 edits. For you, this means doing 4 more edits and waiting 3 days or so (occasionally there is some lag in updating your user rights). Giraffer ^munch 07:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Be aware that semi-protected articles tend to have editors who are avid watchers of every change. As a new editor, you are likely to be reverted for making a change that has already been proposed and rejected in the past. I recommend you first look at the article's Talk pages to see past discussions. David notMD (talk) 08:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Can barnstars be awarded to IPs?[edit]

I know it is meant for editors, but sometimes I see really hardworking IPs who for some reason do not create an account. Are we allowed to give barnstars to IPs? HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 07:36, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello HalfdanRagnarsson. IPs are editors so there is nothing wrong with giving them barnstars. Also, barnstars are entirely unofficial, so you can give one to your puppy or your next door neighbor who has never edited Wikipedia if you want. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:41, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

I'll make that two chamomiles and some dog biscuits. Giraffer ^munch 08:05, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Artist profile[edit]

Hi been trying to create an artist profile for a friend in the industry, am new to wikipedia create page but not new to wikipedia(used resources from here over 10 years ago for my college project). I was able to follow some step and used the visual to create the profile/bio, however, after a while i gotten notifications that is flagging it down, that content are paid. My friend is willing to pay for it, if that is what it entails. would love to know how i can go about this and so he can have his profile of wikipedia like other Nigerian celebrities. Many thanks in anticipation. Smilejorge (talk) 10:07, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Smilejorge Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, I will inform you that Wikipedia does not have a single "profile". That is a social media term. Wikipedia has articles. Second, payment to the editor is not required for a Wikipedia article to exist, and if your friend does not pay you, then you don't need to declare as a paid editor, although you would need to declare a conflict of interest. If your friend intends to pay you, then the paid declaration is correct.

Your draft was deleted as promotional- and I agree that it was. That combined with your use of the term "profile" suggests to me that you have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. It is not social media to merely tell about a person. This is an encyclopedia, and as an encyclopedia Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of (in this case) a notable actress or notable creative professional. Not everyone in a given field merits a Wikipedia article. It depends on the coverage in independent sources completely unaffiliated with the subject. In essence, you need to forget everything you know about this person and only write based on the content of independent sources, and do so without embellishing language(such as "However, her first love was actually singing, which later paved way for her acting career. ") Please read Your First Article for more information. You may find using Articles for Creation helpful if you can do as I have described. 331dot (talk) 10:21, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Has the 3RR rule been broken here?[edit]

Hi there! An editor appears to be targeting some of the articles I've worked on, and I'm trying to get my bearings on what's okay and what is not okay. To start with can you advise me if the 3RR rule has been broken?

On 21 September 2020, between 21:07 and 22:06, one editor made eight reversions to the article on Andrew Hastie (politician), removing about 100,000 bytes of information, which you can see here. At the time I kind of accepted it and started working through the material on the talk page. But I'm starting to realise that, under wiki guidelines, that perhaps I shouldn't have quietly accepted it at all. That the "three-revert rule" means "an editor must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material, on a single page within a 24-hour period."

Should I have reported this? Should I now? Should I offer a warning?

I'd appreciate any advice. The Little Platoon (talk) 11:24, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

The Little Platoon, when you make an accusation against another editor, it's polite to notify them. I'll notify Onetwothreeip now. I see the deletions are explained in rather thorough edit summaries, and I'm inclined to agree that they were warranted. In any case, I don't see the 3RR rule as relevant, any more than it would be if they had deleted all the material in one edit rather than eight. What you should do now is discuss the deletions at the article's talk page. Maproom (talk) 11:42, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No, 8 consecutive edits count as one revert, even if all of them should revert previous edits, per WP:3RR: An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert. In addition, you are misreading the article history slightly: as can be seen here, one editor made a series of edits, not all of them reverts (and in each case explaining their edit) between 21:07 on 21 September and 22:06 on 22 September (UTC). You did the right thing by opening a discussion on the article talk page. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:48, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Dispute between editors appears to have spilled over to Tim Smith (Australian politician). Maybe it is something in the water (or beer) of Australia? David notMD (talk) 11:52, 4 October 2020 (UTC)