From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Saying hello to the community[edit]

Hi, just saying that I've been a user on Wikipedia for 19 or so years, but have only occasionally edited or added an article. I have never engaged with the community much, but recently I have intensified my Wikipedia work somewhat and thus wanted to introduce myself -- I'm Podstawko (Adam in real life), work in IT but have a wide variety of interests otherwise, actually I suffer from overfocusing on new interests and falling into various rabbit holes. I would love to contribute to Wikipedia much more than I have so far. My contributions are split between Polish and English wikipedias, so I'll be building my reputation 2x slower than an average English contributor :) Some tips on where most help is needed would be welcome, I guess Wikipedia:Backlog is one of the places to go, any other hints? In any case, hello and happy to be a part of the Wikipedia Community! Podstawko (talk) 09:32, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, back! Even though you've been around for 19 years, welcome to the English Wikipedia, Podstawko. As far as what to do, you could check the Task center, and I also encourage you to sign up with or visit the project pages for various WP:WikiProjects, which will give you some ideas of things that need doing. Finally, there's User:SuggestBot, which will suggest some articles that may be of interest to you, based on your past editing history. Good luck! Mathglot (talk) 09:47, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
When I first got stuck into editing, I checked out SPECIAL:HOMEPAGE which you can set up and it gives you suggested articles to improve on varying levels of difficulty. Qcne (talk) 10:05, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As you are multilingual, you might want to have a look at pages needing translation; I am sure we have some articles which have been translated from Polish, and need some sprucing up. Example: Paprzyca coat of arms. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 11:03, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Mathglot and Lectonar. Thank you for the tips; I have already bookmarked User:SuggestBot, Wikipedia:Task Center, Wikipedia:WikiProject and SPECIAL:HOMEPAGE, and based on Lectonar's advice I started looking into the translation needs and even suggested one of the new articles... for deletion! (Which is a first for me.) Exciting! Thank you again and I'm looking forward to contribute much more. Podstawko (talk) 13:20, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello! Professor Penguino (talk) 18:43, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello! Podstawko (talk) 20:51, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Welcome back to Wikipedia! Davest3r08 (talk) 01:08, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you @Davest3r08! Podstawko (talk) 20:47, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem. Davest3r08 (talk) 16:42, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

is there software to auto-format wiki-references?[edit]

I see, that some editors are able to qucikly create cited references in a complex formate like [1] . I wonder, if they use software, which allows for such automativ formtating. Walter Tau (talk) 16:03, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to the Teashouse, Walter Tau! You can use RefToolbar for making advanced citations like this one.[2] Davest3r08 (talk) 11:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for all your suggestions. Unfortunately, all of them would be steps back for me: since I have an EndNote license, and since all my databases are stored on the EndNote platform, if makes sense for me to use EndNote to automatically generate citations in the wiki format. I am sure there are other wikipedians, who are paying for EndNote, and would love to take advantage of it while wiki-working. This brings us to the next question: is there someone, who actually works for Wikipedia Foundation, and who can make such formal request for a new Output Style to Clarivate= the current owner of EndNote.
The request can be placed here:
In order to request a new Output Style,the Journal Editor or Librarian would require to fill up a form and submit them directly.
They can use this form to request and include a new Output Style : .
The content team will then review and process them.
You can also refer to our Knowledge base Article to check here: for further details. Walter Tau (talk) 16:16, 22 September 2023 (UTC) Walter Tau (talk) 16:18, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Walter TauReply[reply]


  1. ^ US 4304825, Basu; Samar, "Rechargeable battery", issued 8 December 1981, assigned to Bell Telephone Laboratories 
  2. ^ Dehgan, Bijan (1 January 2023). Garden Plants Taxonomy: Volume 1: Ferns, Gymnosperms, and Angiosperms (Monocots). Springer Nature. p. 223. ISBN 978-3-031-11561-5. Retrieved 21 September 2023.
  • @Walter Tau : There are many Citation tools that can help with this. Personally, I use ProveIt for most of my citations. It isn't perfect, but a lot faster than inputting everything manually. —Kusma (talk) 16:08, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thank you very much for your reply. I suspected, that something like Citation tools existed, but I did not know, what they were called. I shall look the links you provided. Let's make wiki better together :) Walter Tau (talk) 16:14, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Walter Tau: I make heavy use of toolbars to input references using the DOI or URL. But for books I use a google books link, and I would have to manually add the page number. Then later I run citation bot to fix dates and fill some other identifiers. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:00, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Like @Graeme Bartlett, I have also found the toolbar to be sufficient for creating citations. — Mugtheboss (talk) 16:37, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your responses. I my real life outside wiki, I use EndNote to format references in documents. Unfortunately, Clarivate would not accept my request to make an EndNote reference style for wikipedia. However, if Wikipedia Foundation makes such a request (there is no fees involved), Clarivate would honor such request. How do I get Wiki to make such request?

Hello, Walter Tau. and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know if there is any way to do this, but the place to discuss it is at the village pump - not sure which section of it would be most appropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have also found that ChatGPT can convert a reference in text form to a templated wikitext form. However I do not know how reliable it is at that job as I have only done it a few times. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:35, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Walter Tau I am not sure if reFill is similar to what you are looking for, but I often use it myself to rapidly construct structured references from bare URLs. Hopefully it is of some use to you as well. ~Liancetalk 07:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I'm trying to write a page for the first time, how do I make so someone will be redirected to my page if they type in a certain word or phrase? Welcome back bro (talk) 22:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Welcome back bro: Welcome to the Teahouse! See the information at WP:Redirect. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:20, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the reply, so in the brackets of this: #REDIRECT [[target page name here]] Would I place the page I want to redirect to or the page I want to redirect from? If it's the page I want to redirect to, how do I get it to redirect from a certain word or phrase? Thank you! Welcome back bro (talk) 02:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Welcome back bro: There are several examples on WP:Redirect, such as the page Colour contains #REDIRECT [[Color]], which redirects you to the article called Color. GoingBatty (talk) 02:44, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Welcome back bro I see that you are working on Draft:Steklyannaya Garmonika (Film) and it may be that you are wondering how in future there could be a redirect to this from its English translation of "Glass Harmonica". This will be slightly more complicated than a simple redirect, as there is already an article at Glass harmonica. However, if I were you I wouldn't worry about that at present: concentrate on producing a decent article that meets our notability requirements at WP:NFILM. Redirects and disambiguation pages come later. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:31, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the reply, if you think my draft is ready now I'd like to figure out the redirect situation. You were right before, I am trying to redirect to the article if someone searches "glass harmonica" Welcome back bro (talk) 22:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The draft was moved, this is the current version: Draft:Steklyannaya Garmonika - Wikipedia Welcome back bro (talk) 02:57, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Process of removing Templates?[edit]


While I know the process for removing templates like AfD are usually talk page discussions, or removing maintenance templates tends to be a best judgement - what is the process for removing more intense templates like Undisclosed Paid?

An example: I'd like to fix any of the issues with the Cloud Native Computing Foundation article, since it has had an Undisclosed Paid template since 2020. I'm not affiliated with CNCF nor have I ever contributed to CNCF's projects but I think open source work is important (and so is having accurate, unbiased Wiki articles). However, if I do spend time contributing to cleaning up the article and making sure it is more NPOV do I need to open discussion on the talk page for the Undisclosed Paid template to be removed?

No worries if there isn't concrete guidelines on this sort of thing. Just genuinely curious. Thanks! Lightcrowd (talk) 01:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Lightcrowd. You should try to analyze the article history, identify the likely undisclosed paid editors, and take a careful look at their contributions. Remove any promotional content and remove sources that are not reliable, along with content referencd to such sources unless you can find better ones. I think posting on the article talk page is a good idea. Once you have allowed a few days for comments, go ahead and remove the tag if no one disagrees. Cullen328 (talk) 03:32, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the advice! Lightcrowd (talk) 09:24, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
PDX5354 is the creator of the article and author of nearly all prose on the current page. Their talk page says that "they have been paid by The Rust Foundation for their contributions to Wikipedia" so you'll need to go through the whole article minus the "Cilium" and "Istio" sections. Good luck, Lightcrowd! Rjjiii(talk) 08:32, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Awesome, thanks for the help. This actually helps a lot, I know it means a much larger re-write than I was hoping but at least I have a starting point! Lightcrowd (talk) 09:25, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Lightcrowd: Just to be clear, I think Cullen328 suggested a thorough verification but not necessarily a thorough rewrite. The problem with COI editing (of which UPI is the ugliest part) is that the author might (on purpose, or unintentionally) cast the subject in a favorable light. It does not mean all output of COI editing should be thrown into the trash without thinking; you can keep the parts that are neutrally written without modifications. You might even decide to remove the tag without making a single edit to the article if you have reviewed it and are satisfied that there are no problems. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 13:18, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Awesome! Thanks for the expansion. I'll try to review it at some point this week and determine what, if anything, needs to be changed for this to have an NPOV.
Thanks again for all of your help :) Lightcrowd (talk) 18:58, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How should citations to the Talmud be formatted?[edit]

I want to clean up and improve citations to the Talmud, but I don't know how to acccomodate the traditional citation system within Wikipedia's templates.

Background: References to the Talmud invariably mean the Talmud Bavli, the Babylonian Talmud, although it might be specifically identified as such to avoid potential ambiguity. There is another work called the Jerusalem Talmud, which would usually be identified as such. I don't propose to address citation to the Jerusalem Talmud at present, because it's a less standardised system.

Citations to the Babylonian Talmud consist of a volume name, e.g. Bava Batra, and followed by a folio/side number, such as 91a or 12b. This uses the pagination of the standard text, the Vilna Edition Shas. There are many modern editions of this work by different publishers, and several translations. The original (Aramaic) text is almost always identical across editions, but the translations are of course different.

Consequently, it seems to me that a correct citation to the Babylonian Talmud would include:

Where the reference is to the original text:

  • The book: Talmud Bavli or Bablylonian Talmud
  • The volume: Bava Batra or whatever
  • The folio reference: 91a, 12b, or whatever

Additionally, where the reference is to a translation, or a particular edition of the original text:

  • Publisher
  • Name of edition
  • and (possibly) Translator

And of course if the work is online:

  • URL

So a complete reference IMO would be something like:

Talmud Bavli, Bava Batra 91a, The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud,

The particular problems I have had are distinguishing between the title of the text ("Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra") and the title of the edition ("William Davidson Digital Edition"), as well as using the name of a volume ("Bava Batra") rather than a number ("7"). Any suggestions as to how I can best accommodate this within (e.g.) Wikipeda's template:Cite book would be appreciated. Joe in Australia (talk) 06:02, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Joe in Australia. Does Template:Cite Talmud work for you? Concidentally, my wife and I were married in San Francisco 42 years ago by Rabbi Joseph Asher, who spent seven years in Australia during and immediately after World War II, before coming to the United States. Cullen328 (talk) 06:12, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, Cullen328. I wasn’t aware of that template, so thanks! It does solve part of my problem (standardising bare references to the Talmud) but it doesn’t seem to provide a way to link to an online copy. How would one go about proposing an amendment, just suggest it in the talk page? Would I get in trouble if I edited the template to add e.g. fields for an URL and publication data? Alternatively, is there a way to combine two Template:cites in one reference? Joe in Australia (talk) 09:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Joe in Australia Template:Cite Talmud/testcases has examples with associated URL. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Submission review to Mainspace[edit]

Can I move a draft that I have submitted for review to mainspace before the review process? If yes, I need to remove the Draft and AfC tags from the article before moving it, right? Also will there by any other entries that I need to make changes on w.r.t my submission. Draft:Suresh Selvarajan. Jeraxmoira (talk) 06:24, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jeraxmoira Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Unless you have much experience having drafts accepted, it is highly recommended that you allow the review process to play out. It's even more important to use the process if you have a conflict of interest. It's better to find out problems with the draft first, rather than later as an article. However, if you are confident the draft would survive a hypothetical Articles for Deletion discussion, you are probably fine to move it. 331dot (talk) 06:31, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the reply. The article was created forward and I am sure it passes GNG. I am more concerned about the stray entries that it may leave behind because of the submission review. From the 'What links here' page [2] I can see a lot links. Is there a bot to clean up the entries after I move it? Or should I do it myself? Example: Wikipedia:AfC sorting & User:SDZeroBot/Pending AfC submissions. Please advise <3 Jeraxmoira (talk) 07:05, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would be more concerned about whether the draft establishes that the subject is notable. I haven't checked all the references, but those that I did check either weren't independent of the subject, or lacked extensive discussion of him. Maproom (talk) 07:40, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have replied here here regarding WP:N. Jeraxmoira (talk) 08:13, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
please note that interviews are NOT reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 08:20, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Given that this is your first effort at creating an article. I strongly recommend going through AfC versus moving it to mainspace. The latter path could result in the article moved back to draft or even nominated for deletion as part of the New Pages Patrol process. David notMD (talk) 11:00, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I already have two articles in main space and they were created directly. I wanted to know how the review process worked and that's why I submitted this one. Per the discussion here, I guess it doesn't exactly pass GNG but still goes through on WP:CREATIVE Jeraxmoira (talk) 12:01, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Apologies, I missed that in looking at your history of edits. There is a backlog of ~4,000 submitted AfC draft, but the system is not a queue. Reviewers pick what they want to do next. So, could be days, weeks, or sadly, months. Per comments by Theroadislong, consider trying to strengthen refs while waiting for a review. I note that refs 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 are about one film, so you have little on other parts of his career. David notMD (talk) 13:47, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for the inputs, I am working on expanding the article further. Just a question here, WP:CREATIVE is applicable even when its only about one particular notable film/ body of work, right? Do reviewers accept an article when it fails GNG but passes WP:CREATIVE? Or is WP:CREATIVE only used as a point on AfDs Jeraxmoira (talk) 04:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jeraxmoira, there are a few subject-specific notability guidelines which "override" WP:GNG, but WP:NCREATIVE is not one of them. (talk) 13:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help for improving article[edit]

Draft:Shine Shetty for this article. How can I add good and reliable resources? Arumobileworld (talk) 11:16, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pinging the declining reviewer, Jamiebuba. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 11:41, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not the reviewer, but I'll have a go at giving advice. In order for there to be a Wikipedia page about an actor, they need to have passed the WP:NACTOR criteria. However most of your sources are The Times of India, which is generally regarded as an unreliable source for entertainment news articles, see WP:TOI. I would want to see significant coverage of Shine Shetty in reliable, independent (not interviews or press releases) sources. Qcne (talk) 12:16, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
After having a look, 1. I determined that the subject has only played minor roles in most of the movies he has been on. Apart from him winning the Bigg Boss Kannada season 7 there sourcing for the article is poor. He maybe notable but again the sourcing is a problem.
2. The sources used are generally unreliable as cited by another editor above. Jamiebuba (talk) 14:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
its ok (talk) 21:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sandbox question[edit]

I have no idea how to create a new sandbox page (mind you, not DELETE it, but create second one.) Help!!!!!!!!!! UnexpectedSmoreInquisition (talk) 17:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@UnexpectedSmoreInquisition One way is to create a redlink and then click on that. So User:UnexpectedSmoreInquisition/Newsandbox would do the trick. There should be a forward slash (/) after your username and before the name you wish to use. Note that clicking the link I made here also provides the link to the Help Page.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:26, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Much obliged. UnexpectedSmoreInquisition (talk) 17:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(edit conflict × 2) after 2 edit conflicts I'll just add that the guideline for creating subpages is WP:SUB, and it says that you can freely make subpages of your own user page. So you can put it pretty much anywhere you like under your user page, e.g. User:UnexpectedSmoreInquisition/sandbox2 - Astrophobe (talk) 17:32, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
though @UnexpectedSmoreInquisition, please note that other sandboxes do not show up on the top bar like your main sandbox User:UnexpectedSmoreInquisition/sandbox, so you may want to leave a link somewhere like that sandbox or your userpage so you don't lose it. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can't really lose a user subpage. If you go to Special:Contributions and scroll all the way to the bottom, the first link in the navigation box after the username is titled "Subpages", and will show a list of pages in the user's space, like Special:PrefixIndex/User:Melecie/ or Special:PrefixIndex/User:UnexpectedSmoreInquisition/. Folly Mox (talk) 04:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
true, but I think it's still better to keep it stored somewhere just so it's easy to access it. 💜  melecie  talk - 06:54, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Melecie@Folly Mox Thank you both for contributing, I agree on both of your inputs and will utilize those methods going forward. Cheers! UnexpectedSmoreInquisition (talk) 11:01, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I found what appears to be pretty balant vandalism on under the section of CIA and music composition while reading the page.

I was trying to find a wiki project to bring attention to this page but it appears the Cold War wikiproject is dead.

Could I get some assistance in this regard? AevumNova (talk) 19:35, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It looks like the revision is no longer in the page, but I might suggest asking an administrator on their talk page (say, one of these) if this warrants WP:RVDL. - Astrophobe (talk) 20:09, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Astrophobe I don't think REVDEL is quite warranted in this instance.
However, AevumNova, you could easily have reverted the vandalism yourself, simply by going to the View History tab and seeing the table of edits (most recent at the top). Each one has an 'undo' link next to it, and you are free to revert a damaging edit. It helps to leave a brief edit summary like "rv vandalism" to explain why you are undoing the previous edit. You are free to warn an editor if you remove a bad edit (though it's too late to worry about that now in this instance). You can use TWINKLE to make leaving templated messages quicker and easier. There's guidance on dealing with vandalism at WP:RVAN. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! I'm still very confused by a lot of wikipedia policies so I greatly appreciate your help! AevumNova (talk) 20:34, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AevumNova No worries. Note: it has been suggested to me that my advice about REVDEL in this instance could have been incorrect (see here). As always, there can be misunderstandings or misinterpretations of policies. But as long as we all work 'in good faith' we all live and learn for next time. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:09, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Richardo Keens-Douglas[edit]

Hello - I would like to submit an article about children's author/playwright Richardo Keens-Douglas. Would you consider him notable enough for Wikipedia? (talk) 00:46, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I recommend you read WP:NOTABILITY. --Stewpot (TᴳRᴴAᴼIˢNᵀ)-(Cₛ) 00:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, IP editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. To clarify Stewpot's answer: I don't think they are suggesting that Keens-Douglas is or isn't notable, rather than it's your job as the person who wants to write the article to determine whether they meet the criteria.
If you read the policy, and think you've found suitable sources, but you're not sure, then I suggest you come back here with your three best sources, and somebody will probably be willing to look at them and tell you if they think they're enough. (Remember that notability, in Wikipedia's sense, is all about sources, not about what the subject is or has done). ColinFine (talk) 08:56, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for taking the time to break it down for me. Much appreciated. (talk) 23:40, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello IP user. I recommend you read WP:SIGCOV and WP:N. From a single Google search, there seems to be 9 results for media coverage, and they seem to be from mostly unreliable sources, thus making coverage of this person ineligible for a WP article. Davest3r08 (talk) 16:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so much! (talk) 23:40, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem. Davest3r08 (talk) 10:58, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

'Semantic Web Tags' and 'Wiki Markup' should I use a combination, or Wiki Markup exclusively?[edit]

September 19, 2023

To: Wiki Community TeaHouse: Question about 'Semantic Web Tags' and 'Wiki Markup'


Titled: Draft: List of Greek New Testament Print Editions (16th century)

I'm in the process of making a Wiki Page and I'm not quite sure how to handle 'Semantic Web Tags' and 'Wiki Mark Up'. I'm making a Bibliographic Index which is, basically, Bibliographic Citation Data, broken up into its components with each part of the citation in individual table cells so a person can search by any component. There is one citation per row. An example would be that a person can search by date, or by publisher etc.

I read that WikiData's web-bots crawl all the content of Wikipedia each night to extract usable data, especially links.

To cooperate with this goal, I took the trouble to add 'Semantic Web Tags' to all the citation components. After this was completed, I discovered that Wikipedia uses an entirely different method: 'Wiki Mark Up'.

My question is: Should I strip out all my Semantic Web Tags, and go with Wiki Markup exclusively, or should I leave the Semantic Web Tags in and use an alternate tag for the prohibited <a> tag?

Additional Facts:

I noticed that in the 'Edit Source' mode, the Wiki Markup, ignores the Semantic Web Tags, except for a few prohibited ones, such as the <a> tag but I could use an alternate tag for <a>.

Here is an example of my 'Editor' Cell with Semantic Web Tags [Oops!, when I copy and pasted it into this box, all my Semantic Web Tags are gone. Click on the 'Source' tab above to see them.]:

de Cisneros, Francisco Jiménez




And here is the Wikipedia 'Edit Source' cell content [Oops!, when I copy and pasted it into this box, all my Semantic Web Tags are gone. Click on the 'Source' tab above to see them.]:


| <span property="foaf:person" resource=""><span property="foaf:family_name"><span property="foaf:givenname"><span property="schema:additionalName"><span property="gndo:dateOfBirth"><span property="gndo:dateOfDeath"><span property="schema:editor" resource="">de Cisneros, Francisco Jiménez</span></span></span></span></span></span></span>

 [http://Francisco_Jim%C3%A9nez_de_Cisneros Wiki-ID]

 [ OCLC]

And here is the same cell with all the 'Semantic Web Tags' removed:

 | de Cisneros,  Francisco Jiménez (1436-1517)

 [http://Francisco_Jim%C3%A9nez_de_Cisneros Wiki-ID]

 [ OCLC]

As you can see, a lot of detailed information is lost when I remove the Semantic Web Tags. I was thinking that if I can use a combination of Semantic Web Tags and Wiki Markup, then the WikiData bots will be able to harvest a lot more information.

Any advice and guidance you could provide would be appreciated.

sincerely Robert Crawford user: Th74

19 Sept. 2023 Th74 (talk) 02:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

information Note: wrapped code onto {{pre}} and nowiki 💜  melecie  talk - 03:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Melecie: I haven't read all that. In a Wikipedia article, you should never use <a href="...">. If the link is to another Wikipedia article, you should use a "wikilink", with double square brackets. If it's to a published source elsewhere, you should instead cite the source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.   Maproom (talk) 07:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maproom, Melecie edited the OP's post; they're aren't the OP. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 08:57, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can't tell if a certain page is published or not[edit]

I'm currently working on a draft (Draft:Steklyannaya Garmonika (Film) - Wikipedia) because I believed there was no page existing for the movie. If you type the name of the movie in Wikipedia it says the page does not exist. Somehow, I came across this: Glass Harmonica (cartoon) - Wikipedia which has a "current" and a "stable" version, whatever that means. Trying to search for this specific page yields nothing, but the page doesn't say that it is a draft too. What is this page, and does its existence change anything about my plans for my own draft? Welcome back bro (talk) 02:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hi @Welcome back bro and welcome to the Teahouse! the existing article is on the Russian Wikipedia, which is pretty much its own project separate from the English Wikipedia, and is on Russian instead of English. if you couldn't search it here in the English Wikipedia, it probably doesn't exist here so it's still alright for you to make your draft even if there's an existing article in another language. the "current" and "stable" versions refer to whether a certain revision is patrolled, which if I understand it correctly is a process that does exist in the English Wikipedia though in a different and less restrictive form (we only patrol new pages, and while we also do have a similar system of pending changes, it only affects some articles, not all of them). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 03:00, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Welcome back bro Your search led you to one of the other-language versions of an article about that film. The links between these versions are stored in Wikidata, specifically for that film here. Knowing this might help with your draft because it reveals that there are also versions in Dutch and Polish. Any one of these might suggest sources. Once your draft is accepted into English Wikipedia, it too should be linked to Q3124959. Meanwhile I suggest you read MOS:PLOT as I think the section on the plot you currently have, at ~900 words, is a bit too long. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm back after 15 years, and I have a question about removing edits[edit]

I used this account when I was a little boy. I just recovered it and logged in for the first time in 15 years. This is cool.

I looked through my old edits, and I saw one in which I shared some information that I shouldn't have. Live and learn, it was over half a lifetime ago. Is there a way that a moderator can completely remove an edit, as if it never existed, such that others can't see it by looking through an edit history?

Thanks. Chesslover96 (talk) 03:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Chesslover96. Please read Wikipedia:Oversight. Cullen328 (talk) 03:32, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello @Chesslover96, welcome back, and welcome to the Teahouse.
It is possible for the admins to hide any edits a user has made (e.g. privacy or offensive edits). Please see WP:OS. Regards. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 03:34, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wow, thanks @Midori No Sora! I just sent the Oversight Team an email.
By the way, cool username! What do you think is the best way to start editing again after a long break? Chesslover96 (talk) 03:43, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can check the Task Center for things to do. --Stewpot (TᴳRᴴAᴼIˢNᵀ)-(Cₛ) 03:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Chesslover96: Welcome back! If you're interested in editing articles about chess, you might be interested in working on resolving issues on the Cleanup listing for articles in WikiProject Chess. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you haven't, I recommend you brush up on how to add references (WP:TUTORIAL). Adding good refs is essential these days. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

want to create page for a company[edit]

hello my name is Dean Jones and I am from the shopping spout company. Shopping spout is US based company which are providing free coupon codes and promo codes for shopping lovers. I am handling this project and we have targeting top 10 countries with the same name and different TLDs. Is there any one who help me out to creating wiki page. Deanjones12 (talk) 04:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC) – spam link removed ltbdl (talk) 04:09, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Deanjones12: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest you read the essay Wikipedia:When your boss tells you to edit Wikipedia. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 04:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so much for sharing is there any thing i can add related to coupon codes website? Deanjones12 (talk) 04:21, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Deanjones12. It sounds like you might be misunderstanding some important things about Wikipedia. In addition, to the information provided about, you might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. The last two are particularly important since any information you try add about your company to Wikipedia is almost certainly going to be considered a conflict of interest and also fall under Wikipedia's policy on paid editing. If after reading those pages, you still feel Wikipedia should have an article about your company, feel free to come back to the Teahouse and ask additional questions. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thank you so much i have read all the articles which you shared with me. I have seen Retail me not page on Wikipedia retail me not are providing same services which my company are providing so that's why i am here to ask why i can't add if retail me not exist any specific reason? Deanjones12 (talk) 04:39, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
????? ltbdl (talk) 04:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That question should have been answered by Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), which states A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is presumed notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. If such sources exist for the company you work for (like they do for Retailmenot - scroll down to the bottom of that article for the list), an article is acceptable. However, if such sources do not exist, an article may not be included. Tollens (talk) 05:01, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ok some of sources is mentioned but all of those is publications of retail me not Deanjones12 (talk) 05:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Only one of the 23 sources listed is published by Retailmenot. Tollens (talk) 05:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
yes i have read but can you suggest me how i can add any similar site which is related to retailmenot? Deanjones12 (talk) 05:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can't to that page, as has already been made clear. You also can't at all unless the site meets the notability criteria that have already been explained. Tollens (talk) 05:15, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ok Deanjones12 (talk) 05:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Deanjones12 Would recommend reading WP:COI, WP:N, and as @GoingBatty suggested, WP:BOSS. Davest3r08 (talk) 16:44, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Would also recommend reading WP:SIGCOV. Davest3r08 (talk) 16:44, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Davest3r08: OP blocked indef as an advertising-only account. Tollens (talk) 17:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Tollens I just read the original post. They were going to get blocked one way or another anyways. Davest3r08 (talk) 18:22, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pidge (company) article help[edit]

Hello, Can someone please help me with the details that Pidge (company) 2nd nomination article was deleted with less vote plus I feel that company is notable because all the sources where reliable. I have read about WP:NCORP & WP:GNG which is generally addressed. As article is deleted, I cannot edit further. Please help whether page is eligible, I have skipped AfC process, Can I edit further for improvement by refund process or stop worrying. VKG1985 (Talk | E-Mail | Contrib) 07:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @VKG1985, welcome to the Teahouse. You will need to go to WP:DRV if you want to contest the deletion. (talk) 13:11, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for guidance. VKG1985 (Talk | E-Mail | Contrib) 20:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

how its work a sand box[edit]

write a some information about my company BuzzPlussolutions (talk) 08:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OP indef blocked for promotion. Shantavira|feed me 08:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An administrator deleted my photo based on false assumptions[edit]

Hello Wiki friends,

My name is Amin. Yesterday I received a message from a Wiki administrator, claiming that I had uploaded a photo to Wikipedia “primarily for the purpose of insulting, demeaning, or defaming a person..”.. The administrator deleted the photo without giving me a opportunity to discuss it.

The administrator deleted the photo based on his assumptions that were incorrect. I had uploaded that photo with the full permission of my friend, and it was intended to inform, and not to insult or defame anyone. My friend who was in the picture and I both had a laugh about it. By now you must be curious about the photo. As it has been deleted by the administrator, you can still see a screenshot here, on a tweet that happened to go a bit viral, and my reply-tweet here.

I feel the administrator was wrong to delete the photo without any discussion. I would like to restore it. What would be my next step to do that? I welcome any help.

And if the administrator was right to delete it, I could accept that too. But I’d like to understand his arguments better. Because right now I feel they’re based on false assumptions and accusations. Small things like this slowly suck the fun out of reading and editing Wikipedia.

Thanks, Amin (Talk) 09:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Amin. You uploaded the picture to Wikimedia Commons, not to Wikipedia, and it was there that it was deleted. See the message on your Commons user talk page c:User talk:Amin, and address any comments or questions you have to Commons, which is a separate project from Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 10:09, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Commons help desk is at c:commons:Help Desk ColinFine (talk) 13:39, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, I will ask my question there. Amin (Talk) 15:11, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

italicize an article title[edit]

working on an article on a book, but would like to move the page to instead by italicized, how do i do that for an article title? the article is for a book called Dream Hoarders, and i looked at a popular book such as Harry Potter which is already italicized. please help me. Iljhgtn (talk) 11:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@iljhgtn: {{italic title}} ltbdl (talk) 11:35, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Iljhgtn: In this case, {{Infobox book}} already italicizes the article title, so {{italic title}} is superfluous. GoingBatty (talk) 13:19, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
oh well i only added that later in my editing of that page so i didn't notice. so one or the other, but not both is needed? Iljhgtn (talk) 13:20, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yep. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:56, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

History of the Philippines[edit]

In reading History of the Philippines, I noticed lots and lots of places where it seemed to me to need copyediting. I decided to do that. However, when I began editing, I noticed a line near the top of the editing page that said, "{{Use Philippine English|date=January 2023}}." This led me to stop editing, abandon any changes I had made, and come here for clarification. I understand there are allowances for British vs. American English, but what about Philippines English? Is that even a thing? Although I live in the Phils, I am not ethnically a Filipino. I know well that English as used orally by Filipinos is different from how Americans use it, but does that legitimize it for use on Wikipedia? If it does, I will just keep my white nose out of it. If not, I will proceed as I began. I have a second, related question. If I am making lots of small edits, maybe even a couple hundred, do I a) enter and save them together as one very long edit, b) make each a separate edit, or c) somewhere in between the two? Dgndenver (talk) 12:43, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dgndenver, like you, I know nothing of Philippine English, so I'll just answer your second question. I would make the edits in batches, of several on the same issue, or several in one section, with edit summaries that explain what they have in common. A snag with submitting too many at once is that another editor who disagrees with one change may revert the whole edit. Maproom (talk) 12:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Dgndenver: Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not familiar with Philippine English orthography, but this part of the Philippine English article might help you:

Philippine English traditionally follows American English spelling and grammar while it shares some similarity to Commonwealth English. Philippine English follows the latter when it comes to punctuation as well as date notations. For example, a comma almost never precedes the final item in an enumeration (much like the AP Stylebook and other style guides in English-language journalism generally).

Granted, it's got a {{citation needed}} template at the end, so take it with a grain of salt. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:56, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Some more info, albeit probably only slightly useful in this case, might be found at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Philippines-related articles. Lectonar (talk) 13:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(edit conflict)Looking at Philippine English it seems to be a complex mix of "American English spelling and grammar while it shares some similarity to Commonwealth English".
My copy of MS Word has "English (Philippines)" as an option - if you have that, it might be worth copypasting some text and seeing what Word's "English (Philippines)" makes of it - it should give the articles some consistency provided other authors do the same. Arjayay (talk) 13:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Philippine English is definitely a thing, unless the article about it is an elaborate hoax. Philippine_English#Orthography_and_grammar describes some of its particularities. From my five minutes of reading on the subject, it also seems to be well-established in written usage. WP:ENGVAR is not restricted to US vs. UK, so it definitely applies here (use Philippine English for subjects related principally to the Philippines).
That being said, "copyediting" can including many things. If the article says something about the "kolour" of the flag, you can confidently correct to "colour". However, further "correction" of "colour" to "color" (or the other way around - I have no idea which is correct) should not be made unless you are sure that is the Philippine English usage.
Your ethnicity or skin color is irrelevant in that regard, what matters is your proficiency in the (specific dialect of the) language. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 13:06, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

redirects with visual editor[edit]

is there a way to make a simple redirect with the visual editor instead of source editor? Iljhgtn (talk) 12:58, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I recommend you read WP:REDIRECT. --RotciW (TᴳRᴴAᴼIˢNᵀ)-(Cₛ) 13:10, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thank you that was not very hard. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Italicizing article titles[edit]

I'm working on a draft for a movie, so the title should be italicized. There's no option to italicize text in the title, and it also appears that you have to move your article if you want to edit its title. How do other articles italicize their titles? Thanks! Welcome back bro (talk) 13:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Welcome back bro: Welcome to the Teahouse. You may be interested in using the {{italic title}} template. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:15, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Tenryuu is correct! You might also choose to use Template:Infobox film in the lead of your movie article, and it automatically italicizes the title. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:32, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the reply, I looked at all those links but still couldn't figure out how or where to use the template. If you could explain it to me (or do it yourself if you know how) it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again! Welcome back bro (talk) 22:02, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I added an infobox. Feel free to tweak or add to it. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

adding specific pages from a cited book[edit]

i want to add specific page numbers from a cited book for an article i was doing some work on for a book called Dream Hoarders. I was able to cite the book, but was not able to cite the specific page numbers for each different citation. if i added a page number to one, it would add page numbers to all. For example, if i added to one citation "page 3", then all areas where there was a citation to the book would then say "page 3", instead of "page 3" or "page 47" etc. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

look at the block quotes primarily for where i am having this problem. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Iljhgtn. I prefer to use Template:Sfn for situations like that. Some people use Template:Rp. I can answer followup questions on either option. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
are those used in visual editor? source editor is too complicated for me Iljhgtn (talk) 13:35, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Both are available in Visual using the Insert > Template > Template search option. Once you've selected the template, the editor guides you through filling in the needed bits of info. If you're looking for this to be as painless as possible, Rp is probably the way to go. You'll just type in the page number or page range each time you use the template. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:40, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
painless is good. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:41, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I did not get deletion notifications for a draft[edit]

I created Draft:Jikkō kyō a while ago. Normally when a draft is potentially G13 deleted you get notifications about it, but this one I got nothing for, no 5 months warning and no talk page message about it being deleted at 6 months. Since I have a lot of drafts and often use deletion nobtifications as an opportunity to put work into the article I see this as potentially concerning. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 14:00, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Immanuelle. You did get the five month warning - see here. (talk) 14:09, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay so now the only issue is why I didn't get a talk page notification Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 14:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Aren't these notices placed as a courtesy at the discretion of the administrator who deletes the draft? The notice I see at the end of your talk page wasn't left by a bot, but by a human. Isn't there a bot that leaves notices about recently-deleted inactive drafts? ~Anachronist (talk) 14:27, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
FireflyBot only gives five month notices; I don't think there's any notify-upon-deletion bot. Some admins might use scripts to automatically leave a notice. And like most human beings, an admin might occasionally forget. As far as I can tell per Criteria for speedy deletion, no notice is actually required, but there's strong consensus that one should be left. I'd recommend bringing this up with the deleting admin, @Immanuelle. (talk) 15:34, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The deleting admin did leave a deletion notice, here. Immanuelle, I would recommend not relying on G13 notices and warnings as part of your draft workflow. They are common practice, but not required. Many G13 undeletion requests are granted, and you can make such a request at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:03, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Firefangledfeathers - that's a different draft and a different admin. (talk) 16:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
woops! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:22, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I disagree that there's strong consensus about this. Speaking for myself, I never leave a notice after deleting a page, except in rare circumstances. If an editor has already been warned about the possibility of deletion, then notice has already been given. The editor's failure to read or react to that notice isn't really my concern, because the editor had ample opportunity to respond. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:09, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Anachronist, I was just quoting the policy page - There is strong consensus that the creators and major contributors of pages and media files should be warned of a speedy deletion nomination (or of the deletion if not informed before). (and following paragraph). Seems fair to interpret the five month warning as being previously informed, but also fair to say it isn't. (talk) 16:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Adding Linlang to main space[edit]

Can I submit this draft for submission? (talk) 14:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You could, but it's far from ready for review. If you submitted it now, it would be declined. It would be best to improve it first. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Upcoming dramas like Linlang are rarely notable until they have been aired and they have been reviewed in reliable sources. At present, you definitely don't have enough of these. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How do I reply to ITN Candidates?[edit]

Where do I click to reply? Elisecars727 (talk) 15:43, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Elisecars727, welcome to the Teahouse. I assume you're talking about Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates? You could click the little reply link at the end of the nominator's comment, or the edit link next to the title of the nomination if you wanted to reply "manually". (talk) 15:48, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Neutral language for decolonization?[edit]

It's a sensitive subject.

On some pages I see a colony being "granted" independence. On other pages I see a colony "achieving" independence. Two points of view that subtly shift the focus of agency as being more with the colonial power, or more with the objectives of colonial inhabitants. There is another POV that external pressures play a part in decolonization, which neither "grant" not "achieve" quite cover.

There are a number of causal factors which have been said to have played a part in the process of decolonization:

- changes in British political attitude to empire, leaning more to the granted view

- rise of colonial nationalism, the achieving or demanding view

- state of the British economy after 1945, the external pressure, unable to maintain empire view

- by-product of the rise of American and Soviet powers, another external pressure

My personal opinion is that "grant" can seem a bit patronizing, but as the usage of "grant" is so widespread there's consensus for its use.

Would it be more neutral to be generally describing colonies as "becoming" independent?

If there is evidence/analysis in a particular case that one (or some) of the causal factors was (were) more important for a particular country, then use more specific language.

Or do I think too much about the subtleties of language?

I have also been trying a thought experiment, taking a statement from one page and imagining it being placed on another page, and thinking about how its neutrality might be received. It is also interesting to look at the same article in different languages. Is this the right way to be thinking about neutrality, or is neutrality context sensitive? Corsac Fox Kazakhstan (talk) 16:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Corsac Fox Kazakhstan One factor to consider is the wording used in the sources for a given article. In general, Wikipedia uses the same language as its sources, which of course may themselves not be neutral. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Corsac Fox Kazakhstan: I somewhat disagree with Michael D. Turnbull above. A reliable source that uses biased language is not a license for us to do the same. We can do better. There are plenty of biased sources that are nevertheless considered reliable by the community (Mother Jones magazine comes to mind). We cite the facts they report, not their bias.
As for wording, "became independent" or perhaps "gained independence" would be more neutral than "granted" or "achieved" independence, but if it's historically more correct to say "achieved" (say, a country actually did achieve independence through a bloody war) then we should use the historically accurate term. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mike, Anachronist thank you.
"gained independence" is a good alternative.
So in summary
  • use the exact same wording as the source if it's unbiased (like substitution of a formula in mathematics)
  • but take only facts from sources that mix fact & biased interpretation or point of view.
In the simple case where the exact same wording as the source seems OK to me, I've seen unnecessary translations into different wording. It irks when the meaning changes slightly. Perhaps there's a concern that wording has to change because of copyright (shouldn't be a problem for a few words/phrases). Or perhaps it's a habit instilled by teachers asking students to put things into their own words (and so display understanding/engagement with the material beyond copy-and-paste).
The substitution of a formula idea is what I have been doing with my thought experiments about whether statements judged to be neutral on one page would be judged to be neutral on another page. Corsac Fox Kazakhstan (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Right, if a reliable source uses biased wording, neutralize it. If you are using the same neutral terminology as the source, be careful you aren't plagiarizing whole sentences. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:02, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

unable to upload image on my article[edit]

hi, I am new to Wikipedia recently upload an article and submit for the review but I was unable to upload any image in it.. uploading image option is showing error. kindly guide me in this regards. Unaiza Asgher (talk) 17:19, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. New accounts cannot upload images; you may go to Files for upload to work with others to help do so, but before you worry about images I would address the concerns of the reviewer of your draft. Images are not relevant to the draft approval process, which only considers the text and sources. Images can wait until your draft is accepted and placed in the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 17:25, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Unaiza Asgher Drafting articles to our standards is not easy for newcomers and I'm not surprised it has already been declined. You should carefully read WP:YFA and, as far as any pictures are concerned note that these are usually uploaded to Wikipedia Commons (which has its own Helpdesk) and introduced into article as filenames. See Help:Pictures. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Stuck in Sandbox! Publish button has frozen![edit]

Hi. I have created a new article in my sandbox, Wabbity, but when I tried to save my work by pushing the Publish button, it didn't recognize my article and I couldn't save it, because the button got stuck. What do I do to make sure that my article is saved? And what do I do to move it from the sandbox to an editor?

Wabbitty (talk) 18:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wabbitty: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see your draft in Draft:Sarah Boxer. You can add {{Userspace draft}} to request a review. However, you will need to add references in the proper format. Please see WP:EASYREFBEGIN to learn how to add the references. If you haven't done so already, I recommend reading Help:Your first article for lots more helpful information. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does vandalism once ban forever?[edit]

Does it? CalebWave (talk) 19:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@CalebWave Wikipedia tends to be rather forgiving of people and give them a lot of opportunities to reform their behavior. I won't say I approve of all decisions made by Wikipedia but generally you will be given second chances. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 19:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@CalebWave: However, if you do it again after being warned about it, and discussing it here, you have no excuse for further vandalism, and doing more vandalism will quickly result in your account being blocked. Consider yourself warned. This is a collaborative environment and you are expected to make constructive edits. Accounts are blocked if they are deemed to be detrimental to the Wikkpedia project. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

acceptance of citation of a living person biography[edit]

I am not sure if a citation for the person can be accepted such as this (kindly refer ABOUT THE AUTHOR in the supplied link). 1.

2. Renilo77 (talk) 19:19, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Renilo77, and welcome to the Teahouse. I can't see the contents of the first link (Google books says I've reached the limit), so I can't tell for sure. Does it contain significant coverage of Vuh (at least three paragraphs, say) and appear to be written by an independent commentator? If so, then it may be an acceptable source for helping to establish notability. But if it is just a brief biography, then it probably comes from Vuh or his associates, and is not independent. In that case you may still be able to cite it as a primary source (see that link for the limitations on what information you may use it for) but it won't help to establish notability.
And the second link is to a book written by Vuh, so is also not independent.
What I suggest you do is:
  • Go through the sources you have cited in your sandbox, and for each of them, check if it meets the criteria in golden rule. If it doesn't, remove it (you can always save them in another sandbox in case you need them later).
  • If you have no sources that meet the criteria, and you cannot find any, then give up, as that means that Vuh does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and any more time and effort you spend will be wasted.
  • If at least three of your sources do meet those criteria, then format them properly (see REFB).
  • Remove anything in your draft which is not backed up by one of these reliable sources.
Then it might be worth resubmitting the draft. ColinFine (talk) 20:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is is appropriate for the alt on an image to be the same as the caption[edit]

Is is appropriate for the alt on an image to be the same as the caption? See Anna, Illinois. Kk.urban (talk) 19:24, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, we don't want the alt text to duplicate the caption. If the caption is sufficiently descriptive, it's ok for the alt to be "refer to caption". See MOS:ALT for more info. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Firefangledfeathers, I don't see anywhere in that link that says "We don't want the alt text to duplicate the caption". It says that it may say "refer to caption", but, there are several examples given where the alt text is very similar to the caption, and no suggestion that these are wrong. ColinFine (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi ColinFine. It says "The alt text is intended to be read out by screen readers just before the caption, so avoid having the same details in both." Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 21:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Try to imagine being blind/having difficulty seeing - the alt is supposed to describe the image to give you an idea of what it looks like - the caption is a formal description so it could be alt=an old stone gateway in poor repair in a broken down wall: caption=entrance to the castle in 2020 - Arjayay (talk) 21:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I missed that line. Thank you. ColinFine (talk) 22:06, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Incorrect spelling for Wikipedia search result[edit]

When I do a search for Eva M. Mack on the Wikipedia search engine, it says "Merican Attorney" under the search result. I would add a screenshot, but the system won't let me. Starlighsky (talk) 19:31, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Starlightsky: It was in the short description template at the top of the page. I fixed it. That spelling was added by Metroick without any explanation. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:36, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Starlighsky (talk) 19:46, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RE: Notability and Financial Conflict of Interest[edit]

Hello all, I am a paid student worker at Rice University, and I've been tasked with creating Wikipedia pages, one for each member of the Rice Chemistry faculty.

I am brand new to Wiki stuff, and in the last few hours of researching what is and is not allowed on Wiki, I've come across different pages on notability and Conflict of Interest. I am seeking clarification on these issues.

1) Does being a world-class chemistry department qualify each member to have a bio on Wiki? Or does this fail to meet notability criteria?

2) I am a paid student worker creating these pages for the purpose of making the involved scholars more noticeable and searchable on the internet. Would these articles be considered promotion by a business and be disallowed thereby? Also, would articles such as these fail to be accepted because I am a paid worker for this department and a student at this school, having therefore several conflicts of interest? (talk) 21:08, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Each member of the department must meet WP:NACADEMIC individually. Simply being a member of a 'world-class chemistry department' is not sufficient on its own.
As a paid student worker. WP:PAID applies to you. You must complete the mandatory disclosures explained on that page, and you should use the WP:AFC process instead of creating the articles directly in the mainspace. If and when the articles to get moved to the mainspace, you should then only suggest any further changes on the article talk pages rather than continuing to edit them directly.
This isn't policy based, but on a personal note I would suggest you point whoever has asked you to do this to Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing - this project could end up backfiring. MrOllie (talk) 21:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You should probably read this as well Wikipedia:When your boss tells you to edit Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 21:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello. First, you must make the Terms of Use required paid editing disclosure on your userpage. Your username seems to be that of a website, if so, you will need to change it via Special:GlobalRenameRequest. I would also suggest that you read WP:BOSS and have your superiors read it too.
The chemistry department being notable would not necessarily make its staff notable, as notability is not inherited by association. You would need to show that each person is notable themselves to write articles about them. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 21:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This username is not the name of a website as far as I'm aware. How do I put the paid editing disclosure on my user page? I thought that was something you just put on each draft you create.
(Also, I hope to make clear that I respect the intentions and values of Wiki and that's why I looked for a place to ask these questions. I was asked to do this assignment, but I will not do it if it violates the values and terms of this community.) (talk) 21:38, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Use the template {{userbox coi|article1|article2|article3}} and so on, inserting additional articles as need. Put this on your userpage. NW1223<Howl at meMy hunts> 21:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would add that Wikipedia has no interest in search results or getting people noticed. 331dot (talk) 21:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
List of Rice University people includes faculity for whom articles exist. This does not guarantee that all those articles meet current Wikipedia standards for academics, but it should give you some idea of what confirms notability. I have no knowledge of Rice University, but strongly believe that some of the Chem Dept facilty do not meet the criteria of academics. David notMD (talk) 02:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit con== Wikipedia Sandbox/Article gift - Help?[edit]

Good day, all! (This question is not about editing existing pages, and I don't seek to create a new one; I'm just looking for ideas. If the Teahouse is the wrong place for this, could someone point me in the right direction?)

I'm an avid wiki lurker, and so is one of my close friends, who I want to create a birthday card for. The card in itself would be a printed header and introduction of a Wikipedia-style page about the person.

Naturally, they don't qualify for a page, and I'm not interested in publishing one for them. Instead, I want to create an authentic-looking page with the Wikipedia visual editor. I was considering making one in my sandbox, but I obviously would rather refrain from posting their information on the internet. I've also tried hosting my own MediaWiki server, but configuring it to use Wikipedia templates and image hosting has proved a bit beyond my ability.

Does anyone have any ideas on a way I could create a private article (or close mock-up) using the Visual Editor or any other method? Thank you! NootingPenguin (talk) 21:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A quick and dirty solution is to open any biographical Wikipedia webpage, then open a dev console in your browser (e.g. by pressing Option+Command+I in the macOS version of Safari) and edit the source of the Webpage directly. It should be updating as you type without actually changing anything on Wikipedia servers (only your cached copy of the page changes). Podstawko (talk) 21:46, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll try to do that, we'll see how well the markup works. Thanks! NootingPenguin (talk) 21:54, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit conflict[edit]

I am Wabbity and I just added 40 references to an article I wrote in Drafts titled Sarah Boxer. When I tried to publish the draft, it said there was an "editing conflict" and it deleted all the references I put in. Is there any way to get those back? I won't make any more edits, of course, until I figure out how to submit changes without them getting deleted! So two questions:

Can I get my old draft back, the one with the references in it?

How do I prevent this from happening again?

Wabbitty (talk) 21:40, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Wabbitty, and welcome to the Teahouse! An edit conflict happens when someone publishes changes to a page while you are actively editing it. When this happens, the computer doesn't know which changes to keep (yours, theirs, or some combination of both), so it asks you to pick the changes to keep yourself. It seems you likely clicked a button somewhere along the way that kept only the changes made by another editor while you were editing. Unfortunately, you cannot get the changes back, which I understand is very frustrating. Edit conflicts are fairly uncommon, but become more likely and more difficult to fix as you edit for a longer time in a single edit, so saving your changes regularly will help reduce the chance this happens again at all, as well as make it easier to resolve the conflict if it does. The help article on edit conflicts does a better job explaining how to fix an edit conflict than I'll be able to do here concisely - I'd suggest reading through it for all the details. Tollens (talk) 01:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article deleted. Had only 13 percent on copy check[edit]

hi, article deleted? Eleven table tennis? Why? Acetylcholine (talk) 21:42, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Acetylcholine What? This one: Eleven Table Tennis? Could you explain your concerns a little more clearly, please? Nick Moyes (talk) 22:00, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is showing, but for some reason the links to this article in my talk page showing as RED, which means deleted.
I was surprised, I put a lot of effort to collect almost everything on Google to compile the information.
I have seen few more articles about VR games and they are less than half of it and still no one touched them. I hope that this eleven table tennis article does not meet any criteria for deletion.
I am not related to this game in any way. I am a Pediatric Surgeon by professsion. I just love this game.
This game can make our children more thin and active, instead of playing on the couch, this game is to be played like a real table tennis game and yet it can be played at home and in a limited space and it's a great fitness and entertainment duo for our next generation. Acetylcholine (talk) 22:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Acetylcholine. The link on your talk page is to the non-existent Draft:Eleven Table Tennis: you moved it to Eleven Table Tennis.
I have tagged it for tone and peacock language, but I haven't investigated to see whether or not it meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability.
Note that the existence of other articles is irrelevant: see other stuff exists. Also, the virtues of the game are of zero relevance to Wikipedia, unless they have been written about by an independent reliable source. ColinFine (talk) 22:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Acetylcholine: You should have waited for an experienced editor to review your draft rather than move it to main space yourself before it was ready. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
yes, that I admit was not a good thing, "in-experience". I uploaded the logo and the file would not upload unless I give associated article and the upload system would not accept draft version. So I moved it to article with the intention of reversing it to draft after the logo would upload. After upload I tried to revert it to draft status but I failed to do so because I guess my privilege was restricted and I could not do it.... Acetylcholine (talk) 01:44, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
hi @Acetylcholine! generally the guideline is that non-free images are to be used exclusively in fully published articles where they are relevant (not drafts of any kind, and nowhere else in the wiki). so if you want to bring it back to a draft, you have to remove the image until the draft is properly approved. don't worry, the lack of an image won't make it any less likely for the draft to be approved. see the non-free content policy| for more on this. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Acetylcholine I've done an initial copy edit of your article, but I'd really recommend you explore a bit more to understand encyclopedic standards and tone before creating another article from scratch- phrasing like "you do this and then you can do that" is not appropriate here, that's more of a blog or manual style of writing. In addition about half of the sentences were fragments rather than sentences, and none of the proper nouns (company names etc) were capitalized. From the discussion above, I understand you didn't mean to move it out of draft right away, so no worries on this stuff- just trying to identify some of the bigger "themes" in the article's style that would've caused problems upon review, and which you'll want to avoid in future articles.
I left the final section "Reception" unedited, because it seems as though you were directly quoting reviews without actually using quotes. If you're borrowing the direct phrasing from a source, you need to put it into "quotes like this" to make that clear. When you get a chance, please check in that section to see where you've pulled direct language from the sources, and use quotes accordingly. If you'd like me to review that section once you're sure there's no copyright violation, I'm happy to do so! Or, if you want more time to work on it, you can have one of these more experienced editors help you move it back into "draft" status. Chiselinccc (talk) 13:06, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thanks, i only used a direct sentence from gamesradar and i have placed it in quotes, rest of the reception is my own words. Acetylcholine (talk) 13:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi again @Acetylcholine, I think you still have some work to do on understanding what is appropriate to include in Wikipedia articles. I just had to revert your addition of the poorly written text blurb I had already edited for you, which you included in its previous form in the Virtual reality article. It was not only poorly written for an encyclopedia, but you were also taking the language "motivate kids off the couch" VERBATIM from the article, and now I'm starting to suspect that you are the owner of the website you keep linking with that review or something. Pasting that in more than one place looks a lot like link spam: are you affiliated with the site in question? Please pay attention to the quality of the writing you are inserting into the encyclopedia, because the content I just reverted is wildly inappropriate for inclusion. Chiselinccc (talk) 14:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh! No no. I am an advocate of this new technology. I am a Pediatric Surgeon by professsion. There are journal articles which are based on scientific research which has studied the topic of VR and it's effect on children from obesity and exercise perspective. These journal articles are too complex to link to, so I just googled an easy article and l linked to it.
My intention of writing this VR table tennis wiki is that anyone who is interested can have a general idea of what this is and can have good references to go and read. And people can explore more of it. The main website is too small. The faqs for the site exist but in a completely different place, the bug reporting is present built-in the game and also available in the discord server.
I have a question:
One of discord memebr/player of this game sent me a FAQ for this game:
How to use this in the wiki page? Acetylcholine (talk) 15:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to move a table[edit]

I made a draft for a movie: Draft:Steklyannaya Garmonika (Film) - Wikipedia and created a table that explained details of its production. How do I move the table to the right side of the page, above the first photo, like how tables for movies are on other articles? Thanks! Welcome back bro (talk) 22:00, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suggest using an infobox (presumably {{infobox film}}) instead of a wikitable. ColinFine (talk) 22:16, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Figure tags.[edit]

I need to revise the tag of a photograph I submitted to Wikimedia Commons. I need to change the tag to one that records a file (photo of a pre-1923 document) for which I acquired permission to use from the owner. I also learned that the photo has no copyright involved. Which tag is this? Many thanks.Tfhentz (talk) 22:25, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Tfhentz. A document first published before 1923 is in the public domain, as are all things published over 95 years ago. Not knowing the details of whether the document was actually published or just stored for 100 plus years, I suggest that you ask at the Commons Help Desk, providing more details. Cullen328 (talk) 22:36, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Thanks for your kind response. The document is a 1776-dated officer commission for a Revolutionary War soldier that has been in an archive for 100+ years. The archive has just given me permission to use it "as you wish." There are no copyrights involved, and it has never been published. Any ideas on which tag to use? (I just can't find the list of the various tags that I once saw; otherwise I wouldn't bother you.) Thanks! Tfhentz (talk) 22:50, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Tfhentz: I think you are looking for c:Template:PD-US-unpublished but asking at c:Commons:Help_desk may be better. RudolfRed (talk) 23:20, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Indeed, the work was created before 1903, so {{PD-US-unpublished}} applies. I am assuming it is a faithful reproduction of the document with no creativity involved, in which case the WMF’s position is that the reproduction process creates no copyright on its own. (I could not find the link to the legal guideline that says it, but it is for instance in the text of {{PD-art}}.) TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 14:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to post pictures on wikipedia[edit]

I wanted to know how to post a picture on wikipedia. (talk) 00:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unregistered and new users cannot upload pictures to Wikipedia, You can request an upload at WP:FFU. --RotciW (TᴳRᴴAᴼIˢNᵀ)-(Cₛ) 00:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
if you register for an account, you can also upload your own (though yes, it does have to be your own, not ones you just took elsewhere from the internet, unless the author of that image put that image under a free license like these) images on Wikimedia Commons, in the case you have taken some great photos you want to use here in Wikipedia. see Commons:First steps/Uploading files for a tutorial on that over there. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi and what do I do next if my edits are reverted?[edit]

Hi everyone! I was excited to work on an entry, adding what I thought was significant, useful information, but the work I did reverted. There are a couple possible reasons, what? I don't want to spend a lot of time trying to approach this in different ways, guessing about how I can improve enough to be kept live. Is there a person I can talk to who is reverting the stuff, so I can know how to change it so that it will be included? Thanks! Beverly East (talk) 01:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Beverly East:. Read Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Basically, go to the article talk page and start a discussion there to support what you want to add. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:15, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Beverly East: You don't seem to be aware that Wikipedia isn't a web directory or collection of links. It's an encyclopedia. All you added was a big list of external links. A web directory has no encyclopedic value. That's why your contribution was removed. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:18, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. I've seen many lists of TV episodes, lists of films, albums, etc. on wikipedia. I thought this would constitute that sort of list. If I have some other way to add with narrative, I'll try to do that in the future. Beverly East (talk) 23:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Beverly East. For future reference, you can check a page's history to see a record of all the edits made to the page. In many cases, users leave edit summaries explaining why they made their edits, and these edit summaries often contain blue links to relevant Wikipedia policy or guideline pages that further explain what the problem was. In this case, the edit was reverted for not being in accordance with WP:NOTDIRECTORY as explained above by Anachronist. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:33, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. There is an existing bulleted list on that page, and I'm guessing that the reason that list is allowed is because each bullet has a sentence or two and not just a link. I've now read WP:NOTDIRECTORY and the definitions of the many kinds of lists that are allowed. Thank you to you both for helping me understand. Beverly East (talk) 23:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Beverly East, another factor is that external links do not belong in the body of an article. References belong there instead. Cullen328 (talk) 23:17, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Got it. Thank you! Beverly East (talk) 00:12, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

War edition[edit]

Dear friends,

There is a page on wikipedia where I feel a racial bias by a user, which constantly manipulates the figures and gives subjective concepts to explain some percentages that are not included in their references. What can I do to get a third party or a high ranking wikipedian to come in and settle it? Since A few months ago an endless thread was created on the Talk page of the site, where this person debated and debated without argument. Thank you Kodosbs (talk) 01:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Kodosbs: Check out WP:DR for next steps on getting help to resolve the dispute. RudolfRed (talk) 01:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Courtesy link: White Mexicans and Talk:White Mexicans 💜  melecie  talk - 01:30, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


What is azarbaijaan? It's a milatiry name? Or any place? (talk) 01:35, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Azerbaijan is a country at the border of Europe and Asia. You might consider reading the article on the country for more information. Please note that this page is for questions about using or editing Wikipedia - please use a search engine next time, or the reference desk for more complicated questions. Tollens (talk) 01:39, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Participants addition page on WikiProject[edit]

Hi, I hope you are doing well. I need help adding code to a page on a WikiProject I manage. In simple terms, I want to add a 'Participants self-adding entry box' to Wikipedia:WikiProject Chenab Valley/Members, similar to what many other drives and projects have, as shown in this example. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 02:40, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TheChunky; Hi, check WP:MMS#Requesting a mailing. --RotciW (TᴳRᴴAᴼIˢNᵀ)-(Cₛ) 03:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@RotciW Thanks for responding, but my request is not about mailing or mass messages! I am talking about the addition of entry box for users who wish to participate in this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 03:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Opps! Misread it. Sorry! --RotciW (TᴳRᴴAᴼIˢNᵀ)-(Cₛ) 03:28, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Made some changes to the userbox, apparently works. Sorry for the inconveniences! --RotciW (TᴳRᴴAᴼIˢNᵀ)-(Cₛ) 04:06, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No issues, Thanks for that. Waiting for response from an expert for my request above. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 04:39, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
hi @TheChunky! I believe that the above page Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/October 2023/Participants is generated specifically as a mailing list (which the mass mailer bot can easily scan to send mail to everyone) and can't really be made by anyone except those who have the right to make mailing lists (see Help:Extension:MassMessage for more about this). in my opinion I don't think a fancy self-adding entry box is really needed, a simple list of members like most other wikiprojects (such as ones for Computer science, Hong Kong, or the Typo Team) would probably suffice just as well. happy editing 💜  melecie  talk - 07:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. If you could check out this WikiProject and make some improvements to what looks odd there, I would appreciate it. Thanks again. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 07:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@TheChunky, I have requested a shell move at RM/TR. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜 08:46, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@DreamRimmer Thank you. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 08:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Editing Conflict[edit]

Hello! I am working for a person who needs their page updated. I am a conflict of interest and am getting confused on

1) how to declare that I am a conflict of interest

2) getting assistance in updating the page.

I have been emailing the Wikipedia volunteer account and am constantly (and very much unknowingly!!) violating guidelines in trying to request. So, I am looking for some help in mostly getting the page updated, but also declaring that I am a conflict of interest in requesting.

Thank you for your time! Fahroisin (talk) 03:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Follow WP:PAID .You must disclose your conflict of interest, and request changes on the article's talk page rather than making them yourself. Meters (talk) 04:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See WP:EDITREQ for how to request edits once you have disclosed your conflict of interest. Meters (talk) 04:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I notice that the image on contains an advert for a shop by way of “attribution”. Is this allowed ? 2A02:C7C:DE89:3600:ADF8:5299:3B32:1869 (talk) 07:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The attribution requirement is not a problem per se. The problem is that the image has an embedded logo, sometimes called a watermark. That is contrary to policy unless the image is notable itself and the logo is a significant aspect of the notability of the image. That does not seem to be the case here. In my opinion, the image should be cropped to remove the logo, unless there are very good reasons to the contrary. You can do it yourself if you are a moderately skilled image editor. Otherwise, you can ask for help at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Photography workshop. Cullen328 (talk) 07:36, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alternativley, bin it and use this free image. File:Iliotibial band syndrome-en.svg - X201 (talk) 07:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
binned. the original image only allows reuse if you re-use the image with the logo on your website or any online publication as long as the proper creditation is given to which probably means it should be deleted? ltbdl (talk) 08:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nominated for deletion c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Iliotibial Band Syndrome.jpg. MKFI (talk) 08:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft:Mukesh Chhabra[edit]

Hello all wikipedians, before some days im extended and added reliable sources in Draft:Mukesh Chhabra and moved to Article space but User:Anachronist remove it back to draft space and User:Jamiebuba asked me that Do You Have Any Paid Connection with Subject? And he added "Undisclosed paid" on draft.I'm a Indian wikipedians and Draft:Mukesh Chhabra is well known Casting Director in India. Thats why I'm working on Draft:Mukesh Chhabra. Please let me know If you have any objection, I will stop working on this Draft:Mukesh Chhabra subject.Rajmama (talk) 09:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't see reason to assume paid editing based on the content of the article, which is sourced to numerous secondary sources. The article does not appear overly promotional. It does need some grammar and syntax cleanup, but that appears to be the worst problem. Once that's fixed, I don't see a reason to exclude the draft from article space. Pecopteris (talk) 09:15, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rajmama and @Pecopteris, As cited by @Anachronist the draft was moved by an inexperienced editor after it was was submitted previously and declined in draft. Note that the draft was initially submitted by @Creation07, though the subject maybe notable after edits were done by Rajmama but should still should have been resubmitted through AFC or at least moved by an experienced editor.
@Rajmama Again, do you have any COI with the subject? I had asked this on your talk page and you never responded to the question directly. Jamiebuba (talk) 10:28, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No i don't have any COI with the subject and im already replied you on my talk page. Again Draft:Mukesh Chhabra is an well know Casting Director in India. Thats why I am extended this draft and added reliable sources and after that moved to Article Space.Rajmama (talk) 10:37, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rajmama I'm an enthusiastic copy editor, let me know if you'd like me to do an edit on the draft for grammar and readability! I checked it out but was not sure if it would be polite to make changes to someone else's article draft. (Please "ping" me using @Chiselinc or post on my talk page to confirm, as I might not see otherwise. Also, the New Page Review comment on the draft's talk page pointed out that all the sources are paid or promotional sites, requesting that you find other sources to add- I don't know much about that side of editing yet, but thought I'd bring it to your attention here in case you had missed it! Cheers, Chiselinccc (talk) 11:57, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Chiselinccc thank you for bring your attention here but now i don't want to work on this Draft:Mukesh Chhabra, because i don't want to some one said me that i'm paid contributor. thank you once again. Rajmama (talk) 12:39, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rajmama well, that's your prerogative. Anyone asking about a conflict of interest is protecting the encyclopedia from paid editing, which is a rampant concern. If you take that personally, then you should probably find another website to contribute to, as protecting the encyclopedia is more important than your feeling offended. Good luck! Chiselinccc (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Chiselinccc I did not say that I will not contribute to Wikipedia, but at the moment I do not want to contribute on this subject Draft:Mukesh Chhabra. Rajmama (talk) 13:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rajmama: Every sentence you have written above has incorrect grammar, spelling, or punctuation. Every sentence. The same was true for text you added to the draft. If you write that way in articles, then you'll be creating more work for others because other people will have to spend time cleaning up after you. In talk pages, we can figure out what you're saying. But the prose in articles needs to be more polished and professional. If English isn't your native language, then try running your text through a grammar checker before posting it.
@Chiselinccc: I have no objection to moving it back to article space after it's cleaned up for readability and formatted correctly. An experienced reviewer wouldn't have approved it in the state it was in. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Anachronist: thanks, I'm very new and didn't want to be too BITEy on the Teahouse page, but I was very frustrated by this person's childish response and have no interest in editing their mess after that display of attitude. I took the liberty of checking and indeed, they've already put a lot of incomprehensible text directly into article space; I quietly fixed it all, but is there a way to bring this to someone's attention so that they have to go through AFC and can't just move nonsensical articles directly into the 'pedia?
It's not technically vandalism but with the amount of editing I had to do per line of text, it adds up to the same result. Thanks in advance if you have any advice regarding folks who don't understand they're not contributing effectively! Now that I'm lurking Teahouse, I'm seeing a LOT more of that than I expected, and don't know if there are preventative measures for people who keep creating unsalvageable articles 😭Chiselinccc (talk) 14:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Chiselinccc: With enough reviewers patrolling new pages, articles like this would be put back into draft space more efficiently, but there's a huge backlog now.

We do want to encourage bold edits, and give people the opportunity to learn from mistakes. In this case Rajmama is editing in good faith but needs to work harder to avoid creating needless work for others to clean up. With regard to that particular draft, I have concerns about the comment left by one reviewer on the talk page, about the sources being sponsored. Those would need to be eliminated. The subject likely passes notability criteria for inclusion, but not with sponsored sources.

New editors who aren't yet confirmed are required to go through AFC to create anything, but once you have 4 days and 10 edits under your belt, anything goes. I think the autoconfirmed status is too low of a bar to allow article creation directly in article space (or moving to article space from draft space). Raising that bar would require community discussion, probably at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). ~Anachronist (talk) 15:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Link created now working, but previous link to same site are working[edit]

I created a link in the infobox of this site. Existing links work, one is the body of the article. However, the infobox link directs to a site saying the linked article doesn't exist. The spelling is the same, though: The link for this person Hugh Ellwood MacBeth, Sr. Starlighsky (talk) 10:51, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done Theroadislong (talk) 11:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! This is fascinating. How did you fix it?
Is it known why is wasn't working? Starlighsky (talk) 11:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Starlighsky: Here is the correction that Theroadislong made. Titles of Wikipedia articles are case-sensitive after the first letter. Deor (talk) 12:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I understand now, thanks! Starlighsky (talk) 12:34, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK for site's URL to point to Wikipedia article?[edit]

An acquaintance has a Wikipedia article that was written about him. He would like for his website's URL to link directly to the Wikipedia article. Is that permitted? He asked me for advice. I found documentation which says that it is, but what I found was someone's essay and not an official policy. Guidance would be appreciated. Thank you. – Kekki1978 (talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 10:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia welcomes incoming links, but that is a strange request as he will have no control over the content and when you say the URL will link directly such a link implies he is using Wikipedia to host his own website, which is not permitted. If he simply includes a link to Wikipedia on his website, that is fine. What is the name of the article? Shantavira|feed me 11:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kekki1978 I assume he is linking from his own website hosted elsewhere: that website may even be mentioned in the article here about him. Linking back is fine but note that if he chooses to copy any material to re-use it on his website, he should read WP:REUSE which has a policy about the licensing of Wikipedia content. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Actually I understood that person would like to redirect his own website address to a Wikipedia page, so that typing to a browser will instead take you to Example. Obviously we can't prevent that since the redirect is outside Wikipedia but as Shantavira says it is somewhat risky, since the Wikipedia page could change at anytime.
@Kekki1978: could you clarify what your friend is planning to do, since several of us have a different idea of what your question means? MKFI (talk) 11:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe I'm the odd one out here but the original poster's request seemed pretty unambiguous to me. His acquaintance wants some website (say to either link or redirect to the Wikipedia article about that acquaintance ( If that's the case, there's nothing wrong with either of these, and there's nothing Wikipedia can do to prevent either of these, either. Whether that's a good idea is a different question which the acquaintance should answer themselves considering the lack of control they would have over their own bio. Podstawko (talk) 11:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you all for your responses. My acquaintance does not want Wikipedia to host his own website. He has a website hosted elsewhere and, quoting above, "wants to redirect his own website address to a Wikipedia page, so that typing in a browser will instead take you to" [ [ Wikipedia page ] ]. I will let them know that such a thing is permitted. That is a good point that the Wikipedia's article's contents may change at any time. I will bring that risk to their attention. Thank you all for fielding the question. – Kekki1978 (talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 12:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kekki1978, Podstawko is correct, there's nothing wrong with doing this. Check with the web host provider about how to set up an HTTP 301 permanent redirect. Mathglot (talk) 00:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sources articles film/movies[edit]


I need a little help. So I would like someone to tell me which of the websites listed below can be considered good sources. To add content to movie articles.

thanks a lot Matirosta (talk) 11:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

... and also the reasons why a website is or is not considered a good source, please.
Bernhard.rulla (talk) 12:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Some of those are discussed at Wikipedia:Review aggregators. Shantavira|feed me 12:17, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Matirosta:, the best place to start is often the WP:Reliable sources noticeboard, and in particular, the table at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. For example, Metacritic is listed as "generally reliable" at WP:RSP#Metacritic; and Allmovie is evaluated here. You can look for the other ones in the table there. Mathglot (talk) 00:27, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pictures from Getty Images[edit]


does anybody have any experience with using pictures from Getty Images? Getty Images

Is this an easier way to obtain a picture of an actress? I am currently working on the draft of an actress and in Getty Images, there are several nice pictures of hers.

Thanks in advance! Bernhard.rulla (talk) 11:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, I'm afraid you cannot use Getty Images as a source for images. See WP:GETTY. Shantavira|feed me 12:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Shantavira Thank you! Bernhard.rulla (talk) 13:08, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
One slim chance is that Getty and similar agencies have been known to sell images that are actually in the public domain. You could use those. However, if we're talking about a contemporary actress, it's unlikely that'll be the case. – Joe (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A workaround that I have used (hopefully not violating any WP rules) is simply to put such non-free images, or groups of same from a single source, in under "external links", see my example treatment at Shirburn_Castle#External_links. Of course they will not appear in the page, but persons can then go visit them if of interest. Maybe this helps. Regards Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 19:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redirecting a search to an article[edit]

I only need one more thing for my draft: Draft:Steklyannaya Garmonika before I submit it for review. I'd like for someone to be redirected to the article if they search "Glass Harmonica" (the English translation of the title). If any of you know how to do that and are able to help, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Welcome back bro (talk) 12:41, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It is certainly possible to create such a redirect, but I wouldn't worry about that until the draft is accepted and placed in the encyclopedia, then you can create plausible redirects to it. 331dot (talk) 12:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Welcome back bro I told you in an earlier thread at the Teahouse that it will be a little more complicated than a redirect, because we already have an article Glass harmonica. You should also consider whether the title of your article should be the same as its Wikidata item, which is in English as "The Glass Harmonica". Then the Russian title would be the redirect here. However, as 331dot wrote, the draft need to be accepted first. Its plot section is still too long and you should not have any external links within the main text: they can be placed in an "External links" section at the very foot of the article. (See WP:ELPOINTS). Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the reply, I changed the title of the article to The Glass Harmonica and changed mentions of the title in the text accordingly. I also reduced the length of the plot summary and placed the external links in their own section. Should the redirect work with the original Russian title? Thanks again! Welcome back bro (talk) 16:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, the Russian title will redirect correctly, just as the redirect from that draft name does right now (i.e. if you click on the link in the first line of your thread here). Others have commented that the word (film) needs to be in the title, since there is also a novel of that name: see Glass harmonica (disambiguation). One minor point: your external links section should come after the references, in line with our manual of style. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:33, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Title text in reference , beginners help please ![edit]

Hello , I am so in over my head here. I got annoyed that something were missing on a categories page and discovered that to add something I had to add a page to refer to. So I decided to do that (create a new page) by copying code from an existing page and and edit that by inserting and replacing with my own text instead (editing existing code using my own text usually works for me here). I think that my 'creation' is sort of OK - ugly with a lot of warts of course - but I simply can not find out how to get the text of the demanded reference links to display left of links !

I am trying this format :

 ref name="My text">url=</ref 

(I removed the starting < and ending > to make code show here )(could not find out either how to place code here and both be visible and at same time not have it parsed)

But "My text" simply does not show in reference section next to "mylink" (which do show !) instead it shows

I can easily get the text to display by just filling in :

<! My text : >

(with out the starting <! and ending >)

But then it doesn't show as being part of the reference list How do I get the text to show in the reference section next to the link ? The help pages is of absolutely no help at all (I will not list all help pages not of help here !) TeslaTruck (talk) 12:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The correct format is <ref name="myref">[ My text]</ref>, which displays like this.[1] The name="myref" part gives the reference an identifier so it can be re-used again later in the page and is not visible on the page itself. You might consider using the Visual Editor, though, which gives you the ability to format references without using code. – Joe (talk) 13:02, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much for your very kind assistance which I really appreciate.
I had a really hard time getting to understand the placing of the text after the link and it only being separated by a space character. I even ended up copying your link directly from your post into the editing window and then it still took me some time to understand it. So fair to say that I would most likely not have been able to get it done without your help ! Thank you very much !
By the way , could you please refer me to the help page showing how to put code into posts like yours to show it as comment text like you did with no parsing ?

P.S. , Sorry , for asking , I just found out that user Michael placed the answer to that question below her. Thank you ! TeslaTruck (talk) 13:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


You are using what are called WP:NAMED references. The name "My text" is not part of the citation but a way of re-using the reference later. We have better ways of citing web sources, using the {{cite web}} template. To show text on Talk Pages that you don't want to be rendered, it can be surrounded by nowiki and /nowiki tags, possibly with code tags as well, so your original example would be <ref name="My text">url=</ref>. (See source code for how I did that) Actually, to create a weblink, you can just place it within a single bracket: like this. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ooops , sorry , had not seen that you already placed the reference here !
Thank you so much for all your trouble !  :-) TeslaTruck (talk) 13:51, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
PS. Look at how I did this: <ref name=blah></ref> - UtherSRG (talk) 14:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much ! TeslaTruck (talk) 14:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redirection links[edit]

Hello Teahouse,

I was wondering how you set up a redirect link when providing an edit summary. If there's some kind of command that lets you click on the link or something. TheAlienMan2002 (talk) 14:19, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, TheAlienMan2002, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't understand what you mean about "redirection". You can put a WP:Wikilink in an edit summary just as you can in an article or other page, and it will show up in a history or list of contributions as a link. Does that answer your question? ColinFine (talk) 14:32, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi TheAlienMan2002, do you mean a redirect? Those summaries are provided automatically. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC) ]Reply[reply]

Hi TheAlienMan2002, also a bit confused, but if you mean adding a wikilink to your edit summary, so that a term in your summary can be clicked when viewing your edit summary in the history of the page, yes, you can do that. With rare exceptions, you do that the same way as you do when adding a wikilink to an article, that is, you enclose it in double brackets (optionally, piping the link as well). If you look at the edit history of this page, and find my edit summary (look for the phrase, "how to wikilink a term in the edit summary") you will see an example of it in use. Mathglot (talk) 00:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh I forgot you use the [[ to do a redirect link. Thanks for the speedy response. TheAlienMan2002 (talk) 01:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
TheAlienMan2002, For future reference, you should get used to calling that a "wikilink" (or, just plain: "link"), and not a redirect link, as the term "redirect" has a special meaning at Wikipedia, and if you use that term, people are going to get confused, as you can see. Mathglot (talk) 02:20, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Translating foreign film/television titles to English[edit]

Hi Teahouse, I've recently encountered an editor who has taken it upon themselves to translate a large number of foreign-named film and television titles. While I've looked at WP:COMMONNAME and the MOS section on titles, in order to ascertain whether or not this is justified or recommended, as most of the titles in question aren't very common, I'm unsure how to proceed, especially as the editor in question has been somewhat reticent on the topic. I'm wondering if I should just leave it, or if this type of mass translation is frowned upon and further action should be taken. Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:43, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Revirvlkodlaku: Are they actually moving the pages to a new title? Or just adding the translation to the lead? – Joe (talk) 14:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, I should have been more clear: the editor in question is moving pages to an English title. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Without knowing the specifics, that does sound problematic to me then. Especially if they're doing the translating themselves rather than taking it from sources. If they're not responding to requests to stop (which should be enough to stop making the moves unilaterally, per WP:BOLDMOVE), I'd escalate it to ANI. – Joe (talk) 15:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, according to them, they are using sourced, or "official" translations, so that particular point doesn't seem problematic. My main area of concern around this issue is that I'm not sure what the protocol is, or if it is recommended to translate all, or most, foreign titles to English (unless the productions are specifically known by their foreign title rather than a translated one). Any thoughts on this? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The general rule (not just for films) is that we use the name most commonly used in reliable, English sources. If the foreign term is the one most commonly used in English ("Mein Kampf", not "My Struggle"; "Das Kapital", not "Capital (Marx)") then we use the foreign term. If the English term is most common, then we use that: "The 400 Blows" (not: "Les quatre cents coups "); Seven Samurai (not: "Shichinin no Samurai", or "七人の侍"). Mathglot (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Forgot to ping User:Revirvlkodlaku. Mathglot (talk) 00:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I understand that last point; that's what I meant when I wrote "unless the productions are specifically known by their foreign title rather than a translated one". My question is, if the titles are not well known, is it preferable to leave them in their original language, or is the English name preferred? Is there a guiding principle around this? In other words, is it a problem that this user is changing the names of a whole bunch of titles to English? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are these sources reliable?[edit]

Hi! I need your expertise. Can you please verify if these sources are reliable?

Thank you. Impboi (talk) 15:30, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Impboi (talk) 15:26, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It would depend on what facts they are intended to be used to verify: many sources can be regarded as Reliable for some matters, but not others, and a City Guide and Cultural magazine (the third) likely has different degrees of reliability in different topic areas to a major University (which doubtless produces everything from scientific papers to student rag-mags), so a blanket affirmation (or denial), is not applicable. You will have to be more specific about what facts, intended for what Article(s) or Draft(s) (presumably), and what particular passages in what publications. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 15:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. Thank you for responding to my message.
By the way, here are the links. I am hoping I can
use these as references.
You mentioned previously that it depends on
the content. Do you thinkl can use them? 1'd
be grateful if you could response to this again.
Thank you. Impboi (talk) 16:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ask a question[edit]

I've WP:COI with one Proposed to delete article, created long back. Creator is unknown to me. I want to give reliable citations in that page. Should I?,_Rahara Supriyomj16022008 (talk) 16:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Supriyomj16022008! A high school will significant history like this will generally be notable, so if you have sources, feel free to add them and contest the deletion by removing the tag. I wouldn't consider being a student or alum of the school too much of a COI (if you're an employee of the school, that's moreso). Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 16:17, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok fine but I'm not a student, not a alumnus. This school is under one organisation. I am the member of that org but in noway directly involved with that school. Supriyomj16022008 (talk) 16:22, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You do have COI if you represent the org. I would advise that you use the edit request wizard by clicking here to request for the changes/updates that you would like to make on the relevant article. Jeraxmoira (talk) 16:39, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much. When I got first reply, immediately I started. I already edited declare WP:COI. But if you want to see my article page that is If you want you can do. It is my heartiest request. Thank you. Supriyomj16022008 (talk) 17:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confusing, because there is an AfD for the high school article and an unsubmitted draft (without references) for a college - both identified as Ramakrishna Mission. David notMD (talk) 18:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article was previously PRODed. I reverted to the PROD tag, and the editor who added it just opened an AfD. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 18:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Making an article[edit]

Hello, I am interested in making an article. I wrote one and published it right after, following all Wikipedia guidelines. But they still took it down, on suspicion that it had ties to another article that was taken down years ago. After talking to the person who deleted it, they just told me I should redraft it. Is there anything I missed before that led to my article being deleted? The person who deleted it never gave a concrete reason why it was deleted Aescamilla45 (talk) 17:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Aescamilla45, it looks like the article was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joanne Kwong. Are you sure you spoke to the same person who deleted it? That sounds like odd advice to make on their part. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The criteria for Speedy deletion was G4, meaning that your draft was identical or near-identical to the article that had been deleted in 2021, recreated in August 2023 and deleted again. Thus, a suspicion that you had a connection to the old versions (both deleted). David notMD (talk) 17:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Aescamilla45. Deb did not "tell you I should redraft it": she said I can see a case for re-drafting it, which is not the same.
I cannot see your deleted version, but it was deleted on two grounds: (A7: No credible indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events): G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion). This is not "because it has ties to" a previously deleted article, but because it is substantially the same as that deleted article, and also because it does not appear to address the fundamental, inescapable reason for the first deletion: that sources did not exist to establish that Kwong meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability.
If you want to try again, you should read your first article, and follow (and not circumvent) WP:AFC. In any case, you should start by finding at least three rock-solid sources each of which meets all the criteria in golden rule - they are reliably published, wholly independent of Kwong (not written, published, or commissioned by her or her associates, and not based on interviews or press releases), and contain substantial coverage of her.
If you cannot find three such sources, then you will know that there is no point in spending any more time on this, and you should turn to something else. If you can, then you should write your draft based entirely on what those sources say, not on what Kwong says or what you know. ColinFine (talk) 17:40, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note: @ColinFine: probbably meant to link to WP:SIGCOV, WP:substantial coverage is a red link Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for the response, this was actually very helpful. It made me look at my article to see if I actually followed these rules, like the golden rule for example. And yes, I have more than 3 rock-solid sources following the golden rule. All independent of her, reliably published and discussing her in detail instead of just briefly mentioning her in some old record for example. I understand that because it has been deleted its difficult to decide whether what I wrote was in fact following this rule. But looking back I also took note of the sources and the date they were published. I understand that this old Wikipedia article written about her was published in 2021. But most of my sources were published after 2021. That's why I'm having trouble understanding what the reasons were, In one of these articles she is named "100 Asian and Pacific Islander's (API) with the most impact in their industries. This alone should show that there is credible importance to her. Yes, It was published in 2021, but being put in a list with names such as Kamala Harris and Anderson Paak is a huge accomplishment and deserves to be mentioned.
Again, since you couldn't find my article its understandable that you would think there must be some degree of bias towards her or that I wrote this with someone telling me what to write. The only reason I'm insistent on this is because it seems unjust on why it was taken down. I feel like just with what I've written here should give an idea of my article being not only very credible and following this golden rule, but that it was unfairly taken down just because there was another biographical article written years ago. If anything it's motivating me more to make sure it gets published.
I know I can re-draft it, but is there any way I can show it to other volunteers here in Wikipedia so that they can double check it? Just so that I don't have to go through this again? I think there was a suggestion I saw before publishing the article where I can pay others to check, but i prefer not doing that. Thank you again for the response this really was insightful. Aescamilla45 (talk) 22:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
User:Aescamilla45, there's no method whereby you can pay Wikipedia volunteers to check your draft. Any place you saw making such a suggestion is attempting to scam you.
Rather than rewrite your draft right away, you could always post your three best sources for a quick source review. Experienced editors can then verify that they do indeed establish the notability of your subject. Folly Mox (talk) 23:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How do I ask for an article to be restricted?[edit]

There are some articles, like this one or this one where its obvious the article was created by the company as an advertisement. I’m not saying we should delete them, because knowledge is knowledge, and I’ve done by best to make them un bias, but I think that there might just be another IP address coming in and saying that they’re the best in the world. On some pages, I’ve seen edit restrictions for only admins or only accounts. How can I do this or ask for this to be done? Janlopi (talk) 17:37, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Janlopi, pages are protected so only admins (full protection) or users with over a certain number of edits (semi-protected), but only as a last resort. See Wikipedia:Protection policy. I will quickly look at these articles you linked now. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Janlopi, I have requested a complete rewrite of BridgeClimb Sydney and removed a bunch of promotional content from Richard Vaughan Badminton Academy also. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so much man! You have been endlessly useful for me! 👍 👍 👍 Janlopi (talk) 19:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi no worries Janlopi, I appreciate that. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 13:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to avoid strange formatting of reference to external page.[edit]

I wanted to link to an external page and did that at first with the following source:


But this is rendered in a strange way with square brackets enclosing a meaningless number. It links to the right page, but looks weird. How do I avoid this?

  1. ^ "The Beaver People” [1]

Dsiedler (talk) 18:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Dsiedler, welcome to the Teahouse. I assume you want the second [1] to be something more informative - is that correct? If you type: <ref>"The Beaver People” [ Link to film]</ref>

You will get:



  1. ^ "The Beaver People” Link to film
Is that what you want? (talk) 18:28, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Got it, thanks! Actually the icon signifying an external link would in itself suffice - no additional text needed. I found I can get what I want by entering an empty string as the text:
[1] Dsiedler (talk) 19:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Another option is to simply link the whole phrase, like so:[2] (see below for result), but it's more a question of aesthetics at this point. What you should really do, @Dsiedler, is look into the use of citation templates - they're much preferred over using what we call "bare URLs", for various reasons. They're fairly easy to generate if you follow the instructions at Help:Referencing for beginners#RefToolbar. (talk) 20:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Many thanks for the great help! I agree with the advantages of using citation templates. I didn't do so because this is my first contribution to an article and I didn't want to rock the boat too much. The references in the article are a sort of dog's breakfast. If I do more with the article I will overhaul all the references. Dsiedler (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  1. ^ "The Beaver Family"
  2. ^ "The Beaver Family"

Help on A draft that got rejected declined.[edit]

I meant declined, not rejected.

The declined draft is Draft:Krew (Youtube group).

The reason given was:

"This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources."

I do not know if they mean I don't have enough sources to prove notability, if there is information that needs to be sourced but isn't, if some of my sources aren't reliable, or something else. The phrasing is a bit ambiguous to me.

Also, the link given before is for the current version. I added a few new sources in a "Further Reading" section, made a few small edits, and added another reference. EDIT: moved one of the sources out of the "Further reading" section to use as an actual refference.

Link to the rejected version

If this was a case of not having enough references to prove notability, this may have fixed the issue, but not for the other cases.

Noticed another draft, not mine, had the following in addition to what I had on my draft:

"This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."

Now I can tell this isn't a notability issue, but I still don't know if they mean I have unsourced information, or if some of my sources are unreliable, or both. AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) edited 18:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC) edited 01:09, 22 September 2023 (UTC) Reply[reply]

Your draft was declined NOT rejected, rejected would mean that it would not be considered again. Theroadislong (talk) 18:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Am I allowed to change the title to say "declined" or would that mess things up? AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) 18:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Changing the draft title to reflect that it was declined (i.e. moving it) is definitely not recommended. The title of an article, draft, etc., acts as a unique identifier for that page, and moving it will just result in more cleanup if it gets accepted or rejected. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 19:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't mean the draft. I mean this post in the teahouse. AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) 19:06, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
AKFkrewfamKF1, yes, you can do that. I've done it for you, according to the principles of WP:REDACT, which was probably overkill but allowed me to link and share that guideline for you, which may help in the future. Mathglot (talk) 23:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

list order of the list[edit]

in lists of people or works like the one in the disambiguation page for that guy from ultrakill, should the subjects be ordered in alphabetic, chronologic or whatever order an editor feels like using?

from what i saw, it seems it's in a different order in nearly every other article, when there's an order in the first place, so it's probably not a big deal anyway cogsan(give me attention)(see my deeds) 19:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Cog-san, I feel this page covers guidelines for disambiguations well: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Organizing_disambiguation_pages_by_subject_area. Cheers, Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 19:27, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
and that says "do it in alphabetic order lol"
thanks cogsan(give me attention)(see my deeds) 19:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia/Wikimedia web server IP addresses[edit]

I've been using a VPN for the past few months but constantly have the problem of having to add a new IP address to the exclusion list for split tunnelling in my VPN app each time I want to make an edit. A few times I have ended up turning off the VPN or even just giving up with it when it hasn't worked. Where can I find the full list of IP addresses used by Wikipedia and its sister projects? Thanks UaMaol (talk) 19:32, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The closest I've found with a quick search is wikitech:IP and AS allocations#Public IPs, listing several partially rather large IP ranges. I am not aware of how many thereof are used for web traffic. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:17, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Victor Schmidt: I had a feeling that there might be a lot but I entered the listed public IPv4 addresses including CIDR notation and it seems to be working now. Thanks for your help! :) UaMaol (talk) 23:02, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An article I created was declined, and I don't really know why.[edit]

All I have seen is "Stuff you should have in an article". I'm new at this, so I probably shouldn't have tried making a completely new article, but I would still like feedback on what my article needs. I was making an article on the book Obsidio by Amie Kaufman. MonoDev (talk) 19:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello MonoDev and welcome to the Teahouse.
The draft has no independent references about the book. To show a book's notability, you need more than a pointer to the book or its publisher. This role is often served by independent, professional reviews of the book. There's probably more about this at WP:NBOOK. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 20:18, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, I see. Well, I'll just stay out of the professional ways, and I think I'll just settle for copyediting for now. I don't think I would be good for much more anyways lol MonoDev (talk) 20:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, MonoDev, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. I'm afraid that you have made one of the classic beginner's mistakes, by writingmissing words added in edit Draft:Obsidio (Book) BACKWARDS.
A Wikipedia article should be based almost entirely on what independent reliable sources have published about the subject: for a book, that usually means serious, in-depth reviews, published by major newspapers or journals.
I always advise new editors to spend a few weeks or months learning how Wikipedia works by making (small at first) improvements to existing articles, before they read your first article and try their hand at a new article. ColinFine (talk) 20:19, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, I'll do that. Rushing and making an entirely new article was definitely not the smartest move. I'm going to try to be much more active as a Wikipedia member, so I hope there will be a day when I am competent enough. So I'll take your advice and just make small improvements to articles. Cheers! MonoDev (talk) 20:24, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello MonoDev. I’m sorry your draft got declined. As ColinFine advised reading Help:Your first article is a good way to learn guidelines. If a draft is not worked on for six months it will be deleted, so you may want to cut and paste your draft into an offline word file. Over time you could do more research, see if you can find a good source that states the book won an award, and perhaps find one or more reliable book reviews. Reliable means something from a magazine or website that has an editor overseeing what is being published, as apposed to sites that allows people to add data without using any references to show where the info came from.
If you find some good references you will have your original draft saved, which will be a good place to start to improve your article. Best wishes on future Wikipedia projects. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What should we do about vandals?[edit]

General question here, not asking about any page in particular. (talk) 19:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is detailed out at Wikipedia:Vandalism § How to respond to vandalism, however, the basic workflow is that you undo the vandalism, place a warning on the offender's talkpage and report them to WP:AIV if repeated warnings don't cause them to stop. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposed deletion of GiFi[edit]

I had proposed this article for deletion a few days ago and the creator dePRODed it without discussion on the project's talk page or on the creator's talk page. What do I do? Excellenc1 (talk) 20:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can nominate it for deletion. Ruslik_Zero 20:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Excellenc1, and welcome to the Teahouse! Proposed deletion tags are allowed to be removed without discussion, even by the creator of an article - typically they should only be used for uncontroversial deletions where you believe nobody at all would object. You can open a discussion at articles for deletion - after 7 days, if a consensus has formed to delete the article, it will be deleted. Tollens (talk) 20:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Excellenc1 Have you checked out the sources used at French Wikipedia about this chain? It's a much bigger article (see here?) Maybe they might help you do a WP:BEFORE, prior to recommending a deletion discussion. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll add the 'Expand French' and 'More citations needed' templates to the article, given the scope of the article in French Wikipedia. Thank you! Excellenc1 (talk) 03:17, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Roblox Rooms[edit]

Can you add A Roblox Rooms page? TroopGlitch29 (talk) 20:06, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is not the place to ask. Please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Shantavira|feed me 20:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Paraphrasing the sentence[edit]

If I put information from a book using Google Books do I need to paraphrase the sentence because of potential copyright issues? Or can I just copy and paste the sentence? Aredoros87 (talk) 20:19, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Aredoros87, and welcome to the Teahouse! It really depends on what you're doing - if the exact wording is important, you can quote the book, placing the short snippet you need in quotation marks. Typically this is only used for controversial statements from a person, or when the exact wording is critical for a reader's understanding (which is not the case most of the time). In all other cases, yes, you should paraphrase. Tollens (talk) 20:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the explanation! Aredoros87 (talk) 20:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Aredoros87. In general you need to paraphrase. Unless the book is very old, it is almost certainly in copyright, and you may not copy it except as a quotation (see the next paragraph). Even if it is public domain or freely licensed, so you may legally copy it, it is usually a better idea to paraphrase it.
A limited amount of direct quotation is allowed: you must make it clear that it is a quotation and where from, and have a good rationale for quoting. ColinFine (talk) 20:26, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for an answer!
How do we classify the book as "very old"? I remember I read somewhere that the limit is 70 years. But It was about the pictures. Aredoros87 (talk) 20:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's more complicated than it should be, really. The easiest thing to do is assume any work published in 1928 or later is still under copyright. For a guide on the full rules related to when copyright on a work lapses, you could have a look through WP:Public domain. Tollens (talk) 20:44, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for explanation Aredoros87 (talk) 20:45, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note that the details of copyright vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. ColinFine (talk) 21:24, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Place marking an edit in progress[edit]

I started editing a page, but had to stop part way through because of other time comitments. How do I return to the that page and the place I left off? Telerana (talk) 21:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to Catholic University of the Most Holy Conception, you need only to revisit the page and edit it as you did the first time. 331dot (talk) 21:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Telerana, kindly let me know if I got this right or not. I am interpreting what you said as in "you start to type things in the visual editor / source code, but had to stop part way through, and you wonder if your editing progress in the editor can be saved".
If that is the case, I suggest that you make small-stepped edits in your sandbox. Hit "save" / "publish" every time you do it. When you think you've accumulated a cohesive paragraph / sentence, copy-paste it to the article.
Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 02:24, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. I'm new at this and didn't think of using the sandbox. Telerana (talk) 03:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No worries! Welcome to the community. -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 15:54, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Is there any way to receive critique or advice in terms of the revisions that we make so that we may improve as editors? I have made a few minor edits thus far and am worried about making larger ones without receiving critiques on the edits I have previously made. GranolaCube (talk) 22:41, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

GranolaCube, don't worry, just go ahead and edit without fear. BE BOLD is a key feature of Wikipedia, and you won't break anything by trying. At worst, some other editor will undo what you did, but that is very much part of the way things work around here. That said, if you want advice about a specific topic, like, say, Red Sea, then you should ask at its "Talk page", namely, Talk:Red Sea. If you want general help with stuff, like how to make links to another article, or when to use italics, and stuff like that, then this is the perfect place for that kind of question. Good luck! Mathglot (talk) 23:33, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

how to post a photo that is open for use that I don't own and use of twitter as an external link[edit]

Hi, need advice on using a photo that the owner says is open for use, but I don't feel right saying it is mine, that I own it. It is of Timothy Snyder and Olena Zalenska> and it was posted on the website for the Yalta European Strategy Conference. I could not figure out the instructions for uploading it so some other place on Wikipedia or elsewhere, but do know how to upload it from my own environment to Wikipedia, if I say I "own" it, which I do not, but I have permission. Please advise. ALSO: I believe this proposed text meets the exceptional standards for allowing an X "tweet" as an external link. Please advise Olena Zelenska, First Lady of Ukraine, expressed her pleasure at a second meeting with Snyder in September of 2023 to discuss the mental health of Ukrainians, mutual understanding and happiness of people around the world.Olena Zelenska on X, September 10, 2023 LBDon (talk) 00:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC) LBDon (talk) 00:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

for your first question.
usually, all photos and videos are under copyright, and it also seems to be the case here.
copying from the website: © 2006–2023 Yalta European Strategy. this most likely means that you cannot upload the file.
know that copyrighted works can be uploaded, but only under very strict criteria. see Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria § Policy.
your second question:
ok, looking at the tweet you linked on your talk page, it's useless as an external link. if you want to cite it, we have {{cite tweet}}.
understand that external links should contain neutral and accurate material relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article. ltbdl (talk) 01:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm going to add to the above that just because you yourself have permission to use the image doesn't mean you can upload it to Wikipedia, unless you also hold the copyright of the image, as uploading images to Wikipedia usually requires that image to be licensed under a free license (with the exception being images under fair use, which as stated above has very strict criteria). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why Moved article space to draft space?[edit]

Ravensfire moved Baanadariyalli (2023 film) to Draft:Baanadariyalli (2023 film). This film is releasing on 28 September 2023.filming is completed, but they moved to draf space. What about Baanadariyalli article? Arumobileworld (talk) 02:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Arumobileworld – whoopsies! Looks like you have created a duplicate article (the draft you have created duplicates an existing article). In this case the title is a plausible redirect to the main article you have mentioned, Baanadariyalli, and so I will redirect that to the main film instead. Happy editing!3PPYB6 (T / C / L) — 03:47, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For your information, if you have anything to expand on that subject, you can always go to Baanadariyalli and make some improvements to that article. Happy editing!3PPYB6 (T / C / L) — 03:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I created that article before the Baanadariyalli article. When my article moved to draft space then Baanadariyalli article created by someone. Arumobileworld (talk) 04:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Arumobileworld – I see. In that case the standard protocol would have actually been to merge the articles together but seeing as the content in the pages were basically the same I would just leave that as a redirect. However, your draft did cite The Hindu—which is India's newspaper of record and is regarded as a more reliable source (see WP:THEHINDU). I would recommend citing the claim in the main article that is pertinent to the article from The Hindu. Thanks for letting me know!3PPYB6 (T / C / L) — 04:13, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank You 3PPYB6 Arumobileworld (talk) 05:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Arumobileworld, The film did not meet the WP:NFF criteria for unreleased films. There isn't enough in the article to show that the film production itself is notable. Generally articles like that are moved to draft space until they are released. I'm not going to bother pushing on this one, but please read and follow how it should be done. Ravensfire (talk) 03:57, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Arumobileworld, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks as if you think that "This film is releasing on 28 September 2023.filming is completed" had some relevance to Wikipedia: it doesn't. An article is moved to Draft space because the mover believes that it is not at present suitable for the main encyclopaedia, but could be made so. This has nothing to do with dates, but about the quality of the sources, or the writing (or both) in the draft. ColinFine (talk) 11:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:JWB fixing curly quotes—in references?[edit]

Hello, Teahouse hosts (even though I apparently listed myself as one)…
I was working with WP:JWB and found out that when I fixed curly quotes it was extending its reach into the references. Are curly quotes generally allowed in references because they must be titled/styled "as-is" or does MOS:CURLY generally extend into references? Thanks.
Postscript: for example, JWB was attempting to fix a curly apostrophe within a reference and I just allowed it to pass (see Special:Diff/1176502468).3PPYB6 (T / C / L) — 03:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 3PPYB6. As the Manual of Style says, the only place for curly quotes on the English Wikipedia is in direct foreign language quotations. Otherwise, they should be removed, including from references. Cullen328 (talk) 05:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cullen328 – Thanks for letting me know!3PPYB6 (T / C / L) — 13:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seeing previous interactions[edit]

Hello! This is a bit of an odd/niche request (and I also hope it doesn't sound creepy??) but sometimes someone will respond me on a talk page and I feel I have seen their username before, and there's an odd "have I talked to this person before?" especially if they are very kind to me and I feel endeared. Is there anyway to see past interactions between two editors? -- NotCharizard 🗨 05:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Notcharizard: There is - see Wikipedia:Interaction Timeline for the tool. Tollens (talk) 05:11, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This one does the same thing, and also allows for filtering of the namespace you want to search. Tollens (talk) 05:18, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so much! Wikipedia really does have a script for everything :P And thank you for such a fast response too. -- NotCharizard 🗨 05:20, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Logical Quotation period clarification[edit]

Hi there, got a question about logical quotation, specifically about when to put a period before an end quotation mark instead of after. I understand it happens when A) there is a period in the original quote and B) when the quote is a complete sentence. However, I'm seeing a hodge-podge of periods being before and after the end quotation mark specifically in quotations that start mid-sentence. Is the complete sentence piece the deciding factor, or is it ok to do it with incomplete sentences because there is, obviously, a period at the end of the sentence in the original quote? It seems like complete sentence is the deciding factor, but want to make sure before I do any more editing. Thanks! Pac12dan (talk) 05:24, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Pac12dan: Yes, being a complete sentence is the deciding factor. The period should only go only inside the quotation marks if the quote is a full sentence, otherwise it should remain outside. The relevant section of the style guide is MOS:LOGICAL, if you want to have a look. Tollens (talk) 05:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Extended confirmed edit protected request[edit]

There is an extended confirmed protected edit request here which nobody is responding to. Please do the needful.-2406:7400:98:1D35:AEC3:3AFF:FE2C:9622 (talk) 06:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Edit requests are performed by volunteers, doing what they can, when they can. Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 06:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A number of people seem to be discussing that edit request, and the discussion is ongoing. That you are dissatisfied with the situation is clear, but it's also clear that the change will not be made until a consensus for it is reached. Deor (talk) 14:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does WP:REALITYSINGER apply to bands as well? Pottyantós WC (talk) 11:53, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Pottyantós WC: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest asking your question at the associated talk page: Wikipedia talk:Notability (music). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Adding pdfs as references - copyright issue[edit]

Hi Teahouse Hosts, I am currently drafting a page on Shot Peen Forming and want to include references to published articles from a journal. The articles are freely available for downloads as pdfs but I'm not sure whether this makes it ok to upload them to Wikipedia / Wiki Commons. My alternative is to just give links to the relevant articles in the journal. However, this only gives very brief info - not really enough to function as a reference in terms of content. Would appreciate advice on how to proceed. CSK45Kays (talk) 11:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi CSK45Kays, welcome to the Teahouse. Copyright would usually not allow republishing of a journal article. Please give an example link to an article and describe how you got the pdf. It the link is like and you merely clicked "DOWNLOAD PDF" then interested Wikipedia readers can just do that on their own. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That helps a lot. Thank you! CSK45Kays (talk) 14:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, CSK45Kays, and welcome to the Teahouse. Off-line sources are fine, as long as they have been reliably published. The important parts of a citation are the title, author, date, publication, publisher: a link to an online copy is a convenience, not a necessary part of the citation.
If there happens to be an online copy that respects copyright, it is helpful to readers and reviewers to link to it; but Wikipedia should never link to a copyright violation in any circumstances.
If a journal makes its articles available as downloadable PDFs, it is fine to link to those downloads; but if a random person has scanned and uploaded them, then they are probably copyright violations and should not be linked to. (They are also an unreliable copy of the source, as there is a possibility that they could have been altered). ColinFine (talk) 13:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! CSK45Kays (talk) 14:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Writing articles on living people[edit]

I'm new here and getting the hang of things. If I were to create an article on a living person in a certain field I'm knowledgeable about, such as content marketing or holistic health, how popular should they be? What I mean is that if I can't find articles for reputable newspapers or journals on their work, are they still considered notable if their contributions to their community are recognized on other platforms? I'm trying to learn how to do research and not start writing on a topic that has no viable chances of being published here. Introvertedwriter1995 (talk) 12:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A living person merits an article if they receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources showing how they meet the definition of a notable person(or one of the narrower subsets like a notable politician). Sources do not specifically need to be a newspaper/media, but they do need to have a reputation of fact checking and editorial control(i.e. they don't just post anything they want, they check for accuracy). This disqualifies most blogs(though not all). 331dot (talk) 12:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Do not confuse popularity with notability. A person can be popular but not notable, and notable but not popular. 331dot (talk) 12:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, introvertedwriter1995, and welcome. It is perhaps unfortunate that Wikipedia has chosen the word "notable", because it doesn't mean quite the same as the normal meaning of the word. I suggest thinking of it as a shorthand for "there is enough independent reliable material published about the subject for it to be possible to base an article on it" - remembering that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 13:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Can you direct me to specific criteria for notability.

I particular, I'd like to contest a rating of "not notable" with an article I submitted about a Lord-Lieutenant. This is a national position, appointed by HM The King (UK). Can you suggest why this would not meet notability criteria, as it has in the past? LWSimpson (talk) 12:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This appears to be about Draft:Christopher Andrew Crawford Simpson, which has been tagged for Speedy deletion for copyright infringement. David notMD (talk) 12:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The criteria for the notability of individuals can be found at WP:NPEOPLE. Shantavira|feed me 13:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, LWSimpson. I haven't looked at the particular case, but I can certainly suggest why this would not meet notability criteria, as it has in the past: if the person has been appointed that recently, there simply might not be enough material published about him yet - simply a matter of WP:TOOSOON. Even if there are announcements of the appointment, if none of them contain any substantial biographical information, then there are not the sources to establish notability in Wikipedia's sense. ColinFine (talk) 13:58, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Film infobox title[edit]

I had to move my draft Draft:The Glass Harmonica (film) and re-title the infobox in it. The title of the infobox is now in red letters and says "template" on it, which it didn't do before. Is this something I need to fix or will it resolve itself when the page is no longer a draft? Thanks! Welcome back bro (talk) 12:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Welcome back bro: Welcome to the Teahouse! To resolve your issue, I removed the unnecessary braces in the |name= field of the infobox. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:59, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Photo copyright issues[edit]

I uploaded two photos for my draft Draft:The Glass Harmonica (film) which are screenshots of the film itself. As far as I can tell, they are not protected by fair use, and there are steps I need to take to ensure they are allowed. I recently got a message saying "This media file is a derivative work incorporating another work or works. While the source of this file has been identified, essential source and copyright information for all work incorporated in this file is missing. The author and source of all incorporated works must be given so that the copyright status can be verified. Edit the file description page to add source information" for each of the photos. What specifically do I need to do and where and how do I do it? Thank you! Welcome back bro (talk) 12:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Welcome back bro: It appears you uploaded the photos to Wikimedia Commons, not the English Wikipedia. Therefore, your question is best asked at Commons. I suggest you start by visiting commons:Help:Contents. In the future, you might enjoy using Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, which provides prompts for all the information needed when uploading files. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 13:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see you have described File:Steklyannaya Garmonika.jpg as "own work". Unless you hold the copyright to the film from which it was taken, this is not acceptable. You may have made the screenshot, but the copyright in the original subsists. ColinFine (talk) 14:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reporting paid article[edit]

Hi how I can report an upcoming paid article? The last time I reported a page by email to paid wikipedia but no one took any action. Is there anyone who can add the page in their watchlist and take action when created? I have evidence and all. (talk) 14:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. No one can do anything about an article that has not been created yet. 331dot (talk) 14:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
331dot, thank you for replying. I was wondering if someone can add the page in their watchlist and take action as soon as it's created because it's coming from upwork. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You will need to tell us what it is called first. Theroadislong (talk) 14:36, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Theroadislong: Thank you. Can you join wikipedia-en at Wikipedia:IRC so I can share it privately because the screenshot might include private information? (talk) 14:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We don't need a screenshot just the article's likely title. Theroadislong (talk) 14:54, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It could be under this or this. (talk) 15:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll keep the article in mind and check at some point NotAGenious (talk) 17:12, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Inserting a short auto/bio in Wikipedia[edit]

How should I proceed to open the following page featuring a short bio/autobio? Thanks a lot for the support!

Prof. Dr. Enkelejda Miho is an Italian scientist working on artificial intelligence for personalized therapeutics and diagnostics.

She is a full Professor of Digital Life Sciences at the University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland, where she established the Master of Science in Medical Informatics. She is head of the Laboratory of Artificial Intelligence in Health since 2018 and a group leader at the Swiss Bioinformatics Institute since 2019.

Research. Her research focus is investigating personalized adaptive immunity and applying machine learning to discover antibody therapeutics and support personalized diagnostics through the development of clinical decision software based on integrated clinical, laboratory and multi-omics large-scale data.

Education. She did her master studies at University of Bologna, conducted research at Penn State University, completed her advanced studies at the University of Basel and her doctorate at ETH Zurich. Italdech (talk) 16:30, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This Draft:Dr. Enkelejda Miho has been deleted twice as blatant promotion. Theroadislong (talk) 16:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear @Theroadislong
Actually, deleted twice for:
15:58, 22 September 2023 UtherSRG talk contribs deleted page Draft:Dr. Enkelejda Miho (G3: Vandalism) (thank)
15:24, 22 September 2023 Jimfbleak talk contribs deleted page Draft:Dr. Enkelejda Miho (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: self written vanity page, see WP:COI, WP:RS, WP:Notability (people), name is wrong in title) (thank)
Can anyone advice on someone that can publish and edit the content properly? Italdech (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Italdech. The answer is all in WP:YFA. But to summarise:
  • First, find several places where people who have no connection with Miho or any of the universities you mention, or that institute, have chosen to write in some depth about her.
  • If you cannot find any examples of this, then give up, as she does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability.
  • If you can find several such sources, then forget everything you know about her, and write an article based only on what those sources say, citing them as appropriate.
If you write a draft in that way, then it is likely to be accepted, and you can add further (referenced, neutrally described) material.
If you are associated with Miho, then you should declare this fact on your user page. ColinFine (talk) 16:52, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, @Theroadislong sent the link that explained how to do this. The COI is now declared in my user page. Italdech (talk) 18:09, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some to look over my draft before I submit?[edit]

Hi Teahousers!

I wonder if I could get someone to look over a draft before I push the publish button. I am scared to push the button because I have lost all of my citations each time I tried. Thank you, in advance!

Best, Wabbity

Wabbitty (talk) 16:35, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you mean this Draft:Sarah Boxer you have already published the draft but have not submitted it for review, if you do it would immediately declined because indeed there are zero sources. Theroadislong (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That is indeed the article. The trouble is that the draft you are seeing is not the draft I am seeing. My draft shows 45 citations/sources, correctly formatted, but somehow they disappear every time I try to submit. Is there a way I can share my draft page so you can see all the citations? Can I share it without submitting it? Wabbitty (talk) 17:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can I send you a screenshot or a cut-and-pasted version of what my Drafts page, with all the sources footnoted properly, looks like? I saved it as a file on my computer, so as not to lose all my citations. My Drafts page for this article is not the Drafts page you're looking at! Wabbitty (talk) 17:36, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(edit conflict) Oof, it looks like you only have inline references like [1] and [2]. Did you write the draft using a text editor like Microsoft Word, and added the citations there? If you did, you'll have to take a look at WP:REFB, like read in the decline message. Especially see WP:INTREF3. Otherwise, you need to go and find reliable sources for your article. NotAGenious (talk) 17:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can I send you a screenshot or a cut-and-pasted version of what my Drafts page, with all the sources footnoted properly, looks like? I saved it as a file on my computer, so as not to lose all my citations. My Drafts page for this article is not the Drafts page you're looking at! Wabbitty (talk) 17:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problem is - if you wrote the page and added the citations on your computer, you're gonna need to convert them to the code Wikipeda uses, in order for the inline citations to work. WP:REFVISUAL tells you how to give the computer a link, and the citation will be generated. But sure, you can send a screenshot and I'll see what I can do. NotAGenious (talk) 17:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's not submitting the draft (by clicking a "Submit" button in Wikipedia) that makes the sources disappear. It's whatever you do to get the document from Word, or whatever you're using, into Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 18:13, 22 September 2023 (UTC)