Wikipedia:Teahouse

ColinFine, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2-3 days.

Help Wikipedia

Being Hounded by an Editor

Hi everyone. I really need your help. I am being hounded by an editor. They are notifying all the pages i have ever created or contributed to for deletion OR leaving hostile twinkles line FANPOV etc. Instead of being collaborative and assuming good faith or helping with contributions or , they're being incredibly hostile. Month after month, they keep stalking my new contributions and disrupting my edits. Please help me with what to do. Wikipedia has become such a hostile space because of this one editor. TechGenWikinator03 (talk) 12:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

@TechGenWikinator03: Do you refer to User:Thewikizoomer? Either way, please see WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:39, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

I see one article you created (1M1B) and one you edited (Niharika Lyra Dutt) nominated for deletion by User:Thewikizoomer. Is there more 'hounding' than that? David notMD (talk) 15:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Sharing a full list:

Pages nominated for deletion by User:Thewikizoomer

1. Niharika Lyra Dutt
2. 1M1B
3. Reshma Pathan
4. Abha Khetarpal
5. Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2022 (Deleted); Made false sockpuppetry and copyright violation claims: Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2023 August 18 , Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TechGenWikinator03/Archive

FanPOV Twinkles on pages I've contributed to by User:Thewikizoomer

1. Chayanika Shah
2. Why Loiter? Campaign
3. Zubaan Books

Almost every age I've ever contributed to/created has been targeted. They're relentless.. It's been going on for so many months. TechGenWikinator03 (talk) 06:54, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

User @TechGenWikinator03 is advised to stop making personal attacks, they were warned to not do such personal attacks earlier on the talk page of them - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TechGenWikinator03&oldid=1172699815

It's evident that they didn't care to look at what they have written above, they accused me of making false sockpuppetry claims and copyright violation claims. Be informed that the Sockpuppet investigation was taken up and investigated under reasonable suspicion and was closed, the archive link they have mentioned above can be looked at for on how the investigation took place.

I have no idea why they have mentioned me in their so called copyright violation thingy. I don't have anything to do with that and if they have anything that needs to be discussed about the copyright claim, they may contact the user who raised the issue about that copyright claim. Also by looking at the copyright issue, it appears like indeed there was a copyright violation and it can be observed that the article was removed because it was a duplicate of an existing article. It can also be observed that they were advised to not remove the copyright violation template without following due process.

Their reaction before and after the sockpuppet investigation is evident to display which user is the one creating hostility.

Talking about the pages that I nominated for deletion, there are lots of pages that I nominated for deletion which can be found in my edit history, a few for example:

1) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sajjala Ramakrishna Reddy

2) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kakinada Airport

3) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Niharika Lyra Dutt (2nd nomination)

Valid rationale was provided by me in the nominations made can be found on the respective nomination discussions. If they have anything to add, they're advised to discuss in relevant forums.

In the same way, there are lots of articles that are tagged for issues there were identified, if they have anything to add or contribute to fixing an issue or improving an article in accordance with Wikipedia policies, they are more than welcome to do so.

Also by assuming good faith, I'm avoiding the thought of the user @TechGenWikinator03 having problems with me editing on Wikipedia. It appears nothing more than a silly rant and also I'm refraining from saying that they are being hostile to me by again, assuming good faith.

And having been edited about 3000 times on Wikipedia, trust me, I don't really care about who an editor is for an article or who has created an article before identifying issues, contributing or doing anything by sticking to the policies of Wikipedia. Thewikizoomer (talk) 09:21, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

How is it that I only get notifications from you month after month? Even for pages that I created YEARS ago?

Please read:

• WP:HOUND
• WP:HOUNDING
• WP:WIKIHOUNDING
• WP:FOLLOWING Hounding on Wikipedia (or "wikihounding") is the singling out of one or more editors, joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work. This is with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance, or distress to the other editor. Hounding usually involves following the target from place to place on Wikipedia.

TechGenWikinator03 (talk) 06:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Don't know what this copy paste is for, maybe they felt like accusing again - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thewikizoomer&oldid=1238118119. Anyways, user @TechGenWikinator03 may go through Wikipedia:Teahouse#c-Thewikizoomer-20240731092100-TechGenWikinator03-20240731065400, specifically:

"It's evident that they didn't care to look at what they have written above, they accused me of making false sockpuppetry claims and copyright violation claims. Be informed that the Sockpuppet investigation was taken up and investigated under reasonable suspicion and was closed, the archive link they have mentioned above can be looked at for on how the investigation took place.

I have no idea why they have mentioned me in their so called copyright violation thingy. I don't have anything to do with that and if they have anything that needs to be discussed about the copyright claim, they may contact the user who raised the issue about that copyright claim. Also by looking at the copyright issue, it appears like indeed there was a copyright violation and it can be observed that the article was removed because it was a duplicate of an existing article. It can also be observed that they were advised to not remove the copyright violation template without following due process.

Their reaction before and after the sockpuppet investigation is evident to display which user is the one creating hostility."

More importantly:

"Talking about the pages that I nominated for deletion, there are lots of pages that I nominated for deletion which can be found in my edit history, a few for example:

1) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sajjala Ramakrishna Reddy

2) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kakinada Airport

3) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Niharika Lyra Dutt (2nd nomination)

Valid rationale was provided by me in the nominations made can be found on the respective nomination discussions. If they have anything to add, they're advised to discuss in relevant forums.

In the same way, there are lots of articles that are tagged for issues there were identified, if they have anything to add or contribute to fixing an issue or improving an article in accordance with Wikipedia policies, they are more than welcome to do so."

Thewikizoomer (talk) 09:30, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Again I think the more appropriate forum was to follow WP:DR as suggested here. Also the user @TechGenWikinator03 may be advised that if they have any issues with anyone's contributions, they are welcome to discuss them in appropriate forum(s)/associated user(s) talk page in accordance with the policies.

The link may be found here and they can find this and more links to policies. Tips can be found here. Thewikizoomer (talk) 09:32, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

New draft page

This new draft page Draft:Ivo_D._Dinov was been brashly declined by User:SafariScribe. I'm writing to get a better understanding from other wikipedia editors that can review the content of the draft and confirm if it indeed meets the academic-specific criteria? There were plenty of reliable sources provided in the draft article, so I'm not really certain if hte quick response reflects a real review. Here are the details:

According to the 8 wikipedia notabiliuty criteria, this draft page for Ivo D. Dinov, an academic satisfies at least 2 of the criteria:

• #3 The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers or Honorary Fellow of the Institute of Physics).

The scholar is an honorary member (fellow) of the Sigma Theta Tau International Society, and an elected member of the International Statistical Institute (ISI). Both references are provided in the article.

• #5 The person has held a distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research, a named chair appointment that indicates a comparable level of achievement, or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon.

The scholar is a named professor and chair, the University of Michigan Henry Philip Tappan Collegiate professor (reference is provided in the article, it self).

Thanks much, in advance. VodnaTopka (talk) 19:34, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

VodnaTopka The draft does not state nor reference that he is an endowed chair professor. Also, given what is in the Lead, the draft could benefit from a Publications section containing his book and selected journal publications (no more than five). Add to the draft and resubmit. David notMD (talk) 21:19, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

David_notMD, the revised the article draft now contains a new publications section, which outlines 3 examples of high profile works, including 2 peer-reviewed books with wide readership. To clarify the point about "notability, point #5", the subject is the University of Michigan Henry Philip Tappan Collegiate Professor, after the first University of Michigan President Henry Philip Tappan, and a department chair (as a head). Thank you for your constructive feedback. VodnaTopka (talk) 22:49, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I see that you have submitted the draft again. Given the large number of drafts waiting for a review, it can take days, weeks, or sadly, months, for a review. I found it interesting that one of his books is itself the subject of an article. David notMD (talk) 04:47, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Ivo D. Dinov Accepted. David notMD (talk) 18:51, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Great Patriotic War

Can you change the "British Empire" in the article to "British Empire and Commonwealth" Hachiko91919 (talk) 10:20, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Haciko91919 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This question is best raised on the associated article talk page, Talk:Great Patriotic War. 331dot (talk) 10:35, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

The only mention of British Empire in Great Patriotic War is this about the time before the 1941 German invasion of the Soviet Union: "Soviet intelligence reported that Germany would rather invade the USSR after the fall of the British Empire". I don't see good reason to add "and Commonwealth" there. Member states of the Commonwealth of Nations says that apart from the UK, the Commonwealth nations at the time were Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. Japan had not entered the war at the time and none of them were threatened. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:27, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Great Patriotic War

Can you change from "United Kingdom and its colonies"? (from "British Empire") Hachiko91919 (talk) 03:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Hachiko91919: please don't re-ask questions. answers to your previous ask are here: Wikipedia:Teahouse#Great_Patriotic_War RudolfRed (talk) 03:38, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Image copyrights for dummies

There are a few stub-class articles I have been contributing to, and I think it's about time I learn about image copyright rules. How do I find out about any given image's copyright rules and laws or whatever? Is there any site where everything is fair game (Twitter, Instagram etc.)? HYTEN CREW (talk) 19:10, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

There isn't really a site that's "fair game", but https://openverse.org/ searches Flickr for appropriately licensed images that you can then upload on Commons. You can also submit a request to Files for Upload where an experienced editor will review your upload request and determine if it is appropriate. This guide may also be of use. C F A 💬 19:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

See these three guides:

1. Wikipedia:Image use policy

2. Commons:Copyright rules

3. Commons:Licensing

— Toast for Teddy (talk) 19:21, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@HYTEN CREW: With the caveat that I don't claim any degree of knowledge in this area, I offer the following couple of pages that might be of interest:

* WP:Image use policy

* WP:Public domain image resources

Fabrickator (talk) 19:25, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

HYTEN CREW, you can use any image that you find at Wikimedia Commons. There are over 100 million media files there. Any random file that you find online or even in a library or a bookstore or in a magazine must be assumed to be restricted by copyright, unless you can find solid evidence that it is properly freely licensed, or that it is in the public domain. Cullen328 (talk) 05:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

My draft was rejected

Dear Team Wikipedia,

Please kindly assist me with how to properly do my citations and references. Okorieonyemauchezar (talk) 19:51, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:Okorieonyemauchezar/sandbox. C F A 💬 19:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Okorieonyemauchezar. welcome to the Teahouse. You have been supplied with helpful instructions and links to more information on your talk page. Shantavira|^{feed me} 20:25, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Okorieonyemauchezar. Your draft was declined not rejected. That's an important distinction. Please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY for an explanation of how trying to write an article about yourself is a bad idea. Self promotional language like uniquely known for his speed and wonderful ability to score because of his precise passing of the ball, and blessed with dribbling skill hat makes him maneuver with ease, in addition to his possession of both feet making it difficult to be stopped or predicted violates the neutral point of view. Cullen328 (talk) 20:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

... and he would be much more notable as a footballer if he didn't have possession of both feet. :-) Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

"declined not rejected. That's an important distinction" In plain English, it's hardly a distinction at all. The good folk of AFC need to find better, less ambiguous, terms for what they're doing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Paraphrasing without copyright

Hello. I have recently been reading Wikipedia's copyright and non-free content policies and want to make sure that I am properly paraphrasing text from the Handbook of Texas without copyright. I am currently in the process of making an article called Rattan, Texas, and I want to learn how to write acceptable content. It shows what to do in Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing#How to write acceptable content, especially the example box where it shows close paraphrasing repaired. This is the text from the Handbook of Texas:

(Redacted)

How should I properly paraphrase this without getting a copyright warning? I have come to ask for some advice on how to do this before I publish it onto Wikipedia. Thank you! Colman2000 (talk) 22:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Colman2000: Welcome to the Teahouse! In my honest opinion, I recommend you simply don't try to paraphrase that text. There are a couple things that could mean:

1. Given that paraphrasing the Handbook of Texas is what's caused some problems for you in the past, I'd strongly recommend just distancing yourself from it, at least for a little while. You were just unblocked 30 minutes ago—if I were you, I wouldn't sprint back toward the things that got you blocked in the first place.
2. If that didn't convince you to step back and you plan to continue anyway, as has been mentioned on your talk page, Please take care to write your own articles, not just closely follow other copyrighted pages. Do research using other resources too, not just trying to paraphrase the Handbook of Texas, and write your own new original content.

Again, this is my personal advice, but I think you're getting dangerously close to another block by trying to continue what led to your original block. I recommend a step back. If you're looking for other things to do across the wiki, WP:TASKS has a good list. In any case, best wishes and happy editing. (CC: Diannaa, the admin who both blocked and unblocked Colman2000) Bsoyka (t • c • g) 23:02, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Colman2000: You just added a large chunk of copyright text here, after stating that you understand Copyright content is not allowed anywhere on Wikipedia, not even in sandboxes or drafts.. You also said you understood It's more appropriate to summarize the content in your own words than to try to paraphrase, especially if you only have one source available. Find other sources. Find other topics. See the task list suggested by the other user. You need to add material in your own words and stop trying to paraphrase the Handbook of Texas. Find something else to work on. RudolfRed (talk) 01:41, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Colman2000 You're thinking about this the wrong way. You're not meant to paraphrase information from one source- you're meant to use it as a source of information only. And you're meant to be looking at more than one source! If you can only find one or two, its going to ber very hard to write a decent-quality article based.

I notice you're in college. Does your school have a writing lab or workshop you could attend? This has been an issue in Wiki-career since 2017; I fear it's hard for anybody here to help you break the habit of a lifetime. However, the kind of writing you've been showing here is troubling. If you've been doing the same thing on school essays, projects, or assignments, you are at a very real risk of being kicked out or having your degree removed. That should be your priority right now- so again, go to the library, or see if you school offers any tutoring programmes. Many do, for either a nominal sum or even for free! Failing that, you should look through the material on something like Purdue's Online Writing Lab. They have an entire section on avoiding plagiarism here. It's designed for teachers, but it's better than nothing. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 08:57, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

How cite a dynamic web page?

I would like to replace the permanent dead link on Ronald Pelton.

The reference acts as a source for Pelton's release date from prison.

How to view source:

1. Go to https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/
2. Select Find By Number and BOP Register Number
3. Enter Pelton's BOP Register Number: 22914-037
4. Click enter

This does not change the url.

How do I cite the above website? Vasusrir429 (talk) 01:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I would cite it like this:

{{cite web|title=Find an Inmate|website=Federal Bureau of Prisons|url=https://bop.gov/inmateloc/|quote=BOP Register Number 22914-037}}

which gives this:

"Find an Inmate". Federal Bureau of Prisons. BOP Register Number 22914-037

It's kind of hacky, but it does the job. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Vasusrir429 (talk) 07:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Vasusrir429 I think that the parameter |at= (instead of |quote= ) is slightly less hacky. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I just changed it to |id=, which seems least hacky to me. Folly Mox (talk) 11:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, either of those is better. 'quote' was just the first parameter I thought of that lets you create a note inside a citation. ~Anachronist (talk) 12:45, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

surface analysis file

Can add a file for 1960_Pacific_typhoon_season for the Typhoon Shirley {{PD-USGov-NOAA}} 122.52.17.18 (talk) 05:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

see Files for upload 122.52.17.18 (talk) 05:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey there 122.52.17.18! If it falls under that criteria, then go ahead and add it, but please note that there is an active mass-deletion discussion (where a bunch of images may be removed) that editors are discussing, and I wouldn't recommend adding photos of Typhoon Shirley from the National Weather Service because they may be copyrighted. Hope this helps! :) Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 07:11, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@122.52.17.18 and Sir MemeGod: I believe that there shouldn't be an issue with uploading the file for Typhoon Shirley's surface analysis as those were actually created by NOAA/NWS and should automatically be in the public domain. The files under discussion are actually ones created by non-NOAA/NWS employees but uploaded to the NWS's websites, as those may be copyrighted, rather than images made by the organizations themselves. Hope this helps! ChrisWx 🌀 (talk - contribs) 16:51, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Link to a notable person with no Wikipedia article when there's another notable person by that name with a Wikipedia article

In researching some information about Edward Evarts, I ran across some information about his first wife Josephine Semmes. It turns out she was one of the developers of a widely used tactile sensitivity test. I started drafting a small article (a stub?) with what I found.

User:Aurodea108/Josephine Semmes

(This would be my first article.) In my draft, I want to link to her collaborator, Prof. Sidney Weinstein (they developed the Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test). However, when I put a link to his name, it apparently goes to Lt. Gen. Sidney T. Weinstein, a completely different person. Prof. Sidney Weinstein

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3109/00207459209000529

is another notable person who should have his own article, and a disambiguation page should distinguish these two. In the meantime, what should I do about the link in my draft? Aurodea108 (talk) 07:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Aurodea108, I haven't clicked on either the article about S T Weinstein or the tandofline.com link concerning S Weinstein. Let's suppose that S T Weinstein is or was a military person and that your S Weinstein is or was a paleontologist. Now, in your judgement, is the paleontologist notable, and is it likely that somebody will create an article about him any time soon? If the answer to both these questions is yes, then feel free to link to [[Sidney Weinstein (paleontologist)|Sidney Weinstein]]; if the answer to one or more question is no, do not link. If an article on the paleontologist is created, no disambiguation page is needed; for an illustration of what will suffice instead, see what's in italics at the top of the article Akira Toriyama. -- Hoary (talk) 07:49, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Aurodea108, welcome to the Teahouse! I followed some links, and Sidney Weinstein would meet WP:NPROF #8 for being editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Neuroscience, if it can be established that Int. J. Neurosci is a major well-established academic journal in [the] subject area (our article on the journal is pretty brief, but I'm not familiar with the topic area).

He may also meet NPROF #1, since he's described as a founder of the field of neuropsychology both in the tribute (by his assistant at the journal he edited) linked above, as well as Bell-Krotoski JA (2011). "A tribute to Sidney Weinstein, PhD". Functional Neurology, Rehabilitation, and Ergonomics. 1 (3): 421–426.

Some editors may disagree with my brief assessments here, but if you do end up creating an article for this Sidney Weinstein, there's not really a need for a disambiguation page (unless WP:NOPRIMARY applies; haven't checked). You can use {{for}} on Sidney T. Weinstein and on your new article Sidney Weinstein (neuropsychologist) (or whatever) to help readers navigate between them. Folly Mox (talk) 11:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC) edited 11:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Having an eponymous device or method is also evidence of notability, per NPROF 1 and/or 7 (significant impact in their field). There is a nice section in Esthesiometer about the Semmes-Weinstein test (although completely uncited at this time). DMacks (talk) 13:38, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, @Hoary, I have updated the link in my draft as you suggested. Thank you for the additional reference to Sidney Weinstein and the tips about notability and disambiguation, @Folly Mox. I’m fairly certain he’s notable. It might be late September before I can start an article about him though. It seems quite a bit more of an undertaking, as there is more information available. Thank you @DMacks, that also helps with the notability of Josephine Semmes. I am learning a lot from all of your help! Aurodea108 (talk) 08:05, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Can anybody with an Instagram account help me

Resolved

 – My friend told me it's April 2018 QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 08:25, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi!

I recently edited the Baby Gronk article to include {{Infobox Instagram personality}}, but I also want to add the years_active parameter.

To do this, I need to know when the Instagram account was created, however I can't do this due to me not having an account myself. If anyone with an Instagram account can check @maddensanmiguel, click the 3 dots, then "About This Account" and either tell me or update the article, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks, QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 07:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

My posts were removed from the source wiki by unknown admin

account now locked

I did not know that my pages were removed from the archive pages list and the reason that was given to me was that the material provided was some kind of scam artist or spam persons account. the rest of the pages I had been working on were also and I do understand it out of scope with the topic and material allowed and that I should find alternative means to have others enjoy my content. is there any way I could access my pages to my account to copy paste the contents to a different text editor protocol. and who is to say exactly what the nature is for safely included intrest selections which I am sure most people are supportive. The problem I had was that this admin peer was refusing dialogue from my end which really begs some kind of response from others who aren't slow readers and already have like minded resources over the wiki page and reference community here online. There is some truth about these dialogs where the history of there exclusion problematically where then should I look online for some relative support of the things I didn't know were not accepted because of the scope or nature of the subject matter. finally if there was a way I could upload the text content of those postings to my own text/web editor so that the valuable nature is not lost because of administration of the wiki web. Ryantscotchie (talk) 09:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC) Hi...there are no other contributions by your account except your query here, deleted or "live". Did you edit under another username, or while logged out? Lectonar (talk) 09:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC) i was extremely surprised but on of the higher up admins blocked my content and also my account. I was theoretically 100 percent certain that the material and theory behind the pages that I created we going to be extremely long overdue subject matters and I do not one bit think the I was oversourcing content or being out of the scope of or of the state of mind of average Joe users on that portal and the commons.the next best thing this person could do is message me with their concern of whatever subject matter there was to be scrutinized at least then as I did in creating these deleted pages I would keep their contents for my personal interests Ryantscotchie (talk) 13:04, 2 August 2024 (UTC) @Ryantscotchie. What do you mean by the "source wiki"? What do you mean by the "archive pages list"? What do you mean by "my pages"? You are going to have to be a lot more specific for us to be able to begin to help you, but it does sound as though you haven't understood the purpose of Wikipedia. Please take a look at WP:42. Shantavira|feed me 09:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC) Here are your postings. Feel free to copypaste onto your local device and reupload onto your own personal website somewhere. Folly Mox (talk) 10:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC) @Ryantscotchie: See wikimedia commons user history page. Commons is for photos. Wikipedia is for articles. You posted text at Commons, which has all been deleted. The text you posted was in no way suitable for a Wikipedia article, being run-on verbage of no meaning whatsoever, with no references. You can recover what was deleted at Commons ("The white spot /red spot of jupiter", and other) to copy to your own computer, but please do not attempt to use it to create a Wikipedia draft. David notMD (talk) 11:38, 2 August 2024 (UTC) thank you for the link. I have been available to the creators of this contextual platform derived from the interests people have and making the people who we serve in life a reference to our analogous expertise in matters that almost always are a value to be recorded as I do for my personal records and the stability of the web atmosphere in terms of independent creation of what people call out to us ficticiously to report to them when to do so is the work of the most evil one. the method I use is the grandaddy trick and it is as convenient as it is real. the trick with not knowing evil is that it hasn't made your accuaintance. there were several pages I created on the fly to see for myself how I stand in this kind of circuit and with all honesty really don't agree about barring me from my work that it might have been a little too high throttle and minor in design to be accepted. it was however laid out to my socio-scientific history of above average effort and exceeding in accuracy. I do not believe that there is a any body of work that can escape scrutiny of the posters peers thanks Ryantscotchie (talk) 13:26, 2 August 2024 (UTC) Note this editor is blocked on wikisource as "spamming only account" and their page(s) deleted there. If the content there is anything like what they have written on enwiki and commons, I'm not surprised that was the outcome there. DMacks (talk) 13:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC) I reported the user to SRG. Ahri Boy (talk) 14:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Review aggregators

I saw the Bad Sport article, and it got me thinking. The article stated that the show had a 100% approval rate based on 5 votes. Is it really suitable to display it here on the wiki? If it was treated as a research, with such a small sample size, I am sure even mentioning it would be WP:UNDUE. —Mint Keyphase (Did I mess up? What have I done?) 13:04, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Mint Keyphase. "Votes" is probably not the right word here. The text actually says 100% approval rating based on 5 votes on the review aggregator site Rotten Tomatoes and although I haven't been able to get the RT link to work, RT is aggregating published reviews, so it does I think carry some weight. A better place to discuss this, though, would be the talk page of that article. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Mint Keyphase, the summary of the reliability assessment can be found at WP:ROTTENTOMATOES, which says Rotten Tomatoes is considered generally reliable for its review aggregation and its news articles on film and TV. There is no consensus on whether its blog articles and critic opinion pages are generally reliable for facts. There is consensus that user reviews on Rotten Tomatoes are generally unreliable, as they are self-published sources. Cullen328 (talk) 18:38, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

On italicization

If a term of art (i.e., a technical term) contains two words – one English and one non-English – should the non-English one still be italicized per MOS:ITALIC? The page in question is Tuscan gorgia, where "Tuscan" is English and "gorgia" is Italian. The term "gorgia" in linguistics – as far as I know – only appies to this narrow sense of lenition in Tuscan Italian. Any advice? ThaesOfereode (talk) 14:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@ThaesOfereode, It looks like when both of them are together, it is not italicized. However, gorgia does not seem to be integrated enough into the English language. Since gorgia is not English, one should use the {{lang}} template. ✶Quxyz✶ 18:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia Page editing, updating and current removal of photos

Hi, I have tried to reach out with help on Fabio Mancini's "super model" celebrity page and have so many replies and edits have been made but ruined the page layout, which was perfect on June 1, minus the authority database control?? We started the updates in March but since then the page has NOT been SECURED and we are getting different feedback, removals and lots of TALK. Fabio has retired from modeling, transitioned to charity work and patronages for the youth and charity outreach programs, met with the Pope last month but unfortunately this journey has not been easy with the multiple individuals editing and changing the formats. Could you possibly give us a direction on the following? THANK YOU SO MUCH Fabmac2024 (talk) 15:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Fabmac2024: You do not own or have the right to "control" any Wikipedia articles, regardless of who you are. Please read the conflict of interest guidelines and disclose appropriately. Thank you. C F A 💬 15:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Agree I don’t have the right to control articles. Fabio is working on the Italian side of getting his page sercured with worldcat, viaf, and speaking with OCLC. The struggle has been on the US side because of the language and find valid administration from this side. All messages have been passed to his agent (non English speakers) Fabmac2024 (talk) 16:20, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

You say that you agree that you don't have the right to control articles, and then you talk again of "getting his page secured". I'm not sure what you mean by "secured", but in general, a Wikipedia article may be edited by almost anybody in the world except the subject and their associates, who may request edits but not edit the article directly. ColinFine (talk) 16:54, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying. Also, would it be easier to edit & update in Italy and/ or US all links and ips may post “clear secure” from the Italy first? Or it doesn’t matter. The links and copyright is international as well. The photos are secured in Italy, but when it was posted they removed and labeled as not having correct copyright/ links?? Just need clarification Fabmac2024 (talk) 17:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Fabmac2024, I assume that when you say "in Italy and/or US" you mean "in the Italian language Wikipedia and/or the English language Wikipedia". The answer is that they are quite separate, with possibly different rules and procedures, and (with one exception) nothing you do on one has any effect on the other.

That exception is that if you are uploading images which are free for anybody to reuse for any purpose (either public domain or explicitly licensed by the copyright holder under a copyleft licence such as CC-BY-SA) you should upload them to Wikimedia Commons, and then all language versions of Wikipedia can access them. Non-free images are permitted on English Wikipedia only under a very restrictive set of conditions (see NFCC), so for example pictures of living people are almost never permitted in this way. I imagine Italian Wikipedia has a similar set of conditions, but I don't know for sure. ColinFine (talk) 22:10, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Afaict, it-WP doesn't have an article on this guy. [1][2] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:33, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

The article Fabio Mancini needs more independent sources. Maproom (talk) 15:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Note prior discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Fabio Mancini. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Another discussion at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Secure_a_"celebrity"_super_model_page. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Adding actor credits

Hello, I'm a relatively new editor and I have a question. When adding credits to actors or actresses how do I source roles with no articles about castings? I have added a few based on an article with the announcement, however in some cases there are no such sources. Thank you for your help. John's Edits (talk) 16:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

If the person's name is in the credits of the film/tv show, no citation is needed as the information can be verified by viewing the credits. It gets harder if their name is not in the credits. 331dot (talk) 16:41, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation I saw an edit like you described being reversed on a page on my watchlist and was confused. John's Edits (talk) 20:40, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

German Wikipedia page

I noticed that a German language Wikipedia page exists for the late jazz bassist Kelly Roberty. There appears to not be an English language version. How can I create and/or add Roberty’s page so it appears in searches online and for use in related English language Wikipedia pages? (For example, to add him to the list of notable people from Bozeman, Montana.)

de:Kelly_Roberty. MvT (talk) 15:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@MVteacher: See WP:Translation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. MvT (talk) 16:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

But note that the citations in de:Kelly Roberty are nowhere near sufficient to establish that he meets English Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Without better sources, no article will be accepted here. ColinFine (talk) 16:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kelly Roberti (2nd nomination), there was not enough significant coverage in independent reliable sources back in 2006; if the situation has changed since then, the sources have vanished or are generally not search indexable. The best source remains the July 25, 2000 NPR piece mentioned in the AfD. I also found an archived version of the obit from the funeral home as well as a short obit preceding the reprint of a 2009 interview in a local publication. I do not know if either are copies of the obit cited by de-wp, because the source requires registration (or is paywalled; can't tell). Other sources I found were brief mentions, interviews, and non-independent sources (e.g. a newsletter on the local jazz scene maintained by Roberty's widow). In case I missed something, I added links to the de-wp article using {{ill|Kelly Roberti|de}} or {{ill|Kelly Roberty|de}}. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:16, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Is a user acct plus an IP user a sockpuppet situation?

While following my curiosity from the recent Teahouse entry titled "Wikipedia Page editing, updating and current removal of photos", I noticed that IP user 109.52.151.46 is almost certainly user Fabmac2024. The two in tandem have been used to tag-team edits to article Fabio Mancini as well as solicit assistance in their objectives (apparently driven by undisclosed payments, as noted on the article itself) on the talk pages of other users. Maybe this has already been recognized and dealt with, but my inquiry is somewhat more general, using this as an example: (1) Irrespective of the paid-disclosure and exertion-of-control matters with regard to a specific article, themselves, is the use of an IP and a named user together in this manner wrong? and (2) If yes, then should I notice it, what steps ought I to take to invite appropriate administrative attention? Al Begamut (talk) 16:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I've filed an SPI report for Fabmac2024 at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sjutt. They seem to be a part of a large UPE farm (see Shoshat). You can file a report for an IP but CheckUsers will not connect them to accounts, so it will have to be a purely behavioural investigation. C F A 💬 16:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Your response is a bit technical for me; I'm entirely unfamiliar with the processes and terms you mention. Does this mean that, yes, an IP account that can be connected with a user account which together are doing such things is a cognizable assertion of possible sockpuppetry? Al Begamut (talk) 17:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

A CheckUser is someone who can see IP addresses that have been used by accounts and thus determine if the accounts have been used by the same person. For privacy reasons, they won't say if a specific IP address has been used by a specific account, so the investigation will have to be based purely on behavioural, not technical, evidence. C F A 💬 17:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Al Begamut: yes, per WP:LOUTSOCK. Folly Mox (talk) 00:41, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Single source published by subject of article

A person about whom no Wikipedia article yet exists, who received notable media attention in connection with a criminal prosecution against him, has a self-published web page containing explanatory information derived from publicly-accessible legal filings. The conclusions he draws are supported by those other sources, but the conclusions and reasoning are presented, publicly, only on his own website. Is that web page sufficient as a source for those statements (couched appropriately as his own statements) in an article about this person? Al Begamut (talk) 16:47, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Al Begamut. As a source for his claiming those conclusions, probably yes: see SPS (but without more information I can't say whether such claims would be appropriate for the article: see UNDUE). As a source for the validity of the conclusions, no; and of course such a source contributes nothing to establishing that he meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. ColinFine (talk) 17:02, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Perfect answer for me. I understand. Thanks very much!

(P.S. As the author of this Teahouse question, can I "mark it as" completed?) Al Begamut (talk) 17:04, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

It's completed when you say it is, or when people stop responding. If there's a way to "mark" it as completed, I don't know of it. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:32, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Resolved

Help with academic notability criteria

Hi, my draft was recently rejected due to not meeting any of the academic notability specific criteria, even though the subject meets several of the academic specific criteria, most notably third, fifth and sixth criteria.

3rd: Like I wrote in the draft, Lavento is a member/fellow of Finnish Society of Sciences and Letters, which is the practically the Royal Society of Finland. 5th: Finland uses the German academic rank system, where the professor is the highest possible chair and only awarded to the most distinguished researchers, which makes it similar to a distinguished professor. 6th: Lavento was the chairman of the Finnish Antiquarian Society, which is the oldest and the most notable of all scholarly cultural heritage societies in Finland.

How should I edited the article that these points are more apparent? I've already cited the societies where the membership/professor status are mentioned. MrGakster (talk) 19:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Additionally, like I wrote in the article, a peer-reviewed Festschrift was dedicated to the subject recently, which already satisfies the first criteria by itself, according to the academic notability page criteria note 1c. MrGakster (talk) 19:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I would suggest reaching out to the person on their talk-page on why they felt like it didn't meet any of the academic notability specific criteria and see what happens from there. In addition, they did mention on the comment of another reason why it was rejected which was

"cite multiple reliable, secondary sources independent of the subject, which cover the subject in some depth"

which sounds like you didn't do this based on what the reviewer said. Soafy234 (talk) 19:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment, I'll do that and we will see what happens. MrGakster (talk) 20:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

How to use an e-mail as a reference

I received an e-mail, not a PDF from KC Intl Airport concerning annual passenger traffic. Is it possible to source the document in the article? Seems you can't. Any suggestions?Theairportman33531 (talk) 22:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Theairportman33531, and welcome to the Teahouse. In a word, No. All Wikipedia articles should be based 100% on published information, so that in principle any reader anywhere can obtain a copy of the source and verify the information: see verifiability. (Not all existing articles meet that criterion, but if people introduce information which is not cited to a reliable published source, it tends to get reverted nowadays). ColinFine (talk) 22:16, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Finding Wikipedia events to attend

I attended a Wikimedia event on Friday, July 19th, in New York City. Where can I find a list of other upcoming events in my general area? I've been poking around trying to find something like this, but https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Events_calendar seems to have virtually nothing -- which may be as it is. I just want to know if there's somewhere else I should be looking. Al Begamut (talk) 22:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Al Begamut this may help, however there is also a specific page for New York City. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 22:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks... I guess there's just not much going on at the moment. I saw that an event slated for three days in early August in Poland has a "possibility of NYC satellite event in Greenpoint, Brooklyn", but as I couldn't find any more information about that "possibility," I just added the NYC events page to my watch list for now. Cheers! Al Begamut (talk) 23:08, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

P.S. I mean anything, even events not sponsored directly by Wikimedia. I saw something about Editathons, but again, I can't find a list that would be helpful for finding events local to me. Al Begamut (talk) 22:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Al Begamut: You can signup for meet up announcments here NightWolf1223 <Howl at me•My hunts> 23:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Al Begamut: Other good ways to keep abreast of local events are to join a local chapter, such as Wikimedia New York City (some are for cities, some are for countries, and we have many sizes in between), and to watchlist local project pages, like WP:WPNY. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:25, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

draft Draft:Afsheen (musician)

Hi guys! I had discussions with other editors about this draft on the talk page here of this editor. Nobody additional was there to review. So i am asking in places, if we can apply to this article category musicians or general notability perhaps, if there are enough for that. The editor there does not feel confident reviewing it, as they are not sure like me.

I think it is article number 4 I created. I never made articles about a musicians. This case is particularly unclear - as the individual seems to have many credits as producer of music, but with a low publicity. I have listed to their songs over the years myself, and in some cases I did not even know it was their song. J2009j (talk) 23:39, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I need help finding an old deletion discussion

I was looking at the Wikipedia page for Talk:Dirtbag left and noticed it had previously been nominated for deletion. However, there's no link to the previous discussion. I wanted to add a link to it, but I couldn't find it in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 February 16. I also didn't find it in a general search. I also couldn't find it in the nominator's contributions list. Looking at the article's history, it looks like the past deletion discussion was sucessful, and the page was remade. Is there a different place I need to go to find the discussion? Is there a different date I need to look at? Solitaire Wanderer (talk) 00:31, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@Solitaire Wanderer: Welcome to the Teahouse! Proposed deletion (PROD) is different from AfD—there won't be an actual discussion to link to. However, there's some conflicting notes here. From what I can see, the article wasn't actually PRODded but rather deleted under criterion for speedy deletion (CSD) A7, which allows immediate deletion of an article if there's no indication of notability at all. (Specifically, it was deleted when it was named "Dirtbag Left" rather than "Dirtbag left".) There would likely be no discussion in that case either. I'm not sure why a PROD note was added to the talk page since CSD and PROD are separate processes, but that's the confusion of Wikipedia for you sometimes. As such, I've removed the PROD note from the talk page. I hope this helps explain things a bit, happy editing! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 00:49, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! Solitaire Wanderer (talk) 01:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

How to save edits

Sometimes I want to make big edits but am afraid of losing it. So I end up making small changes and upload it again and again Cherry567 (talk) 10:43, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

No problem with that, but another way is to copy an article section into your Sandbox, make your series of changes there, publishing (saving) frequently, and only when done, copy/paste the entire section into the article. David notMD (talk) 10:58, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Thx, but what if someone else is using the Sandbox too? Cherry567 (talk) 11:30, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

The advice wasn't to use "the Sandbox" (which everyone is welcome to use), but instead to use "your Sandbox". There should be a link to it under "My pages" (under "Cherry567" and "Talk"). -- Hoary (talk) 12:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

OIC. Found it. Learn sth new Cherry567 (talk) 01:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

@Cherry567 To add to what David has said, if you use the source editor (or switch to it from the visual editor), you can copy/paste out the source code to store in a text editor on your local PC. That way, you always have a local copy. The "preview" function can be used to see how the source code will look when saved but there is no need to actually save/publish it until you are ready. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:02, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@Cherry567: There is also a recent option "Enable the Edit Recovery feature" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing. I don't know how reliable it is. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:19, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Cherry567, when I am ready to publish a significant change, I just copy it into my clipboard. If I run into an edit conflict, I just pull up the most recent version of the page and quickly paste my content into the appropriate place. Cullen328 (talk) 02:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Reverted Edit

I was working on a page that has a statement:

"This is a dynamic list and may never be able to satisfy particular standards for completeness. You can help by adding missing items with reliable sources."

So I added an entry with 2 sources.

The was reverted by someone who apparently has all-encompassing control over this page with this statement:

"Before you add that line again, either start a discussion on the talk page, or start an article on the LCB line. You asked the question on the talk page in 2020, so you already knew the requirements and added the line anyway. Not a good action."

The talk page discusses 4 options with the final statement:

"By caveat, I mean that lines that are currently in the article (before we had this discussion) without their own article should probably stay, as I feel most (if not all of them) could have their own article. If someone wants to add a line here that doesn't have an article, then the answer should be "yes" if there's enough material to justify a standalone article. If there is, let's start that article first and then add the line here."

But this is written as a suggestion, it never is agreed upon! Additionally, an additional entry was added after that statement, approved by the gate-keeper which does not follow that guideline.

The rules are not clearly stated, obscure, and contradict the statement on the page. Kevinskogg (talk) 16:06, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Kevinskogg, and welcome to the Teahouse. When you have a disagreement with another editor (which happens all the time, and is a normal part of a collaborative project like this) the thing to do is to open a discussion on the article's talk page, and try to reach consensus among whichever editors are interested in the question. The goal is not to be "right" or prove somebody else "wrong", but to reach consensus: see WP:BRD. Make sure you ping the editor who reverted your edit. ColinFine (talk) 18:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

See also WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Want your advise

Hi all! I have been continuously contributing to Wikimedia for the last nine months. My contributions exceed 10,000, and I have created more than 70 articles. Currently, I am an AFC reviewer. Friends, could you please advise whether I should apply for any further rights? Thank you with warm Regards! Youknow? (talk) 19:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

That's entirely up to you. Is there something you want to do that you're currently unable to do? Have you read Wikipedia:User access levels? Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Youknow. I agree with Shantavira. In my view, the only appropriate reason for applying for an access right is "There is a particular thing I want to do to be of service to Wikipedia that is arduous or impossible without this access right." ColinFine (talk) 21:26, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@Youknowwhoistheman Given the number of articles you have created, you should consider applying for WP:Autopatrolled status. That will lighten the load on the New pages patrol and get your new articles indexed by search engines more quickly. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull, I think you are right. Thanks! Youknow? (talk) 12:54, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Gold medals at the 2024 Olympics

how many gold medals will be given away at the many gold medals will be given away at the 2024 olympics 161.184.163.50 (talk) 20:28, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

If no article here tells you, you might ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment. -- Hoary (talk) 21:26, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia protection levels

True or false? The Wikipedia article "Child abuse" is subjected to indefinite 30/500 protection. 2001:569:7C11:B400:458A:50C7:52EF:A334 (talk) 22:23, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I already answered this question but you deleted the section. No, anyone can edit it. C F A 💬 22:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not asking you, CFA. I'm asking Wikipedia administrators. 2001:569:7C11:B400:458A:50C7:52EF:A334 (talk) 22:26, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary: per your suggestion. Folly Mox (talk) 11:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

The only protection currently set on that page is indefinite admin-only move protection. CFA is correct per the protection log, which is publicly viewable. An administrator would see exactly the same details. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 22:27, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I am an administrator and that statement is false. Child abuse has not been protected since 2019. Also, any editor can answer Teahouse questions, not just administrators. Cullen328 (talk) 22:43, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Not sure if you meant to reply to me or the original question, but I'm definitely confident in my answer. Either way, to add a little more context for the IP asking, while the edit protection expired in August 2019, that page has been protected from moves since 2007 (and in 2009 it was switched to admin-only) and still is. From the latest log: [Edit=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 21:21, August 9, 2019) [Move=Require administrator access] (indefinite) Bsoyka (t • c • g) 23:01, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Bsoyka, I was responding to the IP/OP, not to you. If I was responding to you, I would have pinged you. Cullen328 (talk) 23:05, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Cullen328, there is, or anyway there used to be, a convention whereby a comment below another comment and indented by an additional colon is/was understood to be a response to that comment. (I understand that the "reply" function, which I have never used, encourages commenters to ignore this and yet is very popular.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:31, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary, maybe the "reply" function has been updated in some way - I use it almost exclusively and to the best of my knowledge it's always threaded correctly (but I haven't been here that long). Do you use 'edit source' instead, or something else, if you don't mind me asking? StartGrammarTime (talk) 11:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

StartGrammarTime, I use "Edit", which edits the source. (I see no option for "replying" or "visual editor". I daresay if I poked around in "Preferences" I could add these options, but I've never wanted to do so.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Hoary, that's so interesting, I didn't realize there was a toggle! It must have been turned on automatically for account creation at some point before I registered an account. Thanks for answering! StartGrammarTime (talk) 16:08, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

In my experience with ReplyTool, its threading choices have required several alterations. Folly Mox (talk) 11:17, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Now I'm curious as to where ReplyTool would choose to thread a reply to the OP. Turns out it puts it here. Folly Mox (talk) 11:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Folly Mox, you might try replying to CFA's message (currently the topmost but one). I'd put it immediately below the OP's remarkable riposte ("I'm not asking you, CFA. I'm asking Wikipedia administrators") and start it with two colons. But I suspect that this "reply" thing defaults to three colons. -- Hoary (talk) 11:37, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

A new user might need help (not me)

I was trying out the public logs to see how they worked and practice using them and such, and, out of curiosity, I wanted to see some accounts that were created today. I noticed one which had created its user page, but was seemingly using it to try and create an article. I didn't want to message the user myself just b/c I'm kind of new too, and thought I might not be following the right protocol. Also, I'm not sure if English is their first language. If this is none of my business and something I shouldn't do, please tell me so I know in the future. And apologies as well. The user's name is User:Ismailsabrikhushab. Solitaire Wanderer (talk) 01:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

It's great helping out other users. See more about Wikipedia at WP: Welcome. Cwater1 (talk) 02:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I've asked the writer, at User talk:Ismailsabrikhushab. -- Hoary (talk) 02:13, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

New accounts often use their own User page as a place to create an article. Standard follow-up is to advise them to use WP:YFA as guide to creating a draft, and WP:UP for what a User page is for. David notMD (talk) 02:19, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the help guys. On another note, I know Wikipedia also prohibits User pages that are purely promotional in nature, i.e. promoting a random business/website. I saw a few pages possibly like that upon a glance at the page creation area again. Where do I report those? Do they go to speedy deletion? Solitaire Wanderer (talk) 12:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Consider as first step leaving a message on the editors' Talk pages that what they have posted is wrong. David notMD (talk) 13:00, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Solitaire Wanderer (talk) 14:02, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

new page and sources of information

Hello! My father passed away few years ago, he was an italian painter famous in the 60s and 70s. I would like to honor him making his wikipedia page, he wasn't very active in the last years due to illness so there is no trace of him. Problem is that I have a lot of information from papers and various publishing of that time, most of them (probably all of them) are no longer in business and for the most part I have just the article cropped or copied from the newspaper or journal orencyclopedia etc etc. what can I do following the rules? can I also publish a photo of a paint I own? thank you. Goldrake to (talk) 04:08, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Goldrake to, thanks for asking about our rules before diving in. Before you start thinking about sources, please read our Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and Copyright FAQ. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 05:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Potential references (newspaper articles, etc.) do not need to be accessable on-line, but you do need publication information (name of paper, date, etc) to be a ref. Use WP:YFA as a guide to creating and then submitting a draft. Only include referenced content, i.e., not stuff you know to be true but cannot verify via refs. David notMD (talk) 10:06, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

For uploading photos of your father's paintings that you own, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Folly Mox (talk) 11:23, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

How to attach a link to texts within a template?

Hi everyone, i try to attach a link to texts in my template like I do with normal texts. However, when I click upon the template, it moves me to a template editing display which does not support adding a link. Please help WikiLoreKeeper (talk) 07:27, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi WikiLoreKeeper, welcome to the Teahouse. You use VisualEditor which has its own way to edit template calls but that way cannot be applied to the value of parameters. You have to write them as wikitext where internal links are written with double square brackets like [[William Hertling]] to produce William Hertling, or [[William Hertling|W. Hertling]] if you want it to display as W. Hertling. See more at Help:Link#Wikilinks (internal links). PrimeHunter (talk) 08:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Seeking advice regarding when to bring an editor to ANI

Jesse's questions:

1. When should I seek dispute resolution first and when should I come straight to the Administrators' noticeboard?
2. What level of disruption merits bringing an editor to ANI?
3. How should I weigh promises to do better?
4. How should I weigh breaking such promises?
5. How should I weigh the extent to which they calm down when other editors are extra careful to be civil?
6. Should I only look at where I encountered them naturally, or should I add in some stalking to decide whether to bring a case and to make my case?
   • Is it appropriate for me to write automated tools to estimate how much someone is edit-warring, how often they are reverted, etc?
   • and the number of warning messages left on their talk page?
7. Does it matter whether designated contentious topics are involved?
8. Is there a FAQ with answers to these questions, or should there be?

— Jruderman (talk) 09:27, 4 August 2024 (UTC) (subsequently moved from ANI to Teahouse)

@Jruderman That's a lot of questions but most are answered at the guideline on assuming good-faith. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:42, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Notability

how do i get my self on wikipedia 147.161.162.202 (talk) 13:51, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

IP editor. You almost certainly don't as you are probably not wikinotable. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged for the reasons given at that link. See also why it may not be a wise step. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:39, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

User reverting good faith edits

Hello

Not sure where to ask this but came here for advice.

I made good faith edits on the Miss Universe 2024 page last night, following instructions and what has been done before, and a particular user of ONE month, decided to take umbridge and kept reverting. I left a perfectly polite message on their talk page and there responses, I feel, are uncalled for.

Could an admin or a more experienced user take a look and advise if there is anything I can do in regards to harassment/bullying. Of course, I appreciate and welcome constructive criticism .

Kindest regards Heidi bradshaw (talk) Heidi bradshaw (talk) 13:54, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Heidi bradshaw T931201 is being reasonable, I think. Don't use a seniority argument to prove your point. There is also no such thing as 'authorization' to perform an edit. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:29, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Appreciate your reply but why is it that when a contest is about to happen, another user will add the flagicon for a country, to save time during a later edit etc, and they don’t get pulled up on it? I’ve seen this so many times and never seen such ‘harassment’. But I digress. Thankyou for your reply. Heidi bradshaw (talk) 14:38, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I have failed to figure out what the argument is about. But your edit summary "Please look at your talk page for a note that was left for you. Persistent undoing of experienced editors can result in restrictions. DO NOT UNDO AGAIN." is unlikely to sway anyone. It fails to make clear (to me anyway) who "you" is, it implies that your seniority gives you more rights than other users, and it's shouty. If you have a good case to make, there are better ways. Maproom (talk) 14:59, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Your messages on User:T931201's talk page are not acceptable and you appear to have neglected to notify them of this discussion, Please read and abide by WP:AGF and WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:56, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Assistance for publishing an article (compilation) on Wikipedia

I am looking for assistance to publish an article (compilation) on Wikipedia. The article is ready but I don't know how to publish it as I understand little about the technical procedures for such publication on Wikipedia.

I would highly appreciate if someone could assist me in this regard.

Thanks a lot for your response.

A. Reyman from Switzerland A.reymn (talk) 14:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

A.reymn, since you are a new user, you cannot publish the article directly, you must first create a draft and submit it for review. See the Your First Article page for detailed instructions. In particular, ensure the article topic is notable. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:19, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response. Yes. I tried to submit as a draft for review but I didn-t know how to download my article (of some 3500 characters) already written and disponible in both WORD and PDF. A.reymn (talk) 14:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

A.reymn, I think what you want to do is copy the draft from your Word document and paste it into the draft. You can do this by pressing the 'edit source' tab - it should be on the top right of your screen, under your username - pasting the draft below the thing that says 'AfC submission' (etc), and then pressing the 'publish changes' option on the bottom left of the big text-entry box. Publish changes is basically Wikipedia's version of 'save'. You will then be taken back to the view-only version of the page, where you can see whether your changes have been successful.

Having done that, and making sure you now see your draft on the page, I would advise going back to 'edit source' and making sure your formatting and citations (and everything else listed in Your First Article) are done to Wikipedia standards. When you feel you are ready, you can press the 'Submit the draft for review' button on the bottom right of that box up the top of your draft in view-only mode. That will set the draft to the 'ready for review' stage, and a reviewer will come along sooner or later to look at it and give you feedback. We are currently very backlogged on draft reviews so please be patient - don't worry if it takes weeks or even a few months, as long as the draft says 'submitted for review' (or words along those lines) then you are all set! It might also be much less time, since the reviews are in a pool rather than a queue and reviewers often pick fields they know or drafts that have been waiting longest.

I hope that explains it, and happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 16:22, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Are you referring to Draft:Who are the Khitays? If so, this article doesn't have a lot of details added to it. If you were to submit this for review, it be most likely rejected and/or declined. Soafy234 (talk) 14:21, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

"Who are the Khitays" is the Tittle of my article (a compilation of some 3500 characters). To submit it, I need to download the entire article but how to do it?

Thank you verz much. A.reymn (talk) 14:56, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I only see a few words on the draft I stated above. I do not see 3500 characters visible on this draft of yours. Please elaborate on where you are seeing 3500 characters. Soafy234 (talk) 14:59, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

While your draft gives us no clue as to who the Khitays are, it's impossible to advise on whether what you're planning is a suitable topic for a Wikipedia article. Maybe they're the people described in Khitan people?   Maproom (talk) 14:37, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

"Who are the Khitays" is a very strange title for an article. We'd normally only have questions as article titles if the topic were a peice of media with that exact name or a well known saying. I think perhaps you haven't realised that Wikipedia is a not a place for reflective essays, or original research. -- D'n'B-t -- 15:32, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Draft keeps Getting Declined

Hi, I'm trying to create an article about the Compute Pipeline. I do not want to send another request because I've already had 3 declined. They keep on declining because of my sources. What's wrong with my sources? I think they're pretty good. Coulomb1 (talk) 15:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

@Coulomb1 The first source is supposed to go to a .pdf but when I click on it, I get redirected to a top-level on a nvidia website. That's not a good start. Other sources don't seem to be from people WP:INDEPENDENT of the topic, or mention DirectCompute but not specifically Compute pipeline. Given we already have a small article at DirectCompute, why not just expand that? Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:34, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

@Coulomb1, hi and welcome to the Teahouse! Asking instead of sending your draft for review again is a good call - always make sure you've made changes to your draft between reviews, trying to improve it, because otherwise reviewers will conclude it simply cannot be improved and will reject it (which means the end of the road for that draft).

Your first problem appears to be that as far as I can tell, none of your sources actually contain the phrase 'compute pipeline'. This makes it kind of impossible to use any information from them, because they're not talking about the topic. This is usually one of the first things reviewers look for; your sources should all be primarily about your draft's topic (significant coverage). Your second problem is that you need your sources to have been published in reputable places with editorial oversight. At the moment I'm seeing a list of videos (cited to Young - perhaps the wrong link?), two powerpoints (cited to Kramer and Lively) which I think would be treated like blogs (not reliable), and one journal article (Graham-Smith) which would probably be a good source if it actually mentioned 'compute pipeline'.

Sorry I don't have better news for you - Mike Turnbull's advice about improving the DirectCompute article is good, and I'd go with that if I were you. Happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 16:35, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

@Coulomb1 I'll add that it's highly unlikely you're going to find sources which use the term "compute pipeline" as a term specifically referring to DirectCompute's shader pipeline; even the sources you currently have on the page do not do this. Pipeline is a standard general term in computer architecture. I second Mike Turnbull's recommendation that it might be easier to try expanding the existing DirectCompute article with the information you want to add. Dylnuge ^{(Talk • Edits)} 16:37, 4 August 2024 (UTC)