Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 16:59, 22 September 2021

Shortcuts

RudolfRed, 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.

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

Most recent archives
1211, 1212, 1213, 1214, 1215, 1216, 1217, 1218, 1219, 1220, 1221, 1222, 1223, 1224, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1229, 1230

FAQ

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) § FAQ Template in Greek Wikipedia

Template: Pin Messages

hello i have a question about Archiving Suppressor Template

we have two of them {{pin message}} and {{pin section}} i wonder if they work differently? or what's their main differences technically? Thanks —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 10:56, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

( anybody knows about it? —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 12:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sakura emad. The documentation at Template:Pin message and Template:Pin section explains that the latter uses the former, and you should use the latter with {{subst:Pin section}}. This uses substitution to both place the former template and add the actual instruction to the archiving bot. Template:Pin message is only for human readers. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:45, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 23:29, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The removing process of Techyan's links

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) § The removing process of Techyan's links

show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article

Years ago I contributed some under an account User:LegCircus that I have lost access to. I have since forgotten how to navigate issues of proving relevance and objectivity. Maybe I never really learned how to do this well.

I would like some hand holding regarding this page. How do I get this draft into publish worthy form? Draft:Publication_history_of_Whole_Earth_Catalog

This page is a list/inventory of issues, and as such there are numerous examples of similar pages. The table presented on the page above could be included in this page perhaps - Whole_Earth_Catalog - but I feel like it was proper to have them be separate pages.

Thanks for all you do Jerimee (talk) 23:00, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jerimee: I think this falls under WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE and shouldn't be on Wikipedia at all. Wikipedia's purpose is not to include every single piece of information on the planet, but rather, summarize select encyclopedic information. You say that there are numerous examples of similar pages, but I don't ever recall a list of every issue of a magazine (except from comics), and also, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 02:14, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply @Ganbaruby:. Here is what OTHERSTUFFEX says "The nature of Wikipedia means that you cannot make a convincing argument based solely on whether other articles do or do not exist, because there is nothing stopping anyone from creating any article. (This may be an argument that this article is not bad enough to be speedily deleted; but that does not mean it should be kept.) While these comparisons are not a conclusive test, they may form part of a cogent argument; an entire comment should not be dismissed because it includes a comparative statement like this. While comparing with other articles is not, in general, a convincing argument, comparing with articles that have been through some kind of quality review such as Featured article, Good article, or have achieved a WikiProject A class rating, make a much more credible case." So, I'll provide examples, despite them not being sufficient.

Here is that list numerous examples of similar pages:

With regard to WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE the first principle seems to apply to creative works, WEC is not that. The other three principles do not apply.

As for a positive argument...

WEC is arguably a precursor of the internet itself, and the predecessor of the The_WELL. It influenced/inspired Wired_(magazine) and a host of other projects. Steve Jobs compared The Whole Earth Catalog to Internet search engine Google in his June 2005 Stanford University commencement speech.

Of course, I'm looking for help getting the thing published. What labors need to be accomplished for that to happen?

--Jerimee (talk) 18:08, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jerimee: Welcome to the Teahouse! It might be helpful if you could provide independent reliable sources that discuss individual issues. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 18:30, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GoingBatty: ? --Jerimee (talk) 20:11, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Now I get it: "provide independent reliable sources that discuss individual issues of whole earth catalog - sorry I didn't get it at first - okay that's helpful thanks --Jerimee (talk) 00:03, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A question on WP:OTHER

Would referring to another deletion discussion in an AFD be counted under WP:OTHER? That is, if something was done in another AFD, can that AFD be cited to do the same thing in another AFD? My educated guess is No since it would depend on context. But want more opinions. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 23:21, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nomadicghumakkad: You're correct that you can't solely base an argument on a prior AfD result, since AfD should be done on a case by case basis. That being said, if the past discussion is relevant to the current discussion, or if someone made a good point in the past discussion that you also think applies, it's okay to point those out and help editors reach a consensus. WP:OTHER does not blanket-ban referencing other discussions if they're useful. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 00:13, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nomadicghumakkad: I'd add to this that the amount of participation at the discussion is relevant. If only two or three people turned up (or even fewer, as is often happening at AFD nowadays) then it's not much evidence that the result matched normal community standards, but if it had 10 participants then that's much more compelling as an example to point to (if the cases are genuinely quite similar). — Bilorv (talk) 08:26, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

i can't edit anything

Ayansharma214sar (talk) 07:40, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ayansharma214sar You have been partially blocked from Article space as per the notice on your talk page and also please read this discussion on WP:ANB concerning you. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:47, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maps without citations, original research?

What is the policy on wikipedia when it comes to maps that are non-cited.

From my understanding, maps are acceptable when they have a source. This can include an interpretation of a textual description, which would not be original research. It could also be an original conversion or "translation" from a historical map or a map that has citations from a book, to a more legible digital form. This is particularly useful when the image being conveyed is more focused on general labels.

But in all those cases, you still need some sort of source or citation. But some maps have none. Now perhaps they are based off of data. But without the data being cited, how can we know?

And the way maps are depicted, particularly of historical areas, can be very misleading. Particularly when it comes to borders (which is why I appreciate when older maps of cultures have a blur effect on the edge rather than a solid line). This can further bias the difference between areas when one is depicted in their article as having a blurry border, while a comparable group in another article is depicted with a solid border, even though, during that era, borders were effectively just as malleable.

As two examples of maps I'm having issues with: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ancient_Egypt_and_Mesopotamia_c._1450_BC.png This map has no citations. On one page, it has a description, but it does not say whether or not the map is based off that description nor where that description came from, and that information is not located on the page for the image itself.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Black_Drink_map_HRoe_2008.jpg That image has multiple issues, notably the writing within the image, but the primary issue I have with it is the lack of any source. Theres no way to know where the information from this image came from. And there is a LOT of elements within that image.

The problem is... if these maps are acceptable without citations, it can gravely distort what is being conveyed from what is actually known.

If they are not acceptable... well then wikipedia has an endemic issue with citations from my quick look at some of the other maps. As I said before, plenty of maps are fine, but tons would be unacceptable.

And, if they are not acceptable, I'm a little lost at how I should make such known. I could post about it on one of the pages that uses said image... but the issue is with the image itself and it's data. At the same time, I respect that its possible an image DOES have citations that were omitted, and it would be reasonable to give the author the ability to add that data. In the mean-time, would the image stay up? Or be taken down until sources are provided? And... how would I go about doing that when it comes to the image itself, not just the articles its used in?

Thanks! GalacticKiss (talk) 08:09, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GalacticKiss Good question, and I have no idea. You could try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:16, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GalacticKiss and Gråbergs Gråa Sång: actually I'd say it's an issue for the no original research noticeboard as it's a policy violation. Doug Weller talk 15:11, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HOW TO COMMEMORATE BY GRAND FATHER.

Hello Teahouse I'm Edgar Allan N. Flores, grand son of Alejandro Evangelista Flores Senior. I would like to commemorate my grand father through this wikipedia. My reliable source of information is my father Alejandro Santiago Flores Junior, son of my grand father. Any tips on how to start our account.Thank youAlejandro Evangelista Flores Sr. (talk) 08:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC) Alejandro Evangelista Flores Sr. (talk) 08:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alejandro Evangelista Flores Sr., you have already started your account; it's "Alejandro Evangelista Flores Sr." Wikipedia articles are based on reliable, published sources that are independent of their subjects. However reliable he may be, and even if his material is published, your proposed source is not independent of your proposed subject. And you aren't independent of your proposed subject either. Therefore please do not attempt to create a draft. If you'd like to commemorate your grandfather, please do so on some other website. -- Hoary (talk) 09:06, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please also see WP:NOTMEMORIAL, Alejandro Evangelista Flores Sr.. --ColinFine (talk) 14:31, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review before draft posting

Hello, This is the first time I am posting an article on Wikipedia and the process is quite intimidating. I have reviewd the guidelines related to the topic of bitcoin and I think this article respects these guidelines.

Could you tell me if I can click on the "draft review" or an experienced editor has to have a look again? Thanks for the clarification. User67343322 (talk) 10:44, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One of the things which you ought to do before you submit the draft for review is to remove the misplaced external links from the article text. If appropriate you could replace them by references. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:50, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User67343322 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, you click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button to actually submit your draft. You should be aware that you have chosen a challenging area in which to edit(bitcoin) with its own special rules; I posted more information about this on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 10:54, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support for editing and resubmiting an article

Hello Team, My name is Arun and I recently opened a Wikipedia account in the name of Username: vishuddhalive, My first article was about an actor in my home town Kozhikode Kerala, India. As this was my first article I had a few difficulties in adding reference links, external links and adding images to my article and a few technical editing tools. My first article is about a known friend in my home town who has acted in several movies in Indian Malayalam language cinemas and is getting popular in each work he is doing. I have read the guidelines and rules of Wikipedia and drafted this article to the best of my knowledge with all the relevant sources from online and content created by myself. But unfortunately, I could not meet the guidelines and it did not get approval for submission. Kindly note the link to my sandbox:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Vishuddhalive/sandbox&redirect=no and let me know how to go about this further. I'm looking forward to contributing to Wikipedia and would like to become a reliable editor of Wikipedia. Kindle revert what to do next. Thank you Arun Vishuddhalive (talk) 11:01, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Vishuddhalive, let's consider the section "Early Life" as an example. It cites no sources. Where did you find this material? In particular, what's your evidence for saying that "the founder of AP Balakrishna Pillai Jewellers" was "one of the trusted names in the gold and gold jewellery business in Kozhikode", and (even if you have evidence), why do you say it? -- Hoary (talk) 12:10, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Vishuddhalive: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you haven't done so already, please review the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. GoingBatty (talk) 15:36, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rename request

Hello,

Today (Sep. 20, 2021) I created a page for my company and now the tittle of the page is my user name and not the company's name.

I placed a 'rename request' and now the status is: 'pending approval'. I would like to know when I'm going to have news about it.

Thank you very much. Ccruzloudly (talk) 11:26, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved it to User:Ccruzloudly/sandbox. It says that the company "offers music solutions of many types". What is a "music solution"? That aside, if you are an employee, then the company is paying you money for what you do, and part of this is writing a draft, so it's a paid contribution. Please read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure very carefully, and do what it tells you to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoary (talk • contribs) 11:55, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware, Ccruzloudly, that if you succeed in getting your draft accepted as an article, the article will not belong to your company, it will not be under control of you or your company, it may end up saying things you don't want it to say, and it should be based almost 100% on what people unconnected with the company have published about it, not on what the company says or wants to say. At present, the only one of the references that even might be independent is the DJTechTools one, and that does not really have significant coverage of the company. --ColinFine (talk) 14:39, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reference transcluded in multiple places

Hi all, I'm fixing some broken references across Wikipedia and I noticed this one on Bahrain_at_the_2020_Summer_Olympics. It's because the section is transcluded in this Handball at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Men's team rosters article, but I assume this reference is also transcluded to other articles. How do you deal with this situation? I've looked at the Citation help pages but I can't see how to resolve it if a reference definition is needed in multiple places. BeReasonabl (talk) 12:18, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BeReasonabl. That is tricky. The reference is indeed transcluded to other articles. I don't know a recommended solution. I improvised by copying the reference definition with a source comment that it must be identical.[1] It's ugly but it works (until somebody breaks it). It's allowed to define a named reference multiple times if the definitions are identical, but it shouldn't normally be done. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:11, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: thanks for your help again in referencing. I see how it works now, but I also understand how brittle this is. However, it seems like the only way to resolve this issue? Perhaps this is why transclusion is a contested issue on Wikipedia? Once again, thanks. BeReasonabl (talk) 03:09, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

I wish to write an article on a switch emulator named Ryujinx. I found articles about it on https://boilingsteam.com/ryujinx-switch-emulator-gets-the-vulkan-treatment/ https://www.thenerdmag.com/how-to-setup-ryujinx-nintendo-switch-emulator-on-windows-10-and-play-switch-games/ https://wccftech.com/ryujinx-nintendo-switch-emulator-just-got-a-massive-performance-boost/ etc...

Is my subject notable? SakuraMiyazono (talk) 13:39, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SakuraMiyazono: Another Switch emulator.. interesting. Well if it's gotten enough coverage by reliable secondary sources then my guess would be yes, but let's wait for someone who knows whether or not the sources you found are reliable or not. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 13:41, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per aboutpages [2][3] seems to be WP:BLOGS. The third one [4] looks a little better, but per "If you are a marketer looking for ways to connect your brand with our audience, please contact us at" one wonders how independent they are. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:14, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: What about https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/04/19/2-nintendo-switch-emulators-are-operational-and-running-gameplay/?sh=d7c24cf1ef2f?SakuraMiyazono (talk) 14:21, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SakuraMiyazono Please read WP:NSOFTWARE. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:26, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SakuraMiyazono, I swear I didn't make up this one to mess with you: WP:FORBESCON. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:32, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thanks for your help. I was making sure whether the subject for my article is notable.- SakuraMiyazono (talk) 14:34, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: When I looked at that it actually confused me because I had been told that Forbes is reliable, but then I saw that really only the staff written articles on Forbes are reliable. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 14:50, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaze The Wolf Yeah, there are a few RSP entries that are "split." Some newspapers have "blog" sections too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone. - SakuraMiyazono (talk) 14:31, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Lynn article

I've tried editing an article 'Richard Lynn' and another editor keeps changing it right back without discussion. The article's a dog's breakfast, as I've said at the Page Talk. The lede is dozens of lines long. The page is about a 91 year old scientist who is obviously a scientific racist and is still working. That's virtually all that's in the huge article, however. But there's no doubt that much of his work is still orthodoxy today. It should be perfectly possible to have a WP article which describes both in an appropriate way. The lede is absurd and the unusable negative POV of the whole thing has the effect of shading the legitimate criticisms of the man. If any experienced editor or admin could take a look I'd very much appreciate any thoughts. SteveCree2 (talk) 15:03, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SteveCree2: The other user has explained their reverts perfectly well, you are going against an established consensus. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 15:06, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Skllagyook: Pinging so you can explain your reasoning a little better to this user. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 15:07, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @blazethewolf. If the established consensus is that the lede should be dozens of lines long and that the article as a whole should be incoherent and inaccurate then I'll leave it alone. The established consensus appears to be a matter of politics and I really couldn't be less interested. SteveCree2 (talk) 15:10, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SteveCree2: I'd phrase the consensus differently. For such a contentious topic as eugenics, there's a balance required between whitewashing over the topic, and respecting WP:BLP. And frequently (including here), that balance is found by making mention of their non-mainstream (aka fringe) position in the lede (being first mentioned in section 8 of the article is seen as whitewashing, a position I strongly agree with), and often the detail required to explain the notable allegations while respecting WP:BLP ends up increasing the word count.

There might be a lighter touch that could be applied to the lede if your primary concern is length (and not that his eugenic views aren't notable). The issue seems to be that you removed all references to eugenics in the lede, rather than condensing them from ~15 sentences to ~2 sentences in the lede. If you don't want to engage in the topic because you consider it political, then that might just mean it's not the article you want to work on. Bakkster Man (talk) 15:33, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @bakksterman That Lynn is a eugenicist and racist is beyond any reasonable question or doubt. There - that's a single sentence; not 15. The rest don't belong in the lede and should be in the main body. I didn't 'condense' any of those 15 sentences, as I said at the Page Talk I put them unedited into the main body where they were more appropriate. It's not simply a matter of length, either, it's a matter of coherence. It's political, all right. But a little more subtly than readers might think. It includes a defence of the psychology establishment by not permitting any recognition that aspects of Lynn's work remains orthodox within it. It's vested interest lobbying 101. Anyhoo, nice to chat and cheerio for now. SteveCree2 (talk) 15:51, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SteveCree2: in that case, my suggestion for the future (or in your remaining discussions on this article) is that when you move such a substantial topic out of the lede, you should also leave behind a summary of the topic in the lede. If you continue, I've found it beneficial to suggest such a paraphrase as part of the discussion. "This is bad" is less likely to be successful that "here's how we can improve this". Hope that helps. Bakkster Man (talk) 16:47, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @bakksterman Very helpful advice. I'll keep that in mind. SteveCree2 (talk) 17:05, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SteveCree2, when I see that a statement is cited to seven or more sources, as in the Lynn article, I suspect that something fishy is going on. In this case I have no idea on what, and no urge to find out. Maproom (talk) 17:14, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

'When I see that a statement is cited..... no urge to find out'. That is the power of lobbing. But I say that with respect. Thanks @maproom — Preceding unsigned comment added by SteveCree2 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review times changing

Hi, I have created a draftand noticed that the waiting review time is changing according to the number of submissions.I have also noticed that drafts are not reviewed in a specific order. Are new article reviewed according to when the draft was submitted or it doesn't make a difference ? Thanks--Saraino (talk) 15:18, 20 September 2021 (UTC) Saraino (talk) 15:18, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Saraino: Welcome to the Teahouse. It's a backlog, so there isn't any order as to when drafts are reviewed. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:21, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Saraino from what I've read reviewers choose drafts on subjects they are interested in and knowledgable about. For example, a reviewer may be interested in science, but may know nothing about several other subjects, so will look for science-themed drafts. Reviewers are all volunteers, so its best to be patient, and wait for a volunteer with an interest in the subject you are writing about, instead of wanting drafts to be reviewed by the next available person, who may not have any understanding of the topic he or she has to review. Karenthewriter (talk) 23:19, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Andrea Unger - Submission declined on 20 September 2021

Hello Teahouse, I received a page rejection and I want to explore how can I improve the page. Because I think that the person I mentioned is really notable (just to win 4 times the official Worldcup Trading Championship). Other people who won this competition (once) has been already in wikipedia (e.g. Larry Williams). What kind of resources can I use? May helps that this person is already in wikipedia with another language? Thanks in advance for your time and your suggestions. Angio92 Draft:Andrea_Unger Angio92 (talk) 15:41, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFF doesn't count. BTW, your draft has been declined, not rejected. --CiaPan (talk) 15:55, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Other language does not count for confirming notability. However, other language references can be used. 157.157.52.49 (talk) 16:23, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andrea Unger, and welcome to the Teahouse. In general, for determining notability in the special Wikipedia sense, it doesn't help to look at what the person has done: what matters is how much has been (independently) written about them. It is perfectly possible for two people to have done pretty much the same things, but one has been written about at length and the other not: because Wikipedia is based on independent published sources, an article could be written about the first, but not about the secod. --ColinFine (talk) 16:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Correcting misping: Angio92. --ColinFine (talk) 16:50, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine:so, basically I think it's a good idea to add some articles (as resources) written by [[5]] and [[6]] that are the most important financial newspapers in Italy. 20:17, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

@Angio92: The Wikipedia article titled Larry Williams is about an American rhythm and blues and rock and roll singer. Maybe some of the references at Larry R. Williams would be helpful with your draft. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:57, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Angio92: There are two approaches I would take. First, you need to establish that the competition he won is notable. Right now, there's no Wikipedia article about it. If it had an article, you'd have a better chance convincing others that winning is a big deal. Secondly, you might look for coverage of his books. If they've been reviewed in the mainstream press, in English or Italian, that would help your case. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtempleton: thanks for your suggestion! into these two Wiki's pages the competition is mentioned: Larry_R._Williams | Michelle_Williams_(actress) 20:11, 20 September 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angio92 (talk • contribs)

Yes, but notability supported by other referenced accomplishments. 157.157.52.49 (talk) 22:03, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Using AfC and Teahouse

If I were to get access to the tools used to accept or reject AfCs would it still be appropriate to submit my own drafts through AfC? Similarly, if I were to consider becoming someone who answers questions here at the Teahouse would it still be appropriate for me to ask questions here? TipsyElephant (talk) 18:34, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TipsyElephant: Yes, that's fine. I use the reviewer tools and I have also submitted a draft via AFC. There is no conflict. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:40, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TipsyElephant: While I can't answer your first question, the answer to your second question is most definitely yes. Even experienced editors who are Teahouse hosts need to ask questions here occasionally. For example, most recently David notMD asked a question here on something they weren't sure about. I myself, while not a Teahouse host (though I may have enough experience at this point to become one) ask questions here because this place is more friendly and less... well, formal compared to the Help Desk (I'm sure the Help Desk is plenty friendly, however there's a certain... vibe I get from the teahouse that makes me feel better about asking questions, for lack of better words). ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 18:41, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Using AFC is always optional, TipsyElephant. If you think you can create a satisfactory article in one go, you can create it directly in article space. If you create a draft, develop it, and then decide that it is acceptable as an article, you can move it to article space without sending it for review: it's your choice. If you are regularly reviewing drafts, then you can probably judge for yourself whether your article is ready for mainspace, but you always have the option of submitting it for review.

As for the Teahouse: it's supposed to be a place for beginners, so if you are answering questions here, there's a case to say that any questins you still need to ask should go to the help desk rather than here; but nobody's likely to get upset if you post a question here. --ColinFine (talk) 18:42, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting point ColinFine. I agree to a large extent, but I've seen plenty of veterans use TEA to answer questions around archiving user pages, etc. Bkissin (talk) 18:46, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaze The Wolf: The Teahouse and Help Desk have different purposes. And I ask, and answer, questions on both. These venues exist to help anyone, even an administrator with a questions. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:44, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Anachronist: I never really said I felt that the Teahouse and Help Desk have the same purpose. I simply just said that you can ask questions and answer questions here and that I prefer the Teahouse for asking question because.. well I"m not exactly sure how to describe it in a way that would make sense, other than the Teahouse's "vibe" feels less threatening than Help Desk. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 18:47, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)TipsyElephant, as for your other question: It's completely fine to both ask and answer questions here at Teahouse. The one thing I would advise, however, is to chime in when you are sure about the answer to someone's question. We don't want to be providing people with information that may be inaccurate. Bkissin (talk) 18:46, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing name of a page: Cellink

CELLINK recently went through a corporate transformation where their name was changed to BICO. I would like to change the name of the page to BICO, could you advise me on how this can be achieved? Aviminocha (talk) 20:44, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aviminocha Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may request a page move at Requested Moves. If you work for the company, you must make a formal declaration, please see the paid editing policy. 331dot (talk) 20:47, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Long history of deleting properly sourced information from BLP?

The page on W. Brett Wilson has an [extensive history] of removal of properly sourced references to controversial statements which have been widely reported in reputable news sources. In particular, I note that [one IP] has a long history of deleting content about the subject's well-documented controversial statements with comments which seem inaccurate (based on the proper citation of sources and other BLP guidelines) like "Defamation" and "Biased", but most often no comment is left at all.

The content which is removed seems to have been added by numerous editors over time, while most of the large deletions of content appears to be done by that one IP address.

What is the best way to ensure this page maintains its integrity and avoid edit warring? I had reached out to the IP address, but subsequently noted its long history of deleting content with little or no comment. FActivist (talk) 21:06, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the vandalism is somewhat infrequent, at least relatively. You could try a Request for Protection, if it continues. Others may have a different take, though. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 21:21, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FActivist. Since one IP editor has been responsible for most of the disruption, I have blocked that person from editing the article for one year. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:11, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Cullen - that seems like a reasonable action. Also thanks Pyrrho the Skeptic for your input, it is appreciated also. FActivist (talk) 21:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New editor says "Hi!"

Hi! Mohammed12313893 (talk) 21:59, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mohammed12313893: Hello! Did you have a question or did you just want to say hi? ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 02:23, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

kelvite sounding machine

The workings of the kelvite sounding machine(sea depth below a ship). https://sgmuseum.gs/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/The-Illustrated-London-News-17-sept-2021_2000px.jpg Used by Sir Ernest Shackleton and his last expedition. https://sgmuseum.gs/the-ship/

It is facinating to read how it works and I would consider very important naval device. It would be wonderful for somone to write an entry on this.

http://www.gorchfock.net/db/db-03/kelvin.html http://www.godfreydykes.info/KELVITE%20SOUNDING%20MACHINE%20-%20PART%201.pdf

Also an entry in the Royal Museum of Greenwich of how it was to be used.

https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-42898 Mr justmehere (talk) 22:13, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mr justmehere, after you've practised improving existing articles, this could be the first article that you start. -- Hoary (talk) 23:03, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr justmehere: I am not sure if there's enough reliable source coverage for a stand-alone article. The device is mentioned in the article on Kelvin Hughes (which needs a lot of work), so maybe more information can be added there. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:58, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Question Bakbak13 (talk) 01:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC) What is the informational box on the right of article called and how do I create one?[reply]

@Bakbak13: Welcome to the Teahouse! The informational box is called an infobox. You can create an infobox by adding the appropriate template to an article (usually at the top). For example, Pittsburgh Quarterly uses {{Infobox magazine}}, The Sopranos uses {{Infobox television}}, Paul Rudd uses {{Infobox person}}, and The Wallflower (manga) uses a series of {{Infobox animanga}} templates. Each template has documentation to show you how to fill out the appropriate parameters to display the relevant information. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:08, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Talk Pages

If I added a WikiProject banner to a redirect talk page is it better to include "class=redirect" or to leave it blank so that it automatically detects that it is a redirect. Also, should I always include Template:Talk page of redirect when I create a talk page for a redirect or are there instances where I should not include the template? TipsyElephant (talk) 01:54, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TipsyElephant: Why are you creating a talk page on a redirect in the first place? I don't really see any reason you would do this but I could be wrong. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 02:24, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaze The Wolf: I added the Wikiproject banner to a redirect page so that it could be found at the WikiProject in the "Redirect" section of the "articles by quality and importance" table. I figured it would be helpful if someone was looking for potential pages that could be created or something along those lines. I didn't think it would necessarily be super helpful, but it's one of those maintenance things I can pretty easily do from my phone. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For instance, there is a redirect for Hidden Brain and I'm working on a draft Draft:Hidden Brain. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:47, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. Although others have pointed out it's not really a good use of time. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 16:03, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There could be some reasons, one that comes to mind may be to hold record of an AFD which was to redirect to a certain target and allowing the history to be preserved, but generally redirects don't need to have a talk page. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 02:27, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TipsyElephant: To answer your questions: 1.) Leaving it blank is fine, if not preferred, as if it ever becomes something other than a redirect it wouldn't be classified wrong. 2.) It doesn't hurt to do it, but it's fine without it. But as others have pointed out, creating talk pages of redirects is really not a great use of your time around here. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 04:56, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shammi Rana Page

I am trying to establish a page for Mr. Shammi Rana and I need help with this, so please guide me Happybusan (talk) 03:28, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Happybusan: Welcome to the Teahouse! Another editor already suggested that you read Help:Referencing for beginners. You could try Help:Footnotes as well. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:41, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reference threshold to validate Papua New Guinean related articles?

Papua New Guinea is still lacking a much needed online presence, many significant and relevant subjects missing from wikipedia due to lack of online news or digital academic groups/hubs. I've recently attempted to write an article on "Wan Kantri" - the 'Waltzing Matilda' of Papua New Guinea. In spite it being sung all over the country and various places around the world, I am concerned the article lacks enough references (or even what wikipedia may regard as valid references) to be regarded a valid entry. There is such a need for businesses and communities to access this information so schools and businesses can remain informed on modern developments across their country.

I would love this to be reviewed and have any suggestions how such articles can be written or validated to improve wikipedia reach among Papua New Guineans and the West Pacific.

Pnginitiator (talk) 04:35, 21 September 2021 (UTC) Pnginitiator (talk) 04:35, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pnginitiator, the question of inclusion guidelines for underrepresented regions is complicated, but I'll skip ahead to the good news: looking on Google Books, I was able to find some promising results [7] that should likely be enough to establish that the subject meets notability guidelines. Now, as far as inclusion criteria go, while articles are generally expected to meet the general notability guide, we also accept articles about topics where sufficient sources are not available on hand but are highly likely to exist (WP:NPOSSIBLE). As far as what you can do to help, a stepping stone that would make the editing community more aware of PNG would be if you could help contribute articles about reliable sources from PNG (or that write about PNG), as this would vastly improve editors' ability to recognize usable sources from the country. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 04:50, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help Me

Yomamajoy (talk) 04:50, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Yomamajoy, what do you need help with? Be specific. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 04:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft User:Yomamajoy/sandbox/VA-AV Comedy has no potential to becoming an article because the person does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Give up. 157.157.65.34 (talk) 16:08, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't tell them to give up! Just because 1 thing doesn't have potential doesn't mean that they should just give up all together. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 16:09, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I Just Want My Wikipedia Page To Publish

On the quality scale, what class would be this article?

By the number of citations, I think C-class, but by the size of the article, I think it'll come under Start Class. What would it be? Excellenc1 (talk) 05:12, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's no question of it being "Good", let alone "A" or "Featured"; and it hasn't been attached to any WikiProject. So I suspect that nobody other than you cares about the class of such an article. What you might do is (i) attach it (via its talk page, of course) to one or more relevant WikiProject (this in itself would be beneficial), and then, if you're still interested, (ii) ask at the talk page of that WikiProject (or the talk pages of those WikiProjects). -- Hoary (talk) 05:33, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Excellenc1: When I create an article, I usually tag the WikiProjects and let other people assess its class. Don't stress out about this; the only two classes that really matter are "Good" and "Featured" anyways.◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 05:56, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Excellenc1: I added the WikiProjects for you. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 06:06, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you GoingBatty. Excellenc1 (talk) 09:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit extended-protected

I want to add my 4-5 research articles on SARS-CoV-2 on SARS-CoV-2 wiki page but I am unable to add articles data Rahulbioinfowiki (talk) 06:49, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rahulbioinfowiki. Articles are usually protected when there's a very good reason to do so. There a various different levels of protection, and "Externded confirmed protection" is explained here. If you want to edit a particular article and are unable to do so because it's protected, you can always make an edit request on the article's talk page. Just make sure you make your request as clear and easy to understand as possible and also make sure that your request complies with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. In this case, you might want to look at WP:CITESELF, WP:SCHOLARSHIP and WP:MEDRS to make sure the sources you want to cite are appropariate for Wikipedia before actually making your edit request. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:22, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And what is more, Rahulbioinfowiki, Wikipedia is not a place to post your original research. We consider your attempt to republish your work on Wikipedia to be spamming. Further, you do not own the copyright to your publications with Elsevier. Elsevier owns the copyright, even if you paid them to publish your work. Even if the journal is open access. And, very few of your edits were "minor" edits, so marking them all as minor was a mistake. I will have to ask at the admin noticeboard to have your copyright-violating edits revision deleted--Quisqualis (talk) 08:18, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I found a minor typo

Where do I request edits for articles when I don't have permission to directly edit them? I found a typo in the page Artificial intelligence under Statistical AI: "By 2000, solutions developed by Ai researchers...". I just want to capitalize the I in AI so I created an account and have waited 4 days, but it still seems like I don't have permission yet... what do I do? BenjaminVincentCho (talk) 07:35, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BenjaminVincentCho. Make an edit request at Talk: Artificial intelligence. You need to have four days and ten edits to edit semi-protected pages. Welcome to Wikipedia! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:40, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I followed the link, and hopefully I did it correctly. BenjaminVincentCho (talk) 08:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the change for you, but I can't figure out how to change the answered parameter to "yes" so if anyone could help me that would be appreciated :) Princess Persnickety (talk) 08:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PrincessPersnickety: You change the answered parameter to "yes" with an edit like this, thanks to Victor Schmidt. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:10, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you GoingBatty, that's very helpful. Princess Persnickety (talk) 13:14, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PrincessPersnickety: There's also a user script that allows you to do it semi-automatically. (don't remember where it's located though) ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 13:42, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PrincessPersnickety and Blaze The Wolf: Its this one: User:Jackmcbarn/editProtectedHelper.js. To load it, you would insert something like this into your common.js:

mw.loader.load("https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jackmcbarn/editProtectedHelper.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript"); //Backlink: [[User:Jackmcbarn/editProtectedHelper.js]]

See also {{load user script}}, which can be used to create the URL paths for a given JS file automatically. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:39, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Victor Schmidt: Thank you! I already have it in my common.js, I just couldn't remember where someone could find it. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 14:43, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you VictorSchmidt, I will have a play. Princess Persnickety (talk) 18:52, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

creating Disambiguation page

create sub page of my username and use {{subst:submit}} on top, names of persons with text: "person may refer to:" and {{human name disambiguation}} at bottom. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages clearly states the number of persons must be three or or more and text to use on it. should i go ahead and create or am i missing anything? — ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 09:37, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ashtamatrikas: - If you are talking about disambiguating three or more people with the same name you should create the page directly under the format of "forename surname (disambiguation)". Mjroots (talk) 10:09, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjroots: done. i hope i have done correctly at User:Ashtamatrikas/Draft:Margaret Harrison (disambiguation)— ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 11:03, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ashtamatrikas: - would you like the draft page deleted? Mjroots (talk) 12:14, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mjroots yes, please delete it. — ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 12:39, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mjroots in future i can also place {{db-g7}} or {{db-u1}} on the top of my draft page after it is moved. probably it will save time for admins. — ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 15:48, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ashtamatrikas yes, or an admin can suppress the creation of a redirect on moving a draft. Alternative, with disambiguation pages, you can create them directly in article space without causing too much work for editors to clean up. Articles are different, and best created as sandbox/draft articles until you get the hang of it. Mjroots (talk) 15:56, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mjroots i will create subsequent disambiguation pages in article space. thanks for suggestion. — ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 16:13, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between "Article" and "page"

Hello! So I just thought about this but what is the real difference between an article and a page? I usually use the terms interchangeably since to me they mean the same thing. But I want to know what the real difference between the two is. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 13:11, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An article is part of the encyclopaedia itself, and is in the article or main namespace. Pages can be in any namespace, with the other namespaces being there for various aspects of the administration of the project. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:36, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c)All articles are pages (according to Wikipedia, though many editors seem not to like to refer to articles as pages) but not all pages are articles. See for example Wikipedia:Glossary#P, WP:PAGE, and Wikipedia:What is an article?.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:37, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok thank you. Good to know that I"m not wrong using them interchangeably. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 13:41, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They are NOT interchangeable. An article is one type of page. A page is not necessarily an article. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:11, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? BUt what I"m being told tells me that as long as you're referring to something in the article or main namespace it's fine. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 14:20, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you are referring to an article it is not strictly incorrect to refer to it a page, though that is an ambiguous term. If you are referring to another type of page, it would be incorrect to refer to it as an article, so (as I said) the terms are NOT interchangeable. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:31, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok. So they are partially interchangeable, it's simply just situational as to whether or not they are. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 14:34, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blaze The Wolf, when somebody refers to an encyclopaedia article as a "page" (especially if they talk about "a page for X" or "X's page") it suggests to me that they do not understand what Wikipedia is, and think it is like social media. --ColinFine (talk) 14:39, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. When I say "page" in my mind I'm really just referring to a web page (which is what wikipedia is, along with other websites, web pages) and I'm almost never talking about social media (since then I would be saying things like "post" which sections on talk pages technically are, however most of the time it's not really treated like a social media post). ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 14:42, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaze The Wolf: All poodles are dogs, but not all dogs are poodles. Similarly, all articles are pages, but not all pages are articles. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 16:23, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yep I was going to say that myself in response to one of these comments, however it's really already been stated. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 16:26, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Declined draft

Hi my post was declined because of lack of reliable sources. I included three sources...really the only sources that I could find on the Company and Product. These sources were from the Company's website. Ty. Tfalfano (talk) 14:04, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So what is your question? If there are no reliable sources independent of the subject, there can be no article. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:13, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Our policy requires third party sources. This means that the company is probably not notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Ruslik_Zero 14:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tfalfano, please understand that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. --ColinFine (talk) 14:40, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help removing flags

Hi, We are aiming to update the Dassault Systemes page in order to have this tag removed: This article relies too much on references to primary sources. (June 2016)

We've done the research to obtain 3rd party sources and proposed changes on the Talk page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dassault_Syst%C3%A8mes. We'd like to know if it's OK for me to make these changes or if an editor can assist.

Thank you. 3DS Patrick (talk) 15:16, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@3DS Patrick: You saying "we" makes me think that your account is a shared account, which is not allowed per Wikipedia's policies. Also, if you've proposed the changes then you will have to wait for another editor to make sure they are good to be added. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 15:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The account states that it belongs to an Employee of Dassault Systèmes, breaching WP:COI and WP:POV _Signed,Pichemist ^(Talk) 16:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosing the COI on the user page is required, and the username itself is ambiguous enough to not be promotional, I think. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 16:11, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pichemist, that is a very combative way of interacting, and in particular the OP has properly requested changes on the talk page, so POV doesn't arise. Please AGF. 3DS Patrick, thank you for disclosing your status on your user page: WP:PAID recommends that you use the template {{paid}} to do this. Thank you for wanting to improve the article (Wikipedia would like all its articles to be properly referenced, though it does not have much interest in whether this will benefit the subject of the article or not), and also for proposing changes on the talk page rather than directly editing the article. In future, I suggest you use the {{edit request}} template on the talk page: that will put your request on a list of such requests, so that editors who look at that list will see it and you won't need to ask here. --ColinFine (talk) 16:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Two questions.

1. If I'm citing a newspaper/website article with a typo in the title, should I fix the typo when citing or leave it as it is?
2. If I have an old picture, say, 1940s, with an unknown copyright status, am I allowed to take an image of that picture and upload it to Wikipedia?
Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:38, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@BeanieFan11: Welcome to Wikipedia. For (1) cite it as is, but you can put (sic) to indicate the typo is in the source. For (2), ask at WP:MCQ, copyright law is not simple unfortunately and the experts there can provide guidance. RudolfRed (talk) 16:56, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to handle name variations

I am working on a draft of an athlete and the subject has a birthname, playing name, and now a married name. How is all that formatted correctly? Or do I use the playing name and let the rest show in an infobox? TIA SanVeneto (talk) 16:45, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SanVeneto: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for working to improve it. The article title would be the common name for the person, and the lede could say what the birth name is. See Madonna as an example. RudolfRed (talk) 16:54, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SanVeneto You can find more info at MOS:CHANGEDNAME. Eevee01^(talk) 18:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the invite to Tea House

Thank you once again for the Invite, how can we make group in order to write about the bilateral coordination between the two powerful nations? Indoitaly (talk) 16:50, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Indoitaly: Welcome to the Teahouse! The place to discuss suggestions to improve the India–Italy relations article is Talk:India–Italy relations. There are three existing WikiProject groups on the top of that talk page. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:55, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

inserting photos

I have tried adding photos, that I took myself, to my article, but every time Wikipedia will not allow it. There is always some message that says they don't know if it is a proper source and recommend I use my own photos...which is what I have been trying to do. How do I insert photos? Escooter21 (talk) 17:14, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Escooter21, and welcome to the Teahouse. I can't find anywhere that you have tried to upload photos: how have you tried to do it? I suggest using the upload wizard: if you took the photos, you shouldn't have any difficulty doing so. When you have successfully uploaded them, then you can add them to articles. --ColinFine (talk) 17:38, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine: whenever someone mentions that they failed to upload a photo, I have a look at the commons Abuse log, since most often the source of the problem is their Filter #153, better known by his description, Crosswiki upload filter. Escooter21 Assuming you hold the copyright of these images (which usally means that you took them yourself, not just downloaded from some website), please upload them using the Upload Wikzard over at our Media Reprository Project called Wikimedia Commons. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:48, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First, work on getting your draft accepted. Photos do not contriburd to confirming notability. 157.157.65.34 (talk) 21:30, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine: Thanks, I did find out that I needed to upload them to Wiki Common first, I was trying to just insert them from my laptop directly into my article and it would not let me do that. Escooter21 (talk) 13:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestbot leaving suggestions... in the archive?

Hello! So I recently decided to look in my talk page archive as I was going to create a section on my userpage dedicated to WikiLove when I noticed that SuggestBot was leaving the suggestions for me in my talk page archive. Anyone know why it's doing this? ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 19:05, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There was a template there telling it to do so. Have removed it and re-added it to your talk page, which should cure the problem. Mjroots (talk) 19:14, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok thank you! I thought I had taken it out of my archive but I Guess not! ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 21:22, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tracking Conversations in Article Talk Pages

Unlike front-facing article content, the talk pages of articles seem to have a more fast and loose formatting style, and it is proving a tricky eye strain to keep track of conversations I am having with other editors. Is there a tip and/or trick to keeping abreast of the discussions I am in without manually trawling through the whole talk page each time I refresh? - Personofcanada (talk) 19:45, 21 September 2021 (UTC) Personofcanada (talk) 19:45, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Personofcanada: Unfortunately I'm fairly sure there's no where to keep track of what point you are at in the discussion after reloading the page, unless there's something I'm not aware of. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 19:47, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Personofcanada: Welcome to the Teahouse! I go to the "View history" page and select all the diffs marked "updated since your last visit", and then click "Compare selected versions". Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:54, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I had at least hoped someone had come up with a personal shorthand of some kind. All I can think of is opening a desktop sticky note, and then pasting my last contribution in each conversation into it for CTRL+Fing my way back to each thread. Thanks. O

On an unrelated note, how do I make my username highlighted in cool colours like that? Is it all this textual junk: "<b style="background:#0d1125;color:#51aeff;padding:1q;border-radius:5q">" - </b>Personofcanada (talk) 19:52, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ya pretty much. My signature was made by Levi_OP so if you want a cool signature like mine, I'm sure they'd be willing to help you out. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 20:10, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Personofcanada: pinging ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 20:12, 21 September 2021 (UTC) [reply]

@Personofcanada: Welcome to the Teahouse. You may be interested in installing the Convenient Discussions script, which can visually identify which comments have been added since your last visit and your own comments. It also allows you to "watch topics", which I believe shows new comments as bulleted items in the page's table of contents. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:21, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update for the Actor Anthony J. Johnson.

Wikipedia is not showing him as having passed away. I included the links to the New York Times and CNN to show the validity of his passing

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/20/arts/anthony-johnson-dead.html~~

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/20/entertainment/anthony-johnson-died/index.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.214.50.148 (talk)

Anthony_Johnson_(actor) article has been updated by another editor. RudolfRed (talk) 19:51, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

i want to help??

i want to help edit wikipedia but i don't know where i could help Sukunasleftnut (talk) 20:11, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sukunasleftnut: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The Task center has some ideas. You can see in the right column who can/could do that particular thing. You most likely want to pick something tagged as Suitable for all editors Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:27, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I never knew the task center existed. I only knew that there was a list of things that can be done at the village pump. You taught me something. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 21:04, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also the "Help Out" section of the community portal. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 21:07, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That was what I mean when I was saying there was a list of things that can be done at the village pump. I confused the village pump with the community portal. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 21:14, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading Pictures of Art

I am trying to upload art made by Haukur Halldórsson with his permission to his profile but I keep getting denied. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haukur_Halld%C3%B3rsson What to do?

Best Kristjan Mar Hauksson Kristjanmar (talk) 20:29, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need the permission, Wikipedia does (as we're hosting the content), and we emphatically will not seek it. We also don't do profiles, we do encyclopaedia articles. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 20:33, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kristjanmar (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has articles, not "profiles". Your account must be at least four days old before you can upload images even without the added issue of permission. As noted, the artist will need to give the permission themselves, please see WP:DCP for more information. He should be certain that he really wants to do that, as Wikipedia's license allows for reuse for any purpose, including commercial. 331dot (talk) 20:35, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Hello, Kristjanmar. There are several issues here. First of all, your account is not autoconfirmed yet, so you do not have the authority to upload. Secondly, Haukur Halldórsson is the copyright holder and his permission needs to be formal and in writing. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Also, the artist should fully understand the implications of free licensing. People could print posters, coffee mugs and postcards with these images without paying him or even asking for permission. They would just have to give him credit. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:39, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Karan Bajaj

Hello, please, check the articles on the Talk page of Draft:Karan Bajaj (the last two sections) and let me know if they meet WP:RSP, WP:SIGCOV and WP:BIO/WP:AUTHOR. The last reviewer Salimfadhley proposed to show a few articles for him and I did but he is unresponsive:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Salimfadhley#Karan_Bajaj_Draft

There are also 2 last sections on the Talk page Habibiroyal (talk) 20:34, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Were you going to identify some significant coverage in reliable secondary sources? --Salimfadhley (talk) 21:31, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

how to add userboxes?

i cannot figure out how to add userboxes to my page Sukunasleftnut (talk) 20:44, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You still have the "noWiki" markup on your userbox, which looks like this: <nowiki>. Remove those and you're good to go. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 20:57, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You'll want to put the userbox name in curly brackets like this: {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 21:01, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed it for you. Take a look at what I did so you can see what you have to do in the future. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 22:13, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:The Gaming House - Submission declined on 21 September 2021

Hello Teahouse, my draft article for The Gaming House was declined. Please resubmit this draft. AnsrieJames9 (talk) 22:39, 21 September 2021

@AnsrieJames9: Have you checked out the reasoning why it was declined? The declining user stated that the subject does not appear notable. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 22:48, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:The Gaming House TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 02:52, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@AnsrieJames9: Welcome to the Teahouse! It is unlikely that anyone at the Teahouse will resumbit a draft on behalf of someone else. However, after the TV show launches, you may be able to find new independent reliable sources to add to your draft. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:55, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @AnsrieJames9. as mentioned by the reviewer the draft fails WP:NTELEVISION. It requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources. Have you tried looking for more reliable sources? If no more sources are available then it is a case of WP:TOOSOON. You should wait until more news outlets publish articles about this show. Eevee01^(talk) 04:13, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist

How many pages can I have on my watchlist? The Tips of Apmh (talk) 23:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Tips of Apmh: As far as I'm aware the only limit is the number of pages on Wikipedia (which is over a million and if you have every page on wikipedia on your watchlist then your watchlist is functionally identical to Recent Changes. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 23:02, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you. The Tips of Apmh (talk) 23:05, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some users have reported interface problems with watchlists above 5000 to 10000 pages. I have no problems with 8000. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:39, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I regularly run 15,000 to 20,000. Graphical editing of my watchlist sometimes fails due to timeouts with very large watchlists. Meters (talk) 02:55, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I currently have 26,640 with no problems...... reduce from 50,000 that had minor load problem when set to show 500 at a time.Moxy- 03:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source for what a friend we have in Jesus

Hi I just wanted to add a source for my recent edit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWLJ0WCSlQU

Could anybody add it? I don’t know how. 107.15.214.66 (talk) 00:07, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. YouTube and other video-sharing sites are generally not considered reliable sources because anyone can create or manipulate a video clip and upload without editorial oversight, just as with a self-published website. Mattplaysthedrums (talk) 02:29, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing article name

How can I change the name of an article?

This Foundation "One Asia Foundation" changed it's name after it's expansion to "Eurasia Foundation (from Asia)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Asia_Foundation

I have edited the information to suit the update as my wife is one of the managers there and asked me to do it. But I cannot change the actual name. GaijinDad (talk) 00:09, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @GaijinDad, I have changed the article name for you. Mattplaysthedrums (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GaijinDad: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest that you and your wife please read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and refrain from editing the article directly. You may declare your conflict of interest on your talk page, and use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard when you have further suggestions on how to improve the article. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 04:10, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

saving a draft

Doing my first article. I'm in the draft wizard (I think) and I'm not ready to "publish page". I want to save my work as a draft and add citations later. How do I do that? SharedHeritage (talk) 00:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SharedHeritage: The "Publish" button is actually your save button. I will add the appropriate template to you draft though so you can submit it for real when you're ready. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 01:13, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. SharedHeritage, by writing the text of your draft first, and then adding sources to support what you have written, you are making your task of creating an acceptable article much harder than it need be. The recommended method is to start with the citations, and then add text which summarises what your sources say. Maproom (talk) 07:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have submitted an article for a member of legislative assembly

The article i presented was not accepted and i could not understand why! I have mentioned all the required data however the article was not accepted. Could you please help me ! Panwarankit7 (talk) 06:03, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Panwarankit7, I assume this is about Draft:Vijay Singh Panwar. The draft does not cite any sources (though it does list some). So the reader has no way of telling where the information in the draft comes from, and checking it. Any draft that fails to cite reliable published sources will be declined. Maproom (talk) 06:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:Vijay_Singh_Panwar Hi @Panwarankit7, as mentioned by the reviewer your draft needs more reliable sources to prove the notability of the subject. Eevee01^(talk) 07:50, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Panwarankit7 I have also noticed that you have not cited your sources correctly. Read Help:Referencing for beginners for more info. Eevee01^(talk) 08:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Name in list

Can be a name be given multiple times in an alumni list?

I am creating an alumni list of a university. The list is divided in sections as usual. Now suppose a man abc is a scientist, he was a professor and faculty of xyz institute, also he was a Director of pqr institute. Which category (section) will he go to: scientist or academic or organisational head?

There are more instances like abc who is a businessman, also a professor of an institute also writer on Literature having books. Like the prev he can be taken in businessman, academic and also literature personalities.

So in these cases, will the name repeat in the three sections or will be taken only once and if taken only once what will be that section? AnkurWiki 06:34, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Can I get games on Wikipedia article

games On Wikipedia 105.112.184.254 (talk) 08:40, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which game do you want? "Whack-a-Troll"? "JarlaxleArtemis Simulator 2021 Edition"? "A Week in Hell: My Admin Request Story"? "Racial Holy War Against Those Fucking Hipster Liberal N----- K--- C---s"? —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 08:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Wikipedia:Department of Fun#Wikitainment for fun things to do and read on Wikipedia (not just games). Minkai (talk to me) 12:19, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

date format on Ruth Posselt

dates in entire article are in dmy format, however person is american (mdy date format). is it advisable NOT to add mdy date template and change dates in article? i am asking for confirmation of gut feeling. — ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 09:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I count two dmy and one mdy: whichever is chosen, it should be used consistently. Since (a) the subject is American and (b) the original creator Wrightjack initially used mdy, this seems more appropriate. I suggest you be Bold, make the changes and go on to Discuss if anyone Reverts. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.67.3 (talk) 15:58, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question by Rapmusiclover123

can someone help me to move my draft to the real wikipedia?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rapmusiclover123 (talk • contribs)

@Rapmusiclover123: The flow on discussion pages like the Teahouse is that new topics are opened at the bottom of the page, I have accordingly moved it. With regards to your question, I assume this is about Draft:Kah' Linda. That draft would benefit from reliable sources, which is obligatory for articles about living people, because Wikipedia is not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:50, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, why do you think "Kah' Linda lives on music planet X." is good content for a WP:BLP? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:21, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Victor Schmidt: sorry, for not posting it to the bottom, thanks for moving it, the article is about living people, there is a production team behind Kah' Linda and the singer is also a real person, her alter ego is the comic superhero though, maybe I should not have put the information about the comic in the biography field— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rapmusiclover123 (talk • contribs) 11:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Take the time to read WP:MUSICBIO. If you don't have the sources demanded there, the article will not be accepted. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ([[User talk:Gråbergs

Gråa Sång|talk]]) 11:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Rapmusiclover123: I took a look at the article, and it seems a bit WP:POV. You will have to fix it if you want even a chance of the article being accepted.Minkai (talk to me) 15:33, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

edits to Andia Chaves Fonnegra, apparently by subject of page

A page that I have worked on (Andia Chaves Fonnegra) has, mostly uncited, new details being added by the subject of the page. I think this is the case because the edit summary says '...where I earned...'. The IP address also added an excessive number of publications and added an unremarkable grant as an 'award'. What should happen now? From other pages, it seems like this should either be changed back to the way the page was, and/or some of the content flagged as needing citations, and/or flagged as being edited by someone who should not be editing their own page. However, I do not think I should be the one making these changes. DaffodilOcean (talk) 11:50, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the addition, as it's unreferenced and added excessive entries to the selected publications section. I've left a message on the IP's talk page with some advice about WP:COI editing, and how to approach it. Neiltonks (talk) 12:24, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to check drafts?

How do I see my drafts? MrDude1881 (talk) 12:53, 22 September 2021 (UTC)MrDude1881[reply]

If you click on the "Contributions" link near the top right-hand corner of any page you will see your drafts, together with your other edits. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why was my wikipedia page deleted?

I wrote my first article and I don’t know exactly what I did wrong, but the page got deleted with this message:

A tag has been placed on Draft:Fixr.com, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic.

Could you please point out some specific errors which I need to improve? Thanks! OrneGuerrero (talk) 13:21, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:Fixr.com was G11'ed by Materialscientist. I can't read deleted pages and therefore cannot say how bad it was, however, one of the admin folks around here will likely repsond with more details. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:16, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am an administrator and could read the deleted draft. It failed to establish that Fixr.com is a notable topic. The very best of the sources, the Washington Post, the New York Times and U.S. News & World Report just mentioned the website in passing. Others were just entries on a list of similar websites, with a handful of sentences giving a quick overview. I was not able to find any reliable sources devoting significant coverage to Fixr.com itself, and a lot of the content was completely unreferenced. So, it appeared to the deleting administrator that your goal was to promote this website instead of to write a well referenced encyclopedia article about a notable topic. What is your relationship with Fixr.com? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft on hold on the basis of lack of notability

Hello! Here I am trying to contribute with my first article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Youth_Progress_Index) As suggested by the person who reviewed my article, I would like to ask you for an opinion on the notability issue. Thanks to Nomadicghumakkad' tips, the article is already much better, but I am still struggling to reach notability in his opinion.

I based the draft on the Youth Progress Index(YPI)'s big brother Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Progress_Index). Basically, the YPI is a specification of this methodology. If compared, I think that the page we are drafting is even more thorough with a more detailed explanation of data sources. In my opinion, it seems solid since the explanation of data collection and analysis seems convincing and well-supported. Moreover, it has been endorsed by institutions and well-know research groups (the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA), the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), the Social Progress Imperative, and the International Organisation of Employers).

It is undeniable that there is a lack of tons of sources on the subject out there, but still, the draft seems legit to me. All the indicators are explained and the data have been collected using a great number of solid sources.

Could you have a look into it and help me understand how to make it better?

Thank you to this wonderful community. FBMR94 (talk) 13:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FBMR94. The challenge for a reviewer is that your draft has 68 references and it is fairly obvious that many of your references are not independent of the topic. Notability comes from truly independent sources devoting significant coverage to the topic. So, I suggest that you identify the three best independent sources so that an uninvolved editor can easily gauge notability instead of having to wade through all 68. User:RoySmith/Three best sources is an essay that describes this concept. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:36, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

linking in edit summary

How do I link to WP articles in my edit summary? The Tips of Apmh (talk) 14:33, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Tips of Apmh See Help:Cheatsheet. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:42, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Same as in a Wikipedia page. Within double square brackets: [[Article name]]. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:42, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, it works now. The Tips of Apmh (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on some creature automatically notable?

Hello! So while looking through Special:Random I've come across many article about creatures that are basically only 1 sentence with only 1 reference. I tried deleting one of these before however I was told an article about a creature/animal cannot be deleted unless it's an obvious hoax. This seems a bit silly to me because some animal only have 1 reference that proves they aren't a hoax. Could someone explain this reasoning further to me? ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 15:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Notability (natural sciences) is a failed proposal, but might present some useful thoughts on the subject (see also its Talk page).

My personal feeling is that any 'creature' ought to be notable, so if the article on it has only one reference, it's likely that others exist out there somewhere, and one should search for more of them rather than seek to delete the article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.67.3 (talk) 16:11, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blaze The Wolf. I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes which describes longstanding consensus on the notability of broad topic areas. This is what it says about species: "All species that have a correct name (botany) or valid name (zoology) are inherently notable. Their names and at least a brief description must have been published in a reliable academic publication to be recognized as correct or valid. Because of this, they generally survive AfD."

Correct name and valid name are scientific terms. If you search Google Scholar for a species name, you will commonly find discussion in the academic literature that would allow you or another editor to expand these stubs. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:12, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Talia Oze page

Hello My name is Alex Bazaare, Iam working on a page for Anna Talia Oze a Ugandan Public figure in entertainment. I need help on how to edit the article and add pictures, can someone help me on this? Thanks. Alex Bazaare (talk) 16:09, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:Anna Talia Oze Maproom (talk) 16:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editing without knowing coding

How to edit in Wikipedia without knowing coding? Nishānt Omm (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nishānt Omm: You don't need to know coding to edit Wikipedia. (I'm certainly proof of that.) If you familiarize yourself with the material in Help:Cheatsheet, you should get along fine. If you need more detailed help, the links on that page will lead you to it. Deor (talk) 16:44, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Earning from Wikipedia

Can anyone earn money by editing on Wikipedia ? Nishānt Omm (talk) 16:51, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The vast majority of editors here are volunteers. There are also scammers that will take money but not deliver on promises. Some people edit Wikipedia on behalf of their employer, and must abide by WP:PAID rules. RudolfRed (talk) 16:54, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An article named Sangeeta Chauhan that redirects to Sangeita Chauhan

There is an Article of Sangeeta Chauhan which redirects to Sangeita Chauhan. May i fill up the details of MLA of Naugawan Sadat (Assembly constituency) in Sangeeta Chauhan? Bihariboy Rahul (talk) 16:51, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse for Hindi language

Why isn't there a Teahouse in Hindi language ? Nishānt Omm (talk) 16:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

highlight external links in body of articles

is there any script or settings or gadget to find external link: [https://ex.ec rt] in body of articles. User:Ashtamatrikas/sandbox contains link https://yanggongqian.com/ Gong Qian Yang — ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 16:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 656: / Line 656: @@
 Why isn't there a Teahouse in Hindi language ?&nbsp;[[User:Nishānt Omm|Nishānt Omm]] ([[User talk:Nishānt Omm|talk]]) 16:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
+== highlight external links in body of articles ==
+is there any script or settings or gadget to find external link: <code><nowiki>[https://ex.ec rt]</nowiki></code> in body of articles. [[User:Ashtamatrikas/sandbox]] contains link https://yanggongqian.com/ Gong Qian Yang&nbsp;[[User:Ashtamatrikas|<span style="background-color:#eeff1b">— ashtamatrikas</span>]] ([[User talk:Ashtamatrikas|<span style="color:purple">talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ashtamatrikas|contrib]] • [[Special:Log/Ashtamatrikas|actions]]) 16:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)