Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1262

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Archive 1255

←

Archive 1260

Archive 1261

Archive 1262

Archive 1263

Where to ask if people want to join me in working on an article

Latest comment: 22 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, I am working on the 1990s in music article and I noticed there was a section for every continent except Africa -- so I started writing the section for Africa. However, as one might guess, trying to write about an entire continent's music is a lot... so I wondered if anyone would like to work on it too? I'm not sure if here is the right place to ask, I looked at the page for WikiProjects but I'm not entirely sure how they work. I'd appreciate any advice on where to recruit new contributors or how WikiProjects work, thanks! A. E. Katz (talk) 03:21, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

A WikiProject is a group of editors with a shared interest. I don't have a lot of experience with them, but they're a good place to ask for specialized information, they often have alerts about relevant articles (e.g., if there's a deletion discussion or an RfC relevant to their topic), etc. You can search for relevant WikiProjects here. For example, there's a WikiProject Africa, and that has two sections that look relevant: Needing work, and Articles to be written or improved. FactOrOpinion (talk) 04:06, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! A. E. Katz (talk) 13:35, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

@A. E. Katz and FactOrOpinion: There is also Wikipedia:WikiProject Music...   CiaPan (talk) 14:12, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

ReFill

Latest comment: 22 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Is there a way to use Wikipedia:reFill on multiple articles at once? I'm trying to clean up the bare urls on some of Category:All articles with bare URLs for citations. Sushidude21! (talk) 03:41, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

@Sushidude21!, this is not really the answer to the question, but have you used reFill much before? I find it's output varies dramatically depending on the website. Some major website consistently give broken citations with the autofill, so I would personally not feel comfortable using reFill without checking its work first, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:06, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

That's a bad idea. There's a reason those aren't all fixed by now, and I find reFill is significantly more trouble than its worth. In any case, you shouldn't do that, as your changes would likely have to be mass-reverted and you'd end up in hot water. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 16:24, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Political

Latest comment: 22 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Political allegiance of Dewsbury Hall? 2A02:C7C:2C0A:1E00:F800:A5D6:7E76:B8EE (talk) 11:24, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I doubt that Dewsbury Town Hall has a political allegiance but if you mean some other Dewsbury Hall, you'll have to be more specific with your question and move it to an appropriate forum such as the humanities reference desk. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:38, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I guess this is about Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall (who I had never heard of until I happened to see his name a couple of minutes ago, in a subtitle on a television in the store I am in). Unless the answer is in that article, we haven't got that information. Mike Turnbull's suggestion of asking at the Reference Desk is your best bet, but if the answer has not been reported in reliable publications, them we can't answer it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ColinFine (talk • contribs) 15:42, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

GhostArchive

Latest comment: 22 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, I'm using GhostArchive instead of Internet Archive for the sources of Wikipedia articles because Internet Archive often doesn't work. Now, GhostArchive loads quickly, but according to the documentation, short-form links are disallowed. Long-form links are required, but there's no tutorial in the documentation on how to turn a short-form URL into a long-form one. How can I do this? - Arcrev1 (talk) 17:13, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

From WP:GHOSTARCHIVE: If you have a short link (e.g. https://ghostarchive.org/archive/fwAS7), swap the 'archive' part of the URL to 'longurl' (e.g. https://ghostarchive.org/longurl/fwAS7), and visit the resulting URL to get the longform URL (in this case https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20210922203233/https://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/download/) WelpThatWorked (talk) 17:48, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

YouTube as a carrier of a source that is not YouTube

Latest comment: 21 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

There are literally hundreds of discussions on the Wikipedia:Reliable sources noticeboard about using a YouTube link as a source. Opinions vary, but generally, I've seen over the years that the distinction is "YouTube as a source" and "YouTube as merely a carrier of some other source, in which case the question is the reliability of the source being carried, not YouTube itself".

What I cannot find now is has anyone boiled down these years of discussions into a policy or guideline re using a YouTube link in a source citation. Can anyone help point me to that? N2e (talk) 23:46, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

@N2e: Check out WP:RSPYT. Mz7 (talk) 00:05, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, Mz7. That's perfect. Yeah, I totally grok the idea that while many who use YouTube have no value as good sources, some do, and can carry their own info quality forward, independent of the carrier. This was the money quote:

"Content uploaded from a verified official account, such as that of a news organization, may be treated as originating from the uploader and therefore inheriting their level of reliability."

Teahouse help for the win!!! N2e (talk) 02:23, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Can I / How should I add custom graphics?

Latest comment: 21 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

For the specific edit I want to make right now, I'm looking at the Antiprism page, where it shows the Schlegel diagrams of the semiregular antiprisms. There isn't a diagram for the digonal antiprism, even though there is a digonal antiprism in the table directly before it, and I want to add said diagram. The thing I'm worrying about is if the diagram I add will conflict stylistically with the diagrams next to it, or in some other way not match up to their standards.

Do I need to worry about stylistic consistency? If I do, how do I figure out which standards to follow? Anthonyhotel (talk) 00:10, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Anthonyhotel, welcome to the Teahouse. I would just go for it, honestly.   I agree with you that it would definitely look nicer if you followed the same style as the other diagrams that are there—if you could make the lines of the drawing red and the nodes black, that would be ideal. But I suspect this is a case where having some drawing is better than no drawing. If you want to upload a new image, you can do so by uploading it to the Wikimedia Commons: check out commons:Special:UploadWizard. Note that you can only contribute images that you hold the copyright to (or are not eligible for copyright), e.g. diagrams that you yourself created. Mz7 (talk) 02:34, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Anthonyhotel, the Schlegel diagram you added was self-intersecting, instead of being embedded in the plane. It has been removed by Dedhert.Jr. I encourage you to try again, with a nicely embedded version. Maproom (talk) 07:41, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, but I think I'm going to let it stay removed. I wasn't aware of the requirement for Schlegel diagrams to not be self intersecting, which makes sense in retrospect, and I don't think the graph can appropriately show the digonal-ness of the tetrahedron without intersecting itself. I added my image to the Antiprism graph page at the same time I added it to the main article, and that article's more general definition does allow self intersection, so I'm happy enough with that. Anthonyhotel (talk) 17:41, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

creating my wikipedia page

Latest comment: 21 days ago5 comments5 people in discussion

hi,

can i hire someone to create a wikipedia page for me? 94.207.73.78 (talk) 05:06, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Short answer is no, please see WP:FAMOUS 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 05:57, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@IP no.User:StopLookingAtMe1 07:08, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

The fact of the matter is that paid editing is widely unpopular among volunteers and strictly regulated. But it is not forbidden. See WP:PAID for what the Terms of Use says. Cullen328 (talk) 07:34, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Beware: WP:SCAM. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:39, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

why is this called teahouse

Latest comment: 21 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

why is this called teahouse I am curious 121.44.215.202 (talk) 07:54, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Because drinking tea socially is relaxing and conducive to conversation. I am off to make two cups of actual tea right now, one for me and one for my wife. Cullen328 (talk) 07:58, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Village pump, so called because the local pump was a traditional meeting place (and still is in some communities). Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:49, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Real teahouses are also used as meeting places. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:16, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Abt the Gal Gadot page

Latest comment: 20 days ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Gal Gadot

I’m not experienced in editing rules. Can someone explain a sub-section is called ‘support for Israel’ when there are instances where she is critical of Israeli policies? Is this a mistake or a deliberate choice? Cherry567 (talk) 09:46, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

The best place to ask, Cherry567, is Talk:Gal Gadot. -- Hoary (talk) 10:32, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

thanks. I just repost the question in the talk section

You are here longer than a do. Based on your experience, is the topic a correct choice or not? Cherry567 (talk) 18:10, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

You have posted the question to Talk:Gal_Gadot#Gadot’s_views_on_Israel, and should wait for responses there. -- Hoary (talk) 22:07, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Nationality

Latest comment: 21 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hello, I'm trying to create an article for the composer Apollon Gussakovsky (1841-1875). The sources I found are conflicting in the nationality. Some give his nationality as Russian while another gives it as Ukrainian. He was born in Okhtyrka (Ukraine) but it seems that he was active in St. Petersburg (Russia) for most of his life. Should I just simply skip the nationality and say that he was a citizen of the Russian Empire? WafflesInvasion (talk) 11:59, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

You can cite both sources and say "Sources differ regarding his nationality, A says X and B says Y". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:01, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@WafflesInvasion According to our article about Okhtyrka, by 1841 it was part of the Kharkov Governorate, hence part of the Russian Empire. That suggests that at the time he might well have considered himself Russian. However, Andy's suggestion is the safer option. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:00, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Declined the CFR

Latest comment: 20 days ago6 comments5 people in discussion

I wrote CFRtheory, but I don't know how to write wiki text, so my theory submission was declined, what can I do now? 103.55.99.159 (talk) 16:44, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Courtesy link: They appear to be referring to Draft:Cosmic Fabric Refactoring. --Finngall ^talk 16:59, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

IP editor: if you are User:Sra2009, please log in before editing. Your draft seems to include entirely fictional sources. What is the DOI of reference #1, which you say is an article in a 2025 issue of the Journal of Theoretical Physics. And what is the correct citation for reference #3, which currently links to example.com, an apparently "reliable source" according to you? Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

And if you are Syed Resad Ali, please see WP:COI and WP:PAID. Maybe WP:FRINGE also applies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:18, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

ISBN of reference #2 is also fake. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:45, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Mike Turnbull, there is I think a very mild comic value in {{Cite web |title=Theoretical Applications of Quantum Field Manipulation |url=https://example.com |publisher=Reputable Source |access-date=2025-07-23}}. On the other foot, example.com actually exists, and it tells the world: "This ___domain is for use in illustrative examples in documents. You may use this ___domain in literature without prior coordination or asking for permission." Perhaps some limited kind of "intelligence" might infer that example.com is for use in illustrative examples in Wikipedia articles, without prior asking for Wikipedia's permission. -- Hoary (talk) 22:44, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Question on honours section entries

Latest comment: 22 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I am confused about the classification in the "Honours" section of List of awards and nominations received by Tamannaah Bhatia. If I strictly apply the definition of honours, only the Kalaimamani (2010) and Honorary Doctorate (2017) belong in the "Honours" section. The other entries, being media-driven or industry-specific, do not seem to fit in this section. Can someone clarify this and suggest how to proceed? Anoop Bhatia (talk) 15:51, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

[Not answering the query, but I have converted your heading to the correct format so that it is not mistaken for a part of the previous query and overlooked. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.7.140.167 (talk) 16:33, 2 August 2025 (UTC)]

@Anoopspeaks There seems to be a large table of Awards and a smaller one of Honours. If you think that some from the latter should be in the former, then you can just boldly move them and see if anyone objects. If they do, discuss the issue on the Talk Page of the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:26, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

I ran this issue through various large language models, and the consensus was that entries from governmental, academic, or highly prestigious institutions, typically recognizing broad or lifetime contributions to society, culture, or a field, should be treated as honours. Other entries, given by media organizations for industry or style achievements, should be treated as awards. Before making changes, I sought independent human input on this matter, which is why I asked here. I couldn’t find specific Wikipedia guidelines on this distinction. If any exist, please point them out. Anoop Bhatia (talk) 03:04, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

SVG Lineage Diagram

Latest comment: 22 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

SVG Lineage Diagram – Formatting & Policy Check

Hi, I've spent long hours cross referencing information from sources in order to clarify on (as true as possible) the origins of the Australian Cattle Dog (ACD) as there are actually 2 different types. The one I have with me appears to be an earlier model referenced as Cattle Dog of Australia (CDoA) as those were bred before they were imported and only used here in Australia for work. I have added to this diagram the ACD INDEX that is useful for those who which to know where their dog stands in the bigger picture, whilst it be and ACD or CDoA. Those dogs are similar, however different.

 

Australian Cattle Dog - Breed History - Review Only

I attempted to upload an SVG, however, even after several hours of trial and error, revising the code to make the upload wizard happy, I had nothing but failures. So I would like some advice on that if possible, or shall I be asking in the Village Pump instead?

This post is mostly about formatting and policy before I would attempt to post it anywhere. All images have been provided by Wikicommon, appart for some I had to create as they were not available anywhere. They are the one I am listing below since the file is still a static image:

• McNiven's Line
• Bull Terrier Cross
• Older Stumpy Tail
• Queensland Heeler
• Timmin's Experiment

My mentor @Houseblaster advised me to come in here to ask questions about all of that apart from getting the *.svg file correctly formatted so on your advice I may or may not head to Village Pump for that.

Blessings!

Nodocéphale (talk) 10:20, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Nodocéphale! A few thoughts. First, whenever asking for help with an error, it's important to state what the actual error is. For example, what does upload-wizard "failure" mean? Sometimes asking that right away can help shake out some problems and make things overall less frustrating. You asked about policy. Is there any specific policy that comes to mind? One recommendation I'd make is to upload the photos you actually took separately to commons. That helps a lot of readers and potential editors far beyond those interested in the lineage topic. And that also helps simplify the lineage-file, since it would be more directly identifiable as a composite of traceably free images. You would not have to deal with any licensing related to "your own" photos on the lineage file, since it would just link out to each that has its own details separately specified. DMacks (talk) 11:24, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

@Nodocéphale Did you actually try to upload an .SVG = vector graphic file? that would be very unusual for images of dogs, which would usually be standard photographs with .jpg file type. We have a specialist Help desk for vector graphics at Wikipedia:SVG help and that page has some general advice about these types of file when used in Wikipedia. For example Wikipedia:SVG_help#Missing embedded JPEG images Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:13, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Cheers for your valuable information. I have posted on SVG help, hopefully someone will see what is happening. I can search through code but limited knowledge to that's as far as it gets. I'm better at documenting for what I know so far. I'll be back once the file is ready for a review for policy and all, this type of diagram I chose seems to be a high roller. Patience and consistency will pay, I'm certain. EDIT: Actually, what do you guys think about that index I've added to the 2 types of dogs, to me it's spot on, but would there be an issue with that according to policies or else? Nodocéphale (talk) 08:53, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Infinity Engine

Latest comment: 22 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi ;-)

I have translated the short article about Infinity Engine from Polish Wikipedia into English. I hope this is fine? The article isn't were long, but I believe others could work on it in the future, plus it's important enough to have its own article on Wikipedia, I believe?

Best wishes!

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 21:08, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Kaworu1992, and welcome to the Teahouse.

It's not immediately clear to me whether the draft is acceptable or not, because the citations are incomplete. Your citations have a title as well as the URL, which is better than some new editors manage, but they lack other important information: the author, the date, and (arguably most important) the name of the publication. (See WP:REFB). The reason this is so important is that reviewers need to determine whether sources are reliable, and whether they are independent. (Of course, it is usually possible to see these by opening the link, but often they can be evaluated much more quickly).

What I can say is that Github is certainly not a reliable source, and should not be cited; I don't know whether Moddb and Giantbomb are generally reliable, but the pages linked have no author mentioned so we can't tell where they come from, or (crucially) whether they are independent of the people behind Infinity Engine or not.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what several people wholly unconnected with the subject have separately chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources, and very little else (see WP:42). That an article exists in another Wikipedia does not guarantee that the subject meets English Wikipedia's criteria for notability, which depends on those sources. ColinFine (talk) 23:05, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

When translating an article from another language variant of Wikipedia, you need to attribute the source and its authors, Kaworu1992. Please see Help:Translation#Licensing for how to do this. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:40, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

help with including a reliable source

Latest comment: 22 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

hi there, it seems that I need to include a reliable reference on the page I'm working on.

I found this one : nl:Sigmund und sein Freund

please help finishing my draft and review. Thanks Quest and questions (talk) 22:11, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

@Quest and questions See WP:RSPWP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:45, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

No, Quest and questions, not "a reliable reference", but instead a reliable reference for everything asserted. As a humdrum example, the draft currently tells us: "1988 – Released LP See Emily Play, noted for its bleak and emotionally intense style." Which reliable reference noted "its bleak and emotionally intense style"? (An actual reliable reference, please; not some LLM-generated fiction.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:09, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Quest and questions, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid that if you are talking about adding a reference to a page you are working on, you have almost certainly written your draft WP:backwards.

Writing a successful article begins with finding several sources that meet all the criteria in WP:42: you should do this first, because if you cannot find several, then you'll know that there is no point in spending any more time on this subject.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 23:09, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Hounding

Latest comment: 19 days ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Greetings! Another editor seems to be hounding me. What's the right way to resolve it? Tioaeu8943 (talk) 21:31, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Have you tried asking them about it? 331dot (talk) 21:44, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Not yet, but I'm willing. How best to initiate the conversation? Tioaeu8943 (talk) 22:14, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Something to the effect of, "Hello, I noticed you seem to be interested in my edits. Could I ask why? Am I doing something wrong?" 331dot (talk) 22:18, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

I meant the mechanism more than the content. Do I put that on my talk page? Theirs? Tioaeu8943 (talk) 01:27, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh....you could, though their talk page would be better. 331dot (talk) 01:29, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Harassment#Dealing with harassment, which is a section of the page to which your question links. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:50, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Ah, there it is, right in front of me. Thank you for the guidance. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 12:35, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Want to tag a page for updates, how do I do so?

Latest comment: 19 days ago6 comments3 people in discussion

I have noticed that some information in the page Apple File System is very out of date. I don't have the time to look into it, but some parts are needing fixing, specifically the Third-party utilities section.

I have never done this before and thought it was wise to seek help.

How can I tag a page that parts need updating? Urbanracer34 (talk) 15:10, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@Urbanracer34 We have a general template {{update}} which can be used in various ways, as described at that link. Please be as specific as possible when tagging the article so others are clear about what needs fixing. You can use the talk page to suggest sources, even if you don't have time to include them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:16, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

You can also {{update-section}} at the top of one or more sections, or {{update-inline}} after a particular sentence or phrase. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:16, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

I updated the article in question. Did I do it correctly? Urbanracer34 (talk) 15:27, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Not quite. You only tagged one section, so I changed {{update}} to {{update-section}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:34, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that for me! Urbanracer34 (talk) 16:04, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

An article about New Wave artists, who made the transition to dance-pop?

Latest comment: 18 days ago8 comments4 people in discussion

Hello, I am a music enthusiast, and I arguably have been reminded that everytime I look through New Wave artists, who played their own tunes, they were the reasons their own records, became popular, sold millions of dollars, and when the genre left, they made the transition to dance-pop. I found an article about this on SusQueHannock Courier, and I was wondering if I could use it, under New Wave, please?! Thank you! Televisionbuff831G (talk) 02:03, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Please explain a bit more in depth, so we can understand. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 03:00, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

What I'm trying to say is some of the New Wave artists transitioned themselves to dance-pop, because of the popularity of the albums. That's the best I can say. Thank you! I found an article about this. Televisionbuff831G (talk) 03:40, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Do you still need our help? Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 04:28, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes! I gotta go to bed. Thank you! Televisionbuff831G (talk) 04:46, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Televisionbuff831G, and wecome to the Teahouse. I also don't quite understand what you are asking, but if you are proposing to add something to an existing article, the talk page of that article would be the best place to ask, as people interested and knowledgeable in that subject will be more likely to see it. ColinFine (talk) 10:48, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

If you are asking whether you can use "SusQueHannock Courier" as a source to add something to an article; the answer is "probably yes". Make the addition, and see what happens next, noting WP:BRD. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:39, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! At least, I got the question answered and cleared! Televisionbuff831G (talk) 00:11, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft: Florent Chavouet (Redirect in my Sandbox)

Latest comment: 18 days ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Hi! I have a draft about Florent Chavouet in my sandbox (at User:Littleclown27/sandbox), but I can’t move it to Draft:Florent Chavouet because that page currently redirects. I’m not trying to replace the main article — I just want to move my draft out of my sandbox and into the Draft namespace. What’s the best way to do that? Thanks! Littleclown27 (talk) 08:48, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Littleclown27 I don't understand why you need to do this. Your sandbox version was declined, as was the other draft today, which was also originally created by you. If you want to try to improve the draft and re-submit, then just edit it in the normal way and blank your sandbox. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:42, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks a lot @Michael D. Turnbull - someone else created the redirect. I just don't know how to delete it from my Sandbox. Littleclown27 (talk) 10:55, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Littleclown27 Sorry, I hadn't noticed it was a redirect. I've blanked it for you. That's done by clicking on the "redirected from" link at the top of the target page which would take you back to User:Littleclown27/sandbox - old version that I've now edited. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:04, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks a lot @Michael D. Turnbull Littleclown27 (talk) 11:07, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Citing "via"

Latest comment: 18 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello. I want to cite an article from the Herald Sun, ABC's 'tokenistic' tribute for journalist killed in Gaza. The original article is behind a Paywall, but I am able to read it through Newsbank with my Australian library card. The issue is, it doesn't let me read the actual article on the Herald Sun website, but an archived copy of it on the Newsbank site, which I can't link to since as far as I can tell, that url I have is specifically for my library card. Is it enough to just write in the citation "via Newsbank" and use the original Herald Sun url? Thank you so much! -- NotCharizard ^🗨 07:52, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Notcharizard Yes, that's fine. {{cite news}} has a specific |via parameter just for that purpose. WP:SAYWHERE has more details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:53, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, that link is really helpful! -- NotCharizard ^🗨 11:33, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I want to create my own website, give me permission to put your movie on my website, you will pay for it.

Latest comment: 18 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I want to create my own website, give me permission to put your movie on my website, you will pay for it. 175.107.211.83 (talk) 06:12, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

A fascinating business proposition. A suggestion: First create your website; then specify it, specify which movie(s) you're after, and specify how much "we" need (the WMF needs?) to pay for the privilege of having it (them) hosted by you. -- Hoary (talk) 06:31, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Naming a business page versus individual name please

Latest comment: 18 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello Teahouse,

I hope you're doing well. I created a Harry Hillier page about a coachbuilding historical business in Australia. It was called 'Harry Hillier Ltd', but I noticed recently that a sportsperson with the same name was auto-linked to the page (instead of them being redlinked).

Could you please let me know what you would suggest? Should the page have Ltd or coachbuilder in the title, or is there another fix to address this? Thank you SunnyBoi (talk) 02:33, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

SunnyBoi, Harry Hillier, about the coachbuilder, doesn't need to be renamed. A quick look suggests that the incoming links are intended for a golfer of that name. Ignore any examples that are either within signed comments or are within "user spaces"; for those in articles or drafts, rename to "Harry Hillier (golfer)" or "Harry Hillier (golf player)". (I'm not entirely sure which of the pair. Other editors here will know much more than I do about sports terminology.) If you've noticed that the golfer has a sideline in, say, billiards or darts (or if I've made a mistake), then let's rethink. -- Hoary (talk) 02:48, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, this helps a lot! I have changed all the 'What links here' besides user spaces etc. I appreciate your help, thanks again! SunnyBoi (talk) 04:31, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

HexaHealth draft and sourcing

Latest comment: 18 days ago6 comments4 people in discussion

Hello editors,

I’m a new editor working on a Wikipedia draft for HexaHealth, a healthtech company from India focused on surgery facilitation. I’ve compiled sources from Business Standard, Economic Times, YourStory, BioVoice, and BioSpectrum India, and tried to follow Wikipedia’s notability and sourcing guidelines.

Could you kindly help me with:

1. Evaluating if these sources meet notability criteria.
2. Improving tone, structure, or citation quality.
3. Identifying types of sources I should add (e.g., analyst reports, government/health industry publications).

Here’s the draft in my Sandbox: User:Momosnep/sandbox

Thank you so much for your guidance! I'm open to any suggestions.

—‎ momosnep Momosnep (talk) 10:14, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Momosnep I've added a template to your sandbox which will allow you to submit it for formal review, which is our standard process for new editors. Although your draft is well-formatted and cited, the main issue, IMO, is that you are describing WP:RUNOFTHEMILL activities of start-up companies: raising funding etc. None of this make the company notable in the quirky way that Wikipedia defines that word. You need about three sources which meet our golden rules, being reliable, independent and with significant coverage. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:22, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Michael D. Turnbull

Thank you for taking the time to review my draft and for adding the template for formal review. I appreciate your feedback regarding notability and the need for sources with significant coverage.

I understand that routine start-up activities like funding announcements may not meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria. I’ll work on identifying and adding at least three reliable, independent sources that provide substantial, non-trivial coverage of the company beyond basic press releases or announcements.

Could you please review the sandbox, if you have any suggestions or examples of the kind of sources that have worked for similar company pages, that would be very helpful. I’ll update the draft accordingly before resubmitting for review.

Thanks again for your guidance.

@Momosnep Momosnep (talk) 10:30, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

WP:NCORP covers your latter request. Once you have made your edits, request a review, using the template added by Michael. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it to "mainspace". If not, they will give you further advice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:11, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Pigsonthewing. Hoping for the right track. Momosnep (talk) 13:39, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Momosnep. You need to be looking for places where people wholly unconnected with Hexa have chosen, for their own reasons, to write in some depth about Hexa in reliable sources. See WP:42 ColinFine (talk) 13:55, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Proper way to expand a redirect

Latest comment: 18 days ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, I'm looking to expand a few redirect pages into fully-fledged articles, and would like to create some draft pages. My question is, what is the proper way to move the draft articles into mainspace while preserving the page history (i.e., without copy-pasting)? Simply moving the draft article to the destination page name (e.g., by using the "Publish now" button on the Draft Article template) would be blocked by the existing redirect, so I was a bit stumped. Thanks, AluminiumWithAnI (talk) 03:28, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

You can move the draft over the redirect using the “Move” option it will preserve the history. If you’d like, I can move it for you.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 04:32, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I just wanted to know how to do it myself, and besides, I don't have the finished draft yet, so there is no need for you to move anything right now. I appreciate your assistance. AluminiumWithAnI (talk) 04:45, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

You can find guidance here Page mover guide. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 05:07, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks again! I'll be looking into this. AluminiumWithAnI (talk) 05:14, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Is it a reliable source

Latest comment: 20 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/18973/pdf/. Could not find any information on this so I am asking here if this is a good source. 192.184.146.53 (talk) 17:04, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

It is in as much as it is evidence of what the authors said, and you can quote it as such; but it has not gone through peer review or an editorial process, and serves a political purpose, so claims made in it cannot be taken as facts. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:08, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Would like to move an article to Mainspace

Latest comment: 21 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi! I’ve created an article draft at User:Storybysource/sandbox and would like it to be moved to mainspace under the title “Elvin Daniel Rodriguez.” Can someone assist with this move? Thanks!

User:Storybysource/sandbox Storybysource (talk) 04:16, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Storybysource: sorry, but your draft is not ready to be published in the encyclopaedia; it requires considerably more work. There is insufficient evidence that the subject is notable. The referencing is inadequate, as there are no inline citations which are required in articles on living people. The tone is very promotional throughout. And those photographs are almost certainly problematic in terms of copyright.

Could you also read and respond to the conflict of interest query I posted on your talk page. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Question on BLP1E, SINGLEEVENT, and AfD precedent

Latest comment: 19 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I'm seeking clarification on how to properly interpret and apply WP:BLP1E, WP:SINGLEEVENT, and WP:GNG in the context of this ongoing AfD discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ali Nasser Abulaban

The article concerns a subject known for a crime. However, the case has received sustained coverage in reliable national media (e.g., NBC, CBS, etc...), and has since inspired a documentary by G-Unit Film & Television for Peacock. Suggesting that there was continued cultural relevance for this crime.

Some editors argue for deletion under WP:BLP1E, while I believe the scope of coverage and continued public attention satisfy WP:GNG. While I acknowledge that a full biographical article may not be notable due to WP:SINGLEEVENT, I wonder whether the subject matter of the crime itself might warrant coverage.

My questions are:

1. When, if ever, does sustained media coverage and documentary treatment override BLP1E concerns?
2. How do articles like Gypsy-Rose Blanchard, Murder of Laci Peterson, Betty Broderick, or Murder of Eve Carson differ in policy application from cases like this (being Ali Nasser Abulaban)
3. If notability for is deemed insufficient for a stand-alone page, would WP:ATD-M (merging to an article about the crime or to a page that highlights the Peacock documentary) be more suitable than deletion?

I appreciate any guidance to better understand how notability and BLP policy interact in cases like this. Issac I Navarro (talk) Issac I Navarro (talk) 02:56, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Issac I Navarro, in my opinion this crime, though horrific, is pretty commonplace. "Man kills estranged wife and her subsequent boyfriend." This is a sad story that we've heard before. As for Gypsy-Rose Blanchard, her mother's many years of abuse was an unusual factor. Laci Peterson was eight months pregnant, a missing person for nearly four months, and the killer was living a secret life while convincingly pretending to be a loving husband. As for Eve Carson, murdered after a $700 robbery, five shots with a handgun failed to kill her and it took a sawed off shotgun to finish the crime. Also, there were two shooters. So, part of determining whether a murder should be covered on Wikipedia is how unusual the crime is. Cullen328 (talk) 07:56, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you again, @Cullen328. I see your point about how Wikipedia often weighs the unusual nature of a crime when considering notability. I agree that the facts of this case “man kills estranged wife and her boyfriend” are, sadly, not rare. But I’d argue that the context, digital footprint, and media response have made it uncommon in coverage, if not in content.

What sets this apart isn’t just what happened, but how it played out in public view. Ali Nasser Abulaban filmed and posted much of his behavior online. His persona online blurred fiction and reality. News coverage and the Peacock documentary draw parallels to social media influence, toxic masculinity, and the digital performance he did with his skits.

While I understand that WP:BLP1E aims to prevent undue attention to individuals known for a single event, this seems to be a case where, though the crime itself may be common, the national media’s response is not.

We’ve seen similar treatment in other cases where the crime was not especially unusual, yet the coverage elevated its public relevance:

– Murder of David Lynn Harris

– Mary Winkler

– Murder of Daniel Brophy

– Pam Hupp

– Death of Caylee Anthony

– Betty Broderick

– Death of Conrad Roy

In each of these, the media attention, not just the act itself, played a central role in establishing notability. As most of these seem to be not rare cases on their own. I believe this case is of the same character. However, I suppose that is for the AFD to decide.

My question, mainly concerns how to determine when crime is significant, particularly if it has already been featured in a documentary. And where might I find something such as WP:BLP1ENOT that I could read up on. Issac I Navarro (talk) 16:40, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Declined draft

Latest comment: 20 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Help improving declined draft — reviewer suggested I ask here

Hi Teahouse editors,

I recently had my draft article Draft:Anatolis Spyrlidis was declined at AfC on 30 July 2025 by reviewer User:Qcne, who suggested I post here for guidance. The reasons given were “not meeting significant coverage” and “inline citation” requirements. I’d like to request specific help in addressing these points so I can resubmit successfully. The subject (myself) is a Greek Cypriot calligraffiti artist with:

• Coverage by The National Herald (international newspaper)
• Featured profile on the International Museum of Calligraphy site
• Inclusion in the published book Walled Island: Street Art of Cyprus (2025), which profiles 115 artists (StreetArt.cy)

Official Certificate of Appreciation from the Romanian Ministry of Culture, with event coverage on educatie.ong I believe this meets WP:ARTIST standards, but I understand formatting and inline referencing may need improvement. Could someone help me:

• Review my sources and confirm if they meet notability guidelines
• Show me how to format inline citations so each fact is properly referenced
• Recommend any structural or tone changes so the article is neutral and encyclopedic

Thank you for your time — and thanks to User:Qcne for pointing me here. Royalvenom (talk) 11:01, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

1. Please make a proper declaration, per WP:COI (or point to where you have already done so)
2. Do not add yourself to articles, as you did here
3. See WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY
4. Large parts of your draft are uncited; you need to cite a reliable source, independent of you, for each fact you include
5. The second source you list above is a reprint of the first, so cannot be counted for notability. Remove it.
6. For reference formatting, see WP:referencing for beginners.
7. When you have added the necessary citations, re-submit the article for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it to "mainspace". If not, they will give you further advice.

Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:12, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Royalvenom. One of the things that makes it so difficult to write about yourself is 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 exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

Has a reliable published source, wholly unconnected with you, said that you "bridge traditional calligraphy and street culture?" If so, then cite it. If not, then that doesn't belong in the article.

Has a reliable published source, wholly unconnected with you or with Pilot pens, said that you are the Cyprus ambassador for them? If not, then that doesn't belong in the article.

Since you currently have at most one source which is independent of you (the book might be, but searching for it online, I haven't found anything which indicates the publisher, so I'm dubious whether it counts as a reliable source for Wikipedia's purposes), you have little or nothing on which a Wikipedia article could be based.

If you were to go ahead with this (which I don't recommend), you would need to

1. Find several sources which are completely independent of you and your associates, published by reputable publishers, and contain significant coverage of you, as opposed to your work. See WP:42.
2. If you have found several such sources (and only then), effectively forget everything you know about yourself, and write a neutral summary of what those sources say. If they don't mention something you think is important: tough. If they say something you think is wrong - well you shouldn't put anything in the article that contradicts what they say, and if another editor comes along later and adds information you don't like from one of those sources - again, tough.

Do you see why writing an article about yourself is so difficult?

I suggest you also read an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 15:42, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@ColinFine: It would be perfectly acceptable to cite Pilot Pens naming the OP as their Cyprus ambassador. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:13, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, that would be acceptable as a source, Andy; but without an independent source, would it be appropriate to mention it? ColinFine (talk) 22:29, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Discography

Latest comment: 21 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

I just updated a band's discography with over 15 titles now I need to write the linked pages

How do I complete writing this discography? all of the links are in red, I need access to basically rewite the whole discography - how do I do this today? SMFitzgerald (talk) 16:56, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Eagles_of_Death_Metal#Discography --Finngall ^talk 17:22, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Before you start writing, what you'll probably want to do is gather the sources you can find for the albums. Wikipedia only hosts articles for topics that are notable, which, in this context, means topics that have been written about by reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Thus, we can only have articles about any of these albums if sources other than the Eagles of Death Metal themselves have written and published material about them. In my experience, one of the best ways to find sources for albums is to look up professional reviews they've received. I would recommend not starting on writing any articles until you've had a chance to collect your sources and identify which albums have been written about enough to support an article in the first place. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 17:28, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I completed my first album draft:

I added a sentence about the album, sourced that info from a book already sourced on their page, then added 11 online retailers who sell the album and album reviews using this format:

^[1]

I hope this was sufficient; if not, please advise and thank you. SMFitzgerald (talk) 20:41, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I have left some feedback on the draft, but online sellers are not suitable sources. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:08, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

References

1. https://open.spotify.com/album/0ye6RfA8YXuqQ5du0WLUsP

Tables

Latest comment: 21 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

How do I center a Content cell? 1Bluep (talk) 19:27, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi 1Bluep, welcome to the Teahouse. I don't think it's possible in VisualEditor which you usually use. In the source editor, write style="text-align:center;" | A, where A is the content to display in the cell. See the end of Help:VisualEditor#Getting started: the VisualEditor toolbar for how to switch editor on a slanted pencil icon. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:48, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Lyrical G's career start date

Latest comment: 20 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi

I’m editing the Wikipedia article on Lyrical G. The article currently says he started his rap career in the 1990s, but I found a source Alchetron that specifically states he began in 1994.

I understand that Alchetron is a user generated site and may not meet Wikipedia’s reliable sourcing standards. However, I’ve searched extensively and this appears to be the only source available online that gives a specific career start year.

Would it be acceptable to use this source just for that one fact (with a proper citation)? Or should I stick with the broader "1990s" wording in the article until a more reliable source is found? Thilio (talk) 00:28, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Stick with the broader "1990s" wording in the article until a more reliable source is found. -- Hoary (talk) 00:44, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks you so much. Thilio (talk) 00:51, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thilio Note that offline sources are perfectly acceptable, provided reliable. If your searches led you to, say, a newspaper source, that would be fine. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:35, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

As I explained above, it's better to stick with the broader "1990s" wording in the article until a more reliable source is found. Michael D. Turnbull, I acknowledge your input. Cheers. 🐍 Thilio🤖 13:22, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Question

Latest comment: 19 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

I have a question, does Wikipedia prioritize trustworthy, reliable sources, or the original research of some editors? For example, if a film is originally made in one language, but there are no reliable sources confirming it , some editors try to determine the original language by checking lip-sync or similar clues. That becomes their "original research," which somehow gets more importance. Maybe they are right, but why should someone's personal point of view be accepted over what reliable sources say? Even if their analysis is accurate, Wikipedia is supposed to be based on verifiable sources, not what’s "right." I read this somewhere once, though I don’t remember exactly. Sorry if I’m wrong.YashTheBosss (talk) 04:55, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

YashTheBosss: "[D]oes Wikipedia prioritize trustworthy, reliable sources, or the original research of some editors?" The former. (The original research of editors counts for nothing.) "[W]hy should someone's personal point of view be accepted over what reliable sources say?" It should not. -- Hoary (talk) 07:05, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @YashTheBosss, and welcome to the Tahouse. Your memory is correct. See WP:verifiability and WP:original research.

(Side note: I got those links by putting "WP:" on the front of a relevant word or phrase. In this case I knew that they pointed to relevant pages. Searching for WP:(relevant word or phrase) doesn't always find you a policy page or essay that is relevant, but often it does). ColinFine (talk) 10:52, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

The other relevant essay is WP:Verifiability, not truth. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:03, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you all.YashTheBosss (talk) 06:48, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Newspapers

Latest comment: 18 days ago6 comments5 people in discussion

Hello, I am attempting to write to write a article about a person (specifically, San Francisco 49ers halfback Phil Francis). However, most of the sources are newspapers, only available via newspapers.com which has a very annoying paywall. Is there any alternative ways to access these? Notaoffensivename (talk) 03:09, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

In, my opinion, I'd say wait to find some more reliable sources or wait for another editor to do so.

If, you wanted to try, do an AFC/Draft so other advanced reviewers can see if its good enough.

Thats my advice,
Thanks,

Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 03:12, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Valorrr, are you saying that newspaper articles only available via newspapers.com aren't so reliable? -- Hoary (talk) 07:49, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

No, I am not. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 03:01, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello notaoffensivename :). If you have access to the Wikipedia Library you can use it to access newspapers.com. Check out Wikipedia:Newspapers.com for instructions. If you can't access the Library (it has some requirements) you can ask for what you need at Resource Request. Feel free to ask any other questions. Cheers, Sophocrat (talk) 04:44, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

@Notaoffensivename You won't be eligible for The Wikipedia Library as you have fewer than the 500 global contributions to Wikipedia required. I have access to newspapers.com and the search "Phil Francis" + category=Sport still gives over 9,000 matches. If you can refine what you want to search for (e.g. years he was active) and ping me to your talk page or draft, I should be able to help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:18, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Self-article summary

Latest comment: 20 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I can watch Only You to recent My (Im) Perfect Family to article wizard in this article. 2001:44C8:6782:33B5:DCB4:EB04:5DB3:955B (talk) 05:12, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

I cannot parse what you write. Is it a question? A request? Something else? -- Hoary (talk) 06:13, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

The "Karen" slang

Latest comment: 20 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Karen is not a slang word. It is a name. Someone made up a stereotype white woman and said, she looks like a Karen....".People will see this from Wikipedia and assume that it's ok to use the good and pretty name of Karen to use it on any woman if they see fit to say the name in a derogatory way. I know a couple of women named Karen, and they have been laughed at, made fun of and threatened. I feel so worried for my friends that someone will want to harm them if they find out their name is Karen. The way people have been, some people are not afraid to harm anyone, or worse. Karen is not slang. It's an innocent and kind name. 2603:9008:1601:6B09:A9C9:EE9A:FA9B:C89F (talk) 07:47, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

"Karen" is a name. It's also a people, a language, etc. And it's a pejorative slang word. Are you suggesting that the article Karen (slang) should be deleted, or that it should be bowdlerized, or what? -- Hoary (talk) 07:58, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored. We have articles on subjects satisfying Wikipedia:Notability and we report what is said in reliable sources. It's unfortunate for people named Karen that the name is used in this way but it is, and there are reliable sources about it. Karen (slang) has 72 references. I haven't examined how reliable they are and how many specifically use the term "Karen", but it's a well-known term. If you see an article which makes inappropriate comments about a specific person called Karen then you are welcome to report it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:38, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Encyclopaedia vs Wikipedia

Latest comment: 20 days ago6 comments3 people in discussion

After discovering the deep pit of controversy around infoboxes on certain types of biography, and being told very firmly that Wikipedia is encyclopaedic, I'm curious as to why we don't spell it 'Wikipaedia'?

I think it looks better. Tangost1 (talk) 09:20, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Encyclopedia#Etymology has some information including "encyclopedia in American English, encyclopaedia in British English (although the spelling encyclopedia is increasingly gaining acceptance)". Different people are used to different things. WP:ENCYCLOPEDIC is the policy about encyclopedic content. The aim is to document facts without editorial opinion. Further, material covered should be concise without excessive detail. Johnuniq (talk) 09:41, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

That's a fundamental contradiction. The policy about encyclopedic content is editorial opinion. 'Concise' is subjective anyway, and frankly Wikipedia has turned out to be a massive disappointment for me personally... If I'm allowed to say that. Where can I go to express an opinion about this? Tangost1 (talk) 13:01, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

I think I might just go to a book shop and buy an encyclopedia. In the UK. Tangost1 (talk) 13:02, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

I agree that Wikipedia has many problems and can be disappointing. However, thinking about the situation shows that what has been achieved is remarkable. Just like Twitter and 4chan and other places, anyone can participate here so disagreements are inevitable. Wikipedia does a lot better than just about all other open websites. Johnuniq (talk) 21:11, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

The name "Wikipedia" is actually a portmanteau a combination of two words.

wiki (from the Hawaiian word wikiwiki, meaning "quick") and "encyclopedia".

Because Wikipedia was started in the United States it adopted the American English spelling of encyclopedia. That’s why it became "Wikipedia" not Wikipaedia.

Even though the project uses the American spelling in its name, articles themselves follow whatever variety of English is appropriate to the topic so British subjects use British English and so on (see WP:ENGVAR).

So in short:

The "ae" spelling just didn’t make it into the name but the encyclopedic mission definitely did . lol😊 🐍 Thilio🤖 10:30, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Middle names in article titles

Latest comment: 20 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

For biographies, I've noticed that some Russian (or just generally Slavic) biographies also include the middle name in their titles and some don't. Is this done when two individuals have the same given name and surname? Also: I've recently created the Nikolai Dmitrievich Dmitriev article. There exists another biography for a Nikolai Dmitriev. Should I move the "Nikolai Dmitriev" article to "Nikolai Konstantinovich Dmitriev" or move my article to "Nikolai Dmitriev (composer)" and the other to "Nikolai Dmitriev (linguist)"? WafflesInvasion (talk) 10:30, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi WafflesInvasion

From what I’ve seen, Russian or Slavic biographies sometimes include the patronymic (like Dmitrievich or Konstantinovich) but it’s usually left out of the article title unless it’s really needed either to tell two people apart or because the full name is how they’re commonly known in English sources. That’s in line with the naming conventions for people and WP:COMMONNAME.

In your case since there are two people named Nikolai Dmitriev, it makes sense to disambiguate the titles. The standard way to do that is by adding a descriptor in parentheses like you suggested: * Nikolai Dmitriev (composer) * Nikolai Dmitriev (linguist) That approach aligns with WP:DISAMBIGUATION and helps readers quickly tell who's who.

The full name with patronymic can still go in the lead sentence no need to use it in the title unless it’s really the most recognized name.

Hope that helps a bit. Cheers. 🐍 Thilio🤖 10:55, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I will add descriptors to the titles. WafflesInvasion (talk) 12:19, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @WafflesInvasion, and welcome to the Teahouse.

There are two relevant policies here.

COMMONNAME says that article titles should use the name for somebody (or something) that is most common in the various reliable sources that the article is based on. Since using the patronymic (which is not a "middle name" as we usually understand that phrase in English, by the way) is common in Russian publications, it may well be appropriate for a Russian individual: it depends on the sources. See WP:patronymic.

Secondly, where there are articles on several subjects with the same name, we often need to disambiguate. One of the ways to do this is to use the middle name or patronymic - but we wouldn't do this if that form of the name is hardly ever used in publications. ColinFine (talk) 10:58, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation

Latest comment: 20 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hello, I would like to give a disambiguation page for "Consolations." I looked up 'consolations' to attempt to pull up Liszt's Consolations. Currently, 'Consolations' redirects to Seneca's Consolations and there is a Consolation (disambiguation). How do I pull this off? Thanks, Coulomb1 (talk) 18:58, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

there is already a disambiguation page for consolations that you linked with liszt's consolations listed on it.

what exactly do you mean? aquarium substrate^talk 19:02, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Coulomb1. Seneca's Consolations doesn't look like the primary topic for "Consolations" so I have redirected Consolations to Consolation (disambiguation) instead. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:20, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

some help

Latest comment: 19 days ago8 comments5 people in discussion

Hello, I’m Cyril Voyant, Director of Research at the O.I.E. laboratory, Mines Paris‑PSL, based in Sophia Antipolis. I am seeking the assistance of a neutral volunteer editor (with no personal or professional connection to me) who can review or publish a draft about me, in accordance with community standards. My academic credentials are publicly verifiable: HAL profile (116 indexed publications, participation in ANR/EU projects like SAPHIR, Fine4cast, TILOS): https://cv.hal.science/cyril-voyant Google Scholar profile (over 130 peer-reviewed articles, approximately 6,500 citations): https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=aUlP6agAAAAJ&hl=en ResearchGate profile (149 publications, around 6,157 citations): https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cyril-Voyant.My research areas include: Solar irradiance forecasting applying hybrid AI/statistical models, development of novel metrics such as the stochastic coefficient of variation (sCV) and Forecastability Index. ClearSky‑Free forecasting using Extreme Learning Machines trained directly on raw irradiance data. Transfer learning and clustering techniques to deploy models in regions lacking local data. Complex-valued time series modeling to capture amplitude and volatility for probabilistic forecasting. Medical dosimetry and radiotherapy planning, notably the open‑source software LQL‑Equiv used in over 20 countries. Projects with national and European funding: SAPHIR, Fine4cast, TILOS. All the information and reference are availaible at https://www.cyrilvoyant.com/ . A lot reference are available in scopus, publon, mdpi interfaces. This initiative is strictly non-commercial, primarily aimed at improving access to my work and facilitating future scientific collaborations. I would be grateful to any volunteer editor, impartial and independent, who can assist in ensuring the text meets Wikipedia guidelines. I can provide access to the draft via EverybodyWiki (Cyril_voyant) or cyrilvoyant.com if needed. Thank you in advance to anyone willing to contribute to the rigorous and useful dissemination of this scientific work. Best regards, Cyril Voyant Cyril voyant (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

See WP:Article Wizard to make a draft about you. Also see WP:YFA! I recommend you not write about it because all the sources are self published. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 21:23, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

If someone were to do this, they would still have a conflict of interest because they are doing it on your behalf after being asked by you.

In regards to “ This initiative is strictly non-commercial” see WP:YESPROMO. This is an attempt at self-promotion. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 00:10, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

You already posted the same thing earlier on this page, and I responded on your talk page. You've been given a lot of good advice, and I have offered to review your draft if you try to make another one. Bear in mind that your earlier draft was deemed promotional and unacceptable due to your use of LLM to generate prose. The English Wikipedia has high standards; if one of the many journals you've been published in wouldn't accept your prose, then neither would we. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:42, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. My intention is exactly to avoid any conflict of interest by asking a neutral, volunteer editor to review of my draft. I have no experience with wikipedia, and my phrasing is naturally biased by some academic background.

I’m not looking to promote myself, but rather to highlight research topics, open-source tools (like LQL‑Equiv), and innovations in the hope of stimulating interdisciplinary collaboration beyond my usual circles.

I will submit a structured draft in my sandbox, and step back so an experienced editor can evaluate and publish it if it meets encyclopedia standards.

For transparency, I’ll declare my connection, request edits rather than make them directly, and strictly avoid promotional language. Thanks again for your support! Cyril voyant (talk) 06:44, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

re, I writed a draft.... hoping all is ok, i will modify it according remarks !!! thank you Cyril voyant (talk) 08:02, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

"I’m not looking to promote myself, but rather to highlight research topics, open-source tools (like LQL‑Equiv), and innovations"

Great; so instead of repeatedly asking for an article for yourself, look into how you can contribute, in alignment with our polices, to articles on those topics.

"in the hope of stimulating interdisciplinary collaboration beyond my usual circles"

Then you are in the wrong place. That is not what Wikipedia is for. Try LinkedIn. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:57, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your insightful comments, which really help me move forward. Cyril voyant (talk) 11:06, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Sentret and Furret

Latest comment: 19 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

is this good User:A minecraft parkour pro/sandbox/Sentret and Furret. A minecraft parkour pro (talk) 00:26, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@A minecraft parkour pro: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks like your draft does not meet the notability guideline for fictional characters. Also, your only listed source is a wiki style website which are not reliable as they are user-generated, much like Wikipedia. Articles here have to be based on reliable sources, and it is highly unlikely that any exist for those particular characters. I unfortunately don’t see a path for your article to be accepted in any capacity here on Wikipedia do to these reasons. If you are interested in writing about those characters, I encourage you to make edits directly to the wiki you referenced (Bulbapedia), as that is a more appropriate place for articles about Pokémon characters. cyberdog958^Talk 01:32, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

That's fine i tried. :) A minecraft parkour pro (talk) 04:40, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@A minecraft parkour pro I disagree that there are not likely to be reliable sources for the characters, but Pokémon notability is a very weird area. At the moment, most Pokémon are all put into "mini articles" in generational lists. If you can find reliable, non-user generated sources, you might be able to add some information about Sentret and Furret at List_of_generation_II_Pokémon#Sentret and you can find some more info on writing about Pokémon on Wikipedia at WikiProject_Pokémon. Good luck! -- NotCharizard ^🗨 05:21, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Norman Frederick Astbury

Latest comment: 19 days ago8 comments4 people in discussion

I am new to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse. I decided to come here because of the invaluable help that my mentor and other editors have provided to me with respect to the recent publication of the entry for Norman Frederick Astbury. As the subject is my late father, I have declared a COI on my Talk Page. I understand that I am, therefore, precluded from editing the published entry directly. I would, however, like to use my Talk Page to set out topics that visiting Wikipedia editors may wish to select, research, develop and then provide one or more related edits to improve the overall quality of the entry. In the foregoing context, I would like to address Wikipedia’s comments: ‘This article relies excessively on references to primary sources’ and the article being declared an ‘Orphan’. Happily, Editor Nthep has linked the material to the subject’s elder brother by inserting hyperlinks into the Info Boxes in each entry. So, although the material is now a bit less of an orphan than was originally the case, I believe that there may well be many other instances to be established. I am very grateful to Editor Nthep for starting this process. A recent issue with which I would welcome help is that ImageRemovalBot has just deleted a photograph which the owner, Lucideon, had given me written permission to use. The image, which had been placed adjacent related text in the Career section, is of the former BCRA Headquarters in Penkhull, Stoke-on-Trent, where the subject worked for 17 years. The image also appears on Lucideon’s website. Any recommendations as to how best to have the image restored in a manner complaint with Wikipedia’s protocols would be most welcome. To conclude, I would welcome suggestions and guidance with respect using my Talk Page

1. to deal with the excessive reliance on primary sources,
2. to address the orphan issue further,
3. to encourage the sort of editing Wikipedia seeks to improve entries and
4. to expand the material describing the subject’s personal life.

This final objective faces the twin challenges of maintaining a scholarly, encyclopaedic and neutral style while at the same time having few if any citations available simply because ‘personal life’ is rarely newsworthy. Many thanks in advance for any guidance you may feel able to offer to me at the Teahouse. Kestrel2Zero (talk) 05:47, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Kestrel2Zero

Norman Frederick Astbury Kestrel2Zero (talk) 05:47, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Kestrel2Zero, two points. On ImageRemovalBot has just deleted a photograph which the owner, Lucideon, had given me written permission to use: the identity of the owner of a print or a negative, let alone a JPEG, is by the way. Is Lucideon the copyright owner? If so, please see this. And please make suggestions or requests for the article Norman Frederick Astbury not on your user talk page but instead on Talk:Norman Frederick Astbury. -- Hoary (talk) 07:13, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Dear Hoary

Many thanks for all of this guidance. I value your support highly.

I think Lucideon must be the copyright owner because the building belongs to them and it appears on their website. Please let me work my way through the Commons:Volunteer Response Team page along with the other information you have provided.

Lucideon have been immensely helpful, giving their time freely, as one can see from all the references and other material they have been kind enough to provide. Having asked the question, received a positive written reply and asked them to check with their legal department, I am hesitant to trespass on their kindness by way of further questions when they have already spent so much time providing a wide range of information voluntarily.

I think I will need some time for me to work out the way ahead.

Thank you too for explaining that I should be using the page - Talk:Norman Frederick Astbury for suggestions or requests in the future.

Kestrel2Zero (talk) 07:49, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Kestrel2Zero

Hello again, Hoary

Literally five minutes ago, after my previous reply to you, I received the following email from Lucideon:

QUOTE

Dear Nigel,

Please accept my apologies for the delayed reply.

I had looked in to the issue to the Penkhull photo copyright previously but wanted to double check to ensure that there are no misunderstandings and that you have the definitive answer to your query.

I can confirm that the Penkhull photo was taken by a member of the company which means that Lucideon owns the copyright. As you know , Lucideon has given you permission to use the photograph with attribution. Perhaps you just need to add to the photo: ‘Copyright Lucideon. Used with permission from Lucideon’.

I see that the photo has been removed from the page and I assume that this is connected with the enquiry.

As to the point about relying too much on primary sources, in the world of research , primary sources are excellent and the source of original data. I think that because of the way that Wikipedia works, they like to have corroboration from other sources .

I hope this helps.

It’s great to see your project come to fruition and to see your father’s achievements collated.

We still come across , and refer to, his work and it’s so nice to now know more about him.

Kind regards,

Karen

Karen Sutcliffe

Library and Digital Support Officer

[readacted]

www.lucideon.com

UNQUOTE

If are able to reinstate the imager for me on the basis of this communication, I would be most grateful.

I will also put this message on Talk:Norman Frederick Astbury as indicated by you earlier.

Best regards

Kestrel2Zero (talk) 08:03, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Kestrel2Zero

@Kestrel2Zero Unfortunately due to copyright law, we need Lucideon themselves to upload/donate the photo to Commons. You could share the following link with them: Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. qcne (talk) 09:05, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

We do not need Lucideon themselves to "upload/donate the photo to Commons" (whatever the latter means). We need them to follow the process described at the page you link to, to release the image under an applicable open licence. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:40, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks; please let me investigate.

Kestrel2Zero (talk) 10:55, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

REG: Wikipedia Content Policies

Latest comment: 18 days ago6 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, can anyone help if this draft content comply with Wikipedia content policies. I have given enough citation links from all reputed publishers. Have derived content using news from the publishers, have not entertained any topics away from news publishers. Thank you very much.

Draft:Sabarisan Vedamurthy. ArmeVijay (talk) 06:30, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@ArmeVijay try to add more references and citations (basically sources and websites.) User:StopLookingAtMe1 08:49, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@ArmeVijay You need to check that the draft is compliant with the policy for biographies of living people, which the "Personal life" section is not because it cites no published reliable source. Perhaps a source of this type is available. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:55, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Dear Mike Thumbull, thanks for your review and suggestion.

I have added the below link of 'My Corporate Info' website(this is trustable source website available in India to find information about Indian Companies) where Date of Birth information present. This is the only website I can identify online for date of birth.

https://mycorporateinfo.com/director/sabarisan-vedamurthy-1070304

Also, I have added Bharatpedia below link available online for his marriage with Senthamarai Stalin;

https://en.bharatpedia.org/wiki/M._K._Stalin#Early_life_and_family

Please let me know if any more suggestion.

Thank you ArmeVijay (talk) 13:07, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@ArmeVijay We don't allow wikis as sources as basically anyone can write anything they like. Even Wikipedia is not a reliable source. You would need to drill down to whatever the wiki cites (or remove the information if you can't find a reliable source). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:35, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Dear Michael, well noted. I have removed Wiki citation link. Thank you. ArmeVijay (talk) 15:38, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Cameras on the ISS

Latest comment: 18 days ago8 comments4 people in discussion

I've been working on an overhaul of List of cameras on the International Space Station such that it's a little more organised and contains much more information about the cameras that are and were on the space station and why they're there. Before publishing these changes to the article, I'd like to get feedback about my draft (User:Edits4019/sandbox) and know if there are things that can be improved, since I'm pretty 'new' to Wikipedia as far as editing text goes and also especially since my English isn't that great. Edits4019 (talk) 04:13, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Just submit it reviewers will give you feedback whether it’s accepted or not.

🐍 Thilio🤖 04:26, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

It's an article, Thilio, not a draft. -- Hoary (talk) 04:42, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Then just go ahead and make your changes. 🐍 Thilio🤖 05:00, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

OK, Edits4019, I'll bite. Excuse what may look like rudeness, but why should anyone be interested? (Other perhaps than in "I'd guess that this was good publicity for Nikon. Had Nikon been willing to pay more for the privilege than its rivals?" -- a question that unfortunately goes unanswered.) Now, it would be interesting if we read why such a number and variety of cameras was chosen. (What was each for?) But for me the question that's foremost is: Why would anyone "[undergo] photography training" with a camera on which a flashgun and what looks like a long-focal-length lens are simultaneously mounted? -- Hoary (talk) 04:42, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I believe this will be useful for those who are curious about the kinds of cameras astronauts use and have used over the years. I also hope this will be useful for scientists and other people who want to immediately know what photography and video equipment is available in the station, for example. Edits4019 (talk) 16:59, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Edits4019 Given that the list article already exists and you have a large amount of new information and references, I think that your best approach would be to copy/paste into the existing article individual parts of your new material (e.g. the tables) as separate edits. That way, if anyone objects to the content they can revert just that part. If you can answer Hoary's questions using reliable sources, than that would be great but even if you can't your changes look very useful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:13, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I think this is what I'll do. Thank you. Edits4019 (talk) 17:00, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Block This Guy ASAP

Latest comment: 18 days ago7 comments4 people in discussion

User:Balyyadav123YashTheBosss (talk) 04:55, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

See Last edit of this page, Sathyaraj filmographyYashTheBosss (talk) 05:12, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. I have left a warning on their talk page, which is the first step. Now to start cleaning up their mess... ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 06:09, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Blocked while I was replying! ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 06:10, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads-up, YashTheBosss. (This wasn't the best page for it, but no matter.) ClaudineChionh, we only have a limited set of templates, so I'm not criticizing you for posting one that boils down to "You've been a very naughty boy. And if you're naughty once more, we'll actually do something about it." Anyway, rather than append the block message to your warning, I simply replaced your warning with my block message. It's not as if this fellow suggested that he was straying only temporarily from an encyclopedic and altruistic goal. -- Hoary (talk) 06:26, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

No worries @Hoary, I only realised when I started looking at the diffs that this was a more extensive issue that somehow stayed under the radar for nearly a year! ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 06:30, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

For future reference, WP:AIV will be responded to much more quickly, in such cases. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:21, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft:TCR Engineering and AfC

Latest comment: 18 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Hi Teahouse hosts,

I'm working on a draft article titled Draft:TCR Engineering, which has been submitted via the Articles for Creation process. I have a declared conflict of interest (disclosed on the draft’s talk page) and am following Wikipedia guidelines by not editing the article directly in the mainspace.

The draft includes multiple independent, reliable sources and aims to meet notability guidelines. I would appreciate help or advice on improving it further and increasing the chances of it being accepted into the main article space.

Here's the draft link: Draft:TCR Engineering

Thanks in advance! Cyberceo72 (talk) 06:24, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Cyberceo72: firstly, this draft has not been submitted for AfC review. (A bot did add the submission template, but you seem to have removed that.)

Secondly, the draft has no referencing. It does include a number of external sources, but these are constructed as inline external links (which are not allowed), and not as inline citations (which are required). You need to convert them from the former to the latter; please see WP:REFB for advice on referencing. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:41, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

You might want to review Help:Referencing for beginners to ensure all your sources are formatted and cited correctly this can improve the draft’s chances at AfC.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 06:49, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Cyberceo72, and welcome to the Teahouse.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. And that's even without the added complication of COI. ColinFine (talk) 11:52, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Confusing block

Latest comment: 20 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

  Courtesy link: User talk:Gjb0zWxOb § August 2025

Hello, I was recently blocked by an admin for an edit that I had made a month ago which was reverted a day later and which I did not undo. The admin said that if I provide my reasoning for my edit (which was reverted), my account would be unblocked. After I did that, the admin seemed satisfied with my response but then commented that he will, "leave it to another Admin to decide." I was under the impression that my response was sufficient. I have now submitted my appeal and it remains pending. I find this block to be pretty bizarre since it was a "temporary indefinite" block that was done a month after the activity happened. Quite frankly, I just want to get back to editing. Is there anything else I can do to sort this out? Thanks. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 18:01, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I for one would be very wary of unblocking you as long as there's no satisfactory response -- indeed, no response of any kind -- to User talk:Gjb0zWxOb#Jewish terrorism, in which questions were posed less than one month ago. -- Hoary (talk) 22:28, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Gjb, I would say that from what the admins posted on your talk page, they believe that you (perhaps unintentionally) were using incorrect edit summaries that did not match the information you were putting on the page. Particularly with the 'Supremacism' article, the information you added also did not accurately describe what the source said, appearing to be your own original research.

Suggest reviewing Yamla's comment on declining your unblock request, along with Hoary's post immediately prior MilesVorkosigan (talk) 22:43, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I responded to everything raised on my talkpage. There was a bit of confusion on my part based on where to put my comments. I started by putting them on the Jewish Terrorism talkpage, which I had participated in earlier in the month but then moved on to other things. Then when the unblock request was denied, I addressed the Admin's concerns on my talkpage in my new unblock request where he said he would "leave it for another admin to decide." In the block edit summary, it said, "Temporary block until editor responds to recent questions about their edits on Jewish terrorism." What else can be done? Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 23:51, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Well, I ‘’’would’’’ have said that as far as I can see you haven’t really addressed the substance of their concerns, or what I pointed out, but when I was clicking around to make sure I explained extended-confirmed status to you correctly, I saw that you have A LOT more edits than I do.

I’d be happy to try to explain things to a newbie, but… why do ‘’’you’’’ need this explanation? MilesVorkosigan (talk) 01:03, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Help editing an article

Latest comment: 19 days ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Courtesy link to diff

This is about the Heywood-Wakefield page: Heywood-Wakefield Company#External links

This retired composition professor signed up as an editor to fix grammatical errors because they drive me mad and to edit sentences and paragraphs to improve readability. Since then, I have edited a few pages when I have found incorrect or incomplete information on subjects that I know something about. Today, it was the page for the Heywood-Wakefield Co. The problem is that I don't think I added external links correctly. I know there is information I can read to help me, but I'm currently suffering a migraine (thank you, Canadian wildfires) and cannot figure out what I'm supposed to do. I would appreciate it if you would take a look and make necessary corrections. Thank you! Professoressa X (talk) 16:49, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

You used a "bare URLs" as a references; we prefer to avoid these. You also gave each reference twice, rather than "reusing" them. I have fixed both issues; please see WP:referencing for beginners for future cases. You might also be able to add other citations to the existing text, which would be helpful.

You also did not give a citation for your "Marshall Lloyd had developed a process for..." addition; and you used the phrase "Not surprisingly, the Heywood-Wakefield imprimatur increased the popularity of Lloyd's wicker products." Such claims (i.e. that something is unsurprising) should not be made in Wikipedia's voice.

I have removed that part of your edit, but please feel free to remake it, bearing the above in mind, once you have a source, and when you are feeling better—which will be soon, I hope.

I will also leave you some useful links on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:19, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Dear Andy--Thank you for the help. I am feeling much better today and was able to comprehend your instructions. I think I have made the edits and links correctly. That being said, I would appreciate it if you would give the Heywood-Wakefield page a read to make sure. Professoressa X (talk) 14:38, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Glad to hear.

That looks much better. I would caution against over-reliance on a company's own website, especially for positive comments about their own performance (your new edit is close to, but does not cross, that line). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:53, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Как да спечеля значка?

Latest comment: 19 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Как да спечеля 2 значка форматер? 12 Ана анияна (talk) 12:33, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

You write in Bulgarian. This page is about the English-language Wikipedia.

If your question is about the Bulgarian Wikipedia, please ask at bg:Уикипедия:Разговори.

If your question is about the English Wikipedia, you can ask in Bulgarian, at Wikipedia talk:Local Embassy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:08, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello 12 Ana. I have no idea how you get the "Formatter" badge. The only think I can find about badges is at WP:BADGE, which says that the project is not active. ColinFine (talk) 13:18, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

I think 12 Ана анияна is referring to The Wikipedia Adventure. Some parts of the program (which awards badges) are not possible to complete because of the change from Vector legacy (2010) to the current default appearance Vector 2022. -- Reconrabbit 18:58, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Att: Employment Needed Help!!?

Latest comment: 18 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

How could I possibly apply for a job? With Wikipedia and or affiliates or also be a Teahouse employee? Thanks! Yah1designz777 (talk) 13:31, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Teahouse responders are volunteers.

One can find information about open positions at the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) at:

"Work with us – Wikimedia Foundation". Wikimedia Foundation. Retrieved August 7, 2025.

Peaceray (talk) 13:49, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Along with Wikipedias being volunteers, each section of Wikipedia is voluntary and only certain permissions have an application process. Anyone (whose IP isn’t blocked in or in a ___location where Wikipedia is blocked) can make an account and start responding at the Teahouse, although if you do not have experience with Wikipedia you will likely give wrong information and may be asked to slow down. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 01:48, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Black Menace

Latest comment: 19 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Draft:Black Menace

Could it be moved to the mainspace after it was originally deleted via AFD? Nighfidelity (talk) 13:42, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Nighfidelity Since Black Menace was deleted through an AfD, it can’t be approved through AfC alone even if the draft is much better now. You’d need to go to WP:Deletion review and explain what’s changed (like new sources or chart info). AfC reviewers usually won’t move drafts like this without community consensus first. 🐍 Thilio🤖 14:11, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

We shouldn't let petty bureaucracy bind us; the AfD was seven years ago, and we don't even know that the subject is the same one (and even if it is, the new version should be reviewed on its merits). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:27, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: Just FYI: The topics are indeed the same. Deor (talk) 14:38, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft for Kentico

Latest comment: 17 days ago6 comments4 people in discussion

Hello!

I recently spent some time working on a draft article for Kentico, a Czech company that builds a CMS/DXP platform.

Here’s the current draft: Draft:Kentico

The draft has been declined multiple times for different reasons, but I think it's come a long way since I started. The most recent decline said:

“Sources are not independent and reliable. Not WP:NPOV yet.”

I think I am struggling on knowing which references are working, and which are not. In previous submissions I tried removing anything that might be seen as promotional, but I was wondering if anyone could provide anymore pointers?

• Are all of the sources problematic, or just a few?
• Should I just add _more_ sources rather than replacing to back up the statements?
• Does it still read as promotional? Or should I be deleting/removing sections?

Any help would be really appreciated - I took a break after the last rejection, but I am eager to get working on it again!

Thanks Goldfinch.me (talk) 19:04, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Goldfinch.me, I’ve had a look at your draft and the review comments the main concerns are that the sources aren’t independent or reliable... the tone isn’t fully neutral, some sections read like they were AI-generated, and parts come across as promotional to move it forward, you’ll need to swap in high quality independent sources, rewrite for a factual, balanced tone and remove anything that sounds like advertising. Make sure every claim is backed by a verifiable reference once that’s done, it should be in much better shape for resubmission.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 19:37, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I suggest reading WP:NCORP, which explains the types of sources that are, and are not, suitable for articles about companies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:15, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

OK thank you for your advice.

I have managed to find some Dutch/Czech national newspaper articles which may help back the history of Kentico. I think they are seen as good references. Goldfinch.me (talk) 11:18, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Don't let an AI write the words for you. Going down that road leads to article deletion and possibly blocking your account. The licensing terms used by Wikipedia require any text to be attributable to an author, and this is impossible if you use AI-generated content. Therefore you must write in your own words. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:06, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

OK thank you for your advice.

I think this is definitely a learning, not to use AI to reword your content and make it less promotional, only use it for recommendations but still ultimately rewrite the content yourself?

I have started rewriting areas, so hopefully this will help with approval. Goldfinch.me (talk) 11:13, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Are aliens real?

Latest comment: 17 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

So many people in my locality tell me that aliens are real but I am not going to believe what they say. 102.90.79.185 (talk) 11:14, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, always best to make up your own mind based on evidence. See Alien for what Wikipedia has to say. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:18, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, but I wasn't convinced till now 102.90.79.185 (talk) 11:32, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Robots FAQ

Latest comment: 20 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Why are robots considered excessive editing thanks and regards 129.126.36.49 (talk) 01:58, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

"Robots", if you mean the use of AI (Artificial Intelligence), here is some easy information, just look at WP:AI, or the use of robot for quick editing, as they're considered Bots, and need approval from Wikipedia:BAG. Anymore questions, feel free to reply here, or use my talk page...

Thanks, Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 02:54, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Why does vandalism exist

Latest comment: 19 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I regret it so bad man, i thought it was cool, can everyone cleanse me of my sins? 142.161.232.18 (talk) 01:52, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:The motivation of a vandal. Moxy🍁 01:55, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Help improving language articles

Latest comment: 18 days ago6 comments4 people in discussion

Hi, sorry to bother with a stupid question but I’m getting really frustrated over something and need an outsider opinion. I’ve been trying to improve language articles here as that’s my main interest, and have noticed that the vast majority of language articles’ lead sentences follow the form “XXX is a (family) language spoken in (place)”, including all of the language Good articles. This is also reflected in Wikipedia:WikiProject Language’s guideline for article style/structure. However, not every language article follows this structure, so I decided to work to make things more consistent. If you look at my recent contributions you can probably notice that I’ve gotten into a disagreement with another editor because of this; they cite MOS:LEADSENTENCE to say that all articles should have the exact article title in bold in the lead sentence. I’m willing to accept I’ve screwed up and I’m not following the rules properly, but at the same time I find it hard to believe that so many language articles, including all of the Good articles, have fallen through the cracks and missed this very obvious style issue. Can someone help me? EllaMinnowPea371 (talk) 04:43, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

This is a difficult situation, it does seem that there is some ambiguity here that means based on the style guides there's not necessarily a right answer. I do feel that, using this as an example, the form "XXX is a (family) language spoken in (place)" does not mean that "XXX" has to be "Assiniboine" rather than "Assiniboine language". Having said that, your point about all the good and featured articles not using the "language" in the bold word is a very good point, and so I think you are probably right in what you have been doing.

It is also clear there are exceptions to "the article title needs to be specifically what is in bold" given the "Death of Azaria Chamberlain" bit in the mos:lead#Bolding_of_title_and_alternative_names guideline. I think that just nobody has added anything about languages in that section - I think it is worth using the mos:lead guideline's talk page to ask how people feel about this and if we can get a consensus on if language articles should be added in there as an exception as well. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 05:49, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Why do you think that every language article should commence with exactly the same form of words? I'm not saying they can't, or shouldn't, but what is your rationale, and why does it matter that some don't?

We always look for consistency within an article, but exact consistency between all articles of a given "type" (whatever that is) may not be either practical or desirable. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.194.92.162 (talk) 19:53, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

EllaMinnowPea371, may I offer a dufferent perspective? I would not worry overly much about having a consistent style among different articles. Yes, there is something to be said for following local project guidelines as far as that goes if the associated WikiProject, WP:LINGUISTICS and WP:LANGUAGES have one (but not not too far !), and being consistent in that sense. But in my experience, articles on language-related topics generally have some of the most serious problems of WP:Verifiability, WP:SOURCING, and WP:Original research of any of the topic areas I contribute to or read.

I have a theory about why this is. Everyone feels that they are an expert in their own language, and per the theories of linguistic competence, they are not wrong about that—they are! But this may translate into a sense that they don't need to include sources for content they add that are based on their ability in their native language. But this is not how Wikipedia works, it is contrary to WP:EXPERT, and finally, every user has an idiolect, but few are aware of it or of the implications of writing an encyclopedic article based purely on their own personal notions of their language, which even with the best of intentions may not match what the most reliable sources say. This also applies to you, to me, and to everyone else.

So if you are truly interested in contributing to articles on language topics at Wikipedia, may I suggest you put consistency on the back burner for now, as a nice-to-have but not an urgent problem, and turn instead to an area where you could truly make a significant impact in language articles across the board, which is in proper sourcing and verifiability. P.S.: I have changed the section header of this section to "Help improving language articles" to make it easier to understand what it is about in the table of contents or while browsing the page, I hope that is okay with you. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 21:17, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

I am very well aware on the verifiability and sourcing issues in language articles and have been working to fix them. However, this is a HUGE job and I don’t have the energy to research every day, so fixing minor things— typos, confusing phrasing, punctuation, and style inconsistencies— feels like a good alternative on days where I don’t have the energy to do much else. I want to improve Wikipedia, and while I agree that there are WAY, WAY more pressing issues than style minutiae, an improvement is an improvement. I hope this makes sense. ellaminnowpea ^{(371 💬)} 00:32, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Indeed it does. Above all, this is a volunteer effort, and you get to choose whatever it is you wish to work on. Your efforts are appreciated. Happy editing! Mathglot (talk) 01:59, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Article not in search engine results

Latest comment: 18 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

This is probably a stupid question, but why doesn't the article Gerbera (drone) appear in search engine results? E.g., Google, DuckDuckGo. All the other language versions are indexed. DuckDuckGo even indexes Talk:Gerbera drone (talk page of a redirect), but not the article itself.

The article is only a week old, but that seems like it should be more than enough time for the search engine crawlers to have discovered it. Other articles I've worked on seem to update in search engine results more or less immediately.

Btw, if anyone wants to give feedback on the article itself, I would appreciate that. I didn't create it but I have made substantial edits to it. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 08:57, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi IP editor. New articles only become indexable by search engines after they have been reviewed by New Page Patrol, or 90 days have passed since publication, whichever comes sooner. This article has not been reviewed yet (and is only a week old, as you say).

That said, we don't really have any control, anyway, over whether and when search engines decide to point to our articles. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:42, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 10:11, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

IP editor: the article is interesting and I've uprated it to "C" on its talk page, so well done to both User:Yerachmiel C and you. I'm sure that the NPP will have no problem with it and you can find out when they review it from the public logs. My tip would be to make a minor edit once the page is reviewed, as search engines tend to notice new edits. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:34, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

False info about perpetrators

Latest comment: 18 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I don't know much about Wikipedia but this discussion requires urgent attention: Talk:1984 anti-Sikh riots#Perpetrators in the infobox. 2409:40F2:213D:4EE9:E81F:F9FF:FE24:30A0 (talk) 17:29, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

There seem to be plenty of people involved already.

If you think they are not capable of resolving the issue, whatever it is, please follow the process at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:09, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

How to handle article created by non-XC user

Latest comment: 18 days ago6 comments3 people in discussion

While fixing edits made by a non-XC user I stumbled across this page that they created directly.

In addition to having been created by a non-XC user bypassing the AfC process, the article has extensive issues with grammar and formatting.

How should situations like this - where a non-XC user has directly created a new article - be handled?

• Is the article eligible for speedy deletion under WP:G5 or another speedy deletion criteria? If yes, should I just ping an admin to delete it?
• Or is the correct request to move it back to the user's draft space? Is this the same thing as speedy deletion or is it a different process?
• Should I leave a message on the user's talk page reminding them that non-XC users must follow the AfC process to create new articles? Is there a template for this?
• How do I handle cases where a user, who is editing in good faith, seems to have a lower level of english than what is sufficient for an encyclopedia?

NicheSports (talk) 17:40, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

"non-XC users must follow the AfC process to create new articles"

What's "non-XC? And what makes you think that?

G5 is for "Creations by banned or blocked users, or in violation of general sanctions". Which applies here?

What is the actual issue, if any, with the article? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:10, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: "XC" = eXtended-Confirmed (500/30).

@NicheSports: There is nothing wrong with an autoconfirmed (10/4) or better user creating pages directly in mainspace, but they do so under "publish and be damned" rules. They're essentially accepting whatever consequences arise from that action, including the article being tagged for deletion, draftified, or mercilessly edited. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 18:19, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Got it, clear now. I think that "merciless editing" is the appropriate remedy in this case and I'll take that on myself. Thanks! NicheSports (talk) 18:21, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

At the WP:AfC page it says that "new" editors must follow the AfC process to create new articles. It isn't clear what was meant by "new" so I assumed it to mean "non-WP:XC". Seems like that understanding was wrong, and my apologies.

I have no issues at all with this article existing. I just thought it was created improperly. Of course, it is also a mess of bad grammar and formatting but that can be fixed and I will do so myself today NicheSports (talk) 18:19, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@NicheSports: "New" in this case means freshly-registered accounts. (IPs can't create articles in part due to the Seigenthaler incident.) WP:ACPERM specifically sets the threshold at autoconfirmed status, which is 10 edits and at least 4 days' tenure. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 18:40, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Creating pages for Maya Narrative Universe

Latest comment: 17 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi there, there are 3 books, movies, games and shorter works upcoming about this mammoth of a projected created by Zain Memon and Anand Gandhi, acclaimed film-maker and game creators. Currently book one is being published and over 40-50 articles global media, book of lore, architecture, social following, trailer for the universe with over 50 worldwide artists, two studios and else more is being done. I want to start wiki for it, please guide. Maya Narrative Universe (talk) 10:54, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Maya Narrative Universe:, welcome to Teahouse

Before starting a page, check if the project meets notability meaning there’s significant coverage in reliable, independent sources (not just announcements or official material). Wikipedia writes about what has already been widely covered not what’s upcoming.

If it’s notable, you can draft it in your sandbox or through Articles for Creation for review. If you’re connected to the project, please see conflict of interest first.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 11:00, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much for this. It does has notability with significant coverage from media, links on social, concepts and final pieces evolving over a decade. There is ton of information out there over this topic. I understand the COI. Will appreciate any further help if not for the guides you provided will help. Thank you. Maya Narrative Universe (talk) 11:07, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@Maya Narrative Universe Per sources like [1][2], an article might be possible, but those are both from this month, and that indicates a bit of WP:TOOSOON. For WP-purposes, forget social media, wikis and blogs, they will not help you getting an article accepted. You want independent WP:RS. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:32, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I read that the first novel hasn't been published yet, so this is a bit of media-hype-ish atm. It's a "planned franchise". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:36, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Updating Eric Rubin's Biography Page

Latest comment: 21 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi there,

I am working to update Eric Rubin page, the Editor-in-Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine and NEJM Group. My colleagues and I have made the requested edits and have had trouble hearing back from an editor for weeks now. Any feedback to help get this published would be helpful.

Thank you, Talia TpantaleoIMG (talk) 16:53, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

TpantaleoIMG The whole url is not needed when linking, I've fixed this.

You have received a response today(scroll to the bottom of the article talk page); wholesale rewrites are not done via the edit request process. Edits requests should propose small, incremental changes, one or two at a time, so that a volunteer does not need to invest a large amount of time in reviewing the request. 331dot (talk) 20:04, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

"My colleagues and I"—If you are writing on behalf of or about your colleague, please see WP:PAID and WP:BOSS. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Review of new article - Conflict of interest

Latest comment: 20 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hello, I am Jan Rosenow, the subject of a draft biography currently under review via Articles for Creation. I have disclosed my conflict of interest and am seeking independent review and feedback to ensure the article meets Wikipedia’s standards for neutrality and notability. If any uninvolved editors from this WikiProject would be willing to review or comment on the draft, I would greatly appreciate it. The draft is here: User:Janoxon/sandbox Thank you!🙏 Janoxon (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Janoxon. You have not submitted this for review. Please press the big blue Submit your draft for review! button. qcne (talk) 19:57, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Apologies, I misspoke. I did not yet submit it as I was cautious about it being rejected. I’m seeking feedback on the article to improve it. Janoxon (talk) 20:10, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Feedback to improve comes from the review process, so I do think the best way fwd is to submit for review. qcne (talk) 20:13, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@Janoxon It is unfortunate that the first citation to table.media doesn't allow one to see more than a picture and that when one clicks on the website's "about us", both the "career" and "contact us" links give "404-page not found" errors. That will put off any reviewers since it implies the site is not a reliable source. The Oxford Mail article is much better. You need three sources like the Mail to show how you are notable in the way Wikipedia demands and you can augment that with a limited amount of WP:ABOUTSELF content. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:45, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Khaled Hanno-Article Draft

Latest comment: 20 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi Wikipedia Editors,

I'm a new editor and i was trying to creat an article about one of the most important painters in Alexandria/Egypt, Dr. Khaled hanno, whome he have more than 700 painting and 90 exhibitions and many rewards.

I've tried to make the draft as much as possible as per the guidlines of wikipedia, but it was declined, I need your help to guide me how to publish the article and make it stable, especially that Ive asked the Painter - Dr. Hanno - to add sample of his work on wikicommons so we can use it in his article.

the link to tha draft is:

Draft:Khaled Hanno

Thank you in advance,

Thooth777 Thooth777 (talk) 18:09, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Thooth777. You have not proven how this person meets our criteria for inclusion at Wikipedia:Notability (people). Have you read that policy in detail? What criteria do you think this person meets? qcne (talk) 18:26, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

From the English version of the single source used, it appears to be a self-published CV.

If Hanno is indeed "one of the most important painters in Alexandria/Egypt", show us independent publications referring to him as such. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:43, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Edit my vids

Latest comment: 17 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

How to edit my videos Liljimbob20 (talk) 23:16, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello Liljimbob20. It's not clear what videos you are referring to, could you please specify? —Sophocrat (talk) 23:35, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Use some video editing software, many of which are free. You don't use Wikipedia to edit videos. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:08, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Generative Radial Geometry

Latest comment: 19 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Subject: Help with GRG article – New user with scientific publication

Hello, I'm a new user and I'm still learning how Wikipedia works. I'm trying to contribute an article about **Generative Radial Geometry (GRG)**, a new mathematical method I developed that reconstructs the circle's area and circumference without using π. The method is already published on **Zenodo** with a **DOI**, and the article is currently under review by a scientific journal.

I created a draft in my sandbox: User:Fipodigital/sandbox

However, I'm confused by some edits and comments I received, and I'm not sure how to proceed. Since the method is under evaluation and will likely be submitted to multiple journals (one at a time), I would like to understand what is allowed and how to improve the page.

I believe this contribution may benefit the scientific community and general public. The method is clearly demonstrable and documented.

Could a mentor or experienced editor help me move forward correctly?

Thank you very much!

Fipodigital** Fipodigital (talk) 14:50, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Fipodigital. I thought I remembered you asking about this before, and when I checked the archives, it initially looked like your previous query was archived before it was answered (Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1261#Request for Feedback: Generative Radial Geometry). However, closer inspection shows that you edited your question and in the process deleted some responses that had been posted to it (see this edit). Cordless Larry (talk) 14:57, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

...although the advice left on Fipodigital's talk page ("...the subject does not satisfy Wikipedia's notability guidelines ... Unless or until [there are independent sources about it] no article about it will be suitable for Wikipedia, no matter how it may be written. A document written by the creator of a topic is not an independent source; a document self-published by posting it to a site where anyone can post is not a reliable source.") is still there.

WP:FRINGE probably also applies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:14, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

"published on **Zenodo** with a **DOI**" is of no particular significance. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:11, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@Fipodigital In general, an article in WIkipedia needs to be based on secondary sources. That means you will have to wait until your publication(s) have been noticed by other mathematicians and commented upon in reviews or other relaible published sources. It is simply too soon to create a Wikipedia article until that happens. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:11, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Crypto pages presented as sources

Latest comment: 16 days ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Greetings all, how do Wikipedia policies deal with someone who is posting crypto pages as sources in their editing, Clearly this is against them but since this issue is going to be active probably even tomorrow I wish to cite the specific rule on potential report, and should I already report this editor who is doing this on WP:ANI or wait that this turns into edit warring. Thank you Theonewithreason (talk) 13:40, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Theonewithreason: Courtesy link: here

Ideally, you should not "wait that this turns into edit warring" or jump to ANI, but engage in dispute resolution with the editor on the talk page. WP:3O might be useful since it's only 2 editors. I'm a bit confused what you mean by "Crypto pages presented as sources" by the way. —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {u - t? - _uselessc} 14:16, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I think I got it. One of the sources at [3] seems to have had some link rot and has become a crypto website. As an editor with 3.5k edits, Theonewithreason, I would expect you to first check the Internet Archive [4] before coming to the accusation that someone is "posting crypto pages as sources" —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {u - t? - _uselessc} 14:24, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Well I did check it in international scholarship and I could not find any claims that this editor posted, especially written in that form or language, so forgive me if I couldn't find the nation called Serbian Servians or the statistical "info" which this editor presented- And yes they were posting crypto currency sites Theonewithreason (talk) 14:33, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

(FYI let's talk on your talk page, not here Theonewithreason) —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {u - t? - _uselessc} 14:36, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Citing two chapters from the same CD album booklet

Latest comment: 18 days ago7 comments3 people in discussion

How do I cite two different essays by two different authors that are included in the same compact disc liner note booklet? Trying to do that at this article, but haven't been able to figure out how yet. Please see the last two items listed in that page's sources. As always, thank you for your help! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:44, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Make two different citations, with the name of the author in each.

If you need further help, ask here again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:42, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! So in other words, the way I had already cited these sources separately is fine? —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 15:43, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

I can't read Japanese, so I'm unable to say. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:18, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, CurryTime7-24. Yes, you can do what you want. I could give you a better answer, if I knew all the info related to your question. First of all, can I confirm that we are talking about Hori (2013) and Hirabayashi (2013), the two citations just above the external links? If so, where is the citation for the the compact disc info that is common to both of the liner note authors? Surely the CD has a title, an author (musician, group name, etc.), a date, a publisher, and an isbn that is unique, and applies to the CD as a whole, before we even get to the separate liner note authors, right? What I would do in this case is to use template {{cite AV media}} to cite the information that applies to the CD, and then write two {{harvc}} citations each of which applies to only one liner note author. You place those two in the body of the article, just like you do with {{sfn}} templates, and they will link to the AV media citation. If you do a lot of this sort of thing, see the documentation for {{harvc}}, and this annotated example that shows you how to use it . That example is for a book with chapters by different authors, but your case is analogous; just use {{harvc}} instead of {{citec}}. If you add a full CD citation to the References section and ping me, I will show you how to do it. Mathglot (talk) 04:10, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, Hori and Hirabayashi are two essays included in the same CD booklet. Let me add it tomorrow afternoon (PDT). Thank you kindly for your help! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 06:01, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Take your time. Lmk when you have it. Mathglot (talk) 08:17, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Question about Greater Bangladesh

Latest comment: 17 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This article was deleted Greater Bangladesh and then recreated I think a few times. It was tagged for deletion again because it was deleted before. I tried to fix the problems, but it was changed back. It looks like Ahammed Saad and ZDRX are fighting over whether to delete the article. I think I made a mistake trying to fix since it was deleted three times before and now I'm not sure what to do. Can I just add the deletion tag back in so someone will look at it? Sorry for creating a problem, I will fix it just need to know how. Themeparks (talk) 16:26, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Article was deleted, using criteria G4. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:40, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Pin-up art

Latest comment: 19 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Wikipedia has pages for Pin-up model and List of pin-up artists (to which Pin-up artists redirects), as well as a disambiguation page for Pin-up. It does not, however, have a page for Pin-up art. This strikes me as strange, as it has pages for, say, Erotic art, Erotic literature, American burlesque, and similar that describe the topic in terms of genre rather than its participants.

In my opinion, much of the content at Pin-up model would be better served by a Pin-up art page. But in the interest of respecting Chesterton's Fence, I thought I should check in here before creating one. A lot of work has gone into the Pin-up model page, it's connected to 37 languages, and a page for Pin-up art might create a need for extensive trimming of the model page. Any thoughts are appreciated. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 20:33, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

"In my opinion, much of the content at Pin-up model would be better served by a Pin-up art page."

It would probably be best to raise that on Talk:Pin-up model; or if you get no response there, on the talk page of one of the WikiProjects listed there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:56, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Bullying behavior

Latest comment: 19 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, I would like to report unprovoked bullying and insulting behavior. How can I do that? DaringDonna (talk) 17:36, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

See ANI (and be sure to read the instructions at the top of the page before posting). MilesVorkosigan (talk) 17:43, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Harassment#Dealing with harassment. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:24, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee Elections

Latest comment: 17 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

How can I vote in the Arbitration Committee Elections on Wikipedia? Do I need to become and extended confirmed user? Or what? User:StopLookingAtMe1 23:09, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello StopLookingAtMe1 :). When the next elections come around on mid-November 2025, a mass message will be sent out to all eligible voters. As is noted on the page I linked, an account can vote if they have made at least 150 mainspace (ie to articles) edits before 1 November 2025, are active in that year (at least 10 edits), and isn't blocked. So for example, you have made 74 edits to mainspace (thank you :), so to be elegible you would have to reach 150 edits to articles in the following 3 months (eg by doing whatever you may like at the Task Center). Feel free to make any other questions. Cheers, Sophocrat (talk) 23:51, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

How to actively edit Wikipedia?

Latest comment: 19 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hello! All my life I've been editing while reading articles and randomly finding things to fix or add. It seems a lot of users here like to actively edit, ie using the site for the specific purpose of finding things to edit. How do you do that? Dino42 (talk) 08:36, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@Dino42 to be honest, IDK. But to get more contributions (I have around 300-400) I would recommend going to the contributing page. User:StopLookingAtMe1 08:48, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Dino42. I would really recommend checking out Wikipedia:Task Center which includes tasks you can do on Wikipedia at all levels of competency, from beginner to advanced. You could also get involved in an active Wikipedia:WikiProject which often have lists of articles that need editing. qcne (talk) 09:04, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

History of edits

Latest comment: 19 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Is it possible to see history of things I've successfully edited, and things I tried to edit that were rejected. I only see one, which was rejected, and I don't remember what my attempted change was so I don't why it was rejected?

Are these deleted, or am I not looking in the right area? Concerro (talk) 04:24, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Your contributions are at Special:Contributions/Concerro, which, if you're using a computer and not a mobile device, you can see by opening the drop-down menu in the upper right corner (the little person icon) and clicking on "Contributions". Some of the contributions may be tagged with "Reverted". ~Anachronist (talk) 04:33, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Concerro, and welcome to the Teahouse. To add to Anachronist's answer: edits that you made to a page that has since been deleted will not appear; but edits that have been reverted will. ColinFine (talk) 13:06, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Will Ludford.

Latest comment: 19 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, would someone be so kind as to take a little time to visit my page and see if my edits are correct. I have written a new page and hope this time its all ok to meet the Wikipedia standards. Thank you so much,, Will Ludford. Musicmindz14 (talk) 17:47, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

I have moved the page back to Draft:Will Ludford.

Please refer to the advice I and others gave you, the last time you were here; not least to see Help:Referencing for beginners; and use this process to submit it for review, when you feel it meets Wikipedia's requirements. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:30, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Exemplary page on an indigenous people?

Latest comment: 18 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I see a page on a native American people (Mohawk people) that could really use some help. I'd like take a more meta look than just adding citations. Is there an exemplary page on a native people I could use for a template & inspiration? Thanks. Mdottt (talk) 22:29, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Usually, Wikipedia's exemplary articles are our Good Articles and Featured Articles. It looks like there is one GA (Ohlone) and one FA (Indigenous people of the Everglades region) which would be relevant models. Both of them were assessed a long time ago, so they may also be flawed, since Wikipedia is ever-improving, but they may give you some ideas for where to begin. Happy editing! ~ L 🌸 (talk) 22:55, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Dr. Emily Lazarou (Forensic Psychiatrist)

Latest comment: 18 days ago11 comments6 people in discussion

Hello! I am assisting Dr. Emily Lazarou with a draft Wikipedia article. I have a conflict of interest, so I am not posting or editing the article myself.

The draft is fully written, well-sourced with mainstream and academic references, and formatted according to Wikipedia standards. I would like to request a neutral editor to review and, if appropriate, submit the article to Draftspace or mainspace.

The source text is available here:

[ Copy of draft article moved to Draft:Emily Lazarou ]

Thank you for your time and help! MARIGOLDSMEMORIESASSIST (talk) 18:00, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

I have moved your draft to the page linked above.

Please see WP:PAID and WP:BOSS.

Your draft cannot be published, because, contrary to your claim it has no citations, which are required for every statement in an article about a living person. Can you explain this discrepancy? Did you use an LLM (ChatGPT, or suchlike) to compile the draft and/ or your post here?

Please see WP:Referencing for beginners for details of what sources to use and how to add them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:20, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing the draft. I did use a large language model (ChatGPT) to assist with formatting and wording, but all factual information is based on verifiable sources, which I will now add inline. I appreciate your guidance and will revise the draft to include proper references per WP:V and WP:BLP. Thank you again!-- MARIGOLDSMEMORIESASSIST (talk) 18:29, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia's licensing attributes words you write to you, and as far as I can tell, doesn't permit you to use anything but your own words when writing prose. Because whatever is written by LLM is not original content and based on training data, there is no provenance or traceability to the original authors, therefore we cannot use it. Don't poison your well.

Also, refrain from replying or editing further until you respond to the paid editing query on your talk page. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:10, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm assisting Dr. Lazarou with preparing a draft of her biography. I am not being paid to edit Wikipedia, but I do have a conflict of interest due to my relationship with her and I am disclosing this here per WP:PAID. MARIGOLDSMEMORIESASSIST (talk) 20:25, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

In being an assistant to the subject, you are by Wikipedia's definition paid by her (though not necessarily in money) – that this is not specifically to edit Wikipedia is immaterial. You need to make the declaration on your own User page and the Talk page of the draft article for the information of any assessors. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.194.92.162 (talk) 02:16, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

You should add the declaration to your userpage, not a Teahouse post. It says that at wp:paid. When people you have asked for help give you links to help you, please read them. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 02:17, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

You have just added this to the draft, as a source:

<ref>{{cite web |title=Capital Sentencing Order in State v. Granville Ritchie |url=https://www.examplecourtsite.gov/RitchieSentencing.pdf |website=13th Judicial Circuit Court |date=2020-10-23 |access-date=2025-08-07}}</ref>

Clearly, you have never read that supposed document. Accordingly, I have nominated the draft for speedy deletion.

Please stop wasting our time with such nonsense. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:36, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Unbelievable that someone would add an AI-hallucinated source. I've occasionally found ChatGPT helpful in finding sources, but beyond that I have to do my own verification due to the high proportion of hallucinations I get back. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:11, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

There is a real PDF of the Judge's sentencing order and I just didn't know the format and was trying to fix it when I was afraid my power was going to go out. I published it without the correct URL because I was being hasty. I was not trying to be disrespectful - I am just new at this and I apologize if you feel I'm wasting your time. MARIGOLDSMEMORIESASSIST (talk) 14:39, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft deleted. Lectonar (talk) 13:58, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro

Latest comment: 18 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I make occasional edits to Wikipedia, usually grammatical or typographical corrections. There is a substantive edit I would like to make to the page covering Venezuela's President Nicholas Maduro, but the page is semi-protected and I am not autoconfirmed.

Nicolás Maduro

Recently President Trump raised the reward for information leading to Maduro's arrest, from $25 million to $50 million. Here is an AP report:

https://apnews.com/article/venezuela-fbi-bondi-justice-department-0e618369ca68b79b1a2143a95955344a

Perhaps a senior editor could make the change, or perhaps I could be promoted to make the change. Thanks, and cheers. Betaversion1958 (talk) 15:18, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Betaversion1958 You are certainly WP:AUTOCONFIRMed, which only takes 10 edits and a 4-day-old account. Just make sure you WP:CITE your addition in full. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:23, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

How to create an approved page

Latest comment: 18 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

I am hoping to create a page for my professor who is the newly appointed Dean at Howard University. I am trying to understand the parameters around what is acceptable. Thank you! NgeriN1 (talk) 22:26, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

The relevant criteria and other guidance are detailed at Wikipedia:Notability (academics). Be aware that in general, the Wikipedia:Notability of a subject must be demonstrated by citations to at least three items about the subject that are simultaneously independent of the subject, have been published in a Reliable source, and are of substantial length (paragraphs, not mere mentions) – see Wikipedia:Golden rule.

If you think your subject meets the requirements, you could start a Wikipedia:Draft article through the Help:Your first article process, but since you are connected to the subject, this will be harder since you must be mindful of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest as well as our core policy of Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. You might also want to consider (on your subjects's behalf) Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing – does your Professor necessarily want an article about them? If they have in fact suggested you make one, please see Wikipedia:BOSS.

Be aware that creating an article that meets Wikipedia's complex requirements is in itself difficult, and you can at the least expect to have to go through several cycles of submitting the draft, having it declined with explanatory comments, improving it, and resubmitting it before succeeding.

New editors are usually advised to spend at least several weeks or more practising by making minor copyedits and additions to existing articles, and becoming adept at the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle: remember, on Wikipedia there are no deadlines. Hope this helps. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.194.92.162 (talk) 01:41, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello @NgeriN1, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I agree with what others have replied to you, but I want to expand a little on what 87.81 has said.

I too strongly recommend new editors to get considerable practice and learning in before even thinking about creating a new article. But while copyediting, and understanding the BRD cycle are important, much more important for anybody contemplating writing a new article is to understand the policies on verifiability, reliable sources and notability. These are very different from anything you are likely to have met elsewhere (including in academia) and are what cause most newcomers grief and frustration when they try to create an article before becoming familiar with them. ColinFine (talk) 11:44, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I'd add this: NPROF basically declares your professor as notable in Wikipedia's sense if they've occupied a high-level professorship (named chair, distinguished chair or equivalent in a culture that doesn't do distinguished/named), and/or been chief editor of a reasonably important journal, and/or got an excellent publication record or a number of other criteria. The exceptional features, which apply only to academics, are that you can base their chair on their institutional website (don't need secondary source), and their primary publications count towards their impact without requiring independent reviews or secondary reviews discussing their work (the thinking is that academic literature is peer-reviewed, so its existence already implies independent recognition). Practically, if you think your professor meets the standard, look at some pre-existing articles on similar professors; you can use these as models. Don't be obsequious/flattering/obviously awe-struck; stick to straightforward factual information. Submit the article via AfC, that way you can get some help if you stray from what Wikipedia likes. But add a comment on the talk-page pointing to NPROF because some AfC reviewers are blissfully unaware of the special case that NPROF offers. Elemimele (talk) 16:43, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikilink gadget

Latest comment: 15 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Is there some kind of script or semi-automated process to wikilink terms missing wikilinks? Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 14:31, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Iggy pop goes the weasel..... There’s no fully automated way to add missing wikilinks. 'Tools' like WP:AWB can suggest possible links but each one needs to be checked manually to comply with WP:OVERLINK and WP:LINKSTYLE. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 14:47, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Great, thank you. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 14:53, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Using a newspaper cutting as reference

Latest comment: 15 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I cannot find an online link as reference but i have a newspaper clip - can i use this and if it is possible, how do i save it as a link reference ? 119.74.170.237 (talk) 08:08, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

With the help of Template:Cite news. -- Hoary (talk) 09:27, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

IP editor: note that there is no requirement to provide Wikipedia readers with a live link to the image of your clip. All you need are the full details of the newspaper's name, date of publication, page number etc as the template documentation describes. While some websites such as newspapers.com do allow for saved clips we are happy with offline sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:49, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you teahouse editors for advice 119.74.170.237 (talk) 07:13, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Why is the article for X still called Twitter?

Latest comment: 14 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Hello, I've just checked the article for X (formerly Twitter) and it's still has the old name which doesn't make sense to me as when the Taliban took over Afghanistan, Wikipedia recognize the Islamic Emirate as the de-facto ruler of Afghanistan while majority of countries and organizations still recognized (and still up to present day as I am typing this question) the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.

So, if Wikipedia can recognize governments as the de-facto ruler of a certain country, then wouldn't it make sense to recognize the transition of a social media company from a Bird to a Letter? GuesanLoyalist (talk) 22:02, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@GuesanLoyalist

Wikipedia follows WP:COMMONNAME, which means article titles use the name most commonly used in reliable sources... You can propose a change at Talk:Twitter for community discussion. cheers. Good faith edit. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 22:10, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Changes to the article name cannot be proposed, per Talk:Twitter#Requested move 9 August 2025 which has set a moratorium on "all discussions about the article name" for 6 months. Tenshi! (Talk page) 22:13, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @GuesanLoyalist. The relevant policy is WP:COMMONNAME. Wikipedia uses the name for things that the bulk of the reliable sources use, not necessarily the official name.

Please see the FAQ at the top of Talk:Twitter, which refers to the extensive discussion of this specific question. ColinFine (talk) 22:12, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Colin, Will do GuesanLoyalist (talk) 22:28, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

asking for a reality check about banners added to an article

Latest comment: 14 days ago14 comments6 people in discussion

Hello, Some banners were just put up on a page I wrote on artist lawyer Alfred Steiner (artist). It has been up for quite awhile without issues but now there are recent banners for: 1. The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies. 2. This article does not cite any sources containing significant coverage. 3. This article relies excessively on references to primary sources. (July 2025). I researched this article thoroughly and there are so many articles aside from the 1 primary source listed, the SCOTUS, and I guess some trade associations could be included. All of this is so untrue I would appreciate a reality check and a check from another editor because these banners are so inappropriate. Otherwise there are multiple articles that are about or include the subject from numerous nationally and internationally recognized publications including the NY Times, Forbes, Hyperallergic, Washington Post, Artnet, Hypoallergenic, NPR etc. and many well known art publications. Thank you. Ogmany (talk) 17:27, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ogmany, have you asked the editor who tagged the article to explain their reasoning for you? -- asilvering (talk) 17:29, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Frankly, no. I find the banners to be inappropriate and would appreciate another editor's pov before I do so, if I do so. Having had some bad interactions with some editors I hesitate. Yet of course I have had input from some great and truly helpful editors and was looking for that here. Ogmany (talk) 17:35, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

You should ask that editor for their reasoning rather than assume they would react aggressively. There is no reason to assume that. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 17:57, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Will do. Have to admit since I work on my own, have been burned before, was asking because I thought I could ask here first to see if my pov was valid, I thought the Teahouse was for that. Ogmany (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ogmany, welcome to the Teahouse. Apologies if you already know this, but: the "trick" in collaborating successfully is to go in with "how can we each have our views heard, and reach a consensus?" as opposed to "I am right and I'm going to convince you of this". I have not looked at your previous discussions, and perhaps you did this; but very often when somebody gets a response they see as aggressive, this is what they've done.

Looking quickly over the citations in the article, I see that many of them are from institutions or galleries that have an association with Steiner, and so are not independent. ColinFine (talk) 18:53, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

That's true. You are right about the response and I appreciate the reminder. Also true about the gallery listings. The galleries are linked under the list of solo and group exhibitions, after the show name and galleries listed. That is to cite the show the artist was in. Reviews are also cited too. This is a common convention in artist's pages on Wiki that I have seen many times when listing shows artists have been in. Ogmany (talk) 21:26, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

And while reviewing the gallery listings, others are indeed primary sources of collections he is in, again another convention I have seen on Wiki when listing collections artists are in. Ogmany (talk) 21:32, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ogmany, if you approach another editor with something like "All of this is so untrue ... I think this is inappropriate", yes, they may get their hackles up at you unnecessarily. But if you ask a more neutral question, they should be able to explain to you why they put the tags on (of course, you can then disagree). Onel is an experienced NPPer and will take his responsibility to answer your questions pretty seriously. :) -- asilvering (talk) 18:55, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I've removed one (of three) purely because it was redundant to the other two. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:47, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Looking over the fist bunch of references, I must agree with the tags based on those, but my viewpoint might change upon looking further. Although I cannot access the NYT articles, as far as I can tell, the citations are either not independent of the subject, or aren't even about the subject, or don't provide any coverage of the subject; half of the first dozen citations cite a court case for which Steiner submitted a brief. I have to reach citation #20 before I even get to a source that provides coverage of him, and that coverage is brief. Profiles on web sites, interviews, court cases don't count toward notability.

Ogmany, you would have been better off going through the WP:AFC process and submitting a draft for review. I doubt it would have been approved for publication. I'm a far more experienced editor, and even I have used AFC on occasion to get a reality check on a draft. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:58, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. That is helpful and I get that. I will check into and consider the WP:AFC process, particularly for the law section of the article. You made me realize I should rework the legal section of article to more strongly reflect the work he did and direct coverage of that. I have to check it out further but think I may have got caught up in reviewing these landmark cases and their importance to artists and copyright before I got directly into his work on it and what led to him working with artist's coalitions on it. He's definitely unique since he can speak to the law as a lawyer and artist and was trying to get that across perhaps more than actual direct mentions of him regarding it, because their are a lot of interviews with him about this out there. (As to the artist section, I think that is solid. And as mentioned above, those gallery and collection listings, along with many reviews and interviews, are there in his show exhibition list which I see as a regular convention in a lot of artist's listings.) Ogmany (talk) 00:10, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Once when I wrote a draft biography of an author, the reviewer suggested it would be best if I re-cast the draft to be about his books instead, because the sources establishing notability for the books was better than for the author (yes, it is possible for a non-notable author to write a notable book, and it is possible for a non-notable artist-lawyer to work on notable cases). So I rewrote it to be about the books, and it was a better article. The same may be true here. There is a notable topic specific to artists and copyright buried in your article, and that topic may not have a standalone Wikipedia article. You could move your biography article to draft space for the time being to work on it further, or re-cast it to an article about the law topic. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:30, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Good point and appreciate your thoughtful answer. You helped me consider not so rigidly separating his law and art work and bringing them together. They both cover the copyright issues for artists and will make for a more cohesive article with secondary sources predominating. Already drafting it. Thank you. Ogmany (talk) 02:58, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

How to edit the descriptive text

Latest comment: 15 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I would like to edit the descriptive text under the title for a couple of articles. To be clear, I am talking about the unbolded text which appears below the (bolded) article title in the search drop-down, when you start typing your search. I assume it's some kind of metadata, but couldn't find any mention of how to update the metadata. I'm guessing it goes by a different name. Could someone point me to the right place? Thank you! KTnow (talk) 15:12, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @KTnow, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see WP:Short description. ColinFine (talk) 15:33, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

That's the one. Thanks @ColinFine! KTnow (talk) 17:01, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Additional writing credits removed

Latest comment: 14 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahavatar_Narsimha&diff=prev&oldid=1305509607 Is this removal of additional writing credits and main cast allowed? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7eE_dn9u4k, clearly credited in description of the official trailer. and cast removal from infobox, https://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/mahavatar-narsimha-movie-review-the-mythological-animation-spectacle-is-an-entertaining-affair-to-teach-gen-z-kids-about-lord-vishnus-most-fierce-avatar-13911427.html this review clearly mentions the cast. Optim594 (talk) 14:10, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not IMDB. We're concerned more about notability than listing movie credits, which can be hundreds or thousands of people if you look at the ending scroll of recent films. We want to list notable individuals involved in a film. There is no harm listing a few non-notable ones, but where do you draw the line? Therefore there is no harm in removing them. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:48, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok thanks Optim594 (talk) 15:10, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Addison Wiggin Page Edit

Latest comment: 18 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi Teahouse hosts,

I'm seeking help with updating the article on Addison Wiggin. I’ve prepared a fully rewritten draft that updates the article for 2025, trims overly long quotations, and improves sourcing (per WP:BLP and WP:QUOTE). The updated draft includes citations from high-quality secondary sources like The New York Times Magazine, Reuters, The Economist, and Time.

I’ve posted the proposed draft on the article’s Talk page here:

Talk:Addison Wiggin#Proposed Article Rewrite: Addison Wiggin

Would someone be willing to review it and consider making updates if appropriate?

Thanks so much! Awiggingsf (talk) 18:35, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@Awiggingsf The draft still needs stronger, reliably published secondary sources throughout from the lead section to the bibliography to meet WP:BLP and WP:RS standards. I recommend reviewing Wikipedia:Reliable sources and making sure all key claims are well-supported. Once improved.

🐍 Thilio🤖 18:45, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Ledes should not have citations, but should summarise what is cited in the body. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:01, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

I have moved the draft to Draft:Addison Wiggin.

However, as we already have an article at Addison Wiggin it would be best if you made smaller, incremental proposals for changes, one at a time, in the form "replace paragraph X with paragraph Y" or "add paragraph saying Z", with citations, on the article talk page, using the edit request wizard.

Also, see WP:PAID and, depending on whether you are Addison Wiggin or work for him WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY or WP:BOSS. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:01, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

You have already been advised, here and on your talk page, about our CoI and Paid editing policies.

I have therefore undone the edits you made directly to the article, today. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:47, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Question on medical articles

Latest comment: 17 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

So I'm in a bit of a conundrum: this is my first time editing a medical article (Autism) and I'm starting to familiarize myself with the relevant guidelines. NYT is generally reliable except for medical articles, however the article that I want to cite I believe is accurate and is also backed up by academic sources. Not to mention I have personal experience with the subject of the article and know it's accurate firsthand (although I know that doesn't count for much here). Can I cite the NYT article in addition to said sources? Gommeh 🎮 13:00, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

That depends on the nature of the statement. Best to discuss on the talk page of the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:03, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Gommeh, you may also ask at WT:MED. Mathglot (talk) 01:54, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Villee's Biology article?

Latest comment: 17 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi!

I wonder whether some people could create Villee's Biology article for Wikipedia? I am not so much a creator of articles, but if such article would exist, I would gradly translate in into my native Polish. And the topic seems to be encyclopedic? ;-)

Best wishes!

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 23:27, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Kaworu1992, many people wish that other people would create certain articles. Expression of that wish seldom has any effect. But in order to raise the likelihood of an article being created from infinitesimal to very low, you might post your request at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Natural sciences/Biology. (I'm assuming that "Villee's Biology" is a matter of biology. But it could of course be a poem, a mural, a rock group, or whatever.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:12, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Presumably the standard textbook Biology by Claude Alvin Villee Jr. (and other co-authors in some editions).

It seems to have been widely used and updated over a period of decades, so it's likely that there have been enough reviews and other discussions of it to make an article about it possible, but these would not be easy to track down (many will not be online), so the "some people" would have to feel motivated to do so.

It might initially be more productive to improve the article on Villee himself, since it is barely more than a stub, with only one reference. Working on that would likely also throw up more material about the book. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.150.115 (talk) 04:12, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Article about self-harm

Latest comment: 17 days ago7 comments4 people in discussion

Dear Friends.

I think I would like to add substantially to the article about self harm. However, I see so many things in there I do not understand. Like the section with medical sources, I do not know what kind of scientific literature should go where and on what basic. Generally, the structure of this article is very different to "typical" Wikipedia article and I am lost. Can somebody shred some light on this matter?

Best wishes!

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 22:47, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

The self-harm article seems (at least for the first 30% or so that I read through) reasonably written for a layperson to understand. If you find a section too technical or full of medical jargon, you can tag the section with {{Technical|section|date=August 2025}}.

If you have suggestions or comments about improving the article, start a discussion about it on Talk:Self-harm. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:22, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Kaworu1992 It seems a bit odd to me that self-harm is marked as a good article while also having a tag about relying too much on primary sources. Anyway, you should be aware that for human medicine, which is part of the article coverage, we have stricter sourcing standards described at WP:MEDRS and you should bear that in mind when you add more information. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:24, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

One option available to you is to start a discussion on the article's talk page, about what you think should be changed, and why, and stating which sources support the changes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:26, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hm... there seems to be a little bit of confusion? ;-)

I have open access scientific journals articles I want to use as sources. However, I see we have a... particular bibliography section that is kinda problematic to me to understand its structure? Basically, we have books, non-meta-analyzes and meta-analyzes? Do I understand it properly? I'm kinda afraid I will put "bibliography" in the wrong section and people would be angry at me... :-(

Best wishes!

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 23:25, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

The references are split into sections. The first section are the footnotes directly referenced in the article text. For some of these, the article uses <ref> tags, and others use shortened footnote {{sfn}} tags. The shortened footnotes link to the items in the bibliography, and are useful if you need to refer to the same source multiple times, but with different page numbers. If you have a source you want to use this way, put it in the bibliography with the appropriate {{Cite}} template (which {{sfn}} needs to work), and then use the {{sfn}} tag in the article prose to cite that source. See Template:Sfn for documentation on usage. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:49, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear that you are still confused. The answer remains: discuss whatever confuses you, and whatever you wish to change, on the article talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:54, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Lloyd G. Running Wolf Wilcox

Latest comment: 17 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

He was the Hereditary Chief Medicine Man of the Narragansett Indian Tribe. I would like to enter a short biography of him and a series of quotes that demonstrate his philosophy and teaching. Francois Abenaki (talk) 05:19, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

If he is notable by wikipedia standards, you may use the Articles for Creation process to create an article. Be ware though that writing a Wikipedia article from scratch is very difficult when you do not have experience editing - it might be worth spending some time editing other articles first. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 06:03, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Francois Abenaki. I echo what NOtCharizard says, especially about getting experience first, and learning about fundamental principles of Wikipedia such as notability, verifiabilty, and citing sources

Note that a Wikipedia article should be a summary of what people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, and very little else.

A short list of the subject's publications, or quotations, may be added, but these should not be the main part of the article; and if there are not enough independent reliable sources, then there cannot be an article. (Sources do not have to be online, as long as they have been reliably published ColinFine (talk) 08:42, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

See also WP:Your first article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:56, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Quentin Quesnell

Latest comment: 17 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

The only WP article on Quentin Quesnell is in Swedish. Since he was American and was a professor at various U.S. universities, is mentioned in numerous Google snippets and several English WP articles I'm surprised there's no English article about him. Mcljlm (talk) 05:09, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Mcljlm: it's possible that no one has simply got around to creating a proper article on him... or perhaps he isn't notable enough to justify one. (There was an unreferenced one-liner on him back in 2006, but that was deleted in fairly short order.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

If you would like to write an article, see WP:Your first article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:58, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I'd never heard of him till shortly before posting here so I'm not sure I should start an English article. Mcljlm (talk) 13:16, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

That doesn't matter, so long as you can read and understand the sources about him. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:28, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

How to correctly add information to a redirecting page?

Latest comment: 13 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi! I'm new to wikipedia, Im using my account for personal use (mostly sport stuff but im still building my credibility) and also to create my company's wikipedia site. I noticed that the article Gemini Africa was already created only as a redirecting page with no information.

Gemini Africa redirects to Naguib Sawiris, but does not offer any information yet.

Once I started editing, I was given a ban (mainly because I hadn't read Wiki's rules very well which ive now done 😅) but I also understood that the article should be created through the AFC process.

However, is this still possible if its already a redirecting page? Or what can I do to properly edit the article? I am a paid editor paid only for Gemini Africa, and i believe that that's disclosed pproperly on my user page. From my ban, I understood that going through the AFC process is specifically important for my case, but I'm stuck! Thanks for ur time :) FadyWiki (talk) 07:38, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@FadyWiki: Firstly try to determine if the company is WP:Notable. If not then you could propose a change to Naguib Sawiris on its talk page to mention the company. If there are sources, you could start writing at Draft:Gemini Africa. Find independent, reliable, and significant references that write about the company, and base your writings on those, rather than what you know or want to say. The company web site or press releases do not prove notability. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:52, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Okay! Thank you FadyWiki (talk) 07:59, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

List columns

Latest comment: 16 days ago9 comments4 people in discussion

How do I take a long bulleted list and split it into two or more columns? For example, here. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:40, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

You can use the {{Columns-list}} template.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 17:45, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Which is that? And in visual editor I should specify. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:47, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

use the {{Columns-list}} template. I can help you arrange the list if you want.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 17:51, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thilio, you can use template:t to make a template appear as a link. e.g. {{reflist}} 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 21:11, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jothefiredragon Thanks 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 21:17, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I tried tinkering with the columns-list and could not get it to be formatted correctly. Iljhgtn (talk) 22:03, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

It really does not matter, it was just a visually pleasing aesthetic, but it is really no big deal. Iljhgtn (talk) 22:04, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn Done here with {{divcol}} Cremastra (talk · contribs) 02:11, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikibreak

Latest comment: 16 days ago9 comments6 people in discussion

Request for Assistance

Hi, Teahouse editors, I'm a Wikipedia user, but I'm in wikibreak currently. However, I want to collaborate, discuss, or support others. Therefore, Is there anyone open to a casual partnership or collaboration in any area? Thanks for your consideration and help! However, I wonder if this message should be posted here or in my talk page... Upset New Bird (talk) 04:15, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

What would you like to get help with? 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 06:07, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jothefiredragon: For example, there is to engage in some collaboration or discussion around my favorite topics. Upset New Bird (talk) 06:16, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Upset New Bird, Wikipedia's talk pages aren't for discussion around the participants' favorite topics. (Other, unrelated websites do provide such opportunities.) But if you want to discuss the possible improvement of articles on your favorite topic(s), fine. However, are you (A) offering to collaborate with or support other users, or (B) requesting assistance? (And what do you mean by being "in wikibreak"?) -- Hoary (talk) 07:27, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary: I mean both (A) and (B). Also, "in wikibreak" means "being on a wikibreak", that means "taking a break from editing the wiki article". Upset New Bird (talk) 07:34, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Upset New Bird, if you're not editing articles, you should have little need for assistance. -- Hoary (talk) 08:18, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Upset New Bird. One possibilty is to find a WikiProject that interests you, and watch its talk page, or contribute to it - it depends just how "breaky" your Wikibreak is. But, as Hoary says, discussion about topics (as opposed to about creating or improving - or deleting! - articles) is not appropriate anywhere in Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 08:27, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Your post here is as vague as the one you made to the Help Desk. You can help us to help you by being more clear about what you are seeking in your requests.

If you're on a wiki-break, we wouldn't want to spoil that. Come back when it's finished, and at that time, see the links I just left on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:36, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

You are not taking a Wiki break because you are here, actively trying to find ways to use Wikipedia. Osa Akwamarynowa (talk) 17:19, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Dian Rana

Latest comment: 16 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Hi, I’ve submitted a draft biography of Draft:Dian Rana, meeting WP:NBIO with multiple independent reliable sources. Would someone be able to? Thanks in advance. Nusantarakita (talk) 09:36, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Submitting the draft is how one requests a review. Everyone would like their draft reviewed quickly, but this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can. As noted on the draft, "This may take 4 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,129 pending submissions waiting for review." Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 09:44, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Nusantarakita you will just have to wait for your draft to be reviewed. HQIQ (talk) 09:51, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

You were fortunate to get multiple reviews within a span of a few days. That is unusual. Just wait it out. We get people coming to the Teahouse every day asking for draft reviews. That isn't how the process works. You submit for review, and you wait. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:58, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Chromebook Challenge

Latest comment: 13 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

The recent “F Students are Inventors” trend. It once had its own article and even got a picture but was immediately nominated for deletion. Why is this and why can’t challenges have their own articles? Can anything on the internet covered in Wikipedia go 5 seconds without getting redirected or straight up wiped? Anywhosies, should we bring back the article? 199.192.122.199 (talk) 15:09, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

"Can anything on the internet covered in Wikipedia go 5 seconds without getting redirected or straight up wiped?", yes, and we have plenty of such articles. They meet WP:GNG.

"should we bring back the article?" Can you show that it meets WP:GNG? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh look at that. Talking about notability when the article has already existed but got nuked off the website for no reason. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 16:38, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The reasoning was detailed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chromebook challenge. Has anything changed since that discussion? Helpful Raccoon (talk) 21:17, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

If you don't like the correct answer, I suggest you don't ask the question. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

GOAT of Wikipedia

Latest comment: 14 days ago10 comments5 people in discussion

Who is regarded as the greatest user of all-time? 78.212.87.64 (talk) 15:34, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

It's not a competition. Wikipedia is a collaborative project. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing How can I write an Article? 78.212.87.64 (talk) 15:40, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

See WP:Your first article—but first, get to know how Wikipedia works, by making smaller contributions. See the links I left on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:45, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I created a New Article

Is it fine? 78.212.87.64 (talk) 15:44, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Absolutely! Should definitely become a featured article Amministratore 267272 (talk) 15:46, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

What? You don't even know what it is! ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 15:54, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

~Raphael!, the IP editor has not created a new article (this is easy to check), so they were joking, and Amministratore 267272 was also joking. Strictly, people should should not joke around on this desk, but a certain amount of levity is tolerated when it is obvious and harmless. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.150.115 (talk) 16:37, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh, silly me! ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 16:40, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

By the way, my name is Rafaelthegreat, not ~Raphael!. It just shows it like that. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 16:41, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation

Latest comment: 15 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

How can I object to one of the final choices of candidates to become a Trustee to the Wikimedia Foundation

I would like to voice my concern, even outrage, that one of the six finalist to be elected to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees seems to have violated the Foundation's own Universal Code of Conduct. Please see this article for clarification of what I am talking about. https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-863804 As a loyal and dedicated Wikipedia editor for about ten years, I would like to voice my concern about this hypocritical/unethical action. Please guide me how to do this. Thank you. ```` DaringDonna (talk) 19:50, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

See https://wikimediafoundation.org/contact/ -- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:38, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

'de-expand' page data beneath editor

Latest comment: 14 days ago6 comments3 people in discussion

My first Teahouse question after nineteen years! Whenever I edit an article, there's a cluster of data beneath the editor, such as "Wikidata entities on this page", "This page is a member of X categories", etc.. That all would be fine, if each of the entries was not by default expanded, sometimes pushing the preview down an entire screen's length. I've looked through the various preferences I have in place, and I don't think it's 'twinkle' or 'ultraviolet' which I have enabled - but I can't find anywhere to modify their presentation to not be expanded. Help? cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 23:13, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Anastrophe, I haven't the foggiest, but if you can say what skin you're using and whether you're on desktop or mobile, that might help someone else answer your question. -- asilvering (talk) 01:03, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Apologies, I know better. I use monobook on PC, largely on Firefox. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 01:05, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Also, I temporarily disabled the small number of scripts that were in my monobook.js to no avail, so they can be ruled out hopefully (User:AzaToth/twinkle.js. User:Lupin/recent2.js, User:Omegatron/monobook.js, User:Dr_pda/prosesize.js) cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 01:12, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

You may get better answers by asking at WP:Village pump (technical). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:54, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you kindly, I'll give it a whirl. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 18:15, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Sections do not collapse on mobile

Latest comment: 13 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

On the mobile version (Minerva Skin) of some articles, the sections do not collapse, as it is per default. I realized this by chance while revising two articles: Great Britain at the Olympics and Netherlands at the Olympics. It also only affects these two articles, as it seems, and all other similar "Country at Olympics" are correctly displayed with collpased sections, like United States, France, Poland, Italy Japan, ....etc.
Does anyone happen to know what the reason for this could be?
PS: This issue appears regardless of the mobile-browser (tested on: chrome, firefox, brave, mibrowser) . Miria~01 (talk) 14:54, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I suspect that this is a function of the vast size of the articles; or their complex tables.

It would be best if you asked at WP:Village pump (technical). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

thanks, I will ask there Miria~01 (talk) 16:32, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Review updates to our article

Latest comment: 13 days ago7 comments4 people in discussion

Hi - I don't understand any of the review changes which have been made to our article. I realised after a few months that I should have used a sandbox instead of just starting to type but the review comments which were written in English have proven useful.

When I go in to work on the article, I look at the history, I see stuff like this and I have no idea what this means or what has been changed - in other words I don't know if we've made a mistake which we can avoid in future. How do I get in touch with the person who has made the change and ask them for an explanation? Even better, is there a way of understanding the change / correction which has been made without having to contact the person?

Thanks - see below - I cannot understand this.

• curprev 00:51, 6 August 2025 Citation bot talk contribs 85,639 bytes +29 Add: doi, authors 1-1. Removed parameters. Some additions/deletions were parameter name changes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Folkezoft | Category:CS1 maint: date and year | #UCB_Category 95/185 undothanked

Iwmackay (talk) 19:03, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Iwmackay, and welcome to the Teahouse.

That was an edit made by a bot called "Citation bot", whose job is cleaning up the syntax of citations. You really don't need to worry about it - it's there to clean up after us.

If you want to know exactly what it did, you can look at the diffs, and see it did two things, one of them twice:

1. It changed the parameter names first and last to first1 and last1 respectively. This had no visible effect on the article, but is neater, because you had a first2 and last2 (name of a second author), so the parameters are parallel rather than different.
2. It added a doi parameter, which it was able to do easily because the doi was already in the URL. It allows various software to look the resource up easily.

ColinFine (talk) 19:21, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the excellent explanation Colin. I cannae understand why there is not a click explanation to what you just said. Cheers Ian Iwmackay (talk) 14:52, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Iwmackay what you’re seeing in the history is an edit made by Citation bot an automated tool that cleans and standardises references. It can run in both articles and drafts, and it doesn’t change your main text it only works on the wikitext of citations. In the log you posted: "Add: doi, authors 1-1. removed parameters Some additions/deletions were parameter name changes".

That means the bot: "Added missing details to a reference like DOI or author names" or removed unused or incorrect parameters in citation templates & renamed parameters to match Wikipedia’s preferred citation style

How to see what changed In your draft’s history click the {{diff}} link next to the edit and you’ll see a before and after comparison with green highlights for additions and pink for removals.

Since Citation bot is automated you can’t message it like a regular editor but its user page explains how it works and has links for questions or bug reports.

Also please note on your Draft: Submission declined on 21 April 2025 by @Setergh.

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

This means the draft will need more high quality independent and reliable sources before it can be accepted into the encyclopedia,.. You can keep improving it in your draft space until it’s ready for resubmission,... Thanks 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 19:40, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

many thanks for your help. We have made vast strides in adding citations since the rejection and I have spend many hours in the library formalising the sources. We are still confused as to why direct links are not encouraged e.g. there are about a dozen existing Wikipedia articles for buildings etc. in the Southside - we would be remiss surely not to link to these which are well established and well written. Iwmackay (talk) 14:51, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Two comments. I would expect an inner district of a nation's capital city to be notable. The draft would look more like a Wikipedia article if all the boldface were removed from the "Events" table. Maproom (talk) 09:05, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks - that's a very helpful. comment about expecting it to be notable. In terms of the bold - I have no idea why I did that and every time I edit the table , I think "I must fix this". Thanks again. Iwmackay (talk) 14:47, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Efns don't show if hovered over on talk pages

Latest comment: 16 days ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I started an RfC here where the proposed solution includes an EFN with sources explaining the article prose, and as all RfCs are on the talk page of the related article, I'm having this bug where unlike in the article space where if you hover over an EFN it shows a little popup, when I hover over an EFN in the talk page it's not popping up properly like it does in an article space. How do I fix this? Am I using the wrong notelist template? Thank you PHShanghai | they/them (talk) PHShanghai | they/them (talk) 10:50, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

No, you aren't using the wrong template, just that Hover popups for {{efn}} don’t work on talk pages because the necessary reference handling scripts are only loaded in article space. On talk pages, EFNs will appear as plain links to the notes list there’s no way to enable the hover function there. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 11:26, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thilio: How would you suggest I get around this given that the RfC wraps around having an EfN? Would copypasting the EFN content be appropriate? Thank you PHShanghai | they/them (talk) 12:39, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@PHShanghai....On talk pages, the simplest workaround is to paste the EFN text inline or as a brief parenthetical, then keep the full {{efn}} in the article space where hover works.

Alternatively, you could place the explanation in a bullet or numbered list below the relevant point in your RfC so readers don’t need to click to see it. See WP:TPG for talk page formatting guidance. 🐍 Thilio🤖 12:49, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Where do I write a article

Latest comment: 16 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

(Redacted). Respectfully yours (Redacted). 79.143.107.27 (talk) 14:30, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, not a news site, and we do not report original research. Please see our list of alternative outlets.

Also, do not include the names of others in posts like this here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:52, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I've redacted this, because it seems quite oddly specific and could be WP:OUTING. —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {u - t? - _uselessc} 15:25, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Gary Adante (Recording Engineer/Producer)

Latest comment: 16 days ago11 comments9 people in discussion

  Courtesy link: Draft:Gary Adante

Subject: Request for Assistance with New Article on Gary Adante (Recording Engineer/Producer)

Hello Teahouse Editors,

I have prepared a draft article about myself, Gary Adante (formerly credited as Gary Olazabal), a recording engineer and producer with over 40 Grammy certifications. The draft is fully sourced with reliable references including AllMusic, Discogs, Muso.ai, the book *Faces of Music* by David Goggin, and an article on Okayplayer about Stevie Wonder’s *Songs in the Key of Life*.

In addition to my engineering and production work, I have held leadership roles such as Director of Studios for Paul Allen, managing 17 studios worldwide, and I am currently Director of Neptune Valley Studios in Beverly Hills.

I’m disclosing that I am the subject of this article and I’m seeking a neutral, experienced editor to review and, if appropriate, help with the article’s submission.

Here is the draft in my sandbox: User:GaryOAdante1/sandbox

Thank you very much for your consideration and help!

Best regards, User:GaryOAdante GaryOAdante1 (talk) 20:10, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @GaryOAdante1, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid that, like most new editors who plunge straight into the very challenging task of trying to create a new article before they have spent time understanding how Wikipedia works, you have created something that is nowhere near acceptable. In fact writing about yourself successfully on Wikipedia is so difficult that very few people manage it and in consequence you are strongly discouraged from trying: see WP:AUTO.

The problem is that new editors almost always start in what seems to be the obvious way, of writing what they know. This is precisely backwards: Wikipedia is not interested in what you know, even (or, especially) if it is about yourself. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

In order to write an article successfully, you first find reliable, wholly independent reliable sources about the subject - nothing written, published, or commissioned by the subject or their associates, or based on their words; nothing in social media, blogs, or user-generated sources such as iMDB or Wikipedia; nothing which contains only passing mentions of the subject; but places where people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish material about the subject at some length, in reliable publications. (This is the essential, and often challenging, part of the process: it is akin to building the foundations of a building before starting to build it). See WP:42.

Then, assuming that you have found several such sources, the next part of the process is to effectively forget everything you know about the subject, and write a neutral summary of what those indpendent sources say. Do you see why it is extremely difficult to write about yourself?

More generally, My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 20:48, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

That's the point, @ColinFine Thanks, hope they're readying this.....

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 20:58, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Request for neutral editor

Grammy-winning engineer biography draft needs review & submission

Wall of text

Title: Request for neutral editor to review and submit biography draft (Gary Adante / Gary Olazabal) Body: Hello, I am seeking assistance from a neutral Wikipedia editor to review and, if appropriate, submit a biography draft I have prepared for Gary Adante (formerly credited as Gary Olazabal), an American recording engineer and producer. He has worked on over 40 Grammy Award-winning and nominated recordings and has been featured in published books and recognized music industry sources. The draft is fully cited with reliable references, including: – Faces of Music: 25 Years of Lunching with Legends by David Goggin (Alfred Music, 2011) – Buzz Me In: Inside the Record Plant Studios by Martin Porter & David Goggin (Thames & Hudson, 2025) – Official Grammy.com credits – AllMusic and Discogs credits I am aware of conflict-of-interest guidelines and will not be submitting this myself. Instead, I am asking a neutral editor to consider reviewing the draft and, if it meets standards, submit it via Articles for Creation (AfC). Draft in Wikitext format: {{short description|American recording engineer and producer}} {{Use mdy dates|date=August 2025}} '''Gary Adante''' (formerly credited as '''Gary Olazabal''') is an American recording engineer and producer who has contributed to numerous Grammy Award-winning and nominated recordings.<ref name="Faces">{{cite book |last=Goggin |first=David |title=Faces of Music: 25 Years of Lunching with Legends |publisher=Alfred Music |year=2011 |isbn=978-1598630245}}</ref><ref name="Buzz">{{cite book |last1=Porter |first1=Martin |last2=Goggin |first2=David |title=Buzz Me In: Inside the Record Plant Studios |publisher=Thames & Hudson |year=2025 |isbn=978-0500028698}}</ref><ref name="AllMusic">{{cite web |title=Gary Olazabal Credits |url=https://www.allmusic.com/artist/gary-olazabal-mn0000192533|website=AllMusic |access-date=9 August 2025}}</ref><ref name="Discogs">{{cite web |title=Gary Olazabal |url=https://www.discogs.com/artist/306234-Gary-Olazabal |website=Discogs |access-date=9 August 2025}}</ref><ref name="Grammy">{{cite web |title=Gary Olazabal |url=https://www.grammy.com/artists/gary-olazabal/13010 |website=Grammy.com |access-date=9 August 2025}}</ref> == Career == Adante began his career in the 1970s at major Los Angeles recording facilities, including the Record Plant.<ref name="Buzz" /> His credits include engineering and mixing for artists such as [[Stevie Wonder]], [[Barbra Streisand]], [[Quincy Jones]], [[Michael Jackson]], and [[Paul McCartney]].<ref name="Faces" /><ref name="AllMusic" /><ref name="Discogs" /> His work spans pop, rock, and R&B genres, with multiple projects earning Grammy Awards or nominations.<ref name="Grammy" /> He has been profiled in industry publications and books documenting the history of recording studios and the music industry.<ref name="Faces" /><ref name="Buzz" /> These sources detail his role in landmark recording sessions and his association with influential producers and artists. == Selected works == ''Songs in the Key of Life'' – Stevie Wonder (1976) – engineering team<ref name="AllMusic" /> ''Hotter than July'' – Stevie Wonder (1980) – engineer<ref name="AllMusic" /> ''Bad'' – Michael Jackson (1987) – engineering credits<ref name="Discogs" /> ''Live Alive'' – Stevie Ray Vaughan (1986) – mixing/engineering<ref name="Discogs" /> Various collaborations with Paul McCartney, Barbra Streisand, and Quincy Jones<ref name="AllMusic" /> == Publications == Adante is featured in: Goggin, David. ''Faces of Music: 25 Years of Lunching with Legends''. Alfred Music, 2011. ISBN 978-1598630245.<ref name="Faces" /> Porter, Martin; Goggin, David. ''Buzz Me In: Inside the Record Plant Studios''. Thames & Hudson, 2025. ISBN 978-0500028698.<ref name="Buzz" /> == References == <references /> == External links == [https://www.allmusic.com/artist/gary-olazabal-mn0000192533 AllMusic credits] [https://www.discogs.com/artist/306234-Gary-Olazabal Discogs credits] [https://www.grammy.com/artists/gary-olazabal/13010 Grammy.com profile] {{DEFAULTSORT:Adante, Gary}} [[Category:American audio engineers]] [[Category:Record producers from the United States]] [[Category:Living people]] [[Category:Year of birth missing (living people)]] Thank you for considering this request and for your help in preserving accurate music history. 142.129.115.247 (talk) 01:21, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

GaryOAdante1, I presume that this too is from you. You're "seeking assistance from a neutral Wikipedia editor". And you have enabled email. It is very likely that a self-described neutral Wikipedia editor will email you, offering to help you get an article published, of course for a fee. Any such offer is likely to be fraudulent. Any offer of guaranteed success is definitely fraudulent. There is a possibility that the writer is sincere -- but if so then the writer will be uninformed, incompetent, or both. Don't waste your money. -- Hoary (talk) 09:04, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate the heads-up, Hoary.

I’m still hopeful that an experienced, neutral editor with an interest in music history might be willing to review the draft I’ve posted here. It’s fully cited with published sources, and I’ve avoided any promotional tone in accordance with Wikipedia’s biography guidelines.

If anyone from the community has time to take a look, your feedback would be very welcome. GaryOAdante1 (talk) 14:59, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

ColinFine is a an experienced, neutral editor and gave you copious such feedback, above. Please heed it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:05, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Not only is it promotional in tone, it's AI generated. Particularly your comment on the draft talk page. Don't use LLM to write text. Rewrite in your own words. We don't accept AI-generated content. Also, the correct procedure is to submit it for review, not request a review here. I put a submit button on the top of the draft so you can do that after you clean it up. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:06, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Seeking assistance...

Thanks to everyone who commented earlier. I’ve posted an update on the Draft’s Talk page outlining changes made to address sourcing, tone, and structure in line with policy. The current draft uses only independent, reliable publications that provide significant coverage, with promotional material removed. Draft: Gary Adante Talk page with details: Draft talk Further feedback is welcome. 162.255.3.238 (talk) 15:45, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Please remember to log in, two of your sources don't mention him and IMDb is NOT a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 15:56, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@GaryOAdante1: Making sure you see this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:11, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Blacklist

Latest comment: 13 days ago14 comments4 people in discussion

The guy who worked before me left and fled away after our ___domain was blacklisted officialworldrecord.com

now the job is like do or leave the job pleae i tryed evrything

“Wikipedia has a spam blacklist to prevent self-promotion and unreliable links. My ___domain, officialworldrecord.com, is on that list, so any attempt to add it is automatically blocked. This doesn’t mean it’s illegal or wrong—Wikipedia just wants independent, reliable sources.

To get around it safely, I either need to:

1. Cite credible third-party articles about my site instead of the site itself, or
2. Request that Wikipedia whitelist my ___domain, showing that it’s notable and backed by independent sources.

Theanonuser (talk) 18:47, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

• You did neither, so I don't think you tried everything. Drmies (talk) 19:06, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
  • domt know what to do read 10 articles on chat got searched yt for it can you help
  • (Redacted) Theanonuser (talk) 19:08, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
    • Andy, how much should I ask? Drmies (talk) 19:09, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
      • I get paid 60 euros for a month think Accordingly brooo I have to survive on that 60 I can share with you Theanonuser (talk) 19:11, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
      • i can give you 10 🥹 cause I am from Nepal so my collage expenses are to be covered from this work 🥺🥹 or take full 60 cause I need this freelance job anyhow Theanonuser (talk) 19:14, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
        • Theanonuser, stop, and stop putting personal information in here. Editing on Wikipedia requires competence, and no one here is going to take your money, or the promise of your money, to help a site get removed from the blacklist. You could have looked at Wikipedia:Spam blacklist more carefully. Drmies (talk) 19:20, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

          i know nothing about this Wikipedia Theanonuser (talk) 19:27, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

You appear to be making a statement. Do you have a question?

If this relates to your work, please see WP:PAID.

If you need help getting your ___domain unblocked, see WP:BLACKLIST.

If this is about getting an article about your company or website, see WP:NCORP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:08, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

(Redacted) Theanonuser (talk) 19:10, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Please stop. Very carefully read Wikipedia:When your boss tells you to edit Wikipedia and tell your boss that the company website is blacklisted due to spam. qcne (talk) 19:31, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

what kind of spinach specification talking about can we get out Theanonuser (talk) 19:33, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

OK, we're done here. No more spinach. Drmies (talk) 19:36, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Spinach specification? What? qcne (talk) 19:36, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

B&LE 154

Latest comment: 13 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

If Wikipedia made an article on 643, the preserved B&LE Texas type, they might as well make an article about the other preserved B&LE steam locomotive, consolidation number 154. Now, about notability. The engine isn’t as famous as say, 4449, but eh. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 19:13, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Not a question. You know how this works by now. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:20, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Pigsonthewing, I just looked at User talk:199.192.122.199/Archive 1. I don't see any reason let this user continue editing on this page, or really anywhere. Thoughts? Drmies (talk) 19:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Changing copyright information on uploaded images

Latest comment: 12 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hello, recently I've been working on the article Whitney Reynolds with a COI, and I mistakenly uploaded them as if I was the copyright holder. My boss has given me permission to use the photos that are up for deletion. Is there a way to change the copyright info, or is re-uploading with the correct information better? Thanks. BoatsandTrains (talk) 01:06, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

@BoatsandTrains: Wikimedia Commons only accepts images that have been released under public ___domain or a free license; that means they should free for anyone to use for any purpose. You having permission to use it for a particular Wikipedia article isn't enough. If the copyright holder (usually the original photographer, probably not Reynolds herself) agrees to release the photographs under a free license, you can have them contact commons:Commons:Volunteer Response Team to let Commons know this.

The English Wikipedia accepts non-free images that comply with our non-free content policy, but only when non-free photographs are necessary to illustrate the article. This isn't the case for the article Whitney Reynolds which already has plenty of free photographs.

Also, since you stated you work for Reynolds, you are required to make a paid-contribution disclosure, which is detailed at WP:PAID. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 01:22, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi BoatsandTrains. In case you didn't know, you have actually uploaded the photos to Wikimedia Commons which is where most images on Wikipedia live. A list of your uploads there is here.

The Commons process is to have the copyright holder, typically the photographer, send a specific release of rights email - see Commons:VRT as suggested above. I am not sure if it will be easier for you to allow the four deletions and try following the process starting from scratch, including contacting the photographer if they are not selfies or working out if there is a work-for-hire copyright agreement (copyright can be tricky!). You could comment on the deletion discussions and say your intentions, or ask for advice.

Also, apparently it is not mandatory, but it would be helpful if you disclosed your COI on your userpage. (Edit conflict: I wrote this response at the same time as Helpful Racoon) Commander Keane (talk) 01:47, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you both Helpful Raccoon and Commander Keane for the advice. I've added a notice of COI to my userpage for convenience. I'll have to see about most of the removed images as I'm unsure of the photographers in most of them. BoatsandTrains (talk) 02:07, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Deleting draft

Latest comment: 12 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello! I was working on the draft Draft:Aquatica leii but I didn't get too far and someone else made it first. How can I delete the draft now it is no longer in use? PineappleWizard123 (talk) 23:51, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Most simply, PineappleWizard123, by blanking it. I mean, set out to edit it, delete all of its content, save the result. -- Hoary (talk) 00:54, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Rules

Latest comment: 13 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Where can I find the Rules of Wikipedia? 78.208.5.19 (talk) 12:20, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Here. The Ruler of All Wikis (talk) 12:24, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@The Ruler of All Wikis But that page is empty. Could some Admin explain better? 78.208.5.19 (talk) 12:26, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Apologies for the above, thanks for asking! The simplified ruleset can be found here and is a good place to start. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 12:27, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

No, the answer is not an empty draft as User:The Ruler of All Wikis suggests. All of the policies and guidelines can be found linked on this document: Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. You may also find policies at Wikipedia:List of policies, guidelines at Wikipedia:List of guidelines, and manual of style at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Contents. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:28, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

How can a person be gay if they are a Lesbian?

Latest comment: 13 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I am gay and lesbian. 91.193.19.101 (talk) 08:51, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia has an article on gay, where you will see that the term happily includes lesbians. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:58, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

on a related note: it's also completely OK if the existing labels don't seem to quite fit you; we're all unique in our personal ways, and sometimes there aren't words or labels that accurately and fully capture how you feel and what is authentic to you. — DVRTed (Talk) 09:39, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

3RR on user page

Latest comment: 13 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Does the Three-Revert rule count if I am editing my own talk page? by this I don't mean engaging in edit wars, but rather adding information I find necessary to it repeatedly, such as userboxes and milestones. Seanwk (talk) 00:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

It only applies when reverting others, not if you are reverting yourself. — Tenshi! (Talk page) 00:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I see. Thanks a lot : ] Seanwk (talk) 00:25, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Alen Hadzic’s Wikipedia Article

Latest comment: 13 days ago8 comments6 people in discussion

  Courtesy link: Alen Hadzic

Requesting Guidance on Notability and Deletion of Alen Hadzic's Wikipedia Article

Discolure: I am disclosing conflict of interest

Hello,

I need assistance regarding the Wikipedia article about, Alen Hadzic. I believe the article does not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines because the sources used are almost exclusively news reports about a fencing ban and related allegations that were never legally proven. )Title IX – preponderance of the evidence) There is no significant or in-depth coverage in multiple independent, reliable secondary sources about his fencing career, achievements, or other contributions.

What I find striking is that the article begins by focusing on the controversy, which suggests possible malicious intent rather than neutral reporting. The coverage centers on a short-lived controversy that has not resulted in lasting public impact or recognition. Currently, over 1,100 athletes have been banned by SafeSport, so being part of that list alone should not justify a Wikipedia article. My son’s fencing career included a brief period associated with the Olympics, which does not establish lasting notability.

From what I know, Wikipedia requires more than a momentary controversy or a single event to justify a biography, and this article lacks the sustained, independent coverage necessary to establish notability.

For these reasons, I believe the article should be nominated for deletion due to lack of notability and possible violation of Wikipedia’s neutral point of view policy. I would very much appreciate advice on the best way to proceed with this request.

Thank you very much for your help. Goricah3 (talk) 20:02, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, article content and inclusion are based on verifiable, independent reliable sources and notability guidelines see (WP:BLP and WP:GNG). If you believe the subject does not meet these standards the best route is to open a discussion at WP:AFD (Articles for deletion). Please present your concerns there with specific sourcing analysis. Keep in mind that coverage about controversies can establish notability if it is significant, independent and sustained the focus of the article must still follow WP:NPOV. also raise neutrality concerns on the article’s talk page for discussion and improvement 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 20:14, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Despite your COI, you have removed a lot of material from the article today; I have now undone this. You may make suggestions for changes on the article's talk page; as you were advised in May. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:15, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. I understand. the article is clearly written with malicious intent to hurt and not to inform. It is SOLELY focusing on the brief controversy and from the getgo. The consequences and the harmful impact of this anonymously written article can be potentially devastating and I am trying anything I can to removie it. 178.220.219.137 (talk) 21:27, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Could I ask what is your connection to user:FFlorence1992? DS (talk) 01:28, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, of course. That was my previous account from when I first tried editing without understanding Wikipedia's rules. I apologize for any mistakes made then. I've since then taken a lot of time to learn the policies and guidelines, and am working to follow them carefully now. Still learning.I know all editors make mistakes from time to time.

I hope to contribute to Wikipedia over time, beyond just this article. 178.220.219.137 (talk) 07:55, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it looks like the article will be kept since there are way too many sources to justify WP:BLP1E. Besides, the first page of search results when I look up "Alen Hadzic" all talk about the sexual assault claims, so removing the Wikipedia article about him isn't going to make it any better. My only recommendation, unfortunately, is to accept this happened and move on. If you want to contribute elsewhere at Wikipedia, feel free to ask us for help. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 08:08, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your words, I truly appreciate them. I’ve proposed a change on the Wikipedia Talk page because while I accept that SafeSport lists his name, I cannot accept the use of word "rape" in several places or “targeted drunk women” in the article. I’ve posted a verifiable link there showing his attorney publicly stated he was never accused of rape, and “targeted drunk women” is clearly hear-say. I do hope that the editors understand the importance of the removal.

Before the Olympics, an independent arbitrator, a woman with over 45 years’ judicial experience, reviewed the case and ruled, based on the evidence, that he should be allowed to compete. The article notes this but says she “opined,” as if it weren’t a legal decision. The USA Fencing director also believed he was eligible based on the evidence at the time. If the public ignores that process, why have the system at all, only to have a Wikipedia page “seal the deal”?

Caving to the pressure, SafeSport later issued a permanent ban for “sexual misconduct,” the exact wording on their site, alongside over 1,000 other athletes. His accomplishments, AP Scholar, Dean’s List at Columbia, Athlete-scholar, multiple gold medals, should also appear in the introduction for balance. Early Olympic news repeated the same rushed wording and the case was mileadingly “well-covered” for several months. The article, if it exists, should present the full context for a fair, neutral biography. Goricah3 (talk) 12:40, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Map appeared in the article Vibhavadi Rangsit Road oddly

Latest comment: 14 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Vibhavadi Rangsit Road

Hi all, sometime ago I added a map to the article Vibhavadi Rangsit Road but the map showed up with some sort of [[File: artifacts. How do I get rid of it? Thank you very much in advance. 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 03:19, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I have fixed it. For future reference, the |map= parameter of {{infobox road}} normally expects the name of a file (like |map=Example.jpg); if you're going to give it a full image (like the kind that {{maplink}} produces), you need to add |map_custom=yes. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:50, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I see. Thank you very much for your help!🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 15:58, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

kap tata bigay

Latest comment: 14 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

who the user account facebook kap tata bigay 158.62.53.115 (talk) 05:30, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@kap tata bigay 158.62.53.115 (talk) 05:32, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

If this is a question about Wikipedia, please ask it more coherently. (And if it is not, then you're asking at the wrong place.) -- Hoary (talk) 05:47, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

What means "rm puff"

Latest comment: 12 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Hi, all... a while agao someone changed a lot in an article i wrote and the only explanation for this was "rm puff"... are there rules for this? Where could i read more about it? LG, Naomi Hennig (talk) 13:30, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Do you have a specific diff? My best guess is have a look at WP:PUFFERY. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:32, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Presumably "remove puffery", meaning material which, in the view of that person, is promotional, does not adhere to a neutral point of view, or perhaps uses WP:Weasel words. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:35, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

It was probably done in the page about Ivo Ringe. Lectonar (talk) 13:50, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm thankful for your answers... i'm going to reed on this and will perhaps come back with more questions. Kind regards and thanks again to all!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naomi Hennig (talk • contribs) 15:27, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Can't move page

Latest comment: 15 days ago5 comments5 people in discussion

Hi there, could someone move the page for me. I am not yet autoconfirmed and would appreciate to skip that process as I won't write many other articles. User:Fossilio Endgamo/sandbox. Fossilio Endgamo (talk) 17:10, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Fossilio Endgamo: Please see Help:Referencing for beginners; your draft just has references slapped onto the end as an afterthought. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:14, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Fossilio Endgamo, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The answer is no, but I have added a header which will allow you to submit your draft for review.

The restriction on new editors moving articles or creating article in mainspace is there for a reason: editors who have not spent time learning how Wikipedia works before they try to create an article almost always create something that is not acceptable. My personal opinion is that the restriction on creating new articles should be set far beyond four days and ten edits.

As far as I can see, your draft depends on primary sources.

An article on FFZ could be accepted only if it were primarily based on secondary sources, i.e. sources wholly unconnected with Green, UCL, or LINGO, that have published in-depth material about the idea.

Wikipedia is the last place to tell the world about new ideas, not the first: please see WP:NOTADVOCACY. ColinFine (talk) 17:22, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Are you Fergus Green, or do you have some connection to him or to fossilfreezones.org? If so, please see WP:COI and WP:PAID. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:01, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

It would definitely be a good idea to submit to using the WP:AFC process as ColinFine suggests, as this article is definitely not ready to be moved to mainspace. A new concept should not be sourced only from a handful of parties who recently created and/or are advocating for the concept to be implemented. An article about Fossil Free Zones should be primarily sourced from reliable secondary sources writing about Fossil Free Zones. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 02:40, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Researching Shintoism Cosmology & more

Latest comment: 15 days ago10 comments5 people in discussion

Sorry if I am a bother to any of you right now. But, I am wondering if I can get help on getting some information about Shintoism Cosmology and Women's role(s) in Shintoism. I am a new researcher to Shintoism but I don't know the right sources to get them from. My 2 posts were flagged from ChatGPT. Which yes, it was genuinely for being written by ChatGPT. But, I changed some words here in there of my choosing. I get it, I was in the wrong so I do not mind. All I want to do is find true good sources of stuff based on Shintoism. I just found out about Shintoism 2 days ago. I'm also thinking of converting to Shintoism because I can see the beauty and I think I believe in the Kami that are in Shintoism. My recently changed username from yesterday is based on the Kami, Amaterasu Omikami or 天照大神. I will be waiting by going outside to pray to the Kami of love (also known as Ōkuninushi no Mikoto) to pray of getting a beautiful good partner of mine. Can't wait to chat with you!

If you are in need of the draft link, here you go. Draft:Shinto Cosmology. AmaterasuNoMamorite (talk) 18:06, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, typo I mean for being written by ChatGPT. AmaterasuNoMamorite (talk) 18:09, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:15, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Your Draft:Shinto Cosmology currently lacks sufficient reliable sources. Please avoid using AI-generated text, as Wikipedia requires information to be supported by verifiable, published sources (see WP:RS). 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 18:16, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

"currently lacks sufficient reliable sources" This is hardly surprising, given that the OP is here to ask for help finding sources. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:23, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing, Noticed !! 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 18:34, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I would suggest removing everything written by ChatGPT and write the draft in your own words. The information in the draft must also be supported by reliable sources via citations. Anything not supported by reliable sources must be removed. Tenshi! (Talk page) 18:17, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much to all of you whom suggested these things to me. I highly thank @ColinFine, @Tenshi Hinanawi, @Thilio, and @Pigsonthewing. If you have any more suggestions to me, bring it to my talk page if you'd like, or just say the suggestion here. Anything works really. I am open for any suggestions for my further research in Shintoism Cosmology and other things about Shintoism! You can also suggest me articles that are not even on here about Shintoism, like information about any Kami like Fujin/風神, Toyouke-Omikami/豊受大神, and Haniyasu-hime/埴安姫神!

And @ColinFine, Just to confirm for you. Ame-no-Minakanushi is not associated with my user name! In fact, it's associated with the Kami, "Ameterasu".

Ameterasu is literally if you search her up: She is our very own sun goddess of the HIgh Heavenly Plains. Even though she is the most central in Shinto. That does not make her Ame-no-Minakanushi! She was also one of the ancestors to the imperial family of Japan!

There are quite a lot of key differences between them. Ame-no-Minakanushi was one of the first Kami's to exist, Ame-no-Minakanushi is described as a primordial and invisible as mentioned in the article you mentioned (Ame-no-Minakanushi). And the Kami, Ameterasu as I said earlier, was a sun goddess and the ruler of the High Heavenly Plains, also (said again) the utmost centrality of Shinto.

I'm going to say a prayer for all of us here and to those who read this below and read this above,

O High Deity Amatersu-Omikami, please protect us and grant us prosperity. By the divine way, bestow upon us your blessings. Amaterasu-Omikami, arigato gozaimasu. (Amaterasu-Omikami, thank you very much)

Also, arigato gozaimasu for reading my question and this message.

May the Goddesses, and the High god's/Kami's of the Highest of the Heavens and the Earth guide me and you to the correct way of faith of the Kami. O High Deity Amaterasu-Omikami, arigato gozaimasu.

さようなら、良い一日を!/Goodbye, have a nice day!

良い午後を!/Have a nice afternoon! AmaterasuNoMamorite (talk) 23:29, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @AmaterasuNoMamorite. Since we already have articles on Ame-no-Minakanushi and Japanese creation myth (the second of which is woefully short of sources), I suspect it would be more advantageous for you to work on improving those, rather than trying to create a new article. ColinFine (talk) 18:35, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@AmaterasuNoMamorite that's the best suggestion from @ColinFine If I were you, I would definitely take it. Keep improving those, Ame-no-Minakanushi and Japanese creation myth you can even go deep by "see also" similar topics, like Kuni-no-Tokotachi ,Sky father and so on. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 04:30, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Non-free content of video games

Latest comment: 15 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I would like to add some video game screenshots representing the games that I have in the Wikipedia articles associated in them, but I'm not sure what guidelines to follow. For example, Neon White has a gameplay section without a screenshot of the game, but Papers, Please has a screenshot in the gameplay section.

Are there any informational pages (Wikipedia:x) that I can follow regarding non-free video game screenshots? Thanks -shanshansan Shanshansan (talk) 06:51, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@Shanshansan

For non free video game screenshots the key rules are under Non-free content criteria, which set out the ten conditions any non free image must meet. The relevant advice for screenshots is in criterion 8 and the examples under Screenshots. cheers.

~~ 🐍 Thilio🤖 07:02, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@Shanshansan MOS:VGIMAGES would be of good use here. Feel free to add images as long as you as they follow MOS. Go D. Usopp (talk) 06:31, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Example of in-depth, reliable, secondary & strictly independent of the subject

Latest comment: 15 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi Team,

Could you help me review this wiki draft article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:HexaHealth as this draft article submission was declined due to "references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article."? If I compare the sources/references, most of the experienced editors have added these references as a reference links for any wiki article wherever there was possibility to add.

I will be a great thankful to you.

Thanks

Momosnep (talk) 06:45, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Similar question already answered at AfC help desk. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:46, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Momosnep that question already answered here 🐍 Thilio🤖 08:22, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Multi word infobox parameters

Latest comment: 15 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

While creating a infobox, can you create a parmeter with more than one word? If so, how? WikiHelper3906 (talk) 08:10, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@WikiHelper3906 Yes, "you can create a parameter with more than one word" just by using underscores instead of spaces in the parameter name. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 08:32, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

2025 in American television

Latest comment: 15 days ago7 comments5 people in discussion

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

---

I am writing this for my other account but this is my web browser

my main account is Lukas 4550 but I am writing on my web browser the reason I'm doing this is because some of my edits that I needed help for I've been getting reverted which means I haven't been getting the help I need to fix the things that need to be fixed my most recent edit or one of my most recent edits on 2025 in American television was reverted when I just needed help fixing some formatting if you find this contact my account via my talk page 2603:6000:D000:9607:9021:74E1:8746:4A78 (talk) 21:55, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Lukas4550, at least one of your edits to 2025 in American television was reverted with an informative edit summary. If you need help to fix what needs to be fixed, then log in as Lukas4550 and on Talk:2025 in American television ask for specific help. Incidentally, (i) I for one always use a web browser (the only alternative I can think of, the "app", sounds somewhat half-baked), (ii) the conventions of English orthography (commas, periods, sentence-initial capitals, etc) are no more than conventions, but they are helpful all the same. -- Hoary (talk) 22:16, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I use the app as I use a tablet as my main device 2603:6000:D000:9607:B963:2B86:C94C:F79E (talk) 00:51, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Then you may wish to try a browser on your tablet. As it happens I don't use anything other than a computer for editing Wikipedia, but I'm confident that I could use Firefox on my (Android) tablet for editing Wikipedia as well as for viewing it. -- Hoary (talk) 01:19, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@IP is your up your alternative account? HQIQ (talk) 07:04, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I see you have started a discussion on Talk:2025 in American television, which is the correct thing to do.

As for editing from you browser, you can still log in there; and can be logged in in both places at once. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:55, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

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

Move it to draft

Latest comment: 15 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, I have written a biography draft for Rinaa Peter in my sandbox but I am not autoconfirmed and cannot move it to the Draft space. Could someone please help move it to Draft:Rinaa Peter so I can submit it for review? Here is the sandbox link:

User:Nidhi.gupta8/sandbox. Nidhi.gupta8 (talk) 10:21, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Done; now at Draft:Rinaa Peter. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:27, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I have Someone [we edit conflict-ed] has reviewed and declined your draft. Several sections are entirely uncited. You have some inline citations, so use the same technique to cite everything in the article. Remove anything that you cannot cite. Once you have done that, you can resubmit it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:34, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Nidhi.gupta8, and welcome to the Teahouse.

You have made the very common mistake of writing what Peter or her associates would want people to know. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 15:32, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Rosedale Banishment

Latest comment: 15 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hello, and thank you for your time. I’m interested in creating a new Wikipedia article about the Rosedale Banishment, a racially motivated mass expulsion that took place in Johnstown, Pennsylvania in 1923. The event was widely reported in the press at the time, has been the subject of historical research, and was recently commemorated by the state and local governments on its 100th anniversary. I’ve gathered reliable sources, including newspaper coverage from the period, modern scholarship, and official proclamations, but I would like guidance from experienced editors to ensure the article is written in line with Wikipedia’s content and sourcing policies.

I understand the importance of neutrality, verifiability, and avoiding original research. My goal is to present this topic accurately and in a manner consistent with Wikipedia’s standards, while improving public access to documented history. Because the subject intersects with racial history, local history, and notable public recognition, I believe it meets the notability criteria, but I would appreciate help confirming that and structuring the article properly.

If there are editors here who are familiar with U.S. history topics, civil rights history, or Pennsylvania history, I’d be grateful for your assistance. Whether that’s through co-drafting the page in my sandbox, reviewing a draft, or advising on formatting and citations, your input would be invaluable. Please let me know if you’re willing to help or can point me toward the best place to find collaborators for this kind of project. Codypat13 (talk) 06:51, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

It looks like you used Chat GPT or another LLM to generate this. Please write in your own words for this kind of project. First gather the sources and try to summarize what they say. If your message is correct about press coverage and research it will be notable. Osa Akwamarynowa (talk) 06:57, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

You are very unlikely to find someone who will work on this with you from the outset, unless you can find a real-world Wikipedia meetup or "editathon".

Your best bet is to gather as many reliable sources as you can, and then start a draft article using the WP:Article Wizard, citing a source for each statement you name in the draft..

When you have done that, you can ask at relevant Wikipedia project pages, like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pennsylvania or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States History to see if anyone has any comments or suggestions.

You may find WP:Your first article helpful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:24, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

On second thoughts, you may also apply for a Wikipedia mentor. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:38, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. And yes, I did use CHatGPT to write the first message. But in actual correspondence, I would just communicate normally. Codypat13 (talk) 16:11, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

How to not get tagged for speedy deletion?

Latest comment: 15 days ago6 comments5 people in discussion

I wrote a page about a company and they tagged it for speedy deletion claiming it was for advertising purpose though it was just about the company and how inspiring as a startup they are growing.

Don't know what to do. HELP Daalikhattak (talk) 16:07, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Daalikhattak, I managed to get a peek at the articlebefore it was removed. The article didn't have a single independent source. You referenced articles written by the creators, LinkedIn posts by the creators, social media posts by the creators. You need reliable, secondary sources discussing the company. Knitsey (talk) 16:12, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Oops, yes...didn't see there was a thread here at the Teahouse. I will move it to draftspace in a moment. Lectonar (talk) 16:14, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Daalikhattak, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I can't see deleted articles; but you have almost certainly made the same mistake as most people who try the challenging task of creating a new article without first learning about how Wikipedia works: you probably wrote either what you know or think about the company, or else what the company wants people to know.

Wikipedia isn't interested in either of these things. A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what several people wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources, and very little else (see WP:42). If you know much about the subjet, you will need to effectively forget what you know, and confine yourself to what these independent sources have said.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 16:14, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Lowerated. Knitsey (talk) 16:19, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

• Daalikhattak The term "Startup" is a very strong indicator that this company does not yet merit an article. Startups or "rising" companies almost never merit articles, a company must become established and recognized in its field to draw the coverage needed to support an article. 331dot (talk) 16:26, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Malware Mitigation Techniques

Latest comment: 15 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Can you give me the full list of things, which can mitigate malware? Like, i remember Petya (malware family) with "perfc" and "perfc.dat" - but are there other similar files to make for other malware? And other similarly simple tricks to do? 95.167.182.36 (talk) 14:59, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

IP editor: this is a help area for people who edit Wikipedia. We can't usually answer other questions but you might find some ideas at the article Antivirus software. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:28, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Sources

Latest comment: 15 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

How can i update the source of an article? Bgboi179 (talk) 18:15, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Sorry if it’s a dumb question i just want to help with some football (soccer) articles Bgboi179 (talk) 18:17, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Bgboi179 welcome to Teahouse...

To update a source by editing the article, replacing or adding the citation with a reliable, verifiable source and formatting it using Wikipedia’s citation templates like {{cite web}} or {{cite news}}. See guide here Help:Referencing for beginners. 🐍 Thilio🤖 18:23, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Cool, but how do i make the links clickable? Bgboi179 (talk) 18:26, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Bgboi179. One of the parameters in templates such Thilio mentioned is url= - obligatory for {{cite web}}, and optional for the other templates, because sources do not have to be available online. If you fill in that parameter, it will generate a clickable link. Please see the reference pace Thilio linked to. ColinFine (talk) 18:45, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

ref tag in section heading

Latest comment: 11 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Norihiro Satsukawa has ref tag just below Managerial statistics section. in some articles its inside or end of section heading. e.g. ==head <ref>url</ref>== or ==head==<ref>url</ref>. is it allowed? -- jiki (talk) 06:00, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

It isn't desirable. I added some words before it. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:32, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

&Asian as a source?

Latest comment: 11 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello,
Just wondering if &Asian may be used as a source on articles. Another editor raised the concern to me that they don't list their editorial staff on the site itself, though they do mention on their "About" page that they follow Independent Press Standards Organisation rules. They are also recognized by Muck Rack, which auto-generates pages for anything or anyone it identifies as "legit" journalism; while a lot of other online magazines like Metroscene.com (which other editors have said is okay to use as a source) aren't recognized by MR.
Their editorial staff can be found elsewhere, though (LinkedIn). They also have some interviews with legit people like Dolly de Leon and Karen Fukuhara: https://andasian.com/tag/interviews/
Their content has some pretty valuable info, so I'd love to be able to use it, but please let me know if it's not allowed as a source here. Use with discretion/it depends or not at all? Bloomagiliw (talk) 23:32, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

The best place to ask, Bloomagiliw, is WP:RSN -- but only after looking for the search term in that page's archives. Incidentally, I don't know what a "legit person" is; but interviews with people (whether law-abiding citizens or convicted felons) have only very limited uses in Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 01:58, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Obvious things

Latest comment: 12 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

A user wrote to me they wanted me to review their draft. It did not follow the criteria, so it got declined. But it was about a character in The Legend of Korra and it shows what they do that is in the draft. Does it need any sources? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 14:17, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, everything in a Wikipedia article needs reliable sources. If there are no reliable sources on a topic, then that topic does not warrant a separate Wikipedia article, even if (one feels that) the information given is true. See verifiability and notability for more information on this. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:28, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

@Writ Keeper but things like Zaheer_(The_Legend_of_Korra) have very little sources because it shows it in The Legend of Korra. Can characters be like this? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 14:37, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

In this case, the primary source itself is the source of information. It's like a plot summary or synopsis of a book or movie. It's understood that the information comes from the primary source. Character summaries of newspaper comics and cartoon series are similar; the original work is the source. That doesn't mean the article doesn't need citations; at the least it would require assertions to cite episodes. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:56, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Request for additional editor input on article talk page

Latest comment: 11 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello Teahouse, I want to disclose that I have a conflict of interest regarding the Alen Hadzic article,so I am not editing it myself. A discussion is underway about the article’s NPOV and compliance with Wikipedia’s BLP policy. While some editors have already contributed,it would be really helpful to have more editors review and provide input.

You can see one of the discussions here: MediaKyle’s talk page discussion, and on the article’s talk page: Talk:Alen Hadzic.

Any constructive contributions or feedback would be much appreciated to help ensure accuracy,neutrality and compliance with BLP guidelines.

Thank you!Goricah3 (talk) 10:43, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

This page is for asking questions about how to edit Wikipedia, not for recruiting people to ongoing discussions elsewhere. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:54, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Rejected without review

Latest comment: 15 days ago6 comments4 people in discussion

I submitted a detailed COI trying my best to follow the wikipedia process it got rejected without review

I posted a detailed COI request, to the best and most detail possible, Talk:Nithyananda - Wikipedia ; I waited for more than a month, finally i noted a senior admin, and asked him to review. He got angry and rejected it without review. Is there any way to take it forward for a second review? Because the facts were not even read/considered saying it is too long. Should I resubmit shorter request? SurekhaSekar (talk) 17:08, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

You should submit a shorter request, and you should not use an LLM at any point in that process. You should also refrain from pinging individual administrators to look at the request. So long as you have used the request template, your request will go into a maintenance category and patrolling editors will find it. -- asilvering (talk) 17:28, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

thank you, that is what i didn, it was pending for a very very long time; are you able to see my coi request ... ? you can also consider such requests ? SurekhaSekar (talk) 17:38, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

It was likely in the queue for a long time due to the length of the request. If you think that multiple things should be changed, it might be better to break the changes down into several smaller requests. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:47, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@SurekhaSekar, any editor in good standing may consider a request. (Please do not take this as a suggestion that you ask other editors to review it for you.) -- asilvering (talk) 17:59, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

You used an LLM, and said as much in the linked thread. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:16, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Britt Roberson page

Latest comment: 14 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Britt Robertson

I acted, sang, modeled, and danced alongside Britt Roberson at the American Talent Showcase in Charleston SC before she moved to LA. We were clients of Donna Ehrlich at Carolina Winds now Z-One Talent Agency in Chester, SC. She is actually posted as on of their success stories on this page: https://www.z1modelsandtalent.net/about-us. This is where she gained traction and reputable contacts for her move to LA where the bio made it seem like she just took a chance and randomly moved to LA where she got famous which isn't the case. She had to do a lot of local networking to get her contacts in LA. I myself was offered a modeling contract for NY that I never took but this showcase had big connections. If she had never attended that showcase, she would've never been allowed to move to LA to pursue a career on hopes and dreams alone. I edited the bio of course but when I tried to list my references, I feel like failed miserably. How can I site this correctly and orderly as it comes up much earlier in the bio than other information and references? And can I add the photos I have of us at the ATS? I have 2 where we're both in a group photo together? CreativeChaos87 (talk) 21:57, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@CreativeChaos87 Welcome to Teahouse.

Please see the conflict of interest guideline & propose changes on the article’s talk page supported by reliable published sources. For adding photos please see WP:IMAGES to ensure they meet Wikipedia’s licensing and content requirements. Cheers. Good faith edit 🐍 Thilio🤖 22:07, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Because you have a conflict of interest, and you are new here, it would be best if you used Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard to propose specific changes to an article with which you have a conflict of interest. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, @CreativeChaos87, and welcome to Wikipedia editing!

If I'm reading your question correctly, you're trying to add one or both of these as links?

https://www.z1modelsandtalent.net/about-us

https://share.google/hNUdBoOzkZQ8oe36X

You were on the right track, but you wanted web citation. That would take you to this template:

{{cite web |last= |first= |date= |title= |url= |website= |___location= |publisher= |access-date=}}

Filled out, looks more like this:

<ref>{{cite web |last=LastNameofAuthor |first=FirstName |title=About Us |url=http://www.z1modelsandtalent.net/about-us |website=Z1 Models and Talent |publisher= |access-date=August 11, 2025}}</ref>

Which gives us the following: ^[1]

Past the part within the <ref> tags at the end of the sentence (or paragraph) where you mention the information it provides. Good luck!

(and the other user who replied was absolutely correct about reading COI) MilesVorkosigan (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

1. LastNameofAuthor, FirstName. "About Us". Z1 Models and Talent. Retrieved August 11, 2025.

AFC and Reviewed Articles

Latest comment: 14 days ago8 comments4 people in discussion

Shouldn't articles created via the AFC process be marked as reviewed? Because a reviewer at AFC reviewed the article and approved it because it passed Wikipedias main policies and requirements. It would also help lift off work from the New Page Patrollers. 8bit12man (talk) 20:14, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@8bit12man.. Well, At AfC,.. A reviewer checks for notability, sourcing & compliance with core policies before moving a draft to mainspace but that does not count as a New Page Patrol review. NPP includes additional checks such as copyright, formatting & categorization and is a separate process. This is why articles created via AfC still appear in the New Pages Feed and require a page patroller’s review. 🐍 Thilio🤖 20:28, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

AfC reviewers do check for copyright violations and other issues, not just notability & sourcing. It is a quick-fail criteria in the reviewing instructions Tenshi! (Talk page) 20:30, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Tenshi Hinanawi Absolutely you are right but in depth copyright checks done by New Page Patrollers and admins.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 20:45, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Again, disagree. If there's any trace of a copyright violation AfC reviewers need to remove it, request revdel, and decline the draft as a copyvio. Also, what specifically do you mean by an "in-depth copyright check"?. Tenshi! (Talk page) 20:50, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I meant NPP often do a fuller, oops!!, I mean deeper check after the article is in mainspace 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 20:57, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

No, the copyright checks are the same for both AFC and NPP. NPP tends to do some other checks like, as you say, categorization, and also serve as a second set of eyes for (most) AFC reviewers. -- asilvering (talk) 00:58, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@8bit12man, it wouldn't actually lift all that much work off NPP to mark all AFC articles as patrolled - those are already the easier ones that are pretty fast for NPP to handle anyway. But also, it's easier (by design) to become an AFC reviewer, so we want articles that have made it through AFC to get a second look. -- asilvering (talk) 01:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

io soi il ve di domande

Latest comment: 14 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

ala jò a colpâ un cagnin in dare di faim

il graziis al è molt grâs.

Kerry blue terrier - Vichipedie 116.255.2.165 (talk) 03:02, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello. This is the English Wikipedia; please provide an English translation if you can. You may be looking for another language's edition of Wikipedia. Google Translate says this is Friulian, in which case you'll want the Friulian Wikipedia (Vichipedie furlane); otherwise, try https://wikipedia.org or m:List of Wikipedias. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:40, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Edit filtered out: trying to understand why

Latest comment: 14 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I recently tried to make an edit to the page for Normal Douglas, changing a section heading "Sexual Encounters with Children" to "Pedophilia". The motivation for the change was accuracy and brevity, and to better reflect the content of the section. I'd like to understand why the edit was inappropriate and how to avoid this in the future.

Below is my exchange on Edit Filter>False Positive>Reports (thanks to EggRoll97 and 45Dogs for getting me this far)

ME: I was changing "sexual encounters with children" to "pedophilia" in the section title because he had sex with kids as an adult, a fact he documented in his own writings (as described and referenced in that section). The original title was misleading, since it allowed for the idea that he was also a child, rather than an adult many decades older than the children, and also on at least some occasions, paying them. REPLY: Not done – The filter is working properly. I'm not sure this is necessary. The current section title already accurately describes the events, and I don't really see the need to change it as proposed

ME: Thanks for considering it. I'm a new editor — is there a guide to language use in sensitive topics? My edit was partly motivated by clarity and accuracy, but it looks liek I missed the mark here REPLY：There is the Manual of Style, but in this case WP:BLP would likely be better to refer to

ME：Thanks for the direction. I had a look at the two guides and also a couple of similar figures (dead, respected for their work, no debate over the fact they were a pedophile) and I have a follow-up question if you have time to answer. Would "Child Sexual Abuse by Douglas" or "Documentation of Child Sexual Abuse" have been more appropriate edits? REPLY：I am not actually sure. I only realized now I might have pointed you to the wrong resource, since WP:BLP is focused on living people's biographies. In my opinion, it would likely be better to err on the side of caution. Both of those are accusatory in nature, even if they are true. Though honestly, it would likely be better to receive other editor's opinions, which you can do at the teahouse or help desk.

My questions are: 1. Is there any guidance for what language to use in cases like this (preferably with an explanation)? 2. Was the language of my edits accusatory? To my mind, you can't accuse someone of something they have said they did (e.g. if I tell you I drank a coffee this morning, you can't accuse me drinking a coffee this morning). 3. I asked whether "Child Sexual Abuse by Douglas" or "Documentation of Child Sexual Abuse" would have been more appropriate edits; I've since thought of a third: "Child Sexual Abuse Allegations". This doesn't seem quite right (because he wasn't alleging them against himself, he was documenting them), but if the other options seem accuratory, perhaps it's a better fix?

Thanks in advance for any answers or ideas you can provide. Sheidou (talk) 02:18, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

If unquestionably reliable sources say he was a pedophile (and actually used the word pedophile), then in my view, we should call a WP:SPADE a spade and use that term in Wikipedia's voice. The edit filter is just an automated response to words that have historically had a high correlation with unconstructive edits, and it acted accordingly. In this case it's a false positive. However, I don't see a problem with the status-quo wording. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:31, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The article in question is Norman Douglas. It is clear that by late 20th and 21st century standards, his sexual behavior with children was reprehensible and horrific. But stating that he had "pedophilia" implies either a specific psychiatric diagnosis or a criminal conviction. If neither occurred, then explaining his behavior that is now considered shocking without use of that term may be better. Personally, I would have no problem calling him a pedophile in casual conversation but we need to use words very precisely when writing encyclopedia articles, especially when social mores have changed for the better. Cullen328 (talk) 06:58, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Mapbox shapes

Latest comment: 14 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

What determines whether a certain Wikidata id can appear as a shape (versus a simple point) in a mapbox? For example, the infobox on Washington State Capitol correctly shows the shape in the map, but Budd Inlet does not; both have an associated OpenStreetMap relation ID with drawn shape in OSM. OceanLoop (talk) 02:40, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@OceanLoop See mediawikiwiki:Help:Extension:Kartographer/OSM#Limitation —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:29, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Photographing Medieval Graffiti

Latest comment: 14 days ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, I have always used Wikipedia for lots of information. I am focused on photographing Medieval Graffiti in English churches. I have surveyed hundreds of Norman and Anglo Saxon churches and wish to make them available to users of Wikipedia. This means just adding them to the occasionally low content listing of the church already listed. Often on average 6 photographs would be added. How is this done without making a mistake given I am not that IT savy?Thanks

How to add lots of photographs to English church sites. This mostly capture Medieval Graffiti which is generally not mentioned on the sites but is an area of growing interest. I have surveyed hundreds of Norman and Saxon churches to capture photographs and to add to the knowledge of those that visit churches or the Congregation them selves. It would be good to be able to add some of my images to your existing church listings Proving I do not make mistake while doing it. I am not that IT savy. Kenscontribution (talk) 11:03, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

There are two steps:

1. Upload the images to Wikimedia Commons; a sibling project of Wikipedia (this makes them available to Wikipedias in ~300 other languages, too)
2. Insert them into Wikipedia articles

Help:Images should get you started; please ask again if any of it is not clear.

Two things to remember:

• On Commons, images are categorised. If you are uploading several images from one church, and there is no category for that church, you can make one.
• Six images might be a lot for some articles. In that case, you can use the {{Commons category}} template at the foot of the article to indicate that additional images can be found on Wikimedia Commons.

Thank you for offering to donate these images. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:09, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse, if the graffiti is not mentioned in the articles then it is not clear why we would need photographs of it? Theroadislong (talk) 11:11, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome, but I have been here a while.

Of course we want such images. If a church has mediaeval graffiti and that is not mentioned in its article, that is an egregious omission, which needs to be corrected. The images could well prompt such a correction (or indeed Kenscontribution may wish to make it at the same time). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:16, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Listings of English churches typically show a photograph of the outside of the church only. It might detail the age and style of construction and if it is 'listed' as of historic value and therefore protected from changes to the structure. It is very very rare to add that Medieval marks made by the common man exists and never shows these marks which are of huge value.In case you are unaware, the churches I refer to are often 800 to 1100 years old, and often get upgraded. In doing repairs often these important marks made by the congregation are covered up or damaged by replastering. My aim is to capture these important marks before they become lost to future generations. Hope some of that helps understand why Graffiti is not currently mentioned on most websites.

Ken Kenscontribution (talk) 11:27, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps we need an article called Medieval graffiti? Theroadislong (talk) 11:50, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps. For now, I'll redirect that to Graffiti#Medieval Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

question about userboxes

Latest comment: 14 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I wish to add userboxes to my talk page, but I am confused on how to do this. Could you please assist me on this? Thank you :) 76.167.174.124 (talk) 01:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Copy and paste? Incidentally, it's normal to add them to one's user page, but user pages are only for named users. I notice "I plan on creating an account": Please go ahead. -- Hoary (talk) 02:03, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

See WP:Userboxes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:45, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Incorrect edit

Latest comment: 14 days ago5 comments5 people in discussion

Hi, someone changed one of my edits on the page saying it was offensive, but I only reported correct information from the latest interviews (source: interviews themselves with the director of the film himself)If they are not aware of the correct and latest information, please do not change when the page contains incorrect material. 93.45.197.125 (talk) 23:56, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hey! I can't speak for the editor themselves, but I can say, you should follow the Manual of Style when making edits! But on you're edits, I see why they reverted for Manual of Style, unsure how they're offensive to my POV. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 00:06, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

You didn't give a source in the article for either of your edits and both included errors in capitalization. If you have a source somewhere that has the director saying he is not trying to follow the original at all, then post the link and you can ask for help with formatting it for the article. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 00:06, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IP user: welcome to the Teahouse. Your edits appear to be your opinions about the film (and your capitals suggest that they are strongly held. It's fine to have opinions, but they don't belong in Wikipedia, which should report only what reliable published sources say. (I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your opinions: I know nothing about the subject.)

If you have a reliable published source that says those things, then you could add "XXX said that ... ", citing the published source. If you're not sure how to cite it, post on the article's talk page explaining what you think should be added, and who said it where. ColinFine (talk) 10:28, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Neither of your edits was described as "offensive". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:50, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Create pages then blank them?

Latest comment: 14 days ago7 comments4 people in discussion

I don't know if this is the right place to ask this question. Is it OK to create user pages, I don't know if it's the right name for this, for other users then blank them? See this: 1 Qby (talk) 09:33, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@Qby: I don't know if it's against any actual policy, other than the general convention that one shouldn't really edit other users' userpages. If we're talking about a one-off, it's probably not a problem, but if it's being done on larger scale that could be a red flag... for something. I suppose you could always ask the user, to hear what they have to say about this? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

DoubleGrazing I'll tell you what's a red flag, they've amassed almost 19,000 edits since February 25th, that's over 3100 a day. Most of them seem to be deleted redirects. 331dot (talk) 10:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Actually, scratch that, I had my page screwed up. But they do have a lot of edits in a short time. 331dot (talk) 10:45, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed. An interesting edit history – 10 live edits and 18,900+ deleted ones. That's gotta be some sort of record. :) DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:51, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I wonder if they're using a bot.

So the link they provided was limited to the User namespace- it only showed those edits. Their unfiltered contributions. 331dot (talk) 10:54, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The user's history shows over 19K edits, but the deleted contributions is just a hundred or so. Where are the other thousands? on other projects?

This looks like a WP:NOTHERE situation. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:58, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia page for a Senate candidate

Latest comment: 14 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi,

Would the candidate of a grassroots US Senate campaign clear the notability requirements?

Thank you Aetsai26 (talk) 15:10, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hey Aetsai26 Welcome to Teahouse.

For that ,....Not automatically.. Wikipedia’s notability requirements for politicians are explained at WP:NPOL. In the U.S., a person is presumed notable once they have held a significant elected position, such as U.S. Senator or if they have received substantial non trivial coverage in multiple independent & reliable sources.

Merely being a candidate even for the U.S. Senate does not by itself meet notability; many campaigns attract little or no independent coverage beyond routine mentions. The key factor is significant in depth coverage from reputable sources not press releases or campaign materials. 🐍 Thilio🤖 15:20, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

redirect from the article namespace

Latest comment: 14 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello Wiki I'm trying to publish an article for a local band that has a record deal and some articles about them that I properly cited, but I fear I categorized the article wrong so it go immediately shut down before the review started. Here is the official problem it says:" because it was a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces." But the article is still a draft: "Draft:The Band Solstice'. So what do I need to fix this or is there nothing to be fixed Viscosityc (talk) 01:33, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Viscosityc, all you have to do is to (greatly) improve Draft:The Band Solstice. But before you set out to attempt that, are you sure that the band is notable (as understood by and for Wikipedia)? Incidentally, are you perhaps related to the band? -- Hoary (talk) 02:11, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I thought I did everything correct for the article. I guess the only thing I forgot to add is wiki links. The band is notable as they have been covered by 3 independent news company's. And I am not related to the band in any way. I'm just a second degree friend of one of the band members and find it funny there are 4 different solstice bands, so I'm trying to help a friend of a friend out by giving them a wiki page they deserve. Viscosityc (talk) 16:14, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Best approach for requesting implementation of a mass move

Latest comment: 14 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

In order to implement Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism/Archive 2025#RfC on dropping preemptive disambiguation, the names of hundreds of articles related to dioceses and archdioceses need to be named. Those on US dioceses have already been moved (partially through the RM page). However, I don't know how to indicate that this is a task requiring hundreds of articles to be moved. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to phrase it or know any page movers who might be up to the task? Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:20, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

There's User:Ahecht/Scripts/massmove which is available for administrators/page movers, although they'd likely need to do a round-robin mass move because every request at WP:RM/TR about the implementation of this RFC had redirects with history so far. Tenshi! (Talk page) 18:31, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The Rs with history issue is really the only barrier to me taking this up myself. Should I consider requesting temporary page mover perms to fulfill this task without burdening volunteers who might be needed to address more nuanced move requests? Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

hiii

Latest comment: 10 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

hey guys does anyone have any show recommendations for example I like the girls next door, Bambi, pretty little liars, umm the oc, and gossip andddd I like also what else I like well I've been watching desperate housewives Lolitademos (talk) 09:22, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Lolitademos: the Teahouse is a place for asking questions related to Wikipedia. If you wish to chat about films etc., you need to find a different platform for that, like one of the many social media sites out there.

Also, please do not introduce any more intentional factual errors into published articles. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:31, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

how do you even like know that Lolitademos (talk) 09:39, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

What image is best to use in the infobox for a book series?

Latest comment: 10 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there everyone,

I work mainly on the Nevermoor book series articles, but today I noticed that there's no image for the 'page' that comes up when you hover over the link to it (as opposed to the article for The Hunger Games). I figured I could fix this if I added an image to the infobox for the series, but wasn't sure what to use. The series isn't finished so I don't know if it's appropriate to use the box set of the first three books in the series when more will be added. I am also considering just doing the logo of the series similar to how the article for A Series Of Unfortunate Events did it, but I'm not sure how to isolate the header text and upload it as a png to wikimedia as I don't have Photoshop or anything similar. Any ideas? Cornonthehunt (talk) 02:46, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I would suggest using GIMP to isolate the logo if that is what you choose to do, it is free and very easy to use. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 05:11, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion! :) Cornonthehunt (talk) 08:10, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

"Reading lists" to establish notability

Latest comment: 13 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello! This question concerns the articles Cryptid Hunters and Tentacles. Both these articles are in quite poor shape, in my opinion, and I'd like to work on fixing them up.

They were sent to AFD in 2010 for reasons editors did not agree with (though at the time they were essentially unreferenced plot summaries), and were kept after the addition of their inclusion on some reading lists, which the AFD discussion indicated passed WP:BOOKCRIT #4. Cryptid Hunters was also nominated for some awards I do not know the notability of (but I suspect a lack of it).

I am skeptical that inclusion on several reading lists is equivalent to being the subject of instruction at two or more schools. I have found multiple reviews of both these books that qualify them as notable per WP:BOOKCRIT #1, so I do not believe their notability is in question, regardless of the state of the articles.

My question is, as I take a stab at improving these articles, is this information worth preserving? Have I correctly interpreted the guideline of WP:NBOOK in my assessment that this is not useful information, or does this actually contribute to their notability? NovaHyperion (talk) 06:48, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@NovaHyperion your interpretation of WP:NBOOK seems generally correct; Inclusion on reading lists may help demonstrate notability under WP:BOOKCRIT #4 but as you point out this criterion is narrowly defined it refers specifically to works being the subject of instruction in at least two schools not simply being recommended or listed for general reading.

If you have located multiple reliable, independent reviews that would satisfy WP:BOOKCRIT #1 making the reading list inclusion less critical for establishing notability... However, the information might still be worth mentioning in the article if the lists are from notable institutions or widely recognized sources as it could provide useful context even if it’s not determinative for notability.

In short,... you can improve the articles by focusing on high quality independent sources for reception and coverage and treat the reading list information as supplementary rather than central to the notability claim.🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 07:12, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thilio Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Based on that, I remain unconvinced that inclusion on a school's summer reading list is a contribution towards notability (in my experience at least, the gap between "on a summer reading list" and "the subject of instruction" is vast) and I do not believe that the information that it appeared on a reading list is serving readers in this case, so at this juncture I feel comfortable excluding it. NovaHyperion (talk) 02:56, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Can i add images found on x.com

Latest comment: 13 days ago6 comments4 people in discussion

I have been trying to upload image for the Nigerian Armed forces but it has been repeatedly deleted for violating copyright while the image is free to use Nafextreme (talk) 17:37, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

That an image is made available on social media does not necessarily mean that it is free to use. There must be an explicitly given copyright that permits use on Wikipedia, or copyright law in the relevant country must permit it(such as the fact that works of the US federal government are automatically in the public ___domain under US law). 331dot (talk) 17:44, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Can you link here to an image you want to use on WP and consider free to use? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:47, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

https://x.com/beegeaglesblog/status/1557827062030802950

this is the link Nafextreme (talk) 18:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@Nafextreme That photo has appeared online at least 9 years ago according to a reverse image search. It is likely copyrighted by someone. You therefore cannot use it on Wikipedia. qcne (talk) 18:21, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Nothing there indicates that pic has a license (see Commons:Licensing#Well-known_licenses) we can use. That someone puts something on twitter does not mean it's free to use on WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:14, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Having trouble with talk page discussion

Latest comment: 13 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It's been a while. But look, I am having problems trying to correctly set up an article name move on Wikipedia. You see, a musician named Adam Feeney revamped his alias from Frank Dukes to Ging. Of course, Ging exists as a redirect, but I don't think I initiated the move discussion on the Frank Dukes talk page correctly. Any help please? DBrown SPS (talk) 01:31, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

It seems to be set up correctly; you already have some replies there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:31, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Chess book

Latest comment: 13 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I currently own a chess book (shown in the citation).^[1] Could it be used as a source for chess articles? Nighfidelity (talk) 15:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Almost certainly. But if you use it and someone has an issue with it, they should let you know. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:12, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

i, personally, cannot understand the second part of this reply. Is there a typo or missing word perhaps? Osa Akwamarynowa (talk) 17:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Apologies; I omitted the word "let"., which I have now inserted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:48, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

References

1. Williams, Gareth (1995). The Amazing Book of Chess. Surrey, United Kingdom: Chartwell Books. ISBN 0785803084.

Testing Lua Modules + replacing <imagemap>

Latest comment: 12 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Where do i test Lua Modules. Also Your opinion about replacing <imagemap>

I am trying to create a new Lua module in the context of replacing <imagemap>, and generally learning lua scripting for wikipedia, but if i create a sub-page in my user page Starting as Module:, it doesn't get recognized as lua code. It only gets recognized under the Module mainspace as i can see, but that is for complete modules. In addition may i ask your opinion about making a new template that teplaces image map, in order to make it easier to interact with the feauture, allow stylizing (for ex. Centering the image of the image map in the infobox( ex. In the Animal article, the image is not centered) and make the options avaliable through the visual editor. Thank yoj in advance for your help and you opinion/feedback! Mant08 (talk) 16:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Mant08: Hello. To answer the first part of your question: you can create a sandbox module for yourself in the subpage(s) of the module called "Sandbox"—see Module:Sandbox. The common practice is to name the subpage after your username. For example, I have a module at Module:Sandbox/DVRTed that I can invoke from anywhere. I'll leave the second part of your question for someone more familiar with templates to answer. — DVRTed (Talk) 16:40, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@DVRTed Thanks for answering this part of the question. I am waiting, for the opinion of others for the other part. Mant08 (talk) 16:48, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I suggest you ask on WP:Village pump (technical). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:13, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing Thank you, i am going to ask them (The Village Pump), as soon as i have finished the concept of my idea. Mant08 (talk) 16:02, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Image resize

Latest comment: 12 days ago7 comments5 people in discussion

Is it possible to resize an image to be smaller? I recently added an image to the page Megan Woods (singer), but it appears unreasonably large and takes up half of the page. JavaJourney (talk | contribs) 18:18, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

User:Javajourney,   Done. Made it into 180 px, so it is smaller now. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 19:39, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

It was not even that large, anyways. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 19:39, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat: You should instead have used one of |image_upright= or |image_size=, as described in {{Infobox musical artist}}'s documentation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:11, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

@Javajourney: Yes. You can both resize and also crop images in Wikipedia, in different ways, but i will mention the most commonly used ones, and recomended.

[Resize] When an image isloaded in an article, using the format [File:example.png], you can set an "|80px" option/parameter which sets one of the image dimensions (i don't remember which) to that specific number and also the other based of the picture ratio. NOTE: This method doesn't crop images.

[Crop] You can crop an image in two ways. 1) Using the CropTool (Requires Setup) 2) Uploading a new cropped image to wikimedia commmons under the same options, while referencing the original one uploaded and affing an (cropped) at the file name end (not after the extension!), and use that in the article.

If you want/wish/prefer to you can use both, but usually only one is used at a time. Mant08 (talk) 18:52, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat, @Javajourney, @Mant08: Specifying absolute image sizes, such as "180px", is not recommended. See Help:Pictures § Thumbnail sizes.

Specifying thumb is usually enough; adding upright= can be used to adjust the size for (e.g.) portraits or maps. See MOS:IMAGESIZE. Bazza 7 (talk) 19:32, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Bazza 7 Thank you, about that, i didn't know about those guidelines! Mant08 (talk) 19:36, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Help with removing personal information

Latest comment: 11 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, I’d added some personal info to my user page a few years ago, and people are using it to contact me on LinkedIn and other platforms.

Now, even after removing it the edits are visible in the edit history. Any way for me to purge this information, or do I simply need to delete my account (or will even that not work)? TIA. Kanishkawrites (talk) 11:32, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Kanishkawrites, and welcome to the Teahouse. What you want is called Oversight. Please see WP:OSFAQ ColinFine (talk) 11:38, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I've hidden the revisions from view prior to oversight. Oversight will remove it completely - revdel (which I have done) hides it from non-admins. Bilby (talk) 11:43, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much @Bilby, will give that a shot! Kanishkawrites (talk) 06:53, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

and thank you @ColinFine too! Kanishkawrites (talk) 06:55, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

How does one put a section of an article into a category?

Latest comment: 12 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I've seen people putting sections of articles into categories, such as an individual episode from an article of a list of episodes in a TV show. However, I can't find how to do this on the cat. FAQ and I don't see anything in source editing. How do I do this? Shocksingularity (talk) 16:13, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Shocksingularity, as far as I'm aware, there's no way to place anything less than a full page into a category. That said, you can categorize redirect pages, including episode redirects that lead to their show's main page. You can read more about this at WP:RCAT#Article categories. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:22, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

ArchNet CC

Latest comment: 11 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

According to ArchNet's terms of use page:

Archnet is an Open Access resource, provided to the public to facilitate cultural understanding and excellence in both scholarship and practice. Content from Archnet.org may not be published, displayed, or appropriated for commercial use without the expressed written permission of the copyright holder.

Unless otherwise noted, Archnet material is available for instructional, nonprofit use, and personal use on the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license.

The content available on Archnet, including but not limited to information, text, graphics, logos, and multimedia related to the the Aga Khan Trust for Culture’s programmes, such as the Historic Cities Programme, the Aga Khan Award for Architecture and the Aga Khan Music Programme, may be protected by copyright, trademark, or other intellectual property rights and laws, whether owned by the Aga Khan Trust for Culture, its affiliates, or third parties. Unauthorized use, reproduction, distribution, modification, or display of this content is strictly prohibited without the express written permission of the respective copyright or trademark holder. Violation of this prohibition may result in legal penalties.

Would uploading some images from this article to Commons be appropriate, seeing that Wikimedia is a non-profit organization? Hsnkn (talk) 06:52, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hsnkn, you should ask about this at Commons' help desk. But I'm pretty sure the answer will be "No". Maproom (talk) 06:56, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Hsnkn In short no, "NC" is the dealbreaker, since stuff on WP is (mostly) allowed for commercial use. You can see the ok licenses at Commons:Licensing#Well-known_licenses. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:09, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Well that sucks, but still thank you for the list. Hsnkn (talk) 19:56, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

2FABypass

Latest comment: 11 days ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Header inserted by ColinFine (talk) 16:19, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi! I submitted my draft 2FABypass (2)Two Factor Authentication Bypass and it’s been waiting for review for a long time. I’ve worked hard to improve it and would really appreciate if a reviewer could take a fresh look. Here’s the link: Draft:2FABypass (2)Two Factor Authentication Bypass

Thank you so much! Letscontributes (talk) 16:13, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Letscontributes Your draft was declined ten hours before you posted this message, and you made some edits and then resubmitted it seven hours ago. I don't understand your purpose in posting here. ColinFine (talk) 16:21, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @ColinFine,

Thanks for your reply. I understand the timing might seem a bit close I posted here because I’ve been working on this draft for a long time and wanted to make sure it’s on the right track this time. I’ve made several improvements based on previous feedback, including rewriting sections in my own words and adding stronger sources.

I really appreciate the work reviewers do, and I’m just hoping it gets a fair second look when the time comes. If there’s anything specific I should focus on to improve its chances, I’d be grateful for your guidance.

Thanks again,

User:Letscontributes Letscontributes (talk) 16:30, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, @Letscontributes. You have submitted it, and in time a reviewer will look at it. No guarantees as to when, I'm afraid. ColinFine (talk) 18:27, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

I have moved your draft to Draft:2FABypass, which is a more suitable title.

You have a lot of external links. Most of them should either be used as citations, or removed; see WP:ELNO. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:26, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Andy, Thanks a lot for moving the draft to a more fitting title I really appreciate you taking the time to do that. I’ve been working hard on it, so it’s great to see it taking shape.

I hear you on the external links. I’ll go through them with WP:ELNO in mind. If you’re open to it, I’d really value your thoughts on which ones might be worth keeping as citations, and which should go. I’m ready to get it right and learn from the process.

Thanks again for your help! Letscontributes Letscontributes (talk) 18:37, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Frazer

Latest comment: 10 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

There's something really, uh... funky going on with the styling on Frazer (automobile), but I can't figure out what's causing the problem for the life of me. The "edit section" button has completely dissappeared, and the infobox is affecting the placement of the sections (I don't really know how to describe what's going on, you kinda just have to look at it). Can any of you folks figure out what's wrong? I'd be happy to fix it if I could find out what the problem is.

Thanks!

Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 20:23, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Commandant Quacks-a-lot done here... Frazer (automobile) 🐍 Thilio🤖 20:34, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

I am guessing it was fixed by Thilio in this edit by removing the {{-}} directly above the History section.

There were many other helpful additions in the edit so I can't be sure, I can't easily reproduce the funkiness on my phone. Commander Keane (talk) 22:08, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Yep, Thilio fixed the problem. Thanks for checking, though! Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 22:11, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

clearing out Talkpage

Latest comment: 10 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hellooooo + rules on clearing irrelevent / out-of-date discussion on Talkpage

Hi there!

I am purely on here because I feel it's a little lonely on my Wikipedia page (I joke), Border reivers and I thought I would introduce myself and say 'Hi'. It'd be great for more support, especially pointers about referencing - I have tried my best - and also anyone who has interest and knowledge in Scottish or English histoy who wants to contribute to it or has genuine criticism (I mean, not your average grumpy Wiki editor criticism!) or questions - I am all ears. You can either add it on the talk-page where I have tried to garner discussion or message me directly on my account.

One question I do have is - What are the rules on cleaning the Talkpage? - because there has been nothing added since I almost completely rewrote the article and I'd hope to get more thoughts from others and think all the discussions on the Talk:Border reivers are entirely irrelevent to how it is today.

Thanks all and the best of health! Lategreatanddead (talk) 11:47, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I have archived some, and set up automatic archiving. A bot will shortly—and regularly—hide away anything that has not been commented on for 30 days; always leaving at least four discussions visible.

More generally, see Help:Archiving. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:09, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Hopefully less noise on there I'll get more useful ideas on what they don't understand or what they think is missing.

Thanks again! Lategreatanddead (talk) 14:09, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@Lategreatanddead The rule, WP:OWNTALK, is that you can delete almost anything you don't feel like looking at on your own talkpage. However, your fellow Wikipedians appreciate if you archive old discussions etc, since this makes them easy to find and read if someone wants to do that. I recommend Help:Archiving (plain and simple), which is also easy to use if you find an article talkpage with a lot of old stuff. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:45, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Finding sources

Latest comment: 10 days ago11 comments8 people in discussion

How do I find reliable sources for something that only few people know about?

I'm trying to make a page on right minarchism (umbrella term), but it got declined because there was no reliable source of information. So first off, few people know about the ideologies I'm putting in the page, few people follow them, and few people criticize them. I get most my info from polcompball wiki (and it's branched off wikis), and they are a nice community where people know a lot about politics, and put that effort into pages. There is people who criticize eachothers ideologies there, and I'm using that as my basis. I've also experienced the criticism first hand in real life, as a Minarchist myself. And as a Minarchist and political nerd myself, I know what the ideologies believe. kindest regards, MinarchistGuy381 MinarchistGuy381 (talk) 02:42, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

As the link WP:Reliable sources in your draft review says, Wikipedia articles are based on what reliable, published sources have to say about the subject. What you know is not anything Wikipedia can use. What is posted on user-generated sites such as wikis is not anything Wikipedia can use. If there is insufficient material published by independent reliable sources to show the subject's notability then there cannot be an article about it on Wikipedia. Meters (talk) 03:51, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

what if I make a page Of polcompball wiki? Is that possibly allowed? (this is unrelated to the topic at hand) MinarchistGuy381 (talk) 22:02, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

"Whereof. . . ." Hoary (talk) 04:28, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

This. This right here, is why one loiters around the teahouse, even when one does not take tea. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:24, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I assume you've tried places like [5] and [6]? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:22, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Don't use user-generated sources. Go D. Usopp (talk) 06:29, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:14, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for help guys MinarchistGuy381 (talk) 22:04, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Rather than write an entirely new article in which you admittedly don't have much in the way of sources, if you're interested in minarchism, why not improve the existing Night-watchman state article? It could definitely use fleshing out and there are plenty of academic sources out there that could provide that information. Also, it would certainly be a less daunting task for a new editor; writing an article from scratch is not a simple task! CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 15:10, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

great idea! I might do that. MinarchistGuy381 (talk) 14:51, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Kantara 2022 film's article title

Latest comment: 14 days ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Kantara A Legend was released in 2022. Later, in 2023 a prequel, Kantara A Legend Chapter 1 was announced, and it is set to be released in October this year. In February 2023, the director said the 2022 film was part 2^[1]. The page of the first film (Kantara (film)) was moved to Kantara: Chapter 2 in July this year. Should not the first film's article be titled Kantara (2022 film)? The first film is known as Kantara or Kantara A Legend by the audience, the title Kantara Chapter 2 is often interpreted as the 2025 film.^{[2] [3]} Additionally, retroactive titles are not allowed Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning, Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope or Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 1. these are some examples. The current title (Kantara Chapter 2) does not meet the WP:OFFICIAL guidelines, Article titles should be recognizable to readers, unambiguous, and consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources. WP:UCN commonly recognizable names should be used. WP:NCFILM clearly says that this kind of article title is not allowed. I requested a move but it is getting opposed, so what can I do? I do have the option to move the article myself. The film in posters and onscreen, is titled Kantara: A Legend. Optim594 (talk) 15:31, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@Optim594 Since the move request is already under discussion and facing opposition the best approach is to continue on the article’s talk page or requested moves page rather than moving the article unilaterally. Per WP:RM and WP:CONSENSUS, contested title changes require community agreement. You have made valid points citing WP:OFFICIAL, WP:UCN and WP:NCFILM,.... To strengthen your case add multiple independent reliable English language sources that refer to the 2022 film simply as Kantara or Kantara: A Legend and clearly show that “Kantara Chapter 2” creates confusion with the upcoming prequel.

If consensus is not reached you can wait 30 days and submit a new well sourced request. Avoid unilateral moves as they may be reverted under WP:BRD. Continue discussion on the RM page, add strong reliable sources supporting your title and avoid unilateral moves until consensus is reached.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 16:11, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I have added sources but I have one more question, even if it did not confuse, can the title really be changed?, it has not even been retitled, I think apple tv title is because of wikipedia, recently apple tv linked movies to prime video.

An IP user said that it is better to have retitled title than an disambiguation. But Star Wars (film) was retitled and has disambiguation instead of retitled title. Optim594 (talk) 20:59, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

If the film has not been officially renamed Wikipedia’s guidelines (WP:NCFILM and WP:UCN) recommend using the original title... adding the release year if necessary (example, Kantara (2022 film)). Retroactive titles should only be applied when supported by significant usage in reliable sources. As your move request is still under discussion, continue adding high-quality sources demonstrating the common title and avoid moving the page yourself without prior agreement (WP:CONSENSUS, WP:RM). 🐍 Thilio🤖 04:47, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kantara:_Chapter_2#c-DareshMohan-20250811170500-2001:8F8:172B:45CE:E0D6:344D:987D:E91A-20250808155200 what do I do next, please help. Optim594 (talk) 14:12, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I mean when 7 days get completed, what do I do. IP oppose counts or not? Optim594 (talk) 19:40, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

References

1. https://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/rishab-shettys-kantara-is-actually-part-2-prequel-expected-next-year-3759725
2. https://www.indiatoday.in/movies/regional-cinema/story/kantara-chapter-2-kanguva-family-star-prime-video-2024-south-film-releases-2517068-2024-03-20
3. https://www.livemint.com/entertainment/kantara-2-being-postponed-amid-rumours-rishab-shettys-team-says-trust-us-it-ll-be-worth-the-wait-11747933593198.html

My Draft Was Declined

Latest comment: 13 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I submitted my article for approval, its the second time it was declined, I am wondering what information to put in, because when I had information that was useful and insightful it was said that it felt biased, but now that I took the information out they said that it was trivial, if anyone could help by looking at the sources, and looking into the content that would be super helpful here is the wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sjonnyon#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation:_TAIT_(August_12) Sjonnyon (talk) 13:04, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

You need to show that the subject meets the requirements outlined at WP:GOLDENRULE. There is additional guidance on suitable sources at WP:NCORP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:09, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Sjonnyon, Draft:TAIT cites 32 sources. That's a lot for you to expect anyone here to check. Which three, in your opinion, do most to establish thet the subject is notable in Wikipedia's sense? They'll need to be to sources each of which is reliable, is independent of the subject, and has extensive discussion of it. Maproom (talk) 08:55, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Page on Barchart

Latest comment: 13 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Guidance Needed

All My Edits Removed – Seeking Help Writing Informative Page on Barchart

Hello,

I’m hoping to get some guidance. I’ve been attempting to make edits to related Wikipedia pages in preparation for creating an article about Barchart, a financial data provider. I have already disclosed my connection to the company on my user page and in edit summaries.

Unfortunately, every single edit I’ve made so far has been removed, and I’ve now received warnings that my account could be blocked. I have been following what I believe to be Wikipedia guidelines:

• Writing in a neutral, factual tone
• Citing reliable sources
• Ensuring content fits the context of the page

Despite this, the edits are still being reverted, and I’m unsure what I am doing wrong. My goal is to create a fully compliant, informative article about Barchart without promotional language, but I would like to make sure I’m taking the correct approach to avoid further issues.

Could anyone point me toward specific best practices or examples for creating company pages that meet Wikipedia standards, especially when there is a conflict of interest? I would really appreciate detailed feedback before I try again.

Thank you FintechContext (talk) 20:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

FintechContext, none of your five edits thus far appear to be disclosing a COI, and you do not currently have a userpage, as indicated by your username being a redlink. So step one is to actually make the appropriate disclosures and make sure that they're saved, per WP:COIDISCLOSE. Otherwise, while best practices would have you make edit requests relating to topics with which you have a COI as opposed to adding the content directly, I think the bigger issue here is that you did not present any independent sources to justify that your additions were WP:DUE. In order for it to be appropriate to mention Barchart in a given article, you need a source other than Barchart or its creators to highlight its relevance in a given context. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:33, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The mistaken assertion that you'd already complied with disclosures (and also the fact that you say here My goal is to create a fully compliant, informative article about Barchart when you have yet to try to create a new article at all) makes me suspect that your post here was largely drafted by an LLM. If so, don't do that again. LLMs are not savvy enough to replace communication on Wikipedia and constantly commit errors that will get caught. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:44, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

To add to Rosguill's answer, in these edits, you added Barchart to a list of industry bodies, but unless I'm mistaken, it isn't an industry body. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

FintechContext, best practice for creating a company page is to choose a company that you're not associated with. Wikipedia is an encyclopdia, not a platform for free publicity. Yours appears to be a spam-only account. Maproom (talk) 09:17, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Plane crashes in picture montages

Latest comment: 13 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

What's up with the excessive use of plane crashes in the picture montages for "year" articles?

I like looking at the Wikipedia articles for each year to see all the events that took place in each respective year. One thing I noticed though is in the picture montages, there seems to be so many pictures of planes that crashed. Yes these are tragic with significant loss of life, but are plane crashes really so important as to define the ethos of a year?

For example I was just looking at the article for "2000" and there are 2 plane crashes in the montage. Here are some others: "1991" has 2. "1992" has 2. "1995" has 1. "1996" has 3. "1997" has 3. "1998" has 2. "2006" has 2. "2007" has 1. "2008" has 1. "2009" has 2. "2014" has 1.

Seems excessive to feature this many plane crashes. I didn't even look at any before 1990 but I assume there are more. I even wonder if it is a single person making the montages who seems to prefer putting plane crash pictures there. What are your thoughts? Airgum (talk) 01:22, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Airgum. There is an editor who is very active on Wikimedia Commons, called User:Nagae Iku. This user seems to enjoy creating these "year" collages and may be the best person to ask. Please be aware that this editor's native language is Chinese and they claim only basic English competency. Cullen328 (talk) 06:41, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Airgum. An example link for courtesy is 1996. That montage has an incredibly long and hard to follow caption!

I think there is a way to create a montage as individual photos, that way it will be easier to swap out events/photos per discussions (like this one), and you could click on each photo to see what it is about.

That would be more of a wiki way, rather than referring to a static grouping made at some point.

To be honest I would need help in figuring if there are any technical limitations or other reasons as to why it hasn't been done that way yet. Commander Keane (talk) 09:58, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected page on WikiData

Latest comment: 13 days ago8 comments5 people in discussion

I need to change two images the infobox of a museum as a freelance job, but it appears to me as "semi-protected", so I can not edit the page yet. What are the steps to unlock this "edit" option for me, in this case? Slamoreira (talk) 02:06, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello Slamoreira :). Semiprotected pages can be edited by "autoconfirmed" accounts, which on Wikidata requires a 4-day-old account and 50 edits. Alternatively you can ask another user to do it for you (I can do it), or you can ask to be confirmed manually at their requests for permissions page. The same applies for semiprotected pages on Wikipedia (except we require only 10 edits). Feel free to ask any other questions :). Cheers, Sophocrat (talk) 03:20, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Sophocrat,

I appreciate your help! I just need to change two images currently showcasing in the infobox of this page: d:Q82941

The one representing the buildins (currently this one: c:File:Novo MASP.jpg) should be actually this:

c:File:Vista do edifício Lina Bo Bardi e Pietro Maria Bardi, lado a lado, 2024 Foto Pedro Truffi.jpg

The one representing the new logo should be this:

c:File:Novo logo masp.jpg

Could you update the Wikidata page with those two, please? Thank you so much. I just ask because it's a bit urgent. Slamoreira (talk) 04:00, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

The new logo image is a JPG; the old one is SVG, and SVG is preferred for such simple shapes.

The photograph lacks evidence of permission (i.e. a licence release) from Pedro Truffi, the photographer. Please see c:COM:THIRD for guidance on how to resolve this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Slamoreira: Are you being paid by the museum to edit Wikipedia/Wikidata? If so, you are required to make a paid-contribution disclosure as per WP:PAID, and wikidata:Wikidata:Disclosure of paid editing. You should also read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Also, the Teahouse is for questions about Wikipedia, most of us can't help with Wikidata. In the future, maybe ask wikidata:Wikidata:Project chat? Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:51, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Slamoreira yep, you’ll have to get a few more edits until you can edit that page. HQIQ (talk) 07:02, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Helpful Raccoon: There are plenty of people here with good knowledge of Wikidata, and questions relating to it—especially in relation to how its content is transcluded on Wikipedia—should be welcomed, just as they would be for one asked about how to change an image transcluded from Commons. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:15, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

How can I make an addition or edit to a Wikipedia page?

Latest comment: 13 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

I want to add a name to a list of distinguished alumni from my high school, and make other edits on Wikipedia pages, mostly on World War II, my specialty. I have written numerous articles for WW2 History magazine on the subject, and they can be used as citations for various entries on various battles and biographies on this subject. Please contact me to tell me how I do it. Kiwiwriter47 (talk) 15:46, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

see Wp:How to edit Wikipedia. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 15:53, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

We only add people to alumni lists who are the subject of a Wikipedia article.

We recommend that you do not write an article about yourself.

You have a CoI with regard to your own works, but if you think they could be useful, please mention them on the talk pages of relevant articles; or at WT:MILHIST.

Now that you have published your email address here, beware of scams. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:54, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I canked the address. THANKS! 2600:4040:A366:E700:6513:1544:CB85:955C (talk) 00:30, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

The address had already been removed. What you did was to remove Kiwiwriter47's username, which I have restored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:42, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I hate this

Latest comment: 13 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I edited the Mahan Air fleet so it could be easily understand for people. But why didn't Wikipedia accept it? Germanwings9525 (talk) 12:45, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Your edits were reverted (undone) because they were unsourced; the need for sources is explained at WP:Verifiability. You may also find WP:Referencing for beginners helpful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:49, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Proper sourcing and notability

Latest comment: 13 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi all, first time editor here. I have been working on Draft:Anirban Pathak. However I had a few questions about sourcing and notability after my first draft was declined.

Much thanks to the community for helping me out with my improper formatting.

I read that when writing about academics, the subject must pass one of 8 guidelines, one of which is being awarded a prize of national or international importance, another one being a fellow of a Society. Both of which I believe I have now catered to in my second draft.

Another thing I was confused about was sourcing, I am unsure if adding citations after each sentence and linking related wikipedia articles are enough.

Please help out, thanks :D Pustakp (talk) 00:46, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

It's not clear what your questions are.

Your draft was declined again (so needs further work); please see the advice given in the decline notice.

You have clearly found Wikipedia:Notability (academics). The reviewer disagrees that you have shown that Pathak meets this requirement.

Technically, your referencing is fine, although you have some sentences that are still uncited. Either cite, or remove, them.

Do you have some kind of connection to Pathak? If so, please say so here, and see WP:COI Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:38, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

There's a COI disclosure on the draft and the user's page. The Om Prakash Bhasin Award is notable enough to have a WP article and so, IMO, Pathak meets WP:NACADEMIC #2. Whether #3 is also met depends whether the Fellowships are obtained merely by paying a membership fee or require an election similar to the Royal Society. I've made a comment on the draft. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:25, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Help with new article

Latest comment: 13 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hello, I’m a new user and I’m doing my best to write an article that follows Wikipedia’s guidelines. I’m hoping to find some friendly and patient guidance as I work through the process. Is there a particular user who might be able to help me with this?

Thank you so much for your time and support. User972364 (talk) 13:47, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@User972364 Welcome to Teahouse.... Please Leave Message on my Talkpage we shell work on something together. Cheer...🐍 Thilio🤖 14:12, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

You can ask for a mentor. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I can’t successfully create an article about an artist I like.

Latest comment: 13 days ago10 comments5 people in discussion

Hi, I have been trying to write a biography of a Thai musician, I tried to follow all the guidelines. He has appeared on multiple tvshows and news articles(more than30), which I think would definitely pass the notability guide. But I’m new to Wikipedia and I tried to paste the links of the tv shows but failed, now I can only paste some news article links that Wikipedia approves and it is very frustrating. I having been trying this for months now, I am struggling, I also can’t paste pictures,it would be great if anyone would go and read or check the article in my sandbox that I have written for me, and it would also be very great if they can help me edit it and let it go through to googles for you page(or whatever it’s called) hahaha. It’s not a lot that I wrote but I’m sure I can improve from everyone’s suggestions. Thankyou Assawongkvin (talk) 11:33, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I have moved the sandbox to Draft:Assawongrat Assarangchai; you should submit it to review to get more input; as it is, I do not think the page is ready for mainspace. Lectonar (talk) 11:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou so much, I will try that out, I don’t even know if I’m gonna do it right haha. But Thankyou so much Assawongkvin (talk) 11:47, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi I tried pasting it again where you told me to. Did I do it right or what should I do. Thankyouuu Assawongkvin (talk) 11:56, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I think I did it, but it’s waiting for someone to read, Thankyouuu so much Assawongkvin (talk) 12:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Take a look at this version from 21 July, Assawongkvin. It has a decline notice (by DoubleGrazing). This says "Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted." In the next edit, you removed the notice. Any comment? -- Hoary (talk) 11:49, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes that’s why it is so frustrating, and I don’t know what to do now, I will try to draft everything up again and hopefully this time it would be a success and pass Assawongkvin (talk) 11:53, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

WP:NMUSICIAN explains what we need to show that a musician is an appropriate subject for a Wikipedia article.

You will see that "appeared on multiple tvshows" is not listed there; the closest is "Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or television network.". This needs to be demonstrated through citations to reliable, independent sources. Your draft's section on his TV appearances is currently uncited. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I wrote that before and pasted all the links but unfortunately Wikipedia doesn’t allow any YouTube links, sad Assawongkvin (talk) 13:01, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Assawongkvin. Wikipedia does allow linking to some Youtube sites, but they need to be official channels of reliable publishers/broadcasters, because most of the material on YouTube is not reliably published, and much of it is copyright violations. See WP:YOUTUBE.

You need to ensure that most of your citations (and all the citations you're relying on to establish notability meet all the criteria in WP:42. ColinFine (talk) 19:03, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

help for sandbox

Latest comment: 9 days ago29 comments8 people in discussion

User:Harold Foppele/sandbox Please see if this page is now correct to publish. If it is, can you please help me to publish it? Thank You ! Harold Foppele (talk) 11:10, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Your page is in Dutch; this is the English-language Wikipedia. Are you sure you wanted to publish it here? Lectonar (talk) 11:15, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

lack reliable secondary sources. 🐍 Thilio🤖 11:20, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Changed it to English.

Thanks for the help.

Is it now ok to publish ?

Greetings,

Harold Harold Foppele (talk) 12:32, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

No, it is not suitable for EN-wiki. Try nl:Hoofdpagina. -- Softlavender (talk) 11:35, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Changed it to EN :) Harold Foppele (talk) 12:33, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Harold Foppele Your draft appears to consist of original research, which is not allowed in Wikipedia. Although you have included some prior references, you do not use inline citations to make it clear what is already-published information and what is your own new material. Only if you can show that all the content is well-established math will the draft become acceptable. I note that the phrase "C-Wave Quantum Computing" generates no hits on Google Scholar Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:39, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

No, this is still not usable for Wikipedia. It's just a personal blog essay. Even the "References" are useless: None of them have links or DOI numbers; the first one does not have a date, and the other two do not have title names or even the full name of the publication. Softlavender (talk) 12:53, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

I changed the title, the content and the references.

The original title could be confusing i guess.

What do you think of it now ?

Greetings,

Harold Foppele Harold Foppele (talk) 13:33, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

No, this is still not usable for Wikipedia. It's just a personal blog essay. Even the "References" are useless: None of them have links or DOI numbers; the first one does not have a date, and the others either do not have title names or the full name of the publication. The ones I found online do not even mention your premise or title. And there are no inline citations. Softlavender (talk) 14:06, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

https://www.bol.com/nl/nl/f/quantum-computation-and-quantum-information/30538576/

I am cnfused, the references are so easy to find.

Do you want them to be hyperlinked ??

Greetings,

Harold Harold Foppele (talk) 14:50, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Read what I wrote, twice already. They need to have viewable links (or, at the very least, DOI numbers). Softlavender (talk) 15:26, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Dear Softlavender.

All references now have veryfiable links.

I hope you are satisfied with this :)

Greetings,

Harold Foppele Harold Foppele (talk) 17:44, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

More importantly, @Harold Foppele, you need Inline citations - you must show us where the information in each paragraph (or sentence) comes from. Have a look at Referencing for beginners for more information. References don't need to be online, but if they are then links are very useful for reviewers and readers. Meadowlark (talk) 15:37, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Harold Foppele (talk) 17:15, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Dear Meadowlark,

I have done that also.

Is it now publish ready ?

Greetings,

Harold Foppele Harold Foppele (talk) 19:41, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Harold Foppele I suggest you clean up the LLM or ChatGPT generated texts before submitting for Draft AFC review. 🐍 Thilio🤖 19:57, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok, done that.

My feeling is that it slowly is driven away from the original concept.

But if you think this is better, i have to live with that :)

Greetings,

Harold Foppele Harold Foppele (talk) 20:30, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Now you have provided properly cited information, I think that most of the content would be much better if added to our article on the Bloch sphere, which you didn't Wikilink. That article is, IMO, far too technical and your more introductory approach might assist readers. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:05, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks.

are you able to publish my article? 185.91.249.37 (talk) 06:08, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I could do it :):):)

Thanks to all the moderators that made it work !

Greetings,

Harold Foppele Harold Foppele (talk) 08:19, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@Harold Foppele Although you found that it was technically possible to move your draft to mainspace, there is no guarantee that it will survive attention from the new pages patrol and it won't be indexed by search engines until that happens. Meanwhile, getting into an edit-war with admin User:331dot over the "essay-like" and "notability" tags he added to the article is not a good idea. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:56, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Mike,

I had no idea that i was involved in an edit war.

My impression was that someone fiddled with my page without asking or telling me.

It would be so nice if they let me know what and why, and that would be fine by me.

I think that would be decent.

Yet now, after you told me that it was properly cited, i am back to square 1 with no clue of what to do next.

Could you help me? If the textblocks on top need to be put in, ok, Otherwise i do not know what to do.

I put a lot of work in research and assembling started it a long time ago and now finaly it looked smooth. Not exactly what i wanted, but thats fine.

Please tell me what to do. if you want that is.

Greetings,

Harold Foppele Harold Foppele (talk) 15:02, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

It's not your page and no one needs to ask permission from you (or anyone) to edit it, These are core tenets of Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:33, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

It's not my page, but it is my research and work.

So it the page is moved with no other explanation: Not fit for publication, and a whole sentence is not cited, while Mike wrote to me it was all ok, i dont know what to do.

Are you willing to help me ? Harold Foppele (talk) 16:32, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

It is not "a whole sentence" that is uncited, but an entire section. Nor was it moved "with no other explanation".

What help do you need? You have had plenty of good advice, already. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:41, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I have edited the page and submitted for review. Harold Foppele (talk) 21:22, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Tried again :)ᛸ Harold Foppele (talk) 10:04, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

For the reasons given above, I have moved the article to Draft:Bloch sphere representation in mode-counting quantum models.

In particular, one section remains completely uncited.

When you feel it is ready for publication, submit the article for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it to "mainspace". If not, they will give you further advice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:39, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

How do I list the paleobiota of a Geologic Formation

Latest comment: 10 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

When I look at the pages of certain geologic formations like the Elliot or Chinle Formation, hey always list the paleobiota whose fossils were found in that specific geologic formation. How do I do that? A.atokensis (talk) 20:03, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Find WP:Reliable sources that contain these data, and create tables based on those data. (Don't just copy and paste tables from the sources – although facts themselves are not subject to copyright, the exact presentation and layout of them in a source probably is).

Or do you need advice on how to create tables in Wikipedia? If so, see Help:Table. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.150.115 (talk) 20:56, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks A.atokensis (talk) 21:12, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

In case of brigading, did we need consensus here?

Latest comment: 10 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

w:Talk:Anti-Palestinianism#Requested_move_16_August_2025_(Anti-Palestinian_racism) Lumbering in thought (talk) 18:50, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Replied in the thread. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 19:46, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I don’t know if my draft will pass notability standards

Latest comment: 10 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, last time I edited from the advice y’all gave me and now it’s waiting for review. This is the fifth time I have edited this, I hope this will be the last time. Thankyou for all your advices, of any of you could check my draft I would be very greatful. If I do not pass the notability standard, I am willing to learn from my mistakes. Assawongkvin (talk) 15:37, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it to "mainspace". If not, they will give you further advice.

There is a backlog; The Teahouse is not here to circumvent that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:50, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok thankyou Assawongkvin (talk) 15:52, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Assawongkvin. You need to attend to your YouTube links. YouTube is not the publisher, it is the medium, and it is crucial to know who the publisher is in order to tell whether this could be a reliable source. (Most material on YouTube is not reliable, and some of it is copyright infringements, and Wikipedia should never link to those. See WP:YouTube ColinFine (talk) 16:43, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyouuu Assawongkvin (talk) 16:49, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello

Latest comment: 9 days ago6 comments4 people in discussion

Its nice to be a part of Wikipedia. Just had few questions: 1. Where to start? 2. what are the rules? 3. My limitations as newcomer 4. What are administrators? Isolatedchimpanzee (talk) 03:02, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, @Isolatedchimpanzee!

1. Help:Getting started provides helpful resources. As a newcomer, you may want to play The Wikipedia Adventure, which can get you acquainted with basic Wikipedia editing knowledge.
2. There are five pillars which summarize the fundamental principles here, but you can view a more comprehensive list of policies and guidelines here.
3. The basic limitations of a new account are restricted article creation, inability to upload files and not being able to move pages. However, you can "unlock" these easily by becoming "autoconfirmed". See Wikipedia:User groups#User groups granted to accounts for more information.
4. In simple terms, administrators (also called "admins" or "sysops") are highly-trusted volunteer editors, who can perform important and restricted maintenance tasks on the wiki, like blocking bad users, deleting bad pages and more, but they're still equally important as all the other contributors.

Lastly, you may want to see WP:NewbieGuide. Feel free to reply if you have any further questions. randomdude121    04:11, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

thanks but from 3rd question I meant internal restrictions rather than technicals. As I see there are lot of freedom and I dont want to be entangled into too much branches to my own pain. Isolatedchimpanzee (talk) 04:41, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@Isolatedchimpanzee Until you are more familiar with Wikipedia, it is probably sensible not to make edits like this one where you removed an interlanguage link. These are intended to help readers by showing that there is an article about something in another language (in this case German) which is missing currently in English. I have reverted that edit. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:34, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@Isolatedchimpanzee that's the neat part. Unless there is a technical reason to prevent you from doing something, you're free to be bold and make any changes you feel would improve Wikipedia! After all, Wikipedia's intent is to be the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 15:23, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. Isolatedchimpanzee (talk) 01:43, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

How to create a post

Latest comment: 12 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I need help with creating a post for a new technology that is out. What would i need and how do i do this without being flagged? 68.105.255.102 (talk) 21:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.

First, your use of "post" sounds as if, like many people, you are mistaking Wikipedia for a social media site, where people post things they want the world to know about. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which contains articles which summarise what reliable independent sources say about a subject.

This means that unless people wholly unconected with this technology have already published about it in reliable publications (not blogs or social media) then there is no chance of an article being accepted at present - the Wikipedia jargon for this is that the subject is not yet notable. ("New" or "Up and coming" things almost always have this problem - see WP:TOOSOON).

If there are several sources which meet all the criteria in WP:42, then an article is possible, and you may well meet another hurdle: what is your connection with the technology in question? If you have any connection with it, you have at least a conflict of interest, and possibly you are what Wikipedia counts as a paid editor. If either of these hold, then you are not forbidden from creating an article about it, but there are certain things you need to to (see the links above).

Whether or not you have a COI, if you are to write an article, you should summarise what those independent sources say, and very little else. Almost nothing that you know about the subject is relevant, unless it happens to be covered in one of those sources.

More generally My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. And that is even if you don't have a COI. ColinFine (talk) 22:17, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hyiostik?

Latest comment: 9 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Description about Helf in feartime or Fearfeeling.

2A00:6020:4E32:7D00:F97D:8D55:75B1:8D1D (talk) 08:16, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:29, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Changing a name

Latest comment: 13 days ago8 comments7 people in discussion

Hi! I work for CBR (formerly Comic Book Resources) I am trying to change the wikipedia name. How do I do that.

Thank you! Valnetmp (talk) 18:34, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

• Hi Valnetmp, two things. First, look at WP:COI, and follow the guidelines on how to declare your conflict of interest--a box on your user page is the simplest way to do it. Second, place an edit request on Talk:Comic Book Resources, and if it's well-verified it should be an easy one for editors to handle. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 19:09, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
  • Valnetmp, I see that the name is already handled in the lead, and an entry is on CBR, the disambiguation page. A name change requires a move, and it would have to be to something like "CBR (comic books site)" or something unwieldy like that. Drmies (talk) 19:15, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

    Changing the article's name has been discussed a few times; two times it was suggested the move be to "CBR (website)". The last three move discussions resulted in "no consensus" so the status quo remains (2019, 2023, and 2024). Sariel Xilo (talk) 19:24, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello! First of all thank you for wanting to contribute to Wikipedia. The only way you can rename a wikipedia page, is if you move it. Though that requires appropiate permissions, and also in your case because you are affiliated with the company, it causes an Conflict of interest (C.O.I), which is then generally recommended to not act upon yourself and on general edits ask onether editor about your proposing modifications, or in your case make a page move request. See: Wikipedia:Requested moves, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Edit requests. Mant08 (talk) 19:10, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Valnetmp, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The first thing I will say is that if you work for CBR, and you intend to edit articles relating to CBR, Wikipedia regards you as a paid editor (even if you're not paid specifically to edit Wikipedia), and you must make a formal declaration of this, preferably on your user page User:Valnetmp (which is red because you haven't created it yet. There is no obligation to have one, but that's the best place to declare your status).

Then, you should not directly make edits to the article Comic Book Resources, but instead should make edit requests on its talk page.

In this case, what you are wanting is called a move - you cannot do this yourself yet anyway, because your account is too new. But again, you should not even if you technically could.

It will not be possible to move it to CBR, because that already exists as a disambiguation page. It should probably be somethihg like CBR (website).

If you think the move is uncontroversial, you can request it at Requested moves. But if you think anybody is likely to disagree, it would be best to propose it at Talk:Comic Book Resources and get agreement. ColinFine (talk) 19:13, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

There has been no consensus in favor of prior requested moves at the talk discussion, and I do not see that changing with another discussion from an involved party on the company's behalf. Per WP:NAMECHANGES, Wikipedia articles are never retitled just because the subject wants us to call it something else. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 19:36, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

A quick look at Talk:Comic Book Resources shows that the move you're talking about has been requested multiple times previously. Each time the requested move was not done due to lack of editor consensus. I very much doubt you'll have much success with getting the article moved without some sort of new significant justification. 161.11.160.60 (talk) 19:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

December 30th: Addition?

Latest comment: 12 days ago12 comments6 people in discussion

Though it is mentioned in another article on said date, the Hurricane Creek Mine Disaster which happened in Leslie County isn’t included in the article. I sure do hope it isn’t because of notability reasons. I mean, it can’t be said guideline, it has its own article. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 01:46, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

If you are referring to the December 30 article, I see no reason why you shouldn't add Hurricane Creek mine disaster. Please also read WP:DAYS. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:01, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

OP has not responded, so I have added it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:45, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I was reverted by User:Kiwipete. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:00, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

As @Shantavira has mentioned, please read WP:DAYS, and also as I mentioned in my edit summary, WP:DOYCITE. Thanks, Kiwipete (talk) 19:48, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

DAYS is a WikiProject style guide, not a policy ("An advice page has the status of an essay and is not a formal Wikipedia policy or guideline, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community.", as it clearly says), and DOYCITE is a guideline and again not a policy, from which you removed the text "...editors reviewing unsourced entries are encouraged to check for a suitable source themselves before tagging or removing the entry." Perhaps you can tell us why you did not do that, and why you think it is acceptable to revert edits such as mine, instead of building on them—which is I understand, how Wikipedia is supposed to work. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:11, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

You should also take note of the Page Notice displayed whenever you edit a DOY article, specifically "Citations required: Each addition to this page must include a direct citation from a reliable source. Simply providing a wikilink is insufficient; entries without direct sources will be removed.". This is also the reason for removing that text from WP:DOYCITE. I would suggest that if you have further questions, you raise them at the project's talk page. Kiwipete (talk) 21:52, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

You keep asking me to read different pages/ texts which say the same thing, but which have an equal lack of weight, and none of which refer to a policy or a community consensus.

I note that, leaving my addition aside, 25 of the 30 entries in the relevant section have no adjacent sources (they are of course sourced on the linked pages, as was mine), and yet you have not removed them.

You have still not explained why you destructively removed my addition, rather than collaboratively building upon it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:26, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Just people trying to shove notability up your butt. Don’t listen to Kiwipete. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 19:38, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

HI! I am new here Arseo.0111 (talk) 05:48, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

ههههه 105.37.95.104 (talk) 17:19, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

What the flip? 199.192.122.199 (talk) 17:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The Shepherd of the Hills 1941

Latest comment: 12 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Substantially revising an article on The Shepherd of the Hills 1941

  Courtesy link: The Shepherd of the Hills (1941 film)

I have never edited a page before. I just watched the last portion of a 1941 movie named The Shepherd of the Hills, starring John Wayne and Harry Carey. After watching, I checked the Wikipedia article, which was totally wrong. It might have been describing the book but the article indicates it is about the 1941. Moreover, it has a section on how the movie differs from the book. I am hesitant to attempt to correct the text for three reasons: (1) I have never written on Wikipdia before; (2) the changes would be massive (what is written currently might be describing the book accurately; and (3) I did not see the first 5-10 minutes of the movie. LingPo1975 (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

You can fix it by adding reliable, secondary, and independent sources if they can be found. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 01:56, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi LingPo1975, for a plot summary specifically it's OK not to go based off of a secondary source. If you just saw the movie, you're currently en expert on what was in it -- if it was different from the explanation in the article, please do update the article! It looks like the summary at The Shepherd of the Hills (1941 film) is written pretty badly, so it would also be wonderful if you re-wrote it to be more concise and use paragraph breaks to structure things more readably. (Personally, I wouldn't be sad to see the whole thing deleted and replaced...) As for missing the beginning of the movie -- you can leave the beginning of the summary as-is, and pick up with what you know for sure. It'll still be on average more accurate than it was before. If you have any specific problems as you work, feel free to ask for more advice. Happy editing! ~ L 🌸 (talk) 05:57, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I agree with others that you should go ahead. While it does need a major rewrite, I suggest you make a number of smaller steps. Start by splitting the existing section into paragraphs, then rewrite each of those paragraphs, one at a time. Save the page after each.

That will make it easier for other people to see what you are doing, and you can review your work as you go. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:29, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

disambiguation showed up significan conflation on term "GPGPU"

Latest comment: 12 days ago3 comments1 person in discussion

hi there is huge conflation on the word "GPGPU" - i just found a mistake on Nintendo switch where it is used to describe the wrong type of hardware (wrong technical term for an internal part of a GPU). this is a massive task, far too big for one person. how does one go about alerting editors with a view to collaboratively fixing this? (the computing task force is semi-retired/ended, otherwise i would go there) Lkcl (talk) 13:30, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

tia. Lkcl (talk) 13:30, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:General-purpose_computing_on_graphics_processing_units_(hardware)#c-Lkcl-20250814130400-Lkcl-20250814051200 Lkcl (talk) 13:32, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Talk pages

Latest comment: 8 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

How to create talk pages for projects and articles? Userbasicallynot (talk) 14:20, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Visit the project page or article and you should see a "talk" tab near the top of the page. Select that, then "create" or "start discussion".

If you need to do something else, please be more specific. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:48, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing Thanks, on that!!! Userbasicallynot (talk) 03:47, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

My Wikipedia page

Latest comment: 8 days ago6 comments5 people in discussion

Need help in taking my wikipedia page approved and live on the internet

WikiCinemaEditor (talk) 16:41, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@WikiCinemaEditor: I see no edits on your account other than your user talk page and this Teahouse post. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:47, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Their draft large language model edited Draft:Screendollars was deleted. Theroadislong (talk) 16:52, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

And I was today years old when I learned we actually have a speedy criterion for AI slop. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:56, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano It’s quite new, the discussion to introduce it was less than a month ago. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 18:29, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

• WikiCinemaEditor It wasn't "your" page, it was what the AI wrote for you. It didn't do a good job, either. 331dot (talk) 17:12, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Page approval help

Latest comment: 11 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Hi there - I have adjusted my page to be less commercial in tone and added many references. Any other suggestions on how to get it approved? Draft:Numerator

NUWP2025 (talk) 23:42, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

@NUWP2025 Submitting it for review is one of the steps to take when you are satisfied that you have dealt with the three prior declines. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 23:52, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh, and, NUWP2025, get rid of the PR announcements and churnalism you are using for references. The add no value to any notability the topic may have. It is still an advert. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 23:54, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

NUWP2025, please answer 331dot's question. -- Hoary (talk) 01:52, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

NUWP2025, why are you keen to get your draft approved? It does not give a good impression of the company. The first paragraph says that it spies on consumers' purchase data. The second says that it has an app which people install on their mobiles. (The rest is about the company's acquisition history.) Most people reading it will be wary of installing that app. Maproom (talk) 06:53, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Self promotion question/advise?

Latest comment: 11 days ago8 comments4 people in discussion

Hello wiki community. I only have about 40 edits under my belt and have begun making pages specifically around outer space exploration. I created a page for an organization I read about that has sent two people to space. I found this incredibly noteworth so created a wikipage for it. A few days later it was speedydeleted for self promotion. I am not affiliated with the organization so was wondering if y'all had any tips for a newbie on how to make things as non-promotional as possible. I felt it was super neutral so am surprised it got deleted for self promotion. It almosts seems like any wikipedia article for a living person or organization could be interpreted as self promotion. Any insight welcome, I'll use your feedback to test with another page I'm working on in my sandbox. Cheers! Space.tracker.nerd (talk) 22:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

For example, things like "ground-breaking technology" or "high quality products" don't work. This is an encyclopedia, not essay work. See Wikipedia:Yes, it is promotion. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 22:38, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Roger that. Thank you! Space.tracker.nerd (talk) 13:33, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Space.tracker.nerd I appreciate that you understood my comment. Thank you too :D ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 13:57, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Sections like "Mission and Vision" are almost always promotional, since they consist of what the organization wants to say about itself, rather than what independent sources say about it. Also, crypto-focused news outlets such as CoinTelegraph are generally not considered reliable independent sources for crypto-related topics. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 23:18, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Understood. Thank you for the insight. Space.tracker.nerd (talk) 13:33, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Surrounded by a morass of web pages about the "incredibly noteworthy", Space.tracker.nerd, Wikipedia dispassionately describes the credibly noteworthy. -- Hoary (talk) 23:25, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

For example there are other organizations that have passed the wiki "noteworthy" standard such as Space for Humanity. What others are showing me here is that the web resources that provide details on the organization are not the best but I think it would be a poor article if I only mentioned their achievement of sending two people to space. Thank you for the insight, I'll keep tabs on this organization and see if there are better resoures on them into the future but will move on for now. Space.tracker.nerd (talk) 13:38, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

cool designs

Latest comment: 11 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I've seen people when they reply to other people's comments they have special design on username and talk. How do I make that? Breck0530 (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

See WP:Signatures. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:23, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

If you go to your preferences, you can edit your signature in a text box. Also, you can choose for it to be treated as wikitext or not, allowing you to do some pretty cool stuff. Hope this helps, CoroneC0rnix-64 (talk).

Draft not published

Latest comment: 11 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

I am a new edittor.I made a draft and submitted.But that was not worthy to publish.

Can you please help to create a publishable biography? Dsanjustin (talk) 16:38, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

We will not look for sources for you. How do we know anything said about this subject is accurate? How do YOU know anything you wrote about the subject is accurate? Frankly, the page looks like you're promoting a politician, not writing an article. BusterD (talk) 16:43, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok .I got u. But I want to create a draft in neutral way.To do this i need help that where can i edit or which subject can be added or remove? Dsanjustin (talk) 16:57, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Take a look at WP:Your first article, and the pages it links to. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:22, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Dsanjustin. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 18:28, 15 August 2025 (UTC)