Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1263

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 1260

Archive 1261

Archive 1262

Archive 1263

Finding Source for articles

Latest comment: 12 days ago13 comments5 people in discussion

I'm trying to find sources for my articles so they don't get deleted. However, I can't seem to find any sources. What should I do? Breck0530 (talk) 18:24, 14 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.

However, lack of sources is often an indicator that a topic does not meet our requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:31, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Greetings, and welcome to the Teahouse. Sources do not need to be online, as long as they can be appropiately cited. But any article needs to be cited to reliable sources--without these, there is literally nothing upon which a proper encyclopedia article can be based, so if the sources cannot be found, then the subject may simply not be notable enough (in Wikipedia's particular sense of the term) to merit an article here at this time. Hope this helps. Feel free to ask further questions. Thanks, and happy editing! --Finngall ^talk 18:47, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

You're going about it WP:BACKWARD. You find your sources first, before you write a single word of your article. If you cannot find adequate sources, then don't start writing the article. It's that simple. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:52, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I don't have enough sources because I only found 1 or 2 sources about the article and also I've looked at books and none of them talk about the topics I'm writing about. Breck0530 (talk) 20:05, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Maybe you can return to this in the future? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:09, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

As I said, if you can't find sources, don't bother writing the article. If you write the article first and try to find sources later, you're wasting your time. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I can't find sources so I want to delete the articles that were cited with not enough sources, do I just wait or do I tell them that they can remove it. Breck0530 (talk) 16:36, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

You can tag them with {{db-author}}, or just leave them and they will be deleted six months after the last edit. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:56, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

ok thanks I will wait Breck0530 (talk) 16:58, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Breck0530, I took a quick look at your list of contributions and more or less randomly clicked on "1975 Small Club World Cup". This cites one source. I am ignorant of Venezuela (my excuse: it's very distant from where I happen to live), and I have no interest in watching people running around after balls, so it's not surprising that I have no immediate suggestions. But I imagine that the Argentine, East German, Portuguese, Spanish and Venezuelan (and Paraguayan?) press of the time would have said something. Now, if it's even possible to look through newspapers (whether digitized somehow, or on microfilm or microfiche, or on actual, crumbling paper), this is exhausting work; but presumably there were sports/soccer magazines in 1975 and it's likely that some reference library stocks these. You might ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. Your interest in Californian highways suggests to me that you may be in California; if you are, it's unlikely that you'd be able to visit a large library in Argentina, Germany, Portugal, Spain, Venezuela, or Paraguay. Wherever you are, and whatever the languages are that you can and can't read, be sure to word your question in a way that minimizes the risk that respondents would spend a lot of time typing kinds of advice that you couldn't possibly use. -- Hoary (talk) 22:22, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Can I turn the articles into redirects? Breck0530 (talk) 18:23, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes. You might also be able to put some of the material from them so long as it is cited into the target articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:33, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

How to delete a draft

Latest comment: 9 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I had created a draft but now wants to delete it. Abdullah1099 (talk) 15:42, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Abdullah1099, welcome to the Teahouse. I guess it's about Draft:Cygnus NG-23. You are the only contributor so you can place {{db-g7}} on it. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:00, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Abdullah1099 - I have deleted it. Blanking the page like you did is a signal that it should be deleted. However, because it's a draft, simply waiting six months would result in it automatically being deleted.

If you need the draft undeleted in the future, you can request this at WP:REFUND. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:21, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much bro Abdullah1099 (talk) 17:19, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Still Not Notable?

Latest comment: 9 days ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Hi Teahouse, after ten days of researching and writing Draft:Susan Chana Lask upon discovering a red Link for the subject at Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders , a US Supreme Court civil rights case the subject argued, and finding other notable cases such as the subject's Ambien case that prompted the FDA to change warnings, it was clear to me she is notable (i.e. NPR, NY times, News week articles about her and her cases). Im reading Wiki's guidelines and I even read other female attorney Wiki pages and made this one conform--even more I made it so neutral I removed high-profile despite media confirming the subject's cases are. I thought if I did the legwork then someone would take the article over for review, revision and submission---am I wrong about that? MidtownScribe (talk) 20:17, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

You would need to go through it and remove the fake reference links. Only use ones that you have personally confirmed go to an actual article that mentions the subject. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 20:32, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I personally read each link and confirmed them twice--there are no fake links, that's impossible.

Did you find fake links? MidtownScribe (talk) 20:43, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

60. Asian Woman Sues CVS - 404s

57. Billy Sammeth Dead - Is about an entirely different person

63. Appears to be a link to an 'about the professor' blurb, probably a primary source.

I stopped checking at that point, since none of the three I checked were good.

As another editor said on the article page: Comment: There are multiple references in this draft which are dead on arrival. This indicates that the draft was written by a large language model. Please remove such references and find reliable sources to support the material currently supported by dead sources. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 20:54, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Im so sorry, I just went through the 1st 8 links and found two 404 error--it was my mistake as I probably made typos--so sorry--im reviewing every single link now and thank you for the heads up! MidtownScribe (talk) 20:48, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @MidtownScribe. Somebody will review the draft when you resubmit it, but asking for people to collaborate on a draft is not usually very productive. It could be - but only if something about the draft or the subject or your appeal grabs somebody's interest.

Normally, if you want an article to exist, it is mostly up to you to create it - and, in particular, to do the legwork (as you aptly call it) of finding the sources, verifying that they each meet all the criteria in WP:42, and that the text accurately and neutrally summarises what those sources say.

Note that reading other articles is not necessarily helpful. If the articles you look at are featured articles or good articles, they are probably helpful as models, but otherwise there is no guarantee that they meet Wikipedia's current standards (unfortunately, not many editors seem to want to spend much time going back and improving or deleting thousands and thousands of substandard articles) See other stuff exists. ColinFine (talk) 20:43, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, and I was wondering how the other articles got away with stating some of the things they did, but I did not repeat that as I remained neutral. I though it was very interesting that the subject was the whistleblower for Ambien and got FDA warnings as a result and the Florence case to the Supreme Court where she's red listed on wiki, but I'll try again considering your input. Than you. MidtownScribe (talk) 20:51, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Wana have some opinions

Latest comment: 9 days ago4 comments3 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 have been considering submitting a deletion request for the article Effects of pornography on young people, as the current state of the article is more than miserable. According to my review, pretty much everything, including the article name, is not in compliance with any of the policies or guidelines; much of it is fabricated (only 2 claims were complaint at the time of writing). While keeping, it cuz, it's somewhat relevant according to WP:GNG, is understandable, at the same time it hurts Wikipedians reputation more than it helps any reader. And cutting it down would lead to an article with an inadequate scope and some random claims, without any context. When you would summarise that, you would mainly end up at an article with the name Effects of pornography on young people with the sentence, causality could not be shown.

Do you think a deletion request makes sense here, and that it will be successful, since the quality is worse than a stub and more resembles a hoax essay, which it largely is? The Other Karma (talk) 18:22, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I think it the topic is notable, but I also think this article should be completely rewritten to have only the information that was found in the review to be actually verifiable and in compliance with WP:MEDRS. That might drop the length to only a few paragraphs, but it would also remove the obvious improper synthesis/original research. (Credit to you and all the others on the review, excellent work!) rtrb (talk) 19:08, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Your proposal yesterday to rename the article was roundly rejected; so your response is to suggest it be deleted?

There is also relevant prior discussion here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:15, 18 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.

Deleting a page because the business no longer exists

Latest comment: 10 days ago7 comments6 people in discussion

Hi there,

I've come across a page about a business and that business no longer exists - is that page entry worth keeping anymore?

What's the view on that, eg a business that stopped trading over 5 years ago? Is that a legitimate reason to delete the page?

Thanks! Ukdatageek (talk) 11:10, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Once an article exists, and the subject has passed/passes Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), I do not see why we should delete the article. Wikipedia isn't a business directory. And we do not delete articles about people because they have died, either. Lectonar (talk) 11:38, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ukdatageek I hope that you will agree that articles about defunct businesses such as ICI are of interest and worth keeping. You don't name the article which triggered your question but encyclopedias should cover both current and historically-significant topics. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:04, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Lectonar@Michael D. Turnbull My thanks to you both, all noted and understood. Ukdatageek (talk) 12:09, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

You can perhaps improve the article by rewriting it in the past tense and by checking that the business' demise (or takeover) is mentioned and properly cited.

Is it Pricesearcher? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:59, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Ukdatageek; have a read through WP:NOTTEMPORARY. If the company was notable during its existence, that notability is not temporary. So sure, we can keep it. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:47, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

The way I typically answer this question is "historical facts don't disappear just because time has passed", although this answer I usually give to people who want negative information about themselves or their company removed because it was long ago. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:53, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Qualification of reference sources

Latest comment: 9 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

I just got started as a Wikipedia editor and I'm having trouble distinguishing whether or not a reference is reliable and qualified. An article that I have been working on keeps getting declined because of this. I have looked up Wikipedia:Notability thoroughly, but the definitions are somewhat vague and some even conflict with several references in actual articles. So it would be really nice if anyone could give me a more detailed review of the article or just point out the exact reference that's unqualified in my article. That would help me a lot on improving my editing. Thanks!

The article that I'm working on: Draft:Unilumin. Yeehai9527 (talk) 09:45, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeehai9527, Draft:Unilumin has not been declined because of the unreliability of the supplied references. Instead, it has been declined because of the insufficiency of supplied references that are all four of (i) "in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)", (ii) "reliable", (iii) "secondary", and (iv) "strictly independent of the subject". There's a possibility that this means lack of reliability alone; but I immediately notice that Its product portfolio covers indoor and outdoor LED displays, transparent and creative form-factor screens, cinema LED systems, sports and event display solutions, and smart lighting such as multifunctional smart poles is referenced to prnewswire.com, which, it seems, will happily put out whatever it's paid to put out. (I'm also struck by the lack in this draft of any comment -- from reliable and independent sources, of course -- about the company.) -- Hoary (talk) 10:05, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for replying! Can you elaborate more on "comment" that you mentioned though? Is it a necessary part for a article on organizations and companies? What kind of content exactly is considered "comment"? It would be better if you can provide me with one or two example, because I have read through several existing simular articles but there doesn't seem to be anything that look like comment? Yeehai9527 (talk) 09:50, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Yeehai9527 Maybe "commentary" would be a better word. The point is that Wikipedia articles about companies don't just have to show the company exists but that it has attracted attention from reliable sources (newspapers, industry commentators, academics etc) independent of the company itself who have covered some aspect of it in depth. This is what we mean by saying that the article has to demonstrate that the company is notable. This is summarised by our golden rule about decent sources. When you have found three or so such sources, base your draft just on what they say: adding what the company itself would say on their own website is much less important. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:45, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply! That really makes a lot of things much clearer to me. :-) Yeehai9527 (talk) 08:02, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia help

Latest comment: 11 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

How to get help to use this site and, also, get to Ancestry.com 2601:1C2:C004:69B0:8143:30B2:625E:832A (talk) 23:12, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @2601:1C2:C004:69B0:8143:30B2:625E:832A! A good way to get started on Wikipedia is by creating an account and going through The Wikipedia Adventure, which will show you how to edit Wikipedia. If you have more questions, put {{help me}} in the talk page, and an experienced editor will give you a hand. Also, when you create an account, you are assigned a mentor who can lend you a hand.

As for the Ancestry.com question, Wikipedia is in no way affiliated with Ancestry, so we can't be of any help there.

Happy editing!

-Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 23:48, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Commandant Quacks-a-lot Although Wikipedia is not affiliated with Ancestry,com, editors here who are members of the Wikipedia library can obtain free access to it and related sites like newspapaers.com, as well as many other resources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:48, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Create a article on a site critic literary

Latest comment: 11 days ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hello I would like to create a arcticle was a site critics literrary, i can create? Quirbajou (talk) 09:17, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm French but I Don't can Speak good English but I'm So Excited for asnwers! Quirbajou (talk) 09:22, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I am so Excited yes yes yes! Quirbajou (talk) 09:24, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

If you don't speak good English you are likely to have difficulty writing for this site. Perhaps you can write an article in French; on the French Wikipedia (see fr:Wikipédia:Forum des nouveaux) and maybe then someone will translate it into English. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:57, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I have already prepared my article . This site is Makibook. Quirbajou (talk) 15:27, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Then post it at Draft:Makibook so we can see it and give you better advice. Don't forget to include sources. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:38, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Citation format

Latest comment: 8 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

So it happens that in this article that I'm currently working on, there are sentences that go like "<fact 1>, <fact 2>." with each fact supported by its own citation. Is it OK for me to just put all the citations at the end of the sentence or move each citation to the place right after the chunk whose information it supports?

Btw, side question: do FA criteria cover this citation style thing? I'm not going to nominate the article soon but just ask in advance. Strongman13072007 (talk) 04:07, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@Strongman13072007, Yap, I think so it’s okay to put all the citations at the end of the sentence if they support the whole thing but if each source backs a different fact better to place them right after the specific chunk and FA criteria do not require one style over the other just that it’s clear consistent and verifiable. 🐍 Thilio🤖 04:22, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for clarification, going to fix that soon. Strongman13072007 (talk) 04:25, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Creating a draft for review

Latest comment: 11 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I created a draft in my sandbox but only have the option to PUBLISH (no option to submit for review). Do I just publish or am I missing something? 64.98.199.224 (talk) 17:03, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi IP editor. You have logged out, so we cannot see any other contributions so I have no idea what sandbox you are referring to. On Wikipedia, "Publish page" is akin to "Save" on a word processor. If you want to then submit for review, add the code {{AfC submission}} to the top. qcne (talk) 17:22, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Or {{subst:submit}}, because it appears that {{AfC submission}} doesn't timestamp the submission. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 20:25, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I tested it; see Special:Permalink/1306260050. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 20:27, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

ISO 3166-1

Latest comment: 8 days ago5 comments5 people in discussion

I am editing Martin Van Buren. When I press the Preview button, the preview starts with warnings including this:

Script warning: AMERICA ("America") is not a recognized country in ISO 3166-1 (Module:ISO 3166).

How can I fix this? Note that it is not caused by the edit I am making; I got the same warning when I asked for a preview before I had even made my edit.

Can I ask another question about warnings in the preview? After the ISO 3166 warning, I see sevn warnings like this:

Script warning: One or more {{cite book}} templates have errors; messages may be hidden (help).

But I don't see anything wrong with all the cite books in this article. Is there a way to get more diagnostic information? Bruce leverett (talk) 03:32, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

The iso code for the USA is “US” rather than “AMERICA” (see ISO 3166-2:US). I found this by looking at the USA article, as all countries (should) have their iso code in the infobox. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 03:42, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

But where in the wikitext does "AMERICA" appear? I suspect it might be a template calling another template or module so it's hard to debug from that page. @Bruce leverett, Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) might have template experts who can identify the issue. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 03:54, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Maybe in a template at the top of the article? We have one Template:Use American English, which is on over 300,000 pages. In the United States article, it appears in the first line because the full name of the country is "United States of America", of course. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:07, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

A process of elimination (removing content one part at a time, then previewing) shows that the ISO error is triggered by the presence of the string "British America" as part of the value for |birth_place= in {{Infobox officeholder}}.

(Removing just that line causes a "Script warning: No parameter for the country given (Module:ISO 3166)." error instead.)

I have now reported this on the template's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:41, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

How to not get flagged as 'unambiguous promotion'

Latest comment: 11 days ago5 comments5 people in discussion

Hi, I picked a company to try to write an article on (easyJet holidays), I made an effort to be matter of fact and for it to read like an encyclopaedia entry rather than promotional material, every statement was supported by references such as Reuters, Financial Times, The Times, The Standard, Marketing Week etc. However, it was rejected and deleted.

My hope is I did simply fail in my sincere attempt to write matter-of-factly, and that someone can provide guidance and examples of company bio pages done well. Or even better show where I went wrong, although may not be possible now the article is deleted.

However, I suspect that the subject matter is the problem, and that a new company bio will have a very high chance of being deleted however it's written. Is it possible that reviewers are being overly cynical of articles concerning commercial entities?

I'm new and clueless so happy to be put straight, I just ask that you do your best to explain. Thanks. Jlbedits (talk) 14:02, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

If this is your company article [1], it does not merit its own article, it merely warrants a sentence or two in the easyJet article. Plus there need to be WP:INLINE citations (with <ref></ref> tags) and the citations should be clickable/viewable. My recommendation would be to abandon this effort and focus on improving Wikipedia in other ways, which will give you experience in how Wikipedia works and why. Try out WP:TWA (which is fun!) and the newcomer edits suggested on your userpage for starters. Softlavender (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

I can't see the drafts you wrote, because they have been deleted, but I can see the version in your sandbox. Two things stand out:

• It has no sources; you must cite reliable, independent sources, showing us what neutral third parties say about the company. WP:NCORP has guidance; and WP:Referencing for beginners tells you how to make citations.
• It reads like it was copied from their website. That might be me getting the wrong impression, but you must write in your own words.

If you work for easyJet or have some other connection to them, you must abide by WP:PAID and WP:COI.

I suggest you start by making some small edits to the existing article on easyJet, with citations, to get a feel for how things work. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:17, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

To be blunt, when we see sentences like It emphasized flexibility, technology-forward booking, and categorised accommodation (e.g., Luxury, Adult, Family, Boutique, Undiscovered), with features like integrated mapping and itineraries powered by a partnership with Google., there should be a great deal of cynicism. The draft reads a lot like what EasyJet would like to release in a marketing pamphlet, not what an NPOV encyclopedia would say about something.

I agree with Softlavender that notability hasn't been established separately enough for this to be a standalone article. And as is, the sourcing is a mess anyway. When there is a fact in an article, we cite it directly to the independent, reliable source that provided this information. That may be in the form of an exact web page or information to get us to the right page in the exact book, magazine, research paper, or newspaper to find that information. Just typing "Financial Times" or "Reuters" in a pile at the end of an article isn't helpful. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 14:53, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Jlbedits How did you select this company to edit about? People rarely edit about a topic at random. 331dot (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

What constitutes an "article with a short description"?

Latest comment: 8 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

A question with reference to "hidden categories" attached to articles. What constitutes an "article with a short description", specifically as related to a biographical article?

Is this referring to the description in the lead/intro? If so, what word length is "short"? Or, does it refer to the whole article? Again, if so, what word length? Thanks.Joel Russ (talk) 19:20, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

The short description is the little blurb that shows under the title of an article. Articles with titles that make it obvious what it's about to the reader won't have one. They are made with the {{Short description}} template and a guide can be found at Wikipedia:Short description. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 20:02, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you.Joel Russ (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Joel Russ. Category:Articles with short description says: "This category is for articles with short descriptions defined on Wikipedia by {{short description}} (either within the page itself or via another template)." PrimeHunter (talk) 20:04, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you.Joel Russ (talk) 20:47, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

I really do need help with this.

Latest comment: 7 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

(Hello, I have a draft article about Oluwadamilare Timilehin Nathaniel (also known as King Teemhy), a Nigerian entertainment executive and smart housing entrepreneur. Because I have a conflict of interest, I cannot post it myself. Would a neutral editor be willing to review and possibly submit it through Articles for Creation? The draft is ready and properly referenced with independent sources (Pulse, Vanguard, Guardian, Legit.ng, etc.). I can provide a Google Doc or .docx file. Thank you!)

Hello, I have a draft article about Oluwadamilare Timilehin Nathaniel (also known as King Teemhy), a Nigerian entertainment executive and smart housing entrepreneur. Because I have a conflict of interest, I cannot post it myself. Would a neutral editor be willing to review and possibly submit it through Articles for Creation?

The draft is ready and properly referenced with independent sources (Pulse, Vanguard, Guardian, Legit.ng, etc.). I can provide a Google Doc or .docx file. Thank you! Ava Nexus (talk) 21:43, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Ava Nexus! You can find instructions for how to request an article at Wikipedia:Requested articles. You will be able to include a list of sources. S1mply.dogmom (talk) 21:58, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Ava Nexus, the title of this thread was immensely long and duplicated the text that followed it. I have therefore pruned it. You are free to create Draft:Oluwadamilare Timilehin Nathaniel and to submit it for consideration as an article. Be sure to announce your CoI: the best place for this is your user page, User:Ava Nexus. If you have enabled Wikipedia email, it's very likely that people will email you offering to create an article, for a fee. These people will be incompetent, dishonest, or both. Ignore such email. -- Hoary (talk) 06:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Copying signatures?

Latest comment: 7 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

I am new to Wikipedia (joined June, >1000 edits) and when I became extended confirmed a week ago, I decided it was time for a makeover. I started a signature but mainly got inspired by another editors one. Am I allowed to do that? HQIQ (talk) 09:33, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@HQIQ Welcome to Teahouse!

Yes, you can create your own signature. What you cannot do is copy someone else’s exact text (signature) or username. 🐍 Thilio🤖 09:56, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

You can copy someone's signature if you change the username obviously and credit them somewhere to meet CC-BY-SA 4.0 attribution requirements (user/talk page) —Matrix _{ping me}^{when u reply} (t? - c) 11:27, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

(providing the signature is above the threshold of originality, which it might not be in which case you don't have to credit them) —Matrix _{ping me}^{when u reply} (t? - c) 11:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@Matrix and @Thilio thanks a lot for helping!!!! HQIQ (talk) 06:51, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

POV category edits

Latest comment: 9 days ago10 comments4 people in discussion

User seems to be making hundreds of POV category edits

User:Suite1408 seems to have, over the course of the past year or so, gone through pages of Catholic people and deleted the Catholic categories ("American Roman Catholic", "African-American Catholic", etc) from their page if he deemed them not to have been "practicing" Catholics (per his edit summaries). It seems to have involved many, many pages, and he may have been trailing some of my edits to find pages to delete categories from. In virtually all cases, the sources and content on the pages indicate the person was a Catholic, and of course the categories have nothing to do with whether they were practicing (churchgoing?) or not. I have reverted many of his edits, and some editors have taken care of others, but this seems like a systemic matter that should be addressed. Am I handling this correctly? natemup (talk) 06:42, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@Natemup: I examined three category removals [2][3][4] and they all appear in accordance with Wikipedia:Categorizing articles about people#Religion. We don't call somebody Catholic just because a source says they were raised as Catholics or went to a Catholic school. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:32, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

How do you figure with Duplessis? He is literally identified in a source as a practicing Catholic, referring to a recorded quote. And in other cases, why should we assume someone who was raised Catholic is no longer Catholic? (I don't know what your Catholic school reference is to.) natemup (talk) 15:46, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@Natemup: The article should say they are Catholic with an inline reference in that place. There was no mention of being Catholic when Suite1408 removed Catholic categories from Royce Duplessis.[5] See also Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Categories, lists, and navigation templates which says: "Categories regarding religious beliefs (or lack of such) or sexual orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief (or lack of such) or orientation in question, and the subject's beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources." My first example [6] said "Bottum was raised Roman Catholic. As a child, he studied classical piano. Bottum attended Loyola High School, a Jesuit Catholic school in Los Angeles". We should not make any assumption from that, neither that he is or isn't Catholic. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:30, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

And if the subject said they were raised Catholic, how does that not qualify as public self-identification?

(As for Duplessis, the article formerly had information about his religion, but this was later deleted. The category remained.) natemup (talk) 16:08, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

@Natemup: Lots of people were raised in a religion they don't follow as adults, or they keep their own beliefs private. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:05, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Right, but without evidence of *that*, why wouldn't we categorize them based upon the religion they have actually identified themselves with? natemup (talk) 04:18, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I saw that you undid a lot of Suite1408s edits calling them vandalism, where they removed the category from articles that nowhere state the subject is/was catholic. Calling that vandalism seems a pretty intense accusation? -- NotCharizard ^🗨 10:40, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

It was late and I may have fudged some, but I made the reversions because he was clearly following a pattern that ignored whether the person is Catholic (raised Catholic, is Catholic, buried Catholic, etc.) and simply made the category about whether one is practicing. That seems like his personal interpretation of what it means to be Catholic. natemup (talk) 15:49, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Your specific point has been answered, but more generally, if you have a dispute with another editor, please follow the process described at at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:01, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I can't create a new article!

Latest comment: 11 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

My sandbox was moved to a drafts page. Now I seem to have no sandbox. I would like to start a new article but it appears this isn't possible. This interface is extremely frustrating. Jrdemers (talk) 17:55, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello again @Jrdemers.

Your sandbox was moved to Draft:Bakman Technologies, leaving a redirect to that draft. I have removed the redirect for you, leaving an empty sandbox.

(You could have done this yourself, if you knew how: when I went to your sandbox, the software followed the redirect, but there was a line in red at the top saying "Redirected from User:Jrdemers/sandbox". I picked this link, and it took me to the actual sandbox, where I edited it to remove the redirect). ColinFine (talk) 18:10, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I was afraid to touch anything at this point :-) Jrdemers (talk) 20:33, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I edited your sandbox to remove the redirect.

It's best to use the Article Wizard to create a draft. 331dot (talk) 18:11, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I actually edited the sandbox talk page. 331dot (talk) 18:11, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Citation output

Latest comment: 10 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi!

What should I add/fix whenever this error output appears on my citation?

Cite error: The named reference "website_name" was defined multiple times with different content.

Thanks! - MahmoudAbbasAlDilfti (talk) 08:35, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

I am on mobile, and I am currently trying to fix a citation of the Bursa article, which cited the population estimate in 2019. MahmoudAbbasAlDilfti (talk) 08:42, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Fixed already..here 🐍 Thilio🤖 09:00, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!

- MahmoudAbbasAlDilfti (talk) 09:12, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

It means that you have used the same name for two different references (or for two versions of the same reference). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:29, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Quick review request: Draft:Jonas Kruse

Latest comment: 10 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Quick review request: Draft:Jonas Kruse

Hi! I’m aware of the autobiography/COI concerns, so I’ve tried to keep this strictly neutral and supported by independent sources (DN, SvD, Aftonbladet, SFDb, SVT, Storytel). I only created the draft because no article existed yet; all content is based on published sources.

I’d be grateful for comments on notability, tone, and sourcing, and I’m happy to adjust anything that doesn’t meet policy.

Draft: Draft:Jonas Kruse

— --~~~~ Kruse Jonas1 (talk) 12:23, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

You have not pressed the "Submit the draft for review!" button to submit it for review. Though what is your relation to the subject? Tenshi! (Talk page) 12:28, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

The user seems to be writing about themselves. 331dot (talk) 12:34, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

There is no way, even once you formally submit the draft, to guarantee a speedy review. Are you on a deadline? 331dot (talk) 12:42, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Reviewed and declined. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:32, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

TV articles

Latest comment: 10 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I am writing this for my other account but this is my web browser on my tablet I use the app

my real account name for the purpose if you want to contact it is lukas4550 but the reason I'm doing this is because I keep trying to edit one of my favorite pages and it always comes out a mess one of my previous edits was reverted because it broke the page specifically 2025 in American television and trying the edit again further made problems if anybody finds this contact the account listed above and I can send you the details of what I was trying to edit 2603:6000:D000:9607:18A7:A1E9:9019:BFE3 (talk) 15:13, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see the advice you were given previously, at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1262#2025 in American television and Talk:2025 in American television#I need some help. If after reading that you still need help, ask again here, or on the article talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:56, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Should I include an arranger's catalogue?

Latest comment: 7 days ago10 comments5 people in discussion

I'm creating my first article from scratch - it's presently still in my sandbox - for prominent choral arranger Ed Lojeski. It doesn't really make sense to include a "Discography" heading since he didn't release albums - if you check his Discogs page, he has 125 credits, but no original output - but 1381 pieces of music are available for purchase on his publisher's website. It seems absurd to have hundreds of individual pieces of music listed on a Wikipedia page, but it also seems wrong to leave it out altogether. I'd appreciate some guidance from the community! Sopheadraws (talk) 01:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Your draft is User:Sopheadraws/sandbox. You haven't submitted it, and you can of course compose it in whichever order you prefer. The current lack of references that (i) are reliable, (ii) are independent of Lojeski and each other, and (iii) go into depth about Lojeski isn't necessarily a bad thing: you could add these later. However, I have rarely if ever seen a draft developing in such an order and eventually being promoted to article status. Are there solid, substantial sources about Lojeski? If there are, then cite them first and worry about a selective list of his arrangements later. If there aren't, then a draft about Lojeski won't succeed. -- Hoary (talk) 06:46, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Meh. HQIQ talk 07:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@HQIQ: "Meh" is not a helpful response; especially at The Teahouse, which is intended to be an easy to use, gentle, forum for new editors with questions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:11, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm aware of the reference issue. Lojeski was huge in the late 20th century in the choral arrangement world, and, unfortunately, not much content related to that niche has made its way onto the internet. Finding better sources is my main priority, but I'm doing what I can to build up the draft in other ways - in this case, listing arrangements - while I work on that. Sopheadraws (talk) 15:08, 20 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 15:22, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Yep, that's the plan! Sopheadraws (talk) 15:25, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

There are several options:

1. Link to an external list
2. Include only his most well-known or successful works, as a summary
3. Have a separate "list of works" article
4. Don't have a list

Personally I would combine 1 & 2. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:14, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Sopheadraws You are in need of some sources meeting our golden rules for good sources. I did a search at newspapers.com for "Ed Lojeski" and got over 1400 hits, which appears to be plenty until you realise that many are just announcements that some group is playing work he arranged. I found one source fairly quickly to a full article on him in the Thousand Oaks Star, 09 Jul 1975 Page 27. I've clipped that at this URL. If you can't reach that owing to a paywall, email me from my userpage and I'll send it to you as a .pdf. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:52, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate this a lot, thank you! I made a newspapers.com account a couple days ago to take advantage of a free trial to research Lojeski, and, being unfamiliar with the platform, the plethora of "so-and-so choir preformed his arrangement" overtook my researching abilities. Sopheadraws (talk) 15:17, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Suggesting Article Topics

Latest comment: 11 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I'm a new user, and don't feel confident creating an entire article by myself. Is there somewhere I can go to submit recommendations for articles I'd like to see, allowing more experienced users to create them if they feel they meet Wikipedia's standards and are willing to do so? KingEdward502 (talk) 19:52, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

There is (WP:RA), but it is backlogged to the point of uselessness. I don't recommend it. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @KingEdward502, and welcome to the Teahouse and Wikipedia.

It's appropriate that you don't feel confident creating an article by yourself yet - lots of people try it before they are equipped to, and often have a frustrating and disappointing time.

But the question to ask is, why are you concerned about creating an article?

I remember when I started, twenty years ago, I desparately wanted to find an article to add, in order to "make my mark". But now I know that that's not the only way to contribute to Wikipedia. (In 27 500 edits, I've only ever created about a dozen articles).

We have thousands and thousands and thousands of articles that could do with some attention: some are out of date, and need updating with new information; many were created long ago, when we were less careful about citing sources. Some just aren't comprehensive treatments of their subjects.

I suggest you find some areas you're interested in (you might look for a WikiProject that interests you and is active) and look at improving some articles in that area. You might start small, with copyediting, or rewriting a paragraph to make it clearer. In the early stages you might make some changes that other editors disagree with, and then you can learn about how we interact with other editors (see WP:BRD)

Then you could progress to adding sources for unsourced information, or adding new information with proper citations, and learn about reliable sources and how to cite them.

Then as you start to understand about notability, you might find that you notice some articles are under-sourced, and you look and can't find any better sources, so you learn to use the articles for deletion process.

After a few months learning like this, you will be much better prepared, if you choose, to create an article.

Happy editing! ColinFine (talk) 21:27, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Article

Latest comment: 10 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

How to write article for myself Thefarhanmalik786 (talk) 07:09, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thefarhanmalik786 Welcome to Teahouse. And You should not write an article about yourself on Wikipedia. Articles must be about subjects with independent reliable sources writing about yourself is considered a conflict of interest and is likely to be deleted. what you can do is, "improve existing articles or contribute to topics you know well". I suggest you see Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:Notability (people) for guidance. 🐍 Thilio🤖 08:24, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Reasoning for Decline

Latest comment: 10 days ago5 comments5 people in discussion

Hello there. My name is Sasha, username Sasha09272. Could I please get a more in-depth explanation of why my West Hardin Middle School Wikipedia page was declined? If you could help me out here, I could make an article that is appropriate for public view! Thank you. Sasha09272 (talk) 23:45, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:West Hardin Middle School Karenthewriter (talk) 04:59, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

You're told, Sasha09272, that the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting.

A number of the terms in those instructions are linked, so that, for example, if you don't understand the meaning of "secondary" in this context, then you can click on "secondary" for an explanation. NB you're asked for a number of references, each one of which meets all four criteria. Here, in this discussion thread, try specifying just three sources each of which meets all four. If something still isn't clear, feel free to ask. -- Hoary (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

The above terms are also explained at WP:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:31, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

@Sasha09272: Note also that WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES says, "Most elementary (primary) and middle schools that don't source a clear claim to notability usually get merged or redirected to the school district authority that operates them (generally the case in North America) or the lowest level locality (elsewhere or where there is no governing body)." Your draft doesn't seem to indicate that this particular school has any notable characteristics that distinguish it from the many, many other middle schools in the country. The school is already listed at Hardin County Schools#Middle schools, and creating a redirect to that may be the best that can be expected. Deor (talk) 15:06, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

improve article

Latest comment: 7 days ago7 comments2 people in discussion

I have an article in my sandbox and I want see if it is ready to publish or how I can improve it Breck0530 (talk) 18:26, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

One of your citations shows an error message; can you fix that?

There is also a notice, dated April this year, at the top of the page, saying "This article does not cite any sources containing significant coverage." Have you addressed that? It seems you put it there.

When you are ready, submit the article for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it as an article. If not, they will give you further advice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

i don't know how to fix the error message Breck0530 (talk) 19:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Plus also I forgot to remove that when I move my article to sandbox Breck0530 (talk) 19:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

How do I submit for review and can I just not make the article without submitting for review Breck0530 (talk) 19:39, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

The error was "{{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= " and this is the fix.

I have added a button so you can submit the draft for review.

You may just move it to "main space" as an article if you prefer. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

thank you so much I will submit it later Breck0530 (talk) 20:03, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Another military unit article

Latest comment: 7 days ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I am attempting to write an article about a military unit, the 82nd Signal Battalion. It has history going back to 1917 and passing thru WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Dom REp, Grenada, Panama, DS/DS, and humanitarian missions as well. I can see other similar military units have article on wikipedia, such as the 35th Signal Brigade, and asking if there is a certain template or format available that I can follow? Thanks for any assistance. C. E. Moon Mullins (talk) 20:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I found the 35th Signal Brigade article and will mirror that format. Cheers! C. E. Moon Mullins (talk) 20:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Deceased Wikipedians

Latest comment: 6 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians

Hello hosts and users,

I recently came across a "deceased wikipedian" user page. How does Wikipedia know of the demise of its users/editors? Thanks. Kvinnen (talk) 11:27, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

It depends, but if you click on the name, you are usually taken to a text where some explanation is given. Lectonar (talk) 11:32, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Ah thanks! I will be sure to check it out next time I come across a user like that. Kvinnen (talk) 11:38, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

how can i update my article properly

Latest comment: 9 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

  Courtesy link: Draft:Al Baru Mustakim Nibir

please tell me the way to update my article Al Baru Mustakim Nibir (talk) 20:20, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Al Baru Mustakim Nibir, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The answer is that you almost certainly don't.

Writing about yourself in Wikipedia is so difficult, and so rarely successful, that it is strongly discouraged.

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 publications, and very little else.

An article about you should not be based on what you know, still less on what you want the world to know: it should be based on what people you don't know at all have chosen to publish about you - even if you don't like what they have written.

An article about you (whoever writes it) will not belong to you, will not be controlled by you, and may say things you would not like it to say.

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 a conflict of interest. ColinFine (talk) 21:09, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

I find it ironic that the autobiography claims the subject is a "journalist" yet doesn't show the slightest evidence of journalism. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:19, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

English may not be a strong language for this person, and they may be a very strong journalist in their native tongue. Who knows? MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 15:33, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

article about myself has been dropped

Latest comment: 10 days ago12 comments6 people in discussion

I really need help to have an article about me. I have done great work for the wellbeing of humanity, especially farming community. Raziq2007 (talk) 11:36, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

We don't host articles because of the subject's wishes. There are alternative outlets for that.

We host articles about subjects that are Notable according to our criteria.

In particular, be wary of scammers who offer to write about you for money. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:16, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Raziq2007, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid that Wikipedia's needs are not the same as yours. If you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (and only then), then Wikipedia would like to have an article about you.

But such an article would not be based on what you say or want to say, or on what your associates say: it should be a summary of what people wholly unconnected with you have independently chosen to publish about you in reliable publications, and very little else.

Experience has shown that almost nobody can successfully write such an article about themselves, and so they are strongly advised not to try: see autobiography.

If you insist on trying, then I must tell you that Draft:Dr. Abdul Raziq Kakar is written backwards: it begins with what you know, but 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. ColinFine (talk) 15:07, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

• User:Raziq2007 needs deleted as obvious self-promotion. 2A00:23C5:E9AC:DA01:BCF0:9806:F22E:E221 (talk) 15:29, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

  I have merged that user page with the draft, because the user page contained references and the draft didn't cite anything. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:37, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Abdul Raziq Kakar

Please help me in improving this article and want to be published on wikipedia. Raziq2007 (talk) 11:56, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

See above. Please don't keep asking. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:18, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

World camel day

  Courtesy link: Draft:World Camel Day

What stuff is available on world camel day at Wikipedia?

please tell me about the subject cited above. What we can do to highlight this important day. Raziq2007 (talk) 12:12, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

The same applies here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:19, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello again, @Raziq2007. "to highlight this important day" is exactly what Wikipedia calls promotion, and is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia.

Again, if there are substantial independent sources about the event sufficient to establish that it is notable, then Wikipedia could have an article on it. Again, such an article would be based on what those independent sources say, not on what the creators or organisers of the event say or want to say. ColinFine (talk) 15:09, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@Raziq2007: You seem to like getting other people to do things for you. Did you try searching for "world camel day"? I did and got a result in the first entry returned. Bazza 7 (talk) 16:21, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I have now linked to OP's draft, above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:27, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft makibook

Latest comment: 8 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

  Courtesy link: Draft:Makibook

Hello, I Created my draft Quirbajou (talk) 10:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it is not suitable for publication as a Wikipedia article. Please see Help:Your first article. If you are connected to the website that you wrote about, see also WP:COI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:55, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I Created my Project Makibook.

I have my brouillon. Quirbajou (talk) 13:12, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@Quirbajou As I think you were told before, what you have produced at Draft:Makibook is entirely unsuitable for the English Wikipedia as among other things it does not demonstrate that the topic is notable as we define that term. Please read Help:Your first article carefully. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:11, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Citing

Latest comment: 8 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I am trying to edit a stub about a german river, and I am trying to add citations because it does not cite from any sources. However, the only good citation I could find was from another Wikipedia article on the German Wikipedia. Is it OK to cite sources from there, or do I have to find other sources? Seanwk (talk) 03:42, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@Seanwk You can't use another Wikipedia article as a citation, but you can cite non-English-language sources if there are no suitable English-language ones (as long as you can read the source). ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 03:51, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Contradictory Information

Latest comment: 8 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Two different Wikipedia pages say contradictory information. How do we fix this.

Ensign-Bickford Company says Ensign Bickford Aerospace acquired Honeybee Robotics in 2022.

Honeybee Robotics says Blue Origin acquired Honeybee Robotics in 2022. [I believe this post.]

CuriousTech (talk) 17:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@CuriousTech Welcome to the Teahouse! It's correct. Let me put it this way: before 2022, Honeybee Robotics was owned by EBI, the parent company of Ensign-Bickford Aerospace & Defense and In January 2022, EBI sold Honeybee Robotics to Blue Origin. Sources confirmed. 🐍 Thilio🤖 17:47, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@CuriousTech: Ensign-Bickford Company was wrong. I have fixed it.[7] Thanks for telling us about the contradiction. Interestingly, it had the right year of acquisition until yesterday where an unregistered user claiming to be EBAD Marketing Manager Stacy Routhier changed the year from 2017 to 2022. [8] They do have a marketing manager by that name. She also changed another acquisition year from the right to a wrong value. Their own website shows the years at https://ebad.com/history-and-timeline/. Maybe she should learn something about her own company before marketing it. It was also done against Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:35, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

I reverted the substantive paid-editing and tried to restore the minor corrections as well as the corrections you made. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:59, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

János Gausz

Latest comment: 10 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Draft article about Hungarian geneticist János Gausz – request for feedback

Hello,

I have drafted an article about my late father, Hungarian geneticist János Gausz, in my sandbox: User:Gauszildi/sandbox.

I tried to follow the neutral and encyclopedic style as required, adding references to reliable sources. Could someone please take a look and let me know if the draft is appropriate for submission, or if there are still issues I should work on?

Thank you very much for your help!

Ildi Gausz Gauszildi (talk) 19:36, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

If you believe that you have fixed the issues raised in the last review (of Draft:János Gausz), you should resubmit the draft for feedback. 331dot (talk) 19:47, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

I have merged your sandbox with the older draft article. Let's not have drafts in multiple locations please. If you feel that your recent changes have addressed the reviewer concerns, re-submit it for review. I think you have improved the tone, so go ahead and resubmit it. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:49, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

What's the proper way to add an external link as a substitute for a wiki page?

Latest comment: 10 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The context is one of those list articles where every entry with a wiki page gets a link. (List of open-source video games)

There's some entries without a wiki page, or any citations. Would it be appropriate to format it like internal links with the entry name being a link to the game's website, or add its website as a citation or something? NomadicVoxel (talk) 17:39, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @NomadicVoxel

No, it would not be appropriate. There are almost no instances where it is appropriate to put an external link in text, other than in a citation or a "Further reading" section.

I would suggest that if a game is not the subject of its own article, it should not appear in the list at all. Certainly if it is neither an article subject nor has a citation to a reliable independent source. ColinFine (talk) 18:08, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Embedding external links in articles is called WP:LINKSPAM. Disguising a website link as a citation is called WP:REFSPAM here. Don't do it. It's that simple. I agree with ColinFine, either remove non-notable entries from the list, or WP:REDLINK them if they have potential to merit a standalone article. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:58, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

About uploading photos

Latest comment: 10 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Hi. I noticed that when I upload my own photos, the Wizard asks me what license I would like to use for my picture. But I also tried to upload a photo that my daughter took, and there was nowhere to request what license she would like to use for her photo. When I finished the process I noticed on the File page that an automatic tag was created from this code {{Permission_pending}} which I guess means you are waiting for an email with permission to use the photo my daughter took. But when am I supposed to add the license, for instance, if she wants to choose {{cc-by-sa-4.0}}? Thanks DaringDonna (talk) 17:23, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

I assume you mean File:Whole wheat hand made sourdough bread.jpg. I added that licence, in this edit.

It would be better, if she is old enough and able to, if she had her own account and uploaded her own photos. Otherwise, please see c:COM:THIRD for additional guidance. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:02, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

@DaringDonna: I assume if it's your daughter, you've told her that you're uploading the photo, and that she has consented to it being released right? —Matrix _{ping me}^{when u reply} (t? - c) 18:34, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, of course she knows I uploaded her photo. She doesn't want to have an account. But my question is still not answered. Is there a way to add that license during the uploading process? When I upload my own photos the Wizard asks me what license I want. But when I did it for my daughter, that question did not appear. Is the only way to add a license only after the file page is created, with an additional edit? Thanks so much, and thanks for adding the license Pigsonthewing DaringDonna (talk) 19:21, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

If your daughter doesn't want to have an account, and she is an adult, she may use the template at WP:CONSENT, fill in the blanks, and send it to the Virtual Response Team permissions-commonswikimedia.org. An agent there will reply and apply the appropriate tags to the image. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:02, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Edit

Latest comment: 9 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Kindly help edit my wikipedia page, i have links to my notability as public figure, thank you team wikipedia Eric preneur (Ep) EricPreneur (talk) 02:57, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Eric preneur (Ep) EricPreneur to create a draft please follow Wikipedia:Article wizard. Do not place article content on your user page as you have done. qcne (talk) 08:32, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see also WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:47, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

KG Studio

Latest comment: 9 days ago13 comments5 people in discussion

Request to review draft for KG Studio (Label) to move to mainspace

Hello,

I have created a draft about KG Studio, an independent Brazilian record label also known as KG Network. The draft is fully referenced with reliable and independent sources, including news articles and music platforms.

I would like guidance or a review to move this draft to the mainspace as a full article. The draft follows Wikipedia's neutral and encyclopedic style.

Here is the link to the draft: Draft:KG Studio (Label)

Thank you for your help! Kauansinho1 (talk) 11:33, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Kauansinho1. You have submitted it for review and a reviewer will review it in time.

Why does the sentence "..fielding teams in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive and Valorant competitions at both national and international levels " require 11 citations? qcne (talk) 12:04, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Kauansinho1 I fixed your link, the whole url is not needed. Are you associated with this label? 331dot (talk) 12:14, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

I am not directly associated with the label, but I am part of the team that handles their distribution. Regarding the links, some were removed. Would that be detrimental? I believe that the more references included, the stronger the article becomes, as it better demonstrates the label’s notability and coverage in reliable sources.

I want to ensure that the page meets Wikipedia’s standards, but at the same time I hope to preserve as many references as possible to provide a thorough and verifiable overview. Kauansinho1 (talk) 12:49, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

@Kauansinho1 See WP:OVERCITE for why we don't need so many references. Apart from anything else, they make it difficult for a reviewer to confirm the topic is Wikinotable, which is done by checking that sources are reliable, independent of the studio (so not press releases and churnalism), with significant coverage of the topic. This is explained at here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:56, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Submission declined by Theroadislong. @Kauansinho1: Please see the note I left on your talk page, about declaring your professional association with the label. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:55, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Done Kauansinho1 (talk) 00:46, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to request help regarding the draft

I have followed the required steps, including making a disclosure about my affiliation on my user page and using the Talk page instead of editing directly.

Could an experienced editor please review the draft again, or provide further considerations for possible publication?

Thank you very much for your assistance and guidance. Kauansinho1 (talk) 01:00, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Kauansinho1 At the moment, you have not proven Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). qcne (talk) 07:36, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for the review. I understand the concern that the draft does not yet demonstrate WP:Notability (organizations and companies). For transparency, I have disclosed my affiliation related to distribution on my user page and I will not edit the draft directly. I will propose changes here in line with COI and paid editing guidelines.

The draft currently cites more than seventeen sources. I recognize that brief mentions and routine announcements do not satisfy significant coverage. To move this forward, could an experienced editor please advise which of the existing sources may actually qualify as independent, reliable, secondary, and in-depth? I would also appreciate guidance on whether the draft should be trimmed to rely on fewer but stronger sources, and what kind of coverage is most persuasive for a record label article.

I will revise the draft accordingly by removing primary and routine content, keeping a neutral tone, and adding only sources that meet the requirements. If the consensus is that sufficient in-depth coverage does not yet exist, I am happy to keep the draft in user space and wait until there is more independent coverage.

Thank you very much for your time and guidance. Kauansinho1 (talk) 07:58, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), which was mentioned above, tells you which kind of sources can be used to demonstrate notability.

If you list here three of your sources which you feel do that, in the manner described there, we will review them for you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:44, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

Per WP:Notability (organizations and companies), here are four independent and reliable sources that offer significant, third-party coverage relevant to KG Studio / KG Network:

Globo Esporte (GE) – “CBCS Retake: Paquetá e Havan vencem e vão à semifinal” — Coverage of KG Network’s participation in Brazil’s CS:GO scene, from a major national news outlet.

https://ge.globo.com/esports/csgo/noticia/cbcs-retake-paqueta-e-havan-vencem-e-vao-a-semifinal.ghtml

Portal Pop Mais – “Sayu lança single ‘Pato da Vida’” — Editorial piece about an artist associated with KG Studio, providing third-party music coverage.

https://portalpopmais.com.br/patodavida-sayu/

Dust2 Brasil – “Decisão da CBDEL causa indignação de times em qualify do Pan” — Independent reporting on Brazil’s esports ecosystem that includes KG Network’s competitive context.

https://www.dust2.com.br/noticias/48234/decisao-da-cbdel-causa-indignacao-de-times-em-qualify-do-pan

Disconecta – “Sayu une romantismo e humor em seu single de estreia” — Independent review of an artist’s debut single, noting KG Studio’s work/association.

https://disconecta.com.br/resenhas/resenhas-de-discos/sayu-une-romantismo-e-humor-em-seu-single-de-estreia/

Please let me know if these are sufficient under WP:ORG or if further sources are needed. Thank you. Kauansinho1 (talk) 10:59, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I can't read Portuguese, but "an artist associated with KG Studio" and "noting KG Studio’s work/association." suggest that the coverage is not significant; that these are not an articles about KG Studio. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:12, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Oriol Sàbat

Latest comment: 9 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Could someone please help with the Oriol Sàbat article?

Hi Teahouse,

I’ve been trying to update the Oriol Sàbat article, but because I have a conflict of interest, I know I shouldn’t edit directly. I put together requests on the talk page (with sources) a while ago, but so far no one has acted on them.

I realize volunteers are busy and I really appreciate the time people give here. I just don’t want the article to stay outdated when the information and references are ready to go.

If any experienced editor has a moment to review the requests and make the edits (if appropriate), I’d be so grateful.

Thank you so much for your help and patience with a newer editor trying to do things the right way! Mireiaalvarezmiret (talk) 11:16, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Mireiaalvarezmiret! The correct venue for this would be Wikipedia:Edit requests. The kind folks there would be more than happy to help you out. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 13:11, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Mireiaalvarezmiret You have already made an appropriate edit request on the talk page of the article, presumably using the edit request wizard, so that your request has been added to the correct category and will be taken up in due course by those editors who specialise in fulfilling (or not) these suggestions. This can take some time. Your alternative would be to look in the edit history of the article and politely ask one of the editors who has worked on it, via their talk page, to take a look now. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:34, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

... incidentally, you'll get much faster responses if you can format your sources to be full Wikipedia citations. See Help:Referencing for beginners. Then the reviewing editors will have less work to do. Unsourced material certainly won't be added. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:41, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

You can use the WP:Edit Request Wizard to request an edit. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

No CaseOh Article??

Latest comment: 5 days ago11 comments7 people in discussion

For some reason there is no article about the popular Twitch streamer. Would love to create an article draft, but I'm almost a total noob at Wikipedia editing, let alone creating an entire article. Thanks! :)

Sincerely, NUMTOT Nerd NUMTOT Nerd (talk) 00:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/CaseOh and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/CaseOh_(2nd_nomination). What this means is that CaseOh isn't sufficiently notable for inclusion here. Being popular doesn't imply notability, see WP:BFDI which explains this for a similar popular yet non-notable topic. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 00:34, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Well that sucks. Thanks for letting me know! NUMTOT Nerd (talk) 01:21, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

In my honest opinion, Notability in Wikipedia is bloody bizarre. There's no article on CaseOh, who has 8.7 million subscribers. In constrast, Not Just Bikes, who has merely 1 million subscribers, does have an article. I guess what I'm trying to say here is that it's better to think of “Notability” as a word that can have a different meaning in Wikipedia.🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 02:27, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

If one expects Notability in Wikipedia = subscribers, sure. But the internet is bigger than WP, so people can find info on him anyway. Wikipedia:WikiProject_YouTube/Notability#AfD_discussions may or may not be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:26, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

One thing we had to establish very early on is that "number of social media followers" is not the same as "notability", because - although the social media companies don't like to admit this - you can buy fake followers. Am I saying that CaseOh has done this, no, but it's the general principle. DS (talk) 12:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

If you now can find at least three reliable, independent sources, with a reputation for fact-checking, that has provided significant coverage of CaseOh, an article can be un-salted. What was true in August 2025 might not be in December or 2028 or at some point in the future. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 03:10, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

I always assumed you need two (multiple) to pass GNG. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:15, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Technically, sure. In practice... eh. -- asilvering (talk) 04:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@NUMTOT Nerd There is a draft at Draft:CaseOh which you can work on if you like. WP:BLP applies. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:34, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks man! Would be happy to work on it.

-NUMTOT Nerd NUMTOT Nerd (talk) 14:51, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

A company page

Latest comment: 6 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Is it allowed to create a company page, and how can I find a suitable editor? knowing that company is in very good reputation and i think it has notability

I’m new here and I’ve read a lot about Wikipedia’s guidelines, especially regarding company articles and conflict of interest. I have a client that I believe meets the notability criteria (it has independent media coverage), and I’d like to know the correct and transparent way to go about creating a page about it.

i would also like know how can i contact and communicate with an approved editor to help me in this Carol Travel (talk) 14:57, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello. First, if you are editing about a client, the Terms of Use require you to formally disclose that, see WP:PAID.

There are no "approved editors"; everyone who participates here is an "editor", even you. It is permitted for you to submit a draft via Articles for creation. However, Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about something. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Such sources does not include press releases, interviews, brief mentions, the reporting of routine business activities, or other primary sources. You must set aside everything that you know about your client, limiting yourself to summarizing only independent sources. Most people in your position have great difficulty with that. Are you the rare person who can? Maybe, but the odds are against it. We usually recommend that new users not dive right in to creating articles until they gain experience by editing existing articles and using the new user tutorial.

Please also be aware that you may receive solicitations from scammers, please read WP:SCAM. Please also read WP:BOSS, and have your client read it, too. 331dot (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello again,

Thank you very much for the clear explanation, it really helps me understand the standards expected here.

Since I’m still new and don’t have experience with Wikipedia editing, is there an appropriate way to connect with experienced editors who are familiar with the rules and can assist or guide me in the process, especially those who understand how to handle company-related articles while following the Terms of Use (including paid contribution disclosure, if applicable)?

I’m not trying to promote anything, and I truly want to follow all guidelines. I’m just unsure how to move forward in a proper and transparent way, and I’d appreciate any suggestions you can share.

Thanks again for your time and help. Carol Travel (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

You clearly are trying to promote your client; and if you wish to continue editing you are required to name them, which despite the clear guidance given and linked to above, you have still not done. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:24, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Carol Travel, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry, but "I have a client and... " and "I'm not trying to promote anything" are inconsistent statements. If you have a client who is paying you to create a Wikipedia article then (absent a quite remarkable level of altruism), what they, and hence you, are engaged in, is trying to find another channel to tell the world about themselves - in other words, promotion.

Having said that, you are not forbidden from trying, provided you follow the rules about disclosing your status as a WP:paid editor, and (assuming that your draft is eventually accepted) thereafter follow the rules about not editing directly articles in which you have a COI.

But you should probably read WP:BOSS and WP:PROUD.

Also, 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) 16:25, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Is it ok to add an European Space Agency space mission badge to its corresponding page?

Latest comment: 6 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I'd want to do it for Rapid Apophis Mission for SpacE Safey (Ramses).[9] MANARAJu (talk) 15:05, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

  Courtesy link: Ramses (spacecraft)

Hello, @MANARAJu, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The answer is not clear.

Almost all images in Wikipedia are required to be available for anybody to reuse, for any purpose including commercial. But the ESA site says The contents of the ESA website are intended for the personal and non-commercial use of its users. So the badge may not be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons in the usual way.

That said, English Wikipedia does allow the use of non-free images in certain cases, provided all the criteria in the non-free content criteria are met, and it would be up to you, uploading it, to provide that justification. One of the common uses is for logos (see that page for a discussion), and it may be that you could justify using this image in the same way. ColinFine (talk) 16:38, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks a lot: I did it.

File:Ramses space mission insignia.png

Best regards. MANARAJu (talk) 17:47, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Please advise on redirect

Latest comment: 6 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The redirect, "Spanish Inquistion myth" seems to DESERVE both Category:Redirects from misspellings ("Inquis-i-tion") and some other category, like Category:Redirects from incorrect names.
Please help.
Also note that it was me recently, not a longstanding well- accepted edit, which set in place the "Redirects here" and "For..." in the "Historical revision of the Inquisition" page. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 10:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

That has now been   Done; but I have also nominated the redirect for deletion, since we don't redirect form every missing-letter combination. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:57, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

New wikipedia

Latest comment: 9 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi everyone, recently I have started the endeavour of creating a Wikipedia version in Lesser Antillean Creole (this would include St Lucian Creole, Grenadian Creole and Trinidadian Creole as they are all mutually intelligible to each other). And I was wondering if anyone has any tips because recently it's become somewhat stagnant, and if anyone wants to help let me know. Thanks in advance

note: the project is an official project as a 'test project' here is the link ==> Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Antillean French Creole - Meta KeyolTranslater (talk) 07:23, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @KeyolTranslater: you might want to ask at WikiProject Caribbean and/or some of its related projects and workgroups (listed on that page). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:23, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I'll ask, maybe some people over there might like to help, do you have any other tips to get the wikipedia version created, do you know what steps I'll have to go through? KeyolTranslater (talk) 19:35, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

You may be interested in the Celtic Knot Conference 2025, for small-language Wikipedias. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:59, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps, I'll look into it, thanks for the recommendation KeyolTranslater (talk) 19:36, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Artist Profile - Management

Latest comment: 9 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Hello, I'm Demetrius Monday. I manage Belly Gang Kushington and i would like to give you guys info on my artist so that he can have an updated profile. Can you please help me? 2601:C4:C500:B1D0:3D18:481:7C45:3F41 (talk) 18:25, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, we can help you not waste your time. Wikipedia is not a site for promoting your clients, we remove advertisements masquerading as articles, and we block editors who edit for pay without disclosure. Please promote your client somewhere else. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:29, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Demetrius. While, as Ivanvector explains, promotion is not permitted, if there are errors or outdated material about Kushington on Wikipedia, please follow the instructions at WP:COIREQ to request changes. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:57, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

The only thing you would be able to do is make edit requests that can be reviewed by others without a conflict of interest. To do this, see Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:05, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Help with article

Latest comment: 8 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

hey i would love help with my article Sunset7401 (talk) 14:26, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello. If you are referring to Draft:Jack Byrne, what help are you seeking? 331dot (talk) 14:37, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Ideas

Latest comment: 8 days ago6 comments4 people in discussion

Alright, this is kind of unprecedented, asking the Teahouse about something because users (editors) can't be bothered to come to solutions. When fixing infoboxes sometimes there are inadvertent consequences. Thus if you are taking the www out of a url it will change other things such as spacing. Then a big brouhaha ensues. What gives? I couldn't get a few editors or even an admin who has been here about as long as the site has to understand. External links also have www which should be easily removed but since it doesn't even matter if it's there (in the external link) I tried to agree with refraining on those. I also have been changing http:// to https:// when appropriate. Finally a totally different topic: I don't feel a perpetrator of a crime, particularly one like the Midtown Manhattan shooting should have their name in BOLD. Doesn't stop two of the same seemingly problematic editors from disagreeing with me though. Efficacity (talk) 04:55, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

For starters, I suggest you read comments people have left on your talk page. You don't seem to be responsive, and you have one complaint that you actually broke a link.

I unbolded the names in 2025 Midtown Manhattan shooting. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:04, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank goodness and thank you, Anachronist. I suppose you would be invaluable if you took on the infoboxes question! Efficacity (talk) 06:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

IDK, to be honest. Ask someone else, it is not a tea house question. HQIQ (talk) 07:27, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

It is a question for here since it is here and an admin has weighed in and corrected a major error which I brought to his attention as well as the page here. You're welcome to have an opinion but also to be wrong. As for the infobox, do you even know the links of which I am speaking? For example if it was about the Super Bowl and the game had an official site, we would be discussing https://superbowl.com vs https://www.superbowl.com. The latter version would add www in the infobox and IT WOULD appear. It is not necessary to use www. It is almost never needed to get to a web site. In a tiny number of instances the site won't work without it or something like ww3. 07:37, 19 August 2025 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Efficacity (talk • contribs)

The issue of what to do in infoboxes doesn't have a simple solution as there are many different ways to provide the related URL. For example the template {{Official URL}} takes the value stored on Wikidata. Alternatively, the more common template {{URL}} doesn't need either http(s) or www. Maybe it would be less controversial if you were to use one of these templates. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:36, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

I suppose if I edit the www out using the source editing mode and change the www only in infoboxes it may not affect any of the spacing or other formatting in templates, right? Efficacity (talk) 18:20, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

What links here...

Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi! I created an article about a Bolivian international actor and I find it troubling that posting links to the movies he acted in, etc... gets troubled because I saw that it links with a Filipino man of the same name. To a lot of Philippines-related articles.

Should I change the article to (actor)? even when there's no other man with his name? Reynaldo Pacheco.

Thx. CoryGlee (talk) 15:56, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@CoryGlee The problem was a template which had someone of the same name for whom we have no article. This has been fixed by User:ChildrenWillListen. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:01, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

User:ChildrenWillListen & Mike Turnbull, thanks to both of you. CoryGlee (talk) 16:34, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia viewing

Latest comment: 8 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Hi folks. I'm an avid Wikipedia frequenter and editor (>1K edits) and often use my mobile device to surf the site and/or edit articles. However over the last couple of days I've had a bizarre thing happen to the Wikipedia website display on my phone. The mobile viewing is awful, all of a sudden. It looks like the screen is zoomed out and font sizes appear inconsistent. I have attempted switching between the "Desktop view" and "Mobile view" and there's no respite. The desktop mode is, unsurprisingly, a very zoomed-out, computer screen-esque view. However, so is the mobile view. It's different from the desktop view in a way I cannot explain or articulate adequately but it certainly looks very off and is NOT how the mobile view should look (or looked, before this problem).

Additionally, my display is set to dark mode on my account, so it should reflect the same after logging in, right? Turns out, after logging in, it switches to light mode. I've no idea how that is.

This is an extremely frustrating situation for someone like me who frequents the website almost certainly every day. I have screenshots but I'm unfortunately unable to upload them alongside my inquiry.

Is this a device issue or a Wikipedia issue? Or a mix of both? Is there a fix to this? Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Dissoxciate (talk) 20:09, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Dissoxciate. I think WP:VPT would be a better place to ask this kind of question. ColinFine (talk) 20:35, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I prefer dark mode too, but running the app in dark mode, any blue links are illegible. And I don't even log into the app. It's frustrating. So I use my laptop for Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:47, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Does the mobile view look as if you opened the mobile website on a computer? If so, you may have checked the "Desktop site" option somewhere in your browser settings. What browser do you use? --rchard2scout (talk) 23:22, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Copyright

Latest comment: 8 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

So, I'm trying to find the copyright owners of a piece of music, which as I'm sure some of you know, is frustrating beyond belief. But it can be done. But my question is this. Is there a reason why it shouldn't be included in the side panel of the song. For example, Hash Pipe by Weezer. You can see the copyright holders here I believe.

https://api.publicrecords.copyright.gov/search_service_external/copyrights/pdf?copyright_number=SR0000792147

I'm asking because after watching false claims being filed against youtubers for years, who are using fair use provisions within the law, I wanted to know who owns the music. Because in a lot of cases over the past 20 or 30 years, (probably longer, but I'm not well versed in this) the artists have signed their rights to the labels. Not all though. And yes, as a musician, I've done a fair bit of research into this subject, as it directly affects me, and don't really want to get into the nuance of copyright, just want to find the copyright holders easily.

Is this something that can be done? Or is there some policy that says we can't? It doesn't make sense to me why this information shouldn't be included on these pages, as it is publicly available information. (see above link) Thx Mandlerex (talk) 00:43, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

One problem I foresee is that ownerships of anything from individual songs to entire catalogues can be, and are, sold and bought not infrequently, so it would be a considerable task to keep such information up to date on Wikipedia, probably one that far outstrips Wikipedia's (entirely volunteer) editorial resources.

Wikipedia is not meant to serve as a catalogue or directory, and there are commercial / public service organisations that keep track of this sort of information: In my view (FWIW) we should leave it to them. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.150.115 (talk) 02:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Need help with hurricane ike part

Latest comment: 7 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

So um in the Infobox for Hurricane Ike (2008) does not have the hurricane ike related part like for example: effects of Hurricane Ike in Texas or for short Texas (effects) and effects of Hurricane Ike in inland North America or Inland North America for Short (effects) and wikimedia commmons ike images. Hypercyclone 2 (talk) 14:06, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

it does have effects in Texas and inland north America but not in infobox area. Hypercyclone 2 (talk) 14:07, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Hypercyclone 2. I'm sorry that no one has responded to your question yet. Are there other articles that have those features in the infobox that you could point to to help me understand your query better? Cordless Larry (talk) 07:05, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Is an image considered a freely licensed file if its used on other wikis?

Latest comment: 7 days ago10 comments5 people in discussion

^ no more information needed Wikiguyamir (talk) 10:03, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

More information is needed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:33, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@Wikiguyamir: there are any number of wiki-based websites out there, most of which have nothing to do with us, so we clearly couldn't comment on their licensing policies.

Not even every image uploaded to Wikimedia's servers is 'freely licensed' (whatever that means, exactly), as some are used under the so-called fair use policies. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:37, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikiguyamir, yours is a question where no definitive answer is possible. If you mention a specific image and precisely where it is used, then we can give you an answer specific to that image. As a general rule, if you click on an image on a Wikimedia project, you will go to a file information page with information about its licensing. But errors are made on such pages all the time and a large volume of images end up getting deleted because they are improperly licensed. Cullen328 (talk) 15:53, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I have stopped being surprised at the number of images I encounter that claim to be "own work" but are clearly not. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

im asking about this one of kaeng chan, who doesn't have a page that i can take an image from.

(Link:https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fplayschool%2Fimages%2F8%2F83%2FKaeng-Chan-Profile-Pic1.jpg%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20210112123301&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=f0ff8e5c6a747705151f1ec71b39858e6280e5a760bc130fa71cc08169bb46c3) Its from the playschool fandom wiki Wikiguyamir (talk) 20:58, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Source is: https://playschool.fandom.com/wiki/Kaeng_Chan

There is nothing there to say where they got that image from. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:02, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

On that fandom.com link, the licensing information pop-up says "This file is copyrighted. It will be used in a way that qualifies as fair use under US copyright law." That means you cannot upload it to Commons, but you could upload it to Wikipedia for fair-use in an article about Kaeng Chan, which currently doesn't exist. However you may have problems because you don't know where the image actually originated. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:07, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

So, if im allowed to do that, how would I? Wikiguyamir (talk) 21:23, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikiguyamir, since Kaeng Chan is a living person, only freely licensed or public ___domain images of him are allowed on Wikipedia. Fair-use images of living people are not permitted. Cullen328 (talk) 08:35, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Andy Kuper updates

Latest comment: 7 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi all, I’m Melissa, this is my first time engaging on Wikipedia and I wanted to ask the community for some guidance. I recently submitted some suggested updates to the Andrew Kuper article (CEO at LeapFrog Investments) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Andrew_Kuper) to bring it up to date. As an employee of LeapFrog and therefore someone with a conflict of interest, I’m keen not to make these updates myself but would appreciate any help and guidance members can offer. Thank you! Fininc (talk) 08:10, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Fininc Thank you for making a disclosure and the edit request: since there are 257 edit requests waiting for review you'll have to be patient and wait for a volunteer editor to evaluate your request. qcne (talk) 08:50, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

For articles about video games that release on PC, why does Wikipedia only list the compatible operating system?

Latest comment: 7 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Shouldn't the article also list digital storefronts the game is available for acquisition, like Steam, Epic Games or Itch.io? 2603:6080:C9F0:5C90:BDD1:222B:BF69:4A78 (talk) 16:26, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

That would make the articles spam magnets. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

It might be useful for you to read what Wikipedia is not. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:32, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Redirect template

Latest comment: 4 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

What is the suitable redirect template (after moving a page for simplification) for pages like this? Cisomang Barat, Cikalonwetan, West Bandung (redirects to Cisomang Barat) or Ciptagumati, Cikalongwétan, West Bandung (redirects to Ciptagumati). Darijauh (talk) 22:49, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Darijauh what about Template:R from more specific geographic name? Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:05, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I'm going to use the template. Darijauh (talk) 01:29, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

sofware mobile machines

Latest comment: 4 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

@kak stat mijoneram 83.99.155.24 (talk) 20:02, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? qcne (talk) 20:23, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Connecting to an article in another language

Latest comment: 4 days ago19 comments5 people in discussion

So, I have written an article titled, "The National Park of Uzbekistan in the name of Alisher Navoi." This is an English language version of an existing Russian page, (which I don't know how to link except to type it out as I have done) ru:Национальный парк Узбекистана имени Алишера Навои. My page in English is much longer, with many reference citations (although I am not sure that some are acceptable.) I have the page saved on my computer as a word document, but I don't know how to make the title of the page, how to connect it to the Russian page for the same ___location or what to do now that it is written. Please advise. AkilinaL (talk) 22:27, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@AkilinaL: these pages are connected on Wikidata. In this case you can go to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q25527797#sitelinks-wikipedia and click "edit", put "en" in the wiki field and the English title in the box next to it, then click publish. This can only be done if the page exists! If the Wikidata entry did not exist, then you click on the "add links" under languages. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:43, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

AkilinaL, "The National Park of Uzbekistan in the name of Alisher Navoi" is a curiously cumbersome title. I don't know if "Alisher Navoi National Park" is the best option; but for now, let's suppose that it is. Then click on "Draft:Alisher Navoi National Park", create the draft there, "Publish" (i.e. save), keep improving and "publishing" it, and, when you're happy with it, submit it for consideration as an article. Linking between this article and one in Russian about the same subject is a very simple matter and not one that you need to worry about until the English-language article actually exists. I'm not aware of any software that converts a DOCX or ODT file to Mediawiki (i.e. Wikipedia "source") markup. -- Hoary (talk) 23:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

The English title, "The National Park of Uzbekistan in the name of Alisher Navoi" is a direct translation of the official name of the park and the Russian page. You are correct in thinking that the most common name one would find in English for this park is Alisher Navoi National Park. I put the text I created with all the references formatted manually in a word document since I didn't know where to keep it. I initially created it in my sandbox, but I am still not sure what to do next. AkilinaL (talk) 03:06, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@AkilinaL: The precedent, as far as I know, is to not translate имени directly and instead adhere to English norms, at least for many Slavic languages. So Батальон имени Павла Судоплатова is translated as Pavel Sudoplatov Battalion, Балтийский федеральный университет имени Иммануила Канта as Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, and Спорткомплекс имени Али Алиева as Ali Aliyev Sport Complex. Even the equivalents of имени in other Slavic languages are treated the same: Київський військовий ліцей імені Івана Богуна being translated from Ukrainian as Ivan Bohun Military High School and Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu (im. being short for imeni in Polish) as Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań. There's also a Wikipedia policy, WP:COMMONNAME, that mandates the use of the most common name of the subject, which is not necessarily the official name. For example, the article on the current Uzbek prime minister is titled Abdulla Aripov, not "Abdulla Nigʻmat o'g'li Oripov" or "Abdulla Nigmatovich Aripov". So I would highly recommend that you go with Hoary's suggested title of "Alisher Navoi National Park" for the article, for the reasons I have laid out above. Hope this helps. Sincerely, Grumpylawnchair (talk) 04:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. That is helpful. AkilinaL (talk) 06:24, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits to my draft. AkilinaL (talk) 23:15, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

No problem. Let me know if you need help with anything else. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 23:32, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

AkilinaL, copy your Word file as plain text. Click on User:AkilinaL/sandbox in order to edit it. Paste the plain text there. "Publish" (i.e. save). For each of your many (I imagine) numbered footnotes, remove the number that points to the footnote and the number of the footnote, move the footnote to a point immediately after what it verifies, and use REF tags to convert it into a reference. Like this: An assertion.<ref>Author(s), title, publication details</ref>. "Publish" (i.e. save). Turn off the computer before it turns your brain to mush. On a later date, turn it back on. Improve what you have. "Publish" (i.e. save). And so on. -- Hoary (talk) 04:36, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

My footnotes are already inserted in the proper ___location. At this point, the only thing I haven't done is to put the title into the document. How is the title formatted? AkilinaL (talk) 06:23, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I published it in my sandbox. Now what? AkilinaL (talk) 14:24, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

It now exists as a draft: Draft:Alisher Navoi National Park. AkilinaL (talk) 00:51, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

I have fixed your link, changing https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Национальный_парк_Узбекистана_имени_Алишера_Навои to [[:ru:Национальный парк Узбекистана имени Алишера Навои]] Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. AkilinaL (talk) 00:40, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

AkilinaL, here's one of your references:

<ref>[https://fergana.agency/photos/127500/]] "Возвращение «Комсомольского озера»", published 08-29-2022, retrieved 2025-08-20</ref>

It should be more like:

<ref>Andrei Kudryashov. "[https://fergana.agency/photos/127500/ Возвращение «Комсомольского озера»]" (The return of Komsomolskoye Lake). Fergana. August 29, 2002. In Russian. Retrieved 2025-08-20.</ref>

Anyway, the reference should name the author(s) (if, as on this web page, they are named), and also the website. If, as here, the title of the web page is in a language other than English, then a translation into English is welcome, but be careful not to format it in a way that suggests that the translation is the actual title.

(Even better is to use Template:Cite web or Template:Cite news, but let's keep things simple for now.)

When you think the draft is ready, add {{subst:submit}} to the top, and "publish" (save). -- Hoary (talk) 07:41, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok. I will look at all my references and see what I can find. Thanks for your assistance. AkilinaL (talk) 21:24, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Somewhat unrelated question. There is an article about a place in Tajikistan called Kal'ai Mug. I did some editing on this page a) because there was some incorrect information and b) because it was lacking in citations for verification. Someone has corrected the formatting of my citations, and I beleive that every fact now has a citation, but the block at the top still indicates that citations are needed. What is the process for removing that notation? AkilinaL (talk) 01:33, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

In short, there is none. If you think that the template (the "block") is no longer relevant, you can and should remove it. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 01:39, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm assuming that as each fact has a citation, the template can be removed and I did so. Thanks. AkilinaL (talk) 13:43, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Climate Farmers and Philippe Birker

Latest comment: 7 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Hey all,

big fan of Wikipedia and I would love to add my organization and potential myself on here, how do I go about that?

I have reliable sources such as Forbes, Euronews, or Vogue Business who interviewed me and I also appeared in a German documentary on SWR and on Portuguese TV on RTP2 in Biosfera.

I also spoke at many larger events such as COP 27 and Cop 29 or Change Now or the Global Fashion Summit and was selected as Obama Leader this year, would that be enough for an article?

Really appreciate any help or pointers here.

Thanks! Philippebirker (talk) 19:32, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

If you really feel you must, you need better sources to demonstrate that you or your organization are notable. Interviews don't count, no matter who publishes them. Appearances in media don't count. Speaking engagements don't count.

Read Wikipedia:Golden Rule. If you don't have multiple sources that meet all three criteria, then my advice is, don't even try.

This is why editors are strongly discouraged to write about themselves on Wikipedia, or to write about topics with which they have a conflict of interest.

If you're interested in building an encyclopedia, stay and help improve existing articles. If your purpose is publicity, then you're in the wrong venue. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:54, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Please use the active voice AppleFellow (talk) 17:48, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Um, what? I thought I was. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Philippebirker. I'm afraid I echo what Anachronist says.

In my experience, people who join Wikipedia, and immediately try to create an article, usually have a frustrating and disappointing experience. Sometimes, they eventually manage to create an article that gets accepted, usually after days and weeks of trying to understand the advice they have been given.

Often they don't succeed - and in many cases, they never had any hope of succeeding, because they aren't aware that Wikipedia has a minimum standard called notability which the subject of any article must meet; and, further, that "notability" in Wikipedia's sense is not about what they have done or produced, or said, or created, and not about whether they are popular, or famous, or influential, or benificent, but mostly about whether there is enough reliably published material wholly independent of them and their associates to base an article on. For most of us, even if we have done some pretty amazing things, that hurdle is simply not passed, and every minute trying to write an article about them is a minute wasted.

And all this is even when there is no conflict of interest. Writing about yourself or your own company is even less likely to be successful, because most of us find it more or less impossible to lay aside absolutely everything we know, or believe, or feel, about ourselves and our activities, and confine ourselves to summarising what somebody else has written about us/them - even if we know they are wrong.

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) 21:53, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

My draft keeps getting declined

Latest comment: 6 days ago60 comments14 people in discussion

I don’t understand why my draft keeps getting declined

  Courtesy link: Draft:Assawongrat Assarangchai

I have attempted to write a draft:assawongrat assarangchai and it gets declined every single time. It was also deleted once and idk how to fix it. I think all the sources are enough to pass since it includes national and international articles, even from the Royal embassy of new York. Idk what to do now, I guess I will give up now Assawongkvin (talk) 01:02, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

You should read these two pages: Wikipedia:autobiography and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. But to keep it short, creation of Autobiography is strongly prohibited on Wikipedia.

Cordially

Jo the fire dragon 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 02:00, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jothefiredragon: that is not (entirely) correct. Creating an autobiography is discouraged, sure, but there is no outright prohibition. @Assawongkvin:, please check your sources (and external links). Right now [10] has a SSL error and everything else 404's. That is not permitted. We need, at a minimum, the (working) sources nessesary to establish wiki-notability under WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC, plus enough sources to verify everything else in the draft. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:57, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for the clarification. Many celebrities and people in my country hire other people to do it, but I don’t want to spend money on that stuff because I think I am capable of doing it myself and I am trying to make it neutral as much as possible. Right now I am confused, because all my links are clickable, this morning that I checked it was still fine. I think someone must’ve changed all my links or deleted them, and in very new here and have 0 experience in editing, I will try to paste the links again but could you pls give me some advice, because I don’t want my links to be deleted again, is there any way to prevent that. Thankyou so much. I actually like editing, but I’m new abd don’t want to messs up, and I want to know every single step in editing, so u chose to edit myself first before trying to edit other people’s. I hope you understand and I hope I can be a small part in contributing to Wikipedia. Thankyouuuu Assawongkvin (talk) 08:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I’m not sure if this is the case but someone edited my thing and reverted some paragraphs, and cut out some words, idk I have no knowledge about this. Assawongkvin (talk) 08:45, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Assawongkvin That's fine. Almost all articles in Wikipedia can be edited by almost anyone at any time, and that includes drafts. That's how Wikipedia works. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:56, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyouuu I’m trying my best to edit. Btw, I can’t put my birthday in there, my birthday is (Redacted) Assawongkvin (talk) 09:11, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Assawongkvin, I would also like to tell you that writing articles about minors is especially risky and doesn't happen too often here. It isn't prohibited per se, but it's not common. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 13:18, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see the advice you were given at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1262#I can’t successfully create an article about an artist I like., where you were referred to WP:NMUSICIAN. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:52, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Additionally, when citing YouTube, please use the full www.youtube.com/watch?v=... URL, not the youtu.be shortcut. The shortcut is blacklisted, while the full URL's almost never are. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou, but now Wikipedia told me that they would not accept my request smt COI idk, because it’s an autobiography, should I delete this one and create a new account, or get someone experienced to help me? I am very grateful for all your advices Thankyou verymuch Assawongkvin (talk) 13:08, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I wouldn't do that if I were you. That could be Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry, so look into it. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 13:20, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok Thankyouuu so much, sorry to ask again, if I go in the talk page I could ask u questions directly right about some advices Assawongkvin (talk) 13:52, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I am not quite sure of what I should do now. I think the sources are above the standard but I’m not a native speaker and I don’t think I have the ability to make a Wikipedia page on my own, sad. Assawongkvin (talk) 13:55, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Is it possible if someone edited my thing my Wikipedia draft to make it prettier and maybe pass, that would be very helpful, because I have tried many times on my own and failed, but pls don’t remove the links guiding to the source. Thankyou sooo muchhhhh, or maybe give me some advice. Assawongkvin (talk) 13:56, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I assume your native language is Thai, so why not use the sources you already have to create an article in that language? Here on the English Wikipedia, we don't need drafts to be "pretty" but we do need them to pass our notability guidelines for musicians. Also, now that you have revealed you are having difficulties drafting your autobiography, beware that someone may attempt to WP:SCAM you by suggesting they can create a suitable article for money. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:27, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou so much for warning me, I will be aware Assawongkvin (talk) 14:59, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I have asked the good people at Wikipedia:WikiProject Thailand to take a look. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:14, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou so much, does that mean they would come and see my draft ??? Assawongkvin (talk) 15:24, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hopefully. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:32, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou soooo much, this is going to help me a lot, I am grateful for receiving so much kindness and help. Thankyou, hopefully one day if I’m better at editing I will do the same for other people in need too. Assawongkvin (talk) 15:40, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I looked at it, and declined it. It looks like you used an AI to generate the text. It would never be accepted that way. Due to the copyright license used by Wikipedia, all contributions must be attributable to an individual editor. It is impossible to comply with this license if an AI wrote it. You need to use your own words. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:43, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I first drafted the whole thing on my own, but because I’m not a native speaker, some of my grammar and those stuff are not completely right, so I asked Ai to help me correct the grammar and make it as neutral as possible, what should I do Assawongkvin (talk) 15:47, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

The tone and emphasis do not appear neutral. AI is biased toward emphasizing the positive; it does not know how to write neutrally even if individual words are "neutral". You were warned that getting an autobiography published isn't going to be easy.

English is a flexible language because you can convey a thought with bad grammar and others can still understand it, and it's easily corrected. It would have been fine for you to use an AI to correct each sentence without changing the content or rearranging anything. Poor grammar is easy to correct. It is much harder to correct tone and emphasis when the grammar is good.

Your own words are always preferable. Grammar can be cleaned up if the meaning is clear enough. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:16, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh I see, but with the sources I provide is it possible for anyone to help me out, I’m really out of ways (I’m very sorry to waste your time) Assawongkvin (talk) 16:34, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Is your original draft still in the history, or did you do that off Wikipedia? If you can go through it and substitute back your words, retaining the sources and citations, I can help with the grammar. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:17, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately no, I did that on Wikipedia and got deleted once, so I did it on cat got and let it change my grammar automatically. Sad Assawongkvin (talk) 16:30, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I hope u understand what I’m going trough Assawongkvin (talk) 16:30, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Assawongkvin, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm sorry, but what you are going through is exactly what hundreds and hundreds of people go through when they come to Wikipedia and immediately try to create an article - and even more so when that article is about themselves or something they do.

Why is it so important to you that this article get accepted? If it's that you want to be on Wikipedia in order to advance your career, then what you are here for is promotion - which is forbidden anywhere in Wikipedia.

Another thing to realise about an article about you is that you might not like it, but you will not have any control over it: see WP:PROUD.

My advice would be to leave this. If you want to be a Wikipedia editor, then choose some subjects that interest you, and see if you can improve existing articles about those subject. If you are not interested in being a Wikipedia editor, and you are only trying this to help your career, then leave it and go and do that on other outlets. ColinFine (talk) 18:08, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

The thing is, I think that draft has potential, the subject seems notable, it just needs work. I'm willing to clean up bad grammar but it's much more work to rewrite AI slop. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:02, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I’m struggling rn, I need help

Draft: Assawongrat Assarangchai

Hi, I’m struggling rn, although I got plenty of advice and help, my draft still didn’t make it through, I’m going to share to u every single detail and I hope u will understand me more. So I am very new to Wikipedia and very want to edit in here, but I don’t know how, so I started by writing about myself (to test) (but seems like I’m not capable of editing ) before editing other people. The first time I tried, it got declined saying that my writing is not professional and not ethical, so I had to do it all over again. The second time, someone removed my whole sandbox and said that autobiography is prohibited. So I had to start from zero again (note that I had to wait for weeks to be reviewed). Now I didn’t want the same mistake to happen again so I asked AI to correct my grammar mistakes and help me make it neutral, this time it passed into the draft session and later on got declined, saying that I can’t use Ai, and (there were plenty that were declined by numerous reasons but this is just an example). Now idk what to do now, I think I tried so hard and wanted to become a part of this community since many people had given me hope, advice telling me to do this to that, change the links, which really helped me, for now it almost passed the notability standard but I don’t think my English level skills are capable of writing an article that professionally, I just hope if someone could lend me a hand by helping me edit or helping me out of this situation that would be very helpful. I don’t even know what to do now. Again Thankyouuu all very much for ur support and this community means a lot to me. Assawongkvin (talk) 16:24, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

There is plenty on Wikipedia you can do to help or take part that doesn't involve writing an article from scratch - which is probably the hardest thing you could choose to do! If you want, you can take a look at our WP:TASKCENTER for a list of things you could help out with. If you want, there is also likely a Wikipedia for whichever language you are fluent in if you feel that would be something easier for you to get started on? CoconutOctopus talk 16:28, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou, I will have a look, do I have to start over again Assawongkvin (talk) 16:31, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I would suggest you completely avoid trying to write an article for now; especially one about yourself, as it is very unlikely you are notable by Wikipedia's standards. CoconutOctopus talk 16:33, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

U mean like stop writing articles in Wikipedia ? Assawongkvin (talk) 16:36, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

But I don’t know anyone in and outside Wikipedia who can directly help me tho, if I can’t write an article are you willing to help me write one, it would help a lot Assawongkvin (talk) 16:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello again, @Assawongkvin. Writing new article is not the only way to contribute to Wikipedia - and for relatively new users, it is certainly not the most effective way to do so.

We have thousands and thousands and thousands of articles that really need some work - expanding them, making the writing clearer, updating them with new information, and, especially, adding citations.

I suggest you either look at the Task center and see if there is anything there that you would like to help with; or else choose an area that interests you and look for articles that need improvement. (You might look through the WikiProjects, and choose one or two of those to work in).

If you do this, be prepared for some of your edits to get reverted, particularly at the start. This is normal, and is how Wikipedia is supposed to work, as each editor has their own view of what should be there, and the end-result we are looking for is a consensus. See WP:BRD for how to work with it. ColinFine (talk) 18:18, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou for your advice, how about my draft, do you want me to just leave it (but it took me so much time and effort to do it though, )or do you mean that someone is going to fix the bugs in my draft while I go and try to edit other people’s draft. Because it was supposed to pass already but now it’s only stuck with the Ai problem. I will try to go through the task center and wiki projects. Thankyou for your advice again. Assawongkvin (talk) 00:04, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Leaving the draft does no harm. If there are no improvements in six months, it will be deleted automatically, but easily restored again with a request at WP:REFUND. Don't worry about it. Take your time improving it. You might want to start by writing it in your own words, the original words you used that you claim were deleted (I couldn't find that deleted version), retaining the sources in the current draft. I'm happy to help with the grammar. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou for giving me a hand, may I please ask you that does my draft have enough potential to pass if I write the whole thing again with my own words…… Assawongkvin (talk) 00:33, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

If it does I will get to work and write it all again after I get back from skl td, thankyouuu Assawongkvin (talk) 00:41, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I think it does have potential, as I stated in the previous section. Besides using your own words, the main thing to remember about sources is WP:Golden Rule (read it, it is short). You need multiple sources (at least three) that are reliable, independent of you, and provide significant coverage of you. Winning notable awards helps, especially if the award already has its own Wikipedia article. Coverage in publications with nationwide readership also helps. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:44, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou so much for giving me hope, I will try my best for the last time and if it does not work I will proceed to the task center Assawongkvin (talk) 00:47, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

I have now read it Thankyouuu. Assawongkvin (talk) 01:03, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

It says that they are not interested in people writing about themselves, so do I have to get someone else to write it for me? Could it be my friends or does it have to be someone I don’t know very much (like you)? But where am I going to find a person to help me tho? Assawongkvin (talk) 01:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

No, "not interested in people writing about themselves" refers to the sources, not your draft. Wikipedia isn't interested in sources that consist of the subject talking about themselves. These would be interviews, recordings of performances, and so on. We want sources that are independent of you.

We understand that your draft is written by you. It would be better if someone who never met you would write it, but you may have to wait a very long time for that to happen. If it is accepted and published, you should not touch it after that, but you can make edit requests on the article talk page. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:29, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok Thankyouuu very much for helping me Assawongkvin (talk) 08:10, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@Assawongkvin: Have you considered writing in the Wikipedia for your native tongue? You'll have an easier time of it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:29, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou, but do I have to start ober Assawongkvin (talk) 16:32, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you should start over by editing other articles and learning how to do so well. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 18:21, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Assawongkvin Writing a new Wikipedia article as a new editor is like trying to perform in an orchestra when you don't know how to play a musical instrument. Do you see how it's generally a bad idea?

Instead, why don't you look at Wikipedia:Task Center which has lots of Wikipedia tasks you can get involved in, which aren't creating new articles. qcne (talk) 18:21, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I will take a look, Thankyouuu very much Assawongkvin (talk) 00:05, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@Assawongkvin also, is the articles subject you? HQIQ (talk) 09:23, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

This is already discussed above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:05, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I have a question, should I put a horizontal picture or a vertical picture in my info box, and how many pictures can we normally put in an article? Thankyou Assawongkvin (talk) 11:39, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I said on my talk page that I think your infobox picture should be cropped to the head and shoulders. It would likely be a portrait format then ("vertical") rather than landscape format ("horizontal") but it doesn't matter which kind of picture is in the infobox. There is no limit to the number of pictures, but a picture in the article should illustrate the nearby text if possible. With a biography, usually it's inappropriate to include more than just the infobox picture. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:26, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou so much, I will find more pictures Assawongkvin (talk) 00:35, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

You missed my point. You don't need more pictures. And the picture you uploaded is in danger of being deleted, because you don't own it, the television program or the photographer owns it. Only they can donate it to the Wikimedia Foundation, not you. You have not provided any evidence of this donation to [e-mail]. Either you must show a document of copyright transfer, or the actual copyright owner (not you) needs to write to Wikimedia to grant permission for re-use. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:05, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I see, but I own the picture, I went to the tc show that day and took it myself on my phone. I avoid taking pictures from the tvshows and try to use the ones I took myself only. Do you suggest me to change a picture again or Assawongkvin (talk) 08:21, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

If you are the photographer, then it's fine. If someone else took the picture, you don't own it. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:10, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Non-free images

Latest comment: 3 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jewish_Defense_League&diff=1307581185&oldid=1307180490
This was after an EC edit request to change an image in the infobox for another image. To my suprise, these were not uploaded at Commons, but a Wikipedia file. Also, both images were not free. I made the edit, but I wonder if what I did was allowed, or is there an exception for logos and can we use them even when they are not free? Lova Falk (talk) 13:33, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Looks in order, replacing a PNG graphic with the same, but in SVG. I've tagged the old version for speedy deletion as unused.

More generally, see WP:Non-free content. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:02, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

 Thank you! Lova Falk (talk) 16:42, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

How long does the edit takes

Latest comment: 7 days ago6 comments5 people in discussion

  Courtesy link: User:Godwinesewie/sandbox

We uploaded an article of a biography today and when can it be published Godwinesewie (talk) 18:36, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Who is this "we" you are referring to?

It cannot be published until a reviewer accepts it, and that won't happen until you fix the problems the reviewer identified. The details are all on your talk page. Read it. Follow the links and read those. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:03, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

When the reviewer said 'entire article in comment' they meant that you don't seem to have drafted the article correctly, you pasted the entire text into the Edit Summary field.

There also don't seem to be any sources for the article.

I suggest looking at some of the resources for helping new editors learn how to edit and getting used to the process before trying to create a new article. Good luck! MilesVorkosigan (talk) 19:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

The article was actually pasted inside an HTML comment that was already there in the default draft template. The draft content was all there in the source, just the closing end of the <!-- ... --> comment tag needed to be moved. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:12, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

If you are Godwin Eseiwi Ehigiamusoe, please see WP:COI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:32, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Godwinesewie, 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. ColinFine (talk) 19:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Lecture video as source?

Latest comment: 7 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I'd like to expand Shading language with some history, but it's difficult to find WP:RS for this subject. I've just found a great lecture [11] by Pat Hanrahan that covers the subject in detail. I've read through WP:VIDEOLINK but it doesn't really answer my question: Would it be appropriate to use this as a source? I ask because I don't remember seeing a lecture used as a source here before. Apfelmaische (talk) 18:01, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

That seems to be a reputable subject expert in a video published independently by a reputable organisation, so should be OK. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:50, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

AfC draft declined

Latest comment: 7 days ago10 comments4 people in discussion

  Courtesy link: Draft:Michael Mezz

Hi! I submitted an AfC draft which was just declined. Based on the feedback I understand why this was the case which is why I won't be resubmitting a draft, but one of the commenters mentioned that my subject would be banned from re-creation. I would really appreciate if someone would be able to explain why this is the case? Leed66 (talk) 14:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Leed66 I'm not sure where these comments you are referencing are. It seems that you just need to improve the article before resubmission from my end. Please do link this for me. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 14:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

hi @MallardTV, here's the link Here's the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Michael_Mezz Leed66 (talk) 14:44, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Leed66 I found the article on my own, I just don't see where it's "banned from recreation." MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 14:48, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@MallardTV sorry for the confusion! that comment was left on my user talk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Leed66 Leed66 (talk) 14:52, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Leed66 That doesn't say that the biography will be prevented from re-creation but that admins have the power to do this (see link) and may do so if you persist with submitting re-drafts which do not address the issues that have been pointed out, namely that there is no evidence this person is notable in the way that Wikipedia requires. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Leed66 It seems to just be that your subject is not notable at this time, and you have been somewhat persistent anyway. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 14:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Got it, I appreciate the feedback here! I made quite a large redraft based on the original feedback provided by admins, and given it's been declined again I won't be submitting any further redrafts. Leed66 (talk) 15:24, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

It's not unusual for someone's first (or second) article to go through three or four cycles.

You need to show that the subject meets the requirements outlined at WP:GOLDENRULE.

You also have multiple sections with no citation whatsoever—that it not allowed, for articles about living people especially. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:38, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing This is very helpful context, really appreciate you sharing it! Leed66 (talk) 21:18, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Youtube reuploads of series

Latest comment: 7 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

In the declined draft: Draft:Playhouse Disney (Australian TV Show), I used youtube re-uploads of the series as reference, is that not allowed, or did they simply not check what was inside the links? Wikiguyamir (talk) 21:51, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Wikiguyamir.

Two things:

First, it looks to me as if reference 1 (the only one I've looked at) has been uploaded to YouTube by some random guy. If so, then it is a copyright violation, and we never link to these. (If it were uploaded by the copyright holder on their official YouTube channel, that would be OK for copyright).

Secondly, a Wikipedia article should be a summary of what people unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject, and not much else.

As far as I can see, all but one of your sources are to shows in the series (not independent) and the one that is independent does not even mention Playhouse Disney, and so should not be cited anyway. Looking at why you did that, I see that it is supporting a paragraph of editorialising: that should be removed. No Wikipedia article should ever express judgments about whether anything is good, or bad, or important, or unimportant, in Wikipedia's voice. What should go in an "impact" section is a summary of what independent reliable sources have said about the impact of the subject, not what some Wikipedia editor thinks about it.

Almost all your sources should meet all the criteria in WP:42. Unless you have at least three separate sources which all meet all these criteria, you cannot possiblty write an acceptable article.

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) 22:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Removing fancruft

Latest comment: 7 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Would it be acceptable for me to remove the wall of unsourced details on every Kenner toy from Littlest Pet Shop? I absolutely think it falls under WP:FANCRUFT but because it's such a massive wall of text I wanted to ask for a second opinion. Removing it wouldn't negatively impact the article in any way, since fans can find that detailed information elsewhere and there are no sources provided.

I'm trying to work on cleaning that article up because it's shockingly low on sourcing for something that's likely very easy to find sourcing on. Serilly (talk) 00:05, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Serilly Yes. In fact, per WP:BURDEN you can remove any unsourced content you feel like: it shouldn't be your job to look for sources if you don't want to. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 00:53, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Serilly (talk) 01:01, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

The exception might be synopses of shows. These don't need to cite sources (the show is the source) but they should be concise, not walls of text. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:47, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

List of schools in Bengaluru

Latest comment: 7 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

List of schools in Bengaluru

As they instruction says - "Only add a school to this list if it already has its own article on the English Wikipedia". But, "VIBGYOR High School" in different cities have been added to the list with a redirect to VIBGYOR Group of Schools. None of the schools actually have a separate page for them. So....shouldn't they be removed from the list? BhikhariInformer (talk) 01:52, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Adding multiple styles of citation

Latest comment: 6 days ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, planning to make some edits to an article that currently uses full citations. I'd like to add short citations to the article, as I'm pulling from a book and may cite from a number of pages. My reasoning is that citing each by specific page would be more helpful than one citation that says pp. 21, 54, 78, 123, etc. Is it acceptable to add differing styles of citation to an article? (I'm familiar with WP:WHENINROME, but am not planning to change the article's entire style, just add a different sourcing style for this one source. LivelyRatification (talk) 02:26, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Rather than "Rome", LivelyRatification, could you please specify the article for us? Then I'd understand what's meant by "full citations". -- Hoary (talk) 02:39, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary: The article is Peter Breen (Australian politician). LivelyRatification (talk) 02:40, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Got it. The article doesn't seem to cite anything that's obviously a book. If you want to cite page 21, then a little further into the article pages 46–48, and finally page 11 of the same one book (one that I shall choose at random), then your references could be:

• <ref name="Blum">{{Cite book | last=Blum | first=William | year=2014 | title=Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions since World War II | ___location=London | publisher=Zed | ISBN=978-1-7836-0177-6}}</ref>{{Rp|21}}
• <ref name="Blum" />{{Rp|46–48}}
• <ref name="Blum" />{{Rp|11}}

There are many possible complications (e.g. citing differently authored/titled contributions to the same edited volume); feel free to ask about any that might arise. -- Hoary (talk) 04:56, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Article about a company

Latest comment: 6 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

I tried to post an article about a company but it gets rejected

Hi everyone,

I am trying to post an article about a company called Dexatel, but it gets rejected. I gathered 4+ reliable sources, wrote an article that tries to stay informative, rather then promotional, however it still gets rejected for different reasons (for example, LLM usage, unreliable sources, promotional language).

I need help posting it to the platform. If you can help me write and submit article, or give any advice on what to do? Draft:Dexatel. Mikayel Khachatryan (talk) 10:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Most of your sources do not meet the criteria set out at WP:NCORP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:55, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

What I think you should do first, Mikayel Khachatryan, is to respond candidly and informatively to DoubleGrazing's post "Managing a conflict of interest". -- Hoary (talk) 11:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Mikayel Khachatryan. The first two sources I looked at are both Dexatel telling the world about themselves.

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. And it is even more difficult if you have a conflict of interest ColinFine (talk) 13:45, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

WikiSound archive

Latest comment: 6 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

How can we create a beautifully designed WikiSound archive please?

Hello, I am an editor very interested in archiving sound, soudscapes, open access archives of podcasts that is beautifully presented and searchable, similar to Spotify but for files that are able to be shared/copyright free.

I know of Wikimedia Commons and have seen the Sound chapter and feel that some improvements are needed.

I appreciate that Wikipedia has evolved from text-based sources (encyclopedias) and would also love for Wikipedia to archive grassroot sound archives, interviews, podcasts, disappearing sounds, open access music etc.

I have become involved in Wikipedia farily recently, although joined up a few years ago and am impressed with Wikipedia's mission, reach, protocols, opportunities and generous community. Plus now these archives are particularly important community service providers as feed the ai chatbots and therefore provide reliable sources and a repose from the rampant misinformation that is available.

I am familiar with video2commons, musicbrainz, soulseek, internet library and a few other archives. It would be fabulous to centralise sound elements within Wikipedia ( to also be incorporated within the articles) and I believe this additional archive would hold great appeal, support the mission of cultural relevance and encourage more editors to get involved.

It was suggested that this project might suit as a Wikiproject, I don't know much about those and feel that this project should have its own ID and format.

I look forward to knowing your thoughts on this matter! I&I22 (talk) 03:11, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I&I22, as your plans concern Wikimedia Commons, you're likely to get a better answer at their help desk than here at en:Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 08:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Maproom thank you Maproom! I understood that Wikipedia is the top tier umbrella for all Wiki projects. I will check in with Wikimedia and to clarify I am suggesting a sibling Wiki project or chapter of Wikipedia with a slightly different interface. Best regards and thanks again I&I22 (talk) 12:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @I&I22. Please see meta:Proposals for new projects. Note that it says at the top that new proposals can be made and discussed, but will not be accepted until a general review is complete. ColinFine (talk) 13:42, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@ColinFine terrific! thank you and noted re: proposals and general reviews I&I22 (talk) 14:27, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Referencing Wikipedia

Latest comment: 6 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I am working on updating a page. I've seen that in another language, the page has more information. In this case, we are talking about the English page referencing that a person had 4 children, whereas his page in Portuguese also gave the name of the children. I liked for the reference in the Portuguese page to quote it in the English page, but coudn't find it. Can I update the names in the English page and reference the Portuguese page, or write something like "according to the Portugese page, he has 4 children: Osvaldo, Francis, etc...)? Francisdpas89 (talk) 14:34, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Please do not use articles from Wikipedia (whether English Wikipedia or Wikipedias in other languages) as sources, since Wikipedia is a user-generated source. The same goes for websites mirroring Wikipedia content or publications relying on material from Wikipedia as sources. Content from a Wikipedia article is not considered reliable unless it is backed up by citing reliable sources. Confirm that these sources support the content, then use them directly. If they don't, then they can't obviously be used. Lectonar (talk) 14:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Francisdpas89: Just because a person had children doesn't mean they need to be named. WP:BLPNAME, which I recommend you read, suggests that the names of non-notable minors from articles about their notable family members are not given. Bazza 7 (talk) 15:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Translated page

Latest comment: 6 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, I have created an English translation of the Italian Wikipedia page on Filippo Monti. I’d appreciate a review before submitting via Articles for Creation. Here’s the link to my draft: User:Malp89/Filippo Monti Malp89 (talk) 12:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Malp89 I took the liberty of placing your draft at Draft:Filippo Monti over your comment there(which basically said what you say here). You may now submit it for a review; this is the best way to get feedback instead of asking for a pre-review review. 331dot (talk) 13:11, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Please disclose your connection to him, as it seems that you took a picture of him. See WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 13:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I can confirm that I have no professional or financial connection with him. I simply took the picture myself and uploaded it as a volunteer contributor. Malp89 (talk) 15:25, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I have declined your submission, but please continue to work on it. The subject is very likely notable, but the article lacks the required inline citations. Once that is fixed, resubmit it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Mexican Federal and State Highways

Latest comment: 6 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I found a map from the Mexican transportation that lines out each state and federal highway at http://rnc.imt.mx/tablero/. I wouldn't mind working on putting those here. I'd use a mix of google maps and that website. I'm not sure where to start or how to source it. Mostly talking about this article List of Mexican Federal Highways and making a similar one for the state highways AshDaWolfie1 (talk) 08:26, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@AshDaWolfie1 If you haven't already done so, you should read WP:MAPS. Most mapping in Wikipedia is done using OpenStreetMap rather than Google maps. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:18, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

speed up publishing

Latest comment: 2 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

how can i speed up publishing a draft page,its called Draft:Kristian Arsenov,its about my fiend so if you can pls help me Pinki iz caribrod (talk) 23:17, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pinki iz caribrod I just looked at your draft and it got declined. There are a few problems with your article. First, the article must be written in English as this language edition is written in that language. Your article might be better suited for the Bosnian Wikipedia. Second, Wikipedia doesn't care whether you know a person in order to have an article about them. It must meet notability criteria. You also have a conflict of interest, which means you have to be careful about how you write about your friend. It's better to not write the article yourself and instead make edit requests due to COI. I can provide links to the guideline pages upon request if you would like further explanation. Interstellarity (talk) 23:25, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

You want to "speed up publishing a draft"? What is your hurry? There are no deadlines on Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:28, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Your draft is an egregious breach of our policy on writing about living people, and will shortly be deleted.

If you write something like that again your account will be blocked. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:39, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

How to create a reference

Latest comment: 2 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

How to create a reference for Astronomical Journals

  Courtesy link: Draft:OB associations

I am in the the process of creating an article on the topic OB association. Can anyone tell how to create reference for journals Abdullah1099 (talk) 05:25, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Abdullah1099, I recommend using the template, {{Cite journal}}. See that link for full documentation. Reply here if you need additional help. Good luck! Mathglot (talk) 08:09, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

If you use the visual editor, you can put the cursor after the . of the sentence you want to reference, click "cite" and then paste in the doi of the journal article. Then click "insert". Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:34, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

@Abdullah1099 As well as that method in the visual editor, a digital object identifier can be converted automatically to create full citations, using either WP:Citation expander or citer.toolforge. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:36, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for your precious help, Now i am going to understand how this cite journal works. I do source edit and some times visual editing. Abdullah1099 (talk) 11:25, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Reliability :- Namu Wiki

Latest comment: 6 days ago5 comments5 people in discussion

hello, i want to ask about the reliability of Namuwiki

does it accepted as a source or not? Mr.WikiPageEditor (talk) 16:52, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

it's user generated, so no.

but if they list sources you may be able to check those for use. aquarium substrate^talk 17:10, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Namuwiki, being a wiki created by users, would not be considered a Reliable Source. See WP:UGC (or WP:NAMUWIKI) for a full explanation.

It does have a compatible license, meaning you may reuse text from their articles here, but since their English articles are just machine translations, that's unlikely to be useful. WelpThatWorked (talk) 17:14, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Also, @Mr.WikiPageEditor, the wiki states that content still may be biased. HQIQ talk 21:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you're saying that Namuwiki says somewhere that it's biased, @HQIQ, or pointing out that Wikipedia doesn't necessarily rule out a source because it's biased. See WP:BIASEDSOURCES. But unreliability does. ColinFine (talk) 00:04, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Keep getting blocked

Latest comment: 6 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hi! I'm a marketing account manager and have been tasked with building a wikipedia page for a well respected university professor who is published in a lot of journals with tons of credibility. the issue im facing is that my account cannot be created, my ip is getting blocked any time I try this action. Can I please get some help with this issue?

Thank you. 2001:56A:7955:D600:1435:D166:BB51:B404 (talk) 21:29, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

the block now says i cannot do anything until July, 2027. This is super frustrating. 2001:56A:7955:D600:1435:D166:BB51:B404 (talk) 21:32, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello. What you may have been tasked with is between you and whoever has given you the task: it is likely to be extremely difficult unless you are an experienced Wikipedia editor, and may in fact be impossible. Have you read WP:BOSS? ColinFine (talk) 00:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Try here.

That said, it's very important that you understand Wikipedia's policies on conflict of interest, and your obligations in respect to that. Similarly, the professor needs to understand that he (or she) will not have control over the content of the article. DS (talk) 21:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Where do I start?

Latest comment: 5 days ago6 comments6 people in discussion

Is there a link or resource where I can find pages that need editing? I want to contribute to Wikipedia but I don't want to try writing a full article at first. I know a lot about the topics of history and technology if that helps narrow my request.

-Keller KTSTW (talk) 15:10, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@KTSTW Any article could benefit from editing. As long as it’s encyclopedic and sourced! MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 15:13, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @KTSTW. I would strongly recommend having a look at Wikipedia:Task Center which outlines many common tasks, from beginner friendly ones to advanced ones, that a new editor can do! qcne (talk) 15:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@KTSTW You should also find some suggestions at Special:Homepage and that will track your "impact" and assign a mentor, should you need one. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello there! Do you frequently read on Wikipedia? In that case, you will eventually find mistakes or information that isn't up-to-date. I wouldn't worry too much about finding articles that need editing, but rather just discover them. Rockfighterz M (talk) 22:34, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

KTSTW, you could check WikiProjects that are related to topics you are interested in. For example, try WP:WikiProject History, or WP:WikiProject Technology. Mathglot (talk) 03:40, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Mechanics of Wikipedia

Latest comment: 5 days ago6 comments4 people in discussion

  Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Semi-metro

Hello everyone, I've been happily editing Wikipedia for a while now, mostly in the field of architecture, cars and transit. Recently I have came some unpleasantness, which make me wonder: do I need some guidedance? I have searched through earlier entries here, and found the amusing Philosophy of Wikipedia, it's inspiring but I may need something else.

For a long time I was under the impression that one can add almost anything to Wikipedia, as long it is referenced in a reliable and independent source. But things aren't so simple anymore as, some say, that it can be undone because the addition contains a neologism. I disengaged because I took a Wikibreak, also keeping in mind that, per WP:NORUSH, Rome wasn't built in a day. However, recently the narrative "I see a neologism, it means delete" is popping up in multiple places recently.

I'm in need of some guidance of the mechanics of Wikipedia, especially on how to handle discrepancies between a policy and a guideline. I was under the impression that a policy is valued more than a guideline. Has there been any instances where this has happened before, and how was it solved? Or perhaps, even better, has there been an essay written on this topic? Currently I'm lost, and even a suggestion where I could go with my two questions would be really appreciated. KatVanHuis (talk) 10:51, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@KatVanHuis: Perhaps this is what you are looking for: Wikipedia:The difference between policies, guidelines and essays ? And we have of course our own text about neologisms. Lectonar (talk) 11:38, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello Lectonar, and thank you for your quick reply.

The latter link I have studied over and over again in the past months, but I feel it's not in line with the article on neologisms. Or at least, the article mentions "robot" as a neologism. I just can't image that the term "robot" can't be used in Wikipedia articles because it is a neologism. The first link is basically what I was looking for. It does mention that Policies have more value, but of course that exceptions exist... KatVanHuis (talk) 23:55, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@KatVanHuis:, you've made the point that Wikipedia articles are about subjects, not terms. But your article fails to explain what its subject, denoted by the neologism "Semi-metro", is. The closest you come is in the lead: One key difference from metro lines (rapid transit) is that a metro line has an entirely conflict-free track, often completely grade separated, whereas semi-metro has lines which only partially run in tunnels and on viaducts. That makes little sense to me. The Northern Line of the London "underground" runs partially in tunnels and on a viaduct. Maybe your intended subject is worthy of an article, but it's hard to tell without knowing what it is. Maproom (talk) 22:33, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello Maproom and thank you for your interesting comment. I wish someone had pointed this out earlier. I've rewritten the lede, I hope things are clearer now. I've rode the Northern Line, but not end-to-end, so I don't know if it's completely free from road traffic level-crossings. But it didn't appear to be using trams or light rail trains. But again, thank you for mentioning that the lede could have been more specific, this comment is very useful. KatVanHuis (talk) 00:04, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

There used to be a few level crossings on the London Underground system, but they were eliminated in the 1960s; there are certainly none on the Northern Line or elsewhere today, apart from two within depot areas inaccessible to the public, and one on tracks owned by London Underground but beyond the operations of its own trains. Nor are there any trams or light rail trains (as usually defined) on the system. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.150.115 (talk) 06:20, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Something odd in my talk page

Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Yesterday I got a notification from my talk where this anonymous editor asks me about Ardahan page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/149.140.53.235 Keeps asking me about removing cited climate table which has never been removed. Is it possible that this table could not appear in some devices, or is it just someone playing with me?PAper GOL (talk) 10:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@PAper GOL Welcome to Teahouse, The IP editor wants to know why you changed the averages in the table without a clear edit summary. Your edit summary was "Reverted an old change"this. Could you clarify which old change you are referring to? 🐍 Thilio🤖 11:41, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi and Thanks for helping. There were numbers regarding the mean number of days with precipitation (rain-snow etc.), which I reverted. The second reply is the reason I started the discussion, stating that All climate table was removed and not just part of it. I checked the page several times and the table still stands. And most figures are the official 1991-2020 averages as the IP editor stated. Only days with snow has a different source, and I cited that as well.PAper GOL (talk) 11:46, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Declined article

Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments3 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.

---

Hello,

I recently submitted a draft article, which was declined due to concerns that it “is not adequately supported by reliable sources.” I would greatly appreciate guidance from experienced editors on how to improve the article so it meets Wikipedia’s standards.

In particular, I would be grateful for advice on: - Which parts of the article require additional reliable, independent sources. - Recommendations for trustworthy sources that would support the content. - Best practices for referencing, including how to cite web pages, reports, and press coverage in a way that aligns with Wikipedia guidelines.

Thank you very much for your time and help, any guidance or examples would be extremely valuable as I work to improve the article.

Regards, Ngochandao Ngochandao (talk) 11:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Please only use one forum at a time to seek assistance. 331dot (talk) 11:10, 22 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.

Changing a profile picture

Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I am trying to change a 'profile picture' associated with my father - but struggling to do so as I find any edits I make seem to be reverted. Any assistance would be much appreciated. Vsavory5 (talk) 10:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

It looks like you did not know what to do, and inserted the file into the URL as a reference. It is a good idea to experiment on a sandbox to get the hang of what you want to do. Also since you have disclosed a WP:COI it would be good to state that on your user page. Say how you are connected to Michael Savory on User:Vsavory5. Then others who check you edit may determine a motivation. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:21, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Seems to have been done. Is there anything else you need help with? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:31, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Vulgarity policy for article/reversion

Latest comment: 5 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

I removed some extremely offensive text in the page on Justin Roiland (link below) and replaced it with a description that maintains the meaning of the text while maintaining safety for all readers. My edit was removed by someone saying “We don’t censor.” with a link to the talk page. I reviewed the talk page, and I still disagree strongly with the revision because of the following reasons. The Wikipedia:Offensive Material article states, “Material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available.” The included text is universally offensive and does not make the article more useful or informative as is recommended by Wikipedia policy and guidelines. “Not censored" does not give special favor to offensive content.” What is the best course of action? I do not wish to start an argument or editing disagreement. Page: Justin Roiland Peachykiwimon (talk) 04:00, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@Peachykiwimon, you're totally in the clear here to remove this one. I think you were probably reflexively reverted because your edit summary is basically "think of the children!" and that line of argument is given approximately zero weight here. If you'd said "summarizing unencyclopedic quote" or something you'd probably be fine. -- asilvering (talk) 04:03, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! Peachykiwimon (talk) 04:26, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Peachykiwimon, I agree that the quote in question was gratuitous and unnecessary, and that summarizing was best. I also agree with Asilvering that an edit summary mentioning children is likely to provoke an anti-censorship reaction. There is some exceptionally ugly and disgusting content here, because it has encyclopedic value. Kids can see it if they look. That's life. Cullen328 (talk) 08:01, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

You might also want to read WP:NOTCENSORED. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:34, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Better reading when signed out than when signed in

Latest comment: 5 days ago4 comments4 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.

---

When signed in to wikipedia those quick blue links fail to show the brief summary. Therefore I prefer to be signed out and be able to read the pop-ups for the blue words. Why is a paying wikipedia reader put at such a disadvantage?

Or, why are non-members enjoying an a better reading experience?

Q: how to set the page so signed-in paying members can enjoy full services of pop-up summries? SrkhikerS (talk) 22:23, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello @SrkhikerS. As a signed in editor, I'm able to view those link popups when hovering over them. Perhaps you might've messed with a setting accidentally. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 22:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @SrkhikerS, and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds as if you've disabled Navigation popups in your preferences.

Note, by the way, that there is no such thing as a "paying member". Whether or not you choose to donate to the Wikimedia foundation is not known to anybody or anything in the Wikipedia project. Your Wikipedia account is not in any way connected with you as a donor. ColinFine (talk) 00:23, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@SrkhikerS I and others answered this at the help desk several hours before you asked again here at the Teahouse. Please don't ask in multiple places, as it only wastes volunteer time. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:47, 22 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.

Header requesting more citations

Latest comment: 5 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Good day, I was reading through Wikipedia as part of a daily scroll through it and the page I was on didn't have a lot of citations listed for many of things (for not knowing proper terms). While it has a fairly robust references and sources page, it doesn't seem to fall in line with Wikipedia's guidelines on verifiability but I do not know how to add a header to the page requesting more citations and I cannot find anything regarding it.

The article in question is Syndicalism. Johnthegreat6609 (talk) 16:41, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

You could add the {{refimprove}} tag to the top of the page, but it would probably be removed because, as you observed, the referencing is already quite robust. I would suggest tagging individual sentences with {{citation needed}}, {{failed verification}}, or other inline templates listed at Category:Inline citation and verifiability dispute templates. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:48, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, I'll see about doing that later today. Johnthegreat6609 (talk) 16:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@Johnthegreat6609 I see that there is a {{citation needed}} in the Lead. That's not needed, since the lead summarises the rest of the article and that's where the relevant citations should be. See WP:LEADCITE. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:14, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@Johnthegreat6609: I note that every paragraph in the body has a citation. The thing to do would be to check individual sentences that are not cited against those paragraph citations, when you have access to those citations. If they fail verification, then add {{citation needed}} or {{failed verification}}. I do not believe that the article needs {{refimprove}} or any section requires

{{refimprove section}}. Peaceray (talk) 17:25, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Archiving user talk

Latest comment: 5 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

How do you archive the messages on your user talk page? Breck0530 (talk) 17:50, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Help:Archiving (plain and simple) should be helpfully instructive. Amstrad00 (talk) 18:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Help me to go Canada

Latest comment: 1 day ago5 comments5 people in discussion

Please help 103.163.238.204 (talk) 06:00, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a travel agent. HiLo48 (talk) 06:18, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

@IP what do you mean? HQIQ talk 07:08, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Depending on where you're starting from, you might start by heading North. Read the Wikipedia article for compasses for more info about that - you could also read about maps. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 11:42, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Based on your IP address, you appear to be in Islamabad. If that's right, Emirates / Air Canada have a weekly flight to Toronto, with a transfer in Dubai. Total journey time about 24 hours. I found that information in Google Maps. For some inexplicable reason, they seem unable to give driving directions. Mike Marchmont (talk) 13:02, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Artist biography

Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

My name is James Matthew Udofia,I am a gospel music singer and songwriter. Please I want to add my biography to Wikipedia James Matthew Udofia (talk) 17:19, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@James Matthew Udofia: Have outlets with editorial oversight and no connexion to you written about you at length or otherwise reviewed your work? If no, then we can't even consider an article, and we'd urge you to reconsider seeking a Wikipedia article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:22, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @James Matthew Udofia, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory or social media.

Writing about yourself in Wikipedia successfully is so difficult that we strongly advise that you don't even try. See autobiography.

In order to succeed, you would need to find publications where people wholly unconnected with you had chosen to write about you, and base the article almost entirely on what they said about you: what you know or think about yourself is not relevant. Do you think you would find it possible to write in that way, even supposing you found suitable sources?

If you did succeed in having an article about you accepted, the article would not belong to you, would not be controlled by you, and would not necessarily say what you want it to say. It could be edited by almost anybody in the world except you and your associates - you would be able to request changes, but would not get to decide what changes were actually made.

In addition to all this, 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.

I suggest that you either decide you want to contribute to Wikipedia, but give up the idea or writing about yourself; or give up Wikipedia, and use other outlets to promote yourself. You can't successfully to both together. ColinFine (talk) 20:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

IABot issues

Latest comment: 5 days ago10 comments3 people in discussion

Hi there, I am trying to use the IABot via the "Fix dead links" link, but when trying to archive live links, it just crashes with a 502 Gateway Error. I was wondering if anyone else is having this issue? Could it be browser-related? Conyo14 (talk) 05:32, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Conyo14 yep, I agree. I think it’s browser related, i think you’ll have to ask an interface administrator for help. HQIQ talk 07:00, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Please don't post nonsense replies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

"502 bad gateway" is explained at 502 Bad Gateway and in more detial at [12] It is unlikely to be a browser issue, but could be an issue with your VPN, ISP or corporate network, or the target system. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

So, I have done this on two different systems

• ISP#1, w/ VPN (desktop)
• ISP#2, w/o VPN (desktop)

Would it be worth a try on a mobile device? Conyo14 (talk) 15:54, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Probably not; by a process of elimination, you have shown that it not the VPN, nor the ISP. Which leaves the target system. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Could you explain what target system refers to? Conyo14 (talk) 17:14, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

The server or servers at the other end of the request to you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:05, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Excellent. How can I fix the server at the other end (if there is anything I can do)? Conyo14 (talk) 19:54, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Try IABot's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:16, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Trying to add a map to a page

Latest comment: 5 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

I'm trying to add a map to this page: Draft:Southern Walnut Creek Trail

The map I would like to add is here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3457710#map=13/30.29295/-97.66129

The wikidata entry I made is here: d:Q132830932

Can someone help me understand why this is failing? Fastmole (talk) 15:38, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

We can't see why it's failing, because you haven't saved the relevant edit. Can you do so (then revert yourself), or otherwise describe what you're doing, in detail?

See also WP:Maps. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:50, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing The OP does have the template {{maplink|frame=yes|type=line|id=Q132830932}} in the draft's infobox. I don't know why it isn't working as the link in Wikidata does work. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Ah, I assumed this was a recent issue, not one from back in March.

The issue was with |id=Q132830932. The template expects the Wikidata ID of an item that is about the subject (not about an OSM map; now fixed); and expects the equivalent object in OSM to be tagged with the reciprocal Wikidata ID. (as I have now done).

That may fix it (we need to wait for caches to clear), but I'm not sure it works for relations. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:34, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Update: working now; draft reviewed and published. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:55, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Edit types and edit warring

Latest comment: 4 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Which edit types can count as edit warring and which are exempt? ==

I know that the following reverts are exempt from edit warring/3RR:

• Reverting your own edits, including "accidental edits".
• Reverting edits in your own user space.
• Reverting obvious disruptive edits, such as vandalism.
• Revering edits performed to evade a block or ban.

However, I'm not sure if these types of reverts can count towards edit warring:

• Edit warring with a legitimate alternate account by having two computers side-by-side logged into different accounts and constantly reverting each other's edits (i.e. edit warring with yourself).
• Edit warring in someone else's user space (if the owner gives permission).
• Edit warring in the sandbox, or your own user sandbox.
• Canceling out the fourth revert by reverting the violating edit.

2001:56B:3FFA:3632:9961:B1C6:E784:2F12 (talk) 19:28, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

What possible reason could you have for any of these behaviours? ColinFine (talk) 20:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm just curious. I'm not actually going to do these behaviors. 2001:56B:3FFA:3632:9961:B1C6:E784:2F12 (talk) 20:43, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@ColinFine, would any of that activity inflate an editor's edit count? David10244 (talk) 04:36, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, David10244, this would inflate a user's edit count. This is one of several reasons why an edit count is not a very accurate tool for evaluating editor productivity. To the IP editor, edit warring with oneself or on a prearranged basis for amusement is disruptive behavior that can lead to a block. Cullen328 (talk) 06:51, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Name of ITN meme

Latest comment: 1 day ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Name of the ITN meme photo of a Central or South American politician? Famous for staying on ITN for a long time. Therapyisgood (talk) 16:38, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Try asking at WT:ITN. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:35, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Probably Fernando Lugo (Wikipedia:Lugo's law)? Helpful Raccoon (talk) 20:45, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Change name userbox

Latest comment: 13 hours ago3 comments2 people in discussion

How do I change the userbox name? Can anyone help me? User:JohnDavies9612/Userboxes/Userbox Name JohnDavies9612 (talk) 12:04, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

@JohnDavies9612, for you to change your userbox name, you can go to User:JohnDavies9612/Userboxes/Userbox Name, click Edit to change the text, save the page, or use Move to rename the page or I suggest see Wikipedia:Userboxes for guidance. Thilio^{R O B O T🤖 talk} 12:20, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for teaching it. I have changed it. JohnDavies9612 (talk) 13:11, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Requesting review of Draft:DramaBox

Latest comment: 4 days ago6 comments5 people in discussion

Hello, I would like to request a review of my draft article Draft:DramaBox

The draft was previously declined, but I have revised it into a neutral, encyclopedic style and added independent, reliable sources (36Kr Europe, Sensor Tower, Wired, Barchart News).

Could someone please review the draft and let me know if it now meets Wikipedia’s standards for notability, sourcing, and tone? I would greatly appreciate any feedback, as I hope the article can be published soon if it is ready.

Thank you very much! Siqicao47 (talk) 18:51, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

submitting it to review will give you feedback, please look over the notices on top of your draft for advice.

also of your 4 references, the only one about dramabox itself is a press release and thus not independent. see WP:42 for more clarity on what is needed. aquarium substrate^talk 19:09, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I’ve revised and resubmitted my draft on DramaBox.

This time I expanded the article with new sections (History, Features, Market, Industry Context, Awards), rewrote it in a neutral encyclopedic tone, and added multiple independent sources (SCMP, The Guardian, Business Insider, Sensor Tower, 36Kr Europe, Barchart News).

Could someone please take another look and let me know if the draft is now ready for acceptance? Thank you very much! Siqicao47 (talk) 19:21, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

You have submitted it and it is pending. Asking for a review to "jump the line" isn't likely to work. Please be patient. As stated on the draft,."This may take 5 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,786 pending submissions waiting for review." 331dot (talk) 19:23, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Siqicao47 It doesn't help that your first citation to the Guardian, a reliable source, doesn't mention DramaBox. Did you use a chatbot to write the text? These bots are well known for making up citations. This has already been noted by User:jlwoodwa, the previous Afc reviewer and makes for an immediate "fail". Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

... and the fifth, which is to the same Guardian article. Maproom (talk) 22:47, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

How can I get more people to join a WikiProject?

Latest comment: 3 days ago11 comments6 people in discussion

Recently I've been getting more involved with articles about skyscrapers, particularly tallest building lists, on Wikipedia. Most of these articles (especially in non-Western countries) are an absolute mess, and the associated WikiProject, WikiProject Skyscrapers, doesn't appear too active. Besides edits by myself on the project page and its talk page, I saw that both pages have received few edits or interactions. I changed the status from active to semi-active as a result.

While this is possibly a natural result of me having a niche interest that very few other people also share, having more editors involved would definitely make my work easier. All the "tallest building" pages have different standardizations (which is why I updated WP:SKYLIST recently) and any editors who do work on them seem disconnected from any other page, and are probably unaware of the wider WikiProject. I've tried posting to Reddit to boost participation with no result.

What's the best short or long-term way editors have found for reviving a WikiProject? LivinAWestLife (talk) 22:21, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Additionally, a couple of editors who do edit these pages somewhat frequently seem unwilling to communicate. One of them is an IP address editor! Their talk pages are full of other editors chiming in but they themselves have never left edit summaries. Editors like User talk:Camiloj747 never leave edit summaries. For some reason seeing editors not interact with the community irks me. LivinAWestLife (talk) 22:27, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

You could post on the talk pages of "parent" Wikiprojects; in this case Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Architecture.

You could look for featured, or new, articles on Skyscrapers, and post on their talk pages, or on the talk pages of the editors who worked on them. You could post on the talk pages of articles or Wikiprojects about cities with Skyscrapers, such as New York.

For the edit summary issue, you can use {{uw-editsummary}} (for new users) or {{uw-editsummary2}} (for experienced users), on their talk pages (WP:TWINKLE is a handy tool for deploying those, and others). Editors who repeatedly refuse to engage in discussion of disputed edits, to the point of disruption, can be reported at WP:ANI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:07, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Alright, I will try some of those, thanks! LivinAWestLife (talk) 11:29, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the context is that many or most wikiprojects are semiactive or inactive, so reversing the trend at WikiProject Skyscrapers may not be possible. Even Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture is only semi-active. As Pigsonthewing says, it is possible to communicate without using a wikiproject. TSventon (talk) 12:24, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Do you know if there's a reason why WikiProjects have become less active even if the overall number of edits to Wikipedia hasn't declined? LivinAWestLife (talk) 14:01, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

It depends: what do you think the purpose of a WikiProject is, in practical terms? Some WikiProjects have detailed guidelines on how to write articles in their subject area, others use their talk page as a sort of central discussion/help page for their topic, while others are more a list of names of people who are interested in a topic and who you could collaborate with. Interest in each of these types of things waxes and wanes over time. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 00:56, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm thinking of WP:WINE, which started out as a very active Wikiproject and is now a task force under Wikiproject food and drink. The project in its heyday had a lot of activity because wine is a huge topic area, there was a lack of wine-related articles on Wikipedia, and the existing articles were poor quality and needed a lot of development. As the amount of good-quality wine-related content grew, content creation gave way to maintenance. Eventually it languished because people moved on, especially since the main driver for the project left Wikipedia to pursue wine-related career goals. Basically the project served its purpose. I think other wikiprojects experience a similar life cycle. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:59, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Anachronist:, roughly when was the wine project most active? I have been editing Wikipedia for about seven years so I probably missed the golden age of wikiprojects. Annoyingly, Wikipedia:Size of Wikipedia has a gap in word count figures from 2011 to 2017. TSventon (talk) 11:28, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

I'd say the wine project was really active from its beginning around 2006, peaked out over the next couple years and started to taper off around 2009. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:10, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@LivinAWestLife, I would love to help out! Is there anything specific that you might need an extra set of hands in? I'm not a very experienced editor but I am quite interested in architecture....3602kiva (talk) 05:25, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Need experience editor for wikipedia

Latest comment: 3 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I am looking for some one -a volunteer to edit the biography for wikipedia. I tried but failed. My tecnical knowledge so limited that I dare not try again. I will be very glad if someone can help me. thanks Suan Smuanthang (talk) 06:14, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia. It's made up of articles. A CV, which is what you have created, is not an encyclopedia article. Simple advice: Just stop. If you have enabled email for "Smuanthang", it's likely that you will receive offers to produce an article about you, for a price. The people making such offers are incompetent, dishonest, or both. Do not respond. Meanwhile, you can post your CV on LinkedIn or a similar website. -- Hoary (talk) 06:33, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Making photo available

Latest comment: 3 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

  Courtesy link: Jeanne Socrates

I have a photo suitable for adding to my Wiki page (Jeanne Socrates). How does the photographer go about granting free usage so it can be posted to my page?  Or can he simply go to my page and add it directly as the person who took the photo and is happy to grant free use? Seasocks (talk) 04:39, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

@Seasocks, the first step would be to upload the image into Wikimedia Commons. The page is relatively straightforward to use, and seeing as the image is yours, there shouldn't be a problem with granting Creative Commons rights. Once uploaded into Wikimedia Commons with a title (and categories), it is just a matter of inserting the image on the page, either using the Visual Editor's image tool or a source code embed.

I also made a few edits on the aforementioned article as well. 3602kiva (talk) 05:52, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

@Seasocks Please take the time to read WP:A picture of you. "I have a photo" doesn't necessarily mean the copyright is yours, like if it's a selfie. In general, the photographer needs to give permission in the right way. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:50, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

@Seasocks: please note that if, as you say, you are the subject of this article, then you have an obvious conflict of interest in it, and should not be editing the article directly but should instead make edit requests via the article talk page or by using the wizard at WP:ERW. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:55, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation page formatting

Latest comment: 3 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Should there be a period at the end of each entry? Or should it be left out? Jacksonvil (talk) 07:30, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Jacksonvil, if you're asking which is preferable, (A)

• George E. Allen Jr. (1914–1990), Virginia attorney
• George R. Allen (1838–1901), Wisconsin state assemblyman
• George V. Allen (1903–1970), United States diplomat

etc, or (B)

• George E. Allen Jr. (1914–1990), Virginia attorney.
• George R. Allen (1838–1901), Wisconsin state assemblyman.
• George V. Allen (1903–1970), United States diplomat.

etc, then (A) is better. -- Hoary (talk) 07:45, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Jacksonvil, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages#Closing punctuation says no no closing punctuation. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:48, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jacksonvil Periods are used (among other things) to terminate sentences. Those are not sentences. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:26, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Removal of names

Latest comment: 3 days ago7 comments5 people in discussion

Wish to have our names removed from your site to protect our privacy

I wish to have my name and my ex husbands name removed from your site as parents of Orren Stephenson. You have breach Privacy Rules in Australia and my personal privacy and security is threatened. 203.185.243.149 (talk) 06:21, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

I see no names of parents at Orren Stephenson, and that article hasn't been edited since May. You might be thinking of something you see on Google, but Google draws on more than WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:42, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

If you see the names on a page here at wikipedia.org then please link it.

  Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that this paragraph was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong. The same feedback facility is also provided on Bing, Yahoo, and some other search engines. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:41, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Whatever the IP is concerned with, it didn't come from our Wikipedia article Orren Stephenson. His parents have never been mentioned in the article, let alone named. Meters (talk) 07:58, 24 August 2025 (UTC) modified per suggestion 08:56, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

@Meters: As IP is certainly not fluent in wikilinks, I'd like you to emphasise you meant "it didn't come from the Wikipedia article Orren Stephenson". --CiaPan (talk) 08:49, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Fair enough. Done Meters (talk) 08:56, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Their names are not in our Wikipedia article Disappearance of Samantha Murphy either. Meters (talk) 08:08, 24 August 2025 (UTC) modified per suggestion 08:56, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Password reset

Latest comment: 3 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hello. I am user transatracurium, and need to reset my password. I still have access to the associated email address but no matter what device I try to access the special reset password page it reports my IP is blocked. Can someone please help? Many thanks in advance. 2.103.160.198 (talk) 08:35, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

This IP is not currently blocked. Try clearing your cookies -- you may be under a cookie block. If it does not say you are globally blocked, try accessing Special:PasswordReset on another WMF wiki where you have an account, such as Commons (this may or may not work, I never tried). You could also try another IP address, such as resetting your router (on dynamic IPs), switching to mobile data if you are using home WiFi (if available), internet cafes, or establishments/institutions that offer free WiFi (if those exist where you live). OutsideNormality (talk) 21:26, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Many thanks indeed; clearing the cookies worked! Alice Jamie (talk) 10:13, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Andalus Bank

Latest comment: 3 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

•   Courtesy link: User:M.marmouri/sandbox

Hello, I’ve recently created a new article on Andalus Bank (an Islamic commercial bank based in Tripoli, Libya).

I’ve added reliable sources, an infobox, inline citations, and a gallery of images (with permissions). I’ve also disclosed that I am editing under contract on behalf of the bank, in line with Wikipedia’s paid editing policy.

I would greatly appreciate if experienced editors could review the article for neutrality, formatting, and compliance with Wikipedia standards, and let me know if there are areas to improve.

Thank you very much! ~~~~ M.marmouri (talk) 19:19, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @M.marmouri, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for disclosing your status as a paid editor.

The way to get such a review is to submit the draft for review - I have added a header which allows you to do so.

However, on a quick look it seems to me that very few of the sources you cite are independent of the Bank. Such sources do not contribute to establishing that the bank meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability.

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.

I advise you to make sure that most of your sources meet the criteria in WP:42, and discard most of the others.

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 it's even harder when you have a conflict of interest.

(I see your account has been here for three years, but with only two edits before you started this draft this month, you are a new editor). ColinFine (talk) 20:53, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello @ColinFine,

Thank you for taking the time to review my draft and for your detailed guidance. I appreciate your advice regarding the importance of independent, reliable sources in establishing notability. I understand that sources directly connected to the Bank carry little weight in that regard.

I will review the references I have used, remove those that are not independent, and work on adding more coverage from independent, reliable sources that discuss the Bank in depth.

I also take on board your suggestion to spend more time contributing to existing articles to better understand Wikipedia’s standards and editorial processes. In the meantime, I would still like to continue improving this draft in line with your feedback and resubmit it for review once the sourcing issues are addressed.

Thanks again for pointing me in the right direction.

Best regards,

M.marmouri 81.97.66.75 (talk) 10:28, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Najeeba Arif

Latest comment: 3 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Help needed: Drafting article on Prof. Dr. Najeeba Arif (Conflict of Interest declared)

Hello! I am writing articles on Urdu Wikiipedia since 9 years. Now I want to write articles in English. I am working on writing a new article about Prof. Dr. Najeeba Arif, a Pakistani academic, writer, and poet. She is also my friend, so I want to declare a possible conflict of interest. Because of this, I want to be very careful and make sure the article is neutral, well-sourced, and follows Wikipedia rules. I am a bit confused because there are so many detailed instructions. Can anyone please guide me on: How to structure the article (lead, career, works, etc.)? How to properly cite reliable sources? What to avoid so that the article is not considered promotional or a copyvio? Thank you very much for your guidance. یاسمین سکندر (talk) 06:09, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

یاسمین سکندر, you say that "so many detailed instructions". You're right, there are. There have to be. So I suggest that you just forget about the article Najeeba Arif for a month or longer, while you gain experience with other articles, first making very minor edits and gradually making edits that are more ambitious, always reading up on relevant guidelines. This way, you'll absorb many of the detailed instructions painlessly. Then return to Najeeba Arif. -- Hoary (talk) 07:55, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

To answer your specific questions, see WP:Your first article, and the pages it links to. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:35, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Argentina_contaminated_fentanyl

Latest comment: 3 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Draft:Argentina_contaminated_fentanyl

I'm pretty sure the article is notable, as there are dozens if not hundreds of news reports about it (I just cited 3).

I guess my question is regarding how to better structure the article, and what information should I add to it. Uwsi (talk) 03:31, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

The reason given for the decline was "This submission appears to be a news report of a single event and may not be notable enough for an article in Wikipedia.", although a singe event of that nature, in which 96 people died, seems notable.

That said the article has only five short sentences. I suggest you write more, in order to give some indication of the significant nature of the event (statement from a government minister; discussion in parliament; notable victims (if any), fund-raising for the victims, etc.). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:50, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

citation inexistence and repetitive assertion

Latest comment: 3 days ago4 comments3 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.

---

While overviewing some articles, I found that some or most of the claims are, to me, nonsensical or outlandish.

Then I started searching for criticism of the assertions or the sources and found, unfortunately none, because while the people who would critique the topic exist and commonly hold this opinion, they're oppressed and don't get many chances to author their ideas in any capacity, subsequently outpaced by the other opinion; given chances to manufacture supporting literature.

Said literature is cited in Wikipedia, handing both more legitimacy, but ignoring the unauthored but existent opinion

Obv this is a pretty philosophical question, How does Wikipedia's reliance on citation mesh with the pre-requisites of said citations' existence? how does an avowed politically and socially neutral entity cope with its inherently political existence and situation?

This is a vague and open question and is more like a dilemma, but I want some insight from people who've gone through the same question and found an answer. MagiTagi (talk) 21:52, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Other editors who are wondering what MagiTagi is asking about should read Talk:Racism_in_Israel#Edit_request_23_August_2025. Maproom (talk) 22:59, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

That actually wasn't related to that request, sources are available but not directly linked in the request due to an overthought, and I linked those now in a reply

I was actually talking about the Three Ds of antisemitism, which seems to prematurely defuse and dismiss the colonial zionism claim and zionist racism claim as anti-semitic, and the third point seems more like a WhatAboutSyriaIsm rather than an actual criteria.

This detail is periphery, this isn't the only time I've noticed Wikipedia unable to represent a POV because said POV cannot author anything that Wikipedia recognizes as RS, so I was wondering about how some editors cope with this. MagiTagi (talk) 06:45, 24 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.

Derivation for a formula

Latest comment: 3 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Is it okay to adapt my previous thesis work for a derivation for a formula?

I want to add a derivation of the formula of BHL accretion to said article. I have already written a (well-cited) derivation during my writing of my Bachelor's thesis. Would it be okay to adapt my writing from there to fit in the article or would that be considered (self-)plagiarism? Note that my thesis is unpublished and cannot be considered a WP:RS, so I would maintain the citations to the original derivations. Jcuhfehl (talk) 10:06, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

If you own the copyright to your original, and it is unpublished, how would we know? You can use it here (with citations as you note) without fear, subject to all out usual conditions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:18, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

What does Guard mean in AfD discussions?

Latest comment: 3 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I've seen it used a few times in discussions, such as here and here, but it's not immediately obvious what the editors are trying to convey, and there's no entry in the glossary. Thanks for your help! Epsilon.Prota ^talk 18:08, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Both of those are by the same person, so I've asked on their talk page. DS (talk) 18:21, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed that - thanks for checking! Epsilon.Prota ^talk 13:31, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

It seems analogous to keep where it is used here. Could be a translation. -- Reconrabbit 19:14, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Standard Insurance

Latest comment: 3 days ago7 comments4 people in discussion

Standard Insurance is a Philippine non-life insurance company and I wrote an article for review. However, despite my efforts to rewrite it for better notability, make it encyclopedic, etc., my article has been disapproved. May I know how to fix my problem? I do not have experience writing for wikipedia. Here is the link of my article for submission https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AFTamayo&action=edit&section=1 AFTamayo (talk) 10:31, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

That link to to edit your talk page. I have deactivated it.

Did you mean Draft:Standard Insurance? You have re-submitted that page for review, but not changed it since it was declined. I have therefore declined it again. Please do not make a further re-submission, until you have improved it.

The reasons it was originally declined were:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

There are links to explanations in the copy of that message on the draft, which you removed before resubmitting it. I have restored the message; please do not remove it again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:12, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

and according to GPTZero your draft is 100% AI generated. Please don't use LLM to edit here. Theroadislong (talk) 11:23, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Not my draft. GPTZero is unreliable. I don't use LLM. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:27, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Clearly I am referring to User:AFTamayo here. Theroadislong (talk) 11:31, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

And yet your comment is posted as a reply to mine. Please see Help:Using talk pages#Indentation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:44, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

@AFTamayo, A simple explanation is that Wikipedia is against the usage of raw AI generated content because it tends to break multiple policies and guidelines. Any AI content that obviously lacks a human review can and will certainly be deleted. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 14:15, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

New article draft declined

Latest comment: 3 days ago5 comments5 people in discussion

Hello. I submitted my article draft for review. Ms Rhoda McKenzie is an unacknowledged Windrush era community organizer from Jamaica. I have cited primary sources found in The Daily Gleaner as well as official birth record, parents marriage certificate, obituary and a link to her grave site. I have cited links to her books that are in the Schomburg Center for Black Research. My draft was declined and I'd like to know what steps I can take to improve the article to make sure this heroine doesnt remain unknown Izema33 (talk) 03:36, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Rhoda E. MacKenzie Karenthewriter (talk) 03:59, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

At the top of the draft is the message

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

The original massage also includes several links to explanatory pages.

Which three of your sources meet all of the requirements outlined at WP:GOLDENRULE? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:43, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Please note that familysearch.org, findagrave.com and Legacy.com are not reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 10:47, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Izema33, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm sorry, but make sure this heroine doesnt remain unknown sounds as if what you are doing is original research which is not allowed in Wikipedia, however good the cause.

A Wikipedia article should be based almost entirely on independent secondary sources, i.e. where people have already published substantial material about the subject. Unless you can find such sources, an article is not possible. ColinFine (talk) 16:28, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Daniel A. Griffith

Latest comment: 3 days ago7 comments5 people in discussion

This submission was rejected: This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. How do I revise it for acceptance? Draft:Daniel A. Griffith I would like a reply specific to VisualEditor. Dagriffith-1948 (talk) 14:56, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Dagriffith-1948 Hello and welcome. I'm not sure what the form of editor you use has to do with this- You seem to be writing about yourself- which, though not forbidden, is ill advised, please see the autobiography policy. This is in part because people naturally write favorably about themselves, when Wikipedia strives for a neutral point of view. Please see the advice left by reviewers on the draft- but in short, all non-neutral language should be removed- like "pioneering work"(unless you can say who deems your work pioneering). 331dot (talk) 15:05, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

@331dot: The edit notice, shown to everyone who starts a new section here, includes the text "Mention if you'd like a reply specific to mobile view or the VisualEditor." Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:53, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, I guess I don't often see people actually do that. 331dot (talk) 17:06, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Did you take the picture of yourself with a remote? It doesn't appear to be a selfie as you are claiming. 331dot (talk) 15:07, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Part of the problem seems to be your editorialising, for example have been recognized by an interdisciplinary set of peers, organizations, and institutions, as evidenced by his election as a fellow of various associations.. Wikipedia articles just state the facts backed up by reliable sources. Also, you should remove the external links in the main text as we don't use these but some can be converted into citations. See WP:External links. This academic does seem to be notable as we require, so I'd encourage you to continue working on the draft ready for re-submission. If this is an autobiography, you need to mention your COI somewhere (I haven't checked). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:09, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Dagriffith-1948, and welcome to the Teahouse. 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.

It follows that to successfully write an article about yourself or something close to you, you effectively need to forget everything you know, think, or believe, about yourself, and write a neutral summary of what people wholly unknown to you have chosen to publish about you in reliable publications. That thing you think is important, but none of them mention? Doesn't go in. That thing that you hate, that several of them say about you? Should go in. That thing that they all say that you know is wrong? Should go in (the policy is verifiability, not truth).

Do you see why this is difficult, and why we strongly discourage it? ColinFine (talk) 16:40, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Photo of magazine as a source

Latest comment: 3 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

What should be done with references tagged with the "Bare URL image" template? (Examples: [13] [14] [15] [16])

Usually there's not enough info to use a cite magazine template. A digital copy on another site is rarely available (although there are come in archive.org). Looking for physical copies could be an option.

Should the cite web template be used?

Thank you. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 20:06, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes. References with Bare URL image should be converted to {{cite web}} adding as much info as possible (title, website, publisher, access date). If more detailed sources exist (magazine, archive) include them; otherwise cite the URL with proper attribution....I Fixed all of them. Yo welcome 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 20:42, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm dubious that photos of magazines should be used at all, certainly not unless there is a clear indication that they are posted legally. No Wikimedia project should ever link to a copyright violation, and in many cases a posted scan of a print publication will be a copyright violation.

Furthermore, the reliability of the source is only as good as that of the website where it was posted. A scan of an article on a random website is unreliable as well as possibly a copyright violation.

Having said that, the important bit of a citation is the bibliographic information: title, author, date, publication, publisher, page etc. A URL is in most cases only a convenience to the reader, and not an essential part of the citation. So as long as that information is included, the URL should be removed in most such cases. ColinFine (talk) 16:21, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you @ColinFine , your explanation makes sense. I will follow your suggestions. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 17:33, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Citing an email as a source

Latest comment: 3 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello. I was wondering about the origin of the name of a major international company, as it has no clear etymology, and so I asked the company by email. They answered me so now I know, but I have no clear way of providing this email, as it is inherently private, as a source if I add the etymology to the company article. Any idea of how I might solve this? GHolm95 (talk) 17:53, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

@GHolm95 E-mails does not count as published around here, even if you were to share it on google drive or some such, because all we'd have is your word that this is what you say it is. But if the company would be willing to mention this on the company website ("Our history" is not uncommon on such sites), you could probably use that as a WP:ABOUTSELF source. If it's a company that's been around for awhile, try digging at https://archive.org/. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:01, 24 August 2025 (UTC)