Wikipedia:Teahouse

AlanM1, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

Can't edit this page? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

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

Help Wikipedia

Sources

Hello, i'm currently working on a draft for the Italian politician Pietro Amendola. However, i couldn't find a lot of sources for Pietro Amendola. Another thing, the best one i could find was from the Associazione Nazionale Partigiani d'Italia ("National Association Partisans of Italy") but it was marked as WP:SELFPUBLISHED. Why was this the case?

The National Association Partisans of Italy is recognized as a charitable foundation. And Pietro was a member of the organization. Besides, the National Association Partisans of Italy have also been cited in several other articles.

Does anyone have any sources on Pietro?

And why is the source by National Association Partisans of Italy not valid? Khalif Ali Husain the Third (talk) 10:02, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Khalif Ali Husain the Third: Even the Italian version of Wikipedia only has one source (see it:Pietro_Amendola) which suggests to me he is a minor figure who will not pass English Wikipedia's notability requirements. I suspect the reason the NAP of Italy is not a good source for showing he is notable is exactly as you say: he is a member of that organization. The source may be valid for other articles (for example to verify some simple fact). Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:53, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Khalif Ali Husain the Third Welcome to the Teahouse! I checked the 2 sources in your Draft:Pietro Amendola (sounds like an interesting man). ANPI may not be a glaringly awful source on history in general (I can't really say), but the problem with both sources is that they are writing about their own member, which leads us to the independent part of WP:BASIC. Basically, organizations tend to write about their own members in a mostly positive way. Those sources may not be useless for some basic facts per WP:ABOUTSELF, but they don't make a case for WP:GNG.

On more sources, perhaps you can find something useful at [1]. La famiglia Amendola looks promising. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: Pietro Amendola does pass Wikipedia's notability requirements. Since he was a politician who served as a deputy in parliament. And according to Wikipedia :

"The following are presumed to be notable:

Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels. This also applies to people who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them.

Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage."

In this context, a "deputy" is a member of the lower house of the Italian Parliament, equivalent to a member of the House of Commons in the UK or a member of the House of Representatives in America. Apologies if I am telling people things they already know. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:19, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Rosa Glaser Reliable Sources/References

The article I have written was not yet accepted because it was said that there were not sufficient reliable sources and references added to the article. It is the first time I try to publish an article on the English Wiki. I do not understand why the mentioned sources are not reliable. You may check them out. I have published this article on the Dutch Wikipedia and it has been published in Wiki. See Dutch Wiki article Rosa Glaser In that Dutch Wiki I haven mentioned a lot of Dutch sources. ( after the story of Rosa Glaser origines in the Netherlands and Germany) If it might be helpful I will add these Dutch sources also to the English sources and references. There ar also a lot of German sources and references available. In adition I mention that a Dutch Memorial Museum of the concentration camp Vught has investigated the story and made an exhibition of it that have been shown in several Dutch cities and is touring right now in German cities. That museum also added in their museum the story of Rosa Glaser. I don't know how to proceed and what to do, so Please will you help me? Thank you very much Doberran (talk) 10:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Doberran (talk) 10:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Doberran A few points, in no particular order: You need to master the art of inline citations, WP:TUTORIAL/Help:Referencing for beginners can be of help with that. This is essential. Use "Glaser" throughout the article, not "Roosje", it's how we do it. Encyclopedic tone tends towards distant, dry, dusty and bland. Text like "Roosje grew into an emancipated woman who defied conventions with flair. ... She lost the love of her life in 1936, found consolation in the arms of another and married Leo; the wrong man." should be, well, less poetic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Link: Draft:Roosje Glaser. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:36, 28 July 2021

(UTC)

Dear Gråbergs Gråa Sång,

Thank you very much for your help and advices. In the coming week I will improve the article and specially learn how to use References. As soon as I think de draft is ready for publishing I will let you know. Have a nice day and greetings from the Netherlands, Doberran (talk) 13:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

help with Glenn Bray article

hello i am still trying to find someone to help me with Glenn Bray article, the only help i got so far has been telling me about sources, but as many times as i have reread about it, nothing makes sense, i do not work on computers, and it has been very frustrating figuring out what is wrong, having no clue of the problem presented. There is a documentary made by netflix about Glenns art collection, i am not sure how much more noteworthy the person needs to be... all the different books published with art he owns... so i am at a complete loss Sirskull (talk) 17:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Sirskull. When writing an article, the content needs to be based on what reliable sources document about the subject. Taking this on a sentence-by-sentence basis, you've written that "Bray was born in Van Nuys, California on April 1, 1948". What's the source for that statement? You need to add a reference to the source at the end of the sentence. Then you have "His father Gene Bray owned Sylmar Builders Supply, a hardware store that began business in 1959". What's the source for that? You need to reference that too (it might be the same source as his birthplace, in which case you can place the reference after the second sentence rather than the first). And so on for the whole article.... Does that make sense? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Glenn Bray TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Does this rewritten draft meet the neutral POV requirement?

I first submitted this page and got a response saying it was rejected because it didn't meet the notability criteria. In trying to address that issue, I ended up making the page not have a neutral point of view. I then tried to fix the tonal problem but failed abysmally. The latest comment cites notability as an issue again, although commenters have said it does meet the notability criteria (academics). I've since gone over the guidelines with more attention and rewritten the article. I just wanted to make sure this is okay as I don't want to aggravate people even more by submitting something that's not good again.

Thank you for your help! Whatevergb (talk) 18:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Whatevergb, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I see both Bkissin and Hoary both of whom are editors well versed in policy have accessed the article. I find it more helpful if you initiate a dialogue with either of them, they’d tell you what and where the problems are and if addressed they’d accept the article. Bringing this to the Teahouse is a good move but an even better approach is what I just said. Celestina007 (talk) 23:15, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Whatevergb, I wish that the draft said rather more about what was written in the reviews of his books, but this can be added later. The man seems notable and the description isn't promotional. If you submitted this again and I noticed the resubmission, I'd convert it to an article. -- Hoary (talk) 07:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 and @Hoary: Thank you so, so much! I'll get on it! Whatevergb (talk) 14:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Visual editor "1 notice" popup?

Using the visual editor, there seems to always be this popup that says "1 notice" and "Find sources:".

It is quite annoying. Is there any way to disable it from being shown by default? Intralexical (talk) 19:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Intralexical, hello and welcome to the Teahouse we apologize for the delay in answering your question, the problem is your question appears to be vague and a little hard to understand, could you expressly state what the problem is? Celestina007 (talk) 23:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Intralexical: I assume you're referring to the black triangle with the white exclamation mark in it next to the blue 'Publish changes' button in the top right of the screen in desktop view. If so, it hardly seems intrusive, and one simply needs to avoid clicking it. However, perhaps you're editing in 'mobile view' and are seeing more prominent notices than I am. I think it's there as a prompt to encourage readers of articles which have few references to go and find more to add and improve the page. I'm not aware there is a way to stop them showing, though others might know of a way. If the problem is with mobile view, try editing in 'desktop view' instead (which is what I do) when on my phone. Sorry I can't offer you a better solution. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you two for the replies! The ⚠️ icon is indeed what I was talking about. I believe the behaviour I described was due to the article I was editing being in the Draft namespace. It would always pop open even if I didn't click it, hence why I found it annoying. Anyway, I guess it's not so bad if it won't show up most of the time. Intralexical (talk) 00:00, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Intralexical @Nick Moyes I previously had this problem, where the notice appeared in all articles. I recommend using the 2010 wikitext editor instead. ―Qwerfjkltalk 09:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Adding pages

Hi! Can I know if I can add pages without it being reverted? NataliaNutella1226 (talk) 21:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@NataliaNutella1226? hello and welcome to the Teahouse, it isn’t an anomaly for editors to make good faith edits and have it reverted if it appears not to be constructive, in order for you not make edits that don’t get reverted you have to familiarize yourself with some of our policies, practicing in your sandbox and “starting slowly”, such as correcting spelling errors. In time you would be able to make perfect edits that would not get reverted. You may want to see WP:TUTORIAL and WP:CTW. Celestina007 (talk) 22:05, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

More than 20 of your edits to Characters of the Marvel Cinematic Universe were reverted. You could ask on the reverting editors' Talk pages why. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@NataliaNutella1226:, having a quick look, I think you've been over-linking. Generally it's best only to turn critical words here and there into wiki-links, the sorts of words that a reader is likely to find unclear, and for which they're likely to need additional explanation. For example, in a hypothetical film-character description "Tom, who suffers from extreme atelophobia, first appears in series 2 of 'The hideaways', before reappearing briefly in a cross-over episode in the 2019 prequel series, where he's played by James Smith", you might choose to put square brackets around 'atelophobia' on the grounds that an average reader might not know what it is, and it's presumably critical to Tom's role. You wouldn't put them round "Tom", "series 2", "cross-over", "prequel", or even "The hideaways"; you might put it round James Smith if he's a notable actor, but even in this case, you would do it only once, on the first instance of James' name in the article. You also wouldn't do it in any situation where it creates a red link (i.e. there is no Wikipedia article corresponding to the person or concept) unless you are utterly sure that there ought to be a Wikipedia article and you can envisage someone (yourself?) writing one in the very near future. Basically, if you just put square brackets round everything, you'll get reverted a lot. Elemimele (talk) 16:14, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

POV allegation on several articles around same topic

Hello. I have been using Wikipedia as a regular guest as a relatively reliable knowledge source for years. Unfortunately, I have noticed that certain several articles revolving around same certain subject are biased toward a certain viewpoint. I don't know if this is a work of an individual or not, but I wonder if I can request an NPOV evaluation or something of the sort encompassing several articles at once, perhaps by category grouping. Of course, I can just discuss my concerns on the articles' respective talk pages, but the number of articles is somewhat large and it might be impractical to complain on all of them. Thank you for your attention. Tsubasanomura (talk) 07:01, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Tsubasanomura, and thanks for getting involved in helping to improve article content. There's a specific forum for discussing this issue, which is Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. I suggest raising the case there. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:32, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Will I destroy everything?

Will I destroy everything? 106.213.77.0 (talk) 07:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Probably not but please try to be constructive when you edit here on Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

If you mean "Life, the Universe, and Everything", see Phrases from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and please, don't. David notMD (talk) 11:23, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Please can someone explain why my ip was seen editing on a page i never visited

Hi there, today I noticed I had messages on Wikipedia (which is something I never knew you could get) I clicked on it and noticed that I was banned in January for editing an article I had never visited before, I also had a message from this month about editing the same article? keep in mind that at this point I didn't have a Wikipedia account and didn't and still don't have any interest in editing Wikipedia articles, could someone explain why or how this could happen? thanks. JDFtrains (talk) 08:47, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

JDFtrains IP address can be used by multiple people, for various reasons. If you were not responsible for the actions that led to the block, you have nothing to worry about now that you have created an account. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Article improvement verification

Hello, I recently submitted a project that was accepted on ThrustMe. This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. In the near future, I will try to improve this article. However, I might make some mistakes, especially on the neutral point of view aspect as I am related to the topic of this article. Is there a way to submit changes, like submitting a draft, to ensure that the changes do not conflict with wikipedia rules? Antoinebore (talk) 09:40, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Antoinebore. Another editor has left messages in a section of your talk page explaining the correct way to handle your conflict of interest: thanks for being upfront about this in relation to the article. Basically you need to follow the guidelines linked from those messages, which means only adding suggested new content (using the edit request template) on the Talk Page of the article (Talk:ThrustMe), giving specific details along the lines "please change X to Y" or "please add Z", with citations to relaible sources. Other experienced editors will check these requests and act on them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Michael D. Turnbull, thanks for the clarification. I have another point I'm not sure about: should I also use the change request template for minor changes, such as grammar, spelling, writing style? Antoinebore (talk) 12:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Antoinebore: Strictly speaking you should ask before making any change but if the change is "minor" in Wikipedia's rather narrow definition of that term (WP:Minor, which includes undoing vandalism of the article but not tone/grammar changes), I don't think anyone would object, especially if you again mention your COI in the edit summary. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:50, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Public Statues and Sculpture Association

I need help with editing the page on the Public Statues and Sculpture Association page. Our edits have been rejected twice, and we don't understand why. The user name is Edgar Boehm and (redacted). Edgar Boehm (talk) 09:48, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Public Statues and Sculpture Association, declined twice, with reasons given by the declining reviewers. Given the connection to the now defunct Public Monuments and Sculpture Association, perhaps renaming and expanding that article can be made to work. Hyperlinks are not allowed in articles (a flaw of the draft), and all added content must be verified by inline references. See Help:Referencing for beginners. David notMD (talk) 11:34, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

On second thought, my renaming suggestion is bad advice. Articles about no-longer-existing companies and organizations are meant to be kept. Perhaps you can use that article as a model for what the draft should look like (no hyperlinks, needs refs, etc.). David notMD (talk) 12:02, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Chagam and Chagum

There are two articles Chagam and a recently created a copy of it "Chagum". I have added the redirect of Chagum to the respective article, but it still does not do so. What can I do?

Thanks in advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 13:00, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Jocelin Andrea, Redirects to other namespaces, in this case Drafts, are not allowed in Mainspace. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:30, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you then, I see that the article Chagum has been deleted. Is there anything that I can do? Jocelin Andrea (talk) 13:41, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Jocelin Andrea, If it definitely is the same place, you can improve the Chagam article. It desperately needs a few sources to verify the content. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:20, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

to publish the article

I have completed the edit, can I publish it? or should it be reviewed by any experienced contributors? if so, can someone help in reviewing it? LizKurian (talk) 13:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Assuming you mean the draft currently in your sandbox, you have not submitted it for review and I would caution against doing so until you have addressed many issues with it. You need to read the advice about writing articles very carefully. For example, direct external links in the body of the article are not allowed: they must be converted into citations. The WP:tone is currently far from encyclopaedic (too much "takes pride in" phrases which we call WP:peacock) and many of the references are bare URLs rather than proper citations for weblinks. Some of the references are unreliable (see WP:RSPS for a discussion: Youtube is rarely useful). You need to convince the reviewers (I am not one of them) that this person is notable in Wikipedia's somewhat strict sense. Apologies if all of this is disheartening but writing acceptable articles here is difficult for newcomers and you would be better trying to improve existing articles before you tackle that task, LizKurian. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:45, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

1916 Election

I was wondering why the 1916 election page has two random US senators as running for president as opposed to Hughes and Wilson. I think someone might have mucked with the page because the table with the main details seems to be wrong? Connorhird (talk) 14:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

(1916 United States presidential election) Vandalism. Now reverted. Thanks for spotting and alerting. - X201 (talk) 14:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

My first article

Could someone please look at my draft article and point out any glaring errors?

My hope is to add important detail on all the most influential Courtiers in the UK Royal Family.

Thank you! UKRoyalFan (talk) 14:08, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

I was surprised there wasn't already an article about Edward Lane Fox (there is currently a redirect to an article on the Royal households) as he is automatically notable as a holder of the Royal Victorian Order (a type of knighthood). Your draft is currently short but on the right lines, I think. Make sure you follow all the advice about biographies of living people and you should be fine, UKRoyalFan. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:03, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Mike Turnbull. I will do more work on it! UKRoyalFan (talk) 15:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

My page keeps getting refused?

Hi. I'm trying to get a page set back up for Mike Heaton of Embrace, as for some reason his original one had been removed. I've included sources etc and there is nothing on there that isn't factual, nor is it any less lengthy than other links to the band. i've looked on help pages here and nothing is assisting me Smithykit (talk) 14:59, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse Smithykit, findmypast.co.uk, Linkin.com and Allmusic are not reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 15:03, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

i've copied Allmusic and findmypast.co.uk from other, accepted pages on Wiki? Smithykit (talk) 15:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Not all Wikipedia articles are reviewed. Our standards and enforcement thereof have only gotten tougher over the years. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 19:26, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Smithykit Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The sources you have offered are not acceptable for establishing that this person meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable musician. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about him. His LinkedIn profile is not an independent source. His birth records are just that, they are not significant coverage. Please see Your first article. 331dot (talk) 15:07, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Smithykit That other articles use inappropriate sources does not mean it's okay for you as well. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate edits to get by us. We can only address what we know about, please feel free to help by pointing out these other articles with inappropriate sources for possible action. 331dot (talk) 15:09, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

I've added sources and removed the ones that weren't acceptable, I hope this is ok? Any advice is most welcome :-) Smithykit (talk) 15:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

The problem is to do with the types of sources. You need to take to heart that they have to be independent of the subject, so not based just on interviews with him and they must have significant coverage about him, not just mentions. You will irritate the WP:AfC reviewers if you keep putting the draft back for consideration before you have about three sources that firmly establish he is a notable musician. Wikipedia had articles in the past about him which were deleted just for failure to establish notability. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

talkah i understand, thank you :-) Smithykit (talk) 15:35, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Smithykit: Although there are some issues to be aware of regarding Allmusic, Reliable sources/Perennial sources lists it as reliable for some purposes. Gab4gab (talk) 20:54, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Smithykit, I remember seeing this draft in Articles for Creation. One of the things I look at when I see an article for someone who is part of a larger musical group, is this line from Wikipedia's notability criteria for bands and musical artists: Members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability. Singers and musicians who are only notable for participating in a reality television series may be redirected to an article about the series, until they have demonstrated that they are independently notable. So basically, is the person notable outside of their work with the band? Are they known for a solo career outside of the band? If not, we'll just redirect their article to the band. I hope that helps as you work on your draft. Bkissin (talk) 20:02, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

thank you Bkissin ! I know the subject personally (my partner is also a member of the same band) so i've taken a pause for the cause and done a bit more research for sources and sent a few text messages to him to get some info :-) fingers crossed for the next submission... :-) Smithykit (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

No problem Smithykit. Though, keep in mind our policies about conflict of interest editing. It can often be difficult for people who are close to the subject of an article to write about them in the dry, neutral way that WP articles often are. That is another big reason why articles get declined. Bkissin (talk) 20:50, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I think i've kept it sufficiently third person Bkissin, i'm used to writing factual in my day job so fingers crossed :-) Smithykit (talk) 21:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Charles W Taylor Jr of Rice University is a Member of the Senior Executive Service of the United States, as documented on June 25, 1990. Where can his certificate be sent for verification?

I'm new to this site and I'm simply trying to add some content. I am a former Presidential Appointee of President George H.W. Bush. I became a member of the Senior Executive Service on June 25, 1990. How do I send verification of that? Charles W Taylor Jr (talk) 15:41, 29 July 2021 (UTC) 15:41, 29 July 2021 (UTC)Charles W Taylor Jr (talk) Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

You have asked this question at a number of locations, for instance see the replies here [2] Theroadislong (talk) 15:50, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Charles W Taylor Jr. Anyone can add content to Wikipedia but please don't do so on pages where you have a conflict of interest owing to your (former or current) occupation. No-one here is interested in verifying who you are: we assume good faith in our editors. Please familiarise yourself with how things work around here before you make major additions and especially before you try to create a new article. Some general advice is at H:INTRO and WP:YFA. Mike Turnbull (talk)

@Charles W Taylor Jr: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! To be added to that list you need to meet wikipedia's definition of a notable person and have had an article written about you (the two people on the list without articles have had their articles deleted but no-ones got around to cleaning up yet). Wikipedia articles are written on the basis of publicly available sources, like news reports, books and websites, we cannot use your personal documents as a reference. Finally please review our Conflict of interest policies - writing about yourself is very strongly discouraged. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Abuse of administrator rights in Ukrainian wikipedia

Hey, my account: "Пушинко" was block indefinitely on Ukrainian wikipedia by user:Yakudza because he decided that I used open proxies. However, I have never used them. The real reason I was blocked is that I started a discussion in local teahouse about abusing of checkuser rights by one of the checkusers of Ukrainian wikipedia. And right after seral hours I was blocked. That is a direct violation of Wikipedia rules. I demand truth and justice. Please review my case and my account and you will find I didn't do anything wrong. --Пушинко (talk) 16:04, 29 July 2021 (UTC) Пушинко (talk) 16:04, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Пушинко: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! Each language project is completely independent, so unfortunately our administrators cannot help you with a block on the Ukrainian wikipedia. You will need to follow whatever instructions you were given on the Ukrainian wikipedia to appeal your block. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:10, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

thanks, but I wasn't given any instructions. I cannot edit my talk page or send emails. Can you advice me how I can appeal to global stewards ?--Пушинко (talk) 16:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Пушинко: Yes, removing talk page access and email access at the same time does seem rather over the top. Perhaps try contacting an administrator through IRC or their social media sites to request access to your talk page? On most wikis you can also appeal to the Arbitration Committee, but I cannot see a contact email address on the Ukrainian wiki. The users that have administrative rights across most sites are called stewards, and requests can be made on the various Steward requests pages on meta, but they don't involve themselves with local blocks for the most part. Apologies if any of those links are wrong, I don't speak Ukrainian.

If you do have evidence that checkusers are misusing their tools then you'll want to get in contact with the Ombuds commission, who investigate these things. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:57, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Uplift, Inc Wikipedia Page

Hello, I have submitted a page to Wikipedia for Uplift (https://www.uplift.com) which was denied and swiftly deleted (my first time writing an article here and obviously have a lot to learn!) but now also see that a page request has also been made on behalf of the company as well. I just asked a question in my talk page and some of the feedback was COI related as I work at the company and also that some of the articles submitted as references may not be enough. Is there any way I can add more references or articles written about our company to support the page being created? Or do we need to just wait for initial feedback from the community editors and if not approved at that time - what can we do? We certainly don't want a page to "promote" our company, but just to exsist on Wikipedia as a credible one and acknowledge our existence as a company. Any suggestions or insights into how to best assist the cause and adhere/help the Wikipedia guidelines is appreciated! RachelAnderson72489 (talk) 16:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@RachelAnderson72489: Welcome to the Teahouse. The glaring issue here is references or articles written about our company to support the page being created. Reliable sources should be independent from the subject; that is, articles or other items that talk about the company significantly but isn't affiliated with them. If you can't find those I'm afraid you're out of luck.
Also, please disclose your paid relationship with Uplift on your user page, User:RachelAnderson72489. You may use the {{paid}} template to do so. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Need help with the tone of an article

 Courtesy link: Draft:Michael Adams
My first article, on Michael Adams (lawyer) was rejected as not having an encyclopedic tone. I tried to copy the tone in similar articles and would welcome some suggestions or specific feedback on sentences that need to be rewritten or other improvements I can make. Thank you! Hudson165. Hudson165 (talk) 16:52, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hudson165: I just fixed a lot of the glaring syntax errors. You say you copied other articles for tone, but somehow you missed that none of the articles use the big syntax to enlarge the entire article. Also, you don't need to bold the section titles - the title code does that automatically. That was the easy part. The hard part will be fixing the tone. You should read WP:COI since it's obvious you know the subject, if you aren't him yourself. Unsourced statements like Adams was instrumental in highlighting the organization’s emphasis on policy advocacy and promoting legislation that promote the ability of LGBT+ adults to age with dignity and respect. and He was extremely successful at attracting government and private support for SAGE’s programs; the organization’s budget has increased ten-fold under Adams’ leadership. aren't encyclopedic. Neither are Under his leadership, SAGE has undertaken a multi-year project to embed racial equity in its external work and within the organization as part of a long-term commitment to build racial equity and contribute to the dismantling of white supremacy. or Adams also has a strong interest in international issues. That's just for starters. After dealing with the mandatory COI disclosure, you need to forget everything you know about him, and instead only paraphrase and summarize what independent third party sources say about him. If it can't be sourced, don't write it. You could also check out Help:Your first article for more general info. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:54, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

What are reliable sources?

I have read WP:RS many a times, but each time I fail to understand what exactly reliable sources are. As of now, I consider notable and self-published sources reliable (although that might be false). Can someone brief it up (probably with examples too)? Excellenc1📞 17:13, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 Notable does not necessarily mean reliable, OpIndia and Facebook are notable, but generally unreliable. WP:SPS can be useful in very limited circumstances. At WP:RSP you can find a long list of potential sources and the on-WP current view on them (like everything else around here, it may change). There's even a fr-WP version. Scroll through that, it may give you an idea. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:35, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: A good rule of thumb for determining the reliability of a source is to apply a three-prong test: Does the source discuss the subject at length? Is the source independent of the subject and their direct surrogates? Does the outlet have a competent editor in chief or someone who fills an equivalent role in fact-checking, disclosure, and retractions? If the answer to any of them is "no", assume the given source isn't reliable for the purpose you want to use it for. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 19:22, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Discussion of a subject at length relates to determining notability rather than reliability. Reliable sources that are very brief can reliably support portions of an articles content. Gab4gab (talk) 20:36, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:41, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Need help editing a Wikipedia Biography submission

Hello, my submission was declined for not showing significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject, and for not having a formal detached tone. I have workshopped my submission on a google doc that I can link. I would really appreciate any advice or help in editing. VidishaAgarwalla (talk) 17:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@VidishaAgarwalla, is this about Draft:Assaf Biderman? Then improve that draft with new text/sources. One thing you should do is to remove all the WP:External links from the article text. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:24, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@VidishaAgarwalla, I think many of your in-body external links could be converted to in-line citations supporting your text. Gab4gab (talk) 20:32, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gab4gab @VidishaAgarwalla Done via User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/DraftCleaner.js and User:BrandonXLF/ReferenceExpander. ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

pinging

I've noticed that if I go back and edit a comment and include something that would normally ping a user it doesn't notify me that the user was pinged. Why is that? Do I have to include four tildes for a ping to go through? TipsyElephant (talk) 17:31, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Hello, welcome to the teahouse. You are correct - the ping templates will only send people a notification if your comment includes a signature. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:34, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Also the signature and the template have to be added in the same edit, it doesn't work properly if you go back and add a ping template to an already signed comment. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:35, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

WP:PINGFIX has some info. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

How to create subcategory page

Hello, I would like to create a subcategory page "Agriculture ministers of Malawi" to Category:Government_ministers_of_Malawi, but I can't find a good guide anywhere as to how. Thanks in advance! DirkJandeGeer (talk) 20:08, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@DirkJandeGeer, Help:Category has basic info. Pretty much all you need to do to create a subcategory is create a category page and then categorize the page itself under the parent category. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:48, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

reliable sources

I have prepared an article about International Society for Porous Media (InterPore.org). The submission has been rejected because "it is not adequately supported by reliable sources." The references used in my article are given below. It is not clear to me why these are not reliable, and how I should improve them. It'd be great if anyone can help me in this regard.

https://www.interpore.org/news/
https://www.interpore.org/activities/institutional-members
https://www.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/en/
https://www.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/en/institute/team/Helmig-00008/
https://www.interpore.org/activities/national-chapters
https://www.interpore.org/activities/institutional-members
https://www.interpore.org/interpore-foundation Smhfba (talk) 20:40, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:International Society for Porous Media  Courtesy link: Draft:International Society for Porous Media (InterPore) Two submissions with slightly different names. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:46, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Smhfba: You need to find sources that are not connected to the subject. See WP:RS. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:47, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Smhfba: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! The issue isn't that these sources aren't reliable, the issue is that they aren't independent of the society (The declining reviewer used the wrong message there, they should have used the one that says the sources do not demonstrate that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article). The test for whether something has sufficient Notability to qualify for an article is "Has the subject of the article received substantial coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources?" Have a read of WP:GNG. All of these websites are either by the society, or are from a university associated with the society. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of the article says about themselves, Wikipedia articles are written on the basis of what people with no connection to the subject have chosen to write. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 20:55, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Help! The dark mode is misbehaving!

I can't turn off the dark mode in the preferences, and I also read the special page: Wikipedia:Preferences, and even THAT didn't work. What should I do? Please consider my situation. Sparklestern (talk) 00:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Sparklestern Have you tried running the page on safemode? If it is still on dark mode, then this is probably a browser issue. ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Can someone please help me request a deletion of a Wikipedia page

I'd like to help in making Wikipedia a place where each page is notable and not faked. Can someone please help me delete a page of this person - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beau_Vallis_(singer) By researching carefully, I believe the credits/sources are fake. Not 100% sure, so wanted to ask here for support in this decision. Also, I don't know how to request "articles for deletion" so wanted to ask for assistance in doing so please.

Thank you. Thomastrainor (talk) 00:18, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

When I search on "Love Stand Still" Kelly Rowland, it confirms a connection to Beau Vallis. Why do you believe the Vallis references are fake? David notMD (talk) 03:39, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I believe it to be fake because it's only in blog articles and I don't see it verified on Kelly Rowland wikipedia pages or any sources that seem more legitimate.

It wouldn't be verified on her Wikipedia page because (1) we don't have a formal verification process - the sources do that, and (2) we don't require sources for credits or liner notes barring uncredited or Alan Smithee'd roles. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 04:57, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I also just noticed at the top of the wikipedia page that there it says the article doesn't meet the notability guidelines on Wikipedia - this is why I asked about deletion - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beau_Vallis_(singer)

A better response to "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for music." (note "may not meet") is to try to improve the article. For example, his role(s) in the albums and singles are not described nor referenced. David notMD (talk) 02:48, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

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

Hello, I started editing this page in the Encyclopedia section and then ran into a ton of questions about the correct way to list reference works in a bibliographical format. So I did some research and it seems there are several ways to cite bibliographical style. The problem is that on this page, it is just a list of reference material, which are never authored but are compendiums of contributed entries or articles. The citations people are using, however, are citations used as if they were authored. So I did some more research and found that the way reference works should be listed in their entirety is by title first as if on a 'List of Works' in a research paper. I refer you to 2 of the more popular styles of citation to support this: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/16/bib3.html and a sample paper for the MLA style (scroll down to List of Works page for an example) - https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/mla_formatting_and_style_guide/mla_sample_paper.html ... I am going to endeavor to rectify the listings as I can in the Chicago-style format and will also try to cite my research properly. Just giving you a heads up that this is why I am changing much of the page and you may want to check my work in case my inexperience causes errors. If you have reason for me not to do this, please let me know. Thank you. StarRider33 (talk) 00:43, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, StarRider33. That big list article has been around since 2012 and given its scope it isn't surprising that the citations have become a bit of a mess: thanks for wanting to help clean things up. Note that our policy on citation styles says that editors should prefer consistency over any one style (and usually stick to what the originator of the article did). That's clearly impractical for this particular article but working towards one of our standard styles there is fine. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

James C. McWilliams: odd formatting now

I was working on James C. McWilliams to clean up issues that were flagged on the page, but I am now confused by a change made by an IP address. The format of the citations is somewhat odd as everything has been changed to a list of DOIs and none of the links are 'clickable' within the body of the text. I am not sure what the protocol is, nor am I clear why this was done as it does not seem like a common Wikipedia format. Any thoughts would be appreciated. --DaffodilOcean (talk) 00:48, 30 July 2021 (UTC) DaffodilOcean (talk) 00:48, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

DaffodilOcean, it looks to me that an inexperienced editor with a little knowledge of Wikipedia and a lot of knowledge of McWilliams tried to edit his article. I reverted that edit and left the IP a message.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox

Would anything bad happen if I edited a lot in my sandbox?  WinnipegMA (talk) 01:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

WinnipegMA, your sandbox is your own area to work in. Within reason, nothing bad should result from you editing your own sandbox. See WP:SANDBOX.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:18, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I think that Quisqualis directed you to the wrong Help page: H:SANDBOX is where the general principles are laid out, WinnipegMA. One of the main things to avoid is never to place copyrighted material (e.g. copy/pasted from some external website) into a sandbox. I find that I can "preview" my writing in the sandbox to see how the Wiki markup stuff will look when saved/published but actually I rarely do so: I often copy what I've written back out to my local PC for later work. Remember that whatever you do "publish/save" will be there for anyone to see: although most people don't poke around in others' sandboxes! Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:48, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Attempting to resolve an edit war in the Criticism section of Democracy Now! over "poor sourcing"

I've made it practice to watch certain pages which seem to be subject to frequent controversy, but as a relatively new editor (less than 500 edits), I'm unsure how to respond to an edit war, given that I don't want to join in and get banned, and given that I can't actually tell which side is right. I'm also unsure what counts as a reliable source and a neutral point of view. Talib1101 (talk) 01:34, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

To clarify, this is a request for third opinions. Talib1101 (talk) 01:37, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Talib1101. Like many articles on American politics, debates can get pretty heated and you are wise not to engage unless familiar with Wikipedia policies. If you "can't tell which side is right", that's probably because the editors in question have a difference of opinion, not of fact. Talk Pages are supposed to be used to discuss how to improve an article but sometimes editors forget to assume good faith and end up making personal attacks: which you certainly should not engage in. Take some time to read about reliable sources we often use and about the sort of neutral writing style that works well here. Happy editing..... Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Question about an article declined

 Courtesy link: Draft:Praise Matemavi
I wrote an article about Dr. Praise Matemavi the first female Zimbabwean transplant surgeon which was denied despite me having a lot of references and citations. This article is very similar to others in the same category, therefore I do not see why it was denied. I don't know if there is bias of some sort there but I wanted to get another opinion and what I can do to improve it. The first African woman to be trained in a challenging discipline of liver, small bowel, pancreas and kidney transplant as well as hepatobiliary surgery I think is notable for a page. Thank you for your help. Fadzi02 (talk) 02:08, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

African born, but practicing in the U.S., which reduces notability. David notMD (talk) 03:53, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fadzi02: There are too many poor sources in there, mostly university publications (institutions that have some connection to the subject, and are therefore not independent). See Wikipedia:Golden rule for an overview of what is required. What three sources in that list do you consider the most significant and reliable? ~Anachronist (talk) 06:39, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: Thank you very much. That makes sense to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fadzi02 (talk • contribs)

Inbox recovery

My inbox has disappeared again, not generally a bad thing when guest posting, but in this case I was in the middle of a conversation. Is there a way I can recover it on my own or do I need to seek assistance from a mod? I tried ctrl+f for recover, restore, undelete, etc. but found no matches, even hit the "check the deletion log" button after hitting the talk button that takes you to your inbox while active and it just said "No matching items in log", any assistance would be helpful, thanks. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:2CC6:D432:1C1A:FA7 (talk) 02:10, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The most likely reason is that your IP address changed, and all the messages are on the talk page of the previous IP used. I would register for an account if you're expecting to carry a conversation with someone for a long period of time. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:32, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I guess that makes sense. But the nice thing about guest posting is that I can just go back to lurking whenever I want and no one will bother me over it, and let's be real here I've already given my e-mail address to too many sites, and the last thing I need is another source of spam, thanks for explaining things anyway though. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:50F9:F2:32EE:A4 (talk) 02:54, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

You don't need an email to create an account on here, though it does give you the option of recovering your password in the event that you lose it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I have been an active editor for 12 years and an administrator for four years, with an active email link. I get Wiikpedia related emails infrequently, and have never once received any Wikipedia-related spam. I am easy to communicate with right here on Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Well that's good to know. I'm going to be busy for a few weeks here, but when I have time again I may give it a try. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:6D47:E399:D0D4:5571 (talk) 12:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Sethji (Zee TV)

FYI

 – Title added by Qwerfjkl (talk) 12:34, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I have made some changes in the credits on the page of Sethji (Zee TV). Those changes are not being displayed. What is the procedure for accepting edit changes by Wikipedia?

 49.36.121.119 (talk) 02:51, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Here's the edit you made: [3]. One of the changes is visable. The other is hidden because the infobox does not have a field called "Concept". RudolfRed (talk) 03:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

How to "find" vandalism?

I know this question sounds wrong but where do vandalism reverters find vandalism? Excellenc1📞 03:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Vandalism#How_to_spot_vandalism Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:31, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Excellenc1. I recommend adding every article that interests you to your watchlist, and check your watchlist frequently. Learn who the productive experienced editors are in the topic areas you follow, and ignore their edits because the risk of vandalism is low. Learn to look for something suspicious in edit summaries. For example, sometimes you will see an edit summary that says, "Fix typo" and you see that the edit added a lot of characters. View the diff. It might be vandalism with a lying edit summary. Not all IP editors are vandals, and not all redlinked accounts are vandals. But the likelihood of vandalism is increased somewhat, so it is reasonable to view the diffs if you have the time. Do not be quick to conclude "vandalism!" because an incorrect edit made in good faith is not vandalism. As time goes by, experience will inform your "spidey sense" or your ability to detect something that "looks fishy". Look into those edits, revert when necessary, warn when appropriate, and report to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism when the problem is repeated and ongoing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Notability for Talitha (Malaysian Musician)

An enthusiastic and promising editor wants to create a page for Talitha and reached out for feedback on notability. I have provided my feedback but I have limited expertise with Malaysian sources. Can someone look at our discussion and give a more conclusive advise [4]? Tagging them here MarkieC07. Thanks! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I am MarkieC07 from Malaysia. As Nomadicghumakkad had mentioned, I'm interested to create a Wikipedia page for Talitha, a Malaysian artist. Hence, I would appreciate if any reviewing editors/advocates could provide some advice regarding the notability and reliability of the sources mentioned in this discussion with me and Nomadicghumakkad. Looking forward to meeting all of you guys here. Cheers, MarkieC07 (talk) 16:37, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Why is Wikipedia like this?

Articles with no citations exist on Wikipedia but a draft with 13 (previously 11) citations gets declined for unreliability. If I had not followed the AfC procedure, this draft would have been an article much before, without being deleted (I have seen many articles without proper citations, or citing just one source over and over). Why is this so? (P.S.: Sorry if I am shouting)  Excellenc1📞 04:44, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Because drafting didn't exist until 2011 and was not made a requirement until 2018. Our standards and enforcement thereof have only toughened over the years. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 04:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Jéské Couriano, can you please provide a link to the "requirement" to use draft space? I write new articles fairly often and have never once used draft space. I work in my own sandbox subpages and move the articles to main space when I think they are well-referenced and ready. And not a single one of the 104 articles I have written has been deleted. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:55, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: There is no such requirement that I know of. The closest thing we have that comes to a "requirement" is WP:COI, which recommends that editors with a conflict of interest submit their drafts via WP:AFC, and that implies the use of draft space, but a personal sandbox or a user sub-page can be used also. In fact, AFC is really the only actual venue Wikipedia offers for editors with a COI to get something published here. Experienced editors like you and me write articles directly in main space, although I have put things in draft space from time to time when I can't improve something further and I think it's a notable topic but my draft isn't yet ready for prime time, Draft:Mark Cheverton being one example.

For new editors, I highly recommend they draft new articles anywhere but main article space, because they can take their time learning how to do things without worrying about someone coming along and deleting it. It's strongly recommended, but not a requirement. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Anachronist. Are you saying that when Jéské Couriano wrote and was not made a requirement until 2018, Jéské Couriano didn't say there was a requirement imposed in 2018? That is hard to understand. As for writing articles directly in main space, I have never done that. I write articles in my sandbox space until I am completely confident that I have a well-referenced, halfway decent article, and then I move it to main space, open to any good faith editor to improve. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I think we had an edit conflict, where I replaced the assertion to which you just responded. Anyway, yes, I've done the same thing starting from my sandbox, but for some articles I have found myself using "Preview" as my sandbox while writing an article in main space. I recall once it took me most of a day to get an article written, and it was all done by previewing it until I was satisfied that it was worthy of publication. For others, I'll preview it until I have a satisfactory deletion-proof stub, and then expand it. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:23, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, if you are shouting, then you are doing so in a very reasonable and civilized way. Simply, Wikipedia encompasses a huge amount of junk. Of course, this has all been perpetrated by people who are less informed, lazier or stupider than editors like myself -- except that from time to time it has been perpetrated by me, personally, as TheTechnician27 recently pointed out to my considerable embarrassment. I thereupon improved it, but it's still pretty bad. Here's one (not by me) that I happened to encounter just today: Tulane University School of Liberal Arts, which, effectively, is a portrait of this School by the School itself. My gut response is to send hundreds or thousands of such things to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, and let those who think the articles could be worthwhile do the work that somebody should have done in the first place: referencing. But most annoyingly, it's instead the job of the would-be nominator to look for sources. No offence intended to the Tulane University School of Liberal Arts, but it's not a subject that interests me enough for me to want to poll Duckduckgo for reliable sources. And so I just ignore such stuff (usually). -- Hoary (talk) 07:02, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Another factor is that new articles created in main-space by "normal" editors are "patrolled"; they are flagged automatically, and checked by special editors who can assess them. Long-term editors may be declared "auto-patrolled", which means their articles are automatically tagged as checked/approved without anyone actually doing any checking or approving. The checking process means that a new article is subject to more scrutiny than an article that has been lingering here for a decade, and which can slip under the radar. On discovering a badly-referenced article, some editors might nominate it for deletion, but others might feel the basic text is (probably) correct, and well-written, in which case they're more likely to decorate it with {{cn}} tags and hope someone (else) does the work of finding some references ("cn" stands for "citation needed"). Personally, I'm a novice editor who's created two articles directly in main-space, both translations from German WP with additions, and I did it that way because I didn't know about the draft system; I'd probably do it again if I'm fairly confident the article's alright, because I've heard horror stories of AfC articles getting no attention for 18 months, while both of the articles I wrote were patrolled in a very helpful and constructive way within 24 hours. But yes, main-space is a place where failure to reference is likely to be jumped on, and new articles more so than old! Elemimele (talk) 09:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, because not many editors (myself included) are willing to fight their way through thousands and thousands and thousands of pages of dross making the effort to look for sources to improve them or delete them. --ColinFine (talk) 15:12, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

So in a nutshell:

• Old articles tend to lack citations as the draft system wasn't there to approve them (Jéské Couriano's answer).
• Not all old articles, many users checked themselves and that was apt. Cullen328's response.)
• There are many drops of ink in this ocean and they are very slowly cleaned. (Elemimele, Hoary and ColinFine's answer).

(Sorry if I am not supposed to call you directly by your username but instead add a title before (like user, editor, Mr./Ms./Mrs. etc.) and I also apologize if my interpretation is wrong.) Excellenc1📞 17:13, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: It's not just that the draft system didn't exist, the policies that govern how articles are written didn't exist either. WP:What Wikipedia is not wasn't created until late 2001, nearly a year after the project started. WP:Verifiability, the requirement that articles be sourced, was first drafted in 2003. WP:BLP wasn't created untill 2005, in response to the Seigenthaler biography incident. WP:Notability wasn't written down as a policy until 2006. Even when these were written down we didn't get serious about enforcing them until about 2010 ish. There were literally millions of pages that were created in the early 2000's that would not be accepted today, but with 6 million articles and only a few thousand active editors it is going to take decades to clean up everything - bear in mind that not every unsourced stub needs deletion - a lot of them are about notable subjects but are just terribly written. WP:WikiProject Sweep is currently trying to organise a task force to sort through a load of these early pages. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:45, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

And calling people by their username is normal, Excellenc1. I would say it's quite unusual to use titles and honorifics in online forums in English, except perhaps by people from India. --ColinFine (talk) 19:12, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Noticeboards, what to do when not enough editors are involved?

Greetings! I openend a section on July 17th, @Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RFC_Tghat.com whether a source was reliable or not, however last comment dates back to 18 July. There doesn't seem to be a consensus yet. Only 4 editors(excluding myself) responded, two expressing concern, and two in favour. I'm kind of new using noticeboards, does someone propose something? Or is it just waiting for others? I'm asking here, because Noticeboard doesn't seem to have clear cut procedure for this, or did i overlook something? Thanks Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 05:39, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

It's not that uncommon that a WP-discussion ends (at least for the time being) without "result". I think there was some sort of scientific study on it, actually. However, WP:APPNOTE can help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:26, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Questions for Removing the Caution on the top of Our Wiki-page

1. I want to know what is the "subject" in the Phase "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (August 2012)" and how to improve it and remove the caution? (from RIB_Software)

2. I wonder what would happen if the article contained a lot of buzzwords? How do I remove this warning？ （This article appears to contain a large number of buzzwords. (January 2018) from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIB_Software） 103.99.75.85 (talk) 06:40, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

The statement means that a company representative, or otherwise someone with a conflict of interest, has made substantive edits to the article. The article should be cleaned up to remove promotional content and buzzwords before the tag is removed. If the article comes across as a company brochure, with details that aren't relevant to readers, then it needs cleaning up. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:52, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

That article actually says "RIB's iTWO is a cloud-based Big Data BIM 5D enterprise solution" which may be the most vapid string of obfuscating jargon that I have seen in a long time. Whoever writes in that fashion has absolutely no idea how to write a neutral encyclopedia article, which would explain that gobbledygook if it actually means anything. It must have been written by a paid junior PR person of some type. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:16, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

The article was created in 2013 by an editor who did no other successful editing, then at times expanded by three other editors who only edited this article. And now an IP ask about why there is a tag "...on the top of Our Wiki-page." So, the answer is because multiple editors of this article are suspected of having a close connection to the subject, probably paid, but none ever declared their connection. David notMD (talk) 10:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Furthermore, the crucial part of the article - what RIB Software does - has no references. All the refs are for history and financial dealings. Notability has not been established. David notMD (talk) 10:28, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Help creating an article

I am trying to create a wikipedia page for my company. I had submitted an article but was declined. I need to know what can be improved and what else is required for an article to be accepted. Would require help for the same. Analytics 123 (talk) 06:45, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

If you're referring to Draft:Unomer, it comes across as a marketing web page. It doesn't explain why the company would be considered notable, it's full of lists of inline external links that violate the WP:NOTDIRECTORY policy, it has no inline citations except to a couple of LinkedIn profiles. It gives a strong impression that you are attempting to use Wikipedia as a publicity platform (violating WP:NOTPROMOTION policy) rather than conveying content about a notable topic.

Please read Wikipedia:Golden rule to get an idea of what is expected. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Analytics 123, your draft includes these two unreferenced sentences, Unomer helps the market researchers, brand managers and consumer insight leaders to reach the tough segment through the right targeting. Creating surveys that are interactive, these are then distributed with our app partners who embed the same as an advertisement or banner on their UI or channel. That passage violates all three of Wikipedia's core content policies, Verifiability, the Neutral picture of view, and No original research. This is the exact opposite of good encyclopedia article writing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

If you are writing about your company, you need to read about conflict of interest, and make the mandatory declaration of paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

About Veronika Matyunina

Hello, I'm Adam Daniel by original name ,whom my Ukrainian Slavic name is Lyubomyr Bilyovych, and my Croatian Slavic name is Berislav Ismailović, I'm from Malaysia and I'm 16 years old this year. I would like to tell you something about Veronika Matyunina:

Do you know that Veronika Matyunina is a Ukrainian table tennis player and athlete, and I like her very much. I actually created Wikipedia pages about her in other languages following Ukrainian, and I even have created the page about her in the Chinese and Simple English Wikipedia. For the page titled Veronika Matyunina, in the English Wikipedia, could you please let it be published and be clear and same as the Ukrainian Wikipedia page Матюніна Вероніка in a very short time and it's not more than a month? I like her very much. I'm even going to create pages in other languages about her. She is only 15 years old, young than me. Her age is even close to me though 9 months 3 days she's behind me.

Thank you Adamdaniel864 (talk) 07:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Adamdaniel864, do you have a question about editing that wasn't answered in your earlier thread Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1118#Creation_of_the_page_Veronika_Matyunina_and_admitting_it_into_the_English_Wikipedia_as_a_page? If so, please ask it. Meanwhile, most of us like this or that person very much, but I neither presume that you'd be interested in who it is that I like nor expect that an article will materialize about a person because I like her. -- Hoary (talk) 07:08, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

You need to read the answer to your previous question at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1118#Creation of the page Veronika Matyunina and admitting it into the English Wikipedia as a page, add the necessary references, and submit the draft for review. Note also that there is no deadline. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:11, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Veronika Matyunina, no references, not submitted to AfC. David notMD (talk) 15:44, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Requesting to change the title of an existing page

What is the procedure to change the title of an existing Wikipedia page if it can confuse the readers of another page that has the same name? Case in point, The Wikipedia page of Sega's The Dreamcast gaming console, which has a direct name conflict with 'Dreamcast', a Virtual Events Platform based in India. Kindly let me know how to go about doing it, as there is no 'Move' functionality on the page, & efforts to rename the title & the inside text of the page have been disapproved. DCFrontlines (talk) 08:20, 30 July 2021 (UTC) DCFrontlines (talk) 08:20, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

You can use a hat note to direct readers to the other article (assuming it actually exists). Example: {{About|USE1||PAGE2}} would appear as follows:

This page is about USE1. For other uses, see PAGE2.

See Wikipedia:Hatnote. Zudo (talk) 08:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

If an article about the other subject is produced (perhaps by getting a draft approved), the disambiguation can be handled at that time. The reason that you can't see the move functionality is that your account is not autoconfirmed, so you don't have the experience to perform a move. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:31, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Article got declined - Please Help

Hi, I need suggestion on an article which got declined, I tried to fix but not working. Please help me by suggesting what to correct on this article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Reetha_Ramudoo

Q : Is the article getting declined because of adding movie title links on Career ?
Q : I have added a reference link of e-newspaper, Is e-newspaper aren't acceptable ?

Thanks & Regards KeechB (talk) 12:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, KeechB, and welcome to the Teahouse. 1. It's reasonable to Wikilink to articles about a person's works; but you give no reference to support the claim that she was involved in those films, and our articles about them do not mention her. Unless you can find a reliably published source for her connection with those movies, then don't mention them in the article about her. And, though it's not a reason for declining the draft, it would be better if it said what her role was in those films, rather than the vague "launched" - I'm guessing from the previous paragraph that what you mean is that her company distributed them in Malaysia, and I don't see why that is encyclopaedic: thousands of films get distributed in hundreds of countries by thousands of companies: so what? 2. there's nothing necessarily wrong with an e-newspaper. There are three requirements for a source to contribute to establishing notability first, that it be reliably published - it doesn't matter what media, whether online or not, what language; but is it published by someone with a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control? Secondly, is it independent of the subject? The Deccan Chronicle citations are merely reporting her words, and so are not independent of her. Non-independent sources can be used for certain limited purpose (see WP:SPS) but do not contribute to establishing notability. And third, they must contain significant coverage of the subject. Sources with passing mentions may be used for supporting specific statements in an article, but do not contribute to establishing notability.

I notice that your five citations are actually to only two sources: the first two are the same article, which is mostly an interview; the other three are all to the same short article, which is pretty clearly based on a press release.

Creating an article is one of the most difficult tasks there is for an experienced editor: I liken it to starting work as a builder's apprentice and trying to build a house on your first day. What makes it so difficult is the bits that ordinary people don't see: in this case, finding the sources. If you don't survey the ground and build your foundations before you start building your house, it will probably fall down and your work will be wasted. If you don't find the reliable, independent sources before you start writing, your draft will probably not be accepted and your work will be wasted.

I suggest you find three articles, published in reliable sources, where people unconnected with her have written about her at some length, and write your draft around these. --ColinFine (talk) 15:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Reverting my Contributions

This article in Wikipedia was poorly written : Front-end web development, So I myself who is a Front-end developer added some information to the page which makes it clear that what exactly is Front-end web development, also I added an Roadmap image which is my own property which gives a clear idea about front end development. Now a user named MrOllie started reverting my contribution and he is doing this from last two days. I warned him many for not repeating that but keeps on reverting my changes and instead he warned me back. I checked his talk page and found out that he has been doing all this with a lot of people without giving proper reasons. Please help and take a look at this matter its very annoying as he keep on repeating this behavior. Thank You Hacker8679 (talk) 12:50, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hacker8679, please read WP:BRD. You boldly made an edit, and another editor reverted it. You should then have discussed it on the article's talk page. Instead you engaged in an edit was with two other editors, were warned for edit-warring, continued to edit-war, and got yourself blocked for a week. Maproom (talk) 15:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Count is now three editors who have reverted you, and one (MrOllie) who has initiated a discussion on the Talk page. Go there. David notMD (talk) 17:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Edits on the Page Tim Southee

Hi Wikipedians, I have recently edited Cricketer Tim Southee's article and have added info on his performances in the Cricket world cup 2019. I would like someone to check them and let me know if anything needs to be done. Thanks in advance!!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 13:15, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Disneyland

I currently working on Draft:List of media based on Disney theme-park attractions and looking for anyone who can help Finnish it of P+T 92.236.253.249 (talk) 14:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

P&T?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:12, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Please and thanks 92.236.253.249 (talk) 16:47, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Requesting updates to law firm page

Hello! I'm an employee of Thompson Coburn LLP and would love the assistance of Wikipedia editors in making a few updates to our page. In July 2021 we opened a new office in New York. Reuters news story 1) Could the info box at the top be changed to "7" offices? 2) In the first sentence, could New York be added to the list of offices and the total headcount be changed to "more than 400" (Source: https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2021/06/23/new-york-firm-and-thompson-coburn-to-merge-eyeing-benefits-of-scale/?slreturn=20210630104006) Thank you! Allison Spencecomms (talk) 14:42, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Spencecomms Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please make this request on the article talk page, Talk:Thompson Coburn, in the form of an edit request(click for instructions). 331dot (talk) 15:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Spencecomms thank you for doing things properly, and declaring your conflict of interest, and for transferring the requested edit to the talk page of the article. I have made the edit as it seemed uncontroversial and it is best that WP is accurate. Nevertheless, the reference you've used is in a source that's not ideally accessible to an every-day reader (requires registering to a site that permits only one article-read per month). If you have a better reference, it would no doubt be appreciated. Elemimele (talk) 17:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Elemimele Thank you very much for your assistance. Here is another reference that I believe should be accessible to all readers that also has the "more than 400" attorneys information, if you'd like to sub it in. Thank you again! Spencecomms (talk) 17:40, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

References

AfD discussions

Is there a guideline, policy, or even an essay discouraging an AfD nominator from responding to other editors in the deletion discussion? I've come across multiple instances where I've been told it looks really bad, but in almost all cases the user in question has been previously flagged for a policy or guideline violation or their account is relatively new. I've read through a few policies and guidelines relevant to AfDs but I can't find anything discouraging this kind of discussion. Once or twice I've had editors claim I'm not following WP:CIVILITY guidelines, but I'm asking specifically about whether making comments in an AfD after the nomination is bad or not. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:27, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: At WP:AFD it says "Nomination already implies that the nominator recommends deletion (unless indicated otherwise), and nominators should refrain from repeating this." RudolfRed (talk) 16:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: I'm not sure if this applies to what your asking, but it might also be worth having a read of WP:BLUDGEON. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you RudolfRed and 192.76.8.91. I'll keep these in mind. If an editor brings up a point I hadn't considered but still believe is faulty is it appropriate to edit my original rationale? TipsyElephant (talk) 16:55, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: You can add additional stuff to the deletion rationale, but it should be done in a way that it is clear to anyone reading the discussion that it was added after the discussion was started, for example you might add an additional comment underneath the nomination. You shouldn't change the original statement after other people have responded to it as it makes their comments meaningless or difficult to follow. If you do need to correct an error in the nom statement you should strike out the mistake with <s></s> tags, rather than deleting it. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, do not edit your original rationale except to strike out errors. If another editor asks you a question, answer it. If another editor make a good point, concede the point. If another editor is wrong factually, gently point that out. But it is bad form for an AfD nominator to try to refute every "Keep" opinion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:03, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Just as User:Cullen328 has said. But also be aware that people who don't want to discuss and merely want to drive-by "vote", will often try to use BLUDGEON to try to prevent having to support their assertion. AfD is a discussion page, not a voting page. But in all, be Civil, and be prudent. as the others said, and try to WP:AGF as much as you can. And be prepared to explain and discuss should you be asked to as well. I hope this helps : ) - jc37 19:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Jewish Lithuanian history on Hasidic Judaism in Lithuania

Hello; I just put the Jewish Lithuanian history template on the article Hasidic Judaism in Lithuania, but I want the template's section "Groups" to remain expanded, as this is the section that includes that Hasidic Judaism article. I want to know how this can be done. Thank you, Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 17:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Charlie Smith FDTB, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks to me as if this can be done, but it will need an edit to the Template. If you look at {{Sidebar with collapsible lists}}, it says there is an option |expanded=, but that needs as a value the name of the particular list. But as far as I can see {{Jewish Lithuanian history}} doesn't define the name parameters for its lists. I think you'll need to edit that template to add (eg)

list1name=groups

and then you'll be able to add

expanded=groups

to the call in the article. (I'd have tried it myself if it had just required a change to the article, but I don't want to play about with editing a template). --ColinFine (talk) 18:54, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thank you very much, Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 22:35, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Need help with Tone

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § Need help with Tone

 – —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Amir Ghavidel
Hello. I have submitted my draft for Amir Ghavidel for quite some time, and it has been reworked many times. It got rejected again today for having a praising tone for the subject. And I know that my close relationship with the subject does not help it either. So, I butchered the article again and cut many parts. The way I read it, I am not talking up the subject after these new changes.

I would appreciate it if anyone can take a look at it, so I won't take my and anyone else's time on this. It won't take much of your time with its humble 3 paragraphs.

Thanks Wikipedia community.Ngm 7 (talk) 17:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

To be specific, today's action was a Declined (4th), not a Rejection. David notMD (talk) 17:49, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: Thank you for the correction. I'm not quite familiar with the lingo.Ngm 7 (talk) 17:54, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Rejection more severe/final. I did a bit of clean-up toward neutral tone. Are their any potential sources other than IBDb to confirm his accomplishments as film director, screenwriter, etc.? David notMD (talk) 18:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: That's very kind of you. Thank you. For the Iranian Cinema, it is mainly the Iranian Movie Database which has been listed as reference. There are other articles as well (some referenced) but mostly in the Persian language. This one is on BBC for example: https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran/2009/11/091110_na_pj_ghavidel_cinema Ngm 7 (talk) 18:08, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: On the last BBC link, it says and I'm merely translating (not promoting) "Even though Ghavidel's name was not mentioned a lot in the artistic cinema of Iran, but his power of filmmaking is undeniable, and the fact that he made a film such as "Sardar-e Jangal" demonstrates his dominance and skill in directing large-scale cinematic projects". I didn't cite it, cause the writer of the article has a praising tone. Ngm 7 (talk) 18:14, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ngm 7. It's fine to quote a favorable evaluation of the subject as long as 1) you make it clear that it is a quotation, and cite the source; 2) the source is genuinely independent of the subject (not a colleague or an employer, for example) and 3) if there are equally prominent independent sources that are negative, you cite them as well. (You don't necessarily need to quote them, but should make clear that there are other views than the one you quoted). --ColinFine (talk) 18:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine. I will keep that in mind.Ngm 7 (talk) 19:27, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

What's the correct procedure for minor CoI changes that cannot be referenced properly because they're too minor to interest secondary sources?

This is something that happens quite a lot, I think: we have an article on a clearly notable company or institution, which says it has three divisions and 2400 staff, referenced to something sensible. Then it restructures itself into four divisions and ends up with 2250 staff. Even the local newspapers are more excited about a newly-discovered cannabis farm in someone's attic than a rather dull internal restructuring of the national institute for mushroom research, so the change goes unreported. Up pops an employee, declaring their CoI, and in possession of a press-release confirming the change. What do we do? If we don't accept edits like this, on the reasonable grounds that the proposer has a conflict of interest and the reference isn't independent, then we end up with an inaccurate article. But if we do, we're accepting double-standards on references and edits. What's the right thing to do? Elemimele (talk) 17:43, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I think this is a matter of SPSs, Elemimele. While the number of employees could be controversial, in most cases it is not, and we can accept eg their own website, including a press-release that they've put up on their website. If it's never been published anywhere, that's a different matter, though. --ColinFine (talk) 19:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, ColinFine, that makes sense. Elemimele (talk) 22:14, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

My articles keep getting rejected for very vague reasons and it doesn't seem constructive

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § My articles keep getting rejected for very vague reasons and it doesn't seem constructive

 – ―Qwerfjkltalk 21:34, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Transgender Rights in Wales

Hello, I have recently had two articles declined and sent back to me to edit again. The first few times there was genuine feedback that I implemented, however, now all I am getting are very vague or unelaborated declinings that seem very out of place? My draft on Transgender rights in Wales (currently pending again) was rejected for not using a formal register, however, I really feel I was using a formal register. I think it's very strange that it got rejected for this reason, as I have enough reliable sources and content to qualify for a page, a previous rejector noting this and advising on more elaboration the first time. I have extensive UK qualifications (A levels and above) in English Language so I'm well aware of what constitutes a formal register - this recent rejection, it just seems off and out of place (especially when much of my article includes quotes from Uk legislation, which is the one of the most formal registers possible I feel. Re: my other pending draft on discrimination against transgender men, I think that one just hasn't been seen yet, which is okay. Can anyone shed light on why my draft may have been rejected and provide useful feedback on how to improve it? Thank you (edit: my apologies, my dumb ass posted this in the wrong place. Don't wikipedia and sleep deprived) Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 21:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Transandrosupport. The latest reviewer, Bilorv, left some very detailed and constructive feedback on your talk page. Bilorv most certainly did not reject your draft. They were encouraging and asked for some specific changes. Have you read what Bilorv wrote? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:49, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Cullen - I just read that now and yeah, it isn't discouraging this time. The last reviewer straight up didn't leave a reason hence I was quite irked. I'm unfortunately in the middle of a lot of Uni work but I hope to amend the article as much as I can tonight. Thank you for all your patience — Preceding unsigned comment added by Transandrosupport (talk • contribs) 22:08, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I'd just like to add to this, Transandrosupport, that the responses you're receiving in the big pink templates have default wording, but the comments are handwritten. The decline you're talking about is someone clicking "essay" as the decline reason, and I agree with that decline reason. The implication is not supposed to be that you're unable to write in a formal register, but that the draft doesn't read with the tone of a Wikipedia article. Phrases like "The reception has been broadly positive from the LGBTQ+ community in Wales, though many still note that there is a long way to go" are perfectly fine in other contexts (maybe a university essay), but on Wikipedia the aim is to have no opinionated voice—no insertion of our own opinions and no uncritical repetition of biased sources. PinkNews is just one tabloid-ish news source so it can't really be used to describe the whole scope of the LGBT+ response to such a broad plan.

For what it's worth, I know of at least one outstanding editor who failed GCSE English and has been the most major writer of some of our best-quality articles, so writing in a Wikipedia style is not so much a matter of having formal qualifications, but learning from feedback and others' works.

I'm planning to re-review the draft you've submitted sometime in the next 18 hours, depending on real life factors. Before this month, your maximum wait time for a draft would be five months, because of a critical shortage of reviewers, but a concentrated effort of thousands of volunteer labour hours over July has helped us nearly clear our months-long backlog of several thousand drafts. If a draft doesn't get a response, that just means no-one has had the time and energy to assess it yet. — Bilorv (talk) 23:27, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Anthon Bosch

I am really unable to understand why Wikipedia won't accept this Draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anthon_Bosch

He is a professional snowboarder and an Olympian. He clearly passes WP:SPORTBASIC & WP:NOLYMPICS as he has played on various major leagues. If there is no specific criteria for snowboarders, then there should be one created. It's not a barely played sport.

Is an international professional player not notable enough? What can be done? This group seems to be inactive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Skiing_and_Snowboarding DyingLightquests (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2021 (UTC) DyingLightquests (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

DyingLightquests, I think the problem is in the sources. Most of them I have never heard of, except for olympics.com. Try to find better sources. I don't know too much else, pinging User:DoubleGrazing and User:Tamingimpala. Sungodtemple (talk) 00:50, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Sungodtemple I have seen many many pages with only a few references and they are usually tagged as Stubs. The Olympics and FSI are enough! Just because the media giants didn't cover him doesn't mean he is a nobody. He is literally the first person to represent the African continent in Winter Olympic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DyingLightquests (talk • contribs)

Thanks for pinging me, Sungodtemple. Hi @DyingLightquests: happy to account for my decision. The way I see it:

• This person is not an Olympian, as they haven't yet competed at the (forthcoming 2022) games, which is what WP:NOLYMPICS requires; that may well change in approximately six months' time, and in that sense this could be just a case of WP:TOOSOON — then again, anything could change, and lest we forget, Wikipedia is not a WP:CRYSTALBALL.
• Being a 'professional international player' is indeed accepted for some sports as a notability criterion, but as pointed out already, there are no specific criteria for snowboarding. Therefore we have to rely on the general WP:GNG notability rules, which require significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable secondary sources.
• As for being 'the first person to X', that doesn't in itself guarantee notability, although it may provide grounds for significant coverage in secondary sources, which in turn often will. If such coverage has been generated, please cite it in the draft.
• Finally, there may well exist other articles on Wikipedia 'with only a few references', but that is an argument for improving the referencing on them, not for accepting this draft with insufficient references.

Hope this helps, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:48, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

DoubleGrazing How can I create a notability criteria for snowboarding? DyingLightquests (talk) 07:28, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

DyingLightquests Creating a specific notability requirement for snowboarders would not override the requirements of the more general notability guidelines- you would still need significant coverage in independent reliable sources, which you don't have at present. Is there a particular need you have for a speedy movement of this draft to the encyclopedia? In a few short months, if he appears in the Olympics, he will merit an article. 331dot (talk) 07:37, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

One would think there'd be a WP:NSKIING at WP:NSPORT, but no. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:18, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing@DyingLightquests Here's a few decent sources I found (as in they all have WP-articles): [5][6][7]. However, the internet also reveals he's actually Russian ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:57, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Edits on Page: Tim Southee

Hi there, I have asked this question already, but I would like someone to check the Article of Cricketer Tim Southee's stats of the Cricket world cup 2019 which I have added yesterday. I would like to know if anything needs to be changed, Thank you! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:57, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Help on WikiProject creation

Hello, I've created a new project Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian Civil Servants. Please help me to complete the process. Thanks --Shaji issac (talk) 03:43, 31 July 2021 (UTC) Shaji issac (talk) 03:43, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Comparison images

Sorry, I am in a hurry so this question is short and may be hard to understand. I want to upload a comparison images, but one side is not mine and the other is mine. What should I do? Kuro・(Kuro's talk page) 04:04, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Kuro the black dog, where is the "not mine" image? What is its copyright status? Maproom (talk) 07:36, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

I was a bit confused at first, but this image comes from a Wiki hosted by Shoutwiki, which seems to be powered by MediaWiki (link to image). Also, sorry about forgetting to sign a signature. Kuro・(Kuro's talk page) 08:05, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

My edits are getting deleted for very strange reason

Hlo there!, I am newbie to Wikipedia, I have recently made an edit but it was removed by mentioning that it's an SPAM by someone called User:ItsSkV08 ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1036371374 ) It doesn't seems to me like an valid reason for deletion. Help me to figure out if I am wrong (sorry for my english). Xi Xing Ping (talk) 04:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Xi Xing Ping: Hello, and welcome-- the pdf link you provided includes IP , and not opening, you can reverse my edit with correction in source or use other reliable sources, see WP:RS and WP:CITE… Thanks.~ ItsSkV08 (talk) 04:57, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Where to suggest an article topic

Hi Teahouse Hosts

Where would be the best place to leave a suggestion for article creation on an Australian woman diplomat and academic? I have been reading about Coral Bell, who seems like someone who would likely meet notability guidelines, and might be in under-represented categories in WP as well, e.g. Australian subjects; Women diplomats. I had thought she could well have a WP article already, but no. There is an article on the Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs which, apart from mentioning it was renamed for her in 2015, is silent on her work and career.

What would you recommend? I thought of dropping a note on WP:WikiProject Women, WP:WikiProject Women in Red or WP:WikiProject Australia but I am not sure of the protocol, or if suggestions like these would be welcome: I am aware that many WikiProjects have more than enough work already.

I could help with sourcing if that is of any use. There are a few initial refs to start, just on a very quick look around.

• News item
• Book of essays
• Report of speech by Julie Bishop, then Minister for Foreign Affairs

Any suggestions appreciated.

References

 49.177.69.7 (talk) 04:58, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Vernacular name/Common name of Tuberose

Tuberose is commonly known as Rajanigandha or Nishigandha in Asian countries. However, I didn't find any other_names parameter in speciesbox template but present in drugbox and chembox. Should I include its other name directly under some heading `== Common names ==` of Tuberose or is there some parameter for including vernacular name/common name in speciesbox. Adding common name in synonym parameter shouldn't be done right? Machinexa (talk) 05:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC) Machinexa (talk) 05:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Machinexa, this is English-language Wikipedia, so generally only English-language names for subjects should be listed. Maproom (talk) 07:40, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Log out

I currently can not log on to my account, so I am using a I.P but every edit I made get reverted and I told to not edit anymore it seams to started because I my a few edits to my old talk page User:Fanoflionking 92.236.253.249 (talk) 06:41, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

If you are unable to regain access to your account, you may create a new account and on its user page identify it as a successor to your old account("I am User23456, I had used User12345 but lost access to that account"). 331dot (talk) 07:47, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

How do I determine if something is worth an article or not?

Hi there. As a kid I used to play with these specific-branded marble runs called "Techno Gears Marble Mania", and the company that manufactured them is called "The Learning Journey International", which I've been thinking of making an article about, as they certainly have a lot to them than the marble sets and have received numerous awards. Because of the latter, I suspect that if I give it a thorough look, the company as a whole will be mentioned by multiple reliable sources. The problem is, I don't have interest in their other products, so I don't think I'd be able to commit to a full article about them, and I'm not sure if anyone else here really knows what this company is. Is it worth creating? Zeke Essiestudy (talk/contributions) 06:49, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zeke Essiestudy I'll give you my opinion. An article doesn't have to be "full" or "complete" to survive mainspace, but it must "float" on it's own from the start per WP:GNG and in this case WP:NORG. See this example I moved to articlespace: [8]. Not "full", but it didn't fail WP:GNG either. It improved as time passed. So, if you can find a few more good sources like [9][10] (less local is even better), I say go for it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:04, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

mmmmmmmmm

i love tea :) 1aloe (talk) 06:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Requesting Image of a living person bio from the person? (is this permitted?)

I have recently worked on these page and others: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukanya_Krishnan and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Markopolos It would be helpful to add a photo to these notable people. I have no relationship of any kind with these subjects, is it permissible per Wikipedia policies (WP:COI or othewise) to contact the people to request they submit a photo with CC BY-SA 4.0 permissions? CosmicNotes (talk) 09:16, 31 July 2021 (UTC)