Wikipedia:Teahouse

Sdkb, 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

Concerns of notability re: children's author, 1980s-present + possible workaround

This overnight, I was planning to do an AFC page on one Stephanie Calmenson, who has written dozens of children's books since 1982. (Her name ended up in the bibliography for Doug Cushman I set up last night [if only to de-orphan two of the Holiday Mice books he illustrated for Bethany Roberts]; I happened to own one of her titles, Hopscotch, the Tiny Bunny [1991], back in my homeland of Dominica.) Calmenson (b. 11/28/52 in Brooklyn) was once profiled in Gale's Something About the Author series, which is a great start--but from here, what I've approached across ProQuest/GBooks/GScholar/the newspaper outlets (as of this writing) hardly shows any promise. Tons of reviews on her works + scattershot library-shelf listings; almost nothing else on her career save for a 1987 "infobox" in Newsday. No major awards either, not to mention there's an interview on TeachingBooks you have to be an educator to view--which already doesn't count.

TL/DR: Firmly in WP:ONESOURCE territory for the most part--and in turn, clearly short of WP:NAUTHOR expectations. How disappointing...

Absent a Calmenson article, I think I may approach the subject from another angle: Through a page entitled "List of works by Stephanie Calmenson" or "Stephen Calmenson bibliography", as long as the site's community doesn't mind. If not, then we might as well launch a "Books by Stephanie Calmenson" category as a last resort--and only when at least three notable works of hers show up on WP. (Emphasis on "notable": She also did movie, TV, and Disney tie-ins that are better off mentioned on their parent works' pages.)

And if Hopscotch got reviewed (and I bet it already did), then so much the better once I launch its draft. In the meantime, I'll resume my own search after sending this filing to press. To the S.S. @Cunard: Are you up for some source-sleuthing soon? --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 13:52, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

It may be a stretch, but this 1995 New York Times story on the development of a non-fiction book of hers, Rosie: A Visiting Dog's Story, features a biographical tidbit almost midway through. Whether this + the SATA profile makes Calmenson qualify for notability, I have yet to be told. (Unless much better appears on the horizon...) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 14:09, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Even my hopes for Hopscotch—recommended for the kidvid-cottagecore crowd as long as you can find a copy anymore; helps that Barbara Lanza's illustrations are lush as they come—turned out to be overambitious. Nothing to show for that either, save for this clipping that mentions its sales of 113,827 by 1993 (ranked #130 in the "Paperback Backlist Bestsellers" section there). Looks like a bibliography/category for Calmenson is going to be our only way out.

P.S. Hopscotch the rabbit and Squeak the mouse make for one of the best friendships ever to grace a children's book. Draw your own conclusions, fellow furs.

• Roback, Diane (1994-03-07). "Hollywood and horror: in children's, movie tie-ins and scary series ring the registers". Publishers Weekly. Vol. 241, no. 10. pp. S14+. ISSN 0000-0019. Retrieved 2023-07-13 – via Gale General OneFile.

--Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 07:57, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Slgrandson (talk · contribs), thank you for your great work on articles related to children's literature! This book source you linked is a great find. I will look into sources for Stephanie Calmenson. I am confident that she passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria and will share my findings here within two to four days. Cunard (talk) 09:08, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Slgrandson (talk · contribs). Here are some sources about the children's book author Stephanie Calmenson that allow her to meet Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says "multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability":

1. This Gale search from the Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library returns a large number of book reviews of books written by Stephanie Calmenson.
2. The New York Times article and the book source you linked above.
3. Budge, Rose Mary (2008-11-11). "Harry, owner offer tips on petting animals". San Antonio Express-News. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "Calmenson, who has about 100 children's books on a variety of subjects to her credit, is in San Antonio today to speak at the Animal Defense League's fall "friendraiser." ... Growing up in Brooklyn, Calmenson longed for a pet - especially a puppy. But her mother was terrified of dogs. Eventually, the author prevailed and adopted a fuzzy darling named Rosie, who won over Mother. Soon, the dog and her owner were winning even more friends visiting the elderly at nursing homes. ... When Rosie died, Calmenson was heartbroken and doubted she would ever feel so close to an animal again. Then along came Harry."

4. Reid, Robert (1993-02-20). "Aesop's fables offer lasting relevance". Waterloo Region Record. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "The Children's Aesop (McClelland and Stewart, $15.99), selected and retold by Stephanie Calmenson and illustrated by Robert Byrd, is the latest offering. The collection, comprising 28 fables both familiar and not-so-familiar, has a couple of qualities to recommend. Calmenson was a former elementary school teacher, children's book editor and editorial director of Parents Magazine's Read-Aloud Book Club for Children before she turned to writing full time. Her retelling of the fables are written to appeal to young contemporary readers. Byrd's ink and watercolor illustrations capture both the humor and the action of the text."

5. Allport, Brandy Hilboldt (2001-08-20). "Youngest students can jump into school year". The Florida Times-Union. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "-- Title: The Frog Principal. -- Author and illustrator: Stephanie Calmenson/Denise Brunkus -- Publisher: Scholastic Press ... Calmenson is a teacher and editor who lives in New York. She adaptated another classic tale in her book, The Principal's New Clothes. That story featured the first appearance of Mr. Bundy. Readers who enjoyed meeting him in The Frog Principal might want to check this older title. Also, fans of Robert Munsch (Aaron's Hair, Alligator Baby, The Paper Bag Princess) will like Calmenson's work. Their wacky storytelling styles have similar appeal."

6. Rosenthal, Cathy M. (2008-12-21). "Lost pet's finder kept it; would you?". San Antonio Express-News. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "If you are looking for a last-minute gift for a young dog lover this holiday season, check out "May I Pet Your Dog?: The How-to Guide for Kids Meeting Dogs (and Dogs Meeting Kids)" by Stephanie Calmenson. While it is an advanced picture book intended for pre-school to second-grade readers, many elementary-school-age students and adults also would benefit from reading the step-by-step etiquette of meeting and greeting dogs, especially dogs you don't know."

7. Young, Rebecca (2007-05-01). "Books give children pet perspectives". The News Tribune. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "· "May I Pet Your Dog?" by Stephanie Calmenson is an important book for younger children. It effectively teaches the most important thing to remember when encountering a dog you don't know. ... Calmenson features her own long-haired dachshund Harry as narrator, winningly portrayed by veteran illustrator Jan Ormerod."

8. Meehan, Mary (2002-12-01). "Kid Tests, Mother Approves - Of 4 New Titles Picked by Mom, Preschooler Gives Ok to 3". Lexington Herald-Leader. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "At 64 pages, it's not designed for one sitting, but it has a table of contents so parents can choose the topic they want to explore. You can tell the author, Stephanie Calmenson, was once a teacher."

9. Glassman, Molly Dunham (1994-07-03). "Cold Noses, Warm Hearts Make For Tender Accounts". Orlando Sentinel. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

   The article notes: "Some dogs are more loving and smarter than others. One example is the star of Rosie: A Visiting Dog's Story by Stephanie Calmenson, photographs by Justin Sutcliffe (Clarion, $15.95, 48 pages). Rosie is a Tibetan terrier, a middle-sized dog with long, silky hair that hangs in her eyes. Her owner, Stephanie Calmenson, tells how Rosie was trained to become a visiting dog - a Delta Society Pet Partner and a member of Therapy Dogs International."

10. MacPherson, Karen (2001-06-19). "Backseat Books Conjure Vacation Fun on the Road". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "Echoing Chapin, authors Joanna Cole (of "Magic School Bus" fame) and Stephanie Calmenson believe that "sometimes getting there is half the fun." Cole and Calmenson use clear language to give directions for a host of games, including "I Spy," "License Plate Counting," "States and Mottoes," etc. Some of the games are meant for older children, ages 10 and up, while others can be played even by preschoolers."

11. MacPherson, Karen (1998-05-07). "Rounding up Some Wagging Tales of Child's Best Friend". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "It's doggerel at its witty best. Playful rhymes and expressive photographs reveal the true characters of two dozen breeds of dogs in "Shaggy, Waggy Dogs and Others" (Clarion, $15). Author Stephanie Calmenson keeps a light touch as she captures the essence of each breed in four lines of verse. Even kids who think they don't like poetry will be swept away by this lyrical look at dogs. ... "Shaggy, Waggy Dogs" also includes a non-poetry discussion of choosing a dog, as well as Calmenson's personal note about having to live without a dog as a child because her parents refused to get one."

12. Young, Rebecca (2005-08-30). "Back-to-school stories can help children adjust - School days are upon us once more, and new books can ease the vacation-to-classroom transition". The News Tribune. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: ""Kindergarten Kids" is packed full of original rhymes by Stephanie Calmenson.From "Good Morning" to "See You Later Alligator," Calmenson pieces together a patchwork quilt of the kindergarten experience.Some of the poems are riddles, others are rebuses (puzzles using pictures in place of words). They celebrate classroom pets, holidays, show and tell, pizza parties and loose teeth."

13. Allport, Brandy (2017-11-05). "Read All About It: Dinos learn a lesson in charming 'No Honking Allowed'". The Florida Times-Union. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "From Page One, readers get the idea about this book. It’s fun and informational, and the rhyming text catches listeners’ attention right away. “No Honking Allowed” is a great choice for little automobile enthusiasts. The text covers all the fun auditory aspect of the car from the screech of the brakes to, of course, the sound of the horn. ... If you like “No Honking Allowed”, check out other fare by author Calmenson. Titles include “Ollie’s School Day: A Yes and No Book” and “Ollie’s Class Trip: A Yes and No Book.”"

14. Wergeland, Kari (2003-01-04). "Herald new year with books that celebrate babies - Young readers". The Seattle Times. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "Another treasure to read during those first two years is "Welcome, Baby! Baby Rhymes for Baby Times," by Stephanie Calmenson, illustrated by Melissa Sweet (HarperCollins, $16.99, ages birth-2). Calmenson has stuffed this anthology with her own verses, which are original and fun. A wonderful alternative to those same old nursery rhymes."

15. Leach, Pat (2000-08-06). "Road trip books fun, help pass the time". Lincoln Journal Star. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "Families who often pile into the car for a road trip will be interested in "Fun on the Run: Travel Games and Songs" by Joanna Cole and Stephanie Calmenson (Morrow, 1999). Cole and Calmenson provide instructions for all kinds of games to play in the car. While they don't solve the issue of how to provide a window for every passenger, they do supply enough variety in passing the time to make it less of an issue."

16. Butler, Dori Hillestad (1998-05-03). "Books keep kids busy on rainy days". The Gazette. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: ""Marbles 101 Ways to Play" (Morrow, 1998, 127 pages, $16) is by Joanna Cole and Stephanie Calmenson. Cole and Calmenson use simple instructions to explain the rules of various marble games, including Ringer, Black Snake, Gold and Old Bowler, which supposedly was Abraham Lincoln's favorite game."

17. Ross, David (1994-08-22). "Several Good Books for the Littlest Ones". Press-Telegram. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: ""Kinderkittens Show-and-Tell" by Stephanie Calmenson/illustrated by Diane deGroat (Scholastic, $2.50, paperback, second-grade level). ... Calmenson captures the mood of a kindergarten classroom and gives teachers a hand by providing an appendix that includes a shadow play song, traceable puppets and an activity."

18. Martin, Claire (2002-10-20). "Kids' Bookshelf". The Denver Post. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: "Here's a book to warm increasingly nippy evenings: "Crazy Eights and other Card Games" (SeaStar, $14.95). Authors Joanna Cole and Stephanie Calmenson explain everything from the beginning - high and low cards, suits, how to hold cards in a fan, how to shuffle and cut a deck, and how to deal cards."

19. Wright, Sarah (1994-07-31). "Kids' Books". Boston Herald. Archived from the original on 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-07-15.

    The article notes: ""Hotter Than a Hot Dog!" by Stephanie Calmenson, illustrated by Elivia Savadier; Ages 4-8 (Little, Brown)  Stories about children and their grandparents rarely offer the vitality and playful give-and-take with language found in "Hotter Than a Hot Dog!""

Cunard (talk) 09:57, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your service, Cunard! (I'll get to the task no later than mid-August. Wish me luck as always!) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 15:47, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Slgrandson (talk · contribs), and best wishes on the content work! Cunard (talk) 04:09, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Biographical stub for entertainer

This question was archived here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1193#Biographical_stub_article_for_a_self-improvement_coach Not sure if I'm following the correct procedure to revive discussion. Please advise.

The article stub is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Venzen/sandbox I have followed previous suggestions to cite references. Kindly comment. venzen (talk) 07:31, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Venzen You have still not shown how he meets Wikipedia's definition of notability. For example, your citation #10 looks promising until one reads that it was "produced in partnership with Ascend Agency": presumably his PR company. Hence it is not WP:INDEPENDENT. You need about three sources which meet these criteria. You might find it helpful to read this essay on writing articles. Long interviews on YouTube are equally not independent. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:13, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback, Mike. I did not notice the Ascend Agency partnership in ref #10. Will keep on looking - possibly reduce the amount of early life info to reduce reliance on 3rd party interviews. As for notability, does the externally verified award and several nominations not qualify? Those same award and nomination organisations seem to have established notability for most other pornstars. venzen (talk) 12:12, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

According to XRCO Awards, "XRCO members are asked to submit their own nominations", so I'm not very impressed by mere nominations. As to winning, this would be more convincing if backed up by a reliable WP:SECONDARY source, preferably with WP:SIGCOV of Cooper. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:41, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Noted, Mike, thank you for the pointers. venzen (talk) 07:19, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I understand that XRCO self-publication of awards is not WP:SECONDARY, and to find a independent, reliable source that backs up their award publication is difficult since most are trashy camgirl sites that use porn jargon and company names to gain SEO. I could find this Sports publication: https://www.prosportsextra.com/xrco-announces-2020-adult-entertainment-winners/ . Would that qualify as secondary and independent? venzen (talk) 08:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Regarding The Arena Group https://thearenagroup.net/about-us/ I believe that they could qualify as Independent. And my citation #10 is an article in their publication "Men's Journal" as evidenced here https://thearenagroup.net/our-brands/ . I acknowledge your advice to have 3 independent sources and that YouTube interviews do not qualify to establish notability. I will continue searching. venzen (talk) 07:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

As for the Ascend Agency PR company being involved, well, it would be difficult to find any entertainer or public personality that does not have all media placements managed by their PR agency, not true? venzen (talk) 07:37, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I always found this independent, secondary source OK! Magazine https://okmagazine.com/p/stirling-cooper-rises-worlds-best-sex-coach/ that echoes the same notability facts as the other sources, and written by staff writers without any PR agency. Does this source perhaps qualify as a citation? venzen (talk) 08:32, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Could another host kindly gloss over this request for assistance and give advice. Mike Turnbull has made valid points and helped me along the way to find the correct sources, however he now seems occupied elsewhere and this question will soon be archived. Any thoughts from another host? venzen (talk) 16:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Can you please describe what Wikipedia is?

Hi there, I noticed that site and quickly joined in with welcome. I’m very sure that anyone can edit Wikipedia. I also know that I can click on current events to see what is just happening in the news. However, can you please give me more information on what Wikipedia is all about for sure? I just wanted a complex explanation on how this site works. There is so much to view in terms of content. Another question is can you describe what is wiki software and why it can keep the edits forever after publishing it with words? Much obliged to this part. ~WikiCoverings11111 (message) 08:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello @WikiCoverings11111, and welcome to Wikipedia!

There are some articles and essays below that you might find helpful, such as WP:WIKIPEDIA, WP:PURPOSE, WP:PILLARS and WP:EDITING. For information about Wiki softwares, you can take a look at the article. Other than that, if you have more specific questions in mind, please ask.

Happy editing! NotAGenious (talk) 08:39, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@NotAGenious I just need a reason of why Wikipedia keeps a keeps an Akashic record? It means that all edits and contributions are kept by wiki software forever. ~WikiCoverings11111 (message) 08:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@WikiCoverings11111 Are you referring to the fact that all edits (even if cancelled or reverted) are kept in the edit history? NotAGenious (talk) 08:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@NotAGenious Yes it is. I know that edits are kept permanently after editing. How though? ~WikiCoverings11111 (message) 08:54, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I haven't gone into much depth on the technical side of Wikipedia on how the edits are stored on the database, but they are kept because of Wikipedia's licensing policy, which essentially means that "attribution [must] be given to all users involved in creating and altering the content of a page" as stated in WP:COPYWITHIN. If you want a more technical explanation, I would suggest visiting WP:TECHPUMP. NotAGenious (talk) 09:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Every revision (version) of a page is saved separately in the database. Having older revisions is essential for reverting, which is essential if you allow anyone to edit; if someone decides to remove all the content from a page (which they often do) you can just restore a previous version. In reality nothing ever gets deleted this way, which means the content can't be permanently trashed by vandals. Being able to track and compare revisions, and see what was added or removed when, has many other advantages. The specific software used is MediaWiki. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 09:12, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Not to mention Help:Your first article (currently on the verge of a retool), just in case. Greetings, newcomer! --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 10:22, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Slgrandson Alright, I would read articles on Wikipedia to calm from pressure and take a break until further notice. ~WikiCoverings11111 (message) 12:14, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

There is also a video on the topic, which you can find here. NotAGenious (talk) 08:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

UPDATE: User now blocked as a sockpuppet (as many suspected) Nick Moyes (talk) 23:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Right. Thank you! NotAGenious (talk) 07:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Help with edits I made through my ip, rather that my account.

Hi, I accidentally made a edit while not logged in through my account, so it was registered through my ip rather than my account. Is there any way to fix this? MrGamerBoy40 (talk) 16:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

You could doctor the signature, if the edit was on a talk page or somewhere like the reference desk. Simply, scrub the IP address, and replace it with your username as it would normally be written in signature form. Pablothepenguin (talk) 14:51, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Can somebody please help me with my page?

I’m having quite a bit of trouble finding references and sources for a page I’m trying to create. Can anyone help me?

Click here for the page. Joshbanana (talk) 22:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Joshbanana: If you have "trouble finding references and sources for a page" then you certainly should not have started the page. A Wikipedia article must summarize what reliable sources say about the subject. No sources → no article. --CiaPan (talk) 22:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

If you were going to be irrelevant, why did you reply?

Also, keep in mind I’ve only been editing for about six months and that I don’t know everything about Wikipedia and the requirements.

I’m also 14 and I’m trying my hardest, so I’d appreciate if you would show some understanding. Joshbanana (talk) 22:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Joshbanana: Actually, CiaPan is not "being irrelevant". He's telling you basic things about Wikipedia editing. Your draft, in its current state, just won't do, regardless if you were 14 or 140. Wikipedia has guidelines everyone has to follow. If you want to contribute positively to Wikipedia (and believe me, that's a very nice and enjoyable thing to do), you have to know these basic things. Check the links he included. 〜 Festucalex • talk 05:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Joshbanana!

All of your citations appear to violate wp:primary. I did find some sources going to the news section of google, however, some of them might not be reliable. Also, a lot of the article seems to be puffery. For example, the entire final section is a generic, unsourced paragraph that is praising him. I could attach that to pretty much any other influencer. Citation 4 should be used in the paragraph, not the heading, and is also a primary source. The article is borderline at the point where I would start-over, or even, delete the draft.

Also, as I doubt that you are Benji Krol, you need to either get his permission for the images, or delete them. ✶Mitch199811✶ 22:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, I agree that the page should probably be restarted. Thank you for your feedback. I do have one question when I’m finished the revamped version, would you mind having a look at it? Joshbanana (talk) 22:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I will, please either ask me on my user talk page or ping me on the draft's talk page when you are finished. ✶Mitch199811✶ 22:58, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Mitch199811: I understand your doubt - and I keep a marginal bit of it, too - anyway I rather suppose the subject and the author are the same person. In other words, IMHO Joshbanana builds WP:AUTO. --CiaPan (talk) 23:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Joshbanana: If you would read WP:BACKWARD and WP:Golden Rule, you would get good guidance. Basically you need to find your sources first and then write your article based on what your sources say. And, your sources should be reliable, independent of the subject, and provide significant coverage of the subject. If you cannot find such sources, then CiaPan's reply to you is correct; you shouldn't have started the draft. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Joshbanana, what is currently on the draft as of this revision reads like advertising copy. It is very, very far removed from encyclopedic tone and is distinctly not WP:NEUTRAL. Even if reliable sources existed to support this prose, the entire draft would have to be completely rewritten before it could become an article. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:33, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Drafts about this person have been Declined ten times since first attempt in Nov 2022. Joshbanana has deleted the Declined notices. At no point have the drafts been referenced with independent refs. David notMD (talk) 02:13, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Query about external links

Hi, I don’t edit that much on Wikipedia so just wanted to clear up something. I was going over some articles I edited before in this case Warren Farm and noticed some external links added (not by me). I just wanted to check if it allowed to have external links to website linked as one of them is a local campaign website against the development so wanted to check for neutrality purposes if it is fine. Encyloedit (talk) 23:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I removed the two links that were just added today. It isn't appropriate to promote campaigns or petitions. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Encyloedit (talk) 08:32, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Anachronist Thanks. One other thing I noticed was that one of the sources added (by other users) was a YouTube video. Is that acceptable or should I remove that content? Encyloedit (talk) 10:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Encyloedit. YouTube videos can be linked to and cited as sources per WP:YOUTUBE as long as they (1) qualify as a reliable source, (2) are used in proper context and (3) are not considered to be copyright violating content. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:57, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Eureka Stockade article

Can someone please tell me how may I add the Eureka Stockade (disambiguation) link to the top of the Eureka Stockade (fortification) article? Robbiegibbons (talk) 05:12, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Robbiegibbons,

You can use the {{other uses}}-template on the top of the page. Happy editing! NotAGenious (talk) 09:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Request for self block?

Hello, I would like to know whether is it possible for me to request for a self block on Wikipedia for a definite period of time that is 4 months as I am currently trying to focus on something more important in personal life and I have tried limiting Wikipedia but I keep getting back to it again. Is there a way to request for global account block for certain period of time and get unblocked back again later? Any help is appreciated. Thank you. 456legend(talk) 05:18, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, 456legend! I very much doubt a steward would be willing to globally (i.e all Wikimedia sites) block your account as a self-requested action, but you may be able to ask one of the administrators in the category Wikipedia administrators willing to consider placing self-requested blocks for a block specific to the English Wikipedia. —Sirdog (talk) 05:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Or just use an enforced wikibreak, which will prevent logging in. See WP:BREAKENF Meters (talk) 06:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@456legend I've put an offer to block you on en-wiki on your talk page. If you really want to go ahead, please reply to me there and I will assist you. I can't help with other Wikipedia projects, though. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:28, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you all for your input.456legend(talk) 09:32, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:07, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia article

My recent article submission to article for creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted.

Here is the link of article:- Draft:Devis Paganelli What should I do to get it publish.

Am Broly (talk) 11:10, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Am Broly,

Have you read the reasons provided to you on the draft? NotAGenious (talk) 11:23, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia

How do you log in? 41.116.54.103 (talk) 11:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Please take a look at H:LOGIN. NotAGenious (talk) 11:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Are my sources reliable?

I am editing the Clay Kids page, and I don't know if the sources are reliable. I use some references to YouTube and Twitter but I don't know if I should be referencing news articles instead. I'm also editing it with a MAC user and they seem to have a lot of information, so I follow based on that too. DaClayCrew (talk) 11:41, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @DaClayCrew,

I don't have the time to go through your edit as of right now, but I might do so later. For now, you can for example take a look at WP:VIDEOLINK and WP:RSPTWITTER for information on using YouTube and Twitter as sources. NotAGenious (talk) 11:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much, I'll read this. DaClayCrew (talk) 12:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Would an article about an ongoing wildfire be OK?

Should I start a draft about the Flat Fire? https://www.kdrv.com/news/top-stories/roughly-120-acre-flat-fire-burning-in-curry-county-near-agness/article_e0dff204-2385-11ee-a8b3-7f25df9fad9a.html https://kobi5.com/news/flat-fire-burning-at-about-120-acres-in-curry-county-211783/ https://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/news/2023/07/15/large-wildfire-reported-near-oak-flat-in-southwest-oregon-agness/70417528007/ 206.204.236.108 (talk) 17:23, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

It seems notable enough to me, and reliable sources can be found online. Have you taken a look at WP:FIRST, do you think it meets the criteria? NotAGenious (talk) 18:05, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

In the case of creating an article about a current event, I would also suggest taking a look at WP:NOTNEWS. NotAGenious (talk) 18:08, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

You can find guidance at about the notability of a widfire at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wildfire/Guidelines. If it is 2000 to 3000 acres, it may be notable. Cullen328 (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

It meets 1 and 4. It currently doesn't, and hopefully won't, meet 2 and 3. Is meeting two of the conditions enough? 206.204.236.108 (talk) 20:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

That is not a formal guideline but rather informal guidance by a WikiProject. This fire meets that guidance. Cullen328 (talk) 20:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Signing an edit

It's been a while since I've edited. Please remind me how to "sign/include my user name." Thanks NotHoratio (talk) 17:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @NotHoratio,

Use four tildes to get your signature on talk pages, like this: ~~~~. You can also see WP:SIG for more information. NotAGenious (talk) 17:31, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@NotHoratio: Welcome to The Teahouse. If you have the new Reply tool enabled, your signature will be automatically added to the end of your comments when you post them. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:05, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Creating a disambiguation page

Hello all,

I'm currently in the process of possibly creating a disambiguation page for Annalynn, as both Annallynn (video game) and Annalynn (band) have the same name. I have read all the policies, and I'm trying to figure out which of them is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, if neither. Could someone help me on this? According to the page views, the video game article has more views, so would it be more beneficial to use the For-template, or should I be bold and create the draft? Thanks in advance. NotAGenious (talk) 17:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, NotAGenious. If there are only two topics that need to be disambiguated, then there is no need for a separate disambiguation page. You can resolve the matter with hatnotes. You can use Template:For to accomplish that. Cullen328 (talk) 18:48, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I'm confused, because if neither of the articles are primary topics, then WP:NOPRIMARY states the following:

If there are multiple topics (even just two) to which a given title might refer, but there is no primary topic (per the criteria at § Is there a primary topic?), then the base name should lead the reader to the disambiguation page for the term.

I questioned the need for a disambiguation page too, but is the policy a bit unclear? NotAGenious (talk) 19:13, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

It means that instead of a disambiguation page being Dubuque (disambiguation) (where Dubuque is the town in Iowa, and therefore needs a parentheses denoter), it is simply Bee Branch. ✶Mitch199811✶ 19:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

NotAGenious, all signs point to the video game being the primary topic, but I could be wrong. Cullen328 (talk) 20:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Raise a straightforward question on an article

There is a line in a bio of a congressman (Eli Crane) that says "Crane allegedly served in the U.S. Navy from 2001 to 2014." There is no explanation as to why they said "allegedly". I wanted to simply raise that question on the 'talk' page, but I cannot. It is a bio page of a living person and I'm thinking that might be the problem. There is no offer to 'start a topic' on that page as there is on a 'standard' page. I am not looking to edit per se, I want to raise the question. Any help would be appreciated. Cuchulain9 (talk) 18:28, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Cuchulain9. I removed the word "allegedly" since there are several sources verifying his military service. You could have done this yourself. Neither Eli Crane nor Talk: Eli Crane are protected at this time, and the talk page seems to be functioning normally. Cullen328 (talk) 18:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, I knew I could remove it but I wondered why it was labeled 'alleged' and wanted to raise the question. I still don't know why I couldn't do it there but I can do that on other pages. Cheers. Cuchulain9 (talk) 00:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Cuchulain9: the "allegedly" was added yesterday by an unregistered user: [1]. It was not immediately spotted, thanks for notifying. MKFI (talk) 09:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

"New Editor" seeking guidance on a question regarding in-depth editing on Wikipedia

Hello everyone,

I hope you are all doing well on this fine day. I have been a long-time reader and admirer of Wikipedia, with a deep lifelong interest in mathematics and physics—especially the more advanced topics (e.g. differential geometry). Recently, I have encountered a significant question regarding contributing to Wikipedia in these specialized fields, and I am seeking guidance on the best approach.

Essentially, I want to begin to more significantly contribute to the articles of advanced mathematics and physics topics on Wikipedia. I have been making small edits for quite a long time, but I feel an urge to do more. I have come to a deeper, more grounded understanding of many fascinating and important concepts that were once unclear to me, and I wish to improve the already excellent resource that is Wikipedia by refining the (already quite excellent!) writings with these insights to help others on their own path of learning.

The reason this is not just as simple as "well just start doing it", but is a complex and involved question that I feel requires nuanced explanation, is because it is essentially (fundamentally, even) a social issue. This is especially complicated for me because I am autistic, and I fear accidentally stepping on somebody's toes, so to speak, in the act of "just trying to help" and make Wikipedia an even better place for the world's information, friendly and insightful to all.

However, I am unsure if the Teahouse is the appropriate forum to address such a question, as I don't want to overwhelm the page with a lengthy and intricate query—especially a space that is specifically designed to be friendly for newcomers and the like.

Considering the expertise and experience of the community here, I am reaching out to seek your advice on the best course of action. I would greatly appreciate your guidance on whether the Teahouse is the right place to share my question, or if there is some other place where it would be more appropriate to discuss "The right way, the kind and thoughtful way, to constructively add to (physics & mathematics on) Wikipedia."

Thank you all for your time and patience. I genuinely value your insights and expertise, and I look forward to receiving your advice on how to proceed with my inquiry so I can join the Wikipedia community in a healthy, wholesome, and helpful way.

Warm regards,

Castle. 76.125.192.226 (talk) 19:26, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I suggest that you ask your question here, doing your best to be clear and concise. Teahouse hosts may refer you elsewhere, depending on the technical complexity of your question. Cullen328 (talk) 19:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

We (including those spectrum and 'spectrum-adjacent') will be better able to advise if you identify an article you want to amend. A loose guideline is BRD, as in be Bold in edits, but if Reverted, open a Discussion on the article's Talk page. Be aware that highly technical articles may have few editors watching for changes or keeping an eye on the Talk page, so if you propose your changes on the Talk page first, your effort may be unanswered for a long time. HOWEVER, in your query you mention coming to an understanding of concepts. What you yourself conceive of is 'original research' and is not allowed. Any concept you modify or add must be verified by reliable source references at the same time. David notMD (talk) 21:57, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Lastly, it appears you have put content at Wikipedia's Sandbox, which gets frequently bot-cleared. Consider creating an account and using your account Sandbox to develop your ideas for either major article revision or a new article. David notMD (talk) 22:01, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

How to improve a draft

I am working on Draft:Greg J. Marchand. I have discussed it with other reviewers like @Herpetogenesis:, who declined it but gave me some helpful feedback. He says that the draft "looks promising" and provided critical but overall positive comments. I have fully declared everything on my user page and the draft talk page.

What is the best way to continue improving this draft so that it would be ready for AfC or a review again? Do @Cullen328: and other users have suggestions on how I might be able to move forward? Thank you! Danthemedguy22 (talk) 21:47, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Danthemedguy22, there is a long and sordid history of unethical attempts to create an article about this person going back for years. The most recent discussion was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gregory Marchand about six months ago, and support for deletion was unanimous. I recommend that you abandon this effort. Cullen328 (talk) 22:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Danthemedguy22: I agree with Cullen. Apparently Greg Marchand refuses to accept that Wikipedia isn't a publicity medium, and must never be used that way. It seems he was paying shady undisclosed paid editors, and now he's paying an honest disclosed editor. The point is, he's paying for publicity on Wikipedia. I am skeptical that your efforts to draft an article would be accepted given the history. Maybe in a year. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

If you are honest about this, remove all refs to Marchand's sci journal co-authored articles and see if there are sufficient reliable source references ABOUT him. David notMD (talk) 22:28, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Thank you for your response to my Teahouse question.

I do not know who did all the work before me. I checked some random pages such as Kobi Arad, Cardano (cryptocurrency platform) and many others that were subjects of very intense Wikipedia discussions, and they have had long histories of repeated deletions due to unethical editing. They finally made it back up onto Wikipedia after all necessary protocols and declaration requirements were followed.

I have stated before that I would like a completely clean, new start. The most recent deletion actually happened due to an off-wiki encounter, which the community strongly opposed. Therefore, I suggest that we need have another objective, neutral review. Is there any possible way forward? Danthemedguy22 (talk) 22:48, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Danthemedguy22: If you must move forward with it, do so and submit it for review. Take David notMD's advice above, take the advice in WP:Golden Rule and WP:BACKWARD to heart, and start over. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:06, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

The previous versions of Greg J. Marchand were horribly written self-promotional pieces. These simply did not belong on Wikipedia, and the salting was done since we were all fed up with repeated unethical attempts. But to be fair, Danthemedguy22 does have a point here. It's not unreasonable to ask for a fresh start if we blow it up and start all over again (WP:TNT). The January 2023 AfD was nominated by Doc James exactly when the community asked him to resign since he deleted Marchand due to an off-wiki personal vendetta, after the article was on Wikipedia for nearly two full years from around 2021-2022. Also I do think that an article about Marchand could likely be useful for readers browsing through Wikipedia articles about laparoscopy, salpingectomy, and neonatology. Basic GNG and NBIO criteria seem to be met, as he's clearly someone who had made a notable impact in a few medical science subspecialties. There are over 50 PubMed hits, which would be quite an achievement at least in my field, which is evolutionary/taxonomic biology. There are also dozens of independent third-party media mentions. I believe it's reasonable to seriously reconsider this draft if it is properly rewritten. HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ (talk) 23:21, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

User:Danthemedguy22, the important question is not about “improving”, but deciding whether to topic meets the threshold for inclusion. Follow the advice at WP:THREE. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:31, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

"Articles" list included four conference presentations of abstracts, i.e., not peer-reviewed journal articles, so I deleted those. Also, if he is 'known' for laproscopic surgery, I recommend cuting all the neonatology stuff. David notMD (talk) 02:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Encyclopedia.com

I'm wondering if https://www.encyclopedia.com/ is a notable and reliable source for article building. I want to create a new article for WP about composer Vincent Plush. This page at encyclopedia.com republishes an article about him from Baker’s Biographical Dictionary of Musicians. If I were to cite encyclopedia.com for the WP article, how would I also cite Baker’s Biographical Dictionary of Musicians from which is it sourced, as it is not itself published online? Walton22 (talk) 22:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Walton22: Other encyclopedias are considered WP:TERTIARY sources. You can use it, but secondary sources are preferable. I would cite Baker's instead. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:21, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Anachronist, thank you very much for quick reply. How would I directly cite Baker's without a hard copy in my hand, and given it is not published online? All I have is a secondary citation of it by encyclopedia.com Walton22 (talk) 22:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I would probably just use Encyclopedia.com then unless you can find a better source that agrees with it. ✶Mitch199811✶ 23:15, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Walton22, would one of these fit the bill? -- Hoary (talk) 23:17, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hoary, thanks very much for finding that. I should be able to source that way. Walton22 (talk) 23:23, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

how do i make my own article

title explains all SwashbucklingSalamander (talk) 00:47, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, you may want to read WP:YFA. However, I would strongly recommend you get more experience working on existing articles before creating your own. When you feel confident, you can use the Article Wizard to assist in the creation of your article. JML1148 ^{(talk | contribs)} 00:54, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Swash subsequently indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 02:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Court decisions

Is it okay to link to court decisions in a footnote, or must they be relegated to a separate reference heading? Court decisions are primary sources, but more authoritative and useful than a secondary source. I have linked to a recent Ninth Circuit court decision in the text of Rosemont Copper. But I have also used newspaper articles that refer to the court decision. Detrital (talk) 01:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Historical And Cultural Clowns Not Categorically Linked And Historical Pages Missing

Hello, I am writing today because I was researching into historical clowns who were specifically black people. This was surprisingly much harder than I thought it would be, with only 2 named individuals popping up and majority of the articles being unrelated to them and instead focusing on blackface and the social effects it has had. While blackface is definitely an important thing to remember and discuss, it has directly blocked individuals looking to discover historical black clowns, and may even be continuing to skew modern perceptions of clowning as a occupation. This may be directly harming modern day performers, and so I would like to create some articles or at least interlink articles that are relevant to each other. What little information I discovered was very interesting, but with no easily found relation to one and another making finding related or relevant information incredibly frustrating.

First and foremost: There does currently exist a wikipedia article for Rafael Padilla (aka Chocolat), who was a French clown during the late 1800s to early 1900s. However, it does not link to any main clowning articles nor even a specific "famous black clowns" category page. He was a very fascinating man, but is not even listed on the "List of Clowns" page the main clown page links to.

Further, there does not exist an article for the first black clown in Ringlings Circus, Reggie Montgomery, who died as recent as 2002 and was even an actor in several films and tv shows such as: Matlock, Law and Order, and even a Malcolm X movie. This man was historically very important in western clowning, and deserves official recognition for such. There is almost no recorded images I can find easily of this man, and majority of the articles appear to be related to his death in 2002. There is also the notable mention of the Indianapolis Clowns, a baseball team from the 1930s to the 1960s who were renown for playing baseball with gags such as oversized gloves or even pantomiming a game without a baseball or bat. While unpainted, they were unmistakably taking part in clowning as an art form, and deserve recognition and notability for such. It is also notable they were the first baseball team to include a woman, which also means they may be the first record of a famous black clownette.

There is also no categorical organization of non-white nor non-western clowning in relation to the general wester idea of clowns, despite there being articles such as on Heyoka from the Sioux. Though they may not be inherently related to one and another, clowning is even noted on the clown wikipedia page to have been around for at least thousands of years citing possibility to have originated in Egypt. The fact that non-western examples such as the Heyoka are completely isolated from the page, yet black face is directly up and front, appears to pushes a unsavory perception and further pushes non-white actors out of peoples perceptions of clowning.

Though it may not come off as important as some other educational articles, I am very passionate about this. There is a great disservice for Reggie Montgomery, who at the very least deserves a wiki page rather than just an IMDB page. There is also a distinct lack of recognition and accessibility for information on non-white clowns, which ends up creating a untrue perception of clownings history. Black clowns deserve to be recognized and represented appropriately, as well as all other forms of non-white clowning deserves to at least be acknowledged in the same genre to understand sociologically how we have developed this art form yet have had unique cultural distinctions over the years.

Please advise me however I can to at least get a basic article started so others may find what little information I have found, and so others may even take further strides in discovering historical people and maybe even representation for those who are interested in the art and occupation. Thank you for your time and consideration in this, this is my first time ever considering creating or editing wikipedia pages so I appreciate any assistance in the matter. ClownTownMayor (talk) 02:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

ClownTownMayor, you seem to think that this is a notable subject. But being a notable subject (as thinking people normally understand notability) and being a notable subject (as English-language-Wikipedia understands notability) are two different things. When contemplating the creation of a new draft or article, you have to assess the latter. So here (in this discussion thread) please (i) say what would be the subject of the draft/article you have in mind, and (ii) specify the three best reliable sources that you have found for this subject. -- Hoary (talk) 03:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@ClownTownMayor: It might be helpful to create a category like Category:African-American clowns and then go through List of clowns and add appropriate ones to the category. One in the list, Skeeter Reece, isn't explicitly identified as African-American in the article even though they have another African-American category. It is possible that there are other articles like that. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Additions / edits removed without any explanation.

I spent several days editing a few links on this existing so-called 'stub' page. They were reverted.

Michael Stuart Ani

No explanation. As I made the edits, I reviewed some of the basic Wiki requirements, and am not sure which of my edits failed, and again the administrator didn't say why, just 'too many problems'. For example, I found other living people had links to their various social media pages, so that shouldn't be the issue. Finding authentic links on social media is important to ensure that person's official social media pages are found, and not copycats. I added ISBN reference - deleted. I added career update from 2019 and reference to a registered non-profit's web page - deleted. I added an interesting book review from an obscure source - a Chinese/English art magazine- deleted.

The area where this person is known is in indigenous metaphysical & religious knowledge. I don't know if that influenced this administrators decision, since nothing was said. This area is historically ignored by western media, (while society literally outlawed indigenous religious rituals). So references are hard to find. I did find a few and tried to add into the page.

When I looked at that administrators talk page, another user had a similar complaint, and another complained about losing a draft sandbox, also without initial explanation. I made several statements on the Ani talk page, but no one responded. Do I need to write directly on that administrators talk page to get a response? That seems confrontational.

In course of researching links, I found about a dozen non-profits that focus in this indigenous area, and none appeared to have Wiki pages. This makes it harder to ensure correct references. I started to draft a new page for just one such wiki (see my sandbox). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fbcooper/sandbox

I haven't submitted this new page, since I don't know what was wrong about the few edits I made to an existing page, and my experience with Wiki isn't positive at this point.

If Wiki admins don't bother explaining their choices, why does Wiki say 'please help us improve this stub', and then have administrators say they are too busy to explain? Since Wikipedia has claimed it wanted to be more balanced in covering indigenous topics, why not make effort to educate how to expand details on these areas? Or if an administrator is too busy to explain themselves, perhaps they should not edit other people's work.

Thank you for your consideration. Fbcooper (talk) 03:05, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Fbcooper, you say: "For example, I found other living people had links to their various social media pages, so that shouldn't be the issue. Finding authentic links on social media is important to ensure that person's official social media pages are found, and not copycats." Wikipedia is, unfortunately, riddled with poor-quality articles. We don't want to increase their number. Ani has what's described here as an "official" website. He's most welcome to provide links there to his "social media" addresses. So, let's look at the recent deletions. Here's one chunk: "He first lived in Mexico’s remote Sierra Mazateca cloud forest of Oaxaca from the end of the 1960’s through the 1970’s. He was the only outsider to have ever been allowed into their sacred cloud forests, and still returns as often as he can to visit the Mazateca indigenous community there." No reference. Why should the reader believe this? -- Hoary (talk) 05:57, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Fbcooper: you asked Do I need to write directly on that administrators talk page to get a response? That seems confrontational. What you're looking for is officially called a mention notification, but everyone says "ping" for short. On any talk page where you post a message that you will sign (like here) you can add a link to the user's page and they will get a notification. There are several ways to do so, most often using the {{u}} or {{reply to}} templates. In this post, I've pinged you with the "reply to" template and in the post above, Hoary has done so by manually linking to your user page. (That previous sentence creates a ping to Hoary using the "u" template.)

When you post a message to an article's talk page, it often helps to ping specific editors. In your case, I see two editors who have reverted content that you've added to the article. It looks like Hoary already touched on the article content. If you are thinking about writing articles from scratch, I would highly suggest reading the essay, Wikipedia:Writing Wikipedia articles backward. I think it's the best introduction for new users. Take care, Rjjiii (talk) 06:36, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Rjjiii, this started as a stub created by a different editor back in 2017. Fbcooper, I am a bit surprised by the deletion of "Michael Stuart Ani. Heather Vuchinich (ed.). Ghost Dance - An Untold History of the Americas. ISBN 978-1535547659." (Bbb23 might comment on its deletion.) However, this book, unpromisingly, was published by CreateSpace (the vanity-publishing tentacle of Amazon), and it's rare for reviewers, libraries, etc to bother with books that CreateSpace puts out. -- Hoary (talk) 07:18, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, but the editor also mentioned a Sinchi Foundation draft [2] and when I took a look, the references are either primary sources or other articles here. Rjjiii (talk) 07:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Rjjiii, oopsie, yes, you're right of course. -- Hoary (talk) 07:35, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Fbcooper: Ping ({{ping|Bbb23}}) and ask Bbb23 for an explanation, and hopefully reach a consensus. As other editors have pointed out, there are referencing problems with your revisions, but too many problems doesn't look great when held up to WP:REVEXP- which I suggest you read. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:15, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Help

How can I find the cite web template via "<ref name=O_D_summ>", "<ref name=777_O_D_summ>", and "<ref name=BoeingOD>" in the editing page of article Boeing 777?

Because this is a featured article of English Wikipedia and I would like to translate this to Chinese Wikipedia and send to W:zh:WP:FAC if I can. Sinsyuan~Talk 08:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello Sinsyuan, the named references and other parts of that article are transcluded from this other article: List of Boeing 777 orders and deliveries. See Help:Labeled section transclusion for an explanation. Rjjiii (talk) 08:51, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I think there's no named-reference transclusion (Labeled section transclusion) in Chinese Wikipedia, so I have a difficulty finding those for editing. Thanks! Sinsyuan~Talk 09:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Sinsyuan: Since your OP mentioned translation, you might want to take a look at WP:TRANSLATEUS for some general information on what's expected when you translate English Wikipedia articles into other languages. The most important thing to remember is that you need to make sure you properly attribute the original source article in order to comply with Wikipedia's licensing. You should also remember that each Wikipedia has it's own policies and guidelines. So, your translation will need to be in compliance with whatever Chinese Wikipedia's policies and guidelines are. If you already are aware of what to do, then good luck with your translation. However, if this is your first time doing such a thing, the TRANSLATEUSE page contains information that you may find helpful. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Got it, thanks! Sinsyuan~Talk 10:10, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Are the sources not reliable?

I created a new page for Kojo Soboh and it has been flagged for deletion because the sources provided are not reliable. I doubt the claim since the links used are from notable media houses in Ghana Siagoddess (talk) 11:45, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Notablity does not confer reliablity. Anyway the deletion discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kojo Soboh. No need to discuss it here. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Where Can I make a Page?

I am new in Wikipedia. I don't know where I can make a page. If anyone can tell me where I can make one it would be helpful. JIsUN (talk) 14:40, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. We prefer to use the term "article" instead of "page", which has a broader meaning. Writing a new article is the most difficult task to perform here, and it is recommended that instead of diving right in that you first spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to learn how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Using the new user tutorial is also a good idea. If you still want to draft a new article now, please read Your First Article and then go to Articles for creation. 331dot (talk) 14:46, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Easiest thing to do is to search the intended title of the page to check if it exists or not. If it doesn’t, then you can click on the first red link that appears. This should take you to a creation page.

Do note however, that you really have to sure the page will contain notable material before you attempt to create it. If you’re not sure it is, then consider proposing the idea to the Wikipedia Articles for Creation service. Pablothepenguin (talk) 14:47, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, JisUN. Please note that despite what Pablothepenguin says, the system will not let you create a new article by picking a red link until you are autoconfirmed (which means that you have made 10 edits and been here 4 whole days); and even once you are autoconfirmed, I would very very very strongly advise you not to try and create an article in that way, but to follow 331dot's advice. ColinFine (talk) 15:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Are the sources from The List of Newspapers in (Country) reliable?

Hi! Just recently found out that there are these List of Newspapers in different countries (example: List of newspapers in the Philippines). My question is, are they all considered reliable? If not all, how will I know which ones are reliable and which are not? Thank you in advance for your answers. Bmjc98 (talk) 15:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Many newspapers are not reliable, but sometimes it's difficult to tell which they are. I suggest you check out Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#News_organizations and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Getting a faster AfC review outside of WikiProject tagging

Hello! Retired from Wikipedia a few years back, but back after quite a bit of time and getting back into editing! I recently drafted Draft:Tekesha Martinez and noticed the ~4 month timeline on getting drafts reviewed in the AfC process. I know the box at the top suggests tagging a few WikiProjects and going on their respective talk pages asking for a review, though I've noticed the WikiProjects I've tagged have either become somewhat inactive or don't generally see requests for reviews on talk pages. I was wondering if y'all had any suggestions on other ways to possibly get a faster AfC review — I also know that it's possible to just move it to mainspace myself though I'm a bit wary to do so after not editing for 6 years! MrWooHoo (T • C) 15:33, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MrWooHoo, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer is that there is no reliable way of getting a quick review, (and some editors see attempts to do so as trying to game the system). The four months is an (approximate) worst case - there is no queue and no order: it depends on when a reviewer chooses to pick it up. Drafts that are obviously not acceptable tend to get declined pretty quickly, but those that take more work can take longer.

What I notice in your draft is that there are several citations of primary sources (the Election Commission, and interview with her). When I see a lot of these in a draft, I wonder if the writer is desperately trying to pad out an inadequacy of secondary sources. Since you have journalistic sources for her election, what does it add to cite a primary source as well? ColinFine (talk) 16:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @ColinFine! Thanks for getting back to me super quickly. Totally forgot that interviews are deemed primary sources so will cut those out/replace them since there is a decent amount of secondary source coverage. MrWooHoo (T • C) 18:40, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Suggested Edits

In `Suggested Edits` we are shown the pages based on our preferences. But the contents are very random(since it might be just checking the keywords in pages) most of the suggestion I get is not interesting. Is there any provision to make it more restrictive? For eg: I am interested in Computer Science edits. But I get edits about fiction, finance etc.. Wikieditor 2027 (talk) 15:35, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Wikieditor 2027 Have you tried SuggestBot? That can be made to give suggestions within Projects you are interested in. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Need help with getting an article published

I am working on a page that has been rejected, and I am now trying to work around the issues but need some help with the same! Samyraasmund (talk) 15:50, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Art.espionage - 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:12, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Samyraasmund, and welcome to the Teahouse. You appear to be talking about Draft:Art.espionage - this was declined not rejected, which means that the reviewer thought that it might be worth improving and trying again; and I see you have resubmitted it.

I am not a reviewer, but in my view, there is far far far too much detail about each of the individuals, most of it either unreferenced, or only referenced to the artist themselves. This means that it reads very much as promotion which is forbidden on Wikipedia. Note that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

I suspect that you have made the extremely common mistake of writing your draft WP:BACKWARD, and the best thing to do would be to study your first article and start again from the beginning. Personally I would never advise anybody to try the challenging task of creating a new article before they have spent several months making improvements to existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works. ColinFine (talk) 16:12, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Samyraasmund First, remove all hyperlinks from the text. Second, in the descriptions of the artists, remove all of the content in italics, which is what the artists have written about themselves. David notMD (talk) 19:06, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Artifical Intelligence

He'll all. I know that you probably don't know anything about it, but will AI take over Wikipedia in a few years time, or will Wikipedia always have human editors on it? Looking forward to hearing your response, Roads4117 (talk) 17:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Roads4117. There is ongoing discussion: see WP:AI, and WP:LLM. ColinFine (talk) 17:26, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Colin. Roads4117 (talk) 17:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

i'd say "not right now lmao" for pretty much one main reason

ai in general is absolutely terrible at saucing things, and loves making things up

there have been a few cases of people trying to pass their ai written drafts as made by them, and going "idk it's what chatgpt wrote" when asked why the books they mentioned didn't exist cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 18:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

we needddddddd a box of blocks roor here

is there any real problem with asking for a ~30 minute block to see how certain things work? cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 18:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san, I'm not sure what you're asking (and your header makes very little sense) - you want to be blocked for half an hour just to see what it's like? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I can block you on https://test.wikipedia.org if you want cogsan ;) --Thanks, Framawiki (please notify me when you reply) 19:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@199,208.172.35 it's a line from some_engineers_make_a_buildin_2day.sylveon, so don't think too hard about it

@Framawiki it's just a thing i wanted to know for the sake of knowing it, so don't worry too hard about it cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 19:12, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Completed edits of Draft and would now like to have it considered to be published

I have completed ten edits and taken comments on board. I would now like my final draft to be considered to be published. What must I do next. Perhaps someone more experienced can take a look and ascertain whether it now conforms to all regulations of Wikipedia. The article has been cut down dramatically from the original. All references considered to be promotional have been removed and all external links to museums and heritage sites related to the author's books have been removed. Suggested links to google books and other book sites have been added.

My page is Draft: Patric Tariq Mellet. Watsana13 (talk) 19:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added the submission information to allow you to submit your draft for review. 331dot (talk) 19:26, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Your draft has zero independent reliable sources and that is what we base articles on. Theroadislong (talk) 19:28, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

There are four independent and reliable sources in the draft. Googlebooks, Worldcat Books Archive showing a number of Universities in South Africa and Internationally which hold archive copies of the best seller "Lie of 1652" which has had 6 reprints in two and a half years; Johannesburg Review of Books, Tafelberg NB Publishers (largest publishing house in South Africa). I provided much more which I have edited out because someone said that it was SPAM. I am the author, and the Book Covers and phot is my intellectual property by copyright. The well known Camissa Museum in Cape Town and also the Online Museum is my copyright too. Watsana13 (talk) 21:54, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Watsana13, none of those demonstrate how you meet WP:NAUTHOR. It's entirely possible that one or more of your books meets WP:NBOOKS - it might be easier to focus on an article about them. Please review our guideline on editing with a conflict of interest - it is at WP:COI. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:15, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

So receiving Provincial Honours awarded for my groundbreaking work and dedication in the field of intangible heritage is not significant recognition; neither is the fact that I founded the Camissa Museum which was funded by the Kingdom of the Netherlands; my Best Seller now cited by many at universities and other fora around the world is also not recognition enough?; nor does it seem that my appointment by our Sports, Arts and Culture Minister of myself to the governance council of the premier state agency for heritage - the SA Heritage Resources Council. And there is much much more when it comes to my well known public contribution in South Africa. I get the clear impression that Wikipedia is simply censoring out the undesirable and going way beyond what is acceptable practice. There is no conflict of interest here. A very simple request has been coming my way from many students and experts in the field that would like me to have a presence on Wikipedia where all of my written work, museum work and other heritage projects could interface as a ready reference for students and other researchers. What started out as a simple mission has ended up not being worth the amount of time spent trying to deal with subjective and contradictory views. I would simply like to submit my piece for a final decision. I will accept the answer whether my contribution is accepted or rejected. That is very simple. Its not the end of the world if one is found to be undesirable to the Wiki "community". Watsana13 (talk) 22:32, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

331dot (talk) Where will I find this please. At this point I would just like to submit and leave the entire matter to final judgement of the assessors. This process has been like running a gauntlet. Most unpleasant. Watsana13 (talk) 22:36, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I placed it at the top of your draft. Writing a new article is the most difficult task to perform here. It's even harder when writing about yourself. While not forbidden, it is highly discouraged, please read the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not interested in what you say about yourself, Wikipedia is interested in what independent reliable sources say about you. 331dot (talk) 22:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I think it was inadvertently removed. I've readded it. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:46, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Watsana13, you have uploaded several images as your own work, including a photo of the subject and several book covers. Did you take all of these pictures? Do you own the rights to the cover art? Are you associated with this artist in any way? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:11, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

At Draft:Patric Tariq Mellet, references to his books contribute nothing toward confirming his Wikipedia notability. What is lacking is refs that are to publications about Mellet. David notMD (talk) 21:18, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I am Patric Tariq Mellet and can assure you that I am the author and I have copyright of the books and the photograph. This is my intellectual property, as stated in my books which are referenced in the article. I have also provided a review of my best seller book THE LIE OF 1652 in its sixth reprint in two and a half years. In my original post now edited down 10 times to the bare basics. The Johannesberg Review of Books; Tafelberg NB Publishers the largest and reputable publishing house i South Africa; Worldcat Book Archive with reference to a number of South African and International University Libraries stocking my books, and Googlebooks, are surely independent enough as sources for reference to the validity of the books and the author. The motivation for entering it on Wikipedia is the huge amount of requests from students at universities to ensure that it goes of Wikipedia as it helps students who search Wikipedia for reference works on important subjects. In my earlier drafts I included other references to both myself as author and to useful knowledge commons sites with which my books are associated, such as the SA Heritafe Resources Agency, The Castle of Good Hope heritage site, and the Camissa Museum. (the latter for which I have copyright). I was told that I was in infringement of copyright for the latter, and I was told that the museum sites and SA Heritage Resources Agency were SPAM sites. In South Africa I am recognised for my heritage work and have been awarded provincial honours for this work. This was also on an earlier version from which I removed it because rather than seeing this as a reference it was called "self-promotion". I am left even move confused now after so many contradictory statements. I can see why publishers have blacklisted Wikipedia referencing as unreliable. I do believe that this platform has some value, but clearly there also seems to be bias in its universality, and a tendency to be prejudiced. I just would like clarity as to how what I drafted can be adjudicated for publication or not. I will abide by the official decision. My overall experience so far has not been pleasant, and I have seen much much worse published, than my modest effort. Watsana13 (talk) 22:15, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Watsana13. Your draft currently has four references, all of which were written by Patric Tariq Mellet. What is required are references to significant coverage of Mellet in reliable sources that are entirely independent of Mellet. This is a universal requirement for all new articles, and there is no bias involved. You say that you have "seen much much worse published". You are free to nominate articles that are much worse for deletion. Please be aware that the English language Wikipedia currently has 6,685,019 articles, many of which are of poor quality. Experienced editors work 24 hours a day, seven days a week to either improve poor quality articles or delete them. We do not accept more articles that do not comply with our policies and guidelines just because other non-compliant articles exist. Despite all of this, Wikipedia remains a top ten website worldwide, with billions of page views each month. Cullen328 (talk) 22:55, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

None of the four references that I refer to are written by myself. I neither own nor write for Googlebooks, WorldCat, Tafelberg NB Publishers, or Johannesburg Book Review. You clearly seem to have a literacy problem or prejudiced bias to come to the conclusion that these are not independent reliable sources. Some articles, particularly about Camissa Africans aka "Coloured" on Wikipedia reference me and my work already, but regardless of your editorial expertise and 6 685 019 articles (not accepted as unbiased and factual by publishers nor universities) you seem ignorant of the fact that I am quoted for my expertise. I cannot continue to waste my time here. Perhaps Wiki needs some anti-monopoly competition. Certainly the anti-African bias needs to be challenged by an truly Universal approach to learning reference materials. Watsana13 (talk) 23:12, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Watsana13 I will repeat myself. Currently, there are four references. All indicate you are the author of your publications. That contributes nothing to confirming notability. There are also description of reviews of your works. Reviews can contribute to establishing notability, but only if properly formatted as references, not hyperlinks. Basically, you are dabbling in a space without understanding the rules and are complaining about why your flawed efforts have resulted in your draft being declined. Declare conflict of interest (WP:COI) on your User page, fix stuff and try again. Or not. And realize that if you do succeed, the article will not be owned by you. Other editors will be able to add content as long as it is verified by references. David notMD (talk) 23:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Watsana13, please take a look at the "References" section of your own draft. There are four references and you are shown as the author of all four. Google Books is not an independent reliable source devoting significant coverage. It is a comprehensive database that attempts to catalog every published book. The same is true of WorldCat - also a database of every book, and not a source of any value for establishing notability. Tafelberg NB Publishers issued two of your books, so is obviously not an independent source, and is of no value in establishing notability for an author from any country on earth. As for the coverage in the The Johannesburg Review of Books, that is an book excerpt written by you with some additional content written by your publisher. That is clearly not an independent source. I am sorry, but it is clear that you have not bothered to familiarize yourself with the basic requirements for an author biography that apply worldwide. That results in your accusations of anti-African bias ringing hollow. Cullen328 (talk) 00:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

help with draft needed

For this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Yves_Winkin I'm trying to respond to critique. I do not understand the comment that I need to use footnotes - I have 31, so what am I missing? I also do not understand the comment about inappropriate use of bold - the only bold is the subject's name, and I can't find anything saying to use more bold, just less. I think I've managed to introduce a better structure to the whole (adding section headings), and hopefully have taken out anything that might seem subjective, which were the other two critiques. (I posted a note to the Wikipedia help channel, but 20 minutes later have no response.) Leeds-hurwitz (talk) 19:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

never mind - I got help on the other forum Leeds-hurwitz (talk) 20:13, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:HERE question

Does the third section of WP:HERE, i.e. "A focus on encyclopedia building," reflect any specific policy of Wikipedia? Like, I assume having editors around whose contributions are mostly unconstructive (but civil and not POV-pushing) contributions to talk pages and ANI (say) is not for the best. But is there any policy that discourages that? ByVarying (talk) 20:23, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@ByVarying: People who are stirring trouble can be blocked. But simply being wrong sometimes is not enough. tgeorgescu (talk) 20:26, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @ByVarying, welcome to the Teahouse. WP:HERE is an essay, but WP:Disruptive editing is a guideline, and WP:NOT is policy. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Notability

I keep getting declined due to my sources, I have made use of every possible coverage of the organisation and I am still encountering difficulties in approval by moderators. link : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Corona_School,_Ikoyi Wikicorrections26 (talk) 20:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Wikicorrections26, welcome to the Teahouse. If you've used every possible bit of coverage and notability still has not been demonstrated, then it's likely that the subject is just not (yet) notable by our standards, and an article is not (yet) possible. This doesn't mean it's not a great school - just that it doesn't qualify for an article. Many worthy things do not.

As an aside, Wikipedia does not have moderators. We have administrators, but their tools are used to deal with behavioral issues, not content issues. The folks who review Articles for Creation submissions are reviewers - very experienced fellow editors. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

Thanks for this excellent response! I will continue to look for sources, but if you don't mind, could you have a look at my draft and assess whether it is worthy of approval. Also, please can I have a link to publication sites that meet the reliable status quo.

Best regards! Wikicorrections26 (talk) 21:41, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Wikicorrections26, as it stands, your draft looks far from ready to me (note that I am not an AfC reviewer!). If you go to WP:RS/PS you'll see a list of commonly discussed sources and the community's opinion on their reliability or lack thereof. It's not a comprehensive list, just a list of commonly discussed sources over at WP:RSN, but it will give you some idea of what to look for. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:13, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Wikicorrections26. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. It is not a comprehensive list but should give you a sense of the type of sources considered reliable. I also suggest that you read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#Schools. Articles about primary schools are usually kept only when the school is of obvious historic or architectural significance. The vast majority of primary schools are not notable. Cullen328 (talk) 22:21, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

License problem

Doubt whether the license holder of the following file is in reality the license holder or not.

File:Jasprit Bumrah In 2023.jpgজয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা (talk) 21:37, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @জয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা, welcome to the Teahouse for English Wikipedia. This is best handled at Commons, where the image is being hosted along with many other images from the same uploader. You can start a discussion with the uploader on their Commons talk page - here - or, if you have evidence to back up your doubt, nominate the image for deletion per c:Commons:Deletion policy. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:46, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks জয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা (talk) 21:47, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Block

Considering the kind of abusing language User talk:Proctorr127 has been using which is even to the extent of punishable offence in India, the user should be blocked without any further notice. Also, I, days earlier, made some comments in his talkpage in the heat of the moment (currently visible in his talk page), which I apologised later humbly in my talk page জয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা (talk) 21:45, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@জয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা, issues with user conduct should be brought up at WP:ANI. Follow the instructions at the top of the page. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:47, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I know it, it was once described as the 'Hornest's nest' but that was a different story. Actually, I want some advice from a veteran in this context before raising the issue over there. Thanks জয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা (talk) 21:50, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

199.208.172.35 is correct. But I have blocked the account indefinitely and WP:REVDELed some edits. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks my dear. জয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা (talk) 21:54, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

creating an article

Hi! I am trying to add an article to wiki abut a professional athlete (also happens to have a similar name to the people who already have an article on the website) and some people keep deleting it. What an I doing wrong? Maria u1 (talk) 23:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Maria u1: Do not try to change an existing article. Create a new draft following the guidance at WP:YFA and then if the draft is approved it will be moved to become an article. RudolfRed (talk) 23:32, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Maria u1, you have been editing a redirect page, and trying to convert it into an article. This is the wrong approach and you need to stop. Spend some time reading and studying Your first article instead. Cullen328 (talk) 23:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

thank you! I have just created an article using the article wizard and I guess now it is pending review. I am not sure if I should remove Draft from the name or it should not be done by me. My biggest concern is the the person in this article shares a name with two other athletes and there may be confusion Maria u1 (talk) 23:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Changing a title is actually done by 'moving' the page, not by editing the title text, but you don't need to worry about that. The piece is correctly prefixed "Draft:" because it's still in 'Draft space', not 'Article space'. If and when a reviewer accepts the Draft as an Article, they will carry out the necessary move and will also take care of 'disambiguating' the new article from others, typically by adding something like "(athlete)" to the name – they may also add similar additions to other articles already using the name, and perhaps create a 'Disambiguation page' for the bare name that lists and links all the different articles that include it, such as "John Doe (musician)", "John Doe (actor)", "John Doe (athlete)" etc.

That said, I have glanced at your draft and, although I'm not a reviewer, I'm fairly sure your draft will be 'Declined' in its current state. Don't be discouraged, this means that the subject is probably notable enough to qualify for an article, but the draft is not yet good enough, and needs improvement in areas the reviewer will specify. (If it's thought the subject inherently cannot qualify for an article, the draft would be 'Rejected', but I think a professional athlete in a major sport will almost certainly be provably notable – see Wikipedia:Notability (sports) for the most relevant criteria.)

Amongst things I noticed is that, particularly in the Lede paragraph, there are various subjective positive statements about the subject (thus contravening the Neutral Point of View policy), and many of the statements of fact in the text appear not to be cited to published Reliable sources. All this can be worked on (and even if you're waiting for a review, you can continue doing so). Hope this is helpful {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 01:33, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Dmitry Osipov has been submitted for review. This may take days, weeks, or sadly, months, as there is a backlog of thousands of drafts. The system is not a queue. Do not remove "Draft". If a reviewer accepts, that will be handled, and there will be a differentiation in titles. David notMD (talk) 01:28, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! The article is currently under review, and I have edited it to make it as neutral as possible. Maria u1 (talk) 01:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Much of your content is not verified by references. David notMD (talk) 01:42, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

added as many as I could now without basically repeating the same source with all the stats and transactions between the teams. Hopefully it is better. Maria u1 (talk) 01:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Unable to format my page for US rocket pioneer

Hello,

Because it doesn't exist I started a wiki page for American rocket pioneer Edward S Forman who was one of the founders of Aerojet Corporation. His name appears on many other wiki pages...Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Guggenheim Aeronautical Laboratory, Frank Malina, Jack Parsons, but there's no landing page for him). He has been written about in books as well as press. Unfortunately I completely stalled out because the formatting was way too difficult for me. My sandbox page start has now been sitting unfinished for 5 years. I'm a professional writer so the writing, references and citations are no problem. It's the page building. Do you have freelancers who will actually build the page for me?

Thank you LynnMaginnis (talk) 00:24, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

LynnMaginnis, all the references currently cited in User:LynnMaginnis/sandbox/Edward Forman are to a single book that's about somebody other than Forman. So, currently, the referencing is a problem. (Please see WP:GNG.) The freelancers would have to search for information about Forman. As for the formatting, you've done it pretty well; what's the particular problem that you face? -- Hoary (talk) 00:32, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi again, thanks for getting back to me. The article is much longer and uses multiple references. I had to quit writing in the sandbox so started writing the rest of the draft in Pages/Words. Getting what little is there on the page formatted was so frustrating and time consuming I had to quit. I can't do the sidebars, indexes, expanded photo boxes with birth, death, organizations, etc. I don't need freelance writers. I have plenty of sources. I need freelance page builders. LynnMaginnis (talk) 00:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

LynnMaginnis, I've already made a few edits to formatting. A sidebar or expanded photo box (or "gallery") is completely unnecessary. The list of contents has been generated automatically, and if you add or subtract headers then the list of contents will be updated automatically. Formatting tables prettily is tiresome but you probably won't need any table; formatting anything else is pretty easy: just try; and if you're stuck, ask here. (Free of charge!) -- Hoary (talk) 00:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

PS LynnMaginnis, if by "freelancer" you mean somebody who'd do this for payment, please forget the idea. It's unlikely to bring a happy result, for any of a number of reasons. -- Hoary (talk) 00:36, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

So who can help me? Wouldn't Wikipedia want to fill in the missing history of a person who is mentioned on your other pages? LynnMaginnis (talk) 00:51, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Really, LynnMaginnis, do your best to DIY. Easier for you, after a little initial irritation. If/when you get stuck, ask. If you're using Pages or Word, one problem you'll probably face is that plain, single quotation marks (' ') will be autotransformed into "typographic" single quotation marks (‘ ’). Their italicizing and emboldening functions will thereby be lost. Solution: Copy out of Word/Pages and paste into a text editor; use the text editor (I use Geany but any should be OK) to convert "typographic" quotation marks to plain ones; continue editing in the text editor. -- Hoary (talk) 01:05, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

LynnMaginnis, we can help you here at the Teahouse as often as you want, but you are going to have to do most of the work yourself. Your content should be in the draft where experienced editors can see it, not in some "Pages/Words" document off-Wikipedia. Do not worry about sidebars, indexes, expanded photo boxes with birth, death, organizations, etc. because all of that is secondary. What matters far more that that stuff is well written, neutral, well referenced encyclopedic prose. On another note, you uploaded File:Ed Forman1.jpg, a photo taken by a staff photographer at Noel Studio in Pasadena in 1931 or 1932. You claimed that photo as your own work. With all due respect, I consider it unlikely that you were a professional portrait photographer in 1931 or 1932 and are now editing Wikipedia in 2023. The math seems implausible. Please clarify the provenance of this photo. Cullen328 (talk) 01:24, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Teahouse Hosts are generalists, here to advise on Wikipedia practices, but not be co-authors. Consider the Malina and Parsons articles as models. David notMD (talk) 01:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

If we don't know when the copyright holder of the photograph died, and if we have no compelling reason to think that the photograph predates 1932, then according to Prof Hirtle we have to assume that it remains copyright until 2052. (Thanks, Disney Corp!) So I'd be looking for a published photograph to replace it. -- Hoary (talk) 02:27, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@LynnMaginnis Have you tried using Visual Editor? That will look and behave more like a word processing program than source code. -- asilvering (talk) 05:14, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello LynnMaginnis. Back in 2010 I’d had a few magazine articles published, but was intimidated by the Wikipedia article process. Here’s what helped me. I created my encyclopedia article offline, adding the formatting as I wrote, using Help:Cheatsheet. For needed formatting I didn’t know I’d find a published article that contained what I wanted to learn, and clicked on "Edit" to see the formatting.

When my draft was finished I went to Wikipedia:Article wizard/version1/Ready for submission and, for my first article, I used the draft option. I copied and pasted my article title into “Enter your draft name here”, then copied my article manuscript, clicked on "Create new article draft" and pasted the article in the space provided below the Instructions section. After that I clicked on "Show preview" to see what needed corrected. The next step was clicking on "Publish page" which saved everything to the public drafting area. I then had the option to come back later to work on the draft some more, or I could click on "Edit" then add subst:submit (with double brackets around it) at the beginning of my draft, which indicted that I wanted my draft to be reviewed. I am thankful that I received a Notice informing me that my article had been accepted. I hope that you find this helpful. Karenthewriter (talk) 04:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Regarding Copyright Images

How do I identify that which images are copyrighted or which are non copyrighted on News websites, so that I can upload copyright free images on wiki articles. And also should I upload AI generated image on Wikipedia because they are non copyrighted WikiAnchor10 (talk) 03:16, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Unless something specifically says otherwise, assume it is copyrighted. Only very old images will be out of copyright and anything licensed for reuse will say so. RudolfRed (talk) 04:16, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Creating a page for a young company

Perhaps someone can help me or point me in the right direction? I am writing about an Autonomous Driving company: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Inceptio_Technology. The company has been around for only 5 years so there are not a lot of independent sources, just press releases. I looked at companies like TuSimple which is in the same business space. How did they get approval for publication when their sources are about the same as ours? Just1544 (talk) 03:33, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

You can see the guidance at WP:NCORP. If you can't find in-depth coverage in an independent reliable source, then it is WP:TOOSOON. A quick glance at the other article seems to show sources such as Wall Street Journal, IEEE, and Forbes, but I didn't look at those in-depth. RudolfRed (talk) 04:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

If it is considered too soon, what do you suggest? How do some companies get published? Just1544 (talk) 04:31, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Just1544, TuSimple didn't "get approval for publication". Instead 1namesake1 created it and nobody has yet suggested that it should be deleted or "draftified". Its sources aren't obviously bad, although, like RudolfRed, I haven't looked at all closely. Which of its sources would you say are mere press releases? -- Hoary (talk) 04:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Do you consider WSJ not press releases? Just1544 (talk) 04:29, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Just1544, as WSJ is behind the Great Paywall of Murdoch, I'm unfamiliar with it; however, en:Wikipedia says it's usable. -- Hoary (talk) 05:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for your insight. Is there anything you would suggest? I read the WP:TOOSOON article; it was not helpful since it focused on actors and films. Just1544 (talk) 05:12, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@Just1544 depends on the piece. Does it have a byline? Then it's probably not PR. -- asilvering (talk) 05:11, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I noticed that the IBM article, there are articles that have nothing to do with IBM; their CEO played in a charitable golf tournament and that was considered "relevant." My own sources are from independent tech journals. Just1544 (talk) 05:14, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Gosh. I just looked at TuSimple, and I'm truly not sure what to say if you think the sources on your draft are equal to the ones on that article. -- asilvering (talk) 05:19, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Can you please clarify? Just1544 (talk) 05:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I really am not sure what to say; that wasn't hyperbole. Your draft has 8 sources, none with apparent bylines, none from major, mainstream news outlets, almost all announcements, none features. TuSimple has 20 sources, most cited multiple times, including coverage of controversies, from a variety of outlets including Reuters and WSJ, almost all with bylines. This is a spot-the-difference exercise for which I have been given two completely different images. -- asilvering (talk) 06:04, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Just1544, and welcome to the Teahouse. Some of the phrases you use above suggest that, like many people, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. You ask How do some companies get published? The answer is that companies don't "get published". Somebody writes an article about a company - preferably somebody with no connection to the company, but somebody with a connection is permitted to do so if they are open about it and follow Wikipedia's policies. That article does not belong to the company, and it is not in any way for the company's benefit. (Obviously, many companies, and people, do benefit from Wikipedia having an article about them, but that is incidental, and no part of Wikipedia's purpose. Some people and companies wish there were not an article about them: see An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing.)

You ask If it is considered too soon, what do you suggest? My answer is "stop trying to write about this company, and work on something else". If the company does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then continuing to work on the draft is not only a complete waste of your time and effort, but is not adding any value to Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 10:19, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

WikipediAn Heroes?

Hello,

My question is if any Wikipedia editors have become an hero, and if so, would anyone be interested in having an memorial page dedicated to them? I have an associates degree in web design and I am very familiar with an range of webpage syntax, so creating an memorial page in Wikipedia space would be as easy as one two three for this guy. Thanks. Rodthrust (talk) 04:10, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@Rodthrust Wikipedia is not a place for memorials Lightoil (talk) 05:08, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

While @Lightoil is correct - Wikipedia articles are not memorials, Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians does exist which may be the sort of thing @Rodthrust is looking for. Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 06:54, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Ancestry.com as only source of birth date

At this writing, I am preparing a draft page on Marlene Fanta Shyer, one of whose books (1983's Stepdog) I did a Wikipedia article for on Sunday morning (thanks to the Judith Schermer connection--for which you can thank my rescue mission on Mouse in House). After following Google search's lead--Shyer was born in 1932--I have nothing else for this date of birth except for this 1940 U.S.-census snippet provided by Ancestry.com, which is about as reliable as it gets for the time being. Not even Gale's Contemporary Authors listing mentions it. As such, putting my efforts on hold until I receive advice on how to handle this case, or get lucky with a secondary source somewhere. (Perhaps Newspapers.com--owned by the same company--might lend us a hand here before long?) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 06:11, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@Slgrandson any chance it's on the copyright page of one of her books? -- asilvering (talk) 06:13, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Skimmed across the Open Library previews--highly doubtful. I'll keep looking. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 06:31, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia drafted article is completed. How do I get it published live to the public?

Hi everyone,

I am pleased to let you know that my drafted article for an actor is completed. How can I move forward to make it go live publicly?

Many thanks

Shivay Shivaay02 (talk) 09:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:Shivaay02/sandbox

Shivaay02 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You should not attempt to publish it to the encyclopedia, as it is completely unsourced. All information about a living person in an article must be sourced, see the Biographies of Living Persons policy. Please see Referencing for Beginners. The best way to create and submit a draft is via Articles for Creation or the Article Wizard. I'm wondering if you are associated with this actor in some way. 331dot (talk) 09:04, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

Yes, I am associated with an actor. And the web links are already attached in the article. And no, I am not looking to publish it to encyclopedia. Thank you :) Shivaay02 (talk) 09:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

When most people say they want to make their draft "live to the public" they mean as part of the encyclopedia. Your draft is currently visible to anyone who can find it or knows where it is, though it is not searchable by outside search engines. If you don't want the draft in the encyclopedia, why are you writing it?

If you work for this actor(such as being their agent/representative) the Terms of Use require that to be declared, please read the paid editing policy. Regardless of the relationship, you need to declare a conflict of interest, please read WP:COI. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

2021 Houston Astros season fix

Hello and good day. Go to above article, scroll down to pitching table section. Cant figure out how to get rid of double border on right side of table.Thanks for your help.Theairportman33531 (talk) 09:51, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Theairportman33531, Houston Astros is a long article, but doesn't have a section named "pitching table", nor any table that's obviously malformed. Maproom (talk) 10:24, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done You had a stray "|" character at the end of the "Totals" row, which was creating an empty column on the end. ColinFine (talk) 10:27, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 10:29, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your help today. Theairportman33531 (talk) 11:30, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Making An Entry For A New Album

Hello there, I'm a music fan and am trying to create an entry for a new album that came out this year. I've managed to get the album page started and it's awaiting approval. But I have challenges with trying to get the album cover uploaded which, in tradition with Wiki album entries, should be in the 'infobox'.

There seems to be a hurdle in the 'rights' of the album cover.

I have looked at another example and from what I see, it can be uploaded by someone who does not own the image if it is a 'Non-free media information and use rationale'.

Here's an example of another artist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Anchoress_-_The_Art_of_Losing_(Album_Cover).jpg

But I do not know how to do this. Can anyone help? Or even upload the image for me? I would really appreciate it. Thank you! Martin 23M23 (talk) 10:23, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Martin, and welcome to the Teahouse. Non-free images (which album covers almost always are) cannot be used unless every one of the non-free content criteria is met. One of these is that the image is used in an article - it must not be used in a draft.

So, don't worry about the image until your draft has been reviewed and accepted. An image will not affect the review process. ColinFine (talk) 10:31, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks so much for your help. This is the first time I've created a page. Is there anyone on Wikipedia who can look at it to check I've done it correctly. Apart from making the new entry, it's also meant to be an nice birthday gift for someone, so I'm keen for it not to get pushed back by 4 months if I've done something wrong on the entry. Would be great to get an expert's eyes on it if that's possible. Thanks again 23M23 (talk) 10:39, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@23M23 Your article is rather brief, which may not be surprising given that it is about a recently-released album. You need to add more reviews, if possible. Also, at present it is an immediate "fail" because your citation #4 is linking to an image which is a copyright violation. Instead, use {{cite news}} to give the full citation to the original review in The Times. Sources do not need to be online to be used in articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:10, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, thank you very much for your help. I'll do as you suggest. Thanks! 23M23 (talk) 12:11, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@23M23 Also, your very first citation (which had an error I've fixed) was a Press Release by a PR Agency, which means it is not independent. To be acceptable, drafts need about three sources that conform to the golden rules. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:17, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello again Mike, thank you for making the fix. I followed everyone's kind advice on here and added a lot more. It's been several days of work getting all the information together for the article. There's a lot more to add, but it would be disappointing if it's not accepted for some reason that I am not aware of, so I will take a pause. If there's any chance you can give it another look now that I have added more information and give me any notes, that would be so appreciated. Thank you again! 23M23 (talk) 14:34, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you again, I'm having trouble with the 'Cite News' code. It ha s a url field to fill in. Do I still use the link to the image". This is the code I found:

{{cite news |last= |first= |date= |title= |url= |work= |location= |access-date=}} 23M23 (talk) 12:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello again, Martin. Please see Referencing for beginners. For most sources, a URL is an optional extra, a convenience for the reader. The important parts of the citation are things like title, author, publisher and date - so that a reader can find the source if they need it (even if they have to order it from a major library!), and can readily assess the likely value of the source (eg, is it a heavyweight newspaper, a book from a major publisher, or a chat magazine or a self-published blog? Is it likely to be independent of the subject, or is it an interview or based on a press release? Is it likely to contain significant coverage of the subject, or just a namecheck?)

Writing an article "as a birthday gift" is a really bad idea, for several reasons. First, in Wikipedia there is no deadline. If you were an experienced Wikipedia editor with a track record of accepted articles, you could safely bypass the WP:AFC process and create it directly, but otherwise the timescale is dependent on volunteer reviewers deciding to look at your draft. (If you try to create the article directly and it is not ready, New pages patrol will knock it back to Draft status anyway). If your draft is so egregiously bad that a reviewer can see at a glance that it is not acceptable, then it will probably get a swift review, but obviously that doesn't help you. What Wikipedia wants is high-quality articles, and it is quite willing to wait to get them.

The second reason is that a Wikipedia article is not for the benefit of the subject. Obviously, many people and organizations that have articles about them do benefit from it; but some definitely do not. Suppose you write a draft, and it is accepted, and in the future the subject becomes embroiled in some scandal: if that affair is reported in reliable sources, and is not trivial, you can expect that it will be added to the article - and neither you nor the subject will be able to get it removed. ColinFine (talk) 12:38, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

This is so helpful, thanks again. Actually, the main reason is to create an article of a recent and notable work that has becoem critcisally acclaimed in a short time. I was surprised it was not on Wikipedia. The birthday gift side of it is part of my nephew's interest in becoming a wikipedia contributor, to show him how one is done. Which is why i really appreciate all the help. I picked this subject because of the attention the record has garnered in terms of raising public awareness about mental health and technology, which I believe is a vital contribution to the cultural landscape and therefore important to include on Wikipedia. I hope as experts on Wikipedia, you're in agreement :-) 23M23 (talk) 12:51, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@23M23, Wikipedians generally appreciate a good cause - we tend to view Wikipedia itself as one. Just keep in mind that our #1 good cause around here is building a good encyclopedia, and other good causes, while important, are secondary to that. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:09, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

It will be easy to add more reviews. There are a lot of them. I will start to do that. Really appreciate your help. 23M23 (talk) 12:28, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

First, you should verify that your sources are WP:RS and provide WP:SIGCOV for the topic while establishing WP:NOTABILITY per WP:NALBUM. McAynus (talk) 12:49, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

My new account

I'm a retired metallurgist and have been using Wikipedia for 20+ years. I have also contributed money to Wikipedia because I believe in the goal of making all human knowledge available for free to every human being with access to the internet.

Not sure how I can personally help but I would like to help if I can. Metalsguyiowa (talk) 14:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

If you want to help, that's great! Check out Help:Introduction for a guide to editing and Wikipedia:Task Centre for some suggestions. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:18, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Metalsguyiowa, welcome to the Teahouse. If you're interested in helping to improve science-related articles, you could head over to WikiProject Science and check out the various pages which explain what they're working on. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:21, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Possible linkvio?

Is this citation on Dogs Playing Poker a possible linkvio due to linking directly to a copyrighted work without any context? Should it be removed?

On that note, I'm also not very certain of the whole article's notability. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

How to get the semiprotected paragraph back as it was?

i tried to change somethin in then text but i cant publish it because it says there is conflict, how to fix it? Eron Lushaj (talk) 15:23, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@Eron Lushaj: An edit conflict means that another editor wanted to edit that same page at the same time you did, so you may need to wait for them to publish their edit, and then you can make your edits. Hope this helps. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:29, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation

Hi there! I have created an article that is been awaiting review now, and the person has the same name to people already having articles on wikipedia (both are athletes and play hockey, but in different contries and have different birthday). A comment about disambiguation was placed on the article, and my question is - do I need to do something or it will be done once the article is reviewed? I don't want to make it confusing and alter the disambiguation page myself, since I was told it is not ok and can be vandalism. Thank you! Maria u1 (talk) 16:05, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Maria u1, welcome to the Teahouse. Don't worry about it - the accepting reviewer will take of that. The note is basically there to remind them of it when the time comes. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

thank you very much! I was worried that since it is the same name, my article will be deleted. Maria u1 (talk) 16:08, 18 July 2023 (UTC)