Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RobertCailliau (talk | contribs) at 09:16, 4 March 2020 (→Overwrite or delete existing media file: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is the teahouse
Shortcuts

Bonadea, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.
Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

Can't edit this page? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk 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.

(Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.)

I found a new user called HelloPriyank claiming to be an administrator.

I checked the list of admins, and he is not an administrator. What do I do?

Happytoucan72 (talk) 17:54, 29 February 2020 (UTC)Happytoucan72[reply]

Hello Happytoucan72 and welcome to the Teahouse. I will look at this, they may have simply copied another user page as their own. 331dot (talk) 18:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
HelloPriyank appears to be offline. What happens if there is no response?Happytoucan72 (talk) 18:32, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Happytoucan72 and 331dot Not just a claim to be Administrator! The recently registered editor User:HelloPriyank appears to have copied most of the User page content, including claims for contributing to specific GA and FA articles, directly from User:Philg88. David notMD (talk) 19:08, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Happytoucan72 If they never edit again, then the problem is minimal(and the admin claims can be removed later). 331dot (talk) 19:34, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And now the user in question is blocked as a sock puppet Nosebagbear (talk) 16:50, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edith Farmiloe, artist and writer

I submitted an article on a well known Edwardian children's author Edith Farmiloe (1870-1921)in summer 2018. It was rejected and I did not quite understand why. I attempted to contact the reviewer but to no avail. S/he got back to me a couple of months later to say they were very busy and had a backlog. Checking my 'talk' today, I note all references to the article and the reviewer's comments are no longer there. Notes and comments on other articles I have had accepted (and rejected) however are still extant. Advice please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adelphi14 (talk • contribs) 19:44, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell you have never submitted your draft User:Adelphi14/sandbox for review, so not sure why you think it was rejected? Theroadislong (talk) 19:53, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is apparently being worked on at Draft:Edith Farmiloe. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I converted one 'naked URL' ref to a proper format. And deleted two refs (replacing with citation needed) because the refs did not appear to confirm the factual statements in the text of the draft. David notMD (talk) 15:54, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which of these come first? References or see also section?

Which of these do you put first? The references or the see also section. I've seen some articles put references first, and I've seen articles that put the see also section first. Analog Horror, (Speak) 20:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Analog Horror: See also should be before the references. The one after references is "external links". Nahnah4 (talk | contribs) 08:35, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Analog Horror. Wikipedia articles are generally laid out according to WP:ORDER; so, check that page for reference. In addition, please don't move your Teahouse posts to the top of the page. New posts added to a Wikipedia page should go at the bottom of the page, not the top. The Teahouse used to be the exception to that practice and new posts used to be added to the top of the page, but that's no longer the case. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a new image

I would like to update an image on a person's Wiki page. However, every time I try and do this, Wikipedia keeps taking it down. I have permission to use the image and tick the ownership box... How can I prevent the image from being taken down and keep the updated one up?

I have tried many times with many different images!

The image change is for the profile of Brianne West

Thanks in advance :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mazthecat (talk • contribs) 02:11, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mazthecat. It looks like you've been trying to upload files to Wikimedia Commons, but they've been deleted because you're somehow failing to comply with c:Commons:Licensing in some way. If you check your Commons user talk page at c:User talk:Mazthecat you'll find more specific notifications explaining why the files were deleted. Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia are sister projects and there's lots of overlapping between the two, but they still are different projects and have their own respective policies and guidelines. Most likely the problem is that you're not providing any way for others to verify the copyright ownership or copyright status of the files your uploading, and thus Wikimedia Commons isn't able to keep them. You might also want to look at c:Commons:OTRS because it contains information about this kind of thing that you might find helpful.-- Marchjuly (talk) 09:02, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dan arndt rejected my article

I used to donate regularly to Wikipedia but I think it is a vase of money since as I just realized any nutcake can make a decision about whether an article worth for listing or not :-)

the reason for rejection " Wikipedia is not a site to be used to promote a non-ntoable junior football club." I have no idea what is a "non-ntoable" and the club is not a junior football club. The club is the same level as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosnells_City_FC see the following link there is no page exist for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_West_State_League_Division_2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laszlo Jakso (talk • contribs) 04:27, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

obviously I do not know how wikipedia automate the listing why and how elect mediators, all I wanted is to create an article and add more information once it is published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laszlo Jakso (talk • contribs) 03:49, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello! Upon reviewing your complaint, I see that the person who reviewed your submission did not feel it did not have sufficient sources online, primary or secondary, therefore it was deemed not notable. If you have further questions, please ping me and I will get back to you :D. HeartGlow30797 (talk) 04:31, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Laszlo Jasko: Donations go to the WikiMedia Foundation, not Wikipedia proper. The issue the user had was your subject did not have enough good sources to support it having its own article. I suggest reaching out to said user to find out more about this. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 04:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Laszlo Jasko. I asked about this at Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Football. If you can demonstrate the the club in question meets Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Notability then a Wikipedia article can probably be created about it; however, the current state of the draft you're working on is not even close to article standards which probably was also part of the reason it was declined in addition to the lack of proper sourcing. So, you might want to look at Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners for some general information on how to write a Wikipedia article; you might also want to look at some other articles for some general ideas as to how such article tend to be formatted, etc. You can also always ask for help from the members of WikiProject Football and perhaps you'll find someone to help you with the draft.
Some other things, another article about a similar team existing does mean that another article about the team you want to write about should exist; it could mean that the other article should also not exist and needs to be deleted. Donating to Wikipedia is a great thing, but a Wikipedia article is not something you can "buy" by donating. Only subjects considered to be Wikipedia notable are considered to be OK to write about; moreover, even if you're successful in creating an article about the team, neither you nor the team (or anyone associated with it) will have any final editorial control or claim of ownership over the article, and only content deemed to be in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines will be allowed to be added. So, in this sense, Wikipedia can be quite restrictive it what kinds of subjects it allows articles to be written about and then what types of content it allows to be added to articles. If this sounds like a lot of hassle or hoops to jump through, there are lots of alternatives to Wikipedia that don't seem to have as many rules. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

new article help needed as it got rejected

Hello

My name is varon bawa I wanted to make a page giving information

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Varon Bawa (talk • contribs) 04:49, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello, I'm sorry I can't help but this clearly violates Wikipedia page creation guidelines and cannot see it becoming an article. It seems as if it is a promotion and seems to not be notable! Ping me if you need anything else! HeartGlow30797 (talk) 04:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Varon Bawa: Hi, I think you may have misunderstood what Wikipedia is (main article: WP:NOT). It is not a social media or brand-promoting website where puff pieces can be posted; Instagram or LinkedIn are more in line with what you're attempting to do. Wikipedia asks for secondary sources (not related to you) to be where editors get their information about your company from. Said exposure may not be necessarily what you want. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 05:38, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may read this article on notability. The topic based on which your article is, should be notable. No one can simply write about an owner of a company which is not so famous; And that too in a website like Wikipedia, right? Please don't think that I am underestimating your esteemed company. Omniscien1 (talk) 07:01, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please Help

Hi I need help regarding the removal of citations as per WP:QUESTIONABLE. I requested the removal of citations on talk page[1] of Jaggi Vasudev, but no one seems to be intrested in talking. After that I posted request on Help Desk[2] , but again no editor is replying. Can any experienced editor remove these citations, as I am unable to do so. BabyINeedYa (talk) 05:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@BabyINeedYa: Welcome to the Teahouse. You did get replies at the Help desk, which was to refer you to the discussion you started at the article talk page. The article talk page is indeed the right place to discuss this, and you have already received responses there. Asking in a new place that editors who are not aware of the ongoing discussion should circumvent it for you is not really appropriate. Have you read the many previous discussion threads on the article talk page carefully? In any case, the reason people are not responding immediately to your most recent post is likely because you did not address the question asked of you previously (you posted a large number of links but never responded to the question about what was wrong with each one of them), and to me it looks like your request is the same one that has been made many times before, and has been discussed repeatedly. --bonadea contributions talk 07:26, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of reference links are accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaushik2012 (talk • contribs) 06:25, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Picture from outside

Is it possible to tag photos from outside Wikimedia commons in a Wikipedia articles directly? If yes, how? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.191.49.194 (talk) 06:46, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP 223.191.49.194. I'm not sure what you mean by tag photos from outside Wikipedia commons in a Wikipedia articles directly, but I'm guessing you want know if you can add (i.e. display) a photo that has not been uploaded to either Wikimedia Commons or Wikipedia to Wikipedia article or page. If that's your question, then the answer is no; only files uploaded to Wikimedia Commons or Wikipedia can be displayed in Wikipedia articles or on other types of Wikipedia pages;. It might be possible to add a link to a photo found on some other external website, but that will not display the photo directly in the article; rather, the reader will have to have to click on the link and view the photo on the other website. You need to be careful, however, when attempting to do this kind of thing and make sure that linking to the other website doesn't violate WP:ELNEVER. It might be able to give you a more specific answer if you can clarify the type of photo you want to link to and which article/page you want to add the link to. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is Wikipedia safe?

Most of the users here know that, I, Omniscien1, am telling (mostly disturbing) and taking suggestions from you on vanishing. But now I am in a confusion. I like editing in Wikipedia. But I feel like someone is personally viewing, i.e., knowing my personal details. What should I do? I feel like vanishing from here because I feel unsafe in this big group of editors but then I go for editing. What shall I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omniscien1 (talk • contribs) 06:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't give out any personal information that could identify you in real life. Please read this essay for young editors. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 07:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Omniscien1. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Wikipedia is in the real world for some general information about this. Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project that anyone in the world can participate in if they want to and are willing to comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. This means that pretty much every page on Wikipedia can be seen by anyone who wants to, and any edits or posts that we make on Wikipedia can also be seen by others. If you're worried that you might've posted some personal information about yourself on some page that you now wish you hadn't, then please check Wikipedia:Oversight because there are ways to get certain types of information removed. If another editor has been posting your personal information somewhere on Wikipedia, then please check Wikipedia:Harassment#Posting of personal information for more information. Why we can post some personal information about ourselves on Wikipedia if we want, we have to be very careful about what we post about other editors or other people.
Bascially, other Wikipedia editors are only going to really only know you by the edits you make and whatever information you post about yourself. So, as long as you're careful about what you reveal on Wikipedia, you should be fine. Similarly, if you tell your friends, co-workers, family, etc, out in the real world your Wikipedia username or the types of articles you edit, then you have know way to control how they might decide to use that information. If you're worried about others knowing about you and Wikipedia, simply don't tell anyone at all that you edit. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:35, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you editors for your suggestions. Now I am feeling safer here. I especially wanted to mention some users but then they mustn't feel insecure. Now I am happy here. Thank you all once again :) Omniscien1 (talk) 08:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with draft biography tagged for lacking significant coverage

I have created four biographies of living people and one was declined for lacking significant coverage: Draft:Avery Yale Kamila I have improved references by removing ones with passing mentions of subject and adding others where subject is article's focus or gives multiple quotes, including about her pesticide work which was tagged as being under sourced. The subject is well known in Maine but I do not know about nationally. I did find some national sources. I wondered if someone might be willing to take a look at the page and its sourcing and offer feedback? Thank you. --BrikDuk (talk) 10:31, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To get an article accepted in Wikipedia, you'll need to establish that its subject is notable (in Wikipedia's sense of that word), by citing several reliable independent sources that discuss the subject in depth. I've looked at a few of the sourced cited in Draft:Avery Yale Kamila, and they were all reporting what she has said about herself. Such sources are not independent, and so do not help to establish notability. Maybe there are some good independent sources cited in the draft; if there are, I suggest you remove most or all of the others, to make it easier for a reviewer to find the good ones. Maproom (talk) 10:53, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, BrikDuk. You have 26 references in that article (which was declined for being about one person's campaign to change school lunches). Perhaps I could invite you to return here and list the three most significant sources which talk about that person in detail and which, in your view, would show it meets these notability criteria for people. Lots of individuals are widely known in their local area (including me), but we need clear evidence that the 'world at large' has taken note of them before they get a space in this encyclopaedia of notable subjects. 26 is a lot of sources to ask someone to look through for you. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:54, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for this helpful information. I added more citations to try and correct, and I understand from your comments that was wrong. I will post the three most significant sources, as Nick Moyes recommended. I will post three about pesticides as that is the part in question.

1. Bouchard, Kelley (2015-10-07). "Portland citizens' group proposes broad pesticide ban". Portland Press Herald. Retrieved 2020-02-14. https://www.pressherald.com/2015/10/07/portland-citizens-group-proposes-strong-pesticide-ban/ (Subject is quoted and mentioned in lots of articles in the Portland Press Herald and Portland Forecaster about the pesticide ban; this article talks about the founding of the group.)
2. Dow, Rebecca (2017-04-25). "Portland Marches in Solidarity". The SMCC Beacon. Retrieved 2020-02-20. https://thesmccbeacon.wordpress.com/2017/04/25/portland-marches-in-solidarity/
3. Litchfield, Kathy (2016-02-10). "Going Organic in Portland, ME: Portland Protectors Works to Eliminate Pesticides". Organic Land Care Program. Retrieved 2020-02-09. http://nofaorganiclandcare.blogspot.com/2016/02/going-organic-in-portland-me-portland.html

>>Also, this is a profile of subject with lots of biography information: Carter, Emily (2019). "VEGAN ACTION | Avery Yale Kamila: Re-Maine Involved". Vegetarian Journal. Retrieved 2020-02-10. https://www.vrg.org/journal/vj2019issue4/2019_issue4_vegan_action.php
Are these any good? Thank you very much for taking time to help. --BrikDuk (talk) 15:38, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UNAPPROVED ARTICLE

I tried creating a wikipedia page for a musician artist but the page was not approved. it showed that the writings are not closely related to wikipedia's goals. please i need help how to go about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gazzyslim (talk • contribs) 10:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gazzyslim Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume you are referring to the now-deleted draft that was in your sandbox. It appears that you were attempting to write about yourself; this is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. Please read the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves; Wikipedia has articles about subjects shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources(sources completely unrelated to the subject) indicating how the subject meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability, in your case, the definition of a notable musician. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves, in enhancing search results for them, or otherwise aiding their career. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media, not Wikipedia. In order for you to be successful in writing about yourself, you essentially need to forget everything you know about yourself, and only write based on the content of independent sources. Most people have great difficulty doing that, as we all naturally write favorably about ourselves. I have yet to see someone successfully write an article about themselves here in my many years here. 331dot (talk) 10:41, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've just found someone else's abandoned draft about the subject of the article I'm creating

Hi. Can someone advise me, please? I’ve been doing occasional Wikipedia edits, on and off, for a few years now. I recently decided to try & create my first article. So I spent some time researching what seemed like an interesting subject (a big film producer who didn’t have his own page), drafted an article, and collected all the relevant citations. Then I logged into Wikipedia, tried to create the page – and I found that someone else had begun a page on the same person a few months ago. The page was moved to Drafts and appears to have been abandoned. What’s the correct thing to do in a situation like this? Should I add my material to the draft page – and basically edit the article until it is complete enough to submit for approval? Or should I contact the original creator of the draft? Or contact someone else? The original draft is unfinished. It appears to be sourced mainly from website of one of the producer’s companies, whereas I’ve been trawling sources from all over the world. Sorry to be stupid. I hope to get the hang of this soon. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks very much UKpedant2 (talk) 11:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. If the existing draft is a good starting point, then I would use it. There's no need to contact the original creator (or anyone else) to ask permission but you might like to see if the original creator wants to help develop the article with you via a Talk page message, but that's entirely up to you. Before using the existing draft, it'd be a good idea to check it doesn't violate any fundamental policies - like being a copyright violation. If you link to the page you are interested in, I'm sure someone will take a look and offer an opinion. QuiteUnusual (talk) 14:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. That’s really helpful. I think the original creator was thinking along similar lines to me, but he seems to have decided that it’s too much work. So I’ll add my material to his framework and then let him know what I’ve done. The link to the existing draft is here: https://en.wikiredia.com/wiki/Draft:Matthew_Stillman UKpedant2 (talk) 17:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help!

I’ve been trying to make my userpage a bit better. just I realised that my Awards & Badges, Contributions and Created Articles sections weren’t fitting inside my ‘green box’ (Which took me 6 hours to create). Could someone please fix it? Thanks, Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 14:16, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you make the green (which is making my eyes bleed) a bit lighter in color? Thanks again, Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 14:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello? Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 19:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hellooooooo? Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 16:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Partly done. @Rodrigo Valequez: Hey, hope you don't mind, but I went ahead and fixed the sections not being in the green box for you. I removed the offending code ({|style="margin: 1em auto;") and it seems to have resolved the issue. As far as the colour gradient goes I suggest using a color picker like this page to figure out what colors work best for you. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosure of personal location

By the way, to all the users who somewhat know me, I wanted to tell that I am not vanishing from Wikipedia. I have understood that it is safe. But my doubt now is: many users had suggested me not to disclose your original name, location etc., as it is unsafe. But I have seen many users (it would be a displeasure if I name them) who are letting out their names and locations (i.e. city, state, country) but are still safe. Just asking due to curiosity. Omniscien1 (talk) 14:26, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Omniscien1 Some users are more comfortable with using their actual identities here. Some might seem to be doing so but actually are not. There are good reasons not do to so for many people. In your case I wouldn't worry about what other users are doing; as a younger user, you shouldn't reveal personal information about yourself. If you haven't already, please read WP:YOUNG for advice. As noted on that page, it's a good idea for you to discuss your Wikipedia activities with your parents/guardian/whomever is responsible for your care. If you have any follow up comments, please place them here and not on my talk page. Thanks 331dot (talk) 14:47, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Omniscien1: Most people on Wikipedia are good people that are just here to build an encyclopedia and learn new things; some people come on here for other, less noble purposes but they are far and few in between. It is up to you (and said users you've mentioned) as to how much information they would like to reveal about themselves. It does not affect their editing skill and is a personal choice. Like 331dot has mentioned, it's not recommended for you personally as a young user to reveal your own personal details. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:50, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Attempted to publish

Teahouse Edit, I attempted to to publish my own pages years ago and was rejected not sure why. What do I need to do so that this dose not happen again. I am a professional Musician and Songwriter with both National and International copyrights and a member of ASCAP SINCE 1982. Regards Jim Pasquale

James"Jim"Pasquale — Preceding unsigned comment added by James "Jim" Pasquale (talk • contribs) 14:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

James "Jim" Pasquale Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are no edits from your account other than the above, so I assume you used a different account or edited without one. In any event, if you are attempting to write about yourself, this is highly discouraged on Wikipedia per the autobiography policy. This is in part because people naturally write favorably about themselves. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves; Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability; in this case the definition of a notable musician or creative professional. In order for you to be successful in writing about yourself, you need to forget everything you know about yourself and only write based on what independent sources say about you. This is usually difficult for people to do about themselves. 331dot (talk) 14:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, user:Harmonymando and Jim Pasquale. Guy (help!) 15:19, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As Guy noted, appears you had two User names back in 2012. As long as you do not resurrect those, OK to go forward with your current account. Please do not attempt to use your User page as a place to draft an article about yourself; if you insist on trying that, use your Sandbox. However, as 331dot pointed out, the criteria for music notability is strict, and in general, people are strongly advised against trying to create an autobiographical article. David notMD (talk) 16:03, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reference

Hello, i would like you to help me on how to cite references in articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunday William Akiiki (talk • contribs) 15:12, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday William Akiiki Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You can read about how to cite articles by clicking WP:CITE. 331dot (talk) 15:15, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Sunday William Akiiki: You may find also further advice at WP:EASYREFBEGIN which I produced in order to help new editors like yourself. I would add that trying to write an article about yourself (Draft:Angel Williamz Owakabi) is generally a bad idea, and an obvious 'conflict of interest'. See WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY for this, as well as an absolutely critical page called Wikipedia:Notability (people) which will help you understand how we determine whether a person is sufficiently notable to merit having a page about them here. I am afraid that I do not see anything in your draft so far that indicates you will meet our notability criteria (just like most people on this planet!). You might find LinkedIn a more suitable place to promote your profile as you would have total control over it, unlike here.  
Although not terribly important at this stage, if you look at every other article on Wikipedia, you will notice that we do not use bold lettering, except to highlight the subject name or names in the first sentence. You appear to have emboldened virtually every fifth word! As a journalist, I'm sure you can appreciate the importance of following a 'house style'. Ours is at Wikipedia:Manual of Style, where a section called MOS:NOBOLD tells you when it's OK and not OK to use it. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:23, 2 March 2020 (UTC) [reply]

Weak Sources

Sometimes citations and sources will link to non-working websites or books will just the name of the author and a page number with no title ex :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1917_French_Army_mutinies#cite_note-5 . Is there a way to purge or remove/fix these citations. Because if you cant verify them they are practically useless. Texas-Dude1914 (talk) 15:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Texas-Dude1914 In some cases, just a name and page number might mean the full reference is provided earlier. If a website link no longer works, it may be possible to find an archived/saved version somewhere, as in the Wayback Machine archive. 331dot (talk) 15:41, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thats only a partial solution. If a book is only cited once with only an author name and year it shouldnt be acceptable because no one can verify it, not to mentions thats just lazy. Also if a dead link is unable found on the wayback then what? Texas-Dude1914 (talk) 15:46, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Texas-Dude1914: Short citations refer to complete citations elsewhere in the article, either earlier in the same list, or in a References, Bibliography, or Further reading section (incorrectly). In this case, "Gilbert and Bernard, p 28" refers to the fourth entry in the Further reading section, Gilbert, Bentley B., and Paul P. Bernard. "The French Army Mutinies of 1917," Historian (1959) 22#1 pp 24–41. See WP:LINKROT for how to correctly handle dead links. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:46, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article

Hi -

How long does it take to receive feedback from an article you have written on Wiki. --Lwilliamson (talk) 15:50, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lwilliamson: Are you asking about a draft that you're hoping to submit or an article currently existing in the article namespace? For the former it can happen whenever as volunteer reviewers have to give good, meaningful reviews to other drafts, while in the latter other editors can talk about in the article's talk page if they have concerns. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:53, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I currently have my article in the draft space, but I believe it has already been submitted. I'm just waiting for feedback. My article sits in the user contributions space,is that where I should receive updates? What is the article namespace? --Lwilliamson (talk) 15:58, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lwilliamson If you are referring to Draft:Munck Wilson Mandala, LLP, it has not yet been submitted for review. I will shortly add the appropriate information to permit you to do so, but you should not submit it yet, as it would to be frank likely be rejected quickly. The sources you offer are all press releases or the firm's website, which does not establish that the firm meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. You need to have independent reliable sources with significant coverage- not press releases(which are not independent), the firm website, or brief mentions. 331dot (talk) 16:02, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Lwilliamson (talk) 16:13, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly are barnstars?

Are barnstars awards? Or they are a vote of thanks by users. If they are awards, for what are they received? Can anyone suggest me an article to know about them? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omniscien1 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Omniscien1:, they are informal awards with no set criteria given by one editor to another. You can find out more at this link. I hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:11, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

According to me, the 'Minor Barnstar' is suitable for me as I have made many (nearly 60) minor edits and added links. So will it be awarded to me by the administrator or by the users? Omniscien1 (talk) 16:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Omniscien1: There are not designated people to hand these awards out. If someone notices what you have done and chooses to give you one, they will. It isn't required to happen and may not, it all depends on what users choose to do. 331dot (talk) 16:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Omniscien1, also note that they are meant to be, and generally are, quite hard to get. Although there aren't strict criteria for giving them out, they shouldn't be used profligately. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 17:19, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Editors should not self-award barnstars, nor award them to other editors for minor/modest contributions. I've been an editor 10+ years, 20,000+ edits, and am pleased/satisfied that to date have been awarded a dozen barnstars. David notMD (talk) 18:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What do Wikipedia editors mainly do?

I’m now and I want to help Wikipedia as much as possible but I don’t know what to do.I have corrected a few spell errors and added content but what else? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Lewisham (talk • contribs) 17:12, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First thank you for your help. Looking for things to do see Wikipedia:Maintenance.--Moxy 🍁 17:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Up to you really, some people that's all they want to do and we like that. Some like to author articles. You are the volunteer, you decide what brings you constructive pleasure here. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 17:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Daniel Lewisham, every editor is different. If you want to look at maintenance tasks that need doing, you might want to have a look at Wikipedia:Task Center.
An alternative way of doing it is to just press the random page button, or visit special:random, sooner or later you'll find something that needs fixing or updating. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 17:16, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Daniel Lewisham: Completely up to you. If you want suggestions you can always sign up for SuggestBot by going to WP:Teahouse/Suggestions. Another link that may interest you is the WP:Community portal where articles needing different types of help are put up. I myself am primarily a copyeditor and am part of the WP:Guild of Copyeditors (GOCE), and we're always looking for editors to join our ranks and make articles more legible and pleasing to read. There's currently a month-long drive to reduce the number of articles that need to be copyedited if that's something you're interested in.
@Daniel Lewisham: Forgot to sign. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zipcon

I have a topic about zipcon I want to publish this topic on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salmanjammu (talk • contribs) 17:26, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Salmanjammu: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to add to it. Please read WP:YFA for guidance on what the requirements are for an article, and you can use the wizard there to create a draft for review. Creating a new article is not an easy task for new users, so the usual advice is to work on improving existing articles to gain experience first. RudolfRed (talk) 17:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)@Salmanjammu: I suggest you get a draft started (Tool to help you can be found here). Please make sure you don't have a conflict of interest or plan to advertise with the subject in question, as that will make getting it approved for articlespace much harder or impossible respectively. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:49, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zipcon is a article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salmanjammu (talk • contribs) 17:40, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Salmanjammu: You may be in the wrong discussion. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to correct section ~~ Alex Noble - talk 18:12, 2 March 2020 (UTC) [reply]

Appears that Salmanjammu has now created a draft: Draft:Zipcon. This can be worked on, then submitted. In current form (no references) would be rejected. Salmanjammu has also put content on own User page and Talk page that is better suited to being moved elsewhere. David notMD (talk) 18:43, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Salmanjammu: re: Draft:Zipcon, have you read WP:NCORP and WP:YFA as suggested above? Based on the few sentences in the draft, I doubt the subject is notable. It says nothing about what they do, and provides no independent, reliable sources that have significant coverage of the company to establsh notability. Without that, the article will not be accepted, and I wouldn't want you to waste your time. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 00:59, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info box residence element.

Quick question, I wasn't sure where to ask, is the |residence= now redundant in info boxes? Govvy (talk) 17:33, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some infobox templates use that parameter, others don't. You'll need to look at the template for the relevant infobox to check. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:38, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Govvy: Which infobox(es) are you referring to? --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Meant to ping Govvy. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tenryuu: I saw this edit [3] where the element was removed, but when I checked on older preview it wasn't there. So wondered if it was now redundant code. Govvy (talk) 19:25, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Govvy: Checking the template documentation for {{Infobox person}} residence is not a valid parameter and is extraneous. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Govvy: It's not redundant – it's deprecated, as in no longer supported and no longer renders. There was a discussion somewhere that decided to remove residences from infoboxes because it is a constant source of disruption and was apparently decided to be unimportant information. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 01:03, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a link to the discussion Template talk:Infobox person/Archive 34#Residence parameter. MarnetteD|Talk 01:07, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to load pictures

I asked about loading pictures to the Lucien Thévet page I'm creating, and Nick Moyes replied and said "You don't have to use an Infobox - just copy the wikimarkup I've used here." I've tried copying and pasting the image, as well as uploading it by copying the image address into the upload Wizard, but nothing ever seems to happen. Afraid I'm not terribly technology-oriented, so am feeling rather frustrated. Any suggestions? Corniste6367 (talk) 17:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you look back at the wikitext in the previous section #Loading photos you'll see that Nick used the wikitext [[File:Lucien Thévet.jpg|thumb|Lucien Thévet]], so that's the wikitext that you can paste into your draft. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Corniste6367: Note that David Biddulph is referring to the source editor for pasting wikitext, not the visual editor. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:55, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Corniste6367. Is the picture you are wanting to use already in Wikimedia Commons (like the one Nick Moyes used above) or is it one that is not yet in Wikimedia that you are wanting to use? If it is already there, you don't need to upload, and can just put it in the article the way Nick suggets. If it is not, then you must upload it; but in that case, copyright becomes crucial. Your reference to "the image address" suggests that it is an image already on the web somewhere. If that is so, then you may not upload it unless the copyright holder explicitly releases it under a licence such as CC-BY-SA. --ColinFine (talk) 18:09, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Permission to copy image

My wife and I seen an image on Wikipedia. We are trying to obtain permission to use it on a t-shirt. The subject line for Permission Dose not exist. And we are at A loss on how to proceed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Papalg1961 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

thx nick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thewikimeowman (talk • contribs) 18:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you David. The image is A molecule that caught our attention. We are making t-shirts and are not sure how to gain the permission to print it on our t-shirts. Would a picture of a molecule Be owned in a copyright.

Thewikimeowman Wikipedia itself doesn't hold the rights to any images here, and most can be used for any purpose under a CC license. Which image do you want to use? ~~ Alex Noble - talk 18:41, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppets and AfD votes

Another month, another visit to the teahouse for me... In January of this year I nominated an article for deletion. Only two other people voted: One keep and one delete. The result was no consensus. I just saw that the person who voted keep is a sockpuppet and is indefinitely blocked. What happens to the vote now? I'm considering nominating the article for deletion again if that is ok. And thank you for all the help you've provided in the past, teahouse hosts. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 19:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DiamondRemley39, the general rule is that after a no consensus result you should wait for two months, per Wikipedia:Renominating for deletion. I'd personally still follow this, as the puppets weren't being used to manipulate the discussion by commenting twice or anything. Although I doubt there would be much opposition if you were to renominate now, especially considering there wasn't much participation in the first AFD. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 19:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I believe, according to what you've said, that "significant new information has come to light since a deletion," so there should be no problem in at least having it reconsidered. You'd have to persuade others that the new info was "significant." Or, as the user above has said, you could simply wait a bit longer. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 20:11, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both. I'll wait at least two months. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 20:16, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DiamondRemley39: Just a passing comment to say that it is orders of magnitude harder to find good published sources online for people born and who lived their lives mostly in the 19th century than it is for the minor celebrities alive today that our media-hungry world fawns over. So I always urge editors not to rush to delete content about 19th or early 20th century characters, even if it is true that our notability criteria make no distinction for the time period in which these people were alive, or the likelihood of online sources being available - something I personally feel is a real failing, and which many editors sadly forget, trusting as they do to a few minutes spent on Google to make their assessment. The article seems not to have been created for any promotional purpose, so I tend to think such pages about historic characters with at least some verifiable sources indicating a degree of notability actually improves Wikipedia and cost us nothing (reputationally or monetarily) to retain here. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:15, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article Getting Declined

Is there anything wrong in this article, everything is included but always gets denied.

Title of the page is Draft:Sanat Sawant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.36.8.244 (talk • contribs)

As you have been told by Hell in a Bucket on your talk page: "At this time it has been declined (multiple times) because the artist simply does not appear notable. If you can find how this person meets the WP:GNG and show us reliable 3rd party in depth coverage it might change but it doesn't appear that is the case now.". You will now have found that your repeated attempts to put this forward for review has resulted in its deletion. The topic has also been 'salted' meaning only an administrator can now create that page. And it now appears your IP address has been blocked from editing for two weeks for evading a prior block. You have not helped your cause one bit, I'm afraid. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question

Hi, if I am creating a page about a feminist woman, and from the all that I've read about her, it is clear that she believes that women should be referred to by their first name, rather than the surname., should I use her first name or surname in all the subsequent mentions in the article? Thanks in advance. FelixtheNomad (talk) 20:45, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Surname. Go by Wikipedia's manual of style, not an individual's personal opinion. --bonadea contributions talk 20:50, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@FelixtheNomad: Welcome to the Teahouse. I completely agree with the above. The voice that this encyclopaedia uses is really important. It sounds far too chatty and friendly for a neutral encyclopaedia to be talking about a subject by their first name, no matter how the subject like to be addressed in public. If that issue had been commented upon by independant and reliable sources, then it would be fine to mention that preference in the article, but still not refer to them in that way unless that was how the world at large refers to them. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Cher are perhaps notable exceptions to that rule, whilst Elton John uses both 'Elton John' and just 'John' but not, as far as I can see, just 'Elton', which seems the right approach to me. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:04, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This surely helps, Thank you so much. FelixtheNomad (talk) 06:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Redacted) doxxing

I just reverted an edit to page (Redacted) where an unregistered user added (Redacted)'s address into a seemingly random point in the article. Could this be doxxing? If not, did I make the right call in reverting the edit Tornado547 (talk) 21:10, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You did the right thing, this was doxxing and it has now been revision deleted. I now have a question for the Teahouse myself, is the #wikipedia-en-revdel connect channel not working for anyone else? – Thjarkur (talk) 22:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Þjarkur: I don't use IRC, but I always get a prompt repsonse when mailing the oversight team WP:OVERSIGHT RudolfRed (talk) 23:25, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Þjarkur, RudolfRed, and Tornado547: I was surprised the admin who did eventually revdel the edit didn't also immediately report it to Oversight. It was still visible to all admins nearly two hours after it was first made. However I contacted oversight at 22:50 and it was fully redacted pretty soon after. I also blocked the IP address for a year, as this really was an extremely serious breach of our BLP policies.
The one thing I would say to Tornado - who was spot on in immediately reverting the edit - is that it's never a good idea to go to a public forum like this and discuss doxxing/BLP issues, as it only serves to publicise what should remain a private matter. Simple revdelling was insufficient in this case, so WP:OVERSIGHT is the place to go, where you can privately email the oversight team, making sure you include diffs to the edit(s) of concern.
For less serious matters where a simple admin WP:REVDEL would be acceptable, my approach used to be to go to WP:AN or WP:ANI and look for the name of an administrator who appears to have been editing very recently. I'd then post on their page, but there I would simply ask them if I could email them privately to request a revdel. (Admin pages are often heavily watched, too) If I got a reply back immediately I know they're still awake and happy to respond to my request. Before doing that I used to simply email an active-looking admin without checking first, but sometimes it could be many hours, or even a day or two, before they got back to me. I have an admin highlighter script installed which underlines admin's signatures in turquoise, so they're mostly really easy to spot. Cheers all, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)    [reply]
You're correct Nick, per Wikipedia:Harassment#Posting_of_personal_information, I should've reported it to Oversight; will do so in the future for anything that looks like doxxing that I'm the first to revdel. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd revert/redact the offending info, use IRC to contact an admin on the revdel channel, and let them make the decision as to whether to request oversight. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 01:19, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to include the lyrics of a song in a page

Dear hosts, Wikipedians,

I would like to know how I can include lyrics of a song in an article. The song is very famous now, and I'd like to include in the article A rapist in your path. It is soon 8th of March and I think it could help the movement if the Lyrics are on Wikipedia. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 00:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paradise Chronicle There may be copyright issues. See Wikipedia:Lyrics and poetry. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:31, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Paradise Chronicle: You can't include all the lyrics, due to copyright. See WP:LYRICS. Also, this is an encyclopedia, and not a venue for promoting a movement etc. RudolfRed (talk) 00:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I see, I thought there might be issues. This is why I asked before including them. And it was one of the most moving (emotionally at least) songs in ::the last year, so I thought it might be of interest. I'll check the copyright issue and come back for advice, before I include anything of the text.
Thank you, Paradise Chronicle (talk) 00:57, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Of course other lyrics have been moving too and are not represented in Wikipedia. But I understand we should abide to the rules of copyright. This is ::: also why I usually don't even try to quote. So I wanted to ask first.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 01:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Card Games

Why are some card games capitalized (e.g., Durak), while others are sometimes capitalized (e.g., Bridge), and others apparently never capitalized (e.g., poker)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdammers (talk • contribs) 02:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked at the articles about these games. In them, none is capitalised. Skat is mostly capitalised in the article about it, because its name is a German word, and in German all nouns are capitalised. Maproom (talk) 08:31, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

From above: What is the best way to find vandalism?

What is the best way to find vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angry cuman (talk • contribs) 05:31, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Angry cuman: The probably best way is to use Special:RecentChanges. Check out the highlight options, they can save you time. Do you know Twinkle already? It makes reverting and warning much easier and takes care of I.e. Signing your edits were needed. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a time limit on editing for re-submission?

Is there a time limit on editing for re-submission?

I haven't made all the "corrections" I need to make. It will take time. I got notice today I have made 100 revisions. I hope you don't pull the plug because you are expecting something sooner. I have a lot of work about this. thanks folks. I still have to figure out how to put my images up. This current page is not a talk page to be signed? right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carl J. Weber (talk • contribs) 06:15, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Carl J. Weber: If it's not an article and you're making comments, please sign. As far as I know drafts can stay inactive for 6 months before they're considered for deletion. You should be fine. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:46, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think this must be about Draft:Etymology of Chicago. It looks more like an essay than an encyclopedia article, and it's full of original research. But it won't get deleted so long as someone makes at least one edit to it every six months. Wikipedia has no deadline.   Maproom (talk) 09:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Has now been declined twice. This still means that it will exist as a draft which any edit (including creator) can work on before it is resubmitted (or after, for that matter). Important remaining issues are that much of the text still lacks referencing and much of the text appears to be original research on the part of the creator. David notMD (talk) 11:20, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Having been declined twice, you'll want to make sure you carefully read and understand the comments provided by the reviewers and the articles to which they've provided links before submitting the draft again. When people repeatedly re-submit a draft without seeming to make the substantial required changes, it can be seen as disruptive, which could result in the draft being rejected (permanently) and/or the editor blocked, which you don't want. There's no real time limit as long as you keep working on it every so often, so please take your time to find and cite those sources and create an article you (and we) can be proud of. Cheers. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:14, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Controversial Information from Swarajya (magazine)

Hi respected editors, Few editors trying to remove controversial information from Swarajya (magazine) which is well sourced. Is it really be removed from there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DMySon (talk • contribs) 2020-03-03T09:20:59 (UTC)

Hello, DMySon. If there is disagreement about the content of an article, the next stage is to discuss it at the article's Talk page: see WP:BRD. I see no discussion there since January. If editors are unable to reach consensus there, the next steps are explained at WP:DR. --ColinFine (talk) 15:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank You, ColinFine DMySon 05:15, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question about citations

Thank you to Maproom and Nick Moyes for advice about citations at Draft:Avery Yale Kamila. You suggested I post three most significant sources. Sulfurboy commented that the sources about subject's school lunch work are reliable. I'm still trying to figure out what citations show notability and which don't. Would an editor be able to review the following three citations about subject's pesticide work and provide feedback?

1. Bouchard, Kelley (2015-10-07). "Portland citizens' group proposes broad pesticide ban". Portland Press Herald. Retrieved 2020-02-14. https://www.pressherald.com/2015/10/07/portland-citizens-group-proposes-strong-pesticide-ban/ (Subject is quoted and mentioned in lots of articles in the Portland Press Herald and Portland Forecaster about the pesticide ban; this article talks about the group subject founded.)
2. Dow, Rebecca (2017-04-25). "Portland Marches in Solidarity". The SMCC Beacon. Retrieved 2020-02-20. https://thesmccbeacon.wordpress.com/2017/04/25/portland-marches-in-solidarity/
3. Litchfield, Kathy (2016-02-10). "Going Organic in Portland, ME: Portland Protectors Works to Eliminate Pesticides". Organic Land Care Program. Retrieved 2020-02-09. http://nofaorganiclandcare.blogspot.com/2016/02/going-organic-in-portland-me-portland.html

Are these any good? Thank you very much for taking time to help.--BrikDuk (talk) 09:51, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy pings @Maproom, Nick Moyes, and Sulfurboy: And by way of explanation: User:BrikDuk you need to put the User: part in the link as well to activate the ping mechanisn, otherwise it just thinks you want an article page called Maproom. - X201 (talk) 10:03, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for added the code to ping. --BrikDuk (talk) 10:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is not reliability, it's the need for in-depth discussion of the subject by independent sources. Source 1 above does not discuss her, it reports what she said. Source 2 describes things that she talked about, and says that she did so well – that's not the "in-depth discussion" that we're looking for. Source 3 has a whole paragraph on her. It's a start, but details like the age of her son don't seem to me like the kind of material we're looking for. Maproom (talk) 10:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking time to explain. Appreciate it. But still confused. Source 1 discusses a group she founded. That's notable. Isn't it? There are other among 24 sources cited that give biographical details and in-depth discussion. I can highlight those. Earlier I was told not reliable in pesticide area, so that is why I called out these three citations. Subject is mentioned in press for three areas: School lunch, pesticide regulation, and food column. I was told earlier the citation problem was with the pesticide work. Any advice for how to proceed? Appreciate your help.BrikDuk (talk) 10:54, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Source 1 discusses a group she founded. That's notable. Isn't it?". No. Anyone can found a group, I've done it myself. If the group were itself notable, that might do something towards making its founder notable. (A comment, not relevant to this discussion, but maybe helpful to others who want to check source 1. If I try to read it on my desktop PC, I can't, it's behind a paywall. But I can read it freely from my laptop. I've no idea why that can happen.) Maproom (talk) 11:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
More ref weakness: Ref 8 is an interview with Kamila (does not contribute to notability and does not mention that she writes a column), Ref 9 is a one-line mention, and Ref 10 is a dead link. My overall impression is that her involvement in local affairs does not rise to Wikipedia's criteria for notability. David notMD (talk) 11:42, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Where is Twinkle?

I went to the Twinkle's main page and followed the instructions. But I went to my preference page, went to the 'gadgets' section but couldn't find the Twinkle option to enable it. Could anyone please help me with it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omniscien1 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Omniscien1, to use Twinkle you need to be autoconfirmed, by having made 10 edits (which you have), over 4 days. This is done automatically, and should be done at 0615 utc tomorrow, at which point the option to enable Twinkle will appear. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 14:38, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am really sorry but can please explain me these terms you have used: 'autoconfirmed', '0615 UTC'. Sorry for the inconvenience. And I have made total 79 edits, out of which 44 are done in Wikipedia's pages mostly 2020 in India, Kerala, Wagle Estate along with some other. Omniscien1 (talk) 16:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Omniscien1 "Autoconfirmed" means that you have at least 10 edits and your account is at least four days old. Your account will be four days old at 6:15 Coordinated Universal Time(UTC). I'm not sure what time that will be for your area but it should be within 24 hours. 331dot (talk) 16:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it will be 6:26 p.m. in my area. And thanks for explaining me, 331dot. Omniscien1 (talk) 16:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could anyone please help?

I asked this question before but had no reply, that’s why I’m asking it again.

I’ve been trying to make my userpage a bit better. just I realised that my Awards & Badges, Contributions and Created Articles sections weren’t fitting inside my ‘green box’ (Which took me 6 hours to create). Could someone please fix it? Thanks, Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 16:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you make the green (which is making my eyes bleed) a bit lighter in color? Thanks again, Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 16:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The badges and all that look just fine on my desktop computer. Maybe in a phone they might be different. What are you seeing. As for the color, I believe that is just fine also. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 16:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Already done. @Rodrigo Valequez: Please see your previous question above for my response and fix. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 23:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Polish to English

Hello, I'm a British actor, Rupert Frazer, with a Wikipedia page in Polish: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Frazer Would it be possible to have an English page? The Polish page, when translated, doesn't make much sense! Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupert Frazer (talk • contribs) 16:57, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From what I understand about the notability guidelines, someone will write the article about you eventually if you are notable enough. (Just make sure not to write it yourself-that would be a conflict of interest, I think.) Hope this helps, King of Scorpions 17:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you should probably sign your comments with 4 tildes (~). King of Scorpions 17:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not forbidden, but WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY explains why Wikipedia frowns on writing or editing an article about oneself. I do agree that it is a bit odd for an article in Polish to exist (with English references), but not an article in English. David notMD (talk) 19:08, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Foyle's War, Zorn and War and Remembrance. Ok, I'm a fan. I will look for sources tomorrow. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The references in the Polish article are to IMDB (which on the en-Wikipedia is considered not very reliable, and not proving any notability whatsoever) and similar all-actors listings. I did not find much in the way of WP:NACTOR online (mostly minor roles so no press coverage), so I do not think an article (on en-wp) is warranted at that point. Best of luck to GGS in the search. TigraanClick here to contact me 22:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You did hear me say he was in War and Remembrance, right? But I take your point. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please help! I put an article on my Sandbox page and it was not accepted for draft review...

Hello - I wrote an entire article and added footnotes - the article was not submitted for review on my Sandbox due to time-out of my computer. I didn't write it all in one sitting...now it's gone. Is there any way to retrieve it? Thank you so much.

Alwayslp (talk) 17:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alwayslp, Try reopening the editor, and if that doesn't work, I guess you're out of luck, as you have no contributions to your sandbox. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 17:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New article removed from main space to back to draft as not to disrupt official AfC process

Hello TeaHouse people, My article Raed H. Charafeddine was removed from the mainspace back to Draft:Raed H. Charafeddine as ‘not to disrupt the official AfC process’. The reason why I posted it directly to the mainspace is that this is a second version, in which I improved and changed the article responding to previous extensive comments on my original version. I would like to resubmit it to the main space. Would you strongly advise me not to do so? Thank you in advance for any feedback and advise!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarthaBergman (talk • contribs) 17:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MarthaBergman "Resubmitting" by definition means asking for a review at AFC, which happens in Draft-space, not Mainspace. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You resubmitted it, which means you should not have changed your mind and moved it to Mainspace. Given that your original submittal was declined, you are not the best person to decide that your newer edits warranted by-passing AfC this time. My suggestion is wait for the AfC process to proceed. David notMD (talk) 19:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
​In my opinion the other editor is incorrect that your move was "disrupting the official AfC process", AfC is completely optional and you are free to move your articles to mainspace if you wish to do so. I've marked a few places in your draft where the information wasn't directly verified in the cited source, it would be good to fix those. It's not quite clear to me whether he passes WP:GNG since most sources that I looked at were just very short mentions of him rather than independant coverage about him. – Thjarkur (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About my page

Hi My page was deleted .i think it had nothing wrong.please hell — Preceding unsigned comment added by Umar Ali Sofi (talk • contribs) 17:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Umar Ali Sofi Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have no deleted pages, but your user page has been nominated for speedy deletion, as it is not in keeping with the purpose of user pages, which is for you as an individual to introduce yourself to the Wikipedia community in the context of your Wikipedia use.
It is also essentially an advertisement, which is not permitted anywhere on Wikipedia. I would suggest learning more about Wikipedia, by using the new user tutorial and reading Your First Article before attempting to create a new article, which is the hardest task on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 18:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to remember a fake rock band in a wikipedia article

I am searching for a hoax band on wikipedia. I remember an album cover had a nuclear symbol on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lionsleeps23 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lionsleeps23, Have you had a look through Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia? It might be on there. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 18:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why my "Contributions" link/page shows me nothing?

Hello, I am new user here. I have made few edits and it does not appear under the link/page "Contributions". Is there any other place to look for the "edits" I have made? Or is there any other reason for showing me a blank page for "Contributions"? Any help in this regard is appreciated. Thanks in advance. Ayaz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayaz.ashraf (talk • contribs) 20:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ayaz.ashraf: Are you talking about this page: Special:Contributions/Ayaz.ashraf....? --CiaPan (talk) 20:35, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Ayaz.ashraf! The first idea that comes to mind is that you may have been accidently logged out and edited as an IP. Have you checked the pages you edited to see if the edits were actually made? That's "View history" near the top of a page. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

COI as a museum intern

I've been reading the guidelines for disclosing conflict of interest and just want to make sure I do it right! How do I declare my status as a paid intern at an art museum? I plan to edit and/or create at least some articles that relate to this museum's collections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onecentlife (talk • contribs) 20:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Onecentlife! Your userpage declaration looks fine to me. I would suggest that if you edit an existing article, make a similar note on the talkpage + "I intend to edit the article in this manner". Start carefully, perhaps wait a couple of days for reactions, discuss at need, continue. On creating new articles, use the AFC-process described at Help:Your first article, and again note your paid status on the talkpage. If your edits are well-sourced and reasonably neutral in tone, you should do ok. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk · contribs) OK great, that helps. Thanks so much! I'll do my best. Onecentlife (talk) 21:07, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hello, Onecentlife, and thank you for being honest. There are potentially two issues here: conflict of interest and paid editing.
From what you describe, I am not entirely sure whether you are a paid editor. If your internship is in PR/communication, probably yes, if it is in another area (art, documentation, etc.) probably no. If your boss ordered you to edit Wikipedia directly, definitely yes. My personal test would be whether your boss would be happy to learn that you edit Wikipedia during work hours: if yes, it means you are editing for pay. If so, you need to make a formal disclosure that includes your employer and client (here the same person): see WP:PAID.
If you are not a paid editor, you should still disclose the conflict of interest: see Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#How_to_disclose_a_COI for how to do so.
I would think writing about the museum's collections is a relatively mild conflict of interest; that situation is common among expert editors (i.e. editors with a higher than usual knowledge of a niche topic), who are either working in a related field or passionate about it. Make sure to comply with WP:NPOV (do not promote the museum or the works of art, stay neutral and factual) and WP:OR/WP:V (everything in the articles you write should not be your original idea, but should be referenced to a reliable source). TigraanClick here to contact me 21:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tigraan (talk · contribs) Thanks so much for weighing in. Your response is helpful, although I admit I'm still a little confused! Yes, my employer would know and be happy that I am editing Wikipedia during work hours, and/or supplementing or creating pages for artists in the collection here. But is that strictly off-limits? My understanding is that there are exceptions for paid COI, specifically in the cultural sector: Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Library/Cultural_Professionals
I am not a PR/communication specialist of any kind. Rather, I am an art historian (I suppose an art historian in training) who recieves a nominal stipend as a curatorial intern. As such, I carry out a range of research / writing / exhibition-related tasks. Hmm! I definitely understand that I should disclose my position, but am I actually not allowed to edit related content in this capacity? Thanks again for your guidance. Onecentlife (talk) 21:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Onecentlife: I would think you are a paid editor, then, although that is not a clear-cut case. If you want a more definite answer, the best I could advise is to ask for input at this specialized noticeboard; but is it really worth the hassle?
Assuming you are indeed subject to the paid-editing rules, you are not forbidden to edit, but you need to make the mandatory disclosure. Following Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure#How to disclose, you should either make an unambiguous statement on your user page (the current text seems a bit ambiguous to me, I would encourage you to use the standardized template {{paid}} instead) or on the talk page of every article you edit.
Also, there is no exemption for the culture sector. Regarding Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Library/Cultural_Professionals, it does not contradict the terms of use that forbid undisclosed paid editing (even if it did, the terms of use would overrule it). What it says is that teachers, university professors etc. are usually not considered paid editors even though outreach and vulgarization are part of their general work duties because there is no specific instruction from their employer to edit Wikipedia or to write/speak about precise topics. I would add that academic jobs have extremely fuzzy boundaries between work and non-work duties; PR employees rarely write about how great BigCorp's products are in their blogs during weekends, but many academics have vulgarization blogs even without career incentives. Whether an intern in academia editing during "work hours" (again, a fuzzy concept in academia) is a paid editor or not probably depends on intricate details of how closely their supervisor(s) follow them and what instructions they give.
Paid or not, you have a conflict of interest, and therefore should refrain from potentially controversial edits. If you are unsure, err on the side of caution. For possibly-controversial edits, propose the change on the article's talk page in a "change X to Y" edit and slap the template {{request edit}}, someone else will review the change and perform it (or decline and give you a reason for that).
Finally, could you could give a look at how to indent your replies to other posts?
Now that the unpleasant stuff is out of the way: welcome! Academia-oriented profiles usually do well on Wikipedia because the (arguably) most important principle of Wikipedia, citing your sources, is also a bedrock of academic research. TigraanClick here to contact me 22:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Tigraan (talk · contribs), for the advice on all of this, including indentations. I'm still learning, obviously. I was trying to find a template for COIs, but was having trouble with that too, so I appreciate the link. I guess the best thing will just be to proceed slowly and see how it goes. Obviously I'm not looking to do anything problematic on here, and I will certainly disclose whenever I edit! Thanks again. Onecentlife (talk) 23:04, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Onecentlife: There is a specific project for contributors connected to Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums, see WP:GLAM, where you are most welcome to participate. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 23:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago 'L' articles

A couple of IPs (presumably the same person) seem to be going through all the Chicago 'L' stations and changing all the buses to be in monospace font (e.g. Jackson station (CTA Red Line), Chicago station (CTA Brown and Purple Lines)); in the latter case, they've also changed references to other lines to use a coloured template that I think is intended for line diagrams. I'm pretty sure I'm right that this is all inconsistent with WP:MOS and should be reverted, but I wanted to check that was the right thing to do before I go ahead and revert basically every contribution two users have made. YorkshireLad (talk) 20:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@YorkshireLad: I agree the nowiki tags should be removed, but the rest of the edit looks fine to me (or at least, it should be inspected carefully rather than reverted in bulk).
You should really try talking to them, though I am not sure how. That diff is from an IPv6 with four edits in a 10-min window, so the IP address is changing and they cannot be reached via user talk pages. My best guess would be to open discussion somewhere central (is there a Chicago public transportation Wikiproject?), and point to it through edit summaries and hidden wiki comments in the source text. TigraanClick here to contact me 21:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited an article and incorrectly marked my edit as not minor. What should I do?

Theanswertolifetheuniverseandeverything (talk) 21:01, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't sweat it. GMGtalk 21:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:03, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changing category names

need to be changed so that "liberated" is lower case. I think I saw once a tool that would change all the members of the categories. Would someone (preferably) take care of this, or tell me how to do it. Thanks. deisenbe (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

​You can list these at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion#Speedy_renaming_and_merging and someone will run a bot to fix them. – Thjarkur (talk) 21:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I deal with copy right form fill-ins for 17th and 18th century images.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Etymology_of_Chicago?action=edit&veswitched=1

I'm working in both source editor and visual editor on my Draft of The Etymology of Chicago. I'm trying to upload and use on my article 17th and 18th century image documents, and the (1) prompts asks for day/month and I have only the year, but putting the year only is not accepted. (2) when asked if I own the copyright, I say no, and the default goes to ask "info about copy right owner" -- there is none. These images are public domain. In some of the forms I fill in, there is a public domain option, which I check, but I seem to be going in circle.(3) I understand that uploading my images to Wiki Commons is a good thing for the wider community. I've tried that too. Carl — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carl J. Weber (talk • contribs) 2020-03-03T21:37:44 (UTC)

Try the Wikimedia upload wizard: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard You can definitely upliad with year only. Look at my uploads: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/Deisenbe&ilshowall=1 deisenbe (talk) 23:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I fix an article?

I am a board member for the Transcultural Exchange and I and the TCE director, Mary Sherman, are currently trying to fix 2 pages in Wikipedia that have been flagged with this notice:

"This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require clean-up to comply with Wikipedia's content policies. (November 2019)"

The articles were written for pay - we didn't know that it needed to be disclosed, nor that it is not allowed. In trying now to correct this, we find that we are unable to reach the author, who seems to have gone out of business. The articles were written and published in 2015.

Here are the urls of the pages:

How can we fix this? All of the information is factual and adheres to wikipedia's guidelines. Srcohen614 (talk) 22:09, 3 March 2020 (UTC)Srcohen614[reply]

Hi Srcohen614. You can find out more specifics in Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, but basically you shouldn't try and remove those notices yourself. The content may certainly be factual, but whether it adhere's to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines is probably best left for someone else to assess. The first thing you should do is probably declare your conflict of interest; ideally, you should do this both on your userpage and the relevant article's talk page (using Template:Connected contributor), but you should be fine as long as you do so at either of those two places. Then, you can make an edit request as explained in Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide#Steps for engagement. Just explain the situation and ask for the templates to be removed. You request will be added to a queue and someone will eventually answer it. If too much time passes and nobody answers your request, you can ask for assistance at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. If you remember the username of the account of the editor who created the page for you, you can add Template:Connected contributor (paid) to the top of talk page of the relevant article(s) they created, and that should further help to clarify things. You can also post a not on that account's user talk page to let them know about the situation because even that person might still be using the account to edit (perhaps for a different company) and letting them know about things might help them avoid any future problems. There's no guarantee they will respond or do anything, but they might appreciate the heads up.
Please be very careful, however, about reveling any person information about others on Wikipedia or trying to connect an account to a specific person as explained here, and also try and remember that Wikipedia is in the real world and that everything you post is publicly there for anyone and everyone to see. In general, it's best to refer to other editors by their usernames as much as possible and limit the discussion to their Wikipedia activities.
Finally, you might want to suggest to Ms. Sherman that she take a look at Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Relationship between the subject, the article, and Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Ownership of content for reference for information on what options she has regarding the article Wikipedia written about her. You may want to look at those pages as well. The thing to remember is that Wikipedia articles are written about a subject, not for or on behalf of a subject, and that neither the subject or the creator of the article has have final editorial control over the article's content. Content will be assessed to see whether it's in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and anything not OK can be revised so that it is or removed altogether at any time. Subjects or articles are not entirely helpless when it comes to Wikipedia, but they are going to be expected to adhere to relevant policies and guidelines just like everyone else and their are procedures put into place to help them do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:46, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Srcohen614: You seem to have asked about this before at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1050#"Undisclosed payment" notice and your response seemed to imply that you had cleared things up. Is there now something in the answers given to your previous question that you don't understand? — Marchjuly (talk) 00:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) OK, this is a mess. Housekeeping note: both pages were indeed created in 2015. Special:Contributions/88.73.14.92 has substantial edits to both pages, so I do not think WP:G5 applies (and even if it did, it would be better to do the WP:BEFORE and AfD instead, because the pages look decent).
@Srcohen614: first of all, you should make your own paid disclosure before editing further. To do so, click User:Srcohen614 to create your user page, copy-pasting the magic text {{paid|Transcultural Exchange}} should produce an adequate disclosure. (All this assumes that your position as board member is paid, but if TCE can pay someone to write a Wikipedia article, I assume they pay their board members.) Be also warned that user accounts are single-person-use, so Mary Sherman should not be editing through the same account (and she should make the paid disclosure on her own account).
It is no surprise that the author went out of business; their user account Muhammad Ali Khalid was blocked because of undisclosed paid editing. Although it was their responsability to do so, you can declare the payments after the fact. The high-level explanation is at WP:DISCLOSEPAY. For the more technical: if you were directly paying that editor rather than an agency, copy-paste {{Connected contributor (paid)}} on the talk pages of both articles (that is, at Talk:Mary Sherman (artist) and Talk:TransCultural Exchange). If you were paying an agency, copy-paste {{Connected contributor (paid)}} (with the appropriate substitution).
After making those disclosures, you should really not remove the tags yourself, since you have a conflict of interest. Now that you posted on a decently-visible page, someone will likely come and remove them if they judge the problem was addressed.
Regarding the adherence to Wikipedia's guidelines, although I see no promotional language, I am not entirely sure that the references demonstrate the topics meet Wikipedia's "notability" requirement. The short version is that a topic is suitable for a Wikipedia article only if it has been talked/written about at length by multiple reliable sources independent of it. Both articles have many sources, but those I checked are insufficient. For instance, ref 5 of the MS article has only one paragraph about MS's art, so it fails the "at length" requirement; all interviews fail the "independent" requirement. Notability is only supported by sources meeting all three criteria (discusses at length, reliable, independent) so a thousand sources lacking one of the three does not replace one source having all three (see WP:BOMBARD).
I intend to perform a more thorough check of the sources at some point in the near future, and if I find nothing sufficient I will nominate the articles for deletion. In the meanwhile (or after the nomination), if you do have sources meeting all three criteria, please post them. TigraanClick here to contact me 23:09, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for Rollback and PCR

Hi, I had been a temporary rollbacker for a month and a half now, and I'd just been granted the pending changes reviewer right. I'd like to know if I see vandalism by an editor and I undid or rollbacked (using Twinkle or not) his edits, would the edit after the undo be automatically accepted, or would I have to manually accept it. Thanks! tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message) 00:47, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting the social handles of Urdu Wikipedia verified

Hello, I want to ask on behalf of the Urdu Wikipedia community about getting a blue tick on the social handles of Urdu Wikipedia. I've seen the handles of Arabic Wikipedia verified so far. Get the Urdu Wikipedia official social media handles a blue tick. We are on facebook, instagram and twitter @UrduWikipedia. Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 05:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @AaqibAnjum:, you should raise this question directly in an appropriate forum on the Urdu Wikipedia. All language-specific projects are autonomous, and we on English Wikipedia usually can't help you with questions regarding other Wikis. Also, please do not post the same question in multiple forums like Teahouse and Help desk at once. Thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 07:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

what is musical notability criteria

Hello why my article is rejected multiple times saying musical notability criteria is not met — Preceding unsigned comment added by DipSagarregmi12 (talk • contribs) 08:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy: Submitted and declined as User:DipSagarregmi12/sandbox and as Draft:Raman Regmi. Creator has been directed to music notability criteria. David notMD (talk) 09:12, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HIDE USERNAME

How to hide title of the page or username? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1008rajpuranalas (talk • contribs) 09:05, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@1008rajpuranalas: Why would you want to do that? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain how I edit the information about the school I work for?

Hello

I have never edited the information about our school on Wikepedia and would like to do so eg exam results are for 2012 and we are not non-selective.

Thank you.

Holly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.246.163.233 (talk) 09:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Overwrite or delete existing media file

Hello,

Playing in my "sandbox" before editing the real Wikipedia page, I have accidentally uploaded a far too low resolution version of a video. But I do not know how to overwrite or remove the bad one. I really want to remove it. It's not in any article, not even on the sandbox page.

How to remove HuygensMaintaining.ogg ?

Help welcome.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&oldid=943864958"