Wikipedia:Teahouse

Eman235, 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

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

I am perplexed how to correct significant errors of omission regarding my life work.

I check the Wiki page written about me each year out of curiosity, and each year there remain significant omissions of the honors and awards I've received in my career, not the least of which is my involvement in the founding of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985. I am 80 years old now, and at the die is cast for my career. But Wiki's accounting of it omits significant material- all verifiable- about my work. I understand I can't edit this myself. Is there anything I can do to correct the Wiki record? Henry Abraham MD (talk) 18:10, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Unless you can provide facts that what you have done meets Wikipedia:Notability Then there is not much we can do to push your articles forward.Td^she/her 18:15, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Henry Abraham MD, welcome to the Teahouse. I see you've already found the talk page - Talk:Henry David Abraham - and made an edit request in the past. If you want to add more information to the article, accompanied by appropriate sources, please make further edit requests. Keep them short and easy to accomplish ("Add the following sentence: [X] to this section: [Y] cited to this source: [Z]") and they'll probably get done relatively quickly. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:17, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your rapid reply. I'll try doing what you've advised.

Best, Dr Abraham Henry Abraham MD (talk) 18:22, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

I just checked the site. It looks like an editor made the Nobel addition. Thank you for your help.

Dr Abraham Henry Abraham MD (talk) 18:30, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

also building off of what they said make sure to follow Wikipedia:Neutral point of view so that your edits don't get reverted. Have a great time editing Wikipedia! Td^she/her 18:19, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

As pointed out by the IP above and in policy at WP:COIEDIT, subjects of articles are strongly discouraged from editing their own pages directly. Edit requests on the talk page are the proper way to get the article changed. WPscatter ^t/_c 18:41, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Henry Abraham MD The 1985 Nobel Peace Prize was to the organization IPPPNW. You may have been an initial member, but none of the reporting named you as a co-founder. David notMD (talk) 22:25, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Dear "David notMD":

I'm grateful for your quick reply and appreciate your desire for precise language in reporting. For the record, I was a co-author of IPPNW's constitution along with John Pastore, among other roles. For verification, kindly see Lown, Bernard. Prescription for Survival, p. 184, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco, 2008. Additional verification of my participation in the Nobel ceremony is on my website, HenryAbrahamMD.com, which includes a photo of the Americans involved in forming IPPNW (a much younger version of me is in the center holding the Peace medal), reports of my involvement at the awarding of the Prize that appeared in the American and Norwegian presses, and the text of my invited address in Trondheim following the ceremony. I am happy to supply any or all of these consistent with the rules of Wiki. Sincerely, Henry Abraham MD Henry Abraham MD (talk) 23:15, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Except that as I already noted on article TP, there was a C-Span citation which was deleted by another editor, which then left the claim bare which caused Nobel Peace Prize section deletion. I'm trying to avoid citing from the subject's own website for verifiability. Still working on this. TeeVeeed (talk) 14:36, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello Doctor Abraham. Can you maybe please join the Talk Page [[1]] again for the article? I am trying to improve it. thank you. TeeVeeed (talk) 14:57, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

"Pinging" Abraham via Henry Abraham MD. He will see this if he logs in to his account. David notMD (talk) 10:19, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Dear David notMD:

I am learning the lingo. Pinging- the same as emailing me? If so, it worked. The editor, TeeVeeed, requested verification of items for the Wiki page covering my career. I will offer TeeVeeed citations from the media and professional journals via Talk.

Thanks for staying on this.

Henry Abraham MD Henry Abraham MD (talk) 13:54, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Adding another name for a species in an article

Greetings! I've been editing on this site for a long time, and one thing that I still do not understand the guidelines for adding multiple names for a single species (i.e. european marten, iranian leopard). I would like to know the guidelines for doing so, since I am under the assumption that for a species, it does not have to be sourced/widely used. I am still learning everyday, so I will inevitably be prone to making mistakes. Much appreciated. Firekong1 (talk) 16:44, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Firekong1, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you don't get an answer here to this rather specialized question, it might be worth asking at WT:WikiProject Tree of Life. ColinFine (talk) 17:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

I see. Thank you very much!

Firekong1 (talk) 17:32, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

I must say I never really understood the species naming either. Most of the articles we have on various species seem to violate WP:COMMONNAME by being titled according to a Latin taxonomic name instead of the commonly used name. @Firekong1: I would go by the WP:COMMONNAME guideline. If it turns out to be a wrong decision, the title can always be changed easily. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:25, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

I feel the same way, and given that subjects pertaining to science are continually bound to change, and that an individual organism can have multiple common names, I don't exactly understand why we always need sources for multiple names on species. But if many articles violate this rule, then there should be no reason why adding multiple common names would be against the rules. In addition, the statement in question pertains to common names in articles rather than titles. However, I understand the guidelines and I will follow them accordingly.

Firekong1 (talk) 19:23, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

For one thing, common names and scientific names don't always match up one to one. The same common name may be used for multiple species. And multiple common names may be used for the same species. As for Firekong's question on "why we always need sources for multiple names on species", the answer is the same as for why we need sources for anything. We need to show that this "common name" isn't just something the person adding it made up on the spot. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 10:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

My IP address was blocked

My IP address was blocked for no clear reason, or no chance to reveal my issues and intentions. I cannot even send them any messages. This is my IP address (165

Bushra Tughar (talk) 20:46, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Bushra Tughar, welcome to the Teahouse. I reverted a link added to your message by an IP - not sure what's going on there, since you say you're IP blocked. You appear to be able to post here using your account. You're blocked on ar.wiki; are they the ones who've blocked your IP? There's nothing we can do about it on English Wikipedia, if that's the case. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:55, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

is it possible to write in English her on this site, and then publish the article in more than English language?



Bushra Tughar (talk) 21:00, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

@Bushra Tughar, English Wikipedia only hosts articles written in English. Other language Wikipedias host articles written in those languages. You can use whatever language you like in draft space as you're working on an article, either translating to or from English (or the local language), but once you go to publish, it must be in the language appropriate for the wiki you're publishing on. You cannot write an article here and then somehow get it published on ar.wiki, if that's what you're asking, no matter the language. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:06, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

I think the IP address changes all the time. There should be a way to challenge the block.Cwater1 (talk) 23:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@Cwater1 Some IP addresses change frequently, and some don't. Mine seems to stay the same for a month, then change to something else for six months, then three months (kind of at random). Mine is cable internet, but my old DSL used to do about ths same. David10244 (talk) 05:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

New to Wikipedia - tried to enter valid information which was misinterpreted as some kind of web hosting

Noting that another ISO Technical Committee (ISO/TC 176 Quality Management) provided information about its work on Wikipedia, the ISO Technical Committee with which I work, ISO/TC 260 Human Resource Management decided it would be important to present information in Wikipedia and developed information-only article about the work and benefit to stakeholders all over the world. It was not a web hosting or marketing piece. However, I may have misunderstood the words "private sandbox". As I was entering information, before I could even finish initial entering of the text (no opportunity to even proofread), a popup "speedy deletion" occurred. Then, I clicked to contest the speedy deletion and explain. I wrote one sentence and another popup said everything I wrote was deleted because it was of no use. Here is the link to ISO/TC 260 HRM which is the main webhost https://www.iso.org/committee/628737.html (same, by the way for ISO/TC 176, which Wikipedia allows to publish and the factual information we were trying to post is completely congruent with the type of information that ISO/TC 176 posted). So, I'm confused. Doesn't Wikipedia want encyclopedia type information about what is happening in the world to benefit others? The reason ISO/TC 260 HR Management decided to post on Wikipedia is because the organization develops international standards and we noted some confusion about this in the market place. Our goal was to help ameliorate those gaps by providing factual information (with links to same). Instead, we were deemed for speedy deletion. Sadly, I posted on the Talk Page to try to get help and my request for help --similar to the above--was immediately deleted as inappropriate. Inappropriate in what way? I am completely confused. Any suggestions? Hope to hear from someone. Kind regards, Lorelei Carobolante Lcarobo (talk) 22:52, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't really do "private sandboxes". If you commit an edit to Wikipedia's servers, anyone can see it provided they know where to look. The reason it was deleted is because it was seen as misuse of Wikipedia as a website hosting service - which, if the material was overly-detailed, would explain why it was seen as such. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:02, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

OH - that was my misunderstanding then "private sandbox" is actually publishing out. So, we should have consulted a Wikipedia editor to review the page before pasting it? Is there any resource on Wikipedia to help us present relevant information, which seems to directly align with Wikipedia goals? We thought factual, informational detail was required/desired. One reason for confusion: ISO/TC 176 has a Wikipedia page that includes more detail then we had written (at the time, in the middle of a sentence, before it was finished, it was already--and is now--completely deleted). 2600:1700:C1C0:1300:81E6:2017:4074:FFCE (talk) 23:06, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Your login seems to have lapsed. Log back in real quick. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:09, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

The main thing you need to bear in mind is that Wikipedia articles really shouldn't be massive lists of technical info impenetrable to Joe Blow from San Antonio. Our audience is the average person, and they're mainly going to be looking for a brief bit of background information, with links/citations to more detailed resources they can then peruse at their leisure. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:13, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

OH - apologies - my misunderstanding. We thought we needed to substantiate all information (thus--too detailed). So, are we allowed to start over? Or, once deleted, my login isn't allowed to try to repost more generally? It is curious, though, that our counter part committee ISO/TC 176 ISO/TC 176 Wikipedia has same type of information. Only difference seems to be that their keywords tend to link to Wikipedia page definitions. Is their page a good example, in you opinion? Thank you very much for your feedback. Lcarobo (talk) 23:17, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Given that ISO/TC 176 bears a message at the top advising that the article needs cleanup because it doesn't meet quality standards, I would not hold it up as an example to be emulated, no. MrOllie (talk) 23:42, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Oh my - I see that now. Well noted and will do. There is a good case for providing factual information about why ISO international standards are important -- how they help organizations and society at large but in less technical explanatory terms (as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:J%C3%A9sk%C3%A9_Couriano clarified). Advertising is certainly not our intent; clarifying and providing information is the intent. Thank you for your feedback. 2600:1700:C1C0:1300:81E6:2017:4074:FFCE (talk) 00:08, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Who is "we" or "Our"? Wikipedia accounts are not allowed to be shared per the TOS. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 23:46, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

ISO/TC 260 HRM -- https://www.iso.org/committee/628737.html ISO is a nonprofit organization https://www.iso.org/about-us.html and its Technical Committees include experts from around the world who volunteer their time to develop consensus based international standards and technical specifications. The "we" and "our" should have been "ISO/TC 260 HRM registered experts" (volunteers who contribute to ISO international standards development). 2600:1700:C1C0:1300:81E6:2017:4074:FFCE (talk) 00:12, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

I presume he's using it in the sense of "I'm speaking on behalf of my technical committee" rather than "My account is shared". —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:13, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Correct (except that I am a "she") :) -- I am speaking on behalf of my technical committee, correct. 2600:1700:C1C0:1300:81E6:2017:4074:FFCE (talk) 00:16, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

You need to log in again. Alright fair enough. I always have to make sure. You would be surprised how often I come across accounts that have promotional usernames and imply that they are shared. I don't like having to get an editor blocked because they were using a shared account. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:33, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you - actually my user name is really my name, shortened (Lcarobo for Lorelei Carobolante).

Since I am so new to Wikipedia, and may have gotten overwhelmed reading so many articles about creating a new page/article, etc. Using the comments above, I would like to try again. Do I just login and start over or since my first attempt was "speedy deletion" (stopped before I could finish writing, likely because I was going in the wrong direction), or do I need to get someone's permission to start over? Thank you again. Lcarobo (talk) 00:55, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

@Lcarobo: Actually you don't necessarily need to create a new account to just "start over" (or am I misunderstanding what you are saying?). You can simply just continue making constructive edits. If you want to do that however then I recommend you read WP:CLEANSTART. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:00, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf - There is nothing left to edit. All that I wrote was deleted under the "speedy deletion" - so I do need to start over. Great - I will read CLEANSTART. It seems like I still have an account (I am logged in now) but the page looks like what it did before I started attempting to write my first article/page. Thank you, again. Lcarobo (talk) 01:07, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

@Lcarobo: No problem! II would note that here on Wikipedia we have articles about things that have been determiend to be notable via reliable, secondary sources not connected to the subject. Writing an article as the very first thing you do is one of the most difficult things to do (heck I've been on Wikipedia for almost 2 years and I"ve only ever written 2 articles) so it's often suggested you make other edits first to get familiar with the process of editing and how articles should look. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:10, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf Good idea - I can see opportunities to edit terminology/topics (e.g., human resources, human resource management). WOW - 2 years! OK - well, the reason the Technical Committee ISO/TC 260 HR Management wanted me to write an article for Wikipedia is because there seems to be so much misinformation or incomplete information about the consensus-based ISO international standards development process. So, we wanted to provide facts to help clarify (clearly too many facts and too technical though...lesson learned). OK - thank you very much for the suggestion. Lcarobo (talk) 01:23, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello Lcarobo I have pinged the responsible admin, and wrote an explanation why the sandbox should be "refunded" or undeleted. The page "private sandbox" was possibly what misled them. Please do not get discouraged. Your draft box should be a reasonable place to make good faith test/prep edits, without worrying about speedy deletion. On Wikipedia articles themselves, others have given you good advice about WP:TECHNICAL. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:17, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Shushugah Well noted and will do. Thank you. Also, I'll try to make uninterrupted time so that I can complete it in one go instead of stopping and restarting. That may help, too--so that people see I am actually working on it? Thank you Lcarobo (talk) 01:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

I cannot reply to @Cullen328 (states not allowed). Just to clarify, I should hope that what I wrote will be "undeleted"/refunded so that I can edit that. Cleanstart would not help me because I want to write about ISO standards and am qualified to do so. Feedback below suggests, too, that while I can identify ISO/TC 260 HRM, the Wikipedia article should be about published sources that discuss the ISO standard but are entirely independent of ISO (so, not articles by ISO.org but something about them -- example of a posting on the US Security and Exchange Commission about ISO 30414 https://www.sec.gov/comments/4-711/4711-5453156-184911.pdf and what that could mean cause/effect in short-term and longer term future), correct? Lcarobo (talk) 01:31, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Lcarobo, you do not need a clean start. and doing that would be a mistake because it would forbid you from ever writing about ISO standards ever again. What you need to do is study the General notability guideline and Your first article. Read and study and click on the links. A Wikipedia article about an ISO standard should not be based on what ISO or its people say about the standard. Instead, it should summarize what reliable published sources entirely independent of the ISO say about the standard. Cullen328 (talk) 01:21, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Lcarobo, I do not know why you wrote that you cannot reply to me, since you just did. The PDF you linked to is not an independent source. It was written by an ISO committee chairperson. An acceptable Wikipedia article must summarize what people entirely unconnected with the ISO have written about the standard. Journalists and academics, for example. Cullen328 (talk) 01:44, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 must have been a connection glitch because I tried to click on "reply" to your first post and it rejected/not allowed to reply. So, I clicked reply to the post above it-- and it came to you as a reply. Good. Still learning. The writer was a former ISO committee chair person (no current or former)--completely unconnected. Something like these? https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJQSS-04-2020-0065/full/html (academic -ish) or https://www.visier.com/blog/top-10-strategic-hr-ta-metrics/ (more like an independent article)? Or either? Just to clarify. Thank you, kindly. Lcarobo (talk) 01:57, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Lcarobo, at first glance, the first source looks OK. Personally, I am not conversant with the current reliable published sources in this area of study. I got my degree in a closely related field 40 years ago, and have worked in other areas ever since. That article has a reference list that may well lead to other reliable sources. Sources like "ISO 9001: 2015 – a questionable reform: what should the implementing organisations understand and do?" and " and "In Pursuit of Quality: The Case against ISO 9000" are potentially the type of sources that would help ensure the Neutral point of view, which is a core content policy . The second source, however, is clearly not a reliable source. It is an unsigned blog post from a commercial venture that sells software. That is pretty much the opposite of a reliable source. Cullen328 (talk) 03:57, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Thank you and well noted - I thought the first looked reliable/neutral, evidence-based. I'm very unfamiliar with blogs, although they often seem connected to commercial ventures it seems (I didn't notice that until you mentioned it - of course, not neutral). If, though, for example a magazine or other professional article presents information on an ISO group of work or standard, that could be accepted (e.g., HBR, TD, SHRM, CIPD, etc.)? However, if Deloitte writes about it https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/finance/us-advisory-discovery-quality-management.pdf although Deloitte is not connected with ISO, since Deloitte is ISO 9001 certified, it would NOT be a neutral source, correct? Just trying to understand. Thank you. Lcarobo (talk) 04:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

@Lcarobo Many companies are ISO 9001 certified. As a fairly new editor, I don't think that disqualifies a publication from that company that is about ISO standards. David10244 (talk) 04:44, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Lcarobo, I am not in a position to fully evaluate the relationship between Deloitte and ISO Human Resource Management standards. A topic area expert should delve into that. In one sense, Deloitte has a good reputation. On the other hand, it is a gigantic multinational corporation that generates fabulous wealth for its senior managers and largest investors, by providing consulting, accounting and legal services to other giant corporations. The Arthur Andersen experience shows that such accounting and consulting companies can somtimes be hollow inside. Cullen328 (talk) 04:56, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 At this point, I am unsure how to proceed. Someone requested that the "deleter" of my "private sandbox" (not private at all) please "undelete" me so that I could wipe off everything I wrote and start over. Apparently, the deleting authority did not reply (I just logged in to see the same deleted message). Someone else posted that, as a result of my mistake/penalty, I am blocked from ever posting about ISO again. So, it seems my only option is to share the experience with my ISO committee and encourage someone else to try to post the well-intentioned, neutral and independent information. Indeed, Deloitte, PWC, BDO, Accenture, EY and other large consulting firms seem to have excellent reputations. ISO, a nonprofit, is and has always prioritized developing relevant international standards to help organizations of all sizes, industry sectors and growth phases (saving significant amount of consulting money, since they are all developed on a consensus basis by experts in the various fields of the standards (by the way, the experts are unpaid volunteers who strive to make a positive difference within their focus areas). :) Anyway, thank you --difficult lesson but certainly one I will not forget and continue to learn from. Thank you very much for taking time to thoughtfully respond to my queries. Lcarobo (talk) 14:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Lcarobo, your description of what "someone" told you is not plausible. I have posted on your talk page. Cullen328 (talk) 16:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328, they meant that they couldn't reply to your post using the reply function, which is indeed broken in that particular post for reasons explained in this thread at VPT. There may eventually be a fix. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:37, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Fascinating, IP editor. Thank you. It seems that the interim solution is to place the outdent tag and then begin a new line to ping another editor. I will try to remember that. I mostly edit on smartphones and use outdent when heavily indented text gets hard to read because the column is so narrow. Cullen328 (talk) 16:55, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Is this a conflict of interest?

I'm interested in creating an article for a database framework. The company that develops it is my former employer. I've found several independent reliable sources that seem to constitute notability, and I have no vested interest nor anything to gain from unduly promoting it, nor do I wish to disparage them. Do I need to disclose this? And if so, how can I disclose it so that the draft reviewers will see it? WPscatter ^t/_c 09:24, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

yes you do using the COI wizard. someone else will link it i hope. 2006toyotacorrola (talk) 10:55, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

@2006toyotacorrola: I am not aware of the existence of any "COI wizard". Nothing of the sort is listed at WP:COI either. I strongly suspect no such tool exists. In the future, please avoid "someone else will link it I hope" comments - either do the work of finding the link yourself, or refrain from posting entirely.

@Wpscatter: While it is not mandatory to disclose it, it is highly encouraged. Use one of the three options listed at WP:DCOI to do it. As "former employer" is a somewhat distant COI, I do not think you have much restraint to exercise about what edits you make. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:54, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

i meant the edit wizard 2006toyotacorrola (talk) 13:54, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard is the thing to do it with 2006toyotacorrola (talk) 13:56, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

@2006toyotacorrola No, the Edit Request Wizard is not how you declare a COI. David10244 (talk) 07:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

oh i thought that was, nevermind 2006toyotacorrola (talk) 08:03, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Wholesale replacement of an article?

A non-technologically adept friend of mine has written his own version of an already existing wiki. The page is actually on him so he figures he's the best person to update it.

He made some initial changes to the page, which were reverted, and eventually got locked out because he didn't realize that he had to put references in. He's since given me the updated copy (with references included) and has asked me to update the page. Would it be fine if I essentially copied his words wholesale and replaced the already existing text? Thanks! CuriousConservator (talk) 03:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@CuriousConservator: no. don't edit the article.

declare your conflict of interest.

if you want to request changes to the article, you must create an edit request on the talk page of the article.

and may i know which article you are talking about? lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみ, ping me when replying 05:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi! Here's the page in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Gray_(Australian_magistrate)

Should I declare my specific involvement in the COI, or that the text I'm replacing is written by him? CuriousConservator (talk) 05:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@CuriousConservator: declare your conflict of interest on your user page (it's User:Curious Conservator), and you should say that the text was written by him in the edit request. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみ, ping me when replying 05:47, 20 October 2022 (UTC )

CuriousConservator, 22 different editors have worked on that article. Why would you propose to wipe out their work and replace it with text that the subject of the article has written? The subject should not be editing that article at all, even through a proxy like you. When you write he figures he's the best person to update it, that is exactly the opposite of how Wikipedia operates. We summarize reliable published sources that are entirely independent of the topic of the article. A person cannot possibly be independent of themself. Cullen328 (talk) 08:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

The view history for Ian Gray (Australian magistrate) shows no evidence of edits being reverted. Please confirm this is the article. David notMD (talk) 10:45, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I'll have a look myself. He didn't actually do it in front of me but told me afterwards that he had tried correcting a couple of things (His year of birth is wrong, and he wanted to add that he's now a memeber of the Order of Australia). At the time, it looked like he didn't create a Wikipedia account and just tried to edit it without doing so. I'm not every experienced with wikipedia editing so I'm not sure if that makes a difference. CuriousConservator (talk) 21:02, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

How do you undo Drafts?

How do I undo the deletion of Draft:Track and field in the United States. So I can restart a new article? Dwanyewest (talk) 03:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@dwanyewest: go to wikipedia:requests for undeletion/G13, press the button, enter the draft title, and press "make request". lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみ, ping me when replying 04:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dwanyewest. As an administrator, I can read deleted content. That was an extraordinarily poor quality draft with no useful prose content. Instead of trying to restore it, I recommend that you do your best to write a fresh, well-referenced draft from scratch. Any administrator would be happy to accept a high quality draft. Some of the articles in Category:Track and field in the United States may be useful to you. Cullen328 (talk) 08:19, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Redirect for "Raj Mehta'

Hi. I searched about film director Raj Mehta but his Wikipedia page is redirected 1 to movie Good Newwz. I think he is now notable enough to have his own Wikipedia page. He has directed hit movies like Good Newwz, Jugjugg Jeeyo and Ajeeb Daastaans. He also wrote the dialogues of Good Newwz. Previously he assisted in movies like Badrinath Ki Dulhania and Kapoor & Sons. He was also nominated by Filmfare Awards for Best Debut Director. My question is how do we remove the redirect? Thanks. Fifthapril (talk) 05:02, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@fifthapril: for a person to have an article, they must be notable by wikipedia standards. this means that you must at least two or three have reliable sources that cover the person significantly. directing and assisting in movies, and being nominated for awards, means nothing for wikipedia notability if there are no sources that document those events. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみ, ping me when replying 05:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Lettherebedarklight. Thank you for the feedback. I appreciate it. I asked the question because the person is notable now and we can find reliable sources. A few of them are here 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. Thanks. Fifthapril (talk) 06:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@fifthapril: none of your sources prove raj mehta's notability. note that interviews do not contribute towards someone's notability, as they are not independent.

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
1	is an interview with the subject	? moot	? moot	✘ No
2	is an interview with the subject	? moot	? moot	✘ No
3	is an interview with the subject	? moot	? moot	✘ No
4		? moot	article is mostly about the film, only mentions raj mehta as the director of the film and his role in dharma productions and good newwz	✘ No
5	is an interview with the subject	? moot	? moot	✘ No
6	is an interview with the subject	? moot	? moot	✘ No
7	is an interview with the subject	? moot	? moot	✘ No
8	is an interview with the subject	? moot	? moot	✘ No
9		? moot	talks about raj mehta only as the director for selfiee, and his announcements about it	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみ, ping me when replying 08:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@Lettherebedarklight Thank you for the assessment. There are more references available and will share it. Thanks again for the feedback. I appreciate it. Fifthapril (talk) 07:23, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Adding Company in renowned list of comapnies

Need to add Kellton in the list of Indian IT Companies. Kellton is one of the IT companies headquartered in Hyderabad and offices in Gurgaon, Lucknow, USA, Europe. Recently this company has been awarded as top 10 Software Development Companies In India 2023 by Outlook magazine. You can view the article source: https://www.outlookindia.com/outlook-spotlight/top-10-software-development-companies-in-india-2023-news-227565

Let me know if its possible to add this company into the wiki list of top Indian IT companies. Aniket1508 (talk) 05:47, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Aniket1508. List of Indian IT companies is not protected. Anyone can edit it, including you. You do not need advance approval. Cullen328 (talk) 06:32, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

"Characters in the Mario franchise" intro

Would anyone be able to help me with rewriting the intro for the Characters in the Mario franchise article? It's a bit lengthy and also needs to have the list criterion incorporated into its prose. Any help or advice on this would be appreciated. Landfish7 (talk) 07:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

what'd you like some help with? i'll try 2006toyotacorrola (talk) 08:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Also look at WT:VG, it may be worth asking for help there. - X201 (talk) 08:15, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Publishing a Text Revision on an en.Wikipedia webpage without 'damaging' the existing "Notes"

For some weeks now I have left a "Proposed Text Revision" with 21 additional new “Notes” on en.Wikipedia's "No. 25 Squadron RAAF" Talk page.

The proposed revision has not attracted any adverse comment so in the near future I would like to "Publish" the revised text with its additional new "Notes" numbered 1 to 21; please note these additional new "Notes" are intended to supplement the webpage's existing Notes 1 to 10, not replace them.

However, I am genuinely worried that if I do "Publish" my revised text with its numbered additional new "Notes" 1-21 onto the "No. 25 Squadron RAAF" page that doing so will somehow erase completely, or 'alter' the existing references and their number order. I request any advice or help as to how I can prevent adversely affecting the existing "Notes" 1 to 10 in any way.

I hope my use of bold text does not offend in any way; it is purely to clarify my concern. Shellac41 (talk) 11:17, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

• @Shellac41: What you call "notes" are called "references" in Wikipedia-tongue. You should not try to handle the numbering manually; instead, you should list them with the appropriate template (= "magic code"), and the software will do its thing to number them, order them by order of appearance etc.

To learn how to add references, it depends how you are editing. If you are using the visual editor, see the instructions at Help:VisualEditor#Adding_a_new_reference (and the next section) as well. If you are using the source code editor, see Help:Referencing for beginners.

Hopefully, that answers your question. That being said, your edit suggestion at Talk:No. 25 Squadron RAAF is a poorly-formatted wall of text; I am not surprised no editor wanted to look at it. What I would suggest to do is to introduce your modifications by small edits (rather than one gigantic edit).

For instance, you could start by adding in the single sentence and reference Squadron aircraft participated in the protection of convoys ... off WA’s mid-west coast. (1) in the "history" section. Make an edit that only adds this text and reference, and have a look at the final result - does the reference appear correctly? Is the text well-formatted? etc. Don’t worry if you don’t get it right on the first edit - you can do further edits to correct possible mistakes.

If all is fine, move on to the next edit. Start slowly, with maybe one or two edits per day - this way, if someone objects to your edits, they have time to revert you and you can start discussing. If nobody objects, you can ramp up your editing speed. Once you get more familiar with Wikipedia, you will have a feel for what is likely to be disputed or not and adjust accordingly. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 11:53, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the trouble of sending your lengthy advice, it is appreciated.

I have already responded to advice received before I read your advice:

2. I will follow up on the referencing formats as best as I can but I readily admit I am no whiz on the computer nor at understanding all of Wiki's instructions.

3. I mean no offence but if in any way acceptable I would prefer to press on with trying to "Publish" my proposed revision in toto rather than in small segments as you suggest, because (a) one response to my proposed revision has said "These changes look good to me 10:33, 21 August 2022"; (b) aged nearly 80, as an-ex member of No. 25 Squadron would like to try and revise the article in one go as there is no guarantee as to how long I will be around; and (c) I have specifically made one Wiki 'military' administrator aware of my proposed revisions and no adverse comment has been received so I am hoping that means the text is ok.

Thanks again Shellac41 (talk) 13:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Shellac41 and welcome to the Teahouse. The way you have cited your sources on the Talk page is not the way that they are done in Wikipedia articles and you need to read WP:CITE. The main point is that each citation is placed (in articles) between <ref> and </ref> tags. Normally these flank a template such as {{cite book}}. The software automatically re-numbers ALL the references in the article if, say, someone introduces a new reference which happens to be the first one in the text. Wikipedia editors never need to assign these reference/note numbers. Take a look at the editing history of any article and you'll see how the references section has expanded as the article develops. Many of the references from the first draft will stll be present but with new numbers in many cases. So, to proceed, edit your first revision into the main article and check (using "preview") that, indeed, its new reference gets an appropriate number. Proceed to publish when you are happy all is well: if problems arise with the first edit that you don't understand, then seek more help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:38, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Mike

I tried to present my additional new "Notes" following Wiki's format examples under Content 3. What information to include; 3.1 Examples and 3.1.1 to 3.1.4 being books etc on Wikipedia:Citing sources webpage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Books).

Questions:

1. Have I somehow failed to follow those examples correctly in quoting my sources in the proposed revision "Notes"?

2. If I understand your advice correctly, once the additional new "Notes" are considered to be in the correct format if I then "Publish" Wiki will automatically incorporate and renumber where necessary my new additional notes into the existing article without any 'damage' to the existing "Notes"? (In contrast I thought perhaps I might have to do that process manually?)

Thanks again Shellac41 (talk) 12:14, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

As best I can comprehend, on the talk page you have copied the entire article, then added new content - underlined - and below that, your proposed references. To answer your last question, yes, when refs are inserted into the text properly bracketed by ref and /ref inside of < >, the software automatically puts superscripted numbers into the text and the refs listed under References. What you add will also automatically renumber the existing refs. A few suggestions: 1) Use your Sandbox to practice properly creating references. Once the ref works, you then copy it into the article. 2) As advised above, do work piecemeal rather than all at once. 3) For each edit, remember to concisely describe what you did in the Edit summary. David notMD (talk) 12:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

• @Shellac41: You should definitely have a look at the tutorial I linked in my previous answer, but otherwise, I also did the proper formatting of your first reference in this edit. Have a look to understand what changed, and try to reproduce that for your other references.

Note the possibly-confusing difference between where you put the text and where it appears. You put all the reference information (author, title, URL etc.) in a single place in the source. However, in the resulting page, there is only a footnote at that location, and the reference information appears down the page. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, your latest advice looks very helpful. Shellac41 (talk) 13:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks David, I will try and follow all the advice I have received until hopefully I get it right. However, as per my other responses I would really prefer the in toto approach to the revision - I appreciate it is a riskier approach. I also certainly hope my preference does not offend anyone like yourself that has offered help to me.Shellac41 (talk) 13:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

A risk with "in toto" is that an editor who disagrees with several of your many changes may decide to revert everything you did - the en masse "UNDO" being easy to do - rather than look at and decide on each change separately. That editor's Edit summary would not identify what specifically triggered the revert. David notMD (talk) 15:38, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again David for your time and help'

I now realise my good-intentioned but relatively 'un-educated' effort is not as simple and straightforward as I thought.

Sincerely hope I will be able to meet Wiki's standards without causing further inconvenience or angst to others. Shellac41 (talk) 01:46, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Sort categories by rating?

Is there a tool somewhere that would allow me to see the assessment ratings on all the articles in a given category? I guess it would have to be further specified by WikiProject, since different projects will have given different ratings. My specific interest right now is to sort through this list for articles rated C class or lower by Wikiproject Christianity. (It would actually also be useful to see at a glance if there were articles in that list that aren't rated by that Wikiproject, since they all ought to be.) Thanks for any help! Brian (talk) 11:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

• (not a full answer - others, please chime in if you can) I suspect you should ask either at WP:SQLREQ (for a one-time job) or WP:USREQ (for a stable solution), based on the following research.

The standard WikiProject quality table (e.g. Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Christianity_articles_by_quality_statistics) is generated from article categories. Therefore, my idea was a search along the lines of incategory:"Christian ethicists" deepcategory:"C-Class Christianity articles". However, that fails, because while Category:Christian ethicists applies to articles, Category:C-Class Christianity articles applies to the talk page of those articles.

As far as I can tell, there is no way to do a search "article must be in cat A and its talk page must be in cat B" from the basic wikisearch tools.

However, that is probably a rather simple task in terms of programming (get the search for the article, the search for the talk page, do a logical AND, return the list to the user). The only possibly-tricky part might be how to handle diffusing categories, but I have faith the code wizards can solve it. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, @Tigraan! I've posted the request over at WP:USREQ. Brian (talk) 20:22, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

How to find out promotional site?

During article writing we face so many sites, How we can understand

• which site is promotional?

• Which site reference we can add?

Jrovc (talk) 12:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Jrovc, welcome to the Teahouse. The answers to those questions are rather complicated. Here is a lot of reading - WP:Reliable sources, WP:Primary, WP:Independent, WP:NPOV - and here is a shorter, simpler summary: you need to build articles mostly on reliable, published, independent secondary sources, with some additions from non-independent or primary sources. Evaluating which sources are good and which are less good and which are bad is something of an art form. Here is a long list of popular sources which have been evaluated: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#Sources. It's an easy place to start. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer @199.208.172.35 Jrovc (talk) 14:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

first item

Can we create the first item together? Aivirtuous (talk) 13:09, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello Aivirtuous. I'm not sure what you mean by the 'first item'. Please specify. Kpddg ^(talk) 13:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Creating a resource and page, thanks Aivirtuous (talk) 13:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@Aivirtuous, are you asking for help in creating an article here on Wikipedia? Is this about Draft:Çağla Küçükdereli Yoğurtçu? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Aivirtuous. It is not clear what you mean by "a resource". What we create here is encyclopaedia articles - they are a kind of "page", but people who talk about them as "pages" often have a misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is.

Have you read Your first article? ColinFine (talk) 14:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Aivirtuous, the first thing we have to decide about Draft:Çağla Küçükdereli Yoğurtçu is whether its subject is notable. It doesn't cite any sources, but it does list some. They're all in Turkish, so only a reader of Turkish can judge whether they establish her as notable. Maproom (talk) 14:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@Aivirtuous Welcome to Wikipedia editing. Your first language does not appear to be English, since the draft mixes up the nouns "he" and "she" and the possessives "his" and "her" for someone who, judging by their photograph is female. Perhaps you would have more success creating the article on the Turkish-language version of Wikipedia, which would also have the advantage that the reviewers of the draft would be able to confirm that the sources are reliable and independent of the person being written about. Note that here on the English Wikipedia it is not sufficient to supply sources, they must for biographies of living people be used inline (see WP:IC) so that readers can see exactly which source supports each fact stated. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

New editor in chief

I am the PR Director of PEOPLE magazine. I updated the PEOPLE Magazine wiki page with the name of the current editor in chief, Wendy Naugle. Your site took it down because apparently I am not a "reliable source." How do we get the page updated with the accurate information? KoolJool817 (talk) 15:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@KoolJool817 For simple information such as the name of the editor in chief, a citation to the website people.com/somepageorother would suffice. However, I did a quick search and couldn't find such a web URL to use, which was a bit of a surprise. Please provide a reliable alternative source via an {{edit request}} on the Talk Page of the article and someone will make the update. You should not do so yourself owing to a conflict of interest. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Actually, the relevant page is this one I'll make the update in a moment. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:14, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, KoolJool817. I'm afraid that, as somebody with a financial interest in the subject of the article, you are one of the few people in the world who should not edit the article directly.

What you should do is:

1. . Make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor. This is mandatory under Wikipedia's terms of service.
2. . Make an edit request (see that link for details) on the talk page of the article, specifying exactly what change you wish to be made in the article, and giving a reliable published source for the information. (For most kinds of information, this should be a source independent of the magazine, but for the name of an officer, a non-independent source would be acceptable, such as a press release or the magazine's own website. On a quick look, I didn't find it on people.com, and PRNewswire is not regarded as a reliable source)

An uninvolved editor will see your request, and implement it as appropriate.

The reason why you are not a "reliable source" is that you are not published: Verifiability is a core policy. ColinFine (talk) 16:17, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I see Mike Turnbull has found the information (which I didn't) and will do the update for you. Nevertheless, the steps I listed above are the way forward for any further changes you want to make to that article). ColinFine (talk) 16:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

After doing the update, I notice that another editor has realised that the history section of the article is out of date, as it lacks information as to when Naugle became the editor in chief. That's exactly the sort of information which you, @KoolJool817 should provide (via edit request) giving a reliable WP:SECONDARY source for the dates if at all possible. The volunteers here at Wikipedia want articles to be as complete and accurate as possible and will happily work with paid contributors provided the latter stick to our policies and guidelines. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Wendy Naugle was named editor in chief of PEOPLE on September 1, 2022. Here is the official announcement on PR Newswire:

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/wendy-naugle-appointed-editor-in-chief-of-people-301616768.html?tc=eml_cleartime KoolJool817 (talk) 16:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@KoolJool817: Thanks. I suggest you update your own website. https://people.com/author/wendy-naugle/ says she is Deputy Editor. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

We have updated PEOPLE.com with the correct information.

Thank you for updating PEOPLE's Wikipedia page so quickly.

And thank you for being so pleasant about it.

Can't say the same for "Blaze Wolf," who was rather rude.

Best,

Julie Farin KoolJool817 (talk) 18:47, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@KoolJool817: Please remember to comment on content and not contributors. I was only upholding policy as you didn't update the source when you updated the name so it was inaccurate. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

HAVE A NICE DAY. KoolJool817 (talk) 18:51, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Please don't WP:SHOUT either. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm going to suggest that PR Newswire actually is reliable for this purpose, i.e. for uncontroversial claims about the "author" of the press release (as per WP:Perennial Sources#PR_Newswire), in this case, Dotdash Meredith. Fabrickator (talk) 18:39, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Tips and help needed for new article

I have started an article in my userspace draft called Race and transportation in the United States, which is about a major issue that continues today. What tips can I receive to improve it? I will add more sources. Fastfoodfanatic (talk) 16:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Fastfoodfanatic, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have to say that this draft sounds more like an essay than an article in an encyclopedia. It is full of unsourced, WP:POV statements.

Asparagusus (interaction) 19:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

There are numerous sources for your claim about highways, e.g. U.S. freeways flattened Black neighborhoods nationwide (Reuters). Also, this issue is mentioned in Interstate Highway System#Impact and reception.

I'm not addressing whether this is suitable as an article or not, you'll need to take a neutral point of view and not cherry-picking sources to support your personal belief, e.g. you should not avoid incorporating material that supports the idea that minorities benefited from these transportation improvements. Fabrickator (talk) 19:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@Fastfoodfanatic:, I have a tip for you, concerning the article title. This is not a pressing issue, as if there's an issue with the title, it can be resolved later, after the article is developed. Nevertheless, Wikipedia's article title policy says this:

The title indicates what the article is about and distinguishes it from other articles.

The issue I have with the current title, is that the first thing I thought of when I read your proposed article was the Montgomery bus boycott, but scanning your article, the boycott wasn't even mentioned, and doesn't really seem to fit with what you have in mind, either. (On the other hand, I can't read your mind, so perhaps you do plan to include it.)

The current title seems to insufficiently meet the "distinguish" clause based on current content. Looking at your article, I'm guessing that what you have in mind is something more like, "Race and transportation planning in the United States", but I'm not really sure that's it, either.

What I recommend that you do, is to make a list of as many possible titles you can think of, and head over to Google Scholar; do a search for each one of them, and compare the result sets. Whichever one has results which seem to be the most relevant to your chosen topic compared to the other queries, is likely to be the best title (to a first approximation, at least). For example, here's a Scholar search for race and transportation planning – how do they look? Keep trying other ones, and compare. If you want more tips, ping me from the Talk page of your Draft. Good luck! Mathglot (talk) 06:35, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Issues replying to messages

Hi. I am having replying to messages. I won't let me type in the box. I have to use the edit button to add the message manually.Cwater1 (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, the reply-to-message feature is currently experimental, so it can be a bit buggy at times. Sorry about that.

Anyways, could you describe what browser you're using (and what version)? This could help us answer your question. 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐬 (let's chat!) 19:48, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Microsoft Edge. Skin: Vector Legacy (2010)Cwater1 (talk) 00:07, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@Cwater1: Welcome to the Teahouse. I strongly suggest you switch to using the Vector (2022) skin in Preferences → Appearance → Skin. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:14, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

No, didn't work. I might stick with this new skin though.Cwater1 (talk) 02:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

1998 Seattle Mariners season article sourcing problem

Hello. Go to above article. Scroll down to Ken Griffeys 56 Home runs table, go to bottom of table where sources are, reference #27, I cant make it go to the retrosheet page, cant hook up to URL. i know I entered the URL correctly. Thank you for your help.Theairportman33531 (talk) 18:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

The URL itself goes to a 404. That's not a Wikipedia problem, it's just a bad link. A page that doesn't exist. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 20:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Governor Clay

I'd like to know how I can replace the photo on my Wikipedia page with one that's more recent. Last of the Big Time Spenders (talk) 19:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Governor Clay - 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:48, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

You can upload a photo that you own, or have publishing rights to, to the commons. Then I suggest you go to the article Talk Page, state your conflict of interest, and suggest why you believe a different image would better serve readers. The fact is, images in a biography should be relatively recent, but they should not necessarily be updated constantly to reflect "better" or more recent images. The current image is at least 8 years old, though. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 20:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. To disagree slightly with Pyrrho: it is not enough that you own the photo: in order to upload it, you must either control the rights to it, or get the rights-holder to carry out the procedure described in donating copyright materials. You are unlikely to control the rights to a picture of yourself unless it was a selfie, or you have a contract or other legal document specifically assigning the rights to you. ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

To clarify, Last of the Big Time Spenders, the copyright of a photograph usually belongs to the photographer, not the subject. If you can get a friend/relative to take a picture and upload it at commons:Special:UploadWizard, it’s fine (but they have to agree to the licensing stuff, not you). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:31, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Chris Achilleos

I am the daughter of Chris Achilleos, my father died in December 2021. My sister and I have been left his artwork and IP and have set up a new website. His old one is still being advertised on Wikipedia and no longer works. Can we change this please. House of Achilleos (talk) 20:40, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@House of Achilleos Hello, what is the URL? I can update the website for you. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 20:47, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much it is www.houseofachilleos.com House of Achilleos (talk) 21:16, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@House of Achilleos All done. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 21:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks House of Achilleos (talk) 21:19, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] First of all, I'm sorry for your loss: being a long-time sf and fantasy fan, I am very famliar with your father's work and have two published albums of it.

Yes, that should be an uncontroversial correction even for someone with a "Conflict of interest". If you're generally confident about how to edit Wikipedia, go ahead and replace it, leaving a concise explanation of who you are and why you're doing it in the Edit summary. If you're not confident, copy your request above (less the last sentence) into a new section on the article's Talk page and add the new site address, and someone will do it for you. If you're unsure about using Talk pages, tell us the new address here and someone will change it and add a Talk page explanation. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.212.157.244 (talk) 20:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much it is a great loss he was a wonderful father and an amazing artist he will missed by many. House of Achilleos (talk) 21:17, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

A page about myself

I want to know if i can create a page about myself? is this allowed or only notable people can have this page Realfaisalkhan (talk) 21:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the teahouse. Yes, only notable people can have this page. But if there is significant coverage of you, then it may possibly be created. However, you need to declare WP:COI-Conflict of interest. Sarrail (talk) 21:38, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@Realfaisalkhan: Welcome to Wikipedia. Please read WP:AUTO for advice on creating an article about yourself. It is strongly discouraged. RudolfRed (talk) 21:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Reaqlfaisalkhan, and welcome to the Teahouse. For practical purposes, the answer is No. If you do not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then no article on you will be accepted, and you wil be wasting your time and effort to try. If you do meet the criteria, an article on you is possible, but you are strongly discouraged from trying to write it yourself, because it is unlikely that you can achieve the appropriate neutral point of view. Also note that if there is an article about you, whoever writes it, it will not belong to you, it will not be controlled by you, it will not necessarily say what you want it to say, and it should be based nearly 100% on what people unconnected with you have published about you, not on what you or your associates say or want to say. Please see an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 22:01, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

waverly hills sanatorium

i added a ghost story page on waverly hills but it was removed because it was "vandalism" i was not vandalising the article as paranormal activity is reported there Planetarydude (talk) 00:57, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

We're an encyclopaedia, not a place to swap ghost stories. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 01:13, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

i dont think ghosts are real. i just added it because its why its well known and why its famous Planetarydude (talk) 01:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Planetarydude The Waverly Hills Sanatorium article section "In popular culture" lists TV and YouTube paranormal/ghost broadcasts. All of these need references. If there are additional mentions (print or other) about paranormal/ghost activity, those can be added to the list, but only if referenced. David notMD (talk) 02:13, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

i do think ghosts are real. i just said i did not because i did not want to start a fight.the reason i added "ghost stories" is because i noticed how it never mentioned about the place being haunted nor any of the local tales there that most locals in Louisville would know about. i will add references then Planetarydude (talk) 02:29, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

also im new here so i suck at editing so sorry if i make mistakes Planetarydude (talk) 02:40, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello Planetarydude. All Wikipedia editors were newcomers at one time, and made a few mistakes. You may want to read Learn to Edit which could be of help. Best wishes on future projects. Karenthewriter (talk) 02:56, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Untitled question

Am I able to share an article through email? Earlchristopher (talk) 03:45, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Earlchristopher, and welcome to the Teahouse! You can link to a Wikipedia article in an email with a hyperlink just like you would any other web link. See this for more information about sharing Wikipedia content. Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 04:02, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Need help improving a draft article about Australian woman

Can someone help me get this draft article improved so that it can move to mainspace? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Glenys_Livingstone Thanks for any assistance you can provide. Kerrieburn (talk) 04:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Kerrieburn, this is about somebody "who has made significant contributions to the feminist pagan community and is the creator of the earth-based goddess movement known as PaGaian Cosmology". Perhaps people who frequent Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Neopaganism would be able to make suggestions. -- Hoary (talk) 04:51, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I've asked for assistance on that page. Cheers Kerrieburn (talk) 05:02, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@Kerrieburn In addition to what Hoary said, I can tell you that it's not likely going to be published unless you can add several more sources that indicate the subject is notable for Wikipedia, which as you probably know, must be significant coverage in reliable sources. Right now, the article clearly is well-put together, but the quality of the sources themselves are not likely to pass the WP:GNG requirements when it's reviewed. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 05:02, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Kerrieburn, what Pyrrho said; also, don't source material to Livingstone herself. Reliable sources are required, and one of the criteria for reliability is independence of the subject. -- Hoary (talk) 05:12, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Neopronouns

Is there any Wikipedia consensus/guideline/essay/MOS about usage of neopronouns? I searched through MOS and essays but I couldn't find anything about neopronouns. Roostery123 (talk) 08:50, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

If there is, it would be somewhere in the MoS or known to the people who are most interested in the MoS. So the best place to ask would be Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. -- Hoary (talk) 09:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

According to MOS:GENDERID, When the subject of the article identifies with neopronouns, the pronouns should default to singular they. I wish this were written a bit more clearly, but I think this means that Wikipedia articles should use singular they instead of neopronouns. CodeTalker (talk) 15:54, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

There is a current RfC on neopronoun usage at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Gender identity#Neopronouns. Thatbox (talk) 14:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

I just added that clause in the MOS after searching for articles of people with neopronouns and various article-specific discussions in the past. But it turns out I should have made a proper RfC(though somebody else already did). Roostery123 (talk) 14:15, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Re:Page AmirMehdiKazmi

Dear Teahouse, Can I request the update for the page created by me. when it will be published and if I need to do any more edit Page is AmirMehdiKazmi AmirMehdiKazmi (talk) 08:52, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

AmirMehdiKazmi, there is no chance of Draft:Amir Mehdi being accepted in its current state, at it cites no sources. Maproom (talk) 09:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Actually it does. There's a list at the end. But, AmirMehdiKazmi, which part of the draft can be found where among these listed references? -- Hoary (talk) 09:41, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

You have had feedback at Draft:Amir Mehdi and at your user talk page. Please also read the advice against trying to write an autobiography. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:36, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

All the reference link are working you can click and check , can you please pin point exaclty what I need to due to get this page accepted. AmirMehdiKazmi (talk) 09:55, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

AmirMehdiKazmi I would also suggest that you read about how an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. You offer references, but they are not in-line with the text. Every substantive statement about a living person must have a source. Please read Referencing for Beginners if you wish to proceed, but my advice is that you abandon attempting to edit about yourself and allow an article about you to be organically developed by independent editors that take note of your career in independent reliable sources with significant coverage of you. Go worry about your career, and less about a Wikipedia article. 331dot (talk) 10:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

this article is not for myself. My name is Nagma Amir. how do I contact independent editor and if there is a charge for this AmirMehdiKazmi (talk) 10:44, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not charge for anything. If you are not Amir Mehdi, you should not use his name as your username. Please change your username by visiting Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS to make a request. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

thanks. I have requested the name change.

How do I request independent editor for edit of my page AmirMehdiKazmi (talk) 10:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Requested Articles is severely backlogged. You may continue to edit the draft, but you must improve the sources and apply them to statements in the article as I say above. What is your connection to Mr. Mehdi? 331dot (talk) 11:01, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Amie Mehdi is my father AmirMehdiKazmi (talk) 11:51, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

You need to learn how to incorporate your list of references into the text. When you do that properly, the software automatically inserts a ref number in the text and puts the numbered references under References. See Help:Referencing for beginners. For first time editors, I recommend using your Sandbox to format refs, then copy into the article after. David notMD (talk) 10:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

In Early life and education, Legal career and Personal life, I deleted a lot of content that does not belong in the article. All remaining content needs to be referenced. The remainder of the article needs a lot of work. Insert the references where they belong, and delete any content that cannot be referenced. David notMD (talk) 11:15, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Here and on your Talk page, answer 331dot's question about your connection to Amir Mehdi, as you appear to have a lot of knowledge about him that suggests a personal connection. David notMD (talk) 11:17, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Last, most of your proposed references confirm that he wrote books, stories, speeches, etc. NONE of this contributes to establishing his notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. Same for the descriptions of his actions vis-a-vis Kashmir. Unless you can add references for what people have published ABOUT him, there is no potential that this can be an article. David notMD (talk) 11:31, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Article on Radical Empathy

Hi! I wrote an article on radical empathy yesterday and it was declined because of no wish for neologisms. However, when deciding to write the article, I found another article on radical compassion, and thought an article on radical empathy would therefore also be suitable. Furthermore, the article is not just a term or definition, it is also an overview of different understandings of the term. I am wondering why the article on radical empathy is not considered suitable while the article on radical compassion is. Thank you for your help:)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Radical_Empathy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_compassion Amstall (talk) 10:57, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

First off, the fact that there is a similar articles counts for nothing. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Secondly, your draft says Radical empathy is a term coined by several people... There is no clear consensus on the meaning of the term. This alone signals its failure to meet Wikipedia's standards. You first need to find significant coverage in reliable sources completely independent of the topic. See WP:YFA. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:11, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Amstall, and welcome to the Teahouse. Radical compassion is a seriously weak article, because it has no independent sources, and I have tagged it accordingly. However, there do seem to be a few academic sources for the concept, so it is possible that it meets Wikipedia's requirements for notability, and I have not nominated it for deletion. It needs somebody to go in and look at the sources, and make sure that it is a summary of the independent writing about the subject, not simply reporting what the inventor of the term said about it.

Draft:Radical Empathy appears to have similar issues, but compounded by the fact that there are different uses of the term, coined by different people. Until there are scholarly works by people unconnected with any of those coiners, analysing and discussing the term (in at least one of its uses), it will not be suitable material for Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 11:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Alright, thank you for the clarification Amstall (talk) 11:23, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Updating a page

Hi How do I go about getting an update made on a page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_Men%27s_Golf_Tournament_all-time_individual_records My son tied the NCAA record for lowest 18 hole golf round -10 60 and I'd love to have that information reflected on this page. His name is Ryan Eshleman Auburn University and he shot this score in Scottsdale at the Maui Jim Intercollegiate tournament Septemer 9th 2600:1700:6900:63D0:D1C6:5AE1:288E:C91 (talk) 13:40, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

The records on the page to which you linked are specifically for the NCAA Division I Men's Golf Championship, not for any tournament invoving collegiate teams and competitors. The 2022 NCAA championship was held last May–June in Scottsdale, Arizona. Deor (talk) 13:54, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Submitting your draft ...

I can not add my article for review because it does not exist in search bar choices Submit your draft for review at Articles for Creation (AfC)

(Draft:realestate​). Please check draft title. No such draft exists. Bushra Tughar (talk) 16:23, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:Bushra Tughar/sandbox - 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Bushra Tughar: You should be able to submit your draft by using the blue button labeled "Submit your draft for review!" and following the instructions. Note that for the time being, your draft's title is User:Bushra Tughar/sandbox, not Draft:realestate​. The AfC reviewers will eventually rename it when it gets to mainspace. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

yes, now i have clear vision. i wish to be reviewed before this week. 4 months is a sort of long period Bushra Tughar (talk) 18:02, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Bushra Tughar. I see that you attempted to submit Draft:Business exit strategy after you posted here, but that is clearly not what you are referring to. Is it your sandbox, User:Bushra Tughar/sandbox? You can submit that by picking the blue button in the header. But I advise against it until you've cited your sources inline (see Citing sources). I also have doubts as to whether those sources have significant coverage of the company, though I haven't attempted to translate the Arabic to check. ColinFine (talk) 16:54, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Is my article not well cited?, I wish to get detailed advice for avoiding being blocked Bushra Tughar (talk) 18:00, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Drafts are accepted or Declined or Rejected (more severe). Neither Declined nor Rejected put the creating editor at risk for being blocked. The backlog of drafts waiting for review is not a queue, so action can happen in hours, days, weeks, or (sadly) months. Your Sandbox draft was submitted and Declined, same day. Your Business exit strategy is awaiting a Reviewer. David notMD (talk) 19:27, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

As I say, Bushra Tughar, I haven't attempted to examine the sources cited. But judging from your translations of the titles, I would not expect any of them to contain significant coverage of the company. They look like passing mentions, apart from the one about the diabetes camp, which may have more about the company. But my guess is 1) that the article is about that one activity by the company, not about the company, and 2) that it is based on a press release from the company - again, I may be wrong. ColinFine (talk) 22:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Link Hover Issues

When hovering over the link of a page it often shows the most significant image along with the first paragraph. For nations, thats nearly always the national flag, but I've noticed for Turkmenistan it instead shows the borders. Is there anyway to correct this? ThundorLord (talk) 16:54, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi ThundorLord, welcome to the Teahouse. The image is picked by mw:Extension:PageImages. The documentation at mw:Extension:PageImages#How are images scored? says "images smaller than 119 pixels are weighted highly negatively". The source text of Turkmenistan says flag_size = 110px. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Orphan tag

Can anyone tell me please, what is actually called Orphan tag? When and why is it used? Frryan404 (talk) 17:07, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm not the most experienced with Wikipedia, but I'm pretty sure it refers to when a page has no other pages linking into it. ThundorLord (talk) 17:11, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@Frryan404: Welcome to Wikipedia ThundorLord is correct. An orphan article has no incoming links from other articles. See WP:ORPHAN for more info. RudolfRed (talk) 17:32, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Adding a picture

how do I add the picture AmirMehdiKazmi (talk) 17:16, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, AmirMehdiKazmi. Please read Help:Pictures. Feel free to ask more specific questions. Cullen328 (talk) 17:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Work on getting your draft accepted. Adding images does not make a draft more likely to be accepted. If you get that far, the easiest will be if you yourself have taken photos of Mehdi. David notMD (talk) 03:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Removing Broken Links

I have a question regarding the removal of non-existent article links (the red ones), is it acceptable to remove the link if there are no articles that are relevant to it? If an article is created it can always be corrected later. Tungstensmithy (talk) 17:21, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello,Tungstensmithy. In most cases, a red link is an indication that an editor thinks that an article should be created about the topic. These red links should be kept. The guidance is Only remove red links if you are certain that Wikipedia should not have an article on that subject. Please read Wikipedia:Red link for more information. Cullen328 (talk) 17:28, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Cullen328, Thank you, will keep in mind. Tungstensmithy (talk) 17:35, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Table of similarities

Is there any type of table that can be used to list the similarities of an animal to an another animal that also may be able to include an image? Since I wanna add something similar to that to the Hylaecullulus page to make it clearer the differences between Hylaecullulus and Primocandelabrum & Bradgatia. Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 17:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

How would listing similarities make the differences clearer?--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 17:45, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

How to ask editors for ce?

Board of Control for Cricket in India needs extensive ce by GA reviewer. I added a banner for ce there, but not many ce editors are doing work on it. How to ask some to work on an article for ce?Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 19:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@Rock Stone Gold Castle You can make a ce request at the Guild of Copy Editors here. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 19:12, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

United States Polo Association

Asking that an Admin give an opinion on United States Polo Association. Recently, a single-purpose editor User:MadelynBlum has been adding a lot of content, either verbatim from the USPA website (reverted and warned about copyright infringement), or else in my opinion closely paraphrased from same site. My concerns are two: 1) Is much of the current content promotional to a degree that article should be Speedy deleted? 2) Given the majority (all?) of references are to USPA sources, should the article be AfD'd? I strongly believe that the Association is article-worthy given its long history, but am troubled by its current state.David notMD (talk) 19:24, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Non-admin comment: If I might speculate, the 2022 sale/takeover of the organization has precipitated a review of its public face, including its Wikipedia article. The edit summary "Wikipedia updates as discussed with the USPA." is informative. The wording of the first two sections reeks of promotion, as if the intent is to mirror the website as much as possible. I asssume the article could be rolled back to the last encyclopedic version, rather than being deleted (I assume there has also been a recent move/rename of some sort). User:MadelynBlum needs to declare their paid editing status immediately and only make edit suggestions going forward.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:57, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

It sounds as if MadelynBlum has the all-too-common misconception that Wikipedia's article about the Association is in any way owned by, controlled by, or for the benefit of, the Association. ColinFine (talk) 22:10, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

I have reverted the article to the state before MadelynBlum started editing it. I have also pageblocked that editor fron that article, although the editor is free to make well-referenced edit requests on the article talk page. Cullen328 (talk) 01:50, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the bold actions (revert and block). The article still sorely lacks references, David notMD (talk) 03:57, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

My draft article got rejected.

I'm trying to get some help in making this article i made days ago to an official page on Wikipedia. If you want to read it, here's the link: Draft:Slap Battles

Apparently my draft got rejected because it lacks in-depth, reliable, secondary, or independent sources. May one of you find out what sources related to the topic meet this criteria?

-Breerble Breerble (talk) 19:39, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Breerble, there are no in-depth, reliable, secondary, and independent sources related to the topic. The topic is not notable, and I suggest you start by improving existing articles. Sungodtemple (talk) 20:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Alright.

Breerble (talk) 21:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

im having a hard time with the draft

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bite_of_a_Mango

I submitted prior but there wasn't enough articles to support the film, but as of lately it won two awards in a Toronto festival and its been in a lot of press, most recently PLAYBACK and a 9 other articles.

How do we merge or make it a visible page Torontofresh (talk) 19:39, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Torontofresh, you may want to see WP:COI. Although unrelated to your question, as a conflict of interest editor you should read this. Also note that one account cannot be shared by multiple people, see WP:ISU. Sungodtemple (talk) 19:54, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Torontofresh I restored the Comments and put a submit draft template at the top. Per the comments above and on the draft, address whether you have a COI and seek better refs. This may be an instance of WP:TOOSOON. David notMD (talk) 12:25, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Neurooncología

I started the Spanish article "Neurooncología" and then deleted 95% of it from the user "Usuario:Linuxmanía". Does anyone know the solution to this? Examples of the topic can be found here https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroonkologie or here https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-oncologie. Wname1 (talk) 20:44, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Wname1, welcome back. Your question is very unclear and doesn't seem to relate to anything on English Wikipedia. Perhaps you could ask at Spanish Wikipedia's equivalent of the help desk - [2]. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:56, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@Wname1 The editor who reverted you gave a very detailed edit summary in this diff. However, as already suggested, you need to take your views to the Spanish Talk Page, since each language version of Wikipedia runs independently. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:02, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. Before I change to the Spanish area, there might be a user here who is also active in the Spanish area? Wname1 (talk) 21:18, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@Wname1 If there are, they are likely to be categorised here (based on their Babel box) in Category:User es-5 or similar. You could try a few of these and look at their global contribution history. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Cyclical wiki loop called again?

There is an article, but I forget what its called so I'd have no idea where to begin, where there is a term for the phenomenon where some news story starts off being born almost of wikipedia genesis or creation, and then news reporters trust WP enough apparently, that they go to WP and then cite that, and then it becomes real. Because now a reliable source has stated it, which is then citable on WP. That seems to me to be a potential for systemic problems. Is there anyone who has proposed a method to fix that, and does anyone know what it is that I am talking about and what it is called again? TY. — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 20:55, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi again @Oopsemoops - WP:Citeogenesis. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:56, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Excellent. Yes thats the stuff. Now what can be done about it? Anyone have major policy proposals. Seems like it was more of a major issue in the mid 2000's early days of WP. — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 20:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@Oopsemoops, that's not really something which can be hashed out here at the Teahouse; obviously we have processes in place to try and prevent it, but they're not likely to ever be perfect. If you have ideas, feel free to propose them at WP:VPP or in the idea lab. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:04, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Fair. TY. — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 21:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

En Dash Question

The style requirements for the pages I am working on necessitate the use of &ndash; to produce an en dash. Methods such as inserting an en dash from the menu at the top which displays those most frequently used pieces of punctuation, or use of the alt code alt + 0150 produce the "–" symbol itself in Visual editing. This is not the desired outcome, and I have had to resort to copying an en dash from another entry in Visual editing in order to get the desired result when viewed in Source editing.

My question is simple. How, if indeed it is possible, do I type or produce an en dash in Visual editing that displays as &ndash; in Source editing without either copying it from an existing entry or using Source editing? Kxcii (talk) 21:40, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't use visual editing, so I don't know if this will work, but I don't see why not. When I want to get an HTML character to appear properly, I escape that character. So I write –, which displays as –. (Note: don't look at the source code of what I just posted: I had to do an extra level of escaping to get it to look right. If you type exactly what you see, that should work). ColinFine (talk) 22:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

You could remap your keyboard, Kxcii. I've remapped mine (not for "–" but to swap the functions of the keys marked "CapsLock" and "Ctrl"). I suspect that many people are like me in virtually never using their right "Alt" key; one might separate the two "Alt" keys, leaving the left one as is and remapping hyphen-while-right-Alt-key-is-pressed as en-dash. How you do any of this depends on your computer's operating system. -- Hoary (talk) 22:27, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

The question is not about how to display – in the rendered text but how to produce that code in the source text instead of the actual character. It's required by the second-last bullet at Wikipedia:WikiProject Days of the year#Style and {{DOY editnotice}}. I think it's an odd requirement and don't know whether it's possible to satisfy in VisualEditor without copying it from somewhere. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

I blame caffeine deficiency, PrimeHunter, but you may attribute my oversight to simple stupidity. My next suggestions – (A) skip the "visual editor", or (B) use the one-character, two-byte "–" and leave "fixing" (?) this to editors who like to fret over it – would probably cause offence, so I'd better not make either. -- Hoary (talk) 22:46, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Not really a solution but the insertion toolbar(bottom of edit box,just above edit summary) in desktop source mode does include endash. 23:35, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Moved sandbox to draft, requesting assistance with re-directs

Hi, I just submitted a draft for review for the first time. I composed the draft in my sandbox, then submitted it, and it suggested I move it to draft space, which I did. The page showed a message reminding me to clean up after the move, but I'm afraid I don't understand what steps need to be done to do so, even after reading the links. I fear I broke something. As I understand it, my sandbox is currently a redirect page and I have to do something to free up my sandbox to compose another article for submission. Is this right? Thank you kindly for your time. GuineaPig_C77 (𒅗𒌤) ☕ 22:38, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Peru–Yale University dispute looks fascinating, GuineaPigC77. I expect a quick promotion to article status. (I'd embark on this myself, if I weren't pushed for time right now.) Feel free to edit your "sandbox" afresh. (If you click on that link, you won't be redirected.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:53, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Hoary! Yes, it's an interesting story and I was surprised to not find any coverage here, but it was a fun article to work on. Thanks for the feedback. I think I get what happened now with the sandbox and I'll just start fresh. GuineaPig_C77 (𒅗𒌤) ☕ 03:14, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Is kinemaster a notable article?

Kinemaster seems to be very notable. I seen refs from notable websites: 1 2 3 4 5 is it enough to have it's own article? SMBMovieFan (talk) 22:48, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

I clicked on the first of your links, SMBMovieFan. What I saw there starts: KineMaster launched a thoughtfully designed app to help entrepreneurs and small-medium business owners to build their empires in the digital age. / May 18, 2022 15:30 ET / Source: KineMaster. So it's mere PR junk from KineMaster and utterly worthless in establishing notability. -- Hoary (talk) 22:56, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@SMBMovieFan You had a poor choice of the first ref but the others do seem to be genuine reviews from WP:INDEPENDENT reliable sources, so based on WP:THREE you should be OK for a draft. Keep it simple and neutral and use the AfC process so experienced reviewers can comment. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:11, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Draft:KineMaster SMBMovieFan (talk) 15:56, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Slide Show (secondary spelling) entry should be Slideshow (noun) spelled correctly

How does the slide show entry get corrected to the primary rather than variant (secondary) spelling which would be "slideshow" (noun). If you do a search for "slideshow" you will find its the dominant spelling. How does this get corrected? Flibbertigibbets (talk) 23:12, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

N-Gram shows "slide show" as the dominant usage in books from 1940 - 2019 which you can see here. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 23:16, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@Flibbertigibbets: It was moved from Slideshow to Slide show in 2010.[3] The title has been stable for 12 years and a move would probably be controversial so don't move it without discussion. See Wikipedia:Requested moves if you want to propose a move. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:07, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

I could make the entry consistent to "slide show." The article has no sources.. Flibbertigibbets (talk) 01:43, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Flibbertigibbets, the lack of sources can be corrected easily by any motivated editor. A Google Books search shows that a couple of books have been written about the topic of slide shows, and many other books devote significant coverage to this topic. Cullen328 (talk) 02:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

thanks.. Flibbertigibbets (talk) 02:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Random names in Bollywood films

Bollywood films have a lot of credits where a random name will be in brackets next to someone's name ie John Smith (Dave)

Does anyone know what those random names in brackets represent?

They're not companies, they're not place names, and they're not character names...

So I suspect they're either:

• A surname that they don't normally use
• A middle name that they don't normally use, or
• A nickname

I've tried searching for some of these random names, along with the actual names of the people credited, yet I still can't work out what they're supposed to be. Danstarr69 (talk) 02:41, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

I looked and can't find any examples. Could you provide one? Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 05:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

@Danstarr69: Hello. Do you mean actor's real name or character's name? I guess it may be character's nickname. Not sure though. Like Skipper says above, example would be good. —usernamekiran (talk) 07:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Usernamekiran just random names in brackets next the real names of cast and crew members.

Sometimes it will be things like:

• Companies they worked for
• Places they worked in
• Cast members they worked for

etc in brackets, however sometimes the name in brackets won't be any of them.

It'll take forever to search for all the others in the 1000s of credits I've added/updated lately, however the latest one I've found is in the opening credits of the film 1920 London (I've not gone through the end credits yet, apart from to correct the cast), where it says...

• First Assistant Director - Salar Shaikh (Raja)

What is Raja? Danstarr69 (talk) 08:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Pyrrho the Skipper here's another from the film Commando 3 (film)...

• Car Rig - Shahida Parveen Shaikh (Mushtaq)

What is Mushtaq? Danstarr69 (talk) 09:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

@Danstarr69 As the Wikipedia aticle doesn't go into that level of detail for cast and crew (nor should it) I don't think it matters very much. In this particular case IMDB may actually be a better source. According to the full IMDB listing, the car rig was Shahida Parveen Shaikh (the IMDB equivalent of WP:COMMONNAME) but actually credited as Shahida Parveen Shaikh Mushtaq in that particular film's credits. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:53, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Michael D. Turnbull I added the name to IMDB like that, as IMDB requires "credits to be added exactly the same as they are on screen", yet there's a problem with that as brackets can't be added inside the attribute brackets.

I'm trying to concentrate on updating just 5 Bollywood feature films, however I'm getting distracted with countless more Bollywood productions which have the same cast/crew members, yet have countless names, and countless duplicate profiles, just like with every English production I update, however Bollywood ones are on an even bigger scale with the amount of misspelt names and duplicate profiles they contain.

Right now I'm trying to sort out some of the countless duplicate profiles of 3 different Bollywood music duos (who have worked on some of those films), who have been added to IMDB multiple times with misspelt names as separate people, and again with misspelt names as duos. There must be at least 20 separate profiles for those 3 duos/6 singular people. Basically there should be 9 profiles for them maximum, if you include them as individuals and duos, not 20+ profiles.

Many more of the music related people on the productions those duos have worked on also have 3+ duplicate profiles each, which I'll be merging once I've checked the credits on each production. Danstarr69 (talk) 13:08, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

All of that explains why here at Wikipedia we don't consider IMDB as a reliable source. I guess you'll have to take your issues up with them, not us. The websites have no relationship to one another. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:19, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Michael D. Turnbull my issue is...

What do the random names in brackets in Bollywood films mean?

It's a question which applies to both Wikipedia and IMDB.

All the other stuff I can sort out myself, but I can't sort out those two credits until I know what those random names in brackets in the on-screen credits mean. Danstarr69 (talk) 13:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Raja here is a nickname. In case of Shahida Parveen Shaikh (Mushtaq) — Shaikh, and Mushtaq are last names. It seems to be nee, and new name. Not sure which one is which though. Regarding the issue in general, we should remove the bracketed names. —usernamekiran (talk) 14:58, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Trove article referencing on enc.Wiki article

In an articles edit page I have referenced a trove article by trying to use a Wiki Trove template as follows:

Under the articles "References" heading it shows, as a link, as follows:

"CITY OF PERTH: Deeds of R.A.A.F. Squadron: The West Australian, Perth, WA; page 4, 25 August 1945". Trove. National Library of Australia. Retrieved 15 September 2022.

However, when I double-click on this reference I just get an error message "Title 51765008 could not be found." but if I if you copy the articles title "CITY OF PERTH: Deeds of R.A.A.F. Squadron" to https://trove.nla.gov.au/search/advanced/category/newspapers the newspaper article comes up right away.

Using this example can you advise me how fill out Wiki's Trove template correctly so the Reference links properly and directly to the article on Trove?

Maybe my problem is that I cant seem to be able to find the correct id-number at the end of the Trove url. Thanks Shellac41 (talk) 12:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC) Shellac41 (talk) 12:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Shellac41. See the box starting "This is a template for citing newspaper summary pages on Trove" at Template:Cite Trove newspaper. It can only produce url's starting with https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/title/ like https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/title/123. You don't want a newspaper summary but a specific article with the url https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/51765008. The box says: "To cite an article available at Trove, use a citation template such as {{cite news}}, {{cite web}}, or {{citation}}". PrimeHunter (talk) 13:22, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

@Shellac41 So, to be specific, I'd use "City of Perth: Deeds of R.A.A.F. Squadron". The West Australian. 1945-08-25. p. 4.. See source code for the markup. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:35, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Mike, please excuse my ignorance but I can't find on Wiki what you call "source code for the markup"? Shellac41 (talk) 03:18, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

References

I need help

i want to create a article how can I do to make it Happy ending Pretty mkoliswa (talk) 14:57, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello Pretty mkoliswa. Creating an article is usually not easy for newcomers, so it is recommended to get started by helping to improve already existing articles. But for creating a new article, see Wikipedia:Your first article, and try the Article Wizard. It would be recommended to use the Articles for Creation process. Note that the subject of the article should meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and be verifiable by citing reliable sources. Thanks, Kpddg ^(talk) 16:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Currently indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 02:49, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Alaska Life Below Zero other families

There was another family I believe the father's name was Robert he and his wife had 2 daughters one was named Molly. The daughters had some sort of hereditary disease that affected their eyes They were all very soft spoken even in whispers sometimes because they didn't want to startle wild life where they were living. The last I saw them the two girls were getting ready to go away (to college?) Does anyone else remember who they were? Libra0927 (talk) 15:32, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Libra0927, and welcome to the Teahouse! This is a place for new users to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. Do you have a question along those lines?

Asparagusus (interaction) 16:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Libra0927, please read Life Below Zero. In the future, the Reference Desk - Entertainment is a better place for this type of question. Cullen328 (talk) 17:08, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Declined article / request for more feedback

Hello! My article was recently declined a second time, although I edited it after receiving the first feedback. I thought I addressed raised points, but apparently, there's still something I'm missing. Would it be possible to receive more detailed feedback so I can ensure that the article won't be rejected again?

Here's the article in question: Draft:SUBTLE – The Subtitlers' Association. I tried to use articles of similar associations as a template/inspiration, e.g. Institute of Translation & Interpreting, European Association for Studies in Screen Translation, Translators Association.

To be honest, I fail to see how my article "read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia" compared to them. Is it more about the phrasing of specific paragraphs or insufficient notability of the subject?

Any help would be most appreciated. Thank you! Nyjja (talk) 17:19, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Nujja, I think it's about the failure of the draft to establish that the subject is notable. Which three of the sources cited do most, in your opinion, to establish that STABLE is notable? Note that articles based on statements by or interviews with spokespeople for the association don't help. Maproom (talk) 17:48, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

The draft does indeed read like an advertisement, because it's based on what its representatives have said. If you got rid of all or most of those sources, and the content based on them, and relied on what independent sources have said, you'd have a much better article. Maproom (talk) 17:58, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer, Maproom. SUBTLE is a part of an umbrella federation, AudioVisual Translators Europe, and I use its website as one of the sources. There are also few links to academic conferences where SUBTLE members took part as the experts. I think they would count as independent sources. What would be your opinion? Nyjja (talk) 18:32, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Nyjja. "Links to academic conferences where SUBTLE members took part as the experts" would not help in the least. 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. That is the only kind of reference that can contribute to establishing notability. Unfortunately, if few people have written about the association (not its members, but the association) then it is probably not notable in Wikipedia's terms. ColinFine (talk) 19:19, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Adding a missing genus.

I've noticed a missing genus (Tyndis, it's on the List of Pyralidae genera, but it leads to the ancient Greek city) but I haven't been on wikipedia long enough to add it. If anyone could take care of that, that would be great. Here's a link to some usable information: https://www.nhm.ac.uk/our-science/data/butmoth/search/GenusList2.dsml?AUTHOR=Ragonot&beginIndex=270&searchPageURL=BrowseAuthors%2edsml%3fAUTHOR%3dRagonot%26beginIndex%3d210

Thanks!

Balnibarbarian (talk) 17:28, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

It's a moth genus, btw.

Balnibarbarian (talk) 17:29, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

I just realized this should probably be an article request.

Well, while I'm here, Rabiria is also on the list, but redirects to Rabiria gens.

I guess I should just make those links red. If I knew how. Balnibarbarian (talk) 17:56, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to do it in the source editor, but in the visual editor you can highlight the text you want to link and click the add link button as normal. If you look up a page that doesn't exist yet it'll show up with a red link. Hope that helps! AcidicAlloy (talk) 18:02, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Balnibarbarian (talk) 18:09, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Balnibarbarian, in making the red links, you can avoid the redirect problem by linking as: Tyndis (moth) and Rabiria (moth) to achieve disambiguation. If the red-linked articles get written, disambiguation pages will be made for Tyndis and/or Rabiria. --Quisqualis (talk) 20:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I was having trouble getting them red. Balnibarbarian (talk) 00:03, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Citation templates and chapters

I'm sure this is plainly addressed somewhere, but I can't find a guideline or MOS page that cleanly spells it out. I know that citation templates are generally a matter of personal preference, but are there circumstances where I should prioritize one over the others or that one might be better suited (for example, using Template:Sfn over Template:Harvnb and Template:Rp)? And more specifically, how does this apply to citing specific chapters in a book? Is there a standard for what to do or what format to use if I'm citing one chapter from a book where each chapter is written by a different author? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

{{@Thebiguglyalien}}, Greetings! Citation style should be uniform in any article.

Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Variation_in_citation_methods makes no mention of how to choose a citation style (you may have seen this), so I assume it's safe to WP:BEBOLD and choose your preferred style in a new article.

Template:Cite_book#Examples, in the sixth example listed, tells how to cite a chapter in a compilation-type book.--Quisqualis (talk) 20:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

How should I cite the page numbers of a chapter? Do I include the page numbers of the chapter as a whole in the Reflist and then individual page numbers using Sfn/Harvnb/Rp? And what if I use two chapters from the same book? Do I include both of them as their own unique references, duplicating the book info? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:21, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

If the chapters have different authors you will need to create separate references. If the chapter is short, just give the page numbers of the chapter and you won't need to indicate the particular page each time you use the source.

If the entire book is by the same authors we don't usually indicate chapters, just the pages that the material comes from. Do you have an example of what you are trying to do? It sounds rather more complicated than the usual cases. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:40, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

I typically use chapters of books when I edit. Frances Cleveland is the most recent article where I've used chapters of books. I'm asking because I recently got Caroline Harrison to GA, and the reviewer had me do it differently. Since I use book sources so often (especially in large edits), I want to know how I should be using them in different circumstances. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Godzilla B.O.

• I realized the Godzilla vs. Destoroyah's box office numbers in the chart and in the article are very different. I changed it to the latter.
• City on the Edge of Battle had an unsourced box office number, so I just converted 150 million yen into "May 2018" USD
• FW's box office mojo numbers and JP sourced numbers have a difference of at least 3 million. AT least you can acknowledge that...

Overall, some of the stuff in the franchise box office numbers conflict with the articles or just... basic common sense. DougheGojiraMan (talk) 19:37, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse!{{@DougheGojiraMan}}. The Teahouse isn't a great venue for content questions, unfortunately. Your best course is to repost your Teahouse inquiries on the relevant talk pages of the articles involved. The "talk" page is accessed via a tab at the top of the article page. Welcome to the Teahouse!--Quisqualis (talk) 19:45, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Oh I see. Thank you DougheGojiraMan (talk) 19:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Multiple licenses on an image

Do forgive me if this question has been answered before, but what is the protocol for images with two or more licenses on it (e.g., public domain and CC BY)? Which license should be followed if I want to use it? ProfessorM2112 (talk) 22:15, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

@ProfessorM2112: Best practices on how to use multi-license files are described at Commons:Commons:Multi-license copyright tags. ––FormalDude (talk) 22:21, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Excuse me, but the link did not redirect me to any such page. ProfessorM2112 (talk) 22:25, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

@ProfessorM2112: My apologies, link fixed. ––FormalDude (talk) 22:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Article about a failed musical

Ok, so I made a draft about a failed musical written by Stephen Sondheim, Square One. The draft was quickly reviewed and declined. One specific thing was said, “it probably isn’t notable if it hasn’t made it’s debut.” They also said I needed citations of substance, which given the context of the subject material, there is truly only so much a source can give. I feel as though the citations give context for what it is, who wrote it, specific important dates and timeframes. The reviewer obviously thought otherwise. Despite that I’m too stubborn to give up. So if I wanted to get it published, what is my next step? Morgo0915 (talk) 02:37, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Morgo0915, if their is limited source material consider adding a small section to Sondheim's article where it would likely be WP:DUE and then creating the title of musical as a redirect to the section in Sondheim's article. Alternatively, discussion on his talk page about the musical may uncover additional sources or guidance from those more familiar with his careerSlywriter (talk) 02:51, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Square One (Musical) David notMD (talk) 02:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Morgo0915, since Sondheim died about two months after the project was announced, I consider it unlikely that the encyclopedia would benefit from a freestanding article about it. I am certain, though, that this sentence is inappropriate for an encyclopedia article: It is truly not known at present whether or not Square One will make it’s debut, but we hope that one day it may grace the stage and it’s audience. Cullen328 (talk) 02:59, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Righting historical (in)accuracies

Hello! I am trying to improve Busch Gardens Tampa Bay (BGT) to the best as I can, accurately. I am moving onto a section where the physical diameters of the park are to be addressed, with all sources reliable or not pointing to the figure 335-acre (136 ha) (Example 1, Example 2 Example 3). As much as I could slap that statistic on the article and call it a day, historical reporting's point to a different number which amount to around the same acreage the park currently exists upon (The Tampa Tribune). I found that via a county's property appraisal website a way to look up the park's parent company, SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, property. Individually, the total acreage owned by the company amounts to be ~ 353.58 acres (143.09 ha), the BGT park itself being a healthy 249.53 acres (100.98 ha) (minus parking lots or additional property belonging to sister water park Adventure Island).

The problem: no reliable sources support BGT being anywhere near its approximate acreage, and relate the total properties of SeaWorld's Tampa properties to the park's size. Is there a way I can cite the appraisal's website supporting its recorded 249.53 acres (100.98 ha)? If possible, how could I go about citing the total property that Busch Gardens lays upon with its sister park and additional lots owned by the parent company? Since the calculated amount, 353.58 acres (143.09 ha), differs from decades of coverage citing 335-acre (136 ha). Am I just plain wrong and need a trout? Any and all help would be appreciated! Adog (Talk・Cont) 03:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)