Wikipedia:Teahouse

hey! I need help getting the artwork to a song on Wikipedia! FarisLloyd (talk) 21:46, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FarisLloyd: Could you tell us and link to which artwork and which song, please? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:27, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• yes its Lost by Cher Lloyd! I have a hq one on my pc — Preceding unsigned comment added by FarisLloyd (talk • contribs)

  Courtesy ping @Nick Moyes:. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:03, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FarisLloyd: Song lyrics are copyright and must not be added to articles. We take very copyright seriously, and it's important that you do not not attempt to include them, nor link to 3rd party sites which themselves breach the artist's copyright. It would, however, be OK to include an external link to the artist's own website where lyrics are published. {We recently answered a very similar question here - see this) Don't forget that we are all expecting to see your userpage contain a WP:COI or WP:PAID declaration before you do any further editing on articles abut Cher Lloyd. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:39, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Moyes, I thought the question was about uploading an image associated with the song in question, like an album cover? I am thinking WP:FAIRUSE may apply, but not even remotely close to sure. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:14, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Usedtobecool: Quite right! I'm not sure how I managed to misinterpret the question so effectively! Nick Moyes (talk) 16:10, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Moyes, let's call it due under the law of averages, LOL! @Marchjuly and Fastily:, Would the associated artwork for "Lost" by Cher Lloyd be acceptable, perhaps under WP:FAIRUSE if there is an article needing one? I read the guideline which under accepted usage says cover art is acceptable when accompanying critical commentary but I know we use movie posters in infoboxes under fair use which seems to be an exception. There's also the fact that the guideline, under unacceptable uses, specifically names album covers (as part of discography). The OP is working on Lost (Cher Lloyd song) and Cher Lloyd discography, by the way. FarisLloyd, if you do not receive the help you need before this post gets archived, please try asking at WP:MCQ, a venue specifically intended for questions about media-related copyright issues. Best regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind! I seem to have missed a big chunk of the happenings since this was posted. Please feel free to disregard my previous comment. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:26, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It would most likely be fine in a stand-alone article about the song, but not in a discography or on the artist’s page per WP:NFC#cite_note-3. It should, however, be the cover art for the single, not the cover art of the album that the single appeared on. — Marchjuly (talk) 13:29, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! So I really want to update the images portrayed on Cher Lloyd wiki page! The current photos are from 2012 and it is 2020 now! This must be updated!

I have some photos I'd hope you guys can add for me!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/139848974@N07/26177918621/in/photostream/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/96853530@N05/11202591733/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/javicmorales/30406915221/in/photostream/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/javicmorales/29862999694/in/photostream/ FarisLloyd (talk) 05:14, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FarisLloyd. Unfortunately, none of those photos are usable on Wikipedia, since none of them are freely licensed (see the "all rights reserved" tag on Flickr). If you find other photos on Flickr that do have a free license (e.g. Creative Commons license), though, you can add them to Wikimedia Commons by following the instructions there; it's easy to import from Flickr. You could also start a discussion at Talk:Cher Lloyd and see if anyone can find a better image, or browse through commons:Category:Cher Lloyd to try to find one yourself. One thing to keep in mind is that we don't always want to use the most recent photo of someone if older photos are better quality. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:31, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So would red carpet photos be useable? I found some that have no copyright stamp — Preceding unsigned comment added by FarisLloyd (talk • contribs) 05:32, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FarisLloyd: No, sorry. All photos are regarded as copyright of the photographer, even if there's no 'copyright' notice shown. What we actually require is positive evidence of the presence of an appropriate Creative Commons commercial licence, NOT the absence of any copyright notice. Nick Moyes (talk) 06:30, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FarisLloyd. Is your choice of a username just a coincidence or are you somehow connected to Lloyd in a personal or professional way? — Marchjuly (talk) 06:35, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am one of Cher's leading street teams (fan groups) to promote her and her music. I have direct connections to her manager and get exclusive info on new releases etc. That is why I felt the need to update her wiki page photo because her team wanted me to look into it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by FarisLloyd (talk • contribs) 06:38, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying things FarisLloyd. Based upon what you've posted, you do have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and might even be subject to Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. I will post a more detailed reply on your user talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:48, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FarisLloyd: I'll second the advice from Marchjuly on your user page that, since you have connections to Cher's team, one of the most helpful things you can do for the page is to encourage them to release a high-quality freely licensed photo of her by uploading it to Wikipedia Commons. They will need to follow the guidance at commons:Commons:Guidance for paid editors, and it will be up to the community here to decide which photo is actually used, but if they provide a newer photo of comparable or better quality than the current one, I don't see why we wouldn't want to switch. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:08, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Completely understandable! Unfortunately I was told I am not allowed to talk to them in terms of Wikipedia because its conflict of interest so Is there any other way we can obtain a newer image? FarisLloyd (talk) 20:35, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

​ You can continue to have a friendly relationship with Lloyd and her team if you want; you don’t have to stop being anyone’s friend. You just need to follow relevant policies and guidelines if you’re going to be making Wikipedia edits on behalf of Lloyd or her team. Moreover, you need to be very careful to comply with WP:PAID if you’re being compensated in any way for your editing; even it’s just something like free concert tickets, free music or other things that aren’t direct cash payments so to speak but are a result of your edits. As long as you do those things and your edits or edit proposals are otherwise in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you should be fine. You also need to understand that being (as you described yourself above) one of Cher's leading street teams (fan groups) to promote her and her music. I have direct connections to her manager and get exclusive info on new releases etc. doesn’t give you (or Lloyd’s team through you) any special type of editorial control over what’s written about Lloyd on Wikipedia.

As for the infobox image, either you or someone else is going to need to find a freely-licensed replacement that’s a more recent photo of Lloyd for Wikipedia and Commons to accept it. If you or someone else can find such an image that’s better for Wikipedia’s purposes, then most likely no other editors are going to object. However, if someone does object, then any disagreement is going to need to be resolved per WP:DR. In other words, Lloyd’s team can help out by providing a freely-licensed image to use instead, but there might still need to be a WP:CONSENSUS established to do so. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:28, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I found a 404'd link for a magazine article referenced in Persecution of Hindus. So I searched and found a pdf of the article, not on the website of the magazine, but just posted on the website of a Columbia University professor. Is this professor violating copyright, and would Wikipedia be violating copyright if we linked to it? I haven't been able to find any link to the article on the actual Frontline website. Assuming it can't be found, would you recommend posting the pdf, or just referencing the article without any link? Thank you. Shmarrighan (talk) 06:19, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shmarrighan, I'm not qualified to answer your question as far as Wikipedia is concerned, although, given that the article in question was published by the Oxford Journal of Islamic Studies, it is almost certainly the copyright of either the journal or the author (Richard Eaton) or both, but not of the academic from Columbia who posted the PDF. But I did notice that Delhi Sultanate has a link to the same article; this in fact points to the journal's website which inludes a reference to the article, a one-page preview, and a link which subscribers may use to download the article. Maybe the link that you are asking about could point to the same place? Mike Marchmont (talk) 10:30, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Marchmont Thank you, I appreciate it! I'm curious, is there a Wikipedia tool or strategy that you used to find that other reference in Delhi Sultanate? Or did you just poke around and find it by serendipity? Thanks again. Shmarrighan (talk) 06:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Shmarrighan I started by trying to find the page at Columbia where Prof. Pritchett had posted the PDF. My thinking was that that page might have had some information about her source - for example, if she had permission to post the PDF or if there was sort of licence agreement between Columbia and the journal. In order to find that page, I did a Google search. My search term was the PDF's URL, preceded by link:. That didn't lead me to the Columbia site, but the search results did include the Wikipedia article I mentioned above.

I realise that this doesn't really answer your original question - about whether Wikipedia would be violating copyright if you linked to Prof. Pritchett's upload. Perhaps a more knowledgeable Wikipedian could answer that question.

Mike Marchmont (talk) 07:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's no problem, you've given me enough information to proceed, and some good searching tips. Thank you! Shmarrighan (talk) 06:04, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am making a page in wikipedia about a new band. Part of the infobox requires a picture of the band. As you may know by stalking my account, I have had constant operose copyright dilemmas. So i would ask today, what are the copyright requirements? I would provide the name of the band and a picture. Thanks Ice bear johny (talk) 07:10, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

​It's not necessary to include an image in an article, infoboxes have many fields and you can choose which ones to fill in. It's best to assume that an image is copyrighted and can't be used if you did not personally take the image or if you did not encounter it already uploaded on Commons. – Thjarkur (talk) 09:33, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ice bear johny (talk • contribs) 09:55, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ice bear johny Please don't think of editors looking over your (virtual) shoulder as stalking. Any time an editor asks a question at Teahouse, the hosts there may take it upon themselves to look at past article edits by the questioner, to see if there is a pattern of editing that might need improvement. Think of it as training wheels. Also as a spotlight. Hosts - and any experienced editor who has articles on their watch lists - are happy whenever new editors prove to be able to improve articles. David notMD (talk) 12:51, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah that was only a flippant comment, colloquially referenced to today's facebook. Anyways thanks for letting me know that you can see (stalk but euphemised/in a trivial manner) my past edits. Way to go for me hehehe Ice bear johny (talk) 15:55, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ice bear johny, every single edit made by every single user is public on Wikipedia, except the ones that admins have specifically decided to hide (personal details, offensive abuse, etc.) Your history is at Special:Contributions/Ice bear johny. You can see anyone else's by changing the username in the same link. Along with your userpage and your user talk page, your contribution history is one of the most often checked when others come across you. There are further statistics pages that give metadata about your editing pattern and so on, also public. Basically, everything you do is not only public but also analysed endlessly by algorithms and summarised into multiple different kinds of reports. You might find WP:FOLLOWING of interest. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:39, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the article I created on illicit trade was converted to a redirection to the article on black market by another editor, who judged it was a duplicate topic. The discussion that followed with this editor can be found at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MrOllie#Redirecting_illicit_trade_to_black_market

The question is whether illicit trade and black markets are two distinct topics that each deserve their article, or whether the two are sufficiently synonyms for the former to be a redirection to the latter. I would like to ask the input of other Wikipedians on whether there is detailed policy to address such matter (I could find not it). Also, what would be the best way to reach consensus: is it to start a discussion on the talk page of black market?

FYI here is latest version of the article on illicit trade: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Illicit_trade&oldid=974366109

Many thanks for your input, Factfox (talk) 13:49, 27 September 2020 (UTC) Factfox (talk) 13:49, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Factfox, what the other editor did was perform a WP:BOLD WP:MERGE. If the two of you disagree, you can revert it or ask that they revert it and start a proper merge discussion as outlined at WP:MERGE. There's no issue having that discussion with the merge in place either, but that could be confusing to some editors. So, it's best to revert articles to the stable version before your contested change took place and then have the discussion for the change. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:52, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Usedtobecool, this is very useful and exactly the input I needed. Best, Factfox (talk) 15:27, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Usedtobecool The other editor asked that I disclose my COI on this thread. I explained on his talk page that I do not have a COI with this topic , but I may be a connected contributor as I did some academic work on this topic. Factfox (talk) 21:50, 27 September 2020 (UTC) [reply]

Factfox, I have not investigated the issue but if it's just about you adding references to your own academic work, please see WP:SELFCITE and abide by it. If someone challenges any of your citations to your own work, it is best to proceed as though you have a COI in trying to get that reference in, since you are unlikely to be able to be completely objective about the quality and relevance of your own work. That means you can make your case, seek broader input if needed, but should refrain from adding them back to the articles yourself once they are challenged.

I do not care to find out where you are employed and what that organisation's relationship is with "illicit trade". Since this is a general topic, I can't imagine any single organisation that you could be a member of that would make you ineligible to contribute to the whole of the article. But, if and when your organisation or its competitors become relevant within the discussion of the topic (this includes, for example, suggesting that one of the good approaches to tackling illicit trade is [insert one that your employer subscribes to]), you do have a COI and should refrain from adding such content to the article directly. I think there's a line to be toed here between the value you could bring as a subject matter expert and potential of compromise to WP:NPOV because of your close relationship with the topic.

Finally, if you reach an impasse on whether you have a COI and how much, there's WP:COIN to seek opinions, from other editors, about it. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Usedtobecool, sorry for the late reply but I wanted to thank you for taking the time to clarify these topics for me. It clarifies the general approach with respect to COI, and the potential situations  where I need to be especially careful. Have a great day, Factfox (talk) 20:52, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what to do with the wiki page interracial marriage. This page feels highly vandalized with many users pointing fingers at each other and at first I thought I knew who was in the right but now I don't know what to believe, I would personally try to read its history and fix the page but i'm currently really busy in real life and won't be free until around mid to late October, and even when I try my best to fix pages I often take the lazy way out or forget why I was trying to pursuit this edit in the first place and create a bigger mess than before, I don't know how to fix this page or help the users who fight with each other so I'm asking others to help, please -- Toby Mitches (talk) 01:34, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we could always go back to the beginning. No, I am not being serious. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Toby Mitches. If you've got concerns about the article, you can be WP:CAUTIOUS and discuss them at Talk:Interracial marriage. This will give others who also might be interested in subject matter chance to give their opinion as well. You can also be WP:BOLD and try to improve the article yourself; if someone's else reverts your changes, just follow WP:BRD and WP:DR, and try to address the other editor's concerns through article talk page discussion. What you really want to avoid doing (even though I'm pretty sure you just did it by mistake) is essentially blanking an article like you did here; I know you immediately self-reverted, but that's the kind of thing that's going to set off all kinds of buzzers and alarms (i.e. attract lots of immediate attention) and possibly lead to some warnings being added to your user talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:36, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly. To be honest you haven't really helped me, you have only stated the obvious, however this is my fault, I was should have asked a question instead of a statement, also I am aware that you shouldn't black a page, I did that by accident, I have no idea how it happened, but as soon as I saw what I did, I rushed back to editing and I fixed my mistake, I clearly didn't do it out of some malicious intent? instead what I should have asked is that I think their is a user who is abusing edits and I'd like to report him, he is sharing links relative to the topic but than editing the Wikipedia to suit his own interest, I would like to open a case against him, could you help me understand the process a little better and what will I be getting myself into? Thank you in advance -- Toby Mitches (talk) 03:25, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

​ I think you should try and continue to try and engage in discussion with the other editor on the article's talk page; however, I don't think you should be so quick to categorize the other editor as a liar or vandal unless you willing to support such statements by providing actual WP:DIFFs as proof. Content disputes (particularly about contentious subjects) often become emotional and heated and when they do your best bet is to stick to discussing content by showing how the other editor's position or claims is not in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policy and guidelines. Just from looking at the other editor's contributions, their only edits have been to the article's talk page, not the article themself; so, you calling them a vandal and liar is not very WP:CIVIL at all and will likely only make it that much harder to resolve things through discussion.

Editor behavior can be discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (ANI), but should really be the last resort when the problem has gotten so serious that administrator interventaion is needed. If you try to go to ANI now, the things any administrator reviewing the situation is likely going to notice are as follows: (1) the other editor is trying to use the article talk page to discuss things (they might be doing so in a somewhat rude manner, but they're trying); (2) the other editor has done nothing to disrupt or vandalize the article; and (3) your response on the talk page to the other editor has been less than civil. At ANI, you will find your part in things being assessed as well; so, you might want to go back and WP:STRIKE out anything that might be considered a personal attack and just instead focus on the content being discussed. If the other editor refuse to participate in a civil discussion with you, then move to the next step in WP:DR. If their behavior worsens and becomes a serious problem, then perhaps only then you should consider going to to ANI.

FWIW, I do think some of the other editor's comments are also inappropriate and I will add a warning to their user talk page to let them know that they need to do better as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:05, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marchjuly. That is fair, but I'm being civil when accusing him of lying, as that is truly what he is doing, I do not know what else to call it, however I do see that claiming he has vandalized the page is unjust, but this is because I suspect he is sockpuppeting and I should have made that more clear when accusing him, therefore I'll need to fix my edit to better suit my case, however thank you so much, this was truly helpful and I appreciate this dearly, I will use your advice as my next steps going forward, truly thank you -- Toby Mitches (talk) 06:57, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help me to publish wiki page for online study web and android application. Sunresh (talk) 05:39, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I assume this is about Draft:Sunresh. This draft currently lacks independent sources and as such fails WP:GNG Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I hope someone can answer me. Can someone please tell me why the article on 2020-21 FA Vase has either been deleted or moved to draft. Ta.

Courtesy link of article in draft: Draft:2020-21 FA Vase (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 06:29, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From article edit history appears it was created as a draft, and submitted. David notMD (talk) 06:35, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article was deleted on 27 September: (03:37, 27 September 2020 Liz talk contribs deleted page 2020-21 FA Vase (G8: Page dependent on a deleted or nonexistent page) (thank)) Gab4gab (talk) 09:59, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. A simple question today: I noticed the page for poet/writter Tsering Woeser is entitled without her first name [1]. Not usual practice, it seems. Fyi, BBC and France24 also use her as a reliable source for current information on Tibet. What's the process for requesting the correction? Much thanks as always. Pasdecomplot (talk) 06:30, 28 September 2020 (UTC)&nbsp[reply]

Pasdecomplot, hello! If it's your judgement that Tsering Woeser is the WP:COMMONNAME of this person, go ahead and WP:MOVE it. If you feel less sure, you can start a discussion on the talkpage first. If there's no reply for a few days, do what you think is reasonable. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Gråbergs Gråa Sång, wasn't sure every editor could make the move. I'll look into it. Pasdecomplot (talk) 07:09, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pasdecomplot, it's not every editor, but you are reasonably WP:AUTOCONFIRMed by now ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:13, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Regarding the entry for the boardgame of PICHENOTTE at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pichenotte I do have a 'conflict of interest', since I own the United States trademark for PICHENOTTE and have been making the game since 1997. Although some of the content is correct, this entry for pichenotte is very narrow in scope, has several inaccuracies and many statements without citations.

It also promotes a manufacturer, named as Pinnochi, which seems to be a violation of Wiki rules (?) and the manufacturer seems to be very obscure or non-existent. I am not trying to promote my business, but would like my customers to see accurate information on Wikipedia about the game of pichenotte.

With a friend, we made some changes last year, but, being newbies, we used no citations and the whole article we created was deleted. That was somewhat understandable, but it could have been the beginning of a collaborative effort instead of just wiping it out. Can I get help from an experienced, neutral editor to make this entry more correct or do I have to try and do it all myself ? I have a lot of citations and references now, and would like to work with someone who has an interest in promoting an accurate entry for the game. Thank you. Vlaad_Quebec 07:01, 28 September 2020 (UTC) Vlaad_Quebec 07:01, 28 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThreeVictors (talk • contribs)

First, there is no "we" in Wikipedia. A friend may advise you, but you are the only person who should be making edits from your account. Second, please remember to 'sign' your comments bytyping four of ~ at the end. Third, editors who add content need to add citations at the same time. Fourth, your situation is actually paid, not just COI. See WP:PAID for declaring such on your User page. As a paid editor, you should refrain from editing the article directly. Instead, you should propose specific changes in a new section on the article's Talk page, so that an independent editor can decide to implement or not. David notMD (talk) 07:49, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ThreeVictors: I've worked on the article some (a long time ago), and am willing to take a look at additional material for it. It is not impermissible for WP to mention companies, of course. We have many entire articles on companies. For games, major manufacturers are often mentioned (including now-defunct ones). So, it's not problematic for Pinnochi to be mentioned, or ThreeVictors's company to be mentioned, if we have sources for them. Anyway, a good bet would be to put draft material at something like User:ThreeVictors/Draft:Pichenotte, with {{Userspace draft}} at the top of it, then drop me a line at User talk:SMcCandlish and I'll see about integrating some of the material. Trademarks only apply within particular jurisdictions (and a US trademark on the name of French-Canadian folk game is of limited encyclopedic relevance – should not dominate coverage of the topic). Plus we have WP:NOT#PROMO policy. So, some care will have to be taken to not make it sound like a promo for a particular company. If the article already had problems in that regard, toward the old company, it sounds like it needs revision anyway. Coverage of US adoption/availability of a Canadian game or vice versa is encyclopedically relevant, in due amounts. Should be included, but someone with a direct financial conflict of interest should probably not be making the changes. Using a draft and an experienced third-party editor who has no stake in the matter to review the suggested changes is probably the best bet. I've worked before with explicit CoI editors, to good effect.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:09, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update: It's been brought to my attention that Pichenotte has been nominated for deletion or merger, here. Despite this, additional draft material could be useful, especially if it provides reliable sources independent of the subject. In the short term, that may help keep the article. In the longer term, if could help restore it if deleted, or contributed to better coverage of the subject if merged.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:08, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SMcCandlish, thanks for your input and I will post my referenced material, as you suggest, at User:ThreeVictors/Draft:Pichenotte and drop you a line when substantial material is added. My Google search for Pinnochi refers one to 'Pinocchio' and one company that seems to be out of business or out of stock material ^[1] In any case, I do have plenty to add and will beging soon. Thank you. Replying to David non MD...I understand that I am the sole author. I don't receive any money for editing, so I am not sure why I would be considered a WP:PAID editor, even after reading the notes about it. Are you saying that it is because I have a business ? If so, will declare it. Thank you. In any case I will proceed. I have nothing to hide and will declare all relevant information I can think of. And all this is new to me, so please bear with me as I stumble along. I am considering perhaps a new page creation, such as American Pichenotte, or Southwest Pichenotte, or Santa Fe Pichenotte, because I understand there is a legitimate claim that the square version of the board is popular and common in Quebec. The round version is also popular in Quebec and uses the same name of pichenotte, and this is where my family heritage is and many friends of non-French origion say the same thing. It seems more of a case of common terms being used for different games, as in pocket billiards, the correct term, perhaps for pool. We cannot require all pool halls to be renamed pocket billiard halls, so pichenotte players cannot be told to refer to their game as crokinole. Or for example, football and the many variations of football around the world. We can't tell Australians that Australian rules football must change their name because football is an American game with specific rules. But I can see where this gets very difficult to provide accuracy in all the Wikipedia articles without bias. Very tricky and hairsplitting. Anyway, accurate and non-biased information is what I am trying to accomplish, as I am sure you are trying to do same. Thank you.ThreeVictors (talk) 09:25, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have made suggestions for PICHENOTTE here at ^[1]ThreeVictors (talk) 02:19, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am Fikry Muraza. I need help to get a page approved. I really hope for your support. Thank you very much! Fikry Muraza (talk) 09:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fikry Muraza You asked about this at the AFC Help Desk, please only use one method of seeking assistance, to avoid duplication of effort. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Conflict Of Interest declaration properly belongs on your User page, not the draft, but as the draft has been rejected, does not matter. None of the references meet Wikipedia's standard for establishing notability. I recommend that you request the draft be deleted. David notMD (talk) 10:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to update the Celebrity's Date of Birth on her request. and I do have Visual Proof of her original DOB. so How I can submit that? Ufjohns (talk) 10:31, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Give a reference to the reliable source in which it is published; if it's not been published it's not acceptable for Wikipedia. David Biddulph (talk) 10:36, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Guidance at WP:DOB. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to approve my article Draft:Poojabishnoi Naresh Prajapat 11:18, 28 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nareshprajapatmogra (talk • contribs)

@Nareshprajapatmogra: The draft still does not demonstrate that the subject is notable enough to have an article written on it. While David notMD did some cleanup, you still have yet to provide reliable sources to back up your claims, and the article still sounds promotional. In it's current state, it's highly unlikely to be approved. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:51, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Pooja Bishnoi This is WP:TOOSOON by many years. If she continues to excell at sports to the point that she participates in the Olympics, then and only then would an article be appropriate. Nothing else in the draft contributes to notability. David notMD (talk) 14:07, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I submitted the page below but was declined for reasons: Submission declined on 28 September 2020 by Theroadislong (talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Mama Walton (talk) 06:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

References I want to add : http://www.johnwaltonsecondary.co.za/about-us/47-john-walton.html https://epages.co.za/john-walton-secondary-school-jubilee-park/ https://www.africanadvice.com/1365760/Schools/Eastern_Cape/John_Walton_Secondary/ 

Mama Walton (talk) 06:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Mama Walton, please don't post the text of the article here: just link to Draft:John Walton Secondary School. Wikipedia is basically not interested in what the school says or wants to say about itself: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the school have chosen to publish about it in reliable sources such as major newspapers, or books from reputable publishers. All the links you have given above fail at least one of being independent, reliable, and having significant coverage of the school.

For one example of the problem, if I look at the text you have written above: "was established in 1973 because of a growing need for a second coloured high school in Uitenhage at the time", my question is, which person, wholly unconnected with the school, has said in a reliable publication that that was the reason for founding the school? Unless there is an independent reliable source, then that claim does not belong in any Wikipedia article. For another "This situation can however be improved by creating a bigger awareness amongst our community and especially amongst our former pupils" doesn't belong in any encyclopaedia article anywhere: it is not the business of an encyclopaedia to argue for anything, no matter how virtuous. Equally "this fine institution" is utterly out of place in an encylcopaedia. What a Wikipedia article does is to summarise what independent reliable published sources say about a subject, nothing more. --ColinFine (talk) 15:34, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have read your response ColinFine and appreciate your response, I now stand back with a thankfull heart— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mama Walton (talk • contribs) 19:11, 28 September 2020 (UTC+9) (UTC)

Thank you for your appreciation, Mama Walton. I appreciate that you were meaning to be helpful by deleting the material above; but I have restored it. We don't normally change or remove material already on a talk or discussion page, since it may cause following comments to make no sense. --ColinFine (talk) 20:09, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I'm very new to Wiki and learning slowly. I've edited a page, and added new footnotes for the page on John Pinney. One of the existing URLs (note 12) in the References list is in blue, but the ones I've added aren't, and I can't work out why. Can someone tell me? Ruthhenrietta (talk) 12:14, 28 September 2020 (UTC) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 12:14, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruthhenrietta: The blue text that you see are links to the citations, you might find Wikipedia:Citing sources helpful, additionally I'm including a link to the page Template:Cite book which has the script you would need to cite books. I've adjusted two of your sources for you to give you a head start, and use for an example. I hope this helps. Coryphantha Talk 12:40, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Hi Ruthhenrietta. You need to provide a url for a source if you want it to appear blue in the "References" section. It looks like you've cited some sources, but haven't didn't provided any links to where they can be viewed online; this is perfectly OK to do per WP:SAYWHERE because sources aren't required to be available online as long as they're reliable. The reason John Pinney#cite_note-12 is blue is because a link for the source has been provided; the reason John Pinney#cite_note-4, John Pinney#cite_note-10, and John Pinney#cite_note-11 aren't blue is because no url has been provided for those sources. The principle works essentially the same as that for internal links (i.e. WP:WIKILINKS); if I simply type "John Pinney" without providing a link to the page, all you get is "John Pinney"; if, however, I provide a link for "John Pinney", it will be in blue as "John Pinney". -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:43, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Coryphantha @Marchjuly - I'm beginning to realise that getting the citations right is about 100 times more difficult than writing the article itself.. and I can't remember how to tag you in my reply - apologies Ruthhenrietta (talk) 14:16, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried using the VisualEditor to insert references? See here, if you have a URL it can automatically create a linked citation for you. And if you're linking to a book on Google Books, this tool can automatically convert them to a citation for you. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:48, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruthhenrietta: You can find further help on adding references at WP:REFBEGIN or at WP:ERB. (The second is a help page I wrote myself. Both have videos to help you) We have two options of editing tools - both have a helpful 'Cite' button, and both allow you to paste in a url and automatically get it to 'autofill' as much as it can. You'll probably still need to add a few details manually. I will be frank: adding references using Visual Editor is not as easy as doing it using WP:Source Editor, especially when you want to add in additional field. Good luck, and stick with it! Nick Moyes (talk) 20:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Moyes: and @Þjarkur: thank you both - those are REALLY good tips and much much easier than trying to do it all manually. I've spent 10 minutes working out how to tag/ping you in my reply - hope this is right. In my original question I actually meant that the hyperlinks I'd added were fine, but didn't look blue in colour... still haven't cracked that, but I've learnt much easier ways to add references.Ruthhenrietta (talk) 15:56, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruthhenrietta: Yes, you pinged me just perfectly! Well done. I remember being in your shoes when I started out, too. For the first few months I would copy a reference from other articles and manually modify each to fit my needs as I also didn't know there were easier ways to do things. We have all been there and, providing you are willing to ask questions and read (=wade) through some of our guidance pages, there's no reason why you shouldn't enjoy contributing to this amazing encyclopaedia. We are always here at the Teahouse to answer questions quickly, 24/7/365. But if you do decide to stick around (and contribute to Bristol/Slavery-related topics) and need more of a helping hand, I'd be happy to offer more direct support in due course. We have a scheme called Adopt-a-User which suits those who have been around sufficiently long to clearly be committed, but not long enough to fully understand how some of the more subtle or complex things work. Mentoring is a great way to help new but committed editors, especially as we don't have as many female editor as we would wish, despite the efforts of the Te Women in Red WikiProject to encourage women to write about women. Finally, you might find this project of some interest, as it encompasses slavery issues: WP:HUMAN_RIGHTS. All the best, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:16, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Moyes: I would LOVE to have a mentor... I hope I'm going to stick with this, as I do feel passionately that it's the best way to get accurate information in the public realm (though since I've been looking more carefully at Wiki, I realise how many pages have been cobbled together from information on slightly dodgy websites)... I'll keep asking the Teahouse for the moment, but if I'm still 'here' in a month or so's time, I'll definitely take you up on your offer. Meanwhile I'll follow you on Twitter! Ruthhenrietta (talk) 15:17, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If I am not supposed to write from other websites, how can I write it myself with no help. NuvolaBrain123 (talk) 14:28, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

​You'll have to first read the source and then summarize in your own words what the source says. One thing you could try if you're having trouble paraphrasing: Find a few sources and create a list of all the basic facts they contain (add them as a source for each line). Then, take those facts you've just written down and write prose around them. This often works better on Wikipedia than elsewhere because we write in a short summary style. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:36, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Watch out for self-published sources though, Google Sites and Steemit aren't reliable sources. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:38, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

is there a way that I can make a team? AbinadiDanvers (talk) 14:59, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AbinadiDanvers, could you be more specific? Do you mean that you want to write an article about a sports team? – Thjarkur (talk) 15:01, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

no I want to know if you can make a team of editors?--AbinadiDanvers (talk) 17:24, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

​People usually just work by themselves on things that interest them. They can use talk pages to discuss content when needed. You can also see WikiProjects, for example WikiProject Military history, where people can discuss improvements to a broader set of articles. It would probably be quite hard to mantain a team here since it usually just comes down to yourself to be WP:BOLD and improve articles by yourself. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:37, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

no I mean editing the content of the page`s and how stuff looks. But I will see what you say tomorrow I got stuff to do, goodbye.--AbinadiDanvers (talk) 17:49, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hello, AbinadiDanvers. That depends on what you mean by "a team of editors". Each individual editor must have his or her own account, two or more different people must not share the same account. Editors can choose to work together. Indeed the various WikiProjects are in a sense teams of Editors. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory and linked pages for a list of existing projects, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals for where to propose a new project.

Editors can agree to work together in other ways than a project, as long as each editor has a separate account. It is best to create a page where the editors involved can discuss whatever they are working on. I can help you do that. I would need to know what the team planned to work on. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:01, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you DES I will make sure to contact you for help.--AbinadiDanvers (talk) 13:09, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am a relatively new editor. I have been updating this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yell_(company) with company news that is in the public interest and published in the national media.

Another editor, from an anonymous IP address and presumably working for Yell is repeatedly undoing my updates as soon as they are published.

I find the wikipedia guidance on these disputes pretty confusing and would appreciate any advice on how to stop this page vandalism.

Richdanny (talk) 15:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC) Richdanny (talk) 15:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Richdanny, and welcome to the Teahouse.

First of all, you have no evidence that the IP was workign for Yell, nd should not make such an accusation without evidence. The edits that were reverted did not properly cite sourfes, adn might havbe ben reverted for that reason alone.

You have now added sources in proper form, and the matter has now been discussed on Talk:Yell (company). I have removed the inline external links which you had left in place. I will say that the sources you added are less than wonderful, but that can better be discussed on the article talk page. If there are further reverts you can raise the matter there. Note that a revert is not always vandalism, although ideally a revert would indicate the reason, at least briefly. If there seems to be persistent vandalism, it may be reported at WP:AIV or a request for page protection may be made at WP:RFPP. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:09, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I note the reply to an earlier question of mine. Sunderland AFC have put out this statement at:- https://www.safc.com/news/club-news/2020/september/on-this-day-in-1880

I repeat, no matter what is claimed by the organisation they have no primary source material from 1879 on this. None exists. if you take a look at the link on the page that 'confirms' 1879 you will see it is to a page that goes back to 2010 and which has never been altered since and which, is to all intents and purposes, dead.

Meanwhile, there is primary source material from 1880 on this with the Sunderland Echo of 27 September carrying a report of the teachers meeting two days earlier that states 'the teachers have FORMED a football club'

A more accurate report on the club's formation date would start by saying at the meeting of 25 September 1880 the club was formed ..... some people have claimed the club was formed in 1879 and have pointed to an article in 1887 and later in 1929 as indicating this is the case.

I don't wish to labour this point but I am acknowledged as a football historian, I have written numerous football history books and Sunderland is my own team of many years. MarkMetcalf (talk) 16:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This was asked here as recently as four days ago. Start a discussion at Talk:Sunderland A.F.C.. I will post a note to the football WikiProject as well to let them know of this question. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir or Madam,

I didn't realise I couldn't edit my own wikipedia page and now there is a template saying that 'major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view'. Everything on the page is now up to date and factually correct. Can you help me clean it up?

Many thanks and I look forward to hearing from you,

Nic Dunlop Nicdunlop (talk) 16:39, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did not see anything that required cleanup as such, practically the entire article was written by another editor. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:44, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nicdunlop. You might want to look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Relationship between the subject, the article, and Wikipedia as well as Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for information on how you can request help if you've got concerns about the content of the article. I also suggest you take a look at c:User talk:Nicdunlop#File tagging File:Nic Dunlop.jpg and c:Commons:OTRS#Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS? regarding the photo that's currently being used in the article. All you probably need to do (if you're actually the person who took the photo) is email your WP:CONSENT to Wikimedia OTRS for license verification purposes. If you didn't take the photo yourslf, then you probably shouldn't be claiming it as your "own work; in that case, please look at c:Commons:OTRS:If you are NOT the copyright holder for more details. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do i insert images to my story? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foodboy1 (talk • contribs) 16:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Section header added. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Foodboy1. What do you mean by "story"? This is an encyclopedia and we do not have stories. Adding images is very complex, so please describe the image you want to add and where you found it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy: Foodboy1's draft Speedy deleted. David notMD (talk) 17:53, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How does one add images and pictures in their writings? 105.232.25.195 (talk) 17:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This should help you Wikipedia:Images TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:24, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have created a few articles recently. One of this is Jahan Geneve which I created two weeks back. Suddenly I found that to be deleted today for speedy deletion as promotional. I tried to address the issue and recreate the article after removing all the promotional parts. But it was again nominated for speedy deletion in same category. I have been going through the notibility policy and other policies thoughly before creating all my articles. I think the brand is notable as have some historic value while based in switzerland, so decided to write about it. I found some editor said I am an UPE. I have felt devastated and decided to nominate my own article for deletion. I truly believe there are lot of editors there who can judge and decide if the article is worthy of being retained in wikipedia. I am fine with any outcome out of it. But it was very shocking the way I was alleged of being paid editor persistently. I would request any help and I think this will help me with my future activities in wikipedia better. The deletion discussion is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jahan_Geneve --Chiro725 (talk) 20:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC) Chiro725 (talk) 20:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC) Chiro725 (talk) 20:43, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiro725, hello & welcome, an article, no matter how notable the subject matter is, can still be deleted as being too promotional, it’s unfortunate you are saddened by your current predicament but UPE is a serious transgression and editors here try to combat it to the best of their ability, if you are accused of UPE, there’s probably a valid reason for it. Paid editing as long as it is in tune with what has been outlined in WP:PAID is legal but not disclosing it is very much a serious violation that may get you blocked from editing altogether. Celestina007 (talk) 21:29, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007, Thank you very much for your comment. At least someone talked nicely to me. I have understood that there was some problem with my initial article as it has some promotion. At the time of recreating it, I saw the notice which said if I could improve the article only then I should proceed which I followed. Also, I think all are here working to make this resource of enormous value to modern world better and better and better. I did not think that writing about a commercial entity will make me face this. I just want the right thing to happen. I have complete trust on the editors who have spent a lot of time here, but I don't think they are right with the allegation with me. I do not have any wish to say in favor of any article or any edit if that violates our policies. But I am seriously feeling something is not happening right. I have come to know that a lot of people gets blocked here but I don't have any wish to get blocked ever, so I try to always red policies before I do something unfamiliar. I request you further, please forgive me if I am asking too much, but can you please remark what you think about the article? I wish to see something just happen to my article. I agree any article can get deleted, but I think that must happen in proper way. I thank you so much for your taking time and addressing my concern. I am really feeling a lot better. Thank you --Chiro725 (talk) 21:48, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Chiro725, I know that receiving these warnings is quite uncomfortable. The thing about Wikipedia is that we have almost no information about who the other editors are and therefore many things are just based on trying to find patterns. We have seen a lot of paid editors that have a similar editing pattern to yours, so using the best available information it's normal that someone would ask you if you are a paid editor. If you're not, then you can just ignore it and continue writing articles about notable topics. Regarding your article on Jahan Geneve, it appears that the only coverage that they have are press releases and similar, there's little independent coverage to be found. – Thjarkur (talk) 09:50, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Þjarkur, ignoring it isn’t the right move, rather they ought to respond to the editor who has placed the tag & explain to them that they aren’t receiving financial rewards for their edits before proceeding to continue regular editing, asides that i think all you have told them is good. Celestina007 (talk) 16:28, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thjarkur thank you for your comments and help. I don't have a bad feeling now anymore. The article got deleted and most of the senior editors said it was not worthy to keep as the brand is not notable. I though having some historical value it might be notable, but I was wrong. I just wanted to cross check the fact that if the article was only promotional or it was non notable too. I got my answer. I think these discussions have made my understanding matured in some fold about notability. I like to thank Celestina007 for their guidance again. --Chiro725 (talk) 11:41, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chiro725, you are welcome, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page when in doubt or need guidance. Celestina007 (talk) 12:44, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am User:Ylevental, and I have mental issues that will make it hard to not sock. I think six months' time would be fine. My IP range is at Special:Contributions/2606:5580:30C:7F9E:F4A5:547C::/64 and the quarantine makes it hard to go outside much. I've lost interest in Wikipedia anyway; this is just in case. I lost interest particularly because of endless edit wars such as Special:Diff/945920522/945925090 (concerning autism) and Special:Diff/975358290/975359916 (concerning Bernie Sanders)

 2606:5580:30C:7F9E:F4A5:547C:7C47:70C3 (talk) 21:36, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. Just a quick note to say that I do appreciate your post - thank you. I understand your request and the difficulties you must be facing at this time. Be assured that I am looking into this, and will respond again as soon as I am able. (I have posted a note at User talk:Ylevental (see here). Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. Thanks for the post. 2606:5580:30C:7F9E:F003:F68B:EF93:9434 (talk) 23:09, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BTW I have taken up alternative baking as a hobby; I find it more agreeable with me at this time 2606:5580:30C:7F9E:F003:F68B:EF93:9434 (talk) 23:30, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, thank you for responding. (My wife and I have also done quite a bit more cooking and baking recently, too. Her homemade bread is wonderful when toasted and with butter and fig jam!) I do understand how addictive Wikipedia can sometimes be, and how ovewhelming the temptation to check and make edits so often is. As a non-autistic person, self-control is often quite hard for me, so I welcome your post, and can't possibly imagine how hard it has been for you during this time. Having checked your IP 64 range and that your post here is legit, I am shortly going to apply a /64 range block for 6 months, as you requested. Because IPv6 addresses change so much, it might be very hard for anyone to spot any future unblock request. Putting Wikipedia to one side, I just want to say that I can't really fully appreciate what you've been going through, but I am on your side. For your own good, I'm going to instigate that block for you. Please remember that wherever you are in the world, there are local agencies and volunteer bodies able to offer support if things get too much. With respect to Wikipedia, there is also this support page. Kind regards and best wishes from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:11, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, my friend. That has now been done for you. Take good care. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:19, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Can you review my article if it contains an error or not and help me complete it Karrar.allamy (talk) 23:43, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Karrar.allamy: Please link to your draft, as you have created more than one recently. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Karrar.allamy: Is it Rikan Lateef? RudolfRed (talk) 00:32, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RudolfRed Yes, this is the article and also the other, they are the world champions in the kickboxing game, and you can find their names in articles about the games Karrar.allamy (talk) 02:28, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Turn redirects into articles. How do you turn redirects into articles? }} Cwater1 (talk) 02:47, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cwater1, you just hit the edit button just like any other article, remove the redirect code that is there, and start writing an article. If you would need a lot of time and edits to make an acceptable article, you can write a draft on "Draft:" space or your "User:" space and then move the page to the location of the redirect when it is ready, or ask someone else to move it for you. Do note that there may be a reason the redirect is not an article, so you should first explore if there is an existing consensus not to have that article but only a redirect for it. If there is no such consensus, you should still make sure the topic is notable, per WP:N before you make it into an article. If in doubt, write a draft (just use this WP:Article wizard) and submit it. Someone else will check it to determine if the topic is indeed notable, and if the draft is ready, move it to the correct location. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:37, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know how to move a page to a page that already exists? This is my first time venturing into moving pages, and cannot seem to find a way to do this without copy-pasting which is not allowed. Anyone? Heart ^(talk) 03:48, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HeartGlow30797: I think you may need an admin to do this. You can post a request at WP:RM. RudolfRed (talk) 04:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hi HeartGlow30797. I don't think it's technically possible for you do so. The other existing page will need to be deleted first, and you're going to need to be an administrator to do that. It might be possible to WP:USURPTITLE the already existing page, but that can be tricky to do and the possibility of making a mistake is high if you're not familiar with the process. Generally, the way Wikipedia tries to resolve such name conflicts is through Wikipedia:Disambiguation. Disambiguation as well can sometimes tricky though when it involves determing which page is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, which editors might not always agree upon. Anyway, if you can provide more information about the page you want to move, then a Teahouse host can probably give you a more specific answer. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Page mover right is sufficient, so admins are not necessary. Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:45, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marchjuly, thanks, I think I will build up my cred by doing simple page moves for a while. Hopefully, then I can be able to get the page mover right. Thanks, y'all! Heart ^(talk) 05:21, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HeartGlow30797, Please see WP:SWAP for information about how to swap two pages. You may be able to perform this action if you have a page mover right. Once swapped, you may need a little bit cleanup as well. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 14:11, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have added few references to the article I created about Mahaveer Awards. Can you kindly guide me how to get my article approved. Wmydaughter (talk) 04:42, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wmydaughter. Try taking a look at Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners for some general tips on how to properly write, format and cite a Wikipedia article. You might also want to look at Wikipedia:Notability for some information on the kinds of topics generally deemed OK to try and create Wikipedia articles about. Finally, you could also try asking the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards and Wikipedia:WikiProject India for help since those WikiProject seem to be the ones most relevant to the subject of your draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:09, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link:Draft:Mahaveer Awards. Wmydaughter, I added the untitled header to your post to separate it from another. Please feel free to modify it as you like. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:49, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I moved six references into the body of the text, but you may decide that those need to be in different places in the text. David notMD (talk) 09:48, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to wiki, I have never been here before, I want to know how can I publish my Biography to Wikipedia so people can know me more? MizanRahmanSinger (talk) 04:51, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MizanRahmanSinger. You seem to be misunderstanding some important things about Wikipedia. I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing for some general information that you'll might find helpful. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:58, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MizanRahmanSinger, If you found the comment above mine to be confusing or ambiguous, in summary Wikipedia isn’t a platform used by anyone to promote anything or anyone. It also isn’t like a LinkedIn website where anyone can create a page for themselves as we have very stringent policies pertaining to biographical articles & notability, only notable persons can have biographical articles on Wikipedia. Celestina007 (talk) 16:37, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In This request for closure of an expired request for comments, I go into detail about edits from the dispute that caused the request for comments, as none of the other three users in the dispute ever commented on it (with one being inactive for most of it). In fact, all of the votes for the RFC were to keep the content on the page, but there were only 4 votes (including mine), so I felt the need to mention the other three users in the dispute. Additionally, I mention the advice from one of the opposing users that the page needed secondary sources, and then link to an image showing a private thanks from him for me adding said secondary sources. Are these details allowed or not for a request for closure? Considering how low the participation was for the RFC, I felt the need to mention the other users in the dispute due to them not commenting on the RFC, but now I’m having second thoughts that said details aren’t allowed. Unnamed anon (talk) 05:53, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unnamed anon, welcome! What you say here in this post seems fine and also enough for any potential closer. What you've said there doesn't seem neutral and is therefore likely not fine. If the closer should be aware of other discussions, list them in proper order and if you must provide further information, do it like you've done here (I mean neutrally; I don't mean without diffs).

I am answering only because I noticed that this post was somewhat neglected, so please consider my response an opinion and not an answer. Whenever I am at WP:ANRFC, it looks to me like Redrose64 is tending to it. And I have also noticed Rosguill (apologies for pinging you this, the third time in as many days) helping out there. If either of them have any advice, you'll probably receive it too, now that I've pinged them. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:38, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Usedtobecool, at AN/RFC you make slightly too much of an actual argument. Since we're on the topic of RfC closures Unnamed anon, I want to point out that I corrected some mistakes in your filing of the close of a discussion at Nikolai Lukashenko. Your comment at the actual discussion could also have been better written; it reads more like you're taking the side of the consensus rather than summarizing it, you forgot to sign the discussion and you didn't invoke WP:SNOW. That having been said, given the one-sidedness of the discussion I don't think anyone will object, but generally speaking I would maybe avoid closing discussions, and particularly ones where the close is out of process, until you have a bit more experience participating in them. Even if your assessments of consensus are accurate, editors are more likely to object to your close than they would a more experienced editor. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:10, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

sir why my page of K. B. pathak was deleted from the sandbox it was send for pubilcation we are new to this page so please help me out K B Pathak (talk) 06:06, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

K B Pathak, if you are referring to your sandbox, the deletion log says that you requested deletion. See WP:REFUND if you wish to get it back. I see you got blocked temporarily for unsourced content, if you wish to continue editing read WP:CITE and then request for an unblock. Heart ^(talk) 06:12, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See Kader Khan for an example of an article about a person active in the India movie industry. Your draft is just a list of movies for which K B Pathak did the screenplay. David notMD (talk) 09:57, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

K B Pathak, your topic of choice seems notable but you seem to be having problems writing a draft that will get accepted. Perhaps someone might help you if you asked nicely at WT:INDIA? Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:12, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I want to rename the Category:Indian summiters of Mount Everest as the spelling of "summiteers" is wrong, but I cant find any move option and also no help in Help:Category. How do I rename/move this category which reflects the appropriate changes in the 55 articles listed in it without manually labouring on all 55 articles. The articles using the correct spelling like Indian summiteers of Mount Everest show red links. Is in such circumstances tools like AWB appropriate for automated editing? Thanks. Roller26 (talk) 07:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The spelling isn't wrong it can be spelt either way, there are hundreds of catgeories that use the spelling "summiter" here Category:Summiters of Mount Everest. Theroadislong (talk) 08:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Theroadislong, thanks. It so happens that when I was trying to clear this confusion earlier on google, I was misspelling the single e version with a single m and hence was not getting any relevant results, leading me to assume that spelling to be incorrect. Anyways want about future cases of category moves/renaming. Roller26 (talk) 08:40, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Roller26. The name of a category is on every page that is in that category, so they would all need to be edited. I've no doubt there is a bot that can do this, though I know little about bots; but it would need to be done. --ColinFine (talk) 08:54, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Roller26, ColinFine the process for renaming categories is at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion and spelling mistakes can be corrected by Speedy renaming. If renaming is agreed then the administrator who processes it will use a bot to update all the affected articles. TSventon (talk) 12:00, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ColinFine, TSventon Thanks. Roller26 (talk) 13:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Roller26: As has been said, though, this is not a "spelling mistake". Though neither Merriam nor the OED has the word "summiter", it does seem to be in use both here and the web at large, interchangeably with "summiteer" (which is pronounced differently, rhyming with "year"; i.e., it's a different word). Whether we should be using the word should probably be researched. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AlanM1, can you find it in any dictionaries?This must be a really new word, but we didn't invent it, it seems, as I find a few results from before 2001. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My name is Maurice B Thomas, in no need of anonymity, and incredulous of the antics of one poster, widely regarded as a "troll." So, my initial question is, "Who is he?"MARKETEX2020 (talk) 09:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MARKETEX2020 are you talking about Viewmont Viking, who posted a warning on your page, and who you made a legal threat against? Please read Wikipedia:No legal threats. In answer to your question: that editor is an experienced user, and what he put on your page was a standard warning against changing content without providing a reliable source. Bishonen | tålk 09:15, 29 September 2020 (UTC).[reply]

MARKETEX2020 You added content to Timuel Black and Pervis Spann without providing reliable source references. Viewmont Viking reverted the changes and politely posted on your Talk page that the content was removed due to lack of referencing, but could be added back if references were provided. That is standard procedure. As Bishinen noted, VV is an experienced and highly regarded editor - the antithesis of a "troll." Your posting of your credentials on VV's Talk page are for naught; all (well some) of us are experts or have unique access to information. Threatening a "legal snafu" on your own Talk page was, hopefully, hyperbole in the heat of the moment (since removed by you), and so you are free to continue to add valuable information to articles. Just remember that truth is required, but verification via references is also required. This is especially true for biographies of living people. David notMD (talk) 10:08, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The existing entries, for both subjects, remain defamatory, in my humble opinion, as they contain erroneous information about African Americans,(ala 'Amos 'n' Andy') which tends to defame the subjects, both of whom, well known to myself and others, would find the entries objectionable as erroneous.

Both men are African Americans who are advanced in age (88 years and 101 years respectively for Mr. Spann and Mr. Black) who have not, to my knowledge, even seen these entries or are unlikely to ever see these entries, while they remain defamed without their knowledge. MARKETEX2020 (talk) 13:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You should allow the corrections submitted, as even your assertion that, for example, Mr. Black's parents were sharecroppers could not possibly have been true as they lived in urban industrial settings in Bessemer, Florence, and Birmingham, Alabama, where there is no opportunity for agricultural pursuits of any kind whatsoever, and Steel Mills are prevalent.MARKETEX2020 (talk) 13:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My Sources are my own direct knowledge and the subjects themselves, whose interviews I have either conducted over periods as long as 60 years (I attended Farragut High School, where Mr. Black taught, from 1959-1963, for example) or where I have attempted to include such first person interviews, while such inclusion has been prohibited by Wikimedia.MARKETEX2020 (talk) 13:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your suspicions of paid employment by the subjects of myself are personally insultingMARKETEX2020 (talk) 13:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did not initiate either entry, I only supplied corrections to erroneous assumptions or supplied excluded facts about each subject.MARKETEX2020 (talk) 13:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Case In Point: Your original entry on Mr Black excluded both his children and all but one spouse.MARKETEX2020 (talk) 13:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC) Case In Point: Your original entry on Mr Spann portrayed him as if a buffoon devoid of technical or business skill.MARKETEX2020 (talk) 13:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I personally am willing to believe every thing you want to add is true, based on your personal knowledge. Wikipedia requires references, regardless. On the flip side, if there is derogatory content without references, that should be removed. As for being questioned about paid, that is a standard query - not intended to be personally insulting - whenever a new editor is focusing on one or a few articles. A simple declaration on your User page that you are not being paid to edit the articles on T. Black or P. Spann is sufficient. David notMD (talk) 13:46, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To your "Case In Point": About T. Black, the article was created in July 2019 and edited dozens of time before your first edit. Likewise, the P. Spann article was created in 2012. Almost all articles at Wikipedia are a cumulative effort by multiple editors. Your addition of spouses and children remain in the Black article because the content is referenced. The paragraph you want to add about P. Spann being able to draw coverage maps was reverted because it lacked a reference. David notMD (talk) 14:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a way I can help you with your problem tell me, I would love to help.--AbinadiDanvers (talk) 14:15, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, everyone. @MARKETEX2020: I User:Nigetastic (talk) created the initial article. I have met Timuel Black a few times, but my connection was more to the group who facilitated the publication of his memoir "Sacred Ground." The original entry was scant, I'll admit. Time was short, but I thought his life deserved an entry here. And my observation about wikipedia is that, rather than create one detailed, polished entry all in one go, sometimes it's better simply to get the basics in and let others continue to add and shape in their own words and way. I didn't need to "own" the shape of Tim's story. If I skipped over swathes of Tim's life, it was in the spirit of leaving a space for others to participate. . . . But I have 2-3 copies of the book that I'd be glad to mail to those who'd like to read about this amazing man and to help flesh out this entry.

About Tim's parents, MARKETEX2020 is correct according to Tim Black. First, framing his family's life with the Great Migration, Black writes that his father migrated *two times*, first "from tenant farms where they chopped cotton to the market town of Florence, Alabama" (a non-industrial town in N. Alabama), and (later in the same paragraph) that his father "worked for Bessemer Steel in Birmingham, Alabama" before moving north. So Tim didn't say his father was a sharecropper in Bessemer but that he had been "a tenant farmer" who worked in Birmingham at Bessemer Steel. Bessemer, AL is adjacent to B'ham near where the mills are, but the book doesn't say where the family lived.

Now, the diff between "tenant farmer" and a "sharecropper" is small but meaningful. Tenant farmers have their own tools, gear, and livestock. A sharecropper doesn't. Tim called his father "a tenant farmer." The same memoir, however, includes a tribute to Tim that Sen Richard Durbin (D-IL) introduced into the US Congressional Record in 2017 that referred to Tim as having come from "sharecroppers." The upshot is that I think--just my opinion--that a hundred years ago, most readers in a mostly rural USA could and would differentiate between tenant farmers and sharecroppers. These days, I think people just say "sharecroppers" as a poetic and generic word for poor or working-class agriculture families.

I'm happy to dip and add this, but, as I said, I have a couple of copies of his memoir--a very brisk and conversational work--that I'd be glad to mail to someone else if they'd like to participate. Nigetastic (talk) 21:05, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, all. As a follow up, I have updated the Timuel Black entry with a paragraph that succinctly recaps the points in my note above buttressed with one citation to his memoir and a second from the Congressional Record (instead of the book's repeat of the tribute in the Congressional Record). There is still a lot that one could fill in here, of course. With hope, this will have removed a couple of points of disagreement so we can move this forward. Thanks. Nigetastic (talk) 21:00, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nigetastic Thanks for defining the difference between sharecroppers and tenant farmers. I have lived around/in rural areas of NC, lifelong. This important difference, which affects “status” is well-known, at least to people of a certain age. From an historical perspective , it is important for us to recognize the difference. Thanks for creating and now, maintaining, Timuel Black. Thanks also to MARKETEX2020, for introducing this topic, here at the Teahouse, which was done in good faith, and produced desirable results. Best wishes and respect, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 22:35, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tribe of Tiger Native Alabaman here. And since I'm the last person alive who says 'Alabaman' (instead of 'Alabamian'), you can tell I'm of a certain age. You're welcome, sir.

Nigetastic Well, second-person alive, count me in! (From my view, “Alabamian” sounds strange.) I think people often forget that the Southern United States covers a large amount of the US. “Sweet Home Alabama” to you...from “Carolina in My Mind”! Thanks, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 02:03, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I need help in adding/ uploading / inserting a photograph to an artist biography - the image is owned by the artist and used for publicity purposes I am her manager and she owns the image. Shaunosh1 (talk) 10:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC) Shaunosh1[reply]

Hello, Shaunosh1. If she owns the copyright to the image, then she (alone) has the power to license it in a way acceptable to Wikipedia, and must do so explicitly for it to be accepted. Please see Donating copyright materials. She needs to be aware that in doing so, she is giving irrevocable permission to anybody at all to reuse or alter the image for any purpose, commercial or not, provided they attribute it. Please note also that "publicity purposes" are fundamentally incompatible with the purposes of Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 11:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

can someone help me edit pls I'm miserably failed Mr.Knrz. (talk) 10:26, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy: Mr.Knrz. appears to be attempting an autobiography as Draft:Knrz. David notMD (talk) 10:37, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mr.Knrz., I've fixed your draft. However, do note that Wikipedia is not the right place to write about yourself. When you do become notable enough, someone who is not you will eventually write about you. – Thjarkur (talk) 11:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the person Im writng about is not me I'm his mentor/manger he is known locally but not enough is that wat u mean — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.Knrz. (talk • contribs) 11:40, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mr.Knrz., so are you paid by him? If so, you must make a paid editing disclosure on your user page per our terms of usage. JavaHurricane 11:58, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TOOSOON applies to people who have not yet accomplished enough to meet Wikipedia's idea of notability. David notMD (talk) 13:52, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The OP has been indeffed by Materialscientist for WP:NOTHERE. JavaHurricane 15:27, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 2600:1700:7AA1:7D60:5C71:C6DD:765F:C854 (talk) 11:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! Welcome to Wikipedia. Could you explain what your question may be? JavaHurricane 11:56, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just posted my question, but I forgot to add the Subject/headline. So sorry. My question was whether Wikipedia prefers reverse chronological or ordinary chronological in a list of Awards on a BLP. Passiflorida (talk) 13:49, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Passiflorida, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is no clear rule. I think chronological, that is oldest first, is more common, but when the more recent awards are rather more significant, an article may use newest first. Any given article should be consistent, however. And awards of limiter or no significance should often be simply omitted. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:29, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking to add a new listing. I have all the info that needs to be posted. Can someone do that for be or do I have to do this. I don't have a clue how to do all this. Waterhead04 (talk) 14:42, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Waterhead04: I've left a message on your talk page at User talk:Waterhead04, with information about Wikipedia and how to contribute. You might also see WP:Your first article. Keep in mind that we specifically don't have just "listings" or "profiles". Insetad our "articles" are expected to encyclopedically summarize what independent, reliable sources have written in-depth about a notable subject. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:59, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Is there a way to get a clearer answer to what I need to change on an article to get it approved? Each time I have made updates to make it neutral or to update references, it has been dismissed. I keep trying to research, but it seems no matter what I change it won't work. Any help or guidance would be so appreciated! Thank you! EIMBC (talk) 14:47, 29 September 2020 (UTC) EIMBC (talk) 14:47, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello EIMBC, your second submission is much better than the first one, and I think it was declined based on a misunderstanding, the reviewer appears to have thought the first draft was still awaiting review. You could copy the text of User:EIMBC/sandbox over to Draft:Necole Kane and try to resubmit it. – Thjarkur (talk) 15:19, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For reference, there are both User:EIMBC/sandbox and Draft:Necole Kane. Only one of them should be worked on (preferably the Draft: I think) and the other should be blanked. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:48, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good Day,

Could you please explain in detail what was missing from my submission? I attached links to features were they not credible enough? I would like to make the proper corrections as soon as possible. Raslambert (talk) 14:56, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In the feedback, on the draft and on your user talk page, the words in blue are wikilinks to further advice. You have no references in the draft, but you do have a number of misplaced external links. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:12, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Raslambert. Are you referring to the content you wrote at User:Raslambert/sandbox? If so, there's a whole lot wrong with it. I'm sure others could add more:

• It's an AUTOBIOGRAPHY - you would need to declare your obvious 'Conflict of Interest'
• There's nothing much there to suggest you meet our Notabilty Criteria for living people - your awards seem relatively minor, I'm afraid.
• It's full of self-promotional, peacock wording - of the type one might expect a person to write about themselves on LinkedIn (see WP:PEACOCK)
• It's wholly unverifiable - not one reference to independent, reliable third-party sources that allow anyone to VERIFY what you say is correct. Not one reference at all, in fact. (See Reliable Sources)
• It is not written in an encyclopaedic voice. Where, for example, would I go if I wanted to verify that the following is true (even if it were acceptable phrasing, which it most definitely is not!)?: "Although his upbringing is Philadelphia based, his chivalry and southern charm were developed during the summers he spent with his mother's family in a small town called Pitt County, Rocky Mount, North Carolina."?
• The key thing to address is 'Notability' If like me and 7,000,000 others on this planet, your life's achievements haven't been reported upon in detail and in depth by mainstream media, books or journals, then any attempt to create a Wikipedia page about yourself here would, I fear, be a waste of time.

Finally, I would add that this isn't so much of a denial as a rejection of the content and sources at this time as not meeting our criteria for inclusion. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:57, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Background: Cafetran Espresso is a Computer-Aided Translation software tool. It has a sizable amount of users, in particular - but not only - under Linux (Indeed, it is totally cross-platform, and one of the few professional tools under Linux.) It is sufficiently notable to be offered as incentive with the premium membership of ProZ.com (a large community of translators). A couple of years ago, I discovered it was not even listed on the CAT tool comparison page. The reason being that it did not have its own WP page. So I created one. Several people contributed. The page grew organically, some mistakes were made. At the end, its submission was declined then rejected.

I decided to start afresh. I stripped it to the core to remain factual. Now I am trying to add references. And here, I bump into a wall. Primary sources are forbidden, which precludes all references to user-groups, technical documentations, etc. As secondary source, Youtube videos are not accepted, which remove all courses, presentations at conferences., etc. Blogs are not accepted, so that removes all software tool comparisons, description of features, case-studies, etc. It is not a tool develop in academia So there is no published research article (then, it would be easy. After 25 years in academia, I know that we can write a paper about any script, and then create a page on WP. Nobody blinks).

What would be considered a reliable source? Would a blog post coming from a blog regularly posting on CAT tools and comparing them be acceptable? Are-they not the XXI century equivalents of "magazines"?

A large amount of mentions and references is presented on Draft_talk:Cafetran_Espresso. That should definitively settle the notability issue (which still baffles all of us to be honest). Now the problem is which one to include without falling into the trap of "trying to sell the software". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lenov (talk • contribs) 16:24, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disclaimer: I have absolutely no involvement with Cafetran Espresso development or trade. I am just a user. As are all the other people who tried to contribute to the page as far as I know. Nicolas Gambardella (talk) 16:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Lenov. Wikipedia-notability can be frustrating, particular for certain kinds of topic (eg some software, You-tubers, film editors) because they don't get written about much. But consider this: because Wikipedia can be edited by anybody, then even if information in an article started out accurate, it can easily have been altered by mistake, or to advance a point of view, or maliciously. The reader - anywhere, any time - needs to be able to verify it, and so every single piece of information needs to have been published (and, ideally, the source cited). But information in self-published sources (including most blogs) is pretty worthless: anybody can write any old tripe and publish it on the web, or even in a book. So we require sources published by somebody with a reputation for fact-checking and editorial contgrol. Blogs by somebody recognised as an expert in the relevant field may sometimes be regarded as reliable, but most are not. Next, consider how valuable is information from the subject of the article, or from people closely connected with the subject: for some kinds of information (eg places, dates) this is usually regarded as reliable; but anything that might be contentious - and in particular, anything about the virtues of the subject, or the shortcomings of rivals - cannot safely be taken from connected sources; which is why we strongly prefer Independent sources. (Primary sources explains when non-independent sources may be used). But if there are essentially no independent reliable sources, then there is basically nothing can go in the article. --ColinFine (talk) 17:06, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At the momentr, Lenov, the draft (not the talk page the draft itself) cites 7 sources of these, the first is from the company's site, so it is not independent. The second is an academic [a[er, which is often good, but it is not online, so I cannot judge how significant the coverage of CTE is. The third is a similar paper, but an abstract is available. CTE is not mentioned at all in the abstract. The fourth is a comparison listing, which is independent, but does not contain significant coverage, being only brief mention. The fifth is a book. It looks reliable, but is not available online. do I cannot judge if the discussion of CYE is extensive or is less than a single sentence. Thew last two are from github, and list file formats that the software covers, and other documentation. but these are supplied by the developers, apparently, or else are user-generated content. in either case, they do not count for notability. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The second cite (Yapa; Ariyaratne) is now expanded with a free-to-read link. The product is mentioned once in a list of translators, so it does nothing for notability (or much else). Also, for future reference, the publisher (Research and Scientific Innovation Society) may be one of the paid journal mills with limited or no peer review. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:24, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your advice, I'll keep digging in all the sources. Computing science research is unfortunately mostly published in journals with paywalls. However, using SciHub, one can access some papers. And few books are online available for all. This is basically the catch-22 situation. Either we have "reliable sources", but they have to be bought, or we have free resources but deemed unreliable. What we failed to understand is why many other CAT tools, with lower notabilities are allowed to have pages. Look at the references: Across Language Server, Pootle, Gtanslator, MetaTexis, Open_Language_Tools. Even some of the main players have lists of references that would be deemed unsuitable according to the rules, see Smartcat, Déjà_Vu_(software) Nicolas Gambardella (talk) 07:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So, I think this one is good, right? Academic, published, conference in London, PDF available, figure showing clear notability (I was actually surprise to see CTE in 3rd position!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lenov (talk • contribs) 07:54, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not good. It is another trivial mention. These sources need to discuss Cafetran in some depth. All that source does is include it in a list of survey results. - MrOllie (talk) 12:08, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is its aim. The citation is put after the mention of surveys. I am trying to match statements and references. Some references for usage, some references for the supported file formats, etc. I think a user survey showing Cafetran as 3rd after SDL Trados and MemoQ, in front of Across, Wordfast, and Déjà Vu is pretty strong (all having already Wikipedia pages). Let's be clear, there are no articles describing Cafetran in depth. What would be the point? Who would write that? The only people would be the developers. And those sources would therefore be ineligible. And which journal would accept them? This kind of detailed description belong to user-manual (ineligible) and blogs (ineligible). There is nothing specific to Cafetran Espresso here. This is the case of the many productivity software. Millions of users would bot change that. Nicolas Gambardella (talk) 13:37, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If there are no in-depth sources, the topic is not notable and you're probably wasting your time working on the draft. You need to start with 2-3 in-depth, reliable sources and summarize them. - MrOllie (talk) 14:18, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor is continuously removing and replacing photos without a consensus on List of Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign endorsements. When asked about it, they said they will continue to edit war. How can this user's disruptive editing be handled? How can I go about bringing an administrator in? Pennsylvania2 (talk) 18:06, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pennsylvania2: First, do not engage in any edit war yourself. You can post a request for help at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring RudolfRed (talk) 18:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pennsylvania2: Or you can revert once, and then discuss your concerns and rationale on the article talk page, and hope to gain consensus. No editor is going to survive long if they express and follow through with the view that they can revert ad infinitum unless they are solely reverting vandalism. That way leads to blocks for disruptive editing. I'm staying out of arguments over the article itself, though I do feel it has far too many unnecessary photos. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:01, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I write in HTML the symbol for "plus or minus"? It should render as a plus sign underscored. WStlw 18:17, 29 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WilliamSell (talk • contribs)

WilliamSell, you can use ± (click edit to see the code). Hope this helps :) Ed talk! 18:21, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can also use ±. There's a long list of HTML entities here. Zindor (talk) 18:25, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

​There's also the handy template {{Plusminus}} – Thjarkur (talk) 19:04, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Is there a guide somewhere to when you should add page numbers in a citation source and when you should not? Presuming direct quotes have to have a page number? Thanks Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 18:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC) Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 18:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Maryanne Cunningham: generally, you should always add page numbers, maybe except when the text you cite only contains one or two pages. Persons attempting to check the source don't want to read 110 pages to verify something. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Victor Schmidt Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 18:43, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The help page WP:CITEPAGE has a discussion of alternative ways of adding page citations. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 18:52, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I had a Wikipedia page earlier, but it seems to have disappeared into cyberspace. May I please request the 'Authors' here to kindly help me retrieve the same? Www.imamsiddique.com

https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/ImamSiddique/imamispresents Imam A Siddique (talk) 18:58, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be about Imam A Siddique. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:02, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Imam A Siddique, welcome to Wikipedia and the teahouse. Your article has been a redirect since 2019. You can retrieve an older version of the page using the "page history" feature, see here. Ed talk! 19:05, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hi can a person change the language of Wikipedia by using southafrican languages to find meanings of words. Bdetfehigj (talk) 20:16, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bdetfehigj, you can find a list of Wikipedia's in different languages at https://wikipedia.org or at meta:List_of_Wikipedias Ed talk! 21:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But if you're looking for meanings of words, Bdetfehigj, you might have more success at Wiktionary. The English Wiktionary aims to have all words in all languages (though of course that goal is impossible to achieve), and entries often include translations of the word or phrase into other languages. --ColinFine (talk) 22:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The English Wikipedia is meant to be read in English, Bdetfehigj, but you may want to use Google Translate. There are several South African language Wikipedias, but they have far fewer articles: isiXhosa, isiZulu, Sepedi, Afrikaans

How do I know what language to remove when a tag is placed on my page? Also, what do I do about a UDP tag on my page? 2600:8806:100:E1E:A9CB:265A:2A56:21FE (talk) 21:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. Could you please explain what you mean by "my page"? If you work for the company (Attain (consulting firm)) you have absolutely no rights whatsoever over its contents, all of which should be based upon independent, published sources. If you plan to edit that page, you must declare your connection with it on your userpage, per WP:PAID. However, as you are an IPv6 user (and your editing address is liable to change from day to day), you are best advised to register for a free account and declare it on your userpage. (Choose a username which is non-promotional).

The page was created by a user who was blocked for spamming/covert paid advertising, so I think the tag must stay. You are free to discuss this at the article talk page. Whilst at it, you might like to consider whether the article itself meets our notability criteria - I suspect others now will review that. To me, none of the sources show it meets our Notabilty Criteria for companies. If you know of independent, non-insider sources which have talked about this company in detail and in depth, you are welcome to suggest them in the article talk page. But do not edit the article again until you have declared any paid connection with it as the business owner or empoyeee. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:38, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why has the French Open 2020 page dropped the Singles Table with points lost or gained? It has always been the best part of the yearly update. 98.150.164.140 (talk) 21:43, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. I think your question might be more appropriate if you were to ask it at the talk page of 2020 French Open, where other editors might be able to explain a rationale for content removal. There have been a huge number of edits in recent days, so you're bound to get a reply there. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

is there anything out there that lets you draw on a web page and save it to that site. Like, if u had a group of users, like facebook, and yet let people draw over the original idea, similar to wiki,,, but like, if there was a picture/meme on line, you could actually deface it, like ppl used to add moustaches to womens pic??? Richengle (talk) 22:00, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid your question is irrelevant to Wikipedia, and pretty much verges on 'trolling' - take care to focus on building this free encyclopaedia. That's what we're all here for. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:15, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I recently created a page for Anderson Obiagwu which was declined due to use of promotional words which I have since corrected. I would like to have a second or third review to know if I am on the right track for approval. Thank you. LeahNJ (talk) 22:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:Anderson Obiagwu. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:04, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello LeahNJ. Your draft still contains promotional language such as "his commitment to pushing African music" and "he celebrated 10 years in the entertainment industry launching his memoir". Your prose needs to be completely neutral without any trace of promotion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:11, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a purely hypothetical question, but I was wondering if you see 2 or more Wikipedia users engaged in a edit war, should you attempt to stop them, ignore the editing and move on to something else, tell an administrator, or try to find some other solution? Once again, this is hypothetical, as I have not seen anyone engaged in edit wars myself. TheKingCartii (talk) 23:03, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TheKingCartii. You can try to persuade the editors to stop, but the place to file a formal report is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. If you are interested in preventing edit warring, you can read the discussions there to learn more. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:17, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hello, TheKingCartii. Welcome to the Teahouse. As a new and young editor, (minor) I would advise you to stay out of edit wars, including advising other editors of not breaching our WP:3RR rules unless you are really confident of our rules and guidelines. But many editors do try to ameliorate conflict situations. You could express you opinion on the article talk page, and encourage discussion. But if you're not confident, I suggest you steer clear of direct interaction. WP:TWINKLE allows easy warning of editors involved in disputes of the consequences of edit warring (assuming you can find the relevant templated message to leave them). But probably the best way is to report edit warring users at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring (shortcut: WP:AN3). Does this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:18, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yep! Thanks, you guys! Looks like I got more articles to read. TheKingCartii (talk) 00:13, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have translated a short article from German Wikipedia, which I created myself, into English. Apparently, only more experienced editors than I are allowed to publish translated articles on en.wikipedia, so I placed the translation into my own userspace. I created a "talk" page, whatever exactly that amounts to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bernhard_Ritter

Naturally, I would like to have the translated article checked and published. It is a page on Maria von Herbert, a correspondent of philosopher Immanuel Kant. It is not clear to me what I am supposed to do next. I am not in a hurry and will check back tomorrow. Bernhard Ritter (talk) 00:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bernhard Ritter. I'm not sure what you mean by Apparently, only more experienced editors than I are allowed to publish translated articles on en.wikipedia, unless you mean you're not being allowed to create an article for some technical reason. Anyway, you can create a draft for the article and submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review if you like.

Some other things for you to consider are Wikipedia:Translation, Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia#Translating from other language Wikimedia projects, and Wikipedia:Notability (people). The first two pages are mainly about what you need to do to ensure that the content you've translated isn't a WP:COPYVIO. Wikipedia's licensing pretty much allows the content found in its articles to be freely re-used for any purpose, but it does require that proper attribution be given. So, even though you might've have been the main or primary contributor to the German Wikipedia article, it's still probably best for you to properly attribute the original article to avoid any problems. The last page has to do with the concept of Wikipedia notability. Each Wikipedia project has its own policies and guidelines and English Wikipedia's tend to be more rigorously applied than perhaps those for some other language Wikipedias. So, just because an article exists on German Wikipedia that doesn't automatically mean it should exist on English Wikipedia; in other words, you're going to have to establish that Herbert meets relevant English Wikipedia notability guidelines in order for such an article to survive a deletion nomination. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:08, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: It looks like the OP does not have enough edits yet to be autoconfirmed here at en wiki. RudolfRed (talk) 01:28, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy: Appears the draft was created and then deleted by Bernhard Ritter at User:Bernhard Ritter/Maria von Herbert-2 Even if not autoconfirmed, the instructions about for creating a draft and once satisfied with the content, submitting to AfC, apply. David notMD (talk) 01:55, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly. Thank you for your detailed reply. I will submit the translated article as a draft to Wikipedia:Articles for creation including "proper attribution" and a hyperlink to the original page. My phrase Apparently, only more experienced editors than I are allowed to publish translated articles on en.wikipedia was worded after a message displayed on the page in explanation why I cannot publish the page myself. As RudolfRed notes, it must have to do with the fact that the OP does not have enough edits. I understand that I will have to argue that Maria von Herbert meets the relevant notability guidelines when submitting the draft.

@David notMD: I deleted only a copy, or a version "2", of the draft. I was referring to User:Bernhard Ritter/Maria von Herbert instead. Thanks for confirming that the instructions in Wikipedia:Articles for creation apply to my case. -- Bernhard Ritter (talk) 11:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with the draftBernhard Ritter. In case you didn't know, you can cite non-English sources as long as they otherwise meet English Wikipedia's definition of reliable sources. You also can use sources that aren't available online as long as they have been published and reasonably accessible. Finally, the "References" section generally comes before the "External links" section in English Wikipedia articles per WP:ORDER. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:06, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Marchjuly, I moved the "External Links" section to where it belongs. All the information provided in the article has already been published and referenced otherwise. Bernhard Ritter (talk) 12:34, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have a page I would like to edit, by adding information about:

Seventeen's Japanese comeback in September 2020 with mini album 24H, source: https://www.seventeen-17.jp/statics/24h

24H's achievement to top Japan Oricon chart, the first non-Japanese international male artist to achieve a fourth-consecutive win on the weekly album chart, source: http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20200915000374 and http://www.koreatimesus.com/seventeen-earns-fourth-consecutive-oricon-album-chart-win-with-24h/

Seventeen Joshua and DK's collaboration with US based singer, PinkSweats, source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/tamarherman/2020/09/24/pink-sweat--seventeen-discuss-coming-together-on-17-remix-in-age-of-corona/#263097005519 BarbaraUkulele (talk) 02:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be about Seventeen (South Korean band), which is protected. Proper place is to propose changes on the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 02:44, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@BarbaraUkulele: You can follow the steps at Wikipedia:Edit requests and make your request at the talk page of the article. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:14, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have been told l need to pay a status tax to get on wikipedia. Is this so? I am a film maker since 1976, and was a Director of DW Thorpe book publishers. Both my Mother, Joyce Thorpe Nicholson, and brother, Peter Nicholson cartoonist are in it. www.mikenicholson.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael John Nicholson (talk • contribs) 04:13, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike, Getting into Wikipedia wasn’t easy, had to send $1000 “status tax” to Canberra authorities. But think of the status connected with belonging to the Thorpe / Nicholson publishing empire. Nigel. 03:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)~ 2001:8003:58D6:AC00:212F:805E:1C38:8649 (talk) 03:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No payment is necessary to get an article on Wikipedia. RudolfRed (talk) 04:40, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Could you be so kind as to tell us who told you such? Or where you got such information from? It probably may be internet scam artists trying to swindle you, as you do not need to pay a dime to obtain a biographical article on Wikipedia.Celestina007 (talk) 05:04, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Michael John Nicholson. Are you aware that Wikipedia is not the place to tell the world about yourself?--Quisqualis (talk) 04:49, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So how do l get started? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael John Nicholson (talk • contribs) 07:01, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael John Nicholson: To "get on Wikipedia" as an editor is easy. In fact you have done it already by posting here and by registering for a free account. Just follow Help:Introduction or try out The Wikipedia Adventure to learn more about the basics of editing, and of the importance of adding references (See WP:REFBEGIN for that). You could then say a few (non-promotional) things on your userpage about yourself and your interests in editing Wikipedia - but avoid using it as if it were a LinkedIn page to promote yourself or your website (such pages get quickly removed). Like driving a car for the first time, make small. careful edits at first - perhaps fixing typos, improving grammar, adding references etc to articles that interest you. (See the Help Out' section at  Wikipedia:Community portal for a list of ideas to get you started. Never add stuff you happen to know - only ever add content that can be verified by referring to the citations that you will add alongside them.)

However, if by "get on Wikipedia" you mean how do you get an article about yourself in this encyclopaedia, the simple answer is that you don't. Unless you have been written about in detail and in depth by various independent mainstream sources you join the remaining 7,000,000 human beings, and millions of businesses who simply do not meet our Notability Criteria - which is the essential bar for allowing a page here. Does that help? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 07:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)    [reply]

Please also see the answers you received at the help desk back in March, Michael John Nicholson, now archived at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2020 March 22#Michael John Nicholson. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apropos of payments, I hope that you didn't pay any money to "Jaan.raadik", who created a draft about you in January 2016 (subsequently deleted) or to "RashillGopee", who did the same three years later. Each time, an editor appeared merely in order to create such a draft (a curious editing pattern); and each time, submission of the draft got the response "Declining submission: bio - Submission is about a person not yet shown to meet notability guidelines." -- Hoary (talk) 07:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, why can you say l did nothing of 'notibility'? I set up 'Rubbery Figures' [political puppets like Spitting Image] with my brother and they were run for 6 years on Aust national tv? I did scripts, filming, animation, editing and sound. And then there are all my other films l made that were shown on Aust tv, and my books and art exhibitions. And was director of D.W. Thorpe Pty Ltd, publishers. You can see all my work on my website, www.mikenicholson.com so why would you not have me on it? I dont understand this, I seem to be getting mixed messages from a lot of different people at Wikipedia. - Mike. Michael John Nicholson (talk) 08:36, 30 September 2020 (UTC) Michael John Nicholson (talk) 08:36, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability, as that term is used on Wikipedia, is judged not by what you've done, Michael John Nicholson, but by whether people independent of you have written about you in reliable, published sources. See WP:GOLDENRULE for a simple explanation. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:43, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, I don't see any mixed messages coming from the registered editors here. As was said above, whoever suggested paying a status tax to get an article published here was scamming you, and the first response from the IP address 2001...8649 was at best a poor attempt at a joke by an anonymous poster.

As was written above and on your talk page this time and six months ago, the word notable has a specific meaning here, with specific criteria. If you can provide at least three in-depth, independent, reliable sources (all three criteria must be satisfied as described at notable), please provide links to them. If so, we can then discuss how to get an article written.

Note none of this has anything to do with the quality or volume of your work – we don't make value judgements. It's all about those sources having written about you so we can summarize what they said, since that's what we do here as an encyclopedia, a tertiary source.

There are likely many thousands of creative people with man-decades of work who just don't meet the notability criteria and therefore don't qualify for an article. (We acknowledge that there are many such articles that were put here illegitimately in the past; they are slowly being removed if found to be so by this all-volunteer team.)

It's unfortunate that there's this idea out there, especially in the creative world, that not having an article about you on Wikipedia makes one "less-than" or illegitimate. We volunteers do what we can, every day, to try to explain that just isn't so. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The best point you raised appears to be your involvement in Rubbery figures. However, that article has no references (putting it at risk for deletion), and also, the sentence "The Rubbery Figures programs were made in the Melbourne film studio of Peter Nicholson, who also made the puppets themselves." gives all the credit to your brother, Peter Nicholson (cartoonist). If you were truly equally involved, you may consider adding references to that article, including references that mention you, and then add a description of your contributions to the text of the article. As a general note, millions of people are successful in doing creative things (film, books, art exhibitions, publishing), but unless those people are written about by others who have no personal connection to the subject, do not meet Wikipedia's encyclopaedic definition of notability. David notMD (talk) 11:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you help for me how can I use this picture in my article. When I download this link i resive the mail that this file uncorrect and will be deleted. thanks a lot for your answer Marija W Marinkovic (talk) 11:40, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The file which you have named in the section header is presumably in another language's Wikipedia, and can't be used here on enwiki. I see that you have uploaded various logo files both to enwiki and to Wikimedia Commons, & declared them to be licenced under creative commons 4.0, but stated that the owner is Telekom Srbija. It isn't, however, clear that you are authorised to give that licence release on behalf of Telekom Srbija. If the company wishes to release copyright, it should follow the process at WP:Donating copyrighted material. What is more usual for company logos is for them to be used under a fair-use exemption, see WP:Logos. It is also not entirely clear why you are creating a new draft article in your user sandbox, rather than updating the existing article at Mts (Telekom Srbija). --David Biddulph (talk) 12:01, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, though my question wont be relevant to english wikipedia it was the only place to ask, in swahili wiktionary under swahili wikipedia there is no special way to delete words that are not necessary i was wondering how to remove the words that are not relevant to swahili as there are many. Alvin kipchumba (talk) 12:44, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alvin kipchumba Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid we can only help you with questions regarding the English Wikipedia; that said, if by 'deleting words' you mean deleting an article, you will need to use whatever process that version of Wikipedia has for doing so. 331dot (talk) 12:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ThanksAlvin kipchumba (talk) 12:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Alvin kipchumba: I don't think it was the only place to ask is correct. Each project has it's own help and support facilities, with volunteers interested in and knowledgeable about the project. You should be able to find it from the main page. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:09, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 79.120.177.234 (talk) 12:45, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place to ask questions about using Wikipedia; general questions may be asked at the Reference Desk; we do have a good article on Eagles that may have the information you are looking for. 331dot (talk) 12:46, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.

How do you add this as a reference?

youtu.be/rJQTqcV12ik?t=9m4s

Error:No page id specified on YouTube appears failing.Kacziey (talk) 13:20, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, immediately above where you placed your question, it says: "Please post new questions at the BOTTOM of the page", so I have moved it here.

Secondly, in {{youtube}} it says: "This is not a citation template. Use {{cite AV media}} to provide bibliographic citations in footnotes".

David Biddulph (talk) 13:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and sorry. Still new here.Kacziey (talk) 13:34, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I make that two separate statements sourced by the same source have the same number superscript? 1+1=yes (talk) 13:32, 30 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1+1=yes (talk • contribs) [reply]

Instead of the usual <ref>content</ref>, give it a name the first time you use it, like <ref name="myName">content</ref>. For every subsequent use, you can simply put <ref name="myName"/>. Note the extra slash! See WP:REFNAME for more details. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:56, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Failed ping to 1+1=yes. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:59, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, understood 1+1=yes (talk) 14:00, 30 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1+1=yes (talk • contribs) [reply]

Why is this tiny 1+1=yes (talk) 14:04, 30 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1+1=yes (talk • contribs) [reply]

@1+1=yes: It's not anymore, I had a misplaced slash myself that I corrected. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 14:36, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete my User:MirahezeGuy/sandbox/1 and a stub template I recently made, they're unnecessary now --MirahezeGuy (talk) 14:17, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MirahezeGuy: I see you've already request speedy deletion of the page under G7, so it will get deleted in the near future. FYI, you can delete pages under your own userspace (any page that begins with User:MirahezeGuy/...) under U1 as well. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 14:29, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done See WP:REFUND if you ever change your mind, or get in touch. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:09, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I am working on an article for my company's software. My COI is declared on my user page, and a draft of the article is in my sandbox. I got some good help here last time, so now I'm back for round two. Question: I am trying to upload a logo for the infobox. This is the least detailed one I could find. Can this image be uploaded with the fair use rational that it consists only of simple geometric shapes? If not, do I have a chance of getting it in under some other fair use rational? The image I really wanted to use was this one, but from what I'm seeing there may be little or no chance of getting my preferred image into the article without issuing a license. Thanks in advance for your help. Sam at Megaputer (talk) 14:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sam at Megaputer, welcome back! Fair use applies to logos, I know from WP:FAIRUSE. There is also WP:LOGOS, a whole page about using logos on Wikipedia, that I haven't read but you might want to. WP:MCQ is a venue where you may be able to get help with the difficult questions about using media that you may not always get as well at the Teahouse. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sam at Megaputer. Logos are often uploaded as non-free images in articles about the thing they are the logo for. But non-free content may only be used in articles, not drafts, so you need to wait until your draft has been accepted before you upload it. --ColinFine (talk) 15:37, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These have been very helpful responses. I'll get the rest of what I need from WP:MCQ. Thanks a lot! Sam at Megaputer (talk) 15:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, My name is Conor. I'm doing my first article about a Youtuber named Dream who is known for his Minecraft Skill and his Minecraft Manhunt. I worked about two weeks to get this done, but the previous person who reviewed my article said "Needs more external news sources, not its own website and videos. Do not cite fandom wikia". Dream has little to no news sources who talk about him, in fact most of information came from this fandom wikia which is where most of his information I could found. I only found one news sources that talks about Dream Minecraft Manhunt, And this isn't a few thousand subscribers channel. Dream has over 10 million subscribers on his youtube channel is a well-known across youtube. If you have anything to say to me about this question, please contact me. Thanks and have a nice day. Kingconor62 (talk) 14:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kingconor62! Per WP:GNG, if there's no independent WP:RS to base a WP-article on, then the topic will not have a WP-article, that's how this place works, and is meant to work. More at Wikipedia:WikiProject YouTube/Notability. But the internet is bigger than WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kingconor62, Wikipedia needs sources. It does not matter how many subscribers there are if there are no sources. In theory, after you have some sources to support the article and if you have one of them verifying that the subject has X number of subscribers, you ought to be able to argue that Wikipedia should have an article on the subject per WP:ENT which says a person may be Wikipedia notable if they have a large fan base. But even this argument is known almost never to work on discussions about youtubers. Generally, not only need you have sources, but you need to have multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources as described at WP:SIGCOV for such an article to be accepted to Wikipedia. From what you say, I would say the subject is not going to get an article on Wikipedia unless they receive a ton of additional news coverage about their channel first. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:43, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am making an article on Oki Muraza, a world class professor who secured 18 million SAR in a project on chemical engineering. He wrote journals in Indonesian news and currently is teaching at KFUPM. I need help in getting this article draft approved.

Thank you very much... Fikry Muraza (talk) 14:59, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit] He secured a total of $4.8 million USD in research.

References I used are from the University, Indonesian News, and Google scholar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fikry Muraza (talk • contribs) 15:33, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fikry Muraza, if you read the note left by DGG, you can see they told you that the article needs to pass one of Wikipedia's notability guidelines, WP:PROF. They also told you that, for the draft to pass said guideline, the subject's papers' should be heavily cited by external sources and other research papers. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:12, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you add translations? I am bilingual and I would like to help. BaaBaaTheSheep (talk) 16:06, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BaaBaaTheSheep, Yes you can! Either go to Special:ContentTranslation, or go to your desired page, hover over the contributions link in the toolbar and click Translations. Hope this helps! — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:09, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But please read Translation first, BaaBaaTheSheep. Translating articles between Wikipedia editions is not always as straightforward as it might appear, because editions have different requirements for sourcing, (and en-wiki has thousands of sub-standard articles which would not be accepted today). When translating into English, I would always advise a translator to treat it the same as any other new article, and use WP:AFC. When translating from English, the standards of the destination edition are important. --ColinFine (talk) 16:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hi uh Ireallydontcareugh (talk) 16:16, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ireallydontcareugh, do you have a question? If so feel free to ask. :-) — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:17, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Im writing about a cartoon how do i upload pictures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foodboy1 (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Foodboy1. You may only upload images which you have taken yourself (and not simply found somewhere the internet). All images are copyright unless there is a very clear and explicit licence statement accompanying them, indicating they are freely re-usable for non-commercial and' commercial use. I would imagine that all images related to cartoons would be copyright and not useable except in very special circumstances known as WP:FAIRUSE. Please tell us what cartoon you hope to write about and link to the image you are desirous of uploading. See Wikipedia:Images for a pageload of other links which might help you find the answers to various image-related questions (including Wikipedia:Uploading images). Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I wrote a page that was not accepted due to a lack of notability in the sources. I have since added more sources that I think are within Wikipedias guidelines and demonstrate the notability of the subject. I am hoping someone can take a look at these before I submit them for review. If they are not acceptable it would be very helpful to know why.

Here is the page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fundera ClaySmithWiki (talk) 16:38, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ClaySmithWiki: Would you mind linking here to the additional sources, so as to save others the task of working out which are old and which are new? Thanks. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:53, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These questions aren't about an article, but the Teahouse itself (unless the Teahouse can be considered an article).

1. Who came up with the name for the Teahouse?

2. Who is the most well known Teahouse user?

3. Can too many questions cause the Teahouse to crash or temporarily shut down?

4. Can someone be banned (temporarily or permanently) from the Teahouse?

It might seem like I'm asking a lot here, but my curiosity tends to get the better of me at times. TheKingCartii (talk) 17:42, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back to the Teahouse TheKingCartii. Those are interesting questions. Here are my answers to them:

1. You can read more about the evolution of the Teahouse here
2. I think that Cullen328 is probably the most well known and longest-serving of our hosts.
3. No, too many questions wouldn't cause the Teahouse to crash. That would take a sophisticated and sustained DoS attack. If one person persistently and constantly asked disruptive and frivolous questions we might take take action against them, but that's not something you need worry about.
4. Yes, an editor can have their editing rights withdrawn by an administrator, either across the whole of English Wikipedia, or blocked from just specific parts of it. I can only think of one such time in the last three years that we came close to specifically requiring one editor to stop attempting to answer questions because they had the wrong approach to other users, and were quite blunt and rude in their responses. But anyone can be blocked for a whole range of reasons, including WP:NOTHERE and WP:CIR. Equally, we welcome any editor answering questions (providing they answer in a friendly and helpful manner) - there is no requirement to be a 'Host' in order to help other editors. I hope this slakes your thirst for Teahouse-related knowledge! Nick Moyes (talk) 18:10, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

¿Trabajan archivistas en Wikipedia? Pelu Digital (talk) 17:53, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pelu Digital, Hola. Si quieres, preguntas en espanol están permitidos en Wikipedia Espanol. En Wikipedia ingles, usar ingles, por favor. Gracias, WikiMacaroons^Cinnamon? 18:06, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pelu Digital Si tienes dudas en español mejor dirígete al Café en la Wikipedia en español. Por responder a tu pregunta; no, en Wikipedia no trabaja nadie directamente. Estoy seguro de que hay archivistas que colaboran pero lo hacen de forma voluntaria como todos los demás. No confundas Wikipedia con la Fundación Wikimedia que sí tiene empleados.

Pelu Digital If you have any questions in spanish I suggest you head over to Café at spanish Wikipedia. Now onto your question; no, nobody is employed directly by Wikipedia. While I'm sure archivists collaborate here they do so voluntarily just as everyone else. Wikipedia is not to be confused with the Wikimedia Foundation which does employ people. josecurioso ❯❯❯ Talk to me! 18:29, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@Pelu Digital: But please see Wikipedia:GLAM - which is a collaboration between Wikipedia and Galleries, Libraries, Archives & Museums (hence GLAM). Nick Moyes (talk) 18:56, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 AEMA2050 (talk) 18:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AEMA2050. Many referencing styles are acceptable, but consistency of style should be maintained within an article. Wikipedia:Citing sources discusses this in detail. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:47, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jello, AEMA2050, and welcome to the Twagiyse. Im hemera;, a new article may use any citation stile that provides sufficient information for a reader to brtogy the source. Basics are the title of tjhe article or work being cited, and the name of teh publication in which it appears. Highly desirable are the author of the work (when known), its publication date, the name pf the publisher when this adds context, any any relevant identifiers such as an ISBN or a DOI,page numberm and the language of publication if that is not English.

In an existing article, the existing style should be retained un;less three is consensus to make a change, see WP:CITECAR.

Wikipedia's citation templates output a style known as CS1 or CS2. which is native to Wikipedia, but somewhat similar to Chicago

style. 

There was recently a decision nto deprecate a pure parenthetical style where "(Smith 2012)" without limnls was the sole inline reference text, and bare UTLs without details are disgavored snd should be corrected.

AMA style is neither required nor prohibited. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:10, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just had someone edit a reference that I added. He said he "fixed bare ref". He added a bunch of details - website, language, title, stuff like that. Is that required? So far I just put the "ref" tag on either side of a URL because I thought that was fine, but I guess someone "fixed" my "bare ref" so I wanted to know if I should be doing it that way. Wes sideman (talk) 18:33, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For advice about dealng with bare URLs, see WP:Bare URLs. David Biddulph (talk) 18:35, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you David! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wes sideman (talk • contribs) 18:40, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Wes sideman The page David linked too might seem a bit heavy-going. But, yes please, always try and make your references as good and as complete as possible. This is especially helpful when a website owner changes their site's layout and page titling. It may look like a dead link, but a simple Google search on the article title (assuming it was given) often allows one to find an up-to-date, functional version. The 'Cite' button in either of our our editing tools gives you some really easy-to-use templates for main types of citations (books, news, journals and websites, though there are plenty of others). To become a great Wikipedian you really need to know how to add good references as these are the hidden, but highly valuable gems inside every article. So take a look at either of these two introductory pages - WP:REFBEGIN or WP:ERB - for some really simple instructions. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:04, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to make a article, but I'd like to learn more about utilizing Wikipedia's resources before I do so. How can I help edit articles without accidentally impeding on the current progress being made by other more experienced users? Ngblue (talk) 18:47, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]