Wikipedia:Teahouse

AlanM1, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
A friendly place where you can ask questions
to get help with using and editing Wikipedia

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 3 days.
Please remember to sign your posts by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.

Help

Wikipedia

Trouble inserting links

Hi, there seems to have been a change to the software for inserting links, and it's no longer working for me. It used to be that if I wanted to link to a sub-part in an article, I would highlight the phrase in my draft that I wanted to link. Then I would hit the "link" button in the editing box and insert the url for that sub-part and click "insert". The software would then give a message about that being an external link, and did I want to make it an internal link? I would click "internal link" and it would insert it as an internal link. Now, when I get to that stage and click "internal link", nothing happens. It doesn't insert any link at all. Am I doing something wrong? has the software for inserting links changed? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're experiencing, but manually wikilinking to sections within pages still works: When editing the wikitext source, [[Wikipedia:Teahouse#Trouble inserting links|linktext]] generates linktext. If you're using the Wikipedia:VisualEditor, highlighting a word, hitting the link button on the toolbar, and pasting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse#Trouble_inserting_links into the "Add a link" box (within the "Wikipedia" tab, not "External site") automatically abbreviates to the internal wikilink form (alternatively, enter into the box WP:Teahouse#Trouble inserting links), and you can just hit "Done" to make a wikilink. You seem to be quite an experienced editor, but for general questions, H:WIKILINK is the first reference. – Anon423 (talk) 09:52, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

I may be an experienced editor, but I am extremely techno-deficient. :) I don't know what Visual Editor is, for example. However, since I posted this inquiry, the link box now has a new button for internal links and no longer asks if you want an internal link. I think the software has had an update over the past couple of days. Thanks for the H:WIKILINK info - I wasn't aware of it before. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 04:03, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: When you click the "Edit" tab (instead of the "Edit source" tab), you're using the VisualEditor. For more information, see Help:VisualEditor. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

really? It’s like discovering I’ve been speaking prose all my life! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 05:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Declined article

Good evening sir or madam, i have been trying to get an article published for weeks now and i keep receiving different reasons for its refusal. The latest one being about my referencing. I have made a few changes but still not sure that is why i am here to get help. Please how can i get my article published. EsipoWiki (talk) 20:43, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Edo State Investment Promotion Office   Maproom (talk) 21:01, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. All the references appear to be from government websites, which may qualify them as primary sources. Please add reliable, independent, secondary sources to confirm notability of the subject. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 18:27, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

This is a good example of source you could reference in your article if it talks about this. Kaleeb18 (talk) 14:47, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Does this look bad?

The "Species" section in this article to which I have linked, had a long list of beetles so I thougght I'll rather add columns-list. But now I feel it looks congested. Is it fine? Excellenc1 (talk) 04:45, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't notice any difference, Excellenc1. Or anyway none related to congestion. (I'm using Firefox 93.0 right now.) But since you bring up the matter of looking congested, I have to say that your signature strikes me as unusually awkward, spilling as it does over other letters. Removing padding:5px; from it would be a big help. -- Hoary (talk) 05:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Hoary,

Padding	Signature
no padding	Excellenc1 (talk)
1px	Excellenc1 (talk)
2px	Excellenc1 (talk)
3px	Excellenc1 (talk)
4px	Excellenc1 (talk)
5px	Excellenc1 (talk)

No padding looks the worst. Excellenc1 (talk) 06:13, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Then we differ, Excellenc1. To me, using either Firefox 93.0 or Chromium 90.0.4430.212, no padding looks the best. The more padding, the more shouty. (Worse, the more padding, the more interference with other text.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:22, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: Looking at this, from experience, the reason that you might think one looks better than another might be because of the background padding that already comes with the line height. One way to make it look better but not as bloated at the same time would be to add only padding on the left and right, since there is already a "padding" of sorts that comes with the line height. This could be achieved with padding:0px 2px 0px 2px (Excellenc1 (talk)). You could also use a border radius to make it look a little better (in my opinion) padding:0px 2px 0px 2px; border-radius: 4px (Excellenc1 (talk)) Just some suggestions for thought :) ― Levi_OP^Talk 14:49, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, why not put code like this in your personal CSS page User:Excellenc1/common.css

#bodyContent a[title="User:Excellenc1"] { background:#58111A; color:#FFA700; padding:5px; font-weight: bold; }

(See my CSS page User:Verbarson/common.css for an example.) This will highlight your signature whenever you are logged on. That way, you can leave your public signature unchanged from normal, because frankly, I don't need to see it highlighted, whereas you can make it as dramatic as you like for your own consumption. (I would credit whoever told me about this, but I didn't record their name.)--Verbarson (talk) 21:07, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Verbarson I'm sorry but I didn't understand what do you mean by "highlight" when you said "This will highlight your signature whenever you are logged on". Also, what about this signature (somewhat based on Levi_OP's suggestion: Excellenc1 (talk) But I fear this is too long in the source code. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Excellenc1 (talk • contribs) 04:40, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, my CSS page User:Verbarson/common.css is only activated when I am logged on. When you, or anyone else, or nobody (ie anonymous user), is logged on, my signature looks like "Verbarson". When I am logged on, my CSS page is active and turns my signature into "Verbarson". This makes it easier for me to pick out my contributions in a discussion like this, or on a history page or watchlist. I don't care if my signature looks mundane to everyone else.

Of course, there are many people who do like their signature to stand out to other users, which is fine as long as it doesn't affect the way the rest of the page is displayed. Your choice.--Verbarson (talk) 09:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Useful side-effect: doing it with CSS means that it also highlights (when I am signed on) the places where somebody pings me or uses {{u|Verbarson}}. As far as your signature is concerned, I wouldn't worry about the code length too much (have you ever checked the Google front page source?); what affects the text around it is the top and bottom padding, which widens the current text line and (very slightly) disrupts the flow of the paragraph.--Verbarson (talk) 09:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Verbarson: I get it now, this way people can know if I'm offline or online. But it looks the same as my signature at no padding, or like Levi_OP suggested: padding: 0px 2px 0px 2px; border-radius: 4px;. From my end I don't see any overlaps or stuff, so I don't know if I should actually change anything. Excellenc1 (talk) 04:07, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1 I'm afraid I must have communicated badly, because I have still confused you. Using the CSS route to formatting your signature will ONLY affect YOUR computer when you are LOGGED IN to Wikipedia. It will NEVER affect anyone else. It's purely a convenience for you to see your name/signature highlighted when you are using Wikipedia. I'm afraid that Wikipedia does not monitor editors in real time so that it can light up their signatures on other editors' screens whenever they are online.--Verbarson (talk) 09:12, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

How do I get editors to pay attention to other legitimate sources?

The page on Vision Therapy has a lot of errors, misleading information and cites only sources that conform to one bias.

An example is the intro statement that says there is no scientific evidence supporting it. The CITT study, double blind, placebo controlled, and peer reviewed says otherwise.

I am trying to open a discussion with other editors to make the page more objective. Discuss the studies that say it is not supported, and the studies that support it too.

I’m running into a problem. Nobody wants to discuss it in the talk section, but they are happy to revert any edits made to make the page more objective.

• I realize my first attempt at editing it faltered because I hadn’t read enough of the wiki rules. I am now better versed.

Looking for help on what to do. Snapdginger (talk) 05:32, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Snapdginger:  Courtesy link: Vision therapy A great way to encourage participation is to make your comments more succinct. People won't read a wall of talk page text for an article that's considered fringe by prior consensus. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 05:59, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

WP:APPNOTE can help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton:

Thank you very much! I will try that approach! Snapdginger (talk) 13:08, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Is there a specific title I should use for a talk section to try to get the editors who came to a previous consensus to open up a discussion? This is a bit of a challenging topic because ophthalmology publications are always anti-optometry and anti-vision therapy while optometry publications are often the opposite. Do I tag previous authors? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snapdginger (talk • contribs) 13:15, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Courtesy ping. GoingBatty (talk) 13:18, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Snapdginger: GGS’s suggestion above to check out WP:APPNOTE is excellent. Be careful to not canvas by inviting only people you think already agree with you. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton:, @Gråbergs Gråa Sång and Gråbergs Gråa Sång:,

Solid advice. Read WP:RS at length. I've gained a lot of respect for the WIKI process by doing this. Quick Questions: 1. What do you do if one of the previous and established editors or mods seems to be very attached to their perspective? Is there a way to pull in a third party who doesn't have attachment at some point? 2. Is there clear criteria on which peer reviewed journals meet WP:RS. For example, Optometry and Vision Science (peer reviewed). I am having difficulty with an editor dismissing any source I cite (including peer reviewed optometric journals), while they include opinion pieces if it fits their narrative. 3. I have doctorate in Optometry, which allows me to understand the area well. I do not wish to see WP:FRIND. How do I ensure other editors of the fact that all I want to see is an actual neutral point of view that uses sources from established peer reviewed and reliable sources that both support and question something. It seems as though just asking for a more neutral point of view and citing reliable sources has caused one editor to re-write the article in an even less neutral manner that could be perceived as punishment for seeking neutrality.

All of that said, I am very open to feedback if my recent edits were not neutral or violated any wiki terms. If someone not emotionally attached to the current narrative on the page could review the edits of the past few days it would greatly help me learn the process and understand how to best proceed. Excuse the paste, I’m on mobile right now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_therapy?wprov=sfti1 Snapdginger (talk) 13:16, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Snapdginger: See WP:RFC to learn about bringing in unconnected third parties to a dispute on a talk page. You can also ask at the reliable sources noticeboard for an unbiased determination of a source’s reliability. Always be succinct and specific. Focus on one thing at a time and you’ll be more likely to get a response. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:51, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Splitting an article: Second thoughts

As a newish editor, I maybe got a bit ahead of my level of knowledge, by attempting a split of a very long article: Livingstone, Zambia, in this edit. Now I have started to feel nervous this wasn't the right thing to do - it seemed perfectly reasonable at the time! - as my split was to return recently added material back to a draft article page, Draft:Munokalya Mukuni, here. That is not really covered in the WP:SPLIT guide. Maybe I should have told lots of people first, or advised the original editor? Sorry that these thoughts did not occur until I had already moved the material. Wish I had panicked before, rather than after, I did it. What do you think? Have I done the wrong thing? If so, can you advise how to rectify, please? AukusRuckus (talk) 09:44, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps discussing this on the talk page of the page would be better. Thanks Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 18:12, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

I did write it all up on the Talk page, in advance. Just later got nervous, and wanted a general view on whether performing an article split by returning interposed material to a Draft article would be okay, or would cause a problem (and not whether the move itself was warranted. Sorry that I buried the main point!). I am going to assume my first instinct was correct, or at least acceptable, in light of the lack of reaction here, and on the article pages. Thanks for your response, though, Lightbluerain. AukusRuckus (talk) 01:09, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome. I really appreciate your hardwork. If you need help with reverting the edits, feel free to ask me. :) Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 08:45, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Replace a redirect with a disambiguation

I am seeking some guidance or assistance on how I should approach replacing the redirect for Bell Resources with a disambiguation Bell Resources (disambiguation). I am also drafting the following stub article Draft:Bell Resources. All help and guidance welcome. SiamBill555 (talk) 10:10, 19 October 2021 (UTC) SiamBill555 (talk) 10:10, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@SiamBill555 Since both entries at the DAB-page goes to the same place, I think having a dab-page is unnecessary at this point. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:27, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång You have mis-understood. I need advice on how to remove the redirect so I can use a dab-page to point to a new article. How do I remove the redirect? SiamBill555 (talk) 05:38, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Replied at Talk:Bell Resources (disambiguation). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Official dark mode css

I know that there is custom css that you can use on wikipedia. I have found things like this dark skin, but I don't want something with green text. Is there anything like this that is just darker than the normal wikipedia? Thanks, ― Levi_OP^Talk 14:01, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I think this would answer your question. You can enable this gadget from the “Testing and development” section of Gadgets in your preferences. This will give you a black background with white text instead of green text. (Note that this gadget won’t work if you’re using the Opera Mini browser or the Timeless skin.) Hope this helps! GMX^{(on the go!)} 14:58, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

(Direct link to the css: mediawiki:Gadget-dark-mode.css) GMX^{(on the go!)} 15:02, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

This looks great! Thanks for the help. ― Levi_OP^Talk 10:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

chinese wiki for "relish" feels off

Hello. I usually help in translating english wiki into chinese wiki. Recently I found this wikipage about relish (in general), though when I check the chinese page, the name and the description feels really off. In this scenario, should the page be deleted or just heavily modified? Crescentwuju (talk) 20:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Crescentwuju. If you're talking about an article in the Chinese Wikipedia, then you need to discuss it at Chinese Wikipedia, not here on English Wikipedia: they are entirely separate, and few people who look at this page can read Chinese. Try zh:维基百科:互助客栈/条目探讨. --ColinFine (talk) 20:46, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Crescentwuju, are you saying that the articles Relish and 開味小菜 aren't about the same thing? I can't read Chinese, but Google translate makes fairly good sense of the latter, and they seem to me to be about the same subject, near enough. Maproom (talk) 20:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, they seem to give it 2 meanings: "Relish (Relish), also known as hors d'oeuvres , appetizers ... sometimes it is difficult to distinguish from condiments to a certain extent ." We don't seem to have this term in Sweden, unless it's bostongurka. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:04, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Maproom: . The thing that I have with Relish translate as 開味小菜 is that it sounded as if the chinese term is a type of "small appetizer", not used as a condiment or sauce, which I think will cause confusion. Either way, I will go to the chinese teahouse equivalent and see what people think about it. Thanks for the suggestion @ColinFine:. Crescentwuju (talk) 21:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Edit: the more I think of it, the more I felt that the original chinese wiki probably is referring to hors d'oeuvres , appetizers rather than the english-term relish. Maybe the person who wrote the chinese wiki made a wrong interlink? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crescentwuju (talk • contribs) 21:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

It is an old fashioned usage, but you can find places in english language writing where 'relish' is used to mean an appetizer. If you look it up in most dictionaries it will be there as an alternate definition. MrOllie (talk) 21:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Crescentwuju: I'm a Chinese speaker, and I can confirm that Hors d'oeuvre is definitely the better target. The place to fix this is at Wikidata; I'll go ahead and do it now. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 00:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: thanks for your opinion! And I am happy that you also applied the change. Cheers from my part. Crescentwuju (talk) 20:42, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

EIT2: @Ganbaruby: apparently there is also a wiki article called 前菜. In this scenario, should the two merge and then create a brand new article for relish? Or should just revert back to how it is, but then change 開味小菜 for a more suitable name? Crescentwuju (talk) 20:56, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Crescentwuju: That's a discussion for the Chinese Wikipedia, which I don't edit. On the English Wikipedia, editors decided that Hors d'oeuvre and Appetizer are the same topic or similar enough to be in the same article, while Relish is completely different. Other languages may have come to different conclusions though: check the sitelinks for wikidata:Q1628963, wikidata:Q96749544, and wikidata:Q766777. This goes on to show that each language operates independent from each other, and that you should be discussing it over on the Chinese Wikipedia. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 00:28, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Question

QUESTION ABOUT BOLDFACE, JAPANESE LANGUAGE LINKS, AND MOVING PAST "DRAFT" STATUS

Dear Wikipedians,

Thanks to your kind help, I was able to publish my first Wikipedia article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakone_Onsen One question: I wanted to have the paragraph-level names of the specific hotsprings in boldface type. It makes the article easier to read, but is it congruent with Wikipedia style?

Also, I have started on my second Wikipedia article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aiseki_Shokudō QUESTION: Should I be linking to the Japanese Wikipedia articles about the two places in Japan (Inakadate-mura and Gotōrettō Island)? This draft article seems to have some other infelicities, but I am still a novice and am unsure what they are. Could anyone point them out? Many thanks in advance.

TNewfields (talk)TNewfields TNewfields (talk) 23:25, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey there @TNewfields: as for the boldface question, while I am also new myself, I believe only the title of the article and alternate names can be bolded in Wikipedia. An alternative solution is using bullet points, although that may make the section seem like a list. Heythereimaguy (talk) 00:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@TNewfields: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia's manual of style touches on this: do not use boldface for the purpose of making them "more legible" or for emphasis. The paragraphs seem fine as they are right now. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@TNewfields: Welcome to the Teahouse! For each of the {{cite web}} templates in Draft:Aiseki Shokudō, the |title= parameter should have the Japanese title, the |trans-title= parameter should have the English title, and the template should include |language=Japanese. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

TNewfields, your QUESTION: Should I be linking to the Japanese Wikipedia articles about the two places in Japan (Inakadate-mura and Gotōrettō Island)? No, because there's an article in English about both. (I've fixed both.) Clearly you found the Japanese articles; unless you're reading the "mobile" version of an article, it should link you to any articles in other languages about the same subject. Thus 五島列島 links to the English article, to Острови Ґото in Ukrainian, etc. (Incidentally, while editing this section, note how I've linked here to each of those two articles, and made the links below.) Now, suppose that you were writing an article that mentioned 前田寛治. There's no article about "Kanji Maeta" in this, English-language Wikipedia. You could write "Kanji Maeta", thereby taking the reader to the Japanese-language page; but I prefer "Kanji Maeta" (ugly though it is). Why so? First, because it takes the reader to the relevant Wikidata page, which in turn points to the article on Maeta in the Wikipedia of any language. Currently, these are Japanese and German, and the reader might have a strong preference either way. (It's imaginable that other languages will be added too.) Secondly, because if a article about Maeta is ever created in English-language Wikipedia and linked to from the Wikidata page, the ugly link will automatically become a direct link to the English-language article. -- Hoary (talk) 08:17, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Notability for cosmetics

Hi, I was wondering what's the notability guidelines for makeup companies? I noticed that a pretty prominent makeup company (Beauty Bakerie Cosmetics) I've been seeing on Insta a lot doesn't have a WP article yet despite me seeing multiple notable media coverage on the brand. I'd like to see an article for it but I can't find the notability guidelines for makeup brands specifically. I'm not doing this in the interest of promoting said brand or turning it into an ad per WP:COI), I'd just like to see if it's okay to create an article on said company given the notable media coverage.) Thanks! shanghai.^{talk to me} 04:30, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

References

@RogueShanghai: Welcome to the Teahouse! See Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, didn't know that existed. Just checked and said company is notable enough given the amount of sources, going to work on an article about it, thanks! shanghai.^{talk to me} 05:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

RogueShanghai, I think you'll be needing better sources than those. The first gives an error message, the second and third aren't independent of the subject, and the fourth is more like a list of advertisements than an independent discussion. Maproom (talk) 08:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Maproom: These were just the ones I found off Google, and the first source works for me fine. How is the Forbes article not a reliable source? Thanks. shanghai.^{talk to me} 08:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Forbes is reliable, but that article is not independent of Beauty Bakerie. It includes "“Cashmere’s story is a story of resilience above anything else,” says Roderick Roberts, Beauty Bakerie's chief financial officer". Maproom (talk) 09:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Also, Forbes in print is reliable, but forbes.com contains much content from "contributors" who are subject to very light if any editorial scrutiny. See WP:FORBESCON. In the case at hand, Amy Feldman is or was Forbes staff, but the article did not appear in the print edition. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Why are not show my name on Wikipedia - Ajay Raz

Why are not show my name on Wikipedia - Ajay Raz My article already available on Google & other social media Ajay Raz (talk) 05:59, 20 October 2021 (UTC) (Redacted)

Because we are not social media, we do not cite social media, and we do not care about your social media. I've removed the snippet above per our biographical policy. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 06:17, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Musician page

My name is Melissa Harley I’m writing regarding of well known musician artist “Lil Sporty D” Who has been mentioned in multiple news magazine and reliable source he Doesn’t have a Wikipedia page yet? I was wondering can someone please create him a WP article?  MsMelissaBaby (talk) 08:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

MsMelissaBaby, merely being mentioned isn't enough. Has Lil Sporty D been written up in depth in reliable, independent, published sources (plural)? If so, then you can create the article; if not, then nobody can. But before you attempt to create your first article, be sure to get plenty of practice improving and augmenting existing articles. -- Hoary (talk) 08:23, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I am not sure what I am doing but can someone please check my article and see I did it correctly It will be appreciate it here is the link. I don’t know how to put a picture up either I’m still Learning. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lil_Sporty_D Can someone please approve it — Preceding unsigned comment added by MsMelissaBaby (talk • contribs) 16:26, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@MsMelissaBaby: Welcome to the Teahouse! If the draft ever becomes an article, you can use the Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard to upload a photo you took. However, you have many other issues to resolve first, as already noted on your draft. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Thank you very much I appreciate it I was wondering can you do my Oracle and you could take the credit for it I appreciate it I’ve been working on this for like four years and I really don’t know what I’m doing anyway — Preceding unsigned comment added by MsMelissaBaby (talk • contribs) 18:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@MsMelissaBaby: I don't know what "can you do my Oracle" means. I suggest you review Help:Introduction, Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure, and Help:Your first article before continuing your work on the draft. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.) GoingBatty (talk) 02:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I note that Draft:Lil Sporty D right now appears to be nothing more than a badly formatted copy-paste of wikitia(dot)com/wiki/Lil_Sporty_D, which is a blacklisted Wikipedia clone where editing is limited to only specialized editors who are experts in their fields – so, in practical terms, a thinly disguised advertisement / SEO site (as evident by the linked page appearing in a Google knowledge panel when one looks up the subject). As their copyright note states that everything's available under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike, I don't believe this to be a copyvio (although I see no attribution on the draft), but I feel it's still worth pointing out. AngryHarpy‍^talk 04:48, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

MsMelissaBaby, yesterday I advised you: before you attempt to create your first article, be sure to get plenty of practice improving and augmenting existing articles. I suggest that you don't ignore it; that you instead improve and augment existing articles. With that experience behind you, you might be able to create a viable article. -- Hoary (talk) 08:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Tags for every editors "Tag: tag example"

What are the tags for (for example, "Tag: tag example")? 2001:44B8:41C6:F700:9D7:BF4F:D02C:AFAA (talk) 08:17, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Are you referring to Special:Tags? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 11:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes, they are called "Tag: tag example". Tags are for every single editor. 2001:44B8:41C6:F700:D17E:1C6B:7B43:3324 (talk) 23:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

my Ben Cleveland photo

you guys keep removing it,why Footballvoorhees (talk) 10:30, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

The history of the enwiki page explains why, and your user talk page at Commons explains why the photo has been deleted from there. Copyright violation is not allowed. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

In short, WP is strict about copyright. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:48, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

The word "white"

Hello, everyone. I replaced the word "white" with "harmless" in an article, but it was reverted. Does English Wikipedia currently see no problem with using the word "white" to mean "trustworthy", "do no harm", etc.? Kj4bFan (talk) 12:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I think in the article you edited "white" refers to skin colour, so it makes zero sense for you to replace with the word "harmless" unless you are intentionally being racist, in which case you will be blocked. Polyamorph (talk) 12:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

There is no way that edit is racist. And that's the problem with any idea of blocking racists. In this day and age, more and more people are being labeled as racists (and ruined for it) for being genuinely NOT racist; their "crime" is, they seek to treat everyone the same way. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I presume this was the diff. The sentence could/should be rephrased, but your way made no sense. Johnbod (talk) 12:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Kj4bFan: If you haven't done so already, I suggest you follow the reference and read pages 448-451 of Reynolds' book, and then ensure that the Wikipedia article accurately summarizes what is stated in the book. If (like me) you don't have access to the book, then I suggest you don't change the wording. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you all for your comments. I have read the chapter in question in the source before, using DeepL, but I didn't find it natural in the context that the word appeared in the sense of "of the white race," and I thought it was used to indicate that they had no dangerous objects. I have a lot to learn about the English language, so I'll avoid getting involved in this part of the article any further. My apologies, and thank you again.--Kj4bFan (talk) 13:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Kj4bFan—If you have the source to hand, what is the specific wording they use? It might be that the sentence should be re-written to be clearer; as it originally stood I understood as it caucasian and would not have read it as "harmless" (like in the sense of "a white lie"), but if you saw this as the interpretation it does leave open the possibility that our wording is not clear enough. If you have the original quote we can work out whether anything could be improved. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 14:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Fiesta (magazine)

Can someone stop the spammer on Fiesta (magazine)

5.68.124.25 (talk) 13:42, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Reported at WP:AIV. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

edit history

Why are some edits in edit history highlighted blue? The Tips of Apmh (talk) 14:40, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi The Tips of Apmh. Please link pages you refer to, or give an example. I guess you refer to a page with pending changes protection like [1]. Blue background indicates an accepted edit per Wikipedia:Pending changes#Pending changes adds highlighting that is lost when disabled. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Userbox on my user page

Hi, I am bisexual and was trying to use a similar "userbox" field on my userpage as to that used by @GorillaWarfare:, she's amazing! If someone could please help me get that going on my userpage, that would be great. I may add some other details too, but just trying to get started. Thanks! Th78blue (talk) 15:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Th78blue: Thank you for the kind words! The specific userbox I use is {{User:GorillaWarfare/userbox template|[[Image:gay flag.svg|40px]]|This user identifies as '''[[queer]]'''.}}, though it's only a slight stylistic variation from {{User:UBX/queer}}. There are also a whole slew of other options at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Life/Sexuality. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:31, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! @GorillaWarfare: I also noticed you have you pronouns in your user signature!! How can I add mine automatically for when I sign with the four tilde's? Th78blue (talk) 15:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey Th78blue, I'm not GorillaWarfare but you can change your signature by going to your preferences (here) and scrolling down to Signature. You could add [[User:Th78blue|Th78blue]] (pronouns • [[User talk:Th78blue|Th78blue]]) underneath "New signature" (replacing pronouns with your pronouns), tick "Treat signature as wikitext" then press Save. Now, when you post a comment, your pronouns should appear. :) --Ferien (talk) 16:00, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much @Ferien:, I just tried that, does it work now? It should add (They/Them/Theirs) as my chosen pronouns. They/Them/Theirs (talk) 16:12, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Never mind, I botched it there. Let me try again! [[User:Th78blue|Th78blue]] (They/Them/Theirs • [[User talk:Th78blue|Th78blue]]) (talk) 16:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Th78blue, you're nearly there. All you need to do is tick the "Treat signature as wikitext" button :) --Ferien (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Sheesh! Alright, hoping I am good NOW. :-) Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • Th78blue) 17:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Th78blue, yep, it works now. Happy editing! --Ferien (talk) 17:41, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Th78blue Not quite. If you replace the last "Th78blue" in the signature (the one after "User talk:Th78blue|") with the word "talk", then you'll have it. It should look like [[User:Th78blue|Th78blue]] (They/Them/Theirs • [[User talk:Th78blue|talk]] --Verbarson (talk) 18:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Oh my, oh my! Hopefully I get it this time... Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • talk 18:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

In the interest of perfection, I am now closing the parentheses on the back side too... I noticed it missing... check one "last time" :) Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • talk) 18:30, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Controversial or disputed information

How should we present disputed information on Wikipedia?

For example, if a group of people were making a specific claim, and another group of people were to make a counter claim, but there was no verifiable evidence to support either side of the claim as it happened a long time ago, how should this be presented?

Should we present both sides of the argument and state that it is disputed, or to leave it out altogether? Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 15:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia reports what reliable sources report. If there is "no verifiable evidence to support either side of the claim" then it has no place in Wikipedia. If reliable sources differ, then we should present both sides of the argument--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:51, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Occasionalpedestrian—It really depends on context. A situation where there are competing theories on something, neither of which are proven but both are discussed in reliable sources (say, for example, dark energy) then we would give a summary of what the sources say about each theory, like can be seen at dark energy#Theories of dark energy. If a theory or position isn't covered by reliable, third-party sources (that is to say, not directly from the person who believes it, but from an uninvolved publication discussing it) then we shouldn't include it, but it's entirely possible to have valid theories presented if the notability and sourcing are there. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 20:49, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

just checkin The Teahouse

hi. just checking. it looks nice. keep it up. 695LM (talk) 16:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@695LM Thank you - we'll do our best. Anytime you need any help, one of our friendly Teahouse Hosts will be happy to help you. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:20, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Article resubmission help

Hi, I edited an article in Sandbox using visual editing. It was rejected. I am trying to fix the issues but I'm not sure the article is "located" anymore. Now when I go to edit it is wikitext and I don't know wiktext. How do I get it in the visual format again to work with? Thanks in advance for your help! Here is the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Jeremy_Miller_(businessman)&action=edit Bimshirebaby (talk) 17:10, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Bimshirebaby: Welcome to the Teahouse! Looking at the URL you posted, we can see that your draft is located at Draft:Jeremy Miller (businessman). We can also find it by looking at Special:Contributions/Bimshirebaby. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:18, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I guess I meant where can I work with the article in visual editor. Now when I look at it I see wikitext and unfortunately I don't know how to work with this yet. How do I edit, add references etc without using wikitext with this draft? ack, I can't even figure out how to tag you lol. Tried @ing you and copy/pasting the exact format you used for my name and replacing with yours. I was able to use the visual editing really easily and now I'm just confused. I hope my question makes sense? -

@Bimshirebaby: Have you tried following the instructions at WP:VisualEditor - i.e., "Log in, uncheck Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta, optionally change Editing mode to Show me both editor tabs, and save your preferences."? I also see the option "Always give me the visual editor" in the 'Editing mode' menu, which seems like what you want. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 17:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Question

FYI

 – Added header Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 17:54, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Do you have any tea? 86.32.57.31 (talk) 17:51, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Sure. Here you go.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:31, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

but never any biscuits. This place is run on the cheap. Elemimele (talk) 20:33, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Nice biscuit

that's so not true! Everyone here is 'nice'. This one's for you. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:16, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Becoming an admin etc.

Hi all,

I am certainly too new still, but one day I aspire to be an admin and help the wiki in any and all ways that I can. How does one go about that? I assume the process is "invite only"? Thank you all! Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • Th78blue) 17:56, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

That's an awesome goal. I recommend reading this page to learn all about adminship and the process. There are not really any "official" requirements, but you will be relying on the greater community to vote for your adminship once nominated by another editor or if you request adminship. But remember, it's somewhat impossible to gain adminship without a lot of editing experience and support in the community. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 18:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Th78blue I would differ from PtC above and say that a better goal to have would be to just be a good editor. You can do 95% of things here without being an administrator. All being an administrator involves is being entrusted with certain abilities that would be irresponsible to give to everyone (like deleting pages). If through being a good editor and working in areas you like, you demonstrate how having the admin tools would help the project, the community will grant them. This almost always takes years- you need to build up a good edit history, showing a good understanding of Wikipedia policies, a good temperament, and a need for the tools. 331dot (talk) 21:48, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I would agree that's a better goal. Though I think when people say that being an admin is just cleaning up garbage, thankless, etc etc they might be forgetting that many editors see admin status as an "official badge of good judgment" because that's essentially what it is, given how hard it is to get it. It's like being elected to office. Thankless work, but it carries a ton of unwritten weight and deference, not to mention power. I would imagine an admin's edits are less likely to be reverted and their input in disagreements are considered to carry more weight by many editors. I think some people see being admin as far more validating than being a good editor. But that's a weakness of human nature, probably. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 22:12, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Th78blue We do need good administrators, but we need good editors more than we need good administrators. I choose never to be an admin. I believe my editing here is helped by not being one. All the admin tasks I might do are better for being "dual key" tasks.

I commend your ambition. Even so I suggest you set the ambition aside for a substantial time to learn and hone your real skills here Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:53, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Wow! What incredible responses. Thank you all for taking the time to respond, and for the incredible insight. As I mentioned, I'm sure it is a long way off (likely 1+ years), but I plan to edit every day I can, and have already done 500+ in just a month or so. Regardless, I am fully aware that it is not the quantity that matters, but quality. Also, I loved that comment on "needing the right temperament" etc. I agree completely. I do get the very real sense that some admins see their opinions as having more weight than my own. I will put very detailed edit summaries and follow all the WP policies that I exist, but they will revert some of my points sometimes and simply say "unreasonable", or some other extremely short response. Sometimes they will even do a revert with no edit summary at all... which is very discouraging. Without having the context as to what EXACTLY I may have done wrong, I do not know how new editors are supposed to learn. I feel as if WP:BITE is not heeded very often... Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • talk) 23:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I agree that jaded editors can be overly bitey, and I hope you don't get too discouraged. Remember the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. If you're reverted, take it to the Talk Page and make your case. Reverts should have an edit summary, but if not, give them a chance to explain it there. If you still feel the revert is unwarranted, you can always try a Third Opinion. Stick with it, understand that it's a collaboration, and I think you'll have a good time in the long run. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 00:11, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Please do not create overly long edit summaries. It's enough that an ES identifies where in the text the changes were made, and a brief description of reason for change. David notMD (talk) 02:10, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Graphs

How do you add a article that has a graph or a list? TiffPlayz Roblox (talk) 21:36, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, TiffPlayz Roblox. Please read Help: Graph and Help: List. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:53, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) TiffPlayz Roblox—It's not a simple answer and it really would depend on what sort of graph or list you're looking to do. Which article is it and what would you like to add? 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 21:54, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Untitled

FYI

 – Added section header. GoingBatty (talk) 02:37, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

2001:FB1:12B:F33F:E4E9:202C:3DEF:AA06 (talk)Mubeen 2001:FB1:12B:F33F:E4E9:202C:3DEF:AA06 (talk) 22:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Did you have a question? GoingBatty (talk) 02:38, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

how to autoconfirm or confrim your wikipedia account?

FYI

 – Added section header. GoingBatty (talk) 02:37, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

How can i auto confirm my wikipedia account? Haris099 (talk) 23:08, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Haris099: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per WP:AUTOCONFIRM, user accounts that are at least 4 days old and have made at least 10 edits to the encyclopedia will become autoconfirmed. I suggest you start with Help:Introduction and Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:40, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Help with album image copyright

Hi, I've been editing the article for The Conet Project and thought it could use an image of the cover art of the album. I read the information page about uploading images, and I think that I can just upload the image to Wikimedia Commons because on the website the image is hosted on, it says "Open Content 1995-2019 Irdial. All Rights Reserved where applicable." but I'm not sure, because the image itself isn't specifically marked with the "open content" logo. I'm shaky on copyright law, and to be honest had trouble understanding the guidelines page. Would uploading it there be an appropriate thing to do, or should I follow the process for copyrighted album art that can be used here due to fair use?

Also, sorry if this isn't the appropriate page to ask this question on. Thanks in advance for your help. IdealSalesman (talk) 23:12, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IdealSalesman. That "all rights reserved" language is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons. Instead, follow the directions at WP:NFCI #1. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:59, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@IdealSalesman: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can use the Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard to upload the cover art of the album as a non-free file. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Fully-protected for Main Page

Why is Main Page are fully-protected for? 2001:44B8:41C6:F700:D17E:1C6B:7B43:3324 (talk) 00:20, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

So that people don't randomly change things on it and break everything. It's been this way since before I started editing Wikipedia. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 00:37, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Because it would be vandalized constantly if it wasn't protected. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:38, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia page not showing up

Why won't this website (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kevin-Bokoum/sandbox) show up? I'm trying to make a wikipedia page for a person of interest and would like it to show up on google results. 24.49.61.186 (talk) 00:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Userspace is intentionally NOINDEXed. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 00:31, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

How do I transfer it to a non-user page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinbokoum (talk • contribs) 00:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

You don't. Most of your sources are poor at best. https://www.heraldmailmedia.com/story/news/education/2020/07/23/student-standout-north-high-junior-is-new-boe-representative/115889622/ is the only useful source among the whole lot, with most of the rest being mere sound bites. Notability has not been met, and nor has WP:Biographies of living persons. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 00:35, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

What the above comment means is that if you submitted your Sandbox draft to Articles for Creation for review, it would be Rejected or Denied. If you bypass AfC to make it an article, the New Pages Patrol would kick it back to draft or deleted it.David notMD (talk) 02:18, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Kevinbokoum: I've moved the draft article to draftspace for you. You can continue working on it there and then submit it for review once it's ready. ––FormalDude talk 02:31, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Kevin Bokoum. I second the opinion that Mr. Bokoum's accomplishments do not rise to a level that meets Wikipedia's concept of notability. David notMD (talk) 09:43, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia going to consider odd perfect numbers as "underserved"?

I just believe that such numbers should be considered underserved and thus require establishment. This, I believe will require 3 editors or more and will involve gashing it into the server. Thoughts on proposal? Bonnffdo (talk) 02:44, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Bonnffdo: The Teahouse isn't really the right place for this proposal, maybe try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. Also I have no clue what you're getting at. ––FormalDude talk 02:54, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Perfect number#Odd perfect numbers? According to what is written there, there are no odd perfect numbers that are known. If you want to establish an article about them exclusively, you're going to need to be a mathematician or have some really good sources that solve the question. WhoAteMyButter (📨_talk│📝^contribs) 02:58, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft:BONAMY

Welcome to the Teahouse!

FYI

 – Added section header Eevee01^(talk) 06:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

how to correct my refence Jamshi jabeen (talk) 06:13, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:BONAMY Karenthewriter (talk) 07:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey there @Jamshi jabeen, thanks for coming to the Teahouse! Here's some tea and biscuits for you.

It looks like your article was declined because there are not enough sources with significant coverage. Right now there are only two news media sources for the movie. The article requires more reliable sources talking about the movie in order to be considered notable for Wikipedia. Are there any additional sources you can provide? ––FormalDude talk 07:50, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Why recipe blog content can submit to wikipedia references successfully?

油條 Yóutiáo - Angel Wong's Kitchen

Why this kind of recipe blog content can be submit to wikipedia? I have seen many bloggers submit their blog content. Anyone can give me an introduction? Cherryblossomcici (talk) 07:28, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Cherryblossomcici, welcome to the Teahouse! It appears you're talking about this edit of yours to Zongzi.

Adding your own recipe from your blog to a Wikipedia article about it is considered original research and also promotional use of external links. Check out Wikipedia WP:BLOGS which states that blogs are almost always not permitted as sources. This is definitely one of those cases (the exception typically only applies for subject-matter experts).

Let us know if you have any additional questions! ––FormalDude talk 07:41, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

You say "I have seen many bloggers submit their blog content." It would be really helpful if you could provide examples.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

another example:

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

External links Chinese Steamed Bun 饅頭

http://yireservation.com/recipes/mantou-chinese-steamed-bun/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherryblossomcici (talk • contribs) 09:17, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

That doesn't appear to be a blog, and it does provide "neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject" so it appears to meet WP:EL.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:13, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Cherryblossomcici:, there may be misuses elsewhere in Wikipedia where people have included links to personal recipes in blogs, but that's just an on-going risk of an open, collaborative encyclopaedia. Such links will be ruthlessly weeded-out over time, when they are discovered! They are not examples to follow. The essential difference is this: if a reputable source such as a cookery magazine quotes someone's recipe as a "typical recipe for Traditional Martian Greencakes", then we have reasonable grounds to believe the recipe is what it says it is. We assume that good cookery magazines select their writers as experts, and exert some quality-control on what they put into print. If a blog says the same information, all we know is that someone's grandmother told them that that's what she always did when she was a girl, and for all we know, grandma might be the only person in the world who does it that way, and grandson/daughter might have mistaken the instructions! So unfortunately, even if you're a great cook, and really well-informed, you can only include a link to your recipe if a reputable organisation/person has vetted it and published it independently (and even then, you've got a conflict of interest and should get the link included by declaring the situation on the article's talk-page and accepting other editor's evaluation of whether your recipe is the right one to use as an example). I hope this helps! Elemimele (talk) 11:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Need Help with referencing my article 'Tupocracy'

Hello house My new article has been constantly rejected due to issues bordering on referencing and and notability. The word 'Tupocracy' is gaining traction gradually in the political space and then i feel there is need to have it also on Wikipedia.

I wouldn't mind having an experience editor work with me on this project.

Thank you

Niftyrules™ 08:32, 21 October 2021 (UTC) Niftyrules™ 08:32, 21 October 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niftyrules (talk • contribs)

@Niftyrules: Welcome to the Teahouse. The article was rejected, meaning it is not suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia at this time. The word Tupocracy is clearly not notable. It may become notable at some point in the distant future, but until then, it will not be included on Wikipedia. Please do not continue to try to add it to Wikipedia.––FormalDude talk 08:41, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Paid Editor

I am thinking that a user is a paid editor see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Radha_shyam as his contribiutons he create and edit only one page Weidner Memorial Senior Secondary School so it means he is a paid editor what you all think if he is not a paid editor so he edit other pages but he was paid so he only edit Weidner Memorial Senior Secondary School UserABCXYZ (talk) 08:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

UserABCXYZ Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The edits you refer to were made in 2010. If that user resumes editing, any paid editing can be addressed at that time. 331dot (talk) 08:45, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@UserABCXYZ We often find that it's usually school pupils (and occasionally staff) who write about schools. But as 331dot says, those edits were made 11 years ago, so we only need to worry about editors active today. But if you feel there are statements in that (or any other article) that are not supported by citations, feel free to remove them, leaving an edit summary to explain your reasoning for their removal. Many thanks. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Can you please guide me to review my first article submission

Good day,

On my submitted article : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mikhail_Mouty

I received the following reason for rejection on Oct 19th : "Subject does not appear to pass WP:GNG or WP:NPROF. The inline citations do not confirm the sentences they are linked to"

Can you please guide me in improving my article to be accepted.

Great thanks MEF2362 (talk) 09:14, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MEF2362, and welcome to the Tehouse. In the opinion of that reviewer, Mouty (not just your draft about him) does not currently meet the requirements to be the subject of an article in Wikipedia: see WP:NOAMOUNT. Unless you can find at least three sources that are reliably published and unconnected with Mouty and have significant coverage of him, then any further effort you put into that draft will be wasting your time. --ColinFine (talk) 09:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @MEF2362 In my opinion, I think Mouty would (probably) meet our WP:NBIO/WP:NPROF criteria, but the key thing is for your citations to allow anyone to verify every statement you have made. So each citation must allow someone to check that what you wrote is correctly stated in the citation, and not based either on your own conclusions or knowledge of him (we call that original research)

I note that Mouty died only very recently, and it may be that a good, independent obituary about him will become available in time, or that you have missed one in local or regional newspapers. My commiserations to you, as I suspect you knew him personally, by the excellent photo you took of him last year. If you did know him, I would invite you to please follow our guidelines at WP:COI by simply making clear any knowledge or connection you have with him? There is nothing wrong in this, but we simply like to have clarity about who is writing about people, and their motivations.

So, don't give up, but take your time to go through everything, line by line and pretend to be an independent observer, challenging every statement and asking yourself "how can I prove that?" I have made a few small tweaks to your draft which I hope you find helpful. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:15, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Might be worth contacting a relevant university department in Syria, or the publishers of one of his more recent papers, to ask if they know of obituaries in any specialist journals, and/or of any plans to publish a posthumous Festschrift (which could take several months to a few years to come to fruition). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.128.151 (talk) 21:22, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Flags for countries

Hello, where can I found Wikipedia images of flags for countries? That would help me for a draft article I'm working on. Thanks! GTNO6 (talk) 10:12, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi GTNO6. Please see Wikipedia:FLAG.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:15, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft declined

Hi, i recently created an article for torque sealants (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Torque_sealant). My first draft was declined with the comment: "Fails WP: GNG, requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources". This was understandable as there were only two citations for the whole article. Since then I have been researching for more sources and added 7 further references. However, when resubmitting my draft it was declined again and i got following answer: "If this draft is resubmitted without any improvement or with very little improvement again, it will almost certainly be rejected, and it may be nominated for deletion, or a partial block may be requested against further submission by the responsible editor.".

Since I made changes to the article before resubmitting it I am now a bit confused and don't know what else is expected from me. I am new to Wikipedia and maybe I made a mistake I am not aware of? I would greatly appreciate some help. MoritzStorch (talk) 11:46, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Citations

Can someone format all the citations/ref on the article Sora (Kingdom Hearts)? There are tons of cited sources without the name of the website and they aren't even formatted correctly. Thanks. 180.44.113.234 (talk) 11:55, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. The place to request that is on the article's talk page. It's unlikely anyone here would be interested in doing that, whereas the article itself has over 100 watchers. Thanks for raising your concerns, though. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:54, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Recreating a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion

Hi there. I'm here to ask that I want to recreate a page which was deleted per deletion discussion. The page was nominated because it didn't meet with general notability guideline. But I've found some sources which meets with general notability guideline. So I hope that if I recreate this page, it will meet with GNG. Thanks.  ||  Orbit Wharf 11:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Orbit Wharf, please see Wikipedia:Deletion review. -- Hoary (talk) 12:09, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Is Tania Aidrus Notable Topic

Hello community! Iam a content writer from pakistan and wants to write on Tania Aidrus, She was a leader in the Global Business Organization at Google in the US and in Singapore as well, where she was the Country Manager for South Asia Frontier Markets at Google. Prior to her appointment as a Google executive, Tania co-founded a mobile health diagnosis company called ClickDiagnostics which connected rural patients in emerging markets to doctors around the world. She resigned her job just to serve her motherland (Pakistan) and She became minister of technology, Wikipedia lacks information about her and I wanted to share whole story of Tania Aidrus with the globe how her patriotism bring her in the underdeveloping country and her determiniation to which she was resigned for. Mrsginamann (talk) 12:31, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

The requirements for notability for people are at Wikipedia:Notability (people). --David Biddulph (talk) 12:41, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Wiki adventure gets stuck on edit summary

My wiki adventure keeps being unable to progress past 'summarize your edit', even though I complete the summary. Is there a work-around to this? I'd like to make sure I do all of the onboarding lessons. Snapdginger (talk) 13:13, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Snapdginger: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia talk:The Wikipedia Adventure instructs to contact Ocaasi for bug reports. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:25, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Next step with mildly disruptive IP editor

I'm watching a page where an IP editor keeps making unsourced changes, e.g. [2]. The changes are not obvious vandalism, but they also seem very unlikely to be good faith attempts to improve wikipedia. I reverted them a couple of times, and in one edit they even reverted themselves citing my previous edit summary, so they seem to understand. But then they keep doing it. At this point I'm not sure what I should do next. Any advice? Thanks. Danstronger (talk) 13:29, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Oops, that wasn't them reverting themselves, that was another IP editor. Danstronger (talk) 20:39, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

There is a LOT of IP editing, much of it reverted, going on at Casualties of the September 11 attacks. Perhaps some protection warranted? David notMD (talk) 16:34, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try suggesting it for semi-protection Danstronger (talk) 20:39, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

New to all of this

New to all this stuff please help

Hello there, I'm a casual reader of wikipedia but i just found all this editing tools and i'm very confused. I just discovered this about 15 minutes ago so im still pretty confused with all this, i've only used wikipedia before to read some articles. What should i know about all this editing tools and communities and whatnot? I know the teahouse is for editing pages but it said its friendly to newcomers plus i dont know where else to put this. If someone could help me i have a couple questions i would like to be answered

1. What should i know about all these editing tools 2. What is the editing community here in wikipedia? I saw a page on a christianity in china work group but i'm still pretty confused 3. Whats the difference between the wikipedia website and app? Does the app have all these editing features

Thanks in advance :) Overbubble (talk) 13:48, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Overbubble: Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! The learning curve here can be a little steep, but you'll probably find the information at this introduction as good a place as any to start

The Wikipedia app is pretty good (and is getting better!), but its more geared to reading articles than editing, at least in my opinion. ~TheresNoTime ^{(to explain!)} 13:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Overbubble—Welcome and hello! Editing wikipedia can be daunting at first but like any toolbox, tools are there because they might be useful in some cases and don't always need to be used regularly. Most editing can be done very simply with plain text and if you're new to editing it's always good to start small and slow; if you see a mistake like a typo, jump right in and edit it if you like. When you're more familiar with basic editing, the other tools will fall into place more easily. As to your second question, things like work groups and wikiprojects exist as focal points for editing related articles; if you're interested in a specific field there is usually a group for it with listings of relevant articles and sometimes helpful resources and discussions too. You can usually find these listed on the talk page of articles, so if you're reading something interesting, look at its talk page to see any related projects. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 13:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Overbubble: There are multiple Wikipedia apps - see List of Wikipedia mobile applications for more information. GoingBatty (talk) 15:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

New Article

I have created an article Draft:Kawardha Voilence but it is about a very sensitive case so I am fearing about to publish it so I want help to contribute that article because that is very very sensitive and national case it is about and I don't know but if I have write some attacking words so please review it UserABCXYZ (talk) 14:09, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

UserABCXYZ Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added the appropriate information to allow you to submit the draft for review. 331dot (talk) 14:15, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks friend but there is a problem It is one of the most sensitive case in India so it is right to publish this page UserABCXYZ (talk) 14:18, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

We have many articles on similar topics. See Category:Religiously motivated violence in India. Vexations (talk) 15:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Per WP:DISC, it is not wrong because of the topic. Consider WP:EVENTCRIT though. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Help with reliable sources

Page in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Herd_Social was declined due to lack in reliable sources. This is my first time writing a wikipedia page, and was wondering if anyone could help. I'm confused on which sources are not credible, or are the not enough credible sources? Just kinda confused over all.

Thank you in advance! Alihoward82 (talk) 15:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Alihoward82: Welcome to the Teahouse! Everything in your draft should be referenced. For example, what is your source for "Herd emerged from the frustrations of consumers..." and "This early traction led to a waitlist of over 10,000 users pre-launch." and "The App rose to number #15 on the social networking chart..."? Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:31, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Alihoward82, and welcome to the Teahouse. "Credible" is not a criterion we have for sources: the two main ones are "reliable", which means that it was published by somebody with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking; and "independent" of the subject, so not published by the subject or based on an interview or press release from them. (Non-independent sources are accepted for certain kinds of information, but do not contribute to establishing notability. You might find WP:CSMN helpful. --ColinFine (talk) 15:50, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Alihoward82, your draft has content copied from this site, in violation of copyright.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:25, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

INAZUMA ELEVEN ARES

Why don't they publish something about the INAZUMA ELEVEN ARES animation program, I mean this is a great animation so why wouldn't anyone post something about them that includes: photos of characters, their background and episodes and siries or chapters.Template:Plz sm1 post something 41.115.61.132 (talk) 15:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

You mean like this? Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 16:19, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. In addition to the reply given above, it might be considered fancruft to include this information that may be deemed unencyclopedic. There'd be more leeway for addition on another wiki, such as those hosted by FANDOM. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

adding to the further reading section

a question about edits

Hello! I am new here - I was trying to add a book to further reading - powers of two by Joshua Wolf Shenk - it focuses on creative partnerships and tells the story of many historical figures including Emily Dickinson. When I added it to her wikipedia page, I was told I was editing disruptively - not my intention and many apologies! What are the rules on this? How can I get a book, which is very relevant, well revered and I think would be useful - to be listed? What is the process? Many thanks for your help!!

Emma EmmaFDennis (talk) 16:28, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi @EmmaFDennis: Welcome to Wikipedia. Sorry for your frustration. It might help to read this page to learn more about what should and should not be included in that section. For example, it says:

Preference is normally given to works that cover the whole subject of the article rather than a specific aspect of the subject, and to works whose contents are entirely about the subject of the article, rather than only partly.

Hope that helps. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 16:37, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@EmmaFDennis: Welcome to the Teahouse. The reason is most likely because you are spamming the same book across different articles, which gives the impression you are promoting or advertising said book. You might also want to read Wikipedia:FURTHERREADING, particularly the section §Topical. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:39, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

This is really helpful both, thank you so much!! EmmaFDennis (talk) 16:52, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

How to make an alphabetic table of contents?

Hi! I was trying to create an alphabetic table of contents at List of awards and nominations received by NCT, but it doesn't work and I don't understand what I'm doing wrong. How do I fix it? Thanks in advance! Poirot09 (talk) 16:54, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Poirot09—What you would need to include is an anchor for the TOC to point to. Normally a table of contents will point to a heading and just matches the text of that heading, but as there is no entry titled "A" or "B", you need to force the table to have one. If you use the template {{anchor}} you can do this; if you add {{anchor|J}} to the row heading beginning with J then it will create a hidden anchor that the TOC will let you jump to. Do this for any and all letters you need, but only once per letter (two identical anchors will mean the second one doesn't work). 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 17:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the help! Poirot09 (talk) 17:20, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Pls can u keep my edit temporary stayed

Pls can u keep my edit temporary stayed JahXVro999SkiMask (talk) 17:16, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

User blocked (not by me). Deor (talk) 17:49, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

The unblock appeal process is described on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 22:01, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Colonel Powell

I'm really puzzled by the thinking behind Colonel Powell. This is a redirect to Colin Powell (so that's what you see if you hover over the link), but there is also a disambiguation page for the various Colonel Powells, which you can only get to by first going to Colin Powell and then noticing the bit at the top of the article that points to the disambiguation. It seems to me that if a reader types "Colonel Powell" in the search box in Wikipedia, we should consider the possibility that they are intelligent humans capable of typing, who chose to type "Colonel" because they want to read about a Colonel; and that had they wanted to read about Colin, they would have typed "Colin". I suppose there's an added complication that Colin Powell, having been a four-star general, was presumably a colonel at some point in his career?? But he's notable for being Colin Powell, not for being Colonel Powell. My feeling is that the redirect shouldn't exist. Colonel Powell should go to the disambiguation page, which can happily contain a link to Colin Powell to help those who have made a mistake and misheard Colin's name as a rank. But I'm loath to mess around with such a high-profile redirect, and in any case I don't know technically how to deal with bad redirects. Any advice appreciated! Elemimele (talk) 17:48, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

It was made in 2009 by an editor who haven't edited since 2016, so we probably won't get any answer from there. I know of no reason why you shouldn't WP:PROD it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:54, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I can understand the rationale behind the redirects as these are ranks he has held, just like someone might search General MacArthur or General DeGaulle, but if you feel the primary topic should be the disambig page, I would suggest opening a discussion on Colin Powell's talk page. The good news is that the article is likely to be getting extra hits at this time so there should be plenty of eyes on the discussion to chime in. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 17:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hmm, General Powell, Major Powell, Colonel North... Perhaps there is a guideline somewhere, but Colonel Powell makes less sense to me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:10, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

thank you both; I had only just noticed the sad news of his death. I will raise it initially on the talk page of the Colin Powell article, and then consider the PROD if people agree. Elemimele (talk) 18:12, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

My understanding of disambiguation is that Colonel Powell should point to Colonel Powell (disambiguation), but no article should ever point to either except in a hatnote or see also. Perhaps ask the folks at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation pages with links Vexations (talk) 18:47, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @Gråbergs Gråa Sång:, @Grapple X:, @Vexations:, this place moves fast! Someone has agreed and done the deed in less than the time it took me to work out how to edit a redirect. Problem solved! Elemimele (talk) 20:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Requesting for block

Hi. I'm here to ask that can I request for block for any user? I've found a user who is using Wikipedia using a promotional username. And the user should be blocked. Thanks.  ||  Orbit Wharf 19:28, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

You can report that at WP:UAA, Orbit Wharf. Make sure you read the notes at the top. --ColinFine (talk) 19:32, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Thank you so much! Another help! Can I use Twinkle for making a report? Thanks. ||  Orbit Wharf 19:46, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Orbit Wharf Yes, you can certainly use Twinkle to make a UAA report. Assuming you've already activated it in your Preferences, look for the 'TW' tab in desktop view (towards the top right of the page, next to the search box). The first option in the dropdown that appears is 'ARV'. Click that one and select the second option 'Username', then tick the relevant reason for your concern. If you need to add links to pages, diffs, external sites, just write in the comments box. Hope this makes sense. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:51, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft: Charles Williams

Appreciate comments received from various parties. Believe this article is ready. Looking for verification.

Thank you

Flagship1Flagship1 (talk) 20:15, 21 October 2021 (UTC) Flagship1 (talk) 20:15, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Charles_Williams Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 20:24, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Some improvements have been made. More sourcing is required to demonstrate notability per WP:BIO. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:58, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I added a SUBMIT button, but agree more content needed. Other Asst Sec to Navy appear to have articles, but not a guarantee that CW will be approved. David notMD (talk) 22:03, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I am having a bug with the wikipedia adventure

I keep getting a prompt to open the source editor when I already have it open, then I can not continue. Cjs1 21:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Cjs1: I think you'd be better off starting a thread at the Adventure talk page. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:19, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

sorry Cjs1 23:09, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of TW/warning

I chanced upon this situation where a registered user was wrongly criticised for a simple infobox expansion, where there is clearly prose to support with ref (at a mid-point) in the opening section. One viable ref (BBC) is extant since 2007.

I messaged the TW user at User talk:Loriendrew#Your revert at Jane Tomlinson - without any recommendation or request - but s/he has not edited since. Users of third-party utilities are responsible for their correct usage, and as I cannot find anything specific allowing me (under these particular circumstances) to remove Talk content, would an admin remove, in fairness to the initial editor? Thank you. Rocknrollmancer (talk) 23:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you be more specific as to what you are asking to be removed? Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 23:51, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't believe admin intervention is required, you are free to leave a message on the talkpage stating you believe the warning to be an error and that the addition to the infobox was ok. AS for your message about it being a lvl 2 warning being unacceptable, it is not un heard of with a user with history such as this one to no longer warrant level 1 warnings which are generally where we are still assuming good faith. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 00:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

ThanQ Pyrrho the Skeptic, Mcmatter - I've been on WP for eight years and I know there are two admins I could name at the teahouse, rather than approaching any one individual elsewhere, I thought it might be useful for Teahouse volunteers to be able to consider. I meant that the whole section (User talk:Okay,okayhshshs#October 2021) should be removed by an admin as it was wrongly applied. I couldn't find anything (ferinstance at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines) alluding to rectification of incorrect usage of speed-dialled warnings. AFAIK only admin can do that? Other than the initiater who could self-revert.

Regarding my use of "inappropriate", I didn't mean that uw-bio2 was inappropriate instead of level 1, rather the whole presumption that it was unsourced and as such needed to be knee-jerked reverted was inappropriate, being a too-shallow observation by the TW user. I can recognise that Okay,okayhshshs doesn't leave edit summaries and has a history of previous criticisms - already checked that some days ago. But that doesn't excuse the quick-fire trigger on the pop-up utility (I am also aware of the recent development RedWarn) and we should strive to correct wrongs, IMO. I often write individually-composed messages (like this one to the same user in March 2021), rather than the standard, templated messages which can be perceived as harsh.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 01:23, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Make userboxes

FYI

 – Heading added by Tenryuu.

I'm new to Wikipedia.

How do you make userboxes to customize your profile? I have no experience editing this site but have read many political articles and cannot wait to contribute when I have the time.

Thank you, Anonymous user — Preceding unsigned comment added by PoliticallyPassionateGamer (talk • contribs) 00:15, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@PoliticallyPassionateGamer: Welcome to the Teahouse. You are probably looking for Wikipedia:Userboxes, which has info about making your own, as well as asking others to make one and a list of current userboxes further down the page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:26, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Old Oak Tree

What is the common name of Old Oak Tree? I don't know if the current title is correct. Paul Vaurie (talk) 03:20, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Vaurie: This source calls it the "Old Oak Tree", this source and this source call it the "Basking Ridge White Oak Tree". I'm not an admin, I know this doesn't solve your query, just whatever I found on it. Excellenc1 (talk) 03:48, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

How to cite the plot?

When creating an article on a movie (this one), how to cite the entire plot, or is it ok if I don't cite the plot? Excellenc1 (talk) 03:38, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: Generally, it's fine if you don't have a citation for the plot (as MOS:PLOTSOURCE describes). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:50, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Translation's title

Suppose I want to create a translation of fr:Association de défense des actionnaires minoritaires. How do I know if the translation already exists? How do I know if the existing translation's title is in its original language (French in this case) or in English? (Just an example, I have already created its translation). Excellenc1 (talk) 03:42, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Why Is My Article Rejected?

• Why My Was Rejected? TechPandeyYT (talk) 03:48, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I quote: "TSG PANDEY GAMERS (VIVEK PANDEY) is an Indian famous YouTuber and Gamer. He has a channel name 'TSG PANDEY GAMERS' , where he uploaded the videos of Garena Free Fire (The most downloaded game in 2020, in the world). His best friends are LALIT RAJ and SHIVSHANKER ." (And more of the same.) Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia, TechPandeyYT, before attempting to add to it. -- Hoary (talk) 04:22, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

CAS number for chemical compound COSTUNOLIDE

The CAS # in the ChemBox of the article for costunolide (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Costunolide) matches that given by Common Chemistry for this compound. However, the article shows a red "X" by the CAS #, indicating that it is unverified. What should be done to change the red "X" to a green "√" to indicate the CAS # is correct/verified? Chemtalker777 (talk) 04:03, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

How to edit right the draft: draft:Ronnie_Makabai

I have tried to edit the draft Draft:Ronnie Makabai in the right way but all ways have failed. Can i please getr some help and how can i make this right. NB: Am not attached to the subject or know him, i just wrote things i know about him and to me he is notable. I just contributed as an editor and i wish to learn more. please help out. Biggerbenson (talk) 04:05, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Biggerbenson: I have edited the introductory paragraph of your draft. You may check that and do the edits for the rest of the draft as well. The problem was the draft seemed to promote the person. (I'm not an admin) Excellenc1 (talk) 04:50, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Is it ok if I answer queries even if I'm not a teahouse host?

I promise I won't mislead anyone. I'll help only if I can. Excellenc1 (talk) 04:54, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I hope so, as I'm not an official host either! ClaudineChionh (talk) 05:05, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

It is absolutely ok to do that. Answering questions is how you become a host! (Spontaneous generation of Teahouse hosts was a popular theory, but it was proved wrong 150 years ago; it is now known that existing editors are transformed into hosts by exposure to large amounts of tea.)

However, please only answer questions if (1) you are familiar enough with the relevant guidelines etc. and (2) you are welcoming of new users even if they ask "stupid" questions are themselves not likeable characters (POV-pushers, paid editors etc.). (Advice for the first point: do not answer copyright questions until you have seen many of those answered. I got, like, twenty of these wrong before I became halfway decent at it.) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:28, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I have practiced all skills, but why can't i create a page still!

 Jan12shamil (talk) 05:36, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Shamil, on your user page you say that you have or had multiple accounts, so you should first check to see whether you have a legitimate reason for having multiple accounts. You can read about the different levels of access that users have – you need to be at least confirmed or autoconfirmed to create new articles.

I would also advise you to read the guidelines on writing better articles citing sources.

Is there a specific article that you are trying to create? ClaudineChionh (talk) 06:16, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Paperpen2824's article has been declined

Hello , My article has been declined , would appreciate if someone can help me on that and review it once. Paperpen2824 (talk) 06:50, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Paperpen2824, the last time Draft:Abhishek A Rastogi was declined, a few days ago, the comment was 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. This is just as true now. Do these sources exist? If they do not, no article can be created. -- Hoary (talk) 07:11, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Paperpen2824: Welcome to the Teahouse. Your article was declined because is it lacks reliable, significant, independent sources, and the subject is therefore not considered notable. There's tons of content in the article, yet only two references, which leaves major verifiability issues. Unless you can provide reliable independent sources that show significant coverage of the subject, the article is likely to be entirely rejected for inclusion on Wikipedia. ––FormalDude talk 07:24, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee

What voting system is used to elect the arbitration committee? (e.g. first-past-the-post, etc.) Timis189 (talk) 09:05, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

My IP has been blocked even though I don't do anything

 183.171.25.164 (talk) 09:05, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Since you posted here, your IP is not blocked. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. 331dot is correct - you;re Ip address has never been actively blocked by us. However, if you tried to edit via a browser such as Opera which can default to using a VPN (and thus hide your real IP address), you will see a scary red message saying that the VPN's own IP address (and not yours) has been blocked. That got me the first time it happened. But, as you've managed to post this, you've obviously no longer got any issues to worry about. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:32, 22 October 2021 (UTC)