Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


Would it be okay to translate a Scots language page into English?[edit]

Since the Scots Language is mutually intelligible with English, would it be appropriate for me, a non-Scots speaker, to translate a page from Scots Wikipedia into English?

The page that I thought I would like to translate is this one. All of the words seem to be cognate with an English equivalent, and the references seem adequate, so it passes that criteria.

Lastly, I would like to clarify that I would of course provide attribution to the original page in the edit summary.

Thanks, Slamforeman (talk) 20:45, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Slamforeman, most likely. If you need to, you can just machine-translate it and copyedit the result. Note that notability must still be established on English Wikipedia, since these are two separate Wikipedias. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 20:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Just a little interjection; avoid machine translations if possible (see WP:MACHINE...many languages require at least a basic understanding by oneself to do a good copyediting in their English version. Lectonar (talk) 14:44, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Sungodtemple just to be clear, this is true even though WP:CXT disallows machine translation? I asked here to make sure that guideline does not apply in this circumstance. Slamforeman (talk) 21:01, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's a very short article with four sentences, most of which I can already understand. Common sense tells me it should be okay. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 21:20, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, that’s good to know. Thank you for your advice! Slamforeman (talk) 21:28, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If it is common sense and you can find no real problems with it then be bold and WP:IAR! jayhawker6 (talk) 03:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Slamforeman, Thank you for your interest in WIkipedia and in translations. You might want to familiarize yourself with this controversy a few years back when an editor who did not speak Scots performed thousands of inaccurate translations creating massive inaccuracies in the Scots Wikipedia.[1], [2]. Given that history, it may be best to proceed with caution, and consider collaborating with other editors who do speak Scots. You might want to reach out to Wikiproject:Scotland for some advice. Netherzone (talk) 21:12, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I’ve heard about that controversy, and I find it fascinating. I think that what happened there is unlikely to happen here because the controversy was that the user mangled the Scots Wikipedia with false words and incorrect grammar. Since I would be translating from Scots into English I would not be inserting false words into the article, and I try my best on the grammar aspect.
Of course, should I need to, I will not hesitate to contact Wikiproject Scotland users for advice. But I think in this case, as Sungodtemple points out, the page is much too simple for that to be a worry.
Cheers, Slamforeman (talk) 21:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You also have the advantage that several of the sources are in English. :) Netherzone (talk) 21:42, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Slamforeman, one other thing: per Wikipedia's licensing requirements, translating or copying from other Wikipedia articles is permitted, but you are required to provide attribution to the original authors in the edit summary field and provide a link to the original article. See WP:TFOLWP for a boilerplate example you can copy-modify-paste into the edit summary when you save your English version of the article. Mathglot (talk) 06:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have done so; please see The Cundeez article. Thank you for the reminder, though. :) Slamforeman (talk) 06:13, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Creating a page[edit]

Hello, Wikipedians! I'm trying to create an article but I don't know how (; - w -). Could someone help me? 8UB3RG1N3 (talk) 01:39, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 8UB3RG1N3, and welcome to the Teahouse! You'll probably want to create your article as a draft to begin with – to create the page itself you can use the article wizard to do so. I would also recommend reading Help:Your first article, which has some information that may be useful. Perhaps the most important thing to keep in mind while writing your draft is that reviewers will check that the content in the article is supported by reliable sources: it is typically far easier to make sure that the draft is this way by finding the sources you will use first, and starting to write after that, using only the information in those sources – even if you already know a lot about the topic. Tollens (talk) 03:05, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Woah, I was about to ask the same question. Thanks for the explanation! Mariamnei (talk) 08:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Need advice[edit]

I am waiting for the reply from a user for weeks, where the user left a messege "replying soon" and haven't made a reply yet. What should I do here. I am not sure if this is the appropriate place for asking about this. Imperial[AFCND] 10:55, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please name the article, article talk page or editor talk page involved. David notMD (talk) 12:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This happened at Talk: Lalitaditya Muktapida. Imperial[AFCND] 18:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
While making no comment about the lengthy discussion on that Talk page, I see that you have just now reminded the editors who were participating in the discussion that you felt a reply was still necessary. They both continue to be active editors, so you should hope that they rejoin the fray. David notMD (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
May I know that if I edit that article, will that be a violation of regulations? Imperial[AFCND] 05:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@ImperialAficionado if they are not responsive, I think it could be a good idea to just write to them on their talk page politely reminding them if they can participate in the ongoing discussion.
ANLgrad (talk) 00:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I decided to give them some more time. Thank you for the advice though :) Imperial[AFCND] 04:13, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can I edit in English Wikipedia?[edit]

Hello, my name is Hanoifun. I was a member in Vietnamese Wikipedia before I got banned from a Vietnamese Wikipedia administrator who accused me of sockpuppetry few days ago (even though I am not a sockpuppetry, I was like a noob when I edited Wikipedia page about 2 and 3 years ago) (reason I got banned written in Vietnamese). I think maybe he had some confusions and thought I was a professional sockpuppetry and tried to hide identity before socking. I want to edit in English Wikipedia, in Vietnam topic, add some information and make people know more about Vietnam country and Vietnamese culture. And I also want to prove to Vietnamese Wikipedia that I am not sockpuppetry and at that time, I was a beginner, not good in edit Wikipedia and maybe too childish (like I did spam in some page to buff my contribution, used Google to translate some pages at that time). Can I edit in English wikipedia? Thank you! Hanoifun (talk) 13:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hanoifun: Bans and blocks (in most cases) only apply to individual projects, and we have no policies which prevent you editing here just because you're blocked elsewhere. Your edits may receive increased scrutiny, and your edits on other wikis can be examined for recent misbehaviour - if for example there are indications that any problematic behaviour is likely to occur here. At this time I see nothing to say you should be blocked and can't edit here. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Zzuuzz Well, I'm so happy that I can edit there! Thanks! Hanoifun (talk) 13:29, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Hanoifun Just be aware that the rules on English Wikipedia are not necessarily the same as on other projects, and that we hear our rules and policies are generally much more strict and stringent too. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:26, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Nick Moyes Oh, thank you! I know that English Wikipedia is more strict than some other Wikipedia, so I have to learn more and more. Can you tell me some important rules, policies and some faults the beginner can easily have (Though I'm old in Vietnamese Wikipedia)? Regards! Hanoifun (talk) 08:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Hanoifun I've added a set of links on your Talk Page that you should find useful. The best way to learn how things work here is to edit in areas you are familiar with and keep an eye on the Teahouse to see what other new users are asking. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Hanoifun I suspect en.wiki is fussier on Notability, and our demand for Reliable Sources. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:56, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Nick Moyes Well, okay, thank you! I often use sources from reputable newspapers to edit (like The Guardian, The New York Times in English and Lao Dong news, Vnexpress News in Vietnamese). But do I have to add sources for all edits? Like when I translate some information in Vietnamese Wikipedia to English or just update the population of a town like some other Wikipedia. Hanoifun (talk) 00:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Hanoifun You don’t need to cite a source if the statement you’re making is unlikely to be challenged (e.g. “the sky is blue”, but if you’re updating a population of a town then, yes, you should show the source of your information. If you’re translating, either consider leaving out UNVERIFIABLE content, or add a {{cn}} template at the end. We are a lot fussier these days than we used to be, because we want this encyclopaedia to be high quality, and based solely on reliable published sources. Nick Moyes (talk) 03:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Nick Moyes Thank you very much! I will try my best to edit Wikipedia, but as a beginner, I may make some mistakes while editing. If you notice any errors, please point them out so that I can correct them. Thanks! Hanoifun (talk) 04:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Any help?[edit]

Any help? use this section! Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 16:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Shalomie, I am unsure what you are asking. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Please clarify. TypoEater (talk) 16:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Shalomie. What's your question? ColinFine (talk) 16:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes! This teahouse is to help other editors but What's your question Shalomie? TheProEditor11 (talk) 12:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to do Draft Submission for Review[edit]

Hi. I would like to do a draft submission for review, but am concerned by the process steps identified in ChatGPT 3.5. The steps they detail do not exactly coincide with what I am seeing on the Wikipedia user interface. In particular, I am concerned about the MOVE step and whether my document has been marked up correctly to ensure it doesn't get lost in limbo. Is there a straightforward process to do this detailing the exact steps? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 00:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've added the information necessary to be able to submit the draft; this is provided if you use the Article Wizard to create a draft. 331dot (talk) 00:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, but can Article Wizard be used if the document for submission was not created using "Article Wizard" and already exists in my Sandbox? If so, how does one find the Article Wizard? Thank you. 24.224.87.173 (talk) 00:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As I said, I added the information needed to submit the draft to it, you may submit it when ready. If you click the words "article wizard" in my message, it will take you there. You may also access it via Articles for creation. 331dot (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
When I clicked on the Article Wizard link it took me to an introductory Sandbox page, with all of the details that you have to practice and make edits....etc. I have been working in my Sandbox page for over a week. The document is 2 or 3 pages long. What I would appreciate is instructions on how to publish (or move?) this existing document to either the Main Space(?) or some alternate location where the document can be reviewed, if necessary.... Thanks. Flightbook (talk) 02:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't really understand what you are asking- I provided you with the information to submit the draft for review, I placed it at the top and you just need to click the "submit your draft for review!" button on the screen. You apparently figured out how to move it yourself- unless you are experienced in creating articles successfully, this is ill advised. As noted below, you should be working on the existing article. I might suggest that you use the new user tutorial to learn more about what it is that is being looked for. While you might stumble upon a video that accurately describes this, better to get it from the source directly. 331dot (talk) 10:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
When you reach the article wizard by clicking the link I provided, it takes you to a screen where you are given the opportunity to practice in your sandbox, or to begin the process of creating a draft by clicking "Next". You should do the latter if you want to move beyond practice. 331dot (talk) 10:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. I received a message that my IP address has been blocked, with the reason being "Block Evasion: As before?" I 'm not sure what "before" is being referred to. And it's an interesting reason because I'm not very proficient at any kind of evasion... If just making entries on an unfamiliar user interface and believing guidance from conflicting instructional videos in YouTube constitute evasion, then I am perplexed as to the purpose of a 6 month blockage... Flightbook (talk) 17:07, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you can edit this page, you are not affected by a block. 331dot (talk) 22:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great. Thank you! Flightbook (talk) 22:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have created an utter mess. First, the article Serafín García Menocal exists. You have created Draft:Serafin Garcia Menocal (Engineer) (and moved it to Mainspace without a review, and it was moved back), when what you should have been doing is editing the existing article. You also created a version of the draft at User:Flightbook/sandbox2 and at User:Flightbook/sandbox3. None of these are properly referenced. See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to embed references in the text so that the software leaves a superscript number there and puts the ref content under References. Once either your Draft or Sandbox content is properly referenced, copy that into the existing article. Once you have done that delete the two Sandbox and tag the unsubmitted draft for deletion by putting Db-author inside of double curly brackets {{ }} at the top. David notMD (talk) 04:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your instruction, David. If I understood correctly, I will ultimately need to edit the prexisting stub on Wiki, rather than creating a second document by the same name. (Once I have corrected the referencing issue in my sandbox.) To add the new content to the existing stub I suspect that I will need to embed the narrow content from the preexisting stub into the broader context biography that I am attempting to create. Is that correct? i.e, It's not just a matter of copying it to the preexisting article since that would not be a readable, contiguous story? Thanks for any clarification. Flightbook (talk) 20:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
David, I have Read through the Help:References for beginners you sent me to and tried to practice the editing shown, but I can not seem to get past step 1. The RefToolbar shown in the above link doesn't match what shows up on my screen. My screen does not contain any RefToolbar with the >Advanced >Special characters >Help v Cite command. How do I get to this toolbar? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 22:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Flightbook Are you using Visual Editor instead? Just click the "cite" button in the top toolbar. -- asilvering (talk) 22:12, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. Because my previous attempts to use the Source editor did not function as I expected, I am trying to go back to the Visual editor. In the Help:Referencing for beginners it shows a RefToolbar that include the command "Cite". On my window, the toolbar I see has a " " button that I believe inserts a citation.... but causes all of the problems I had before. Can you shed light on what my problem might be?
Does "inline citation" mean that I have to be in Source mode to see the RefToolbar with the Cite command option? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 22:29, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks asilvering! It looks like the Cite button only appears when I am in the Source editing mode! I missed the box at the top of the page that states "This is a how-to-guide. This page assumes you are in the source editor." Ugh! Flightbook (talk) 22:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I thought that might have been the case. That box is more visible now, so hopefully it won't trip up anyone else. There is a cite button in Visual Editor too - actually, I usually use this one, since the automatic citation in it is faster (imo) than doing it in source editor. -- asilvering (talk) 00:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Order by first or last name?[edit]

I've been using the Greatest Hits Volume One/Two/Three listings recently to find album articles, and the ordering is a bit of a mess at the moment, which I'd like to try and clean up. I've already done so for "Two", where the order was mainly alphabetical by artist's last name. For "One" and "Three", the order is currently mainly by artist's first name, however.

If it were, say, book titles and author names instead, by last name would feel like clearly the way to go. Here, the first/last pattern is only one among several, because of stage names and band names and the like. That muddies the waters, and makes me dislike by first name less than I otherwise would.

The only thing I feel definite about is that the pages ought to agree with each other.

MOS:LISTSORT is no help, and MOS:LISTOFWORKS doesn't quite apply, I think.

Any good precedents? Other thoughts?

- 2A02:560:5821:6C00:6C34:7F80:767:BA83 (talk) 14:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse! I recommend alphabetizing the same way you'd see in a record store: by artist's last name (e.g. Biily Joel would be under "J") or band name (e.g. Flaming Lips would be under "F"). GoingBatty (talk) 14:42, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Weighing in because the asker requested it on my talk page. My personal preference is to alphabetize by the artist name as it would be displayed in an article title if the song/album had its own article, so for individual artists it ends up being by first name. However, I've seen a few discussions about this topic and would say that the overall consensus skews toward sorting by last name, as GoingBatty said. In practice I usually just go with whatever sorting is already in place on the page, as the very small difference isn't worth the effort and possible conflict. -- Fyrael (talk) 19:44, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Consistency, no matter which way, would be quite a bit more user-friendly. An unreliably ordered list is a negligible improvement on an unordered list, and even for lists that fit on a single page, the result is that it's likely quicker to type the name into the CTRL+F box than to try and spot it directly. If, as you say, no consensus has materialized, though, I quite agree that there's little to be done. Thanks for the rapid response!
- 2A02:560:5821:6C00:6C34:7F80:767:BA83 (talk) 20:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If no one else can come up with any good precedents (I can't, and I'd generally agree with GoingBatty), you might try leaving a comment on the article talk page explaining your proposed edits. If no one gets back to you there within a week to complain, I think you're probably free to fix it up however you'd like without anyone objecting. -- asilvering (talk) 22:01, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Error[edit]

Please someone help me fix error (unknown to me) in my newly created draft- Draft:Kanak Bhawan TheProEditor11 (talk) 17:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TheProEditor11 Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you be specific about what the errors are that you’re seeing? It generally looks ok to me, though some paragraphs need citations to support the stated ‘facts’. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I cleaned up the error, it was because they included the <reference></reference> code mid draft. @TheProEditor11there is no need for a reference list mid article. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 18:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, section titles needed double =, as in == == which I fixed David notMD (talk) 18:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank-you so much for fixing the error! Really thankful! TheProEditor11 (talk) 03:21, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@TheProEditor11: Reference #6 doesn't seem to support the sentences in the "History" section. GoingBatty (talk) 18:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, you are right. Thank-you for noticing it! I will replace it with better sources! TheProEditor11 (talk) 03:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

new page[edit]

Can anyone recommend a service to start new page at wikipedia?

Sugarpantsjohnson (talk) 19:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you describe what you're looking for? I don't immediately understand but once I do I'd be more than happy to help! Dionysius Millertalk 19:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thanks
looking for help to create a page Sugarpantsjohnson (talk) 19:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Sugarpantsjohnson Welcome to the Teahouse. The only way to create a new page is to learn to do it yourself. Anyone offering to make a page about you or your company/band/product is a scammer. You’d be charged thousands for a draft article that won’t meet our notability requirements. Sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Sugarpantsjohnson Oh, and you might like to read this recent scam story. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thank you so much for that nick
so there aren't any services that are accredited?
I'm trying to create a page or two for my wife and her company and feeling a tad overwhelmed at the process Sugarpantsjohnson (talk) 19:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Unfortunately, it is generally not acceptable to write an article for yourself, your business, or your family member as that is seen as a "conflict of interest". You can make a general request while making your conflict of interest clear. If you post the company's name and/or website on my Talk Page I can probably help let you know if the company meets Wikipedia's fairly strict requirements for a topic/company/person to get an article. Dionysius Millertalk 20:02, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dionysius is in error. Itis not forbidden to try to create and then submit a draft about your wife and/or her company. Your COI (see WP:COI) means that you must declare your connection on your User page. Of greator importance, you cannot create content because you know it to be true. Instead, see WP:42 for an explanation of the nature of references you must have to verify every factual statement. WP:BLP also worth a look. David notMD (talk) 20:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I did say generally. The point is that it's easier with help to make such a decision with help when you have five day's experience. So, @Sugarpantsjohnson I'd recommend reading up on it at the sources kindly provided and asking experienced editors for advice. Dionysius Millertalk 20:52, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello respected, I know that you will help me with the page, and for that i am thankful from the bottom of the heart.[edit]

I ask you from the bottom of my soul to help me correct the page for a famous Macedonian doctor and writer. The page has been translated into 7 world languages, there is not only an English version. If you want to help me, I'll send you the page ?

Thank you Shviki (talk) 19:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Absolutely, I'd love to help out! You can send over any of the articles and I'll take a look! If you'd like I can just make it or we can collaborate. Dionysius Millertalk 20:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am grateful, we have not only English version, we made seven languages worldwide for our famous writter.. Help me.<3
Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia Shviki (talk) 20:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Admittedly, I'm not entirely certain that Trajkovski meets the high requirements for an article on English Wikipedia. I wouldn't say I know 100% he doesn't, but reading the Macedonian and Romanian (a language I understand) versions, I'm not confident.
Two of the four sources are self published, one is a 404 error, and the last is three paragraphs from what appears to be a tabloid and smells paid for. At the very least, I'm not too willing to champion an article I don't see as within English Wikipedia's rules.
I do encourage you to read some of this site's many guides, rulebooks, etcetera as to make a decision for yourself. I'm obviously not the end-all-be-all, so the decision rests in your best judgement and further requests made for advise and/or help. Dionysius Millertalk 20:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will add that for Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski, what is needed is references that are about him. Referencing his publications does not contribute to establishing his notability for the English Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 20:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@David notMD, that's not quite true. As a physician, he might be notable under WP:NPROF. As an author, we'd require references about his writings, not necessarily about him. -- asilvering (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Acknowledged. In the existing draft his potential for notability looks to be connected to his poetry. David notMD (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This References are not in Macedonian version, he had 7 versions of his page, we have poets with En wiki with only three book. If zou understand Macedonian, PLEASE read above
д-р Александар Саша Трајковски - Македонско Научно Друштво - Битола (mnd-bitola.mk)
https://bitolanews.mk/2023/08/29/%d0%bf%d0%be%d0%b5%d1%82%d0%be%d1%82-%d0%b0%d0%bb%d0%b5%d0%ba%d1%81%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b4%d0%b0%d1%80-%d1%81%d0%b0%d1%88%d0%b0-%d1%82%d1%80%d0%b0%d1%98%d0%ba%d0%be%d0%b2%d1%81%d0%ba%d0%b8-%d0%be%d0%b4/
https://markukule.mk/%D0%B4%D1%83%D1%88%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0-%D0%BD%D0%B0-%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%88%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0-%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B0-%D0%B7%D0%B0-%D0%BD/
https://biznisvesti.mk/nova-kniga-poezija-i-nagrada-za-nashiot-poet-i-doktor-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
https://mnd-bitola.mk/%D0%B4-%D1%80-%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%80-%D1%81%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B0-%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%98%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8/
https://smart.sdk.mk/vesti/lekarot-aleksandar-trajkovski-objavi-dve-knigi-poezija/
https://netpress.com.mk/lirski-elegii-na-aleksandar-tra-kovski-na-prodavana-vo-prodavnicata-na-kindl/
https://smart.sdk.mk/vesti/knigata-lirski-elegii-na-poetot-i-doktor-aleksandar-trajkovski-prevedena-na-angliski-jazik/
https://www.crnobelo.com/novosti/domasni/101678-makedonskiot-poet-i-lekar-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski-e-dobitnik-na-platinesta-plaketa-za-najubava-poezija
https://novvavilon.medium.com/%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B5-%D0%BE%D0%B4-%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%82-%D0%BA%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0-%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%83-%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0-%D0%B1%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE-%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%83-%D1%85%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%B8-%D0%BE%D0%B4-%D0%B4-%D1%80-%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%80-%D1%81-%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%98%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8-c7923bf4a052
https://bitolanews.mk/2023/08/29/%d0%bf%d0%be%d0%b5%d1%82%d0%be%d1%82-%d0%b0%d0%bb%d0%b5%d0%ba%d1%81%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b4%d0%b0%d1%80-%d1%81%d0%b0%d1%88%d0%b0-%d1%82%d1%80%d0%b0%d1%98%d0%ba%d0%be%d0%b2%d1%81%d0%ba%d0%b8-%d0%be%d0%b4/
https://bitolanews.mk/2023/06/19/%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b0%d1%82%d0%be%d0%bc%d0%b8%d1%98%d0%b0-%d0%bd%d0%b0-%d0%bf%d0%be%d0%b5%d0%b7%d0%b8%d1%98%d0%b0%d1%82%d0%b0-%d1%88%d0%b5%d1%81%d1%82%d0%b0%d1%82%d0%b0-%d0%ba%d0%bd/
https://www.crnobelo.com/novosti/domasni/99043-nova-kniga-poezija-i-nagrada-za-makedonskiot-poet-i-doktor-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski
https://antropol.mk/2023/06/19/anatomija-na-poezijata-shestata-kniga-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
https://denesen.mk/nova-kniga-poezija-i-nagrada-za-poetot-i-doktor-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
https://ohridsky.com/tag/d-r-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
“ДУШАТА НА ЧАРШИЈАТА” – награда за најдобра поетска книга за книгите “Лирски елегии” и “Поеми од Балканот” на поетот Александар Саша Трајковски - Маркукуле (markukule.mk)
„Лирски елегии” на Александар Трајковски најпродавана во продавницата на „Киндл” | NetPress
ПОЕТОТ И ЛЕКАР АЛЕКСАНДАР ТРАЈКОВСКИ ЈА ОБЈАВИ ШЕСТАТА КНИГА, „АНАТОМИЈА НА ПОЕЗИЈАТА“ - СМАРТ - СДК МК (sdk.mk)
News Network : Нова книга и награда за поетот и лекар Александар Саша Трајковски
Нова книга поезија и награда за поетот и доктор Александар Саша Трајковски (daily.mk)
https://asantovski.wixsite.com/space-radio/single-post/%D0%BB Shviki (talk) 21:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All info about him is here Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski - Wikidata Shviki (talk) 21:53, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Alalch E.: Thank you from the heart: This is the page Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia Shviki (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merging draft and article[edit]

Hello, I am looking for tips or guidance on comparing and combining an article draft with an article, via merger. The draft is at draft:Barry Gough (businessman) and the article is the same title, Barry Gough (businessman). Have already read up on WP:Merging but have not performed one before. Thank you for any advice. Matthewvetter (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Matthewvetter! In that circumstance, I would just copy any useful elements from the draft to the live article, and include in the edit summary something like Merging in Draft:Barry Gough (businessman). Once that is complete, just turn the draft into a redirect by replacing the content of the page with #REDIRECT [[Barry Gough (businessman)]]. Hope that helps! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 00:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How/who do I report users to?[edit]

Special:Contributions/Omarshahkeelmalik

Special:Contributions/Umermalikshahkeel


^It seems those two users above are only here to spam links to some online casino Kasperquickly (talk) 21:22, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Kasperquickly you're looking for WP:AIV. You might also want to enable WP:TWINKLE. This allows you to easily leave talk page warnings for spamming, vandalism, etc. -- asilvering (talk) 21:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hasten to add - the warnings come first. AIV is the answer to your question as written, but you shouldn't go there right away. The guide linked at WP:AIV will tell you when bad enough is really bad enough. -- asilvering (talk) 21:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Authority control[edit]

please help me with Authority control databases with this page Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia :

https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39QDDVwgGxK4vyYR9RqV6fkkf

Library of Congress authority ID https://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n2024001790.html

VIAF ID: http://viaf.org/viaf/3630164423041120530007

ISNI: https://isni.oclc.org/cbs/DB=1.2//CMD?ACT=SRCH&IKT=8006&TRM=ISN%3A0000000504648303&TERMS_OF_USE_AGREED=Y&terms_of_use_agree=send&COOKIE=U50,KENDUSER,I28,B0028++++++,SY,NISNI,D1.2,Ebf864f37-50,A,H1,,3-28,,30-41,,43-59,,65-70,,74-75,R176.1.15.2,FY

NL CR AUT ID: https://aleph.nkp.cz/F/I4G5QNC53BSTIKNS2LGP3UN3I5JQJVDPSNHHBSEPCINBBQHKFL-00111?func=find-c&ccl_term=ica=js20221169677&local_base=MOBIL-AUT

Open Library ID: https://openlibrary.org/authors/OL9955863A/Aleksandar_Sasha_Trajkovski

and reference abou him:

д-р Александар Саша Трајковски - Македонско Научно Друштво - Битола (mnd-bitola.mk) Shviki (talk) 21:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Shviki, authority control doesn't work on draft articles. If the subject has a wikidata item, they will automatically connect once the article is in mainspace (ie, is no longer a draft). It looks like those appear in Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski (Q109748846) already, so there isn't anything further you need to do. -- asilvering (talk) 21:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you.Will if I press submit, it will no longer be a draft, What else I need to give you as information for he writter _ Shviki (talk) 21:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Shviki no, if you press "resubmit" it will still be a draft, and it will return to the AFC queue for a reviewer to look at. I'll leave a note on the draft for you so that reviewers are aware of the info in wikidata. -- asilvering (talk) 21:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you from my heart <3 Shviki (talk) 21:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Publishing an article[edit]

Hi there, I am new here and am wondering if my draft article needs to be reviewed and edited before being publicly published?

If so, is it possible to contact the user reviewing my article to contextualize my standpoint on it? I am concerned about a conflict of interest issue.

Many thanks Annalewis0022 (talk) 21:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Annalewis0022 what draft article are you talking about? I don't see that you've written one...? If you're worried about conflicts of interest, you should go through the process at WP:AFC. If you start your article through WP:WIZARD, it will go through AFC by default. Make sure to read the info at WP:COI if you haven't yet. -- asilvering (talk) 21:37, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have not yet drafted my article on Wikipedia, as I do not want it to be read yet. My concern is my article will be rejected without discussion as to why I suppose. Thank you for the links though! Annalewis0022 (talk) 21:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your article might be declined through the AFC process, but it will not be rejected without any discussion whatsoever. (We use the word "declined" to mean "you can resubmit this", whereas "rejected" is "do not resubmit this", and is very rarely used.) AFC declines are very common - don't worry about it. Try to take the reviewer's comments into account before resubmitting. If you don't understand them, you can ask the reviewer directly or come back here for more help. -- asilvering (talk) 21:58, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Annalewis, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia.
My experience is that when new editors try to plunge straight into the challenging task of creating a new article, they often have a miserable and frustrating experience. Would you build a car as your first engineering project? Or give a public recital one day after beginning to learn a musical instrument?
I always advise new editors to spend a few months making improvements to existing articles and learning about how Wikipedia works - especially about verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view, and notability, before trying it. Then, when they have some understanding of these ideas, they can read your first article and proceed. ColinFine (talk) 23:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reference naming[edit]

Is there a policy on naming references? I assume nothing needlessly offensive but how about things such as deceptively labelling a reference in a style commonly used for books such as AuthorNameYearPageNumber when the source isn't actually a book. I noticed this on one article I was editing and it almost tricked me into thinking it was a reliable source when it wasn't. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Traumnovelle, if you're asking about the "whatever" within <ref name="whatever">, I see nothing wrong with an author's name, a year, and a page number, if these do in reality correspond to what's being cited. If OTOH it were, say, "NNabokov_New Grove_2001_12_237", suggesting (for some fluff written by some hack for an in-flight magazine) a nonexistent article by Nicolas Nabokov in the New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, I'd strongly object to it. -- Hoary (talk) 22:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think Traumnovelle is talking about Sfn style short notes. There is indeed no reason not to use these for everything - Traumnovelle, if I'm correct and you meant short footnotes, I urge you to banish the idea that anything in sfn is a reliable source. It's more often used by more reliable editors, but it isn't any kind of comment on the sources themselves. -- asilvering (talk) 00:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It wasn't the author's name and there were no pages as the source was a website. I removed the source already because it's unreliable and replaced it with a reliable one but I am wondering about what kind of standard we have for reference naming. I usually cite studies with citer but the reference names are long and complex so I usually shorten to something simple (although not that informative).
The reference in question that was surreptitious was several years old and I doubt the editor is still active but I'm wondering about it in case I come across it in the future if mislabelling references in a deceptive manner would violate any sort of policy.
Also to address asilvering, I'm not talking about footnotes. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think in that case if you were to notice a pattern it would just fall under the general "disruptive editing". You'd want to make sure first that there wasn't some good reason for it that you'd just managed to miss, of course, but I don't have any idea what good reason anyone would have for writing down the wrong author's name. -- asilvering (talk) 00:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll keep that in mind if I come across it again, thanks. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Traumnovelle, Wikipedia policies are few (and near immutable). Wikipedia guidelines are many. Life's too short to keep searching among them. I'd like to recommend WP:DICK, which covers so much -- but I'm disappointed to find that our nervous or sensitive betters have done away with it. Anyway, it's good to hesitate before chastising other editors, let alone calling them dicks, as the history of these somewhat misleading references could be complex. As a ferinstance, editor A cites a page in a book. Later, editor B can't immediately find that book but can immediately find a web page that he or she rightly or wrongly thinks (i) is reliable and (ii) says what the book is cited for saying. Thinking that a web page will be more convenient for readers of the article, and that a reference name is just an arbitrary name -- think of the zillions named ":0"! -- and isn't even visible to the reader of the article, they change the content of the one informative REF tag but leave the name of the REF tags unchanged. As a later editor, I'd be annoyed by this, but I wouldn't call editor B a dick. (I wouldn't even mutter it under my breath. I'd just roll my eyes.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reliable source?[edit]

I've just started working on a draft article for Zach Panning and have found extensive sources from two websites that I'm not sure qualify as reliable citable sources. They are https://www.flotrack.org/, and https://citiusmag.com/ I feel strongly that they do qualify - they have staff, function officially within the track world, etc. but I just want to be sure. Wondering what you (all) think. AdmiralAckbar1977 talk contribs 23:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AdmiralAckbar1977, the place to ask is WP:RSN. -- Hoary (talk) 23:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

how should i view the critism section?[edit]

Should i view it as either endorsing the critiques in question? As showcasing a list of critiques made by diferrent people on the matter discussed? How should i take critisism? 181.1.138.237 (talk) 23:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. Are you referring to a particular article, or generally? Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources say about a topic. That something is present in an article should not be taken as an "endorsement" of anything. 331dot (talk) 00:00, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to provide proof of death for subject of wiki article?[edit]

Hello,

My father (Gene Merlino) passed away last month, and I edited his article to reflect his death and the date. The changes were rejected due to lack of verifiable information, which makes sense. The note says that only reports of his death in the media will be sufficient, which I don't think will be possible. I can provide a copy of his death certificate, if that will be sufficient.

Thank you, John Merlino Myrddin111 (talk) 00:07, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Was there a local obituary published in a newspaper or funeral home site that can be used as a reference source? Karenthewriter (talk) 00:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Very sorry to hear of your loss, @Myrddin111, and thank you for trying to update the article. In order for readers to be able to verify sources used on Wikipedia, they need to be public. So the only way for us to use a death certificate would be for you to publish it online (ideally from somewhere that proves your identity). As Karen said above, a local obituary (even if published only in print) or information about the funeral would be preferable. Best, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 00:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Myrddin111: you have all of our sympathies. I found this blog entry which is an obituary. It may not be a traditional Reliable Source, but under the circumstances I will use it to update the article.--Gronk Oz (talk) 00:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so much! I have requested an obituary page to be dedicated to him on this site, and it should be available shortly. Myrddin111 (talk) 22:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help with updating dead name[edit]

Hi! I don't manage my Wikipedia artist page or have experience editing. I'm a nonbinary person who changed my first name from Lily to Lucky to better reflect my gender. Was curious if anyone is able to update the name here? A friend was able to change it in the body of the article but not the title.

Thanks in advance. I'm so grateful for any help!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lily_Benson 2603:8000:D600:3510:4C52:6EEA:5E8:6F5 (talk) 00:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We'd be happy to. Can you give us any kind of source we can cite for this change? (Not that I think this is likely, but for all we know you're a troll with a vendetta against the article subject or something.) -- asilvering (talk) 00:24, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Citation and Numbering[edit]

Hi. I'm having trouble citing references in my Sandbox in the Source mode. I place the cursor in the location that I wish to reference, and press Cite in the tool menu. I then select the template, fill in the content and Insert press Preview. The document then shows the citation that I've typed in the Reference list, but with no number. In the main text there is also no number or indication that a citation has been made where I had the cursor. Would someone be kind enough to show me what I might be doing wrong? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 01:36, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flightbook, I see no recent edits by you to anything that might be called a sandbox. After editing, press "Publish changes", and link here to the result of publishing those changes. -- Hoary (talk) 01:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Hoary. When I hit publish changes the numbering showed up in both places.... so some progress on that front. A couple of questions... 1) Do I need to erase all of the references that were previously listed below the Reflist to prevent duplication? I suspect this might be the case since I'm reentering everything with Cite and the appropriate template... 2) When you instructed above to "link here," how do I do that? What does it mean to link here? 3) Because I earlier erroneously MOVED my Sandbox to the Active area, when I now select Ssandbox below my name, It tells me it doesn't find me anywhere! To continue my editing I'm having to select User:Flightbook/Sandbox2. But the only way I can get there is to manually enter the above in the Wikipedia Search Box and wait for it to find the content before I can edit it. Thanks for your assistance. Flightbook (talk) 02:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Flightbook: I see this diff [3] for an edit you made after posting this question. The results look fine to me. Please clarify what problems you are seeing RudolfRed (talk) 02:14, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi RudolfRed. The reference entry problem is queried Hoary on appears to be solved. I think I just need to erase all the manual entries I had earlier made below the Reflist so that they don't show up as duplicates in the Reference section. I asked him a couple of additional questions related to accessing my Sandbox page, and what he meant by "linking to here." Thank you for your assistance! Flightbook (talk) 02:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lack of notability on game studio draft.[edit]

Hi there,

Not long ago I create a draft article for Hypergryph, known for Arknights, but it got declined due to a lack of notability a couple of weeks later. I have placed a notice on the draft saying that it is "a work in progress open to editing by anyone" while I am still looking for sources. Here is the draft.

What can I do to find notability for my draft?

P.S. Speaking of, I play Arknights :) TriFusion (talk) 03:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the problem you're running into is that almost all of the sources you are using are press releases or are about the media that Hypergryph has produced, not Hypergryph itself. This exact thing happened with Taiwanese mobile game company Rayark, Inc. Arknights and the various productions of Hypergryph like Prelude to Dawn are probably notable on their own, though the producing company has probably not received enough coverage to merit its own article. Reconrabbit 03:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for Assistance with Deleting a Draft[edit]

Recently, I created a draft for an article about an Oppenheimer actor which was subsequently declined: Draft:Troy Bronson Actor After reviewing the feedback and considering the best approach to address the issues, I decided to start afresh and created a new draft that better aligns with Wikipedia's guidelines and standards: Draft:Troy Bronson 2024

Given this context, I would like some assistance in deleting the original draft. I believe removing this draft would help avoid confusion and ensure that the focus remains on the improved version!

~~~~ EagleSleuth (talk) 03:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have placed a tag asking for it to be deleted. You can use the tag {{db-author}} in the future. NW1223<Howl at meMy hunts> 03:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
EagleSleuth, there is no article titled Troy Bronson. If there were such an article, about a trombonist, physicist, landscape gardener or whatever of that name, then "Draft:Troy Bronson (actor)" would have been a good title. But as it was, "Draft:Troy Bronson" would have been good. The title "Draft:Troy Bronson Actor" would never be required. If you decide that you don't like a draft that you created, simply delete its content and start afresh. Asking for it to be deleted while you restart elsewhere is a waste of people's time. (And there are no circumstances in which "Draft:Troy Bronson 2024" would be a suitable title.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:12, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is no "Draft:Troy Bronson" anymore because i got help deleting trough live-help, the new one up for review is Draft:Troy Bronson 2024, are you suggesting to change it's title? ~~~~ EagleSleuth (talk) 04:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Do not exist: Draft:Troy Bronson and Draft:Troy Bronson (actor)
Exist: Draft:Troy Bronson 2024
Explanation: The existing is indeed about a guy named Troy Bronson from Oppenheimer who happens to be an actor. EagleSleuth (talk) 04:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Turns out there already is a Draft:Troy Bronson. But this will probably die of old age (six months) soon. Simplest is just to ignore it: If a reviewer is impressed by Draft:Troy Bronson 2024 they'll be able to rename ("move") it when they promote it. -- Hoary (talk) 05:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the heads-up I've been pouring effort into Draft:Troy Bronson 2024, hopefully it doesn't fade. Here's hoping it catches a reviewer's eye for all the right reasons before it gets a chance to 'die of old age.' Appreciate the advice on the renaming process too! EagleSleuth (talk) 05:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
EagleSleuth, drafts only 'die of old age' after they have lain entirely unedited for a continual 6 months. It certainly won't expire while it is awaiting a review after having been submitted for one. Incidentally, you can continue to improve it during the wait, as well as after it has been Accepted or Declined. Do not be disheartened if it is Declined – that just means "needs further improvement" (usually in areas that will be specified). Only if it's Rejected should you give up on it, and I'm sure from a cursory glance that it won't be. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.208.215 (talk) 07:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would not be concerned about the existance of Draft:Troy Bronson. It was created in 2022 and the creating editor has done no editing on anything since then. It will be deleted by an Administrator for lack of activity. If your effort succeeds, it can be moved to the name without the 2024 when approved. David notMD (talk) 13:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd want to suggest that one for speedy deletion because Draft:Troy Bronson is a new one that has been improved and is awaiting approval; nevertheless, I'm not the author. How can I go about doing that? Also, thank you for your support and thorough explanation of the draft process. Your feedback is very welcomed and encourages me to continue improving the post. I look forward to making it better! EagleSleuth (talk) 20:42, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
EagleSleuth, you can just forget about Draft:Troy Bronson. Your own creation is Draft:Troy Bronson 2024; and, if this oddly titled draft is good enough to be promoted to article status, it will be renamed "Troy Bronson" (sans "2024"). However, your recent removal of the "failed verification" template that GoingBatty very rightly placed within it, your use of an obvious PR puff, and your hagiographic description of Bronson in the draft's talk page all suggest that this draft has little chance of being accepted. -- Hoary (talk) 23:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've just been looking at (deleted) John Gowans Actor. It has some similarities to Draft:Troy Bronson 2024, which might interest one or more among Fram, Deb, and Jimfbleak. -- Hoary (talk) 00:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I've already looked at that and it needs a heck of a lot of work, but I stopped short of speedy deletion. As long as it stays in draft... Deb (talk) 08:52, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ref # 9 includes a United States Social Security number. Is this a violation of Wikipedia rules concerning individual privacy or security? 76.14.122.5 (talk) 03:49, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perhaps not if it's for somebody who, we're told, died 49 years ago. But that's an interesting reference. Do you know what "Source: Death Master File (public domain)" means? I certainly don't. -- Hoary (talk) 04:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's not legal nor appropriate for a Wikipedia page to contain the Social Security number of a deceased person. EagleSleuth (talk) 04:38, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@EagleSleuth: It may not be appropriate, but I am skeptical it's illegal. In some states it's publicly available; for example in Virginia your driver's license number is your social security number. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Hoary The death master file is a database of all deaths recorded by the US Social Security Administration. I'm not whether it counts as being in the public domain. Although it is "publicly" available, I believe that it is only provided to people who have a legitimate need to access the data. 76.14.122.5 (talk) 06:38, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My brother, who studied policy making, has explained that the Death Master File is indeed a database maintained by the US Social Security Administration, containing records of all deaths. While it may be considered publicly available, access to this database is typically restricted to individuals with a legitimate need for the data, such as government agencies or financial institutions. However, regardless of its accessibility, it's important to consider the privacy implications and ethical considerations of including Social Security numbers, even for deceased individuals, on a public platform like Wikipedia. EagleSleuth (talk) 07:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, of course, if your brother said so, Wikipedia would have to accept this as gospel. (Yes, I know sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but you do realise that the word of an anonymous inexperienced contributor that someone else whose identity we don't know has said that something is a fact will in no way influence what does and doesn't happen here?) Deb (talk) 09:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also not sure if it's illegal, but in an article about a living person I would contact oversight about someone's SSN in an article. Could someone explain what the privacy guidelines are for dead people? HansVonStuttgart (talk) 09:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Our stringent policy about Biographies of living people can extend for months or perhaps a year or two after their death, primarily because of the very real potential of poorly referenced content causing harm to family and close friends shortly after a death. So, Toby Keith is covered by the policy, but not someone who died 49 years ago. On the other hand, I see very little need in any but in the most unusual situations to include a Social Security Number or any analogous personally identifying number from any country on this encyclopedia. Even if a person has died, they may have an estate with financial assets that is an ongoing legal entity for the benefit of the person's heirs, and that number if misused may assist criminal activity. This type of data offers no value to our legitimate human readers but may endanger the heirs if the legions of bad actors get their hands on it. Cullen328 (talk) 09:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks to all for your replies. I see that the ref that included the SSN has been removed from the article, although obvs it is still available in the history if someone wanted to go digging for it. (which is unlikely, imo) 76.14.122.5 (talk) 20:09, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Create reflist in different groups.[edit]

Hi, Is it possible to separate the refs related to the sfn format from other refs? For example, here all sources are placed in a reflist (normal references and sfn) and the sourcing was not done in a neat and clean way. How to put sfn at the beginning of the reflist and other references after it? Pereoptic Talk✉️   10:00, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Pereoptic: Welcome to the Teahouse! You could replace each instance of <ref> with <ref group="groupname"> and then add {{Reflist|group=groupname}} above {{Reflist}}. GoingBatty (talk) 14:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@GoingBatty: Thanks for your help, isn't there another way? In the way you suggested, the volume of the article will be too large. Pereoptic Talk✉️   17:39, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pereoptic: If you want the references in two groups, you need to specify which references are in the first group and which are in the other group. There may be other ways, but they'll be similar. GoingBatty (talk) 20:10, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've been reading the village stocks...[edit]

and I noticed there are certain people who are "editors". Does that mean that only certain people can edit or that certain people have certain permissions to edit certain things? Cdominic8 (talk) 14:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not exactly problem I know but I'm super new to editing so I don't know what I'm talking about :) Cdominic8 (talk) 15:01, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Cdominic8, welcome to the Teahouse. "Editor" is a general term for anyone who edits Wikipedia, rather than just reading it, which includes you and me and whole hosts of other folks. There are more specialized terms for those with certain rights or who do certain things - admin, reviewer, template editor, etc. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 15:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes we are all Wikipedians. Lectonar (talk) 15:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In general, even people who have not created accounts can edit articles. Some articles are semi-protected or protected (a symbol of a lock appears at upper right), which requires an account and a history of editing first. David notMD (talk) 16:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wiki User: SmartCake[edit]

I need help with a biography of a living person Smartcake (talk) 15:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

information Note: this appears to be about the contents of the since-deleted User:Zuleika Lee Castro. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 15:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The OP has now been blocked from editing, for various reasons. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Any advice for my draft? Should I submit it btw?[edit]

I've been creating a draft for the local mosque in my neighborhood (I had doubts about the idea at first but my school encouraged me to do it), but I don't want to submit unless I'm sure it'd get accepted because I don't want to tell my school that I suck at doing this XD. Here's the draft btw: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Al-Qaed_Ibrahim_Mosque Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 15:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Moe the Alexandrian: Welcome to the Teahouse! Did you upload copies of publications to amazonaws.com (which could be a copyright violation), or did you just find them there? (References do not have to be online.) I suggest using additional parameters in your citation templates to make it easier for people to find sources offline, such as |author=, |publisher=, |year=, and |pages=. Good luck with the draft! GoingBatty (talk) 15:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why thank you for the welcoming! No, I was just looking for sources really that's all, and I found a source, I didn't upload anything really. Also, thanks for the advice! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 16:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Alexandrian, and welcome to the Teahouse. Successfully creating an article is challenging, and anybody who thinks that not getting one accepted on the first attempt means the writer "sucks" is somebody whose opinion is worthless.
It's not clear to me whether you mean your school officially suggested this, and will censure you if you are not successful, or whether you are talking about unofficial attitudes. If it is official, I suggest you look at WP:Education program and show it to anybody else who needs to see it. Otherwise, I suggest you ignore people's opinions, and concentrate on doing the best job you can in contributing to this amazing project.
I'm not a reviewer, but it looks to me as if your draft should be accepted. It could do with more about the back-story - how the mosque came to be built, who was involved, etc - if you can find it; but I think it is a good start. ColinFine (talk) 16:42, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello again, and thanks for welcoming me! The school didn't officially suggest this, it was just the headmaster and a few of the workers who expressed delight about my idea, which is why they let me edit on the school computer. But yeah, I still don't want them to think I'm bad or it wouldn't be worth their time to give me the school computer to edit. Thanks a lot for your suggestion, I think I just saw a book on the detailed history of the mosque so yeah I'll be using that. Thanks once again! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 17:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have just accepted your draft which was excellent, well done. Theroadislong (talk) 17:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you kind sir, it is my first page ever. Hoping for much more in the near future, proud to be a wikipedian! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 17:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PLEASE, can you help me with the page. Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia. The page has been translated into 7 world languages, there is not only an English version. This is link for reviewers: subject is Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski (Q109748846) Thank you <3 Shviki (talk) 15:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Shviki: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you're working on Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski. Articles on the English Wikipedia should be written based on multiple independent reliable published sources that provide significant coverage of the person or topic. Maybe some of the articles on the other language Wikipedias have references you can reuse in this draft. The "Membership" section should have sources or be removed. For each non-English reference in the draft, you could add |trans-title= and |language=. Good luck with the draft! GoingBatty (talk) 15:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
More citations are needed for this page 𝑭𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 (talk) 15:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Teahouse Hosts are here to advise, but not to be co-authors. David notMD (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shviki According to the article editing history you are not the person who created the draft and have not made any edits to the draft other than to submit it to AfC (Declined). You action is unfair to the creating editor, as that person may intend to further improve the draft before submitting it. David notMD (talk) 16:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I completely apologize David, I have no wikipedia experience, so I cannot edit the page, I just wanted to help make an article with an English version for our doctor and the greatest modern Macedonian poets. Notice an apology once again. Shviki (talk) 17:07, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Shviki The draft is not locked, so I believe you can edit. My comment was specific about not submitting it. David notMD (talk) 03:50, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Referencing problem.[edit]

Hi. I'm the process of editing a document, replacing each incorrectly written citation so that the wiki program knows they are there.  Up to now things were going well.  The program was renumbering the changes I entered in proper sequence and at the bottom of the page they were showing up correctly below the  References line.  On attempting to enter citation number 5 (which was the first time a book was being cited, rather than news), the program enters the citation but renumbers it "one," and all previous citations shown in the Reference list disappear.  Can anyone tell me what is causing this and how to fix it? (On occasion I have been getting a "Reload" pop-up on my screen that I have been ignoring, since I don't know what that will do...)  Thanks. Flightbook (talk) 17:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Flightbook. The usual reason for things disappearing from a page on editing is that something before them is not being closed properly, so it's swallowing the rest (as far as the parser is concerned). It's hard to say more without seeing what it is you are doing specifically. ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You appear to be creating two new versions of an article that already exists here Serafín García Menocal]], you can improve that one rather than create a new one. Theroadislong (talk) 17:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, Theroadislong. Sometimes when I ask for help I get multiple responses and suggestions (a great thing!), but I'm not sure if my reply to one is seen by all the others. So I wanted to make sure you saw my reply to the concern that there is another (stub) Biography on the person that I'm writing on. 1) I don't know if any real-time edits I make to the existing stub will be visible to the outside world while I'm still wordsmithing... 2) I haven't figured out how I will merge the much broader biography into the existing stub with the same title. I'm concerned about the granularity. If the finished Biography winds up being 2 pages long it, it would be awkward to have the material in the stub content taking up 1/3 of it. (It is like the hypothetical situation of having a 2 page Biography on Thomas Edison, and having 1 of the 2 pages dedicated to his 4-H club activities....) Flightbook (talk) 18:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Colin, That's possibly what's going on. I always like to Preview the changes before publishing and messing something up. Perhaps I need to publish each change before moving to the next one. Theroadislong suggested that I Publish now so that they can see what is going on. I will try that and see what happens. Flightbook (talk) 18:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Flightbook, I assume that this is about User:Flightbook/sandbox2. I see that you've redone 1..4 as proper references. If you've done anything to citation 5, you haven't saved your change, so I can't see what you did wrong. Maproom (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wow! Once I hit Publish the whole problem disappeared! Thanks, Everyone! Flightbook (talk) 18:23, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. The problem has disappeared. I am working on Sandbox2, since everything that was in Sandbox was moved and there's nothing there... I don't know how to access or change anything in Draft, but at some point I will need to replace the flawed copy in Draft with the completed Sandbox2 content.
A bigger challenge later on will be how to merge the much broader biography into the existing stub with the same title. I'm concerned about the granularity aspect... If the Biography winds up being 2 pages long it, it will be awkward to have the stub content taking up 1/3 of it. (It is like the hypothetical situation of having a 2 page Biography on Thomas Edison, and having to include 1 page on his 4-H club activities....) But I guess I will have to deal with that when I'm further down the road. Thank you! Flightbook (talk) 18:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Flightbook It is not usually recommended to usurp an article like that, it would have been better to have made incremental changes to Serafín García Menocal. Theroadislong (talk) 18:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think that I will ultimately have to do that once my draft biography is complete. (I'm trying to put together a comprehensive biography in the workbook just so that I (myself) can summarize the big picture of the man's life and present accomplishments that might be important to the reader). It will be a challenge to integrate the broader life-story into the existing stub, but I will give it a try if I get that far... I don't have any intention to usurp a good article. But it does make my effort to convey the big picture more difficult. Flightbook (talk) 19:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Flightbook As you are working on your Sandbox2 to properly reference, continue that. DO NOT bother to copy that content into your draft. Instead, you need to copy the content into the existing article. (And delete your draft.) David notMD (talk) 03:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, David. Sounds like good advice! When I start to work on the existing article, is it necessary to basically retype everything in such the the new text gracefully wraps around and adds to the content that is already there? Or do I copy the entire new text in all at once (as a single document) and then try to fix all of the problems that creates? I suspect that there would be chaos from the overlapping (and conflicting) reference numbers, etc. Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 16:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello[edit]

Is it a concern that the Whit Haydn article was heavily edited by an account named Whit Haydn? Most of the "Life" section of the article has no sources listed for the information in it. Can I remove the parts that have no sources? Oliver Phile (talk) 17:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Oliver Phile: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, you may revert unsourced additions by Haydn. Haydn should be submitting edit requests on the talk page instead of adding unsourced content to the article. I have updated {{Notable Wikipedian}} on the article's talk page. GoingBatty (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Links| Sources[edit]

Hello. I hope you can help me. I have several questions about the links and sources.

  1. If the article is written in English, and sources I refer to are written in another language, should I translate the text of the references in English?
  2. In which way I have to form references? What is the best way they look like?
  3. What information from source should included the text of references?

Lool forward for your reply. Thanks in advance.

Best regards Stephanie Boyko (talk) 18:29, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Stephanie Boyko: Welcome to the Teahouse! When using a citation template such as {{cite web}}, you can use parameters such as |language= and |trans-title= to help those of use who don't read non-English languages. Fore more details, pleasse see the template documentation such as Template:Cite web. GoingBatty (talk) 19:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit summary format of edits made by automated or semiautomated tools such as bots or scripts[edit]

Is there any specification of format of an edit summary format of edits made by automated or semiautomated tools such as bots or scripts?

When I filter edits, I can specify whether it was made by a human or a bot. However, I am curious how does Wikipedia know that?

Is there any specific text that the bots leave in the edit summary in order these bot edits are classified as such?

I wanted to be able to classify these edits myself. However, I didn't find any rule such as one similar to other rules (WP:BOTEDITSUMMARY might have been an example) or a specification.

However, I've noticed that automated or semi-automated tools add # character to the edit summary.

Where can I find more information on that requirement (if any) for edit summary format for bots? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Maxim Masiutin: Welcome to the Teahouse! I believe the watchlist marks an edit with (b) to indicate it was made by a bot if the user has a bot flag. There's nothing special about the edit summary that does this. GoingBatty (talk) 19:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My question is that when a bot makes an edit summary, this edit summary is a string. I was interested in the format of this string, in particular whether the # character has any meaning. By displaying as "(b)" that you mentioned Wikipedia somehow already parsed this edit summary to figure out that it was bot. So I was interested to read about the format and the requirements, if you are aware. Thank you for your quick reply! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Maxim Masiutin: There is nothing in the edit summary string that causes the (b) to be displayed in the watchlist. Bot owners should follow Help:Edit summary just as everyone should for manual edits. GoingBatty (talk) 20:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How does the Wikipedia then distingushes between the bot edits and human edits if there are no differences in the edit summaries left by the bots and left by the humans? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I read that page before writing at the teahouse, but there was no information that I searched. I also checked the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_summary_legend but also didn't find anything there :-((( Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:43, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Maxim Masiutin: As I wrote above, I believe the watchlist marks an edit with (b) to indicate it was made by a bot if the user has a bot flag. GoingBatty (talk) 20:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, thank you, that makes sense! Thank you for your explanation! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 21:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Maxim Masiutin: Yes, a bold b and bot filters on edit lists are entirely determined by whether the account has been assigned a bot flag by a bureaucrat. Unauthorized bots without the flag are sometimes discovered and blocked. If you want to make your own bot then see Wikipedia:Bot policy. Some bots make an edit summary containing "#" before the name or shortened name of the bot like in [4]. Such edit summaries were coded by the bot operators and I don't know any features which use the "#". Edit summaries are automatically shown in parentheses and my example says "(Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5)". That gives a misleading impression that "#IABot (v2.0.9.5)" is added after the edit summary. The bot operator was a little tricky and the edit summary without the surrounding parentheses is actually "Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5".[5] PrimeHunter (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great explanation, thank you! Very helpful! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 22:42, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New editor; Help![edit]

I just started editing for wikipedia and i don't know where to start. i'd like to edit or even make articles but i dont know how to find things in my range of knowledge. Rotprince (talk) 20:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Rotprince. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Community portal and Wikipedia:Task Center. Cullen328 (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rotprince: Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new Wikipedia article can be quite challenging, especially if you do not have a lot of experience editing existing Wikipedia articles. To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction, and then spend a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. If you like, you can visit the Wikipedia:Task center to find ways you can contribute. When you have enough editing experience, then visit Help:Your first article for lots of information about creating new articles. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do Helicopters fall under the aviation category?[edit]

Just wondering because they are flying machines and Aviation is a general term, im currently editing 2024 in aviation and woud like to know so my edit doesn't get deleted, im rather new and havent done major edits like this before. Lolzer3000 (talk) 20:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lolzer3000: See Aviation, or General aviation. Bazza (talk) 20:25, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bazza 7 Thanks Lolzer3000 (talk) 21:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Lolzer3000, and welcome to the Teahouse. As far as I can see, your edit belongs perfectly well in that article - you've even backed it up with a reference: well done.
But note that, if somebody disagrees that it fits, and reverts it, that is no reflection on you: that's how Wikipedia works! See WP:BRD.
If there's another case where you are uncertain whether an edit is appropriate, the best thing to do is to ask first, on the article's talk page - in this case Talk:2024 in aviation. ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Helicopters are definitely part of aviation. The search helicopter intitle:"in aviation" finds many other mentions in similar articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

on the border between "proper wording" and fancruft[edit]

is the extent to which articles on any given franchise use wording specific to that franchise a concrete guideline, up to consensus within that franchise's boundaries, or somewhere in between?

because from what i've seen, articles on pokémon stick pretty closely to the games' wording (give or take the possibility of a debate on whether pokémon should be labeled fictional characters or species), while articles on jojo's abnormal proceeding are a bit less fixated on that, such as not capitalizing dio's name in the context of his post part 2 counterpart cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, cogsan. Generally the answer to questions like this is: What do the independent sources on which the article is based say? ColinFine (talk) 21:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
from a quick look, the answer seems to be "follow the ingame wording religiously or you'll die" for pokémon, and "eh, you do you" for dio
though it still seems consensus has been reached somewhere around here to keep the "io" lowercase, so i'll follow that
thanks cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cogsan: See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction. I don't know anyhting about jojo. JoJo's Bizarre Adventure#Plot says: Part 3 ... Dio Brando (now referred to as only "Dio"). Are you saying he is referred to as "dio" at that point? If that's the case then it sounds like an error to claim "Dio" in qoutation marks, but I think it would be confusing if the article generally switched back and forth between "Dio" and "dio" depending on which part it referred to. Many of the 22 mentions aren't even about a specific part. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
dio, in the context of parts 1 and 2, is referred to as "Dio Brando"
in part 3 onward, he's referred to as "DIO" (all caps, no last name)
the difference, and what a "part" is... probably just don't matter, now that i think about it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:24, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cogsan: It was changed from (now referred to as "DIO") to (now referred to as only "Dio") in [6]. A Google search says you are right so I have changed it to (now referred to as only "DIO").[7] We often omit all caps from sources per MOS:ALLCAPS and here it would also add confusion so I haven't changed any other mentions. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category and subcategory[edit]

Hello! Is it okay to have a page in both a category and its parent category? I made a category called Former Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra under the category Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra. Should I have people who are in it in both? Thank you! Tuxedoed (talk) 22:19, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tuxedoed: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per WP:CATSPECIFIC, an article would be in Category:Former Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra or Category:Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra, but not both. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Tuxedoed, to answer your first, general question: Sometimes. See Wikipedia:Categorization#Non-diffusing_subcategories. Such a category will be so labelled. Thus when you're about to categorize somebody as Category:Finnish women conductors (music), you'll read there, or anyway you should read there, that "This is a non-diffusing subcategory of Category:Finnish conductors (music). It includes Finnish conductors (music) that can also be found in the parent category, or in diffusing subcategories of the parent." And therefore you categorize her as a (gender-irrelevant) Finnish conductor (of music) as well as a female one. -- Hoary (talk) 23:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@GoingBatty Thank you so much for the answer and the welcome!!! Tuxedoed (talk) 00:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Whoops I replied to the wrong person. Thank you for the good answer!!! I've seen the category but I didn't know what it meant. I think my case is a diffusing category, so I'll only add it to one of them. Tuxedoed (talk) 00:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Hoary Tuxedoed (talk) 00:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Tuxedoed, at the top of Category:Former Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra there is no template pointing out that it is a non-diffusing category. (Compare what you see at Category:Finnish women conductors (music).) -- Hoary (talk) 01:09, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Hoary! Is there a template for a diffusing category? I think this category is non-diffusing because it's separated into former musicians and current musicians, but it might not be. Tuxedoed (talk) 01:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have never seen such a template. And I have no reason to think that Category:Former Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra is non-diffusing. -- Hoary (talk) 01:39, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Perfect, so I'll just remove the duplicates. Thank you so much for your help! Tuxedoed (talk) 04:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Disputed inline template not working?[edit]

Greetings.
I have disputed a couple of subjects in an article. One discussion is from years ago; it's the disputation of a commonly repeated factoid that, even if sources suppport it, is unsupported by reality. It was too long as to make a note. Here is the link:
Talk:David_Carradine#Disputed:_Americana's_"people's_prize"_at_the_1981_Directors'_Fortnight (link not working here)
More recently, I disputed an assertion in the same article because it is not supported by the source given:
Talk:David_Carradine#Disputed:_Thai_police_suggested,_is_not_supported_by_the_source. (link working here)
The problem is, in both cases, that clicking on the template part "discuss" in the article, leads to the Talk page, but a message appears there saying "The topic could not be found. It could have been moved or deleted." But both posts are actually there, neither moved nor deleted. The recent one is still on the Talk page current page, and the old one is here:
Talk:David_Carradine&oldid=1053759681#Disputed:_Americana's_"people's_prize"_at_the_1981_Directors'_Fortnight (link not working here, working in this format: [[8]])
but different versions of the links in the templates still lead to the same message; even putting the links here with the [[ ]] format is not quite working.
So, anyone can see what is the problem?
Thanks. Maykiwi (talk) 22:26, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Maykiwi! I fixed the second instance. The issue was that the {{Disputed inline}} template only wants the section name, whereas you had the "Talk:David Carradine" in there, creating a duplicate.
For the first instance, it has been archived to Talk:David_Carradine/Archive_1#Disputed:_Americana's_"people's_prize"_at_the_1981_Directors'_Fortnight with no reply. Your post is extremely long, which I'm guessing is why it didn't get a reply. Try creating a new talk page section stating the issue more concisely. You could also try being bold and just editing the article directly to fix the issue, and then waiting to see if anyone objects.
Hope that helps! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 23:00, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Snow White cast[edit]

Please, add Emilia Faucher as young Snow White and Alan Tudyk as the Magic Mirror in the cast of the Snow White (2025 film) article. Sources: [9]https://snowwhitemuseum.com/about-the-film/sequels/snow-white-2025-disney-remake/ [10]https://youtube.com/watch?v=jcze6-WBDUE?si=9um51gld2Y60zAzm [11]https://thedisinsider.com/2024/01/17/emilia-faucher-to-play-young-snow-white-in-the-rachel-zegler-led-remake/ 152.230.125.226 (talk) 22:53, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse! If you can't edit the article directly, then the best place to make the request is the article's talk page: Talk:Snow White (2025 film). You could also use the Wikipedia:Edit request wizard if you like. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:01, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I already added the request in the talk page, now I hope that someone adds the information in the cast section 170.247.206.227 (talk) 21:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Anyone know this quote?[edit]

Hello! I was wondering if anyone knew who said, ‘Beware the moment you think yourself wise, for you may have just become a fool.’ I searched Wikiquote and Wikipedia, but nothing turned up.

Also, follow-up question: the Teahouse probably isn’t the best place to be asking something like this, as my question does not concern how to use Wikipedia, but I asked here because I didn’t know where would be the appropriate place. Can someone inform me as to where it is, please?

Thanks, Shadestar474 (talk) 23:53, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, Shadestar474, please ask this at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous. -- Hoary (talk) 00:00, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, @Hoary! Shadestar474 (talk) 00:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Using images from te.wikipedia.org[edit]

I'm trying to use this image from Telugu version of Wikipedia for Kokkiligadda Rakshana Nidhi article with no success. Is there any way around? Or does it need to be uploaded again? RWILD 23:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, RWILDONLINE. It's (conventionally) copyright, and thus may not be uploaded to Commons. The subject is alive, and thus "fair use" for the photo's appearance in an article about its subject cannot be claimed, and thus it may not be uploaded to en:Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 00:05, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Welcome to Teahouse! Adding to what @Hoary said, if it was allowed to be used on English Wikipedia, it would have to be re-uploaded via WP:NFCC (Fair Use according to English Wikipedia). It is probably in violation of Telugu Wikipedia Fair Use policies too, but that is beyond our scope here as English Wikipedia editors. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 00:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And adding to what Shushugah said, WP:NFCC says that among the requirements is "No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." A free (as in libre, or "free speech") photograph of a living person could be created. Look, RWILDONLINE, this fellow Kokkiligadda Rakshana Nidhi has "served" for a decade, but what, if anything, has he done? What has he proposed, opposed, delayed, improved, accelerated, innovated, etc? The article doesn't even start to hint, so he comes off like a nobody. What he has done is, I'd say, far more important than whether he's plump or slim, full-bearded or clean-shaven, etc. -- Hoary (talk) 00:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reusing references question[edit]

Hi. I need to reuse a reference in a document but need to know the exact keystrokes to use. In the Wikipedia instruction page it says

"Often, you will want to use the same source more than once in an article to support multiple facts. In this case, you can click Named References   in the toolbar, and select a previously added source to re-use.

However, when I click Named references in the toolbar, the box is blank. (There is nothing to select). If my cursor is on the location where I want the reused reference to be inserted, what are the keystrokes needed after that? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 00:51, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Without knowing what article and ref you are referring to I can't be sure, but it is likely that there are no named references in the section (article?) you are attempting to edit. If so you need to add a name to the ref definition you wish to reuse by changing <ref> to <ref name="some name"> . Any further uses of that ref can then be made by simply adding <ref name="some name"/> (note the addition of the "/") without the ref definiton. Meters (talk) 01:00, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your guidance. I'm still not sure where the refname definition statement goes in the text, because I don't name anything anywhere in the document... As an example in the following text:
Gustavo Garcia Menocal was a Representative in Congress from the Province of Matanzas, and Lieutenant Colonel in the Cuban War of independence.[1] His uncle, Mario Garcia Menocal, was the third President of Cuba.
I would like to reuse reference [1] after the last sentence in the paragraph (word Cuba).( When I copied and pasted from my Sandbox to this box it replaced the real number of the citation with a [1], but I don't think that would change anything for example purposes....) Where does the ref name="some name"/ statement go? Thanks for any guidance. I cant type the exact symbols showed above because it launches a popup trying to create a reference here, Flightbook (talk) 01:58, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Cuban Government Matters". The Cuba Review (Cuba Periodicals): 10.
You have used plain <ref>. Give it a name, e.g. <ref name="govt_matters">. Then you can reuse it, as I showed you (below) how I might reuse <ref name="on_bullshit">. -- Hoary (talk) 02:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you all. Problem solved. Flightbook (talk) 02:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And it should show up when you select named references. Meters (talk) 01:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just type the stuff in. For the first reference: <ref name="on_bullshit">{{cite book | first=Harry | last=Frankfurt | title=On Bullshit |location=Princeton, New Jersey |publisher=[[Princeton University Press]] |date=2005 |isbn=978-0691122946}}</ref>. For any subsequent reference: <ref name="on_bullshit" />. (A wonderful little book, by the way.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, Hoary. Ha, ha,,,,Pending feedback from others I'll do the experiment and see what happens! Flightbook (talk) 02:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. That worked!!! Flightbook (talk) 02:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Terry Collins[edit]

When you click on the link for the 2023 Sanford Fleming Award winner, it takes you tu the Mets Manager,not the linguist winner. 50.35.115.201 (talk) 02:49, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It appears there is not yet an article for the correct Terry Collins. I changed it to a red link, maybe someone will create one. RudolfRed (talk) 03:00, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help in verification[edit]

Hi, this was my first time dealing with a clarify word issue/template on Wikipedia. Here is my edit: [12]. Please look into it and let me know if I did right or wrong. Thank you in advance 456legendtalk 03:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

can someone please help me with this. 456legendtalk 02:14, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Heyo, 456legend! I'm not familiar with the topic area nor have I reviewed sources, so I can't give you an assessment on your diff's accuracy, but I'd say it certainly clarifies things. If you are wondering whether or not you can remove the maintenance template, I'd say go ahead. So long as you lack a conflict of interest in the topic area and you are reasonably certain the article no longer has the cited issue, you can remove any such template. See WP:WTRMT for further details. At worst someone will disagree with you and revert (which given this article's activity I somewhat doubt), in which case you can either discuss on the talk page or let the revert stand. Sirdog (talk) 05:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question about Copyright[edit]

I visited the Creative Commons website and received an Licence Text Code and HTML. Do i have to copy these? And. How exactly use CC licence?

I saved the License Text Code in a PDF file, i don't really know how to use CC Licence

I have asked another question earlier about Copyright Akhinesh777 (talk) 04:10, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Akhinesh777: You do not need to copy the license text code into a PDF. Simply go to commons:Special:UploadWizard and follow the prompts, and then choose the appropriate license when prompted to do so. GoingBatty (talk) 04:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello @GoingBattyit looks like you're American, hey i really don't know how to use CC licence. I know how to upload to the Wikimedia Commons
I'm fear of getting blocked here that's why I'm talking about CC licence. it's my own work but if Wikipedia remove this work from Wikimedia Commons for ( Copyright Infringement ) then i will be blocked for sure.
Thanks for the response, I have talked with my mentor on Wikipedia and he said that he don't know anything related to Copyright that's why I'm asking this multiple times

Akhinesh777 (talk) 06:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Akhinesh777, do you want to upload a photograph or a drawing or similar? If so, then it's normally best to do so as a JPEG or PNG file. (See Allowable file types for a fuller list.) If you want to copyleft something and then to upload it as a PDF file, then is this "something" within the scope of Commons? -- Hoary (talk) 07:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
hello @Hoary Ok i will upload my work to the Wikimedia Commons. I would save the License Text Code in an PDF file if it's important Akhinesh777 (talk) 08:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is not important. What is important that you know the name of the license. It will say so usually, e.g Creative Commons Share-Alike, Public-Domain, CC 2.0 SA-ND etc.. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 09:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It has to be your own work, not someone else's. And you may only choose a license from the available options, you may not devise a license having your own terms. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another question about uploading own work to Wikimedia Commons[edit]

I wants to upload some of my work to Wikimedia Commons for knowledge, For Articles.

I have acquired knowledge of How to upload an article to Wikipedia. i don't know how to use CC Licence. So please respond Akhinesh777 (talk) 04:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Akhinesh777: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can go to commons:Special:UploadWizard and follow the prompts. GoingBatty (talk) 04:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Page Rejected[edit]

Sir i am Music Artists and I try to make my organisation Wikipedia Page ( RT Pathik) . I have all References like Amazon music Artist page, Spotify Artist Profile many Artist verified Account. Also I have own YouTube channel with same name and it was 31k+ subscribers. Also we have Own Android app on Google Play Store with same name But still my page it's Rejected I provide all links in references RT Pathik (talk) 07:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, RT Pathik. Articles on Wikipedia must meet our notability guidelines. There are a couple ways this can be accomplished, however, for purposes of brevity and ease of explanation it may be best for you to just review WP:MUSICBIO and determine if you or your band meet any of these twelve criteria. Unless you do, it's unlikely your submission will be approved no matter how many YouTube subscribers you have. If this is bad news, I'm sorry to be its bearer. Chetsford (talk) 07:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@RT Pathik: You seem to be under a misconception that Wikipedia can be used as a publicity medium. No, it emphatically cannot.. Bottom line, if you don't meet any of the criteria in WP:MUSICBIO, there cannot be an article about you. If you cannot find reliable independent sources that comply with WP:Golden Rule, there cannot be an article about you. You have made repeated attempts at this, and it is becoming WP:TENDENTIOUS and may lead to your account being blocked because you are evidently not here to build an encyclopedia. If you are interested in Wikipedia, then try to improve other articles rather than write about yourself. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:27, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And now indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 14:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

creation[edit]

Can we create article here without submitting to AfC (without posting a request)? I am asking because whenever my article is created after submitting it, I get a notification about the creation and the notification also says - "Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer". If yes then HOW? TheProEditor11 (talk) 07:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TheProEditor11: Until you get a draft article submitted via AFC and approved for publication, it is a good idea to continue using AFC. You already have a couple of drafts approved, so if you want, create articles but be careful. One good reason to use AFC is that AFC gives you time to make improvements. If you try to create an article directly in article space, without experience, it is almost guaranteed that the article would be deleted.
Note that I am an administrator and even I occasionally use AFC to get another set of eyes on a draft before publishing it in article space. It helps ensure that what goes into article space is good enough. AFC takes a long time, but there are no deadlines here, so you shouldn't be in a hurry to publish anything. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:31, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You are right! It is better to use AfC. I just wanted to know if it is possible also.. That's why I asked! I myself have created two articles (by AfC obviously) and I find it better. Only one thing is that it takes time but in both of my cases, It took only 1 day. There was no backlog while I created my 1st article (hence took one day) and in the 2nd one, there were almost 1620 pending submissions (but by luck, it also took 1 day). TheProEditor11 (talk) 07:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, TheProEditor11. What you may do, given your experience, is to create a Draft, and develop your article in draft, and then move it to mainspace yourself, instead of putting it through AFC. (You'll want to remove the AFC header if there is one, when you do that). ColinFine (talk) 11:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank-you for replying! Yes it is also a good option! TheProEditor11 (talk) 11:29, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Be aware that direct-to-mainspace articles are subsequently reviewed by New Pages Patrol. Articles may be converted to drafts or nominated for deletion. David notMD (talk) 14:27, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How can I create a new article about a filmmaker or actor[edit]

How can I create a new article about a filmmaker Shailendra Pandey who is a established Filmmaker, Media Person. I am not able to understand what is wrong in my draft, I gave articles and IMDb link for reference. ShamshanKali (talk) 07:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

IMDb is not a relaible source for reference. Only one reference which is also unreliable cannot be used to create article. Find more sources and create article (Articles for creation). Also, check our notability guidelines (criteria) to confirm if the person on whom you are creating article is actually notable or not! Thanks! TheProEditor11 (talk) 07:47, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

italics in quoted journal article in citation[edit]

I want to add a citation from a journal so am using the "cite journal" template. I have:

periodical = Mammalian Species

and that appears in italics. I also have:

title = Lepus arcticus

and that appears in double quotes. That's a genus/species so should be in italics. I thought I read that you should not have something in both quotes & italics. Is that right? Or it ok to have:

title = ''Lepus arcticus''

so it appears in both quotes & italics.

Sunandshade (talk) 07:49, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Using {{cite journal}} for your citation is the right move; trust the template to do the right thing. The only time I'd add italics to a title is when a title, as given in the journal, was in standard font except for a portion of it that was in italics, for a reason that matches the reasons for italics as given by our WP:Manual of Style. Mathglot (talk) 09:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The link you gave said to put genus & species in italics, which is as expected. But it didn't address the case where it was also in double quotes. But you say to use italics when italics is in the title which is the case here so I guess you're saying to use italics within the double quotes. Sunandshade (talk) 09:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You don't add double quotes, the template does. If italics are needed per MOS, then you can add them. Here's an example from the article Academy Awards, where you have parameter |title=''Parasite'' Makes Oscars History as the First Foreign-Language Film to Win Best Picture in citation Farhi (2020). HTH, Mathglot (talk) 09:26, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think we are saying the same thing. I'm adding double quotes since italics are needed. Sunandshade (talk) 09:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Possible terminology problem here: a quotation mark character is the single punctuation character (also called double quote) represented by two small vertical strokes, like "this". You said you were "adding double quotes since italics are needed", but that's not right: one must add two single quote characters before and after text when italics are needed, not double quotes. I think you understood that, but just got the wording wrong, because if we are talking about Best & Henry (1994) at Cecotrope, you did it right. Mathglot (talk) 09:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the clarification. I know it's good to use the correct terminology so I appreciate the info. And yes, that's the citation I was asking about. Sunandshade (talk) 17:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Revamped a article[edit]

Hi there. I wanted to ask that after fully revamping a article should i uncheck the Automatic MILHIST checklist assessment, done by the military history project bot. I have done best on my side to meet the criteria. So to get it reviewed again do i have to nominate, uncheck the Automatic MILHIST checklist assessment, or do something else to get it reviewed.

page revamped :-Hunza–Nagar Campaign Rahim231 (talk) 09:17, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Rahim231: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can request reassessment at WP:MHA#REQ (and also Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan/Assessment). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:17, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I need a help to create article for my online magazine called InfoKosova[edit]

Hi there, i am Besnik Emrullahu and i need a help for creating article for my online magazine InfoKosova, i dont want to use this article for advertising or something els, just to have an article on wikipeda. How is this possible. you can contact us on info [at] infokosova [dot] net BesEmr (talk) 10:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BesEmr Hello and welcome. First, please declare your conflict of interest, see WP:COI for instructions. If you derive an income from your magazine, the Terms of Use require that to be disclosed, see WP:PAID. We won't communicate with you via email- Wikipedia matters should be discussed on Wikipedia for openness and transparency if at all possible.
Things do not merit articles just because they exist. (that, despite what you say, would be a form of advertising/promotion) Any article about your magazine must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Put another way, we want to know what sources wholly unaffiliated with your magazine say is important/significant/influential about it- we don't want to know what it says is important about itself. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
i want to find someone to writte article, i dont want to writte article for my magazine, i have many strong sources that mentioned InfoKosova. BesEmr (talk) 10:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, BesEmr. Sources that "mention" InfoKosova are not enough. Are there places where people who have no connection with your or your magazine, and have not been prompted or fed information by you, have chosen to write at length about the magazine, and been published in reliable sources? If the answer is yes, then an article on your magazine is possible, though I doubt whether you will be able to find somebody to write it. If the answer is No, then no article is possible, and you should not spend any more time on this.
You clearly want there to be an article about your magazine. You have not given us any reason to think that Wikipedia wants an article about your magazine. WIkipedia does not have, or want, articles about everything. ColinFine (talk) 11:17, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
i want to find someone to writte article–In any case, please do not attempt to hire anyone to write the article for you! Please see Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning. If anyone wants to write an article for you for money, they're most likely to be scammers. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 11:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Troubles with publishing an English translation[edit]

Hello, I would like to ask for an advice: I would like to publish either an article in English or an English translation of a page/article that I have already published in Slovak. But when I try to create a new article in English, it says I don't have enough credible sources (although they are the same ones that were sufficient for the article in Slovak, and there are no other sources available for the article). And when I try to create an English "translation" of the article, it says that I am not an experienced editor and thus cannot publish such a translation. Could you please give me an advice on how I can publish the article in English or its English translation? I will be very grateful for any advice. Have a nice day. Edu.2022.wiki (talk) 12:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@edu.2022.wiki: you have already asked this at Wikipedia:Help desk § Troubles with publishing English translation; please don't post the same question at more than one venue. ltbdl (talk) 12:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Each language Wikipedia-though connected- is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. What is acceptable on one version is not necessarily acceptable on another; as you have found, the English Wikipedia tends to have stricter standards than others like the Slovak Wikipedia. Whether you do a direct translation or write from scratch, the topic must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources that can be summarized in an article, showing how the topic meets our definition of notability. If you do not have any more sources, the topic would not merit an article here at this time- even if it is considered acceptable on the Slovak Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 12:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Main namespace sandbox[edit]

Hello, I have noticed that some templates don't work on the main namespace. Can there be a "fake" main namespace page dedicated specifically to sandboxes? 2003 LN6 14:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@2003 LN6: the current tech is not suited for this. ltbdl (talk) 14:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@2003 LN6: Welcome to the Teahouse! What's an example of a template that wouldn't work at Wikipedia:Sandbox? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:40, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@User:GoingBatty I've heard that userboxes and other templates like CSDs don't work in the main namespace. 2003 LN6 16:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@2003 LN6: A userbox would work in your user sandbox (e.g. User:2003 LN6/sandbox). Maybe a better question is: What do you want to test in a sandbox that isn't working for you, and where did you perform your test? GoingBatty (talk) 18:54, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@User:GoingBatty: I wanted to test out CSDs and some of them like G1 and G2 did not work in the Wikipedia or User namespaces. 2003 LN6 22:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@2003 LN6: CSD templates absolutely work in the Wikipedia namespace. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 22:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Move debate[edit]

When I am debating for an article to move, which comment do I reply to? The particular article is this one and I want to participate in the move request debate, but which comment should I reply to? I already made one mistake and had to fix it. WikiHmmmm... (talk) 17:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can reply to the first overall user-written comment with your oppose/support stance with an explanation as you see fit.
For generic debate you can reply to whichever user-written comment which you are making a point in relation to. Dionysius Millertalk 18:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

on EXTERMINATION[edit]

i'm planning on proposing the deletion of a lot of pokémon-related redirects in a while (read: once i looked around enough articles). some are implausible typos, some might be vandalism, and some are vandalism

is there a way to propose them en masse, as opposed to tagging each one and potentially clogging the page, or manually editing the page to add them? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:52, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Cogsan! I'm not immediately seeing an easy way to do that at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. I'd ask at the talk page of that project, where editors are more likely to be able to help.
Also, mass nominations in general aren't something to do when you're just wading into an area — have you familiarized yourself with RfD's guiding principles and participated in some other discussions there? {{u|Sdkb}}talk 21:49, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
to be fair, i'm about to wade into the rfd scene
i'm already... more than a little familiar with pokémon articles
for now, i asked about it there
thanks cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notability for a doctor[edit]

Hello, I am new here and want to create a page for this doctor/researcher who really helped me. I was diagnosed HIV positive and she was the first doctor I met and really changed my life. So as a thank you I want to create a page for her. I don't know her personally and I don't think she would recall me at all, and it doesn't matter either. I have edited wikipedia before and added more information for some pages I was interested so I know how it works but never created a page. This article talks about her work https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2019-11-29/kind-clinic-leader-recognized-for-her-hiv-work/ and this is her google scholar https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C44&q=Cynthia+Brinson&btnG=&oq=Cynthia. Can someone help me understand if she would be notable? If yes, I will try to create draft and submit. Thank you Newhere134 (talk) 19:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Newhere134. One of the journal articles she co-authored has been cited over 1000 times and several others have been cited hundreds of times. The Austin Chronicle coverage looks solid to me. Try to find more like that. The shortcut to the relevant notability guideline is WP:ACADEMIC. I suggest you begin a draft. Cullen328 (talk) 20:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Newhere134, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm glad for you that Dr Brinson was able to do so much for you I see that Cullen has looked at the sources and concoudes that she's probably notable in Wikipedia's sense, so it's probably worth going forward.
But I would like to caution you about your purpose. You say you want to create a page for her as a thank you. That is understandable; but it is not always a good idea. The problem is that once you have created it, neither you nor she will have control over its contents. If, for example, at some time she became involved in a public controversy and uncomplimentary things got published about her, that may get added to the article. Please have a look at an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing before you go any further, ColinFine (talk) 20:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

adding a redirect[edit]

I've read the help files about adding redirects but still had some questions. Apparently every redirect needs a new page. I read the new page help article but it seems to discuss when to make a new page (& when not to) but I couldn't see where it talks about how to actually create the new page.

Once I create the page with the name of the redirect (e.g., Bunny), I know it should contain one line, e.g., #REDIRECT [[Rabbit]]. This is an example that has already been created. I will not be creating it.

In this example, I see the Bunny page also has other info, e.g., "Redirect category shell ...". Do I need to add that also? Looks like if I also want to add the plural, I need to create another new page, right?

I also saw this: (2 curly braces) redirect | Cottontail (2 curly braces). Can that be used instead? I said (2 curly braces) so it would not convert so it will show what I typed. This is used in the Rabbit article using "Bunny" as the redirect.

Finally, do I have permission to do this? Thanks. Sunandshade (talk) 20:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sunandshade: Welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, you may create appropriate redirects, and Help:Redirects details how to do so. {{redirect}} is a template placed on the target page, not the redirect page, and Template:Redirect has more information. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 20:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why are some of my edits being removed?[edit]

So I'm editing, and a day later, they're removed. Why is this happening? 3.14 (talk) 20:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@3.14159265459AAAs: Welcome to the Teahouse! The edit summary for each reversion should let you know why this is happening. For example, go to Jason Voorhees and click "View history", and you'll see your edit was reverted by Bignole because you added "in-universe minutia that doesn't consistently appear, except the hockey mask which is mentioned". However, when looking at the history for Chucky (Child's Play), I see NJZombie did not provide an edit summary as they should have. As part of the normal Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, feel free to start a discussion on the article's talk page to discuss why you think your edits are beneficial, and invite the person who reverted your edits to discuss their rationale. Hopefully the two of you and others will come to a consensus, and the article will be better for it. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For one, 3.14159265459AAAs makes significant edits and then marks them as minor, as one of the edit summaries I did leave explains. NJZombie (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I think my edits are only minor, but I only just started 2 weeks ago. I would appreciate it if you helped me understand. 3.14 (talk) 00:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
3.14159265459AAAs, please read Help:Minor edit. Cullen328 (talk) 00:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. 3.14 (talk) 00:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussing: Chucky[edit]

Can the person/people who reverted my edit give a explaination, and some ways I can improve?

Chucky (Child's Play) 3.14 (talk) 00:12, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No need to ask the person who reverted it, 3.14159265459AAAs. The reason's obvious: you provided no reliable source (indeed, no source whatever) for your addition. (Also, a minor point: it had typos -- "alternationg", "regualr" -- suggesting that you were uninterested in getting the addition right.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This seems to be merely a repetition of your previous question, 3.14159265459AAAs. -- Hoary (talk) 01:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Non-free images in userboxes[edit]

Can i use non-free images in a userbox? (E.G Album covers) Powder9157 (talk) 21:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Powder9157: Welcome to the Teahouse! No, you may not use non-free images in a userbox - see WP:UBCR for details. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How can I retrieve a deleted help message?[edit]

I just deleted by mistake someone's message in response to a request for help on a certain topic, and I really want it back. It happened because I didn't realize clicking on a blue circle would delete the message. I wish that had been shown near the blue circle.

I think the person who wrote me some important information was named something like RedRudolph, but I don't know how to see a list of the names of all editors so I could try to contact him or her directly.

The information that editor gave me was in answer to my question as to whether requests for completely replacing an existing article might ever be considered. I remember that editor sent me a link to a help article on this subject with something like "blowing up an article" in its title.?

Augnablik (talk) 22:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Augnablik: I'm happy to help you, but I need a bit more information. (FYI, the editor you refer to is almost certainly RudolfRed).
  • Where did this take place? Like, what page?
  • What is the blue button?
  • When did this happen? Today, yesterday, earlier? Whatever you did, it will show up in your contributions.
🌺 Cremastra (talk) 22:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Augnablik: Is Wikipedia:Help desk#Full replacements what you're talking about? RudolfRed is one of the commenters there. Deor (talk) 23:30, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Cremastra and Deor, thank you for replying. My original message was apparently at the Help Desk on the 8th. The blue button seems to have been on an Alert message ... over at the top right of the message. Happy to hear that there is a RudolfRed among the editors, as that should be a very helpful piece of information in tracking him or her down. Augnablik (talk) 02:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Augnablik: Are you referring to notifications that you can access by clicking at the top of the page? Clicking on the blue dot only marks it as read. You'll still be able to read it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All I know is that it disappeared when I clicked on the blue button. Augnablik (talk) 03:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Declined Wikipedia Page[edit]

My page was declined, can I have some help SparkleOtter (talk) 22:26, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @SparkleOtter! The references you added to the draft article do not appear to be to reliable sources. Please review the reliable sources guideline and the general notability guideline to get a sense of what we're looking for. If such sources do not exist, then there is unfortunately no way to create the article at present. Best, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Black now, not dark blue[edit]

I have no idea where to take this question so I thought I'd try here. Visited links I now see as black and not dark blue (versus light blue for unvisited links). Wow, I don't like that. Anyone know if there's a setting so I can change it back? (I also don't like the orange and blue for diffs but that's not nearly as bad) Masterhatch (talk) 23:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Masterhatch: According to the discussion at WP:VPT there was a recent change that caused this on mobile. A ticket is open for the developers to look into it. RudolfRed (talk) 01:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, so it's not just me. Extremely irritating! Please don't fix, if it's not broken... Maresa63 Talk 03:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for pointing me to WP:VPT. Masterhatch (talk) 03:53, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i need your help[edit]

i am creating an article on a notable producer who has produced songs for musicians who have a wikipedia page some of this musicians he has produced for are very notable in nigeria what can i do to get this page approved i am been told to site his notability but he is so notable for producing for this music artistes and their songs are on various websites and streaming platforms please help me "Icon240$%" (talk) 01:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Archive link behaving weirdly[edit]

I was going through the refideas at Talk:She-Ra and the Princesses of Power, and when I attempted to add an archive link for this citation, it didn't seem to work. The archived content appeared normally, then it redirected to this link. This does not seem ideal for readability. This happened with both the previous most recent archiving and my own attempt to archive it. (Also when I attempted to archive it, the banner at the top is green in the archive, as opposed to yellow in the actual article? No idea why.)

This isn't happening with the two oldest archivings ([14] [15]), so in the end it should be fine, but I'd still like to know why this is happening. Is it something about Syfy.com as a domain? If anyone knows, please tell me.

Thanks. — Toast for Teddy (talk) 02:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help get article approved[edit]

Draft: Mohit Joshi, was declined after 3rd edit, please guide me through on how I can get it approved. Tanmay.s.15 (talk) 04:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tanmay.s.15, at the top, you can see "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 people)." Perhaps part of this is (or parts of it are) difficult to understand. If so, which part(s)?

Article Rama[edit]

Re Article Rama 2402:1980:8464:422:0:0:0:1 (talk) 04:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you have a question, then what is the question? -- Hoary (talk) 05:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to use Literal books not online as citation for Wikipedia[edit]

I have noticed that when given articles to contribute to, I can barely find any online citation, or most instances the only source is the Wikipedia page itself, were I to find an actual book on the subject matter, would that suffice as a relevant citation or is Wikipedia specific to just internet literature? I would love advice on this. Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 05:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Anoghena Okoyomoh: You can absolutely use sources not online. For example, you can use {{Cite book}} and provide the relevant info (title, author, etc) of the book. Since it is not online, you would omit the URL info. RudolfRed (talk) 05:35, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Anoghena Okoyomoh:, I agree with what RudolfRed said above, plus it is often helpful to the reader and to other editors who are trying to verify, for you to include the exact page number(s), and if possible an exact quote (in the Quote field in the hidden/extra fields). [If you want to get really fancy, you can include the chapter title, especially if the chapter has a different author than the overall book -- in which case you would use the chapter author in the author field, and the editor's name in the editor field.] Softlavender (talk) 05:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Anoghena Okoyomoh In addition to the above, I would recommend searching the Internet Archive's Texts to Borrow to see if a digital copy could be linked (alongside |"url-access=registration" in the citation) for ease of WP:VERIFIABILITY.
If there is no digital copy availible, it would still be advisable to link either to the book's page on its publisher's website, or page on Google Books, so that someone looking to verify the information has a place to start. — Toast for Teddy (talk) 06:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]