Search Wikipedia Create account Log in

Wikipedia:Teahouse 29 languages

Contents [hide] Project page Talk Read Edit View history Tools

(Top) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Publishing a page I created in my
sandbox

Draft on Sanket Goel (Draft:Sanket

Welcome to the Teahouse! Shortcuts

A friendly place where you can ask questions WP:TEA

Goel)
WP:TH
to get help with using and editing Wikipedia
search for experienced art-lover

I'm new and confused if I should write

an article or not.

Please help to make this article about

Marie Burde a Righteous Among the
Nations, Happen
Ask a question
Requesting Feedback on Article

How do I post an image when the

account is locked David Biddulph, a Teahouse host

Issue with short descriptions

Gold Coast highrises Question forum Meet your hosts Articles to improve Become a host

Article create

George Addo Jr. New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Q: re: Categories Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2-3 days.
Publishing a new article

Adding an image Search Help pages Search Help

Costs
To read the newest questions, skip to bottom · About the Teahouse
Advice

Most recent archives

1166, 1167, 1168, 1169, 1170, 1171, 1172,
Publishing a page I created in my sandbox [ edit ] 1173, 1174, 1175, 1176, 1177, 1178, 1179,
1180, 1181, 1182, 1183, 1184, 1185
??? That then I seemed to have to switch over from User: myname/sandbox to just
myname/sandbox... but then it is there somewhere and how do I publish? I had initially pressed a Search archives
button in the sandbox that said "Publish" and then checked back later but nothing seems to suggest
Go find it!
that it was waiting for review or anything...

This used to be so easy... Karyn Huenemann (talk) 20:27, 4 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Karyn Huenemann, your article was at Karyn Huenemann/sandbox. I have moved it back to User:Karyn Huenemann/sandbox. Your draft is
awaiting review. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 20:31, 4 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
It's now at Draft:Dora Sanders Carney. Unfortunately it cites only one two reliable independent sources, and is unlikely to be accepted as
an article unless someone can find more. Maproom (talk) 21:31, 4 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Would it count as more reliable if the newspaper articles had links to them? I could make that happen. All of the sources are
published sources except the CWRC site which is an academic research site. Karyn Huenemann (talk) 14:53, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
[ reply ]
The CWRC site counts as a published source. The bigger problem with the article is that most of it is sourced either to her own
memoir or to her daughter's. If you're having trouble finding more sources, I suggest asking the helpful folks at WP:WIRED.
They're very good at finding early 20thc newspaper articles for cases like this. -- asilvering (talk) 17:00, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
[ reply ]

Thanks. Karyn Huenemann (talk) 14:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

It's not clear what the level of oversight is at CWRC, and if you are selecting something to be posted on CWRC which you then cite,
that is another thing to be concerned about. Fabrickator (talk) 22:11, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
What do you mean by "it's not clear what the level of oversight is at CWRC"? It's a research project based at the University of
Alberta. -- asilvering (talk) 15:56, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Draft on Sanket Goel (Draft:Sanket Goel) [ edit ]

I already started a discussion about this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sanket_Goel ) but it got pushed away into archives and I didn't
know how to revive it. Sorry.

I've improved the citations of the article and a lotta other stuff and wanna know if there is anything else to be done about it.

Also if its good enough to be accepted then how do I get it accepted faster? Shashy 922 (talk) 09:20, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Any particular reason for the big rush, Shashy 922? -- Hoary (talk) 10:02, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
It's not like anybody's dyin or somethin. It's just that I would feel better if thing's that I have spent time doing are done Shashy 922 (talk)
10:19, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Each time a draft is submitted it goes to volunteer reviewers who each decide what they want to review next. The system is not a
queue. So, could be days, weeks, or sadly, months. David notMD (talk) 10:55, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Thanks a lot for the advice. I mainly wanted more help on the article but thanks for the advice on the reviewing process. Shashy
922 (talk) 03:27, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

search for experienced art-lover [ edit ]

I'm at the moment busy with translating some articles on Concrete art from the German to the English wikipedia and i could use some help by
an experienced writer of art-related articles. Someone willing to help? Kind regards, Naomi Hennig (talk) 12:12, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

HI @Naomi Hennig, welcome to the Teahouse. You could try asking at the talk page of WikiProject Arts. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:48, 7 April
2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@Naomi Hennig ...and/or you could try here WP:WikiProject Intertranswiki/German or perhaps here WP:WikiProject Germany? --
DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:34, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
You are really wonderful and quick. Thank you all for the good links! Will contact them! Kind regards, --Naomi Hennig (talk) 15:24, 7 April
2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@Naomi Hennig, a very important word of advice for you: the German-language wikipedia is happy with articles that have a bibliography
("Literatur") but no footnotes, but English-language wikipedia is the other way around. Patrollers and reviewers on en-wiki will often draftify
articles or remove chunks of text if they aren't footnoted, so don't bother translating anything with long stretches of unfootnoted text! It's
honestly easier to write an article from scratch than to try to find appropriate footnotes for a lot of de-wiki articles. Pick ones that are easier
for you to verify sentence-by-sentence and you'll have a much better time. -- asilvering (talk) 17:58, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Dear Asilvering... i do have 50 footnotes in each of my articles... at least 50... :-), i used to work as a researcher for television and i do
love to have good references to what i write! I do write for the German wikipedia for more than 10 years now - and up to now i did not
find lots of German articles as you described, i rather did find lots of articles which have no reference-info at all...and when i come across
this, i try to add reference-info. But it is good that you alerted me on this, i will keep this in mind, because i don't want my English articles
with this "says whom" in blue or something like that. Kind regards, --Naomi Hennig (talk) 20:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
It sounds like you'll do fine, then! I'm glad that's been your experience. It sure hasn't been mine, occasionally patrolling
Category:Unassessed Germany articles... -- asilvering (talk) 16:03, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

I'm new and confused if I should write an article or not. [ edit ]

Hello, I have been asked to write an article about a company I work for. It is a manufacturing company based in the U.S. and has been in
existence since 1935. The only thing that has been written about the company (to use as a source) is the company website. Anything that I
would put into the wikipedia article is on the company website. Are company websites/company press releases are not acceptable sources? I
would really appreciate if someone could give me some guidance on this before I put more time into it. Thanks very much. TaraB1216 (talk)
17:51, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@TaraB1216 No, that wouldn't count for notability since it's the company's own website. The article would be deleted in that case. Sorry! --
asilvering (talk) 17:54, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Ugh - I appreciate that feedback. Thank you for the quick reply :) TaraB1216 (talk) 18:00, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Would an Amazon storefront count as notability? The company sells their products through Amazon and has a large Amazon storefront
with an "About" page on it. I think I'm grasping at straws here but worth asking! TaraB1216 (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@TaraB1216, nope, not at all. Not an independent reliable source. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:07, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@Asilvering I'm wondering why this wikipedia page was acceptable with only the company's website used as a source? Any insight? http
s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Leavitt_Corporation TaraB1216 (talk) 18:30, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@TaraB1216, that article was created in 2012, well before our current standards were in place. It may very well merit deletion. The
problem is that few editors are interested in fixing up old, bad articles; the best we can do is prevent any more such articles from
being created, and slowly work on the backlog. Also see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:35, 7 April 2023
(UTC) [ reply ]
Think of it like this: since articles are written and maintained by volunteers, people gravitate towards things that editors find
interesting, or things that are urgent. New articles are urgent, so loads of people watch out for those. Old articles on peanut butter
manufacturing companies are not urgent, and while I'm not saying it's impossible, I've never met anyone with a special interest in
peanut butter manufacturing companies. -- asilvering (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Except, of course, a peanut butter manufacturing company. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:49, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Hi @TaraB1216. As asilvering and the IP user have already stated what your suggesting is not in line with Wikipedia's sourcing guidelines.
However, if you don't mind letting me know the companies name I might be able to help out with the article you intend to create!
AdmiralAckbar1977 talk contribs 18:35, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@AdmiralAckbar1977 I would be writing the article about 4C Foods (Brooklyn, NY) TaraB1216 (talk) 18:47, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Well, @TaraB1216, there's good news and bad news. I did find quite a lot of independent sources about the company - however they
all seem to be about a Salmonella contamination.[1] [2] , and [3] just to name a few. There also seems to be a Bloomberg
Profile [4] but that's about it. Do keep in mind there's a bunch more about the Salmonella contamination. I hope this helped.
AdmiralAckbar1977 talk contribs 18:59, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@AdmiralAckbar1977 @TaraB1216 Since the company was founded in 1935 (4CCCC is the old name), there may be usable
sources in newspaper archives etc. I found this [5] on Proquest. TaraB1216, I want to to point out that if this article is made and
"sticks", Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing very much applies. Think double-edged sword.
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:07, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
More hits:[6] [7] [8] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:25, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

TaraB1216 Please see your user talk page, and please read WP:BOSS, and have your superiors at your company read it too. 331dot (talk)
18:45, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@331dotThank you very much! I really appreciate you taking the time to point me here. TaraB1216 (talk) 18:51, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
[ reply ]

Thank you, TaraB1216, for drawing people's attention to the feeble article The Leavitt Corporation. It's easy to say that this is a product of the
bad old days; however, looking a little longer at its history reveals that it was still being augmented with unsourced material as recently as 2017.
(My own favorite (?) edit is this minor one , in which an IP helpfully points out that a number of the "current owners" are "living". I suppose that
the IP feared that some people take the term "working stiffs" rather too literally. This was added to a paragraph that was already telling the
reader that "Leavitt products are exported internationally to countries such as Switzerland, Serbia, Croatia, UK, Germany, Japan, Saudi Arabia,
Russia, Brazil, Argentina and Panama" -- because, as we all know, exporting internationally is more impressive than just doing so domestically.)
Well, a huge percentage of Wikipedia articles are terrible; all we can do is try to decrease this percentage, one way or another. I'm happy to see
that Asilvering has already made a start at unterriblizing this article. But there's much more work to be done on it; would you like to try your hand
at it, TaraB1216? -- Hoary (talk) 00:09, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Regarding the The Leavitt Corporation, a took a Be bold approach to show what the article looks like after a cleanup of multiple, long-
standing issues without an engaged editor. See Talk:The_Leavitt_Corporation#Article_cleanup.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:23, 8 April 2023
(UTC) [ reply ]

Please help to make this article about Marie Burde a Righteous Among the Nations, Happen
[ edit ]

I Tried to translate this a German wikipedia article and could benefit from some support in bringing it to the english wikipedia. Unfoutunatley I do
not find a lot of englich sources but I think it is an intresting life story. Thank you for your support. Entrey with an English description : https://coll
ections.yadvashem.org/en/righteous/9619346 This is my draft. It is based on a translarion of the german wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aberlin2/Marie_Burde Aberlin2 (talk) 19:49, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

I, mean, what should be my next step?

where could I get more help? I would prefer not to go to deep ito the english wikipedia because I would prefer to give this article to an native
english speker who could complete it. Aberlin2 (talk) 19:56, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Hi Aberlin2, if you have Google Chrome, there's a translation extension. It will translate the page easy for you.KatoKungLee (talk) 19:58,
7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@KatoKungLee, @Aberlin2 Machine translation is strongly discouraged at Wikipedia, because the results are so poor. An editor who
is translating an article should be fluent in both languages. David10244 (talk) 06:07, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@Aberlin2, no English sources is fine. We prefer them when they're available, but a reliable source in another language is fine. I am very
interested in this topic, and while I'm not an expert, I'd be willing to do a copyedit at minimum. I'd need you to be available by ping to
make sure we agree on what I'm rendering, agree on significance of coverage and whether the source is reliable enough for enwiki, etc.,
would that work for you? Valereee (talk) 20:11, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
I don't understand what you mean by "I'd need you to be available by ping " .
if you mention me here or on my talk page i get a notification. I Try to ansewer you fast and help you with your questions.
I have problems with making it look like a completed entry. Especially with the wiki Syntax and error messages. I alao have not so
much expirience with the process of taking it from a draft on my page to a normal wikipedia page.
I guess there could also be more englisch and german sources on this topic.
Does this answer your question? Aberlin2 (talk) 20:35, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@ValereeeI guess i have to mention you this way to give you a notification Aberlin2 (talk) 20:38, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@Aberlin2, yes, that's what I mean -- that I would want you to continue to respond when I have questions, and since you
seem to be happy to do that, I'm happy to help! I am going offline for the evening but I'll ping myself to take a look tomorrow.
(And, yes, you have to both ping and sign in the same edit to send a notification.) Valereee (talk) 20:45, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
[ reply ]
@Aberlin2 and Valereee:, It looks like there is a great start to this very interesting article. I would be happy to work on it,
too, if you would like. I don't want to get in the way.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:04, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@CaroleHenson@Valereee
Thank you very much,
I think it would be good if you worked on the article as well. You can take it away from my userpage to a more fitting
place and I supplement it then there. I don't know what the conventions are and how it works best. I think the next step
would be to move the article off my userpage so that more people can work on it equally. Maybe more persons here
are also interested. furthermore, it would probably be good if the discussion about the technical details and individual
sources would be in the discussion of an article draft rather than here in the teahouse. Aberlin2 (talk) 07:31, 8 April
2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@Aberlin2 and Valereee:, That all makes sense. I moved it to Draft:Marie Burde and then we can use Draft
talk:Marie Burde for further conversation.–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:40, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@CaroleHenson@ValereeeThank you for your support. I think I will be away for some hours but then I think I
will go to the next step and will try to explain the German sources in the discussion of the draft. There was
some discussion about naming a place with here name and this could also be added to the article. I just lloked
up in ferurary 2023 a Street was namit with her name.
I will add more details in the discussion of the draft. Aberlin2 (talk) 07:57, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Requesting Feedback on Article [ edit ]

Hello everyone. I have recently edited the page for Provoke Magazine. I am fairly new to Wikipedia and I am reaching out to anyone who might
be willing to provide some feedback on my edits. Thank you in advance. Andrew34jack (talk) 20:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Andrew34jack, you have been "reaching out to" a lot of people over this. One of these people is me. Yesterday, I put a lot of time into two
long comments: see the lower half of this. Within each, I pinged you. Why not attend to the comments you've already received before
soliciting more comments? (Of course, "attending to" need not mean "agreeing with and acting on"; you are free to disagree and reject.) --
Hoary (talk) 22:02, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@Andrew34jack: Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for your edit to the Provoke (magazine) article. You can look at all the edits
made to the article since then to get some feedback. I see there are two {{Full citation needed}} tags and two {{Dubious}} tags that you
hopefully would be able to address. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:04, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Andrew34jack, As I said on the talk page: "I made a few minor changes, mostly shortening the section headings. I will come back after these
issues have been resolved. My major thought is: the content could benefit from summarization and copy edits. I'll be back."–CaroleHenson
(talk) 02:59, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Sorry but I'm new to this ... what does "Ping" mean? and how can I do that? b'art homme 22:29, 8 April 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned
comment added by B'art homme (talk • contribs)

B'art homme, you asked the same question below, you have answers to it there. -- Hoary (talk) 02:48, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

How do I post an image when the account is locked [ edit ]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jessica_Nabongo.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jessica_Nabongo#trivia_in_lead 2600:8802:3A12:E700:2D63:7D21:720C:7DAA (talk) 23:10, 7 April 2023

(UTC) [ reply ]

Are you saying that, when you were logged in, you were one of the participants in Talk:Jessica Nabongo#trivia_in_lead, but that when
logged in you are blocked from editing? If so, what's your username? If you mean something else, what is it that you mean? -- Hoary (talk)
23:24, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
I'm not able to log in now. I didn't try. I was trying to provide a CC0 picture for the article.
Thanks 2600:8802:3A12:E700:2D63:7D21:720C:7DAA (talk) 23:43, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
What's the username as which you're unable to log in? -- Hoary (talk) 23:47, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Why?
I'll add it later. 2600:8802:3A12:E700:2D63:7D21:720C:7DAA (talk) 00:10, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Because if you're unable to log in, something is going wrong somewhere. Don't you want it fixed? As for asking other people
to add an image, that's a very odd request to make here. And that image itself is dubious. The uploader says that it's her own
work, and that it's somebody else's own work. If it's her own work, why is it so small, and why is its quality so bad? -- Hoary
(talk) 00:19, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
If it's an issue, I do it when I'm home. 2600:8802:3A12:E700:2D63:7D21:720C:7DAA (talk) 00:38, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
[ reply ]
Yes, in view of the semi-protection of the article and Valereee's "note", I'd say that this is a very good idea. -- Hoary
(talk) 00:47, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

You didn't "try" to log in, or you didn't try something else? If you didn't try to log in, then how do you know you are not able to? Your
comment confused me, but maybe it was just me. David10244 (talk) 06:13, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Judging by their comments, I expect they're editing from a mobile browser. I wouldn't be able to log in on a mobile browser either
- and I know that in advance, so no need to try, and no reason for concern. -- asilvering (talk) 01:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Ah, I see. It was not clear to me. David10244 (talk) 07:00, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Please do not remove a message thread. -- Hoary (talk) 01:44, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

The file uploader's account name is the partial title of the article subject's book. The other party in the IRL dispute just had an image
uploaded to the article about her.
IP 2600, if you'll go to Talk:Jessica Nabongo I can help you get an image uploaded that is one you like. Valereee (talk) 10:43, 8 April 2023
(UTC) [ reply ]

Issue with short descriptions [ edit ]

When I have the page for Worm's-eye view (and some other pages, including Orthographic projection) open in the Wikipedia app, the short
description displays under the title as "Consumption of feces."

This clearly isn't actually the short description, as if I go to edit the page, I see appropriate text (in the case of Worm's-eye view, "View of an
object or location from below"). Moreover, if I look at the preview of all of the Wikipedia tabs I have open in the app, the normal short description
is what displays. It's not a problem I'm happening in my browser on my PC, and it's also not happening with all short descriptions.

Nonetheless, I feel like this "Consumption of feces" description should be fixed. I'm happy to try and do this, but I can't figure out how. Could
anybody give me any advice, or direct me to a better place to ask this question? – Insincere Giraffe (talk) 02:13, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

It is almost surely a lingering effect from some template vandalism a bit more than a week ago and talked about in Wikipedia:Village pump
(technical)#Incorrect preview images. I have gone ahead and done a null edit, then even a minor real edit, to Worm's-eye view and then
cleared my mobile app storage and cache. But it's still showing the vandalized short description. Something is weird since it says the article
was updated 108 days ago yet I made an edit ~10 minutes ago, so some extra caching is happening on the Android app. Skynxnex (talk)
02:43, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
It feels similar to phab:T274359 perhaps but I'm not sure if it is this. Skynxnex (talk) 02:55, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Hi @Insincere Giraffe, apologies I forgot to ping before. I waited a bit above and it seems that Worm was resolved a bit after I did a
page edit (so just extra slow to clear). So I went ahead and did a small fix to Orthographic as well and now, for me at least, it's
showing correctly on the Android app, Reading Wikipedia:Purge might be interesting to learn more. Hope this helped. Skynxnex
(talk) 04:33, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Oh that's great! I'll try null edits/small page edits in the future if I see the same problem on other pages. Thanks so much for your
help. – Insincere Giraffe (talk) 05:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Gold Coast highrises [ edit ]

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Contact us  – {{u| Sdkb }} talk 04:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

 Courtesy link: List of tallest buildings on the Gold Coast

My changes to Gold Coast Highrise have been reverted by Wikipedia! I spent hours researching and editing Gold Coast highrise Under
construction/Approved/Proposed only to have it reverted back to incorrect information that is now being presented! I will never donate another
cent of money to this botched website! Wikipedia is a joke where incorrect information is mostly printed and when its corrected the idiot editor
reverts it back to the wrong information that is presented and wrong. Anthony_kd is my loin name! I demand that the corrected changes that
made be reinstalled to give readers the correct information regarding Gold Coast Highrise!

I request that the reverted information about Gold Coast highrise be reinstalled to the correct information that I printed regarding Gold Coast
highrise Login name Anthony_kd Anthony kd (talk) 01:17, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@Anthony kd: Sorry to hear about the frustrating experience. It looks like you're referring to your edits at List of tallest buildings on the Gold
Coast. The changes you made are saved in the revision history, but it looks like they were reversed by @MelbourneStar, who noted "Tests,
incorrect formatting, unexplained changes" and "Further unsourced". I've pinged them to this discussion so that they can provide some
further explanation for you about why they did not find the edits suitable. We're all trying to improve the quality of the information on
Wikipedia, but we have some requirements, such as proper referencing, and your edits may need some tweaks to ensure that they follow
those requirements before we can reinstate them. Cheers, {{u| Sdkb }} talk 04:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Hello Anthony kd, we're all volunteer editors here. I am (perhaps obviously) not the editor who reverted your additions. I would like to offer
some guidance. You mention that the information is correct. I believe you, but if I wanted to check it out, I wouldn't be able to verify the
information with your citations. I see that you added "<ref>{{cite web}}</ref>" in several places. For instructions on how to fill the "cite web"
template, check out the {{cite web}} page. It's normal to at least use the url and access-date parameters. Url provides the link and access-
date is helpful if the link dies. Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 05:23, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Anthony kd, if you think that your threat to withold donations will help you get your way in a content dispute, please be advised that you
are completely wrong on that point. Experienced editors do not care in the slightest whether or not you donate money, and have no way
of knowing in any event. The Wikimedia Foundation has annual revenue of US $155 million and net assets of US $240 million, plus an
endowment of over US $100 million. They will survive just fine without your financial donations. We just want you to donate well
referenced, policy compliant content. Cullen328 (talk) 07:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

MelbourneStar had already left a message on your Talk page, stating willing to discuss why your work was reverted. From above and looking at
article, it appears you moved the future buildings table to the wrong place and added content without working refs. David notMD (talk) 10:00, 8
April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Article create [ edit ]

how to create a article on wikipedia Abhishree19 (talk) 05:05, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@Abhishree19 Please click on WP:YFA. David10244 (talk) 06:16, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
An attempt to create an article about yourself was speedy deleted in March. Wikipedia advises against autopbiographies. See
WP:AUTO. David notMD (talk) 10:12, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

George Addo Jr. [ edit ]

I edited and I moved the page of George Addo Jr. from another users sandbox and when I published it, it seems that article does not exist after I
have shared link with community members, but I can see that the page exist at my end. I need help on this. Thanks Jwale2 (talk) 08:07, 8 April
2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

I see it too. -- Hoary (talk) 09:18, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

I see it three. What do you mean by "article does not exist"? David notMD (talk) 10:15, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
I, umm... four see it. It hasn't been patrolled yet, so Google isn't indexing it; wonder if that's what @Jwale2 means? -- DoubleGrazing
(talk) 11:16, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@Jwale2 Shouldn't the article title be George Addo, based on WP:PRECISE? Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:37, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
.... or maybe I'm wrong, since MOS:JR says Jr. is OK when it is commonly used in the sources, which it seems to be in this case.
Apologies. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:10, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Hi @Michael D. Turnbull it should be George Addo Jr. rather that George Addo as result of the using his name in full reading from
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people).Thanks Jwale2 (talk) 14:15, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Q: re: Categories [ edit ]

In Category:Women-related WikiProjects, why does Wikiproject:Women in Green appear under "G", while Wikiproject:Women in Red is under
"W"? (I've posted the same question on the relevant Talk page, but it seems like it might not get much attention there.) Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk)
11:37, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@Cl3phact0: Welcome to the Teahouse! I answered your question at the talk page. GoingBatty (talk) 15:10, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Thank you, I'll head over there and have a look. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 15:35, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Publishing a new article [ edit ]

I have tried to publish a new article Draft:Vaishnavi Chaitanya, my article has been declined twice stating that 'This submission's references do
not show that the subject - that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject'. I have added new and
better references, but the same reason. I don't know how else to improve my article. Please help me out with improving and publishing this
article. Ashrit918 (talk) 13:41, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@Ashrit918: Welcome to the Teahouse! The "YouTube" section needs more references and the "Awards" section needs a reference.
GoingBatty (talk) 15:01, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Thanks for your earlier feedback. I have made some changes and added references in the YouTube and Awards section. Pls let me
know if the article is better now.
Link : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vaishnavi_Chaitanya Ashrit918 (talk) 13:15, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Adding an image [ edit ]

Hi I have been trying to add an image to a page I am editing and it has uploaded onto Wiki Commons but now I can't seem to add it to the page
I am trying to add to Mark Reed (sculptor) Hannahlucy100 (talk) 13:44, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@Hannahlucy100 That should be easy and I see that the article already has many (perhaps too many) images. General advice for the way
to add them is at H:PIC. Come back here if you are still having problems after reading that Help page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:04, 8 April
2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Hello Hannahlucy100, and welcome to the Teahouse. Assuming you're talking about File:Wave sculpture installation by Mark Reed during
flood at Norwich Cathedral , Natural History Museum's Dippy on Tour.jpg, if you go to that page, and then click "View on Wikimedia
Commons", you'll get to the Commons page c:File:Wave sculpture installation by Mark Reed during flood at Norwich Cathedral , Natural
History Museum's Dippy on Tour.jpg (which is where it should have put you when you completed uploading the picture). At the top there is a
link "Use this file", which shows you the string you can copy and paste into the article.
I see that you have uploaded a number of pictures of Reed's work over the years. I must ask: might you have a conflict of interest in working
on Wikipedia's article about him? ColinFine (talk) 15:49, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Costs [ edit ]

how much are the costs for the buyer in case of a private purchase of a gate box and are these costs deductible? 77.162.183.48 (talk) 13:51, 8
April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Sorry, IP editor, we can only answer questions about Wikipedia here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:56, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Advice [ edit ]

Hi everyone. A friend of mine has recently created an account to learn about what we do here on Wikipedia, though I'm a little concerned that
he'll be overwhelmed with the Wiki-jargon that we oftentimes throw around. Any particular advice on how to better familiarize a completely new
editor with policy, without pointing too much to all the PAG pages? Thanks, The Night Watch (talk) 16:32, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Personally, I think the best thing you can do is simply to be there for your friend to ask questions of. -- asilvering (talk) 16:51, 8 April 2023
(UTC) [ reply ]
If the jargon is the only problem, Help:Glossary explains a lot of them. Alternatively, Here's a tip for finding relevant policies, procedures and
guidelines, and most anything else you hear mentioned by regular editors, or come across in Wikipedia's interface. Type " WP: (an easier-
to-type alias of " Wikipedia: ") into the search box, followed by the word or phrase you heard. Most of the time, this will quickly locate a
targeted, behind-the-scenes information/help page, or how-to guide. See more at Help:WP search protocol. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:33, 8
April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
(addressed at your friend) Honestly, the best way to get acquainted with P&G is to read the P&G. Start with the 5 pillars and core content
policies, and follow the links. Also, when you see someone link/refer to a P&G, read it. ■ ∃ Madeline   ∃ Part of me ; 18:05, 8 April 2023
(UTC) [ reply ]

What are considered 'reliable sources', please? [ edit ]

I am confused as to what are considered reliable sources, I thought a website link or a newspaper link could be secondary source. Could
someone give me some light on this, please? Thank you, guys!

Truthbetold27 (talk) 17:56, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

A good place to begin is here . Have a good day.   Aloha27  talk  18:06, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Thank you! You have a good day as well! Truthbetold27 (talk) 18:15, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@Truthbetold27: While websites and newspapers can be secondary sources, they're not all reliable sources. GoingBatty (talk) 18:14, 8 April
2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Thank you! I'll check these out! Truthbetold27 (talk) 18:15, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

A question from my heart [ edit ]

Hi, I am a mom and I love my daughter very much, she is going to be 36 years old and she was told that her husband' sperms are not good
quality and couldn't swim unto her womb. so, she couldn't get pregnant with her husband. she has tried to transfer her husband' sperms unto
her womb, but were failed because the sperms didn't swim. Now, she was told that take her eggs out and then put her husband' sperms unto
her eggs by the doctor specialist. I am very worrying about this procedure that she is about to going through? I have heard about the first lady,
Michelle Obama has gone through somewhat difficulty pregnancy and she also needed help at the time. I would like to ask Michelle if she would
tell me what kind of procedure that she has taken more in detail: did she has taken her eggs out and how long after the eggs were put back unto
her womb? did she do any analyze of her eggs at all? would it be possible to have her to reply to me question although, my question is very
strange to others and yet, I am very worrying about my daughter and want to do anything I can to help if Michelle Obama would accept my
request? My daughter is getting older and she is worrying of course. I love Obama, Michelle, Biden and Jill Biden.

Lai Guen 206.45.199.232 (talk) 18:29, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

I am sorry but the Teahouse is for asking and answering questions about editing Wikipedia. We cannot assist you in contacting Michelle
Obama or any other famous person. Cullen328 (talk) 18:33, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Lai Guen, you may, however, find our article In vitro fertilisation helpful. Deor (talk) 22:00, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
However, remember WP:MEDICAL - We're not your doctor! A diehard editor (talk | edits) 22:05, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

WUNDERMAP/INTERACTIVE MAP AND RADAR [ edit ]

I have questions about using Wundermap/interactive map and radar. Can it be live radar all the time? SCPLOWBOY (talk) 20:06, 8 April 2023
(UTC) [ reply ]

Hello, SCPLOWBOY. Is this a question about using or editing Wikipedia? If it is, then please clarify what the issue is. If it isn't, then this is the
wrong place for it. You might find somebody at the Wikipedia Reference desk who can help you. ColinFine (talk) 12:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
[ reply ]

Self-published sources [ edit ]

I wanted to get clarification on rules for using self-published sources. I'm referring to this page: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources

"Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant
field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. Exercise caution when using such sources: if the information in
question is suitable for inclusion, someone else will probably have published it in independent, reliable sources. Never use self-published
sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer."

I'd like to use a self-published expert source that was produced by a subject-matter expert. This is primarily academic/scientific literature
published in scientific journals. However, I'd like to use them on a biography of a living person. So is this not allowed?

For example, I am writing a biography about a prominent scientist who is a living person, and would like to cite some of his own research to note
that he did important research on a particular topic. Is this not allowed? Once he has died it will be allowed? I'm confused about this and need
clarification.

Fugimus (talk) 20:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Hello, Fugimus. You can list a scientist's own widely cited papers, but any assessment of their importance must be cited to an independent
reliable source. Cullen328 (talk) 21:42, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Academic/scientific literature is not self-published! As you say, it's published in scientific journals. That's fine to use as sources and not what
that guideline is referring to. (It's referring to things like a scientist's popular blog, a book someone wrote and sold through a vanity press,
and so on.) Saying "he did important research" is something else - it's not WP:V you need to be worried about so much as WP:Wikivoice.
Basically, wikipedia shouldn't be saying a person's research was "important", unless sources independent of that person frequently call their
research "important". Saying "John Smith does research on DNA" and sticking a footnote on the end of that to a paper he's published about
his DNA research is perfectly fine. -- asilvering (talk) 00:31, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
thanks, this clarifies things. Also, not going to state that he did important research... I was just trying to get the point across that he is a
legitimate researcher so I want to know if citing his own work is acceptable. Such as: "In her early career, he did research on a given
subject and described these species." Fugimus (talk) 00:49, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Yes, that's fine, provided you cite the peer-reviewed articles in which he published that research. If you haven't yet, have a look at
WP:NPROF to see what can be used to show notability for an academic. If you make a Wikidata item for them, you can add various
identifiers (like their Google Scholar profile or ORCID) that will get picked up by Authority control if you add that template to the
bottom of your article. -- asilvering (talk) 01:21, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
For many academics, the article authors create a section "Selected journal articles" and limit it to about ten. The help portray the
person's work, but contribute little to nothing as far as establishing notability. David notMD (talk) 01:32, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

blocked [ edit ]

I wanted to suggest an alternative picture for maria -- the picture shown is not flattering - it looks messed up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_
Makino komodobite (talk) 21:13, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Maria+Makino+22&t=ffab&atb=v342-1&iar=images&iaf=size%3AWallpaper&iax=images&ia=images — Preceding
unsigned comment added by Komodobite (talk • contribs) 21:18, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Hello, Komodobite. We can only use photos that have an acceptable free license or that are in the public domain. Photos that you find online
are presumed to be restricted by copyright, unless you have written evidence to the contrary. Cullen328 (talk) 21:38, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
[ reply ]
@Komodobite I don't see any problem with the current image. However, at the URL for the image search you provided, there is a tool
under the drop-down "All licenses" which will restrict the hits to acceptable files for Wikimedia Commons. Either public domain or CC BY.
Using that tool, I can't see any usable pictures for Makino, which is odd since the existing Wikipedia one should be there. Google images
does have it when you do the same search: but again no others. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

My recent post on February 29 Talk page [ edit ]

A user came to my talkpage and told me that my recent changes on February 29 talk page is undone because it didn't appear constructive.

But why didn't it appear constructive?!

I write that post here for your judgement.

"Iranian actor, Saeed Poursamimi was also born on February 29, 1944."

If I were another person seeing this post, I would quickly figure out that it is a suggestion to include that actor on the births section.

If a user just saw the births section after seeing the talk page post, they would see by themselves that there are a few persons born on February
29, 1944 but Saeed Poursamimi isn't among them.

I honestly can't understand why my post didn't appear to be constructive.

Please convince me if you think I'm wrong. Aminabzz (talk) 21:51, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Actually, Aminabzz, John Maynard Friedman removed it as "nonsense". This surprises me, as your comment makes sense to me.
(Whether your suggestion is factually correct, or whether it deserved incorporation into the article, are other matters.) Perhaps Friedman
would care to comment here. -- Hoary (talk) 21:57, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Maybe Friedman thought my post was on an article about food! :-))) Aminabzz (talk) 22:00, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@Aminabzz: Ok, "nonsense" was a bit harsh but it really just seemed without purpose. A more accurate description is "so what?"
What point were you trying to make? And why? Saeed Poursamimi appears to be WP:notable (as in there is an article about him), so
why did you not add the entry yourself rather than leave a seemingly random remark at the talk page? Or do you not have a citation
for his DOB? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 22:43, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
𝕁𝕄𝔽, in your place I'd have taken it to be a suggestion for an addition. Yes, "Be bold" is a much touted slogan hereabouts; but, as
is widely recognized, it's very often no more than the first half of "Be bold and thereupon be reverted". -- Hoary (talk) 22:51, 8
April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

I completly agree with you @Aminabzz. Be bold might be nice, but you certainly shouldn't be penalized with a removal for nonsense for
wishing to discuss first. In fact, if you are unsure, discussing is often the best tactic @John Maynard Friedman Starship 24 (talk) 12:54, 9
April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Yes, I agree with you too.
No one should be penalized for wishing to discuss first.
@John Maynard Friedman Aminabzz (talk) 21:40, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
I'm sure Saeed Poursamimi was born on February 29, 1944. He was born on Esfand 9, 1322 in Iranian calendar which matches
the Leap Day of 1944.
But wait a minutte. You're blaming me for not adding the entry in the original article?!
I'm not the one who deserves to be blamed here.
The talk page post was not factually wrong. So it shouldn't have been removed.

Aminabzz (talk) 22:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

True, not factually wrong but without evident purpose. I'm not a mind reader. (The background to this is a silly internet meme
to "spray tag" WP with pointless posts, seemingly a bet on whose lasts longest. Deletion of your post was collateral damage.
Yes, I could have and probably should have just ignored it.) --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
I'll take a plea bargain on WP:Please don't bite the newbies but there it ends. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 13:37, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
[ reply ]
I still believe that even if it wasnt a newbie you are still wrong @John Maynard Friedman Starship 24 (talk) 13:38, 9
April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

I thought we mostly left talk page comments alone, unless they were (for example) copyvios, atracks, etc. I didn't see anything at WP:TALK
that would argue for the removal of that comment, even if it wasn't an extremely valuable comment. David10244 (talk) 07:15, 10 April 2023
(UTC) [ reply ]
I completely agree. I would remove it if it wwas utter nonsense (ex.fdalkjfdslkjfadskjds) but other than that dont remove it. You are
allowed to express youir opinions and ask (that is the purpose) @David10244 Starship 24 (talk) 10:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Restrict template usage in certain namespaces [ edit ]

How do you prevent a template from being used in a certain namespace? A diehard editor (talk | edits) 21:49, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Hi A diehard editor. You cannot prevent it from being called but you can code it to display nothing in some namespaces, e.g. with one of the
templates in {{Namespace and pagename-detecting templates}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:21, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
I just want it to display a big red error message like "DO NOT USE IN ARTICLE SPACE" when in article space. I just used {{User other}}
and it does the job well. Thanks for your help! A diehard editor (talk | edits) 22:27, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Thomas Swann article name change request [ edit ]

I have been creating articles in part to disambiguate Virginia political figures with the same name. Using the link of the list of members of the
Virginia House of Burgesses, yesterday I created a page for the Thomas Swann. The parenthetical refers to him as a burgess in 1645, whereas
his importance was as a member of the Virginia Governor's Council during and after Bacon's Rebellion, after which his son Thomas Swann Jr.
served more in a military capacity as local sheriff (but later became a burgess). A while ago, I created a couple of other Thomas Swann articles
for 18th century political figures (probably descendants but I haven't finished the genealogy, since they returned to Virginia from Maryland and
thus far I've only traced the descendants of the eldest Thomas Swann to North Carolina and Virginia). Because of the messy disambiguation
page, I now realize I should have changed the title from "burgesss" to "councillor" before I created the article, and am requesting you do so.
Thanks.Jweaver28 (talk) 22:25, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

In most cases, you can move it yourself. H:MOVE

However, if you can't move it yourself, use WP:RM (requested moves).
 Courtesy link: Thomas Swann A diehard editor (talk | edits) 22:31, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Suggestions made on but no editor responses [ edit ]

Hi There... I've made suggestions to improve the Art Intervention description on the talk page - but have received no responses from editors...
should I simply "Be Bold"?

b'art homme 22:26, 8 April 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by B'art homme (talk • contribs)

B'art homme, the lowermost comment within Talk:Art intervention is by you and is dated 29 March; it comes below another by you dated 6
April. Their relationship to each other isn't obvious. Each is bulky; their combination is very bulky. Of those people who have Art intervention
on their watchlists, I suspect that a number glance at the bulk, reflect that there are only 24 hours in the day, and move on to other matters.
If a suggestion you've made on a talk page hasn't yet received any response, it's quite OK to make a radical revision to it. I suggest that you
reorganize this suggestion (or set of suggestions). You might then revise the brief note you posted about it on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject
Visual arts (a note in which you failed to link to either the article or its talk page), to say that you've revised and streamlined your
presentation of your suggestion(s). Incidentally, I don't know what you've done to your signature in order to avoid linking; but restoration of
the link (which is included by default) would be helpful. -- Hoary (talk) 23:19, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Thank you Hoary. I have edited the talk page suggestion down to one thing on your helpful advice. Thanks again. I've also failed to add a/my
signature sorry - I tried but nothing happened Art Intervention. BTW what is a ping? b'art homme 00:11, 9 April 2023 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by B'art homme (talk • contribs)

@B'art homme: A "ping" is a cute name for a notification, like the one I did using {{ping}} to notify you of my reply. See WP:PING for
more info. Happy editing!
B'art homme, if I write a message in which I simultaneously (A) use any one among [[User:B'art homme|B'art homme]] and {{U|B'art
homme}} and {{Ping|B'art homme}} and (B) sign my name, then you'll be notified of a message (you'll be "pinged" [Wikt:ping#Verb, #4]
about it). However, if you try to do the same, it will fail (there'll be no notification), unless/until you restore the link to what's currently
merely a quasi-signature, -- Hoary (talk) 00:36, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@B'art homme Yes, it would be nice if your signature wasn't mangled so much that Sinebot is auto-signing after you, and nothing in your
modified sig is clickable. Can you fix that, or do you need help? David10244 (talk) 07:21, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

What reason to select for warning? [ edit ]

I noticed someone posted a nonsense comment on a talk page filled with gibberish. I figured that I should warn them. However, none of the
reasons are really applicable. What should I do? Starship 24 (talk) 00:43, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

In that case, you can always use subst:uw-disruptive1. Alternatively, you can use a custom warning message you write yourself. These
can be even more helpful because you can explain what talk pages are for. Welcome to the Teahouse @Starship 24! - 𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆
(𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌) 01:27, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
The comment by John Maynard Friedman in the section #My recent post on February 29 Talk page above may help to explain this
occurrence. ColinFine (talk) 12:33, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Operation Blackleg Article [ edit ]

Hi Editorial team, Here's the link to the page that was declined publishing to Wikipedia Draft:Operation Blackleg Asking where the information
came from. I did reference both the author Royal Navy Lt. Nick Hawkins and the publication. The official Record of Procedure was submitted to
Commander-in-Chief Fleet on 8th July 1983. The Wikipedia entry for HMS Coventry sinking in the Falklands War references Operation Blackleg
on the Wiki page; this article will eventually link to the Coventry entry. I be happy to make the narrative a more neutral tone but do feel other
than a few " flowery " references just factually stated exactly what was achieved. regards Devargo007 (talk) 02:13, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

The whole thing is sourced to "Hawkins (8 July 1983). "Operation Blackleg" (1): 12–15." What is this -- part of a book, a magazine article, or
what? Here, in this discussion thread, can you point to two other substantive sources for the subject of the draft? Why is each heading at the
same level? I didn't attempt to read the draft: I stopped reading with the introduction because the introduction isn't even written in sentences.
(Wikipedia articles are written in sentences, any one of which has a verb as well as a subject.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
[ reply ]
I had a similar experience to what Hoary described above. Wikipedia has a lot of quirks and rules, so I'd like to offer a brief outline of the
standard way to write a new article:
1. Find at least 3 reliable, secondary sources that cover your topic. For Operation Blackleg it would be stuff like this: https://www.bbc
.com/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-18195170 Primary sources are fine if you're citing undisputed factual statements,
like dates. To meet Wikipedia's threshold for notability though, the general rule is 3 reliable, secondary sources.
2. After you've found sufficient sources, then write your article as a summary.
3. Use primary sources only to fill in straightforward, factual details.
And there are several ways to source an article, but I'll describe the most straightforward way:
1. At the end of a paragraph, sentence, or clause, place a "<ref>your citation here</ref>"
2. You can write the citations by hand or use templates like {{cite web}}, {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}, etc.
3. You can cite a source multiple times using named references. For instructions see: WP:NAMEDREFS
4. If you are citing multiple times from a longer work (books, long journal articles, etc.), you can add page numbers to a named
reference using the {{rp}} template. (If all of the sources are very long, it will make more sense to use shortened footnotes, but
this will likely not apply to "Operation Blackleg")
You are of course free to ask more questions here. I think something that may be helpful though is to check out the Military History
project's talk page, and ask if there are any similar events to Operation Blackleg that you could look at as an example of what may be
expected: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history
Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 03:33, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

On Bonadea's talk page, Devargo007 has elaborated: the Ministery of Defence extensive Record of Procedure, submitted to
Commander-in-Chief fleet on the 8th of July 1983. The record is a comprehensive document which was subject to the Official Secrets
Act for 30 years. I referenced the Record of Procdure and the author. Royal Navy Lieutenant Nick Hawkins. I infer that it's a primary
source. If it indeed is, then this means that it's unusable (but for details, see this). ¶ Additionally, the language is inappropriate. From the
last paragraph alone: faced incalculable odds ... never in its history undertaken such an audacious and dangerous operation ... their
resolve and dedication to the task ... ambitious objective. -- Hoary (talk) 04:21, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Thank you, I as a Bachelor of Journalism have used the primary source in the writing as a secondary source as referenced.
The language I will edit to reflect a less emotional and more formal account. 120.22.133.196 (talk) 05:30, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Hello, Devargo007. I am sorry to say that your draft is a very long way away from an acceptable encyclopedia article. We write in
a clear, informative, neutrally written prose style, in full expositive sentences and paragraphs. Your lead section fails to
adequately summarize the topic, and a reader who stopped reading at that point would have no idea that this pertains to the
Falklands War or that an important ship had been sunk in combat. You cannot assume that your readers are mind readers or well
informed about that war . Vast swathes of the article are unreferenced, forcing readers to either trust that someone who cannot
write an encyclopedic lead should be trusted to provide accurate content, without any evidence that you are summarizing reliable
sources. I recommend that you read and study Your first article, and modify your draft accordingly, once you fully understand what
you have read. Cullen328 (talk) 07:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Thank you , I will take this as a first draft and endeavour to write a more concise encyclopaedic draft. 123.100.146.129 (talk)
08:36, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Devargo007 You claim that the group photograph and a photograph of a painting are your own work. If the first is true, that
suggests you have a personal connection to the topic. See WP:COI for how to declare this on your User page. You are not
prevented from creating an article despite a personal connection. If you were not the photographer, what is the source of
the group photo? As for the second, a photograph of a work of art is a copyright infringement. As a separate concern, is
any of the content copied verbatim from the source, and if so, what is that country's law pertaining to government
documents being copyright protected? David notMD (talk) 08:49, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Thanks David, yes I’m am connected to the photograph , but it’s a stock standard Creative Commons image.
The painting is a commission by myself , I’ve credited the artist , Dave Coburn, I don’t see this as an issue?
There are no copyright laws pertaining to the Record of Procedure, I’ve referenced the main author Lt Nick Hawkins ?
regards 123.100.146.129 (talk) 09:04, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Simply, everything as young as this must be assumed to be conventional copyright ("All rights reserved") unless
there's explicit evidence to the contrary. The copyright holder of a photograph is the person (or organization) that
affixes this or that Creative Commons license to it. Who's the copyright holder, and where can we read about the
particular CC license? -- Hoary (talk) 09:44, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
 @Devargo007 FYI, uploading an image and labeling it "Own work" means that you took the picture. It can all get a
bit confusing. David10244 (talk) 07:30, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@Devargo007 It looks like you are not logged in to your account when you made some of your replies here. It's better if
you stay logged in. Thanks. David10244 (talk) 07:32, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Advice left on your Talk page about declaring your conflict of interest. David notMD (talk) 15:51, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

what should i edit so that my page gets approved [ edit ]

I submitted my page for review but it got declined . I cannot get it that whats the case about?

please can you help me solve it? Triman Ranvir (talk) 09:24, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Triman Ranvir Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not a place for people to write about themselves, please read the
autobiography policy. It is not absolutely forbidden, but it is highly discouraged, in part because people naturally write favorably about
themselves. My suggestion would be for you to go on with your career and working to achieve your goals, and forget about Wikipedia. A
Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable, there are good reasons to not want one. If you truly meet the criteria, someone will eventually
write about you.
If you still wish to proceed, you must set aside everything you know about yourself, and all materials you or your associates put out, and only
write based on the content of independent reliable sources. Any article about you must summarize what independent reliable sources with
significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about you, showing how you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person.
Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 09:50, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
OP now indefinitely blocked. Shantavira|feed me 12:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

template help [ edit ]

Could an admin/template editor look at Module talk:Science redirect#Edit request 2 April 2023 please? Thanks, greyzxq talk 11:29, 9 April 2023
(UTC) [ reply ]

What is the threshold for need to site "obvious" facts? [ edit ]

I'm currently gathering sources for a prospective page on the Marvel Comic Misty and it's thrown up a question I've been meaning to ask for a
while - at what sort of threshold do we need to find citations for 'evident' facts?

In this case the comic is frequently referred to as Meet Misty in contemporary sources due to the strap-line on the cover, but the publisher's
indicia calls it Misty, which is a minor point of trivia I feel would need explaining to show readers why an article on a comic called Misty kept
referring to sources that call it Meet Misty. For encyclopaedic reasons you go with the indicia for various reasons I won't bore you with, but the
long and short is comic nerds like myself will know what's what or at least be able to join the dots but potential normal readers won't.

As it's a minor point of trivia no source really bothers addressing the issue. But if you look at the covers, and look at the publisher's indicia it's
evident. We don't need to cite things like "London is in England" (right? =0) but at what point does it cross over to needing citing for something
that's inarguable but obviously a lot, lot more obscure. So would I need to find a citation for the above thing before putting it in the article?

Cheers for reading! =) BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 12:32, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

You might find Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue helpful. Shantavira|feed me 12:42, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Excellent, thank you! BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 14:30, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Hello, Boombox, and welcome to the Teahouse. It seems to me that there are two separate issues here.
One is about the name of the article. If the sources mostly refer to it as Meet Misty then that should be the name of the article, with Misty
being a redirect to it: in Wikipedia you don't "go with the indicia". Please see WP:COMMONNAME.
As for the other question, see WP:SKYISBLUE. General knowledge of something among people in the comics world is not enough, it seems
to me. However, I don't think you'd need a secondary source for the identity. ColinFine (talk) 12:43, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Thanks! Most sources was probably an exaggeration on my part; casting around there are probably enough referencing sites that use
the 'right' name that it can also be taken as the 'common' name, even if the coverage on those sources is less in-depth than others.
Though when I get to writing the article I will probably still address the issue, if nothing else to clear up any potential confusion as to
there being two books (like X-Men and Uncanny X-Men, etc.) BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 14:35, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Changing colors of a table [ edit ]

Could someone help me change the table color to purple for November 22? I don't know how to make it purple like all other squares in that
table. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_films_of_2022 Helpfulwikieditoryay (talk) 15:19, 9 April 2023 (UTC) Helpfulwikieditoryay
(talk) 15:19, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Helpfulwikieditoryay, I see that it's already been made purple, by an IP editor. Maproom (talk) 18:04, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Help with creating a micronation wiki page. [ edit ]

Can someone help me create a page about my micronation (Republic of Lipiev)? StanleySmom (talk) 15:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Is the micromation widely known? NotTriangle (t, u) 16:12, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
I doubt we can help you, but first you need to read Wikipedia:Your first article. Shantavira|feed me 16:13, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@StanleySmom. See WP:GNG. Per the guidance there, what are the three best sources you can think of? Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for
things made up one day may be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:18, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@StanleySmom Welcome to Teahouse! Many Micronations don't qualify for a Wikipedia article on English Wikipedia, but you may find
this other website useful https://micronations.wiki/wiki/Main_Page . Happy editing! ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:39, 9 April 2023
(UTC) [ reply ]
Agree that articles about micronations are rare, two that I know of are Principality of Sealand and Republic of Molossia. 331dot (talk)
21:58, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@StanleySmom: The only Google results are the official website and https://micronations.wiki/wiki/Draft:Republic_of_Lipiev . Both are
selfpublished (the latter by https://micronations.wiki/wiki/User:Presidentoflipie ) so it definitely looks like it fails Wikipedia:Notability and
doesn't belong in Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:49, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Actually, there are many current and former micronation articles listed at List of micronations, but most of those are adequately
referenced. David notMD (talk) 01:22, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Teahouse hosts are here to advise, not to be co-authors. If there are no refs for Lipiev, no article. David notMD (talk) 01:22, 10 April
2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

On-line reputation [ edit ]

I am in a chicken and egg situation. I represent a music society that was founded in 2006. It has hosted and facilitated 80+ intimate concerts in
Johannesburg. Since they were mostly mostly private affairs, very little online information, except what is available on Facebook, is available.
We would like to improve its overall status as a 16 year old organisation online. I need someone who can help me with the necessary steps to
publish a legitimate article on the organisation. I am a first-time publisher. Kalaharikudu (talk) 19:45, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Hey Kalaharikudu, are you sure your organization would satisfy the WP:NOTABILITY guidelines? It doesn't sound like it would, given that
they mostly cater to private events. 〜 FESTUCALEX • TALK 20:02, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
I did some research, a reasonable way forward for me is to contribute to article "Music of South Africa". Also, these events were not
"private affairs", they could be better defined as "privately hosted affairs, mostly open to attendance by the public". I since discovered a
similar French organisation who is featuring on Wikipedia, it is legitimised by a WikiProject about France. It also does not meet some of
the WP guidelines. Kalaharikudu (talk) 21:00, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@Kalaharikudu: Before you move any further, please read the guidelines at WP:SOAPBOX. We are extremely strict about those
guidelines for a good reason. 〜 FESTUCALEX • TALK 21:03, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Hello, Kalaharikudu, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that to improve its overall status as a 16 year old organisation online is a very
clear example of what Wikipedia calls "promotion", which is forbidden anywhere in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not here to enhance (or detract
from) anybody's online presence. Please put your effort to a site where promotion is allowed. ColinFine (talk) 21:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
[ reply ]
Teahouse hosts are here to advise, not co-author. Your draft, declined, at User:Kalaharikudu/sandbox has no references. Any content
must ber verified by independent, reliable source references. A search at Google did not discover any publications that could serve as
references. "Other stuff exists" is never a rationale for a non-qualifying draft. Given all this, I recommend you delete the content of your
Sandbox. David notMD (talk) 02:25, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Writing a Wikipedia BASH script [ edit ]

I want to write a bash script that notifies me on the desktop (using notify-send) when I have a notification on Wikipedia or when something
shows up on my watchlist. Is that possible? Is there an API I can use for that? 〜 FESTUCALEX • TALK 20:06, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Is Wikipedia:Syndication#Watchlist feed with token what you're looking for? Cabayi (talk) 20:23, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
@Cabayi: That's exactly what I'm looking for! Thanks. 〜 FESTUCALEX • TALK 21:00, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Wikipediocracy [ edit ]

Will taking part in discussions on Wikipediocracy result in sanctions/bans here on Wikipedia? Not a current Wikipediocracy user but may
register in the future. -- Shadow of the Starlit Sky 22:05, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Also, do Wikipediocracy users need to declare their use of Wikipediocracy on Wikipedia? -- Shadow of the Starlit Sky 22:08, 9 April 2023
(UTC) [ reply ]
@Shadow of the Starlit Sky no in short. But do not WP:Harass other editors. That applies whether on or off Wikipedia. ~
Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:02, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
No. You can if you want, and I'm fairly sure there are editors who edit both sites with the same username. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk)
08:06, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

I recommend not interacting with Wikipediocracy as they have been known to out Wikipedia editors. And as Shushugah said above
harassment applies on-wiki and off-wiki. Carpimaps (talk) 04:55, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Re-Using My Own Content [ edit ]

Can someone please tell me if I'm allowed to copy and paste material from one Wikipedia article to another Wikipedia article if I was the writer
of the first Wikipedia article? ThanksLJA123 (talk) 22:55, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

@LJA123 Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia Deals with this question. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 22:58, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
How did I miss that...I kept searching and only found copyright stuff. ThanksLJA123 (talk) 23:02, 9 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Cherie Bennett - edits about her death [ edit ]

Hi, I could do with more eyes on this in case I've taken the wrong action. I've reverted two edits to Cherie Bennett because they added
unsourced information announcing her death. On the one hand, I don't want to add to the stress of a family member who is trying to update the
article; on the other, I'm aware that we don't have proof without a published source (I've looked and can't find one). If anyone wants to revert my
reversion, or can find a reference to add, please do so. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 00:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

You did the correct thing. However, you could have pointed the family member to WP:ABOUTSELF for a way to verify the information.
Carpimaps (talk) 04:44, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

How to submit my first article? [ edit ]

Hi Wikipedia team, This is Lekshmi VG one of NEW INDIA ATTESTATION company member, we would like to submit an article of our page in
Wikipedia so we need to know few concerns on below listed: 1. What are the procedures to follow in submitting the article and how to submit? 2.
Is there any payments for publishing the article? 3. Do we need to contact anyone before submitting the article. 4. Is there future edit and
content add option to the submitted article? 5. How the evaluation procedures takes place for the article approval?

Hope for a fast and accurate message for the above concerns we have.

Thank You Newindia2023 (talk) 05:38, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Hello, Newindia2023. Please be aware that promotional and marketing activity is not permitted on Wikipedia, and neither are account names
that are company names. Please do not write as "we" because a Wikipedia account is for one person only. As an employee, you must make
the mandatory Paid contributions disclosure. Read the Notability guideline for companies, and also read Your first article. There are no fees
to publish. Because you have a conflict of interest, you need to write a well-referenced, policy compliant draft, and submit it to the Articles for
Creation review process. Any Wikipedia draft or article can be improved by anyone at any time. Cullen328 (talk) 05:56, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
[ reply ]
Okay thank you team, I will make the changes to the account name and will follow as mentioned. Incase of any clarifications will reach
out here, please be kind for helping me out.
Thank You Newindia2023 (talk) 06:10, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Physics [ edit ]

How the walking of a person happen in terms of vector forces ? 115.243.189.170 (talk) 05:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

The Teahouse is a place to ask and answer questions about editing Wikipedia. Please try the Reference Desk/Science instead. Gait
(human) may be of interest. Cullen328 (talk) 06:01, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Rejected article on the Brownian Snake (mathematics) [ edit ]

Hi everyone, I'm verry sorry to bother you with this, it just so happens that my article for a sophisticated mathematical object was turned down
and I'm not sure how to make it acceptable. The draft is here [[9] ]

The draft was turned down because "not adequately supported by reliable sources", but the two references I based it upon are academic books
of top quality, one of which is partly accessible on Google Books.

I'm a PhD student working on something similar and I believe this article would be an important addition to make to Wikipedia, in particular
because it would help people who just found out about this object to discover what it really is intuitively (I even made animations).

Any advice on how to make it acceptable would be hugely appreciated. Bobbywatsonicus (talk) 10:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Bobbywatsonicus, Draft:Brownian snake has two references for the statement "It has been extensively studied", one them repeated later;
but none in the longer sections of the article. Its attempt to explain what a Brownian snake is starts "Let be the space of càdlàg
paths from to ". That's pretty technical, but maybe I can manage − I clicked on the càdlàg link, and found an article about càdlàg
functions. Ok, I now know what a càdlàg function is. I've still no idea what a càdlàg path is, let alone a Brownian snake. Maproom (talk)
10:40, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Hello, Bobbywatsonicus, and welcome to the Teahouse. You'll need to ask Compusolus about why they declined your draft (not "rejected",
which would be saying that they didn't believe it was possible to make the draft acceptable): I have pinged them, so perhaps they will
respond here.
My guess is that it was because almost the whole article is unreferenced - you've cited two papers in the very first sentence, and that's it.
You have not sourced the detailed mathematics: is it all in one of your sources? If even part of it is your own development, then it is original
research, and does not belong anywhere in Wikipedia.
The other thing I notice is that your draft does not say anything about the development of the snake: who, where, when, how, and what it
drew on: in an encyclopaedia article about it those are at least as important as the content, and should be included and sourced.
Furthermore, if Li or Le Gall were involved in the development, then the references are not indepedent, and cannot establish that the
construct meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, which are about reliable sources independent of the subject.
I suspect that you have done what many new editors do, and written the article BACKWARD. First find the independent sources, and then
summarise what they say: that's all ColinFine (talk) 10:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]

Categories: Wikipedia Teahouse Wikipedia help forums

This page was last edited on 10 April 2023, at 10:48 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 3.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of
the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Mobile view Developers Statistics Cookie statement