Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Equal Inequity (talk | contribs) at 13:43, 1 September 2022 (General newbie question re images - rules on fair use/ the right policies to look at?: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


I have been reported with alleged W:NOTHERE in admin noticeboard.

Where can I have an independent, constructive discussion about this specifically with a group admins? The current discussion is full of false accusations about me, as well as reports of my behavior as problematic when in reality it was not. Ki999 (talk) 21:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: WP:ANI#User:Ki999 is WP:NOTHERE, a discussion involving multiple well-versed editors and concluded with an indef-block of this editor. DMacks (talk) 01:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Page creation blockage consensus

Take a look at the following links:
White privilege
Black privilege
They sound very similar, yet one of them is very extensive and the other one has been blocked from being created again. What is the reasoning behind this? What is the current consensus? I cannot find anything regarding this except some small debate about this from 8.5 years ago where the main argument for deletion was probably lack of google search results but this is not the case anymore, and that debate did not cover creation protection. I am not particularly interested with topics covered/to be covered in those articles, just want to improve my understanding how Wikipedia works. Ki999 (talk) 21:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Filter edits

How can I see the list of edits made by a specific person on a specific article? Ki999 (talk) 21:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Search by article name

How can I get the full list of the articles that have my search query on their names? If they have it only in content but not in names they should not be on the list. Ki999 (talk) 21:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: user blocked as per WP:NOTHERE. (see here) WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 13:00, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sources in another language reason not to be trusted?

I am in a big dilemma. Please help me. Yesterday I wrote the following comment on the article [1] I've been working on so far, quote: "Regarding the two wordpress sources. These have been changed with reliable sources. Regarding the commercial source. This was suppressed, not being necessary anyway, since it is clearly shown that the book mentioned by Borbely was published in France, being an additional reason for notability to announce the future appearance of a book. What I can't understand is something else entirely. This time I ask for your help as a user because I am in a dilemma.Entered the URL address along with the name of the person who reviewed, but also the title of the publication and the page where the review is located, thinking that it is enough. I did this because I understood that it does not matter that the reviews are written in another language. I thought it was easy for anyone to put the review on google translate and find out what is written there. The sources I indicated represent the most important Romanian cultural publications. I don't understand why you put the label with: "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified", once that the sources posted by me are reliable and especially can be very easily verified. Can you show me one source out of many that would not be reliable? The fact that those who have to give a solution do not want to read the sources on the grounds that they are in another language does not mean that the sources are not reliable. Those who wrote the reviews to which there are URLs are the most important literary critics of Romania, recognized as such by Wikipedia. Their reviews are in the most important Romanian publications. What is written in them shows facts that support Cerin's work. Each review clearly and unequivocally shows the book it refers to and claims special things about it. You just had to download them on any google translate and you would have immediately had the review in English. Let me understand that if I entered the titles of the books that the reviews refer to and two or three words about what they say, wouldn't you have translated the reviews to see what was written in them and would you have made the decisions only after some words? If you had translated them, why don't you translate them now and you would have exactly the same result? How can you say that the sources that lead to the reviews are not reliable once you have not even translated to see what is written in those reviews that the sources lead you to? Sorin Cerin is currently the most appreciated writer by the most important literary critics. The reviews about Cerin are not just passing passages, they stretch over pages of literary criticism, showing that Cerin is one of the most important contemporary writers. I wrote all this because Wikipedia asks us to let the reviews about the writers speak for themselves, thus reinforcing the neutral point of view. Once the literary critics write about Cerin's work more than laudatory, how can I show all this? Isn't it better for the reader to access the respective review and make up his own mind?. The dilemma is all the greater as those who write about Cerin have praised him. Asking me to write what exactly these literary critics write about Cerin would mean praising Cerin, even in the two or three words, a fact that goes against Wikipedia and the neutral point of view. Please also give me your opinions on those written by me" end the quote.

Can someone explain to me how to write the few words from the existing reviews about this author, but especially how to place the books that the reviews are talking about? Should I write next to each review the books it refers to, and if several reviews also refer to the same book, should I repeat the title of the respective book? When I mean how to write the few words about the review, I want to know if they can be laudatory as well as the respective review or not? If no, it does not mean that it does not reflect what is written in the review, and if yes, it means that I am breaking Wikipedia's rules regarding the neutral point of view. Thank you for your help.Bineart (talk) 05:10, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bineart, your first paragraph above is dismayingly long, especially if it's about Draft:Sorin_Cerin, which has very much less text. I therefore haven't bothered to read it. On to your second paragraph. I think that the relevant sections of the article Morris Bishop exemplify a decent way of using specific reviews to describe the books that they're reviewing (which isn't to say that those sections can't be improved). Neutrally summarizing laudatory coverage is neutral. Picking among mixed coverage, summarizing what's laudatory and ignoring the rest is not neutral. -- Hoary (talk) 05:49, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoary - Thank you. I took note of what you showed Bineart (talk) 12:26, 29 August 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Hello, Bineart. I, too, am having great difficulty understanding much of what you wrote. But I do see you asking whether references to sources not in English are acceptable. The answer is that yes, they are. For some topics, there are plenty of high quality English language sources, and they should be used in such cases. For other topics, the best sources are in other languages, and in these cases, references to non-English sources are perfectly acceptable. I hope that this helps. Cullen328 (talk) 06:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cullen328 - It is good news that references in other languages are also valid. Thank you for your message Bineart (talk) 12:26, 29 August 2022 (UTC).[reply]

@Bineart: As you have been told above, better keep your posts shorter, it makes them easier to read. However, I have tried to understand what you meant to say, and will reply also:
a) Yes, foreign language sources are allowed, just not preferred (see WP:NOENG). If you believe a Romanian source is WP:RELIABLE, you may use it. However, it is more difficult for most editors to evaluate whether a Romanian source is reliable – this is why Bonadea advised you to convert the bare urls to use Wikipedia:Citation templates (you have done this for some, but not all). This wasn't declined because the sources were in Romanian, but because the reviewer couldn't find out from the article what the sources say. It is your job as author of the article to present the information in a way that a reviewer can easily see what Sorin Cerin did, which leads to:
b) Do write out the "Critical reception" section as prose (see MOS:PROSE)! Write out what the reviews say; if they are indeed mostly praising, that info is not forbidden on Wikipedia. This would also help in understanding whether the subject really is WP:NOTABLE. He seems to have published a lot, but other people also publish many works which are never recognized – a reader should not need to click every single link and use google translate to find out about Sorin Cerin, that is not the idea if an encyclopedia article. (If you can find some review that is more critical of his work, that would also be great; but such "balance" (the WP:NPOV) is another issue, and you can solve it later.)
c) Not a question you had, but another point I want to add: Do you know what "Paco Publishing House" is? I couldn't find information on this publisher, and that might lead others to suspect WP:SELFPUBLISH. But it might be that the information is in Romanian, and I couldn't find it.
I hope that helps, but please ask again if you don't understand something. --LordPeterII (talk) 11:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@LordPeterII Thank you very much for the message that was really helpful. I will also look for reviews that are critical, not just laudatory. That's why I will delay resending even a few months, because I want things to be perfect. Bonadea is perfectly right when he states that certain descriptions are necessary. Until tomorrow, I will present them to you in small measure here as well. I'm glad that Bonadea is a doctor of philosophy like me. I teach philosophy at the university and I am a scrupulous person, which is why I ask that everything be perfect about this philosopher. The URLs that I posted in draft at Sorin Cerin refer to the most important cultural publications of Romania. The reviewers are the most important literary critics of Romania such as Cistelecan (considered by ro.wikipedia the most important contemporary poetry critic of Romania) Sorohan, Tupan, Borbely, etc., etc., personalities who wrote reviews on many pages about Cerin , as I said in prestigious magazines whose URLs I posted in the draft. The fact that they are prestigious publications also comes from the fact that most of them are also on en.wikipedia, being founded more than a century ago. Here I am referring to the magazines Convorbiri literare or Familia, etc. Regarding the fact that the Paco publishing house could be self-publishing. First of all, this publishing house has not existed for several years, the owner being deceased. Secondly, I read on Wikipedia notabiliy books that if there are important critics who write serious reviews, it doesn't matter what kind of publishing house published the book. Thirdly, Cerin also published in other publishing houses, for example in France, a prestigious publishing house, etc. Fourthly, critics such as Borbely or Cistelecan do not review only one book but refer to the entire work of philosophical poems by Cerin. Other critics like Tupan or Sorohan review several books. Please give me a few days to present the first finished draft, for which I am asking you very much to give your opinion if you think it is acceptable. Afterwards, I will look for critical reviews about Cewrin, not just laudatory ones. I want everything to be balanced. That's why it can take several months. Once again, thank you very much for your help. Bineart (talk) 12:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Paco publishing house was never self-publishing.But even, admitting that it would have been a self-publishing house. If the Paco publishing house had been self-publishing, there would still be no reason not to recognize the large number of critics who wrote about Cerin's books published at Paco. In this case, criterion 1 does it no longer apply to Cerin?, regarding the notability of a book comes into play. When I referred to self-published books, I referred to notability books[2], namely: Self-publication and/or publication by a vanity press do not correlate with notability. Exceptions do exist, such as Robert Gunther's Early Science in Oxford and Edgar Allan Poe's Tamerlane, but both of these books would be considered notable by virtue (for instance) of criterion 1. The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivia ] published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media reprints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.Thank You. Bineart (talk) 14:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I inquired about the Paco publishing house. I found out that Paco Publishing House was a traditional publishing house. The books were published at the expense of the publishing house. The Paco publishing house published authors who today are in en.wikipedia and who at the time of publication at the Paco publishing house were long deceased, such as Leon Tomsa, Gheorghe Pintilie or Stefan Foris, books published after the death of Gheorghe Apostol, from 2010, the author of some of them, and books from the Paco publishing house are also mentioned in other articles. All this proves that Paco Publishing House was a traditional publishing house and by no means self-publishing.[3] I could give you many other facts about the Paco Publishing House, which prove irrefutably that the Paco Publishing House was a traditional publishing house that published authors with the money of the publishing house and not with the money of the authors, many of them were not even alive when the books they had appeared in Paco, having died tens or hundreds of years ago. I don't think there can be another more eloquent example.Paco publishing house was, at one point, the only traditional publishing house in Romania. All the others demanded money for publication in one way or another. The authors were very carefully selected at the Paco Publishing House, where not just anyone could publish anyway. Only top personalities were usually accepted as authors at Paco Publishing House, such as great politicians, Gheorghe Apostol was prime minister of Romania, great writers, etc. Thank You Bineart (talk) 05:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I know I have written a lot here, but if you look carefully, each sentence expresses an idea. I studied very carefully the reasons why Cerin was deleted 16 years ago. I don't know who introduced it to Wikipedia then, because it had no serious recognition from any critic. Now he has a lot. I don't know why I have the impression that someone in the shadows wants to keep Cerin deleted by any means. Maybe I'm wrong, but if so? In time I will find out. I know, it is possible to create a diversion through all kinds of manipulations through which the Paco publishing house can be removed as a self-publishing publishing house. Even so, the publishing houses in France or Bulgaria that published Cerin, whose books were reviewed by important critics, can no longer be included in any diversion by any manipulator because there are concrete data about them. To be sure that I am not mistaken, that Cerin is not going to be the subject of any manipulation or diversion to keep it deleted, I want first of all to establish the status of the Paco publishing house. In the event that the Paco publishing house was declared self-publishing by manipulators or diversionists with the aim of keeping Cerin deleted, I would like to find out if the other articles or sources from the English wikipedia that rely on the books of the Paco publishing house will also be deleted. Anyway, I have decided not to work on the Sorin Cerin article from now on, not to write anything at all on this article, until the situation of the Paco publishing house is established as seriously as possible. I think there will be bona fide users who will help me understand what kind of publishing house Paco really is..Bineart (talk) 15:02, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Error in wikipedia article on the Trinity

There is no significant tendency among modern scholars to deny that John 1:1 and John 20:28 identify Jesus with God.

This is not true. An increasing number of credible Bible scholars are now saying that John 1:1 is a mistranslation. I would like the article to reflect that so as not to mislead others. Here is a credible source on the matter: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/kermitzarleyblog/2013/07/your-gospel-of-john-says-the-word-was-god-but-that-translation-is-really-quite-odd/

How can I make an edit to reflect this which will not be deleted? Tedw2 (talk) 17:54, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tedw2, and welcome to the Teahouse. The only way to get such an edit to stick is by citing a reliable source which says what you are wanting to add. Blogs are almost never regarded as reliable. Furthermore, since it is pretty clear that what you want to add is controversial, you are stongly advised to get consensus by discussing it on the article's talk page before making such an edit. ColinFine (talk) 18:09, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Tedw2. The author of that blog post is Kermit Zarley, a retired professional golfer with highly idiosyncratic and unorthodox views on religion. He is by no means an academic theologian or a recognized expert in translating Koine Greek. In short, his blog is not a reliable source. Cullen328 (talk) 18:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you failed to see that Kermit Zarley mentioned Phillip B. Harner who is a recognized expert and who wrote in the Journal of Bible Literature of Journal of Bible literature about John 1:1c being mistranslated. That is not a blog and is a credible source . In addition, the New English Bible translates it propery and was endorsed by · Baptist Union of Great Britain and Ireland
· British and Foreign Bible Society
· Church of England
· Church of Scotland
· Congregational Church in England and Wales
· Council of Churches for Wales
· Irish Council of Churches
· London Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends
· Methodist Church of Great Britain
· National Bible Society of Scotland
· Presbyterian Church of England
I am content to cite the New English Bible translation as a credible source and the Journal of Bible Literate. But then again, maybe you did see it and don't really care what the truth is. Unorthodox does not necessarily mean incorrect if Orthodoxy is wrong. Tedw2 (talk) 18:34, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus may be unable to achieve since this is a deeply held cherished belief held by many and , unfortunately, is based largely on translator errors. But I think Wikipedia readers have a right to know that the traditional translation may be in error ( based on credible sources) Tedw2 (talk) 18:40, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You have to provide a reliable source first. Quoting a biblical translation would be using a primary source to discuss itself. I'm not sure that would stick. You need a secondary reliable source, not blogs. --ARoseWolf 18:42, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tedw2, I analyzed the source you offered and established quite clearly that it is not reliable by Wikipedia standards. As for Phillip B. Harner, he earned a PhD in Old Testament studies from Yale, so he is presumably a far better source than Zarley, and the Journal of Biblical Literature is highly respected in its field. So, it is best to cite Harner and leave Zarley out of the discussion. As for your comment that maybe I don't really care what the truth is, that is an unjustified personal attack. I have spent 14 years working to improve this encyclopedia and help less experienced editors like you. Cullen328 (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I will add that whether Cullen cares what the "truth" is or not is irrelevant anyway, though I have been here long enough to trust their judgement when it comes to this encyclopedia. The reason it is irrelevant is because truth and credibility are not a concern of the encyclopedia, verification and reliability are. --ARoseWolf 19:02, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did not know truth did not matter. And credibility and reliablity seem like the same thing to me. Tedw2 (talk) 19:11, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately due to the no original research policy, we can't draw conclusions from the primary material. Are sources used necessarily accurate? No, and clarifying would have to be done at the source, not on here.
It could be useful for the blog post to mention the Journal of Biblical Literature, but in that case just skip the middleman and cite Harner directly. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
'But then again, maybe"
I said maybe not really an attack on you. If you are neutral and objective that is wonderful, but I noted you did not mention Harner in your first post. Zarley has also written a book on the matter. I don't think you have to have a PHD to be a expert on a subject. Thank you for you input, no offense intended. Tedw2 (talk) 19:08, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tedw2, why the heck would I mention Harner when I was evaluating Zarley's reliability? A blog post by an unqualified person does not suddenly become reliable if it mentions Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. Cullen328 (talk) 19:20, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think Zarley has been doing what he is doing for decades. I don't know what standard you use to determine reliability. The people who wrote the original text we are talking about had no PHD's. Tedw2 (talk) 20:22, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kermet Zarley: In the period between his careers on the PGA Tour and the Champions Tour, he wrote three [books on religion and world affairs. He received an honorary doctorate degree in 2001 from North Park University in Chicago, which has a lecture series named for him. Tedw2 (talk) 20:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And thank you for your feedback. Tedw2 (talk) 01:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tedw2, I neither said nor implied that a PhD is required but it should be obvious to anybody that a peer-reviewed academic journal article written by a guy with a Yale PhD is a far more reliable source than a blog post written by a retired professional golfer. Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources for the content guideline. Cullen328 (talk) 20:50, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, Tedw2, I would point out that reliability depends on context. A blog post by Zarley about how golf clubs changed their shape in the 1970s would probably be reliable, as a self-published source from a subject-matter expert. A blog post by the same person about a theology question involving translation across languages he does not know, less so. Conversely, if Harner had somehow published a discussion of golf clubs in a Journal of Biblical Literature article, it would be a rather dubious source for that topic.
The fact that Zarley published books on "religion and world affairs" is not relevant. Many people publish many books containing many crazy things; any decently famous person can publish the most random gibberish and it will sell decently based on the author’s popularity (and therefore some publisher will still accept it). Books addressed to the general public are usually not reliable sources to overturn scholarly literature.
Now, it may well be that your proposed change is supported by reliable sources. If that is so, cite them (and stop citing random people’s blogs). If you find it hard to read scholarly literature, well, that’s the game. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 11:18, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All the feedback is appreciated. I have made the correction citing Harner which is enough for men. Wikipedia users will now know that the most frequently cited verse proving Jesus is God is a mistranslation, and so they should. It should not be in just some obscure scholarly journal. Tedw2 (talk) 12:48, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Zarley probably considers himself more of an expert on Trinitarian doctrine than an expert on Golf clubs. Tedw2 (talk) 12:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is their pornography on the pages?

Why are editors allowed to upload pornography to Wikipedia, Wikipedia is supposed to be a site for everyone to use, Wikipedia isn’t pornhub. MinecraftFan23 (talk) 05:49, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Which specific pages are you talking about, MinecraftFan23? Wikipedia is not censored but content should serve an encyclopedic purpose and should not be gratuitous. You are correct that Wikipedia is not Pornhub but I very much doubt that you will find Pornhub-style content on Wikipedia. Be specific. Cullen328 (talk) 06:06, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See Help:Options to hide an image and Wikipedia:Content disclaimer. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OP indef'ed a s sock of NOTHERE user:User:Jurrasic kid Meters (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strange activity by user VickyBenz

I was going to report this at WP:ANI, but figured Teahouse might be a better place first (if I figured wrong and such cases belong to WP:ANI or elsewhere, please let me know).

I spotted by chance a user whose whole activity (I checked ca. 20 edits) is either changing correct grammar and punctuation to incorrect, or making unnecessary wikilinks (often self-referencing an article). My request to stop damaging WP seemed to have effect – there was no response, but this daily activity has stopped so far: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/VickyBenz

There are a couple of points I'd like to raise in this regard.

1. While many of his/her edits were reverted by now, many are still there – not because they are all good, but rather because noone noticed or doesn't care. I think all remaining edits must be reverted (I haven't seen a single good one, recent and first edits included).

2. Doesn't software which WP runs on include a utility which would analyze edits and report suspicious activity to draw attention to them, so a human admin can notice it immediately and cut it short, preventing massive damage as it happened with this user? Cases like spoiling grammar or bad wikilinking (at least self-referencing) are fairly easy to catch, after all, and a good tracker can cover much more than such trivial cases. 188.66.34.125 (talk) 07:29, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place for new editors to ask questions about editing.
Asparagusus (interaction) 13:05, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply, so did I seek help in a wrong place? Reverting all edits by a user is easy for an admin, I believe, but not something I can do. To the best of my knowledge, there are no good edits by VickyBenz *at all*; those which remain unreverted must be result of oversight or lack of article maintainers (anyone, feel free to review the edits on your own).
So, can anyone here handle this and revert the rest of edits, or should this issue be reported elsewhere (where?)? I thought reporting it at WP:ANI first, but I'm not sure it belongs there after reading the rule section. Help please. 188.66.34.125 (talk) 13:18, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that VickyBenz’s contributions seem to be incorrect. However, I see no evidence that they are vandalism (self-linking is a likely newbie mistake, the rest are probably non-native-English-speaker mistakes). As such, you definitely need to talk with the user first before reporting to ANI or any other place about user conduct (WP:AIV for clear vandalism).
ANI would be the place to ask for a mass reversal of all edits from one user. However, I doubt those would be approved in such a case because (1) it’s not really large-scale (I see ~100ish edits and three pages for which it’s still the current version, not really "massive damage" by the standards of what "massive" can be); (2) it’s not a hundred times the same edit with a clear pattern; and (3) the account has not been blocked for vandalism/disruption. Manual review seems both feasible and desirable.
Detecting self-linking could be done by bot, even though to my knowledge it is not done yet. There is a question of what to do about it (revert the whole edit? remove the self-link but leave the rest? notify the editor? etc.). In particular, cases like page moves would need to be accounted for. At any rate, you can definitely ask at WP:BOTREQ. Grammar mistakes are much harder to catch, and highly context-sensitive (for instance, you don’t want to fix grammar from quotes).
There are quite a few bots, tools etc. that try to do general "bad edit" detection. There is mw:ORES which attempts to score an expected quality of edits; it does nothing by itself but reviewers can look at only the "most likely to be bad" edit queue etc. There is also User:ClueBot NG, which does revert vandalism on sight, but is set to be rather conservative (according to the page, it tries to keep the false positive rate under 0.1%, which means it catches about 40% of vandalism). It would be fairly difficult for such tools to identify that wikilinking to the current page is bad (when wikilinking to another page is most often good). TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 13:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Most of Vicky's edits are tagged as Newcomer Tasks. I'm not sure if the Growth Team has an avenue to report cases like this where the tool leads to undesirable outcomes. @User:Trizek (WMF)? Encouraging newcomers to get involved is not bad, but if they are using a high-volume workflow, how do we gently advise someone that grammar is not their strong suit, and suggest other activities? ⁓ Pelagicmessages ) 21:01, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see that 188. has posted to Vicki's talk page and received a reply. ⁓ Pelagicmessages ) 21:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I hope User:VickyBenz will read this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Linking#What_generally_should_not_be_linked because this user overlinks too much. Migfab008 (talk) 00:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at some of their edits, and it seems that articles tagged for "unencyclopedic tone" or "reads like an advertisement" are included in the 'easy' proofread-for-spelling-and-grammar task. The checkbox is labelled "Copyedit (fix spelling, grammar, and tone)" Add links is the other easy task. So if a user doesn't attend to the task instructions, they might add links to an article that needs grammar fixes. And if they don't read the cleanup tag at the top of the article, they might "fix" grammar for an article that needs parts rewritten for tone. To be honest though, cleanup tags often need to taken with a grain of salt anyway. You can see the Suggested Edit feature by visiting Special:Homepage. ⁓ Pelagicmessages ) 20:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you everyone who took time to address the issue (although, to be honest, I hoped that someone would simply cleanup remaining damage). There's some hope now that the user will do it him/herself, I only fear that it can result in even more mess...

It occurred to me that the best option for such users would be getting a supervisor/mentor; not one merely answering questions, but one "watching" edits of a mentee so as to revert bad ones immediately and provide some guidance, and by doing so prevent massive content damage and teach newbies wanted and effective editing of Wikipedia in a shorter time span than in mentorless mode.

Can anyone here give VickyBenz pointers as to where and how to ask for a mentor, as I've personally never been involved in it and can't really advise on this topic?

Also left a note for Growth Team – I agree with Pelagic they'd better be aware of such cases and it's obvious we need more effective measures to prevent something like this from happening: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Growth_Team_features#Some_newcomers_need_a_lot_more_attention

And a question: I'm thinking of submitting formal proposals at Village Pump for introduction of edit analyzer and supervision for problematic newcomers; any pointers to what I should read first prior to posting there? 188.66.34.204 (talk) 17:59, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish Junior Cup Finals - List of attendances

There is no attendance listed against the 2005 Final Tayport v Lochee United at Tannadice Park Dundee. I was secretary of Tayport FC from 1968 to 2016 and can confirm that the attendance was 6,668. This figure is recorded in Tayport FC's match programme on 4th June 2005 Tayport v Linlithgow Rose. This programme can be accessed in Tayport FC's Programme Archive www.tayportfcarchive.com Thank You - Albert J.Oswald 2A00:23C8:6187:BB01:3DBB:2877:96A2:3003 (talk) 19:41, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is something that you think merits addition to the article Tayport F.C., then please add it there. Specify the published source. Don't just say "in Tayport FC's Programme Archive www.tayportfcarchive.com"; instead, provide the title and URL of the precise page (or PDF file) within this website. If you'd prefer not to do this, then please suggest the addition by writing at the foot of Talk:Tayport F.C. ("Start a discussion"). -- Hoary (talk) 00:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, if it's instead for Scottish Junior Cup, then either edit this or make the suggestion at the foot of Talk:Scottish Junior Cup. -- Hoary (talk) 08:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for answering my question. I want to send the cited article below via email, but I do not know how to properly copy and insert the link (mobile view) in a email message.

ttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carolingian_dynasty&oldid=1107241012 Jahquelyn (talk) 23:10, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hi @Jahquelyn and welcome to the teahouse! the link seems to already work which is probably all you need for an email link, although you might wanna add a "h" at the start ("https:// ...") to make sure it works. or, are you trying to get another link copied? 💜  melecie  talk - 00:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jahquelyn Welcome to Tea House! You can send the link as is (with the added h in the beginning), however if you want a mobile view of the url (the person recieving your email might be using desktop though), you can always search bottom of view for mobile view or directly prefix m (shorthand for mobile) before the wikipedia.org, for example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carolingian_dynasty&oldid=1107241012 ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jahquelyn: I suggest you just copy-paste the url https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carolingian_dynasty&oldid=1107241012 into the mail. Whether it becomes a clickable link for the recipient or they have to copy the url to a browser address bar will depend on the used email software or mail service. If you want to increase the chance it's clickable then send a HTML email with a link if your own email software or mail service allows it. Maybe HTML emails is the default for you. It varies how to make a link and you didn't say which software or service you use. Maybe there is a link icon with a chain. Maybe it happens automatically when you copy-paste the url. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

APNG size limit

GIFs can't display over 12.5 million pixels according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images#Consideration_of_image_download_size

What is the limit for APNG? Is it the same? Tallungs (talk) 01:39, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tallungs Welcome to Teahouse! This place is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. If you find a good source, you can add it to APNG. You can ask questions about topics at WP:REFDESK, specifically Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing instead. Happy learning and editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:50, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think you misunderstand. I am asking for a technicality regarding the wikipedia tumbnail system. Not about APNG in general. Tallungs (talk) 01:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tallungs please accept my apologies, and consider WP:trouting me. I didn't find a recent answer, but unclear whether APNG's are widely used on Wikimedia. See for example c:Category:Animated PNG which is rather small. I suspect low browser usage, with various fallbacks make it a non-reliable format for wide browser varieties. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. It's a very specific question. Apparently the gif size limit has increased to 100 million pixels. While this page indicates that APNG hasn't followed suit: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Animated_GIF_files_exceeding_the_100_MP_limit
I've updated the manual of style. Too bad though, since it'd reduce bandwidth a lot. Tallungs (talk) 03:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tigraan Thank you. I'll make sure to direct future questions to the more proper board. --Tallungs (talk) 23:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

a question

has anybody here heard of Battle For Circle? Somecoolguy12345 (talk) 02:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Somecoolguy12345: Welcome to the Teahouse! I had not heard of this, but found some information with a quick Google search. I do not see any mention of it in the English Wikipedia. Do you have a question about Wikipedia? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:43, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Battle For Circle is one of my favorite object shows
it has 20 circles and 14 episodes all named circle (BFDI has 63 episodes so far for comparison) Somecoolguy12345 (talk) 15:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Somecoolguy12345, do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? This is a place for folks to ask questions about editing. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:18, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
no not really Somecoolguy12345 (talk) 15:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How does one start a search for sources?

I'm about to start a search for non-primary sources to rewrite my article for resubmission. How do you go about searching for sources online and/or offline? Mcb mikeb (talk) 06:48, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcb mikeb: try the resources in {{find sources}}. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 06:54, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mcb mikeb: Welcome to the Teahouse! See also Help:Your first article#Gathering references. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mcb mikeb. I see no evidence whatsoever that Polydina Flynt is a notable person. It is not possible to write an acceptable biography without significant coverage of the person in independent, reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 17:06, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Explanatory footnotes

I added an Efn to Sam Smith, but I am unable to click on it when viewing the article. Any advise, anyone? GOLDIEM J (talk) 07:15, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GOLDIEM J, since your efn was the first/only one, you also needed this:[4]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:39, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers mate👍😀 GOLDIEM J (talk) 08:04, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Host notability

Hey, What are the notability criteria for a Radio Personality/Host. I only found the notability of American Radio host. What about other countries? Thanks കോട്ടയംകാരൻ (talk) 07:36, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@കോട്ടയംകാരൻ, WP:BASIC may be as close as you get. Note that your WP:RS doesn't have to be in English, see WP:NOENG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:04, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting a Draft

Hi, I wrote a failed draft a few months ago and I am looking for the best way to erase it. I am not the solely contributor to this draft so I am having difficulties to erase it, but it hasnt been edited in over 5 months. Any advice? SDC3021 (talk) 07:57, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SDC3021, you could just wait, drafts that are un-edited for about 6 months get delete-nominations by a bot. Or you can try Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article Wizard

I am trying to use Article Wizard. Why my draft continued to get deleting? Charlottetang2022 (talk) 08:45, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:KuCoin is heading toward Speedy deletion. Hyperlinks within the body of the article are not allowed, and the draft has no references. You can oppose the SD by clicking on the Talk page of the draft, but without references, it has no potential. Beyond my areas of expertise, but I believe that cryptocurrency articles have special requirements. David notMD (talk) 09:56, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@David notMD: As far as I know, cryptocurrency articles don’t have "special requirements" (i.e. there is no WP:SNG pertaining to them). They are evaluated under the WP:GNG framework.
That being said, my understanding is that specialized sources about that topic are usually not of sufficient quality for GNG (see for instance Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_273#RfC_-_CoinDesk_as_a_source). As a result, only things that hit the mainstream press (i.e. few of them) are considered notable. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 10:24, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not so much special requirements as general sanctions. Shantavira|feed me 10:51, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, when I looked at the draft it had what looked as if they'd been intended as references. It was just that instead of the usual pattern Assertion<ref>Reference</ref> there was the (of course unacceptable) pattern [URL-of-reference Assertion]. I shan't comment on the quality of these would-be references, or on any of the other issues here. -- Hoary (talk) 11:29, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Accidentally drafted my sandbox, can't put it back

Hi there! In an attempt to draft an article I was working on in my Sandbox, I accidentally drafted my whole sandbox, including the history for the entire ~8 months I've been using it (link). I tried putting it back, but somehow managed to make an entirely new Sandbox in the process and now I can't just move the original Sandbox back to where it should be. I read Wikipedia:Moving a page and Wikipedia:Requested moves, but I'm a little confused on where to put my request. Would someone be able to point me in the right direction? ItsMackie ( Talk ) 14:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ItsMackie! What you need is something called a WP:HISTSPLIT, something that takes admin assistance. User:PrimeHunter appears to have undone the page-move, not sure if he's going to do the split also. DMacks (talk) 15:21, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi ItsMackie, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm an administrator and have moved Draft:The Mortuary Assistant back to User:ItsMackie/sandbox. If you are the only contributor to the content then you can create a new draft page with content copied from your sandbox without attributing the source. A history split is possible if you really want the page history of the draft to show your individual edits but it's not necessary. Many users create drafts in named subpages like User:ItsMackie/The Mortuary Assistant. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All I wanted was for everything to be moved back to where it was! I thought I'd discovered some lovely shortcut to just pasting everything over, obviously that wasn't the result. Thank you so much for taking your time out of your day to do that. And @DMacks, thank you for pointing me toward WP:HISTSPLIT. ItsMackie ( Talk ) 15:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Correction and clarification

Hello! I would like to know if it is correct to use that Template: Family name hatnote especially the All others (A, not B) for the article of a personality with foreign blood (e.g. Sam Milby)? Then my co-editor constantly criticized me for having two accounts and if I did have an account, I rarely logged in because I was too busy with tasks that had nothing to do with the encyclopedia. Now how can I prove that what they are accusing me of is wrong so there are times when I am on hiatus due to being too busy as well as the depression I experienced that started 4 years ago which was made worse by the current pandemic. RenRen070193 (talk) 15:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RenRen070193, you seem to have got into a bit of a confusion here. (1) So far as I can see, most of your edits aren't using the family name hatnote template, but are using the plain hatnote template which isn't intended for names. The hatnote template, which doesn't mention family names, is used at the top of an article where there is another article with a similar article-name, where the reader might have found themselves at the wrong article. As a result, you are being constantly reverted by other editors. On a few occasions you have taken a valid specific name template such as the Philippine name template at Conrado Estrella III and replaced it with a hatnote (not the family name one) template, which is also unhelpful. I'd suggest you stop doing these edits until you've sorted out how the templates work. It's a good idea to assume that existing articles with name templates are probably mostly correct, rather than assume they're all wrong! (2) You're also clearly in a pickle at the moment with an accusation of editing while logged off, or under another name. Editing while logged off isn't actually necessarily wrong, but doing it in a way that might mislead people (for example writing something when you're logged on, and then supporting your viewpoint when logged off, so you sound like two people agreeing instead of one person) is wrong and will get you in trouble. Overall, to get out of both problems I would suggest (1) telling the world that you will stop editing foreign names and working with name format templates; there are lots of other useful things to do in Wikipedia; and (2) decide on one account and promise to stick to it (or alternatively, decide to edit only as an IP editor and never use an account at all). Generally the community here dislikes disruption, but can be forgiving and look forwards, rather than vengeful and looking backwards, if you can give assurances that you will not create problems. If you do want to carry on editing foreign name templates, I'd suggest strongly that you look at good articles as examples, listen to other editors when they give advice, and experiment in your sand box, and in the current situation it would help your case if you can undertake to do this. I am, though, very sorry that you're finding editing Wikipedia stressful, and I hope you find your niche. Hope this helps! Elemimele (talk) 16:34, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Elemimele I plan to give up my account on March 2020 but my plan was posposed due to pandemic and now I going to sign off permanently on December 2022. Should I retire my account permanently or not? RenRen070193 (talk) 02:47, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Only you can decide; just keep in mind that Wikipedia is nothing more than an encyclopaedia. Lots of people come and go, depending on how they feel about Wikipedia, and what's going on in their lives (being able to walk away from Wikipedia when things are going wrong is a useful life skill that I personally need to improve). But wikipedia is not a great resource for handling social connections. The talk here tends to concentrate on the edit, not on the editor, which is normally practical, but can feel bad when we're in need of human warmth and recognition. There are other, better places for that. In any case, it is best not to let Wikipedia become too important; it's only a heap of information. I hope you find a corner of it to which you enjoy contributing. Elemimele (talk) 07:02, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Elemimele Thanks for your advice. Now I pursue my decision to say goodbye to my account permanently. Imagine, I wouldn't last 10 years without all of you especially my co-editors, contributor s and most of all, our fellow readers. It's no need to wait for account to be deactivate at the end of this year unless some editors allow me to sign off. Thank you and goodbye! RenRen070193 (talk) 10:41, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Hello, RenRen070193. First of all, please search for help outside Wikipedia if you have depression or similar health problems. You do not have to keep editing Wikipedia (or even give a status update to other editors). Second, I notice from your post here, and a few other contributions, that your English is not easy to understand. I suspect this can lead to misunderstandings with other editors. Consider editing the Wikipedia version corresponding to your native language (I assume that is not English - maybe Tagalog?). (Also, having more than two native languages is already a rarity, yet your userpage states that you are a native speaker of no less than six languages, belonging to four very different linguistic groups; you might want to correct that.)
I will assume that your question is about names for people with multiple plausible nationality / origin backgrounds. I would say the answer depends on the culture to which the name is attached. In general, a hatnote is only needed if the name order would cause surprise to someone reading the article with an assumption of the English/Western name order.
In the case of Sam Milby, it seems to me that his name is clearly American, and therefore there is no need for a family name hatnote. I would be more concerned about mentions of him being "Filipino-American", which usually implies someone lives in the US after either they or their family emigrated from the Philippines. There, it is rather the reverse - he is American-born and emigrated to the Philippines. (The article says he "return[ed] to the Philippines in 2005" but that is a dubious way of saying it if he never lived there before.)
In the case of Ryzza Mae Dizon, you would need to present evidence that this person is most commonly referred to as "de Guzman" in English media. If so, the article should probably be moved, and all references to "Dizon" changed throughout the text, and then add the family hatnote. However, if English sources refer to her as "Dizon", no matter how incorrect that might be in Tagalog, that is what should be kept in the article. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 16:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Any sidebar template for Annual 12 months

While working on several "Romania in year xxxx" articles I see some with many events per month. Today, just for fun, I made a simple sidebar template here. There is the existing template {{BD ToC|deaths}} for births & deaths, but none that I can find for Events. Does anyone here at Teahouse know of such a 12-months template? Thought to ask here first before going to WP:VPT. JoeNMLC (talk) 17:45, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JoeNMLC. Is there a reason for a sidebar instead of the horizontal {{BD ToC}}? I have added some optional parameters to {{TOCMonths}}. Maybe you can use that. {{TOCMonths|title=Events|top=no|primary=false}} produces:
PrimeHunter (talk) 21:05, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Done - Thanks PrimeHunter for this solution. That "TOCMonths" is the best - it matches the look-style of Births & Deaths. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 21:14, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
fyi, PrimeHunter, I added first TOCMonths template [5] with wikicode {{TOCMonths|top=no|align=center}}. Dropped the "title" parameter as it was appearing in the top TOC as a second "Events" entry. It now shows default of "Contents" which is okay. JoeNMLC (talk) 21:55, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The example code also added an "Events" entry in the TOC of this page so I have added |primary=false to the example per Template:TOC top#Usage. I also added it in 2021 in Romania. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@JoeNMLC: I have added an |events option to {{BD ToC}} so now you can just say {{BD ToC|events}} to get the same defaults and options as for {{BD ToC|births}} and {{BD ToC|deaths}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:12, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: I tested a few articles for {{BD ToC}} with |events option. It works ok for article with "short" right column at top. When I added to 2000 Events section, it clears down until bottom of "tall" right column. JoeNMLC (talk) 01:19, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@JoeNMLC: {{BD ToC}} always adds {{clear}} at the end (going back to the creation which used {{-}}). I'm not sure why. It's probably rarely an issue for births and deaths which tend to be further down. We could omit if for events or make an option but first I'm pinging the creator Davykamanzi. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Late yesterday, I found article 2021 that uses {{horizontal TOC|nonum=yes}} positioned at bottom of the lead. This may be a better solution instead of trying to make BD ToC function for "Events". At this point, I've only updated a few articles & holding off on any deployment; open to suggestions/discussion. JoeNMLC (talk) 09:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@JoeNMLC: At the moment, you can test the effect of omitting clear with {{replace|{{BD ToC|events}}|clear:both|}}. It works fine for me if there is room to the left of the right-floating content. If the screen is too narrow then it moves down. It stays nicely to the left if inline-block is also removed: {{replace|{{replace|{{BD ToC|events}}|clear:both|}}|display: inline-block|}}. The {{replace}} code is not for permanent use but just testing. Clear can also affect births and deaths. 1966#Deaths has huge whitespace before the heading. That's currently because somebody added {{clear}} but they probably did because otherwise {{BDToC|deaths}} would have made whitespace in a worse place. (The births section should have fewer or smaller images but that's another discussion). Our discussion could affect many year articles so I have posted a notification at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#Template:Births and deaths TOC. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:15, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Creating an article

Hey, I've been sent here by User:Chris troutman in order to get a Wikipedia editor to create an article for a biography of a living person, to be more specific a tattoo artist. I am not quite experienced with how Wikipedia works but as said I've been guided a little bit by Chris Troutman. I was wondering if you're accepting this kind of service. I'm looking forward hearing from you. PinkWriter99 (talk) 20:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PinkWriter99: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! I looked at User talk:PinkWriter99 and read the message from Chris troutman.
Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, 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. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the artist, and determine whether the artist meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article (including writing in your own words), and be prepared for a process that may include waiting for review, rejections, and rewrites, before an article is created. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:12, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I believe you misunderstood Troutman's recommendation. Hosts at Teahouse provide guidance about how to do stuff but are not here to be article creators or co-creators. If no one mentioned it, WP:TOOSOON addresses fact that for some people or organizations/companies, there may not yet be published content ABOUT the person/biz, so not possible to get an article accepted. David notMD (talk) 22:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adding awards in another language

Hi, I work for a PR company and one of our clients in based in China-making them a Chinese company with U.S. operations. We have helped them develop their U.S. wiki page recently and they've asked if we are able to add some of their comapny's Chinese awards to the U.S. page. Is this possible, or am I only able to reference U.S. awards? 2603:8080:2001:EFF:9991:C597:7C79:F62A (talk) 22:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Register an account and disclose FIRST, then we'll talk.Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please tell us what the title of the article is? PICKLEDICAE🥒 22:56, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. From your description, it sounds as if you are engaged in Paid editing, in which case it is mandatory to make a formal declaration of your status, or else you are in breach of Wikipedia's terms of service. It also sounds as if you and your client have a (very common) complete misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is.
First, when you say "their U.S. wiki page", you presumably mean "English Wikipedia's article about them". This article does not belong to them, is not controlled by them, should be written neutrally, and is not for their benefit except incidentally. Neither you nor they should be editing it directly, but should instead make edit requests whcih uninvolved editors may decide whether and how to implement.
On your specific question: if the awards are significant (and not trivial marketing ploys, for example), and there are reliable sources confirming them, then they can be added to the article: the country of origin is irrelevant. Please (once you have made the mandatory declaration), raise edit requests asking for them to be added.
Please note that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 10:32, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mongolia - Genghis Khan

The spelling for Genghis Khan is Chingghis Khan. Possible to change the spelling? Nunu1499 (talk) 01:42, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nunu1499, welcome to the Teahouse. The English Wikipedia uses the common name in English sources. Chingghis Khan is rare compared to Genghis Khan and the Mongols didn't use the English/Latin alphabet so we will stick with Genghis Khan. You can suggest mention of alternative spellings in his main article at Talk:Genghis Khan but I suggest you search the archives first. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:21, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...by City

Are categories which are sorted "by city" allowed to include towns and other non-city Districts of England?

Or should a new category be created for the towns and other non-city Districts of England?

I find that there's a lot of non-Wikipedia websites and videos which include British places like towns, villages and even neighbourhoods in "British city lists".

And now Wikipedia seems to be doing the same, by confusing already confused mainly non-Brit people, into thinking that those non-cities are actually cities, just like with the county and region of Greater London which is not a city, has never been a city, and never will be a city, contrary to what Wikipedia claims.

I've looked at the following category page before and never noticed that it includes towns, because they've either been recently added, or most likely because I wasn't paying attention

Category:Films set in England by city

Those towns are Blackpool, Hartlepool, Luton, Oldham, Whitby and Windsor.

There's also the town of Brighton category which I was going to rename to the city of Brighton and Hove category, however that wasn't an option, so I redirected it instead expecting all the entries to move too, but they haven't, so could someone fix it so that Category:Films set in Brighton gets merged into Category:Films set in Brighton and Hove? Danstarr69 (talk) 01:56, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"The Greatest City in the World: What is London famous for?" Well, for one it's "the fourth most expensive city in the world". My point being that "city" can mean any of various things. (By a certain understanding of "city", London isn't one -- and plenty of other cities aren't either, Tokyo being a prime example. Whereas the entire island of Sado -- whose sources of income are farming, fishing, and tourism -- is a "city".) Maybe bring up your question on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject England? -- Hoary (talk) 04:13, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary no, there's only one definition of city in the UK for people who know what they're talking about, and those people are a minority like me. There's currently 71 cities in the UK, which will soon be increased to 76 cities.
The Office for National Statistics is the only official source for UK statistics on things like cities. All the other UK city "sources," mainly from countries like the USA, Germany, Ukraine, Anguilla etc talk nonsense.
List of cities in the United Kingdom
Why is it whenever I ask a question on Teahouse, or 3 questions in this case, I always get directed to somewhere else, where my question will no doubt also be ignored, just like my last 5 or 6 questions on here and wherever I was directed to?
I'll be re-asking whatever those questions were, when I can be bothered looking through my talk page at my archived Teahouse threads. Danstarr69 (talk) 04:47, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I imagine, Danstarr69, that you've been advised to ask elsewhere because the people who direct you believe that the destination is likelier than this "Teahouse" to be read by people who've already given thought to the matter you're asking about. Certainly this is why I have so advised you. Meanwhile, Chambers says: city noun (cities) 1 any large town. 2 in the UK: a town with a royal charter and usually a cathedral. 3 the body of inhabitants of a city. 4 (the City) the business centre of a city, especially London. I think you'll find that educated people in USA, Germany, Ukraine, Anguilla etc are just as able to comprehend the concept of polysemy as are those in Blighty. Your fellow-editors here are also likely to understand the benefit of adhering to a particular definition for certain purposes, as long as you propose this reasonably, sparing them bluster about alternative definitions being "nonsense". -- Hoary (talk) 06:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore to the above, Danstarr69: if you edit Wikipedia long enough, you will at some point find yourself in disagreement with multiple other editors, in a minority of one, about a point you are dead certain of. That happens. The solution is to step away from the keyboard, (optionally) yell to the wall that all those people are idiots, and drop the matter. It’s ok. Consider going through this without being blocked as a a rite of passage. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 15:24, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I learn how to edit?

Hi everyone I just joined Wikipedia and I would like to know where I can learn how to edit Wikipedia GNAA2022 (talk) 03:02, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse @GNAA2022:! Perhaps WP:FAQ/Editing may be useful. Sarrail (talk) 03:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@GNAA2022: there is the introduction to wikipedia. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 03:10, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @GNAA2022 and welcome to the Teahouse! If you click on your name at the top of the page, you should see a screen with all kinds of help tools. One of those things is a mentor. You can ask them for help. Happy Editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 03:32, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Humor Pages

Can normal members make humorous pages? Or is it limited to high level members / Wikipedia staff? Not because I'm gonna make one (I can't edit like... at all.) but it would be nice to know. 68.41.231.207 (talk) 03:11, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

i think you mean pages like those in Category:Wikipedia humor. you can make those yourself. also, do note that there is no such thing as "high level" or "normal" members here on wikipedia. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 03:21, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello 68.41.231.207 and welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, you can make a humorous page, just make sure you put the {{humor}} tag on top of the page. Happy Editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 03:26, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
also, you may only put it in projectspace or userspace. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 03:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Using this IP number, you appear to have made only one attempt to edit the encyclopedia. Here it is. I can tell that you have (or anyway had) only a weak idea of categorization. How about putting effort into studying categorization, or of course making constructive, well-referenced edits to articles, before attempting humour? -- Hoary (talk) 04:17, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't saying I would make one. Just curious. 68.41.231.207 (talk) 14:25, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Roaring Lion

Why do my editing changes get constantly undone! For example, the 'Location' of the Yousuf Karsh photograph of Winston Churchill should be where the image was originally photographed which was the Speaker's Chamber of the Speaker of the House of Commons in Ottawa, NOT in the Fairmont Chateau Laurier in the same city. There are two Wikipedia editors continuously undoing this fact. It seems widely assumed the 'original' of this photograph is located in that hotel. Wrong! The Roaring Lion topic is to discuss the historical facts of its creation. When 'peacock prose' notations are posted, the word or sentence is changed accordingly to the guidelines but for some reason is undone! Winone65 (talk) 05:18, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stop edit warring immediately, Winone65, and discuss the matter with Mr.weedle, Neveselbert and anyone else. And not here but instead on Talk:The Roaring Lion. (I notice that nobody seems to have made any attempt to discuss there.) -- Hoary (talk) 06:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I must say by the tone of your message, you and the two editors in question make trying to learn and willingly contribute to Wikipedia a rather unenjoyable and frustrating experience! Winone65 (talk) 06:33, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve left you a talk page message with some really useful links. Your work is not gone and it’s always available in the page history. You’re most welcome to restore it and add sources. I’ve no concerns with the content you’re adding, nor am I disputing the facts; correct citing and adherence to the Manual of Style is important. Mr.weedle (talk) 06:45, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Winone65, it looks to me that you are trying to insert content into an article about a photograph that may instead belong in the biography of the photographer. Maybe I am wrong but I am not judging the content. When your content is challenged, it is your job to gain consensus for its inclusion on the article talk page which is Talk:The Roaring Lion in this case. Cullen328 (talk) 06:58, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, Winone65, see the documentation at {{Infobox artwork/wikidata#Parameters}}: the location parameter should be filled with the Museum that currently houses the artwork, and city / general place in which the artwork is currently located, not where the image was originally photographed. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:17, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Search tools

Hi, I would like to browse a list of top importance stubs. I'm able to find Category:Top-importance articles and also Category:Stub-Class articles but is there a way to search for articles that belong to both categories? Thanks for your help. GuineaPigC77 (talk) 05:55, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GuineaPig. I believe that PetScan is your friend, though I've never used it myself. ColinFine (talk) 10:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, GuineaPigC77. One problem with your inquiry is that many articles that are categorized as stubs are not actually stubs at all. I have been editing for 14 years and have repeatedly run across articles that are in no way stubs but are categorized as stubs based on a decision made by a single editor 5, 10 or 15 years ago, with no attention paid to the subsequent improvements. I bump these articles up to start class or higher without hesitation but I am not actively looking for these miscatorizations. But they are everywhere. Cullen328 (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to both of you, much appreciated. And yep if it's really start-class that's fine too, but I see why the system isn't perfect. This gets me in the right direction, thank you. GuineaPigC77 (talk) 16:04, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What to do next?

I submitted an article "Draft:Adly Thoma" and got rejected (npov - Submission is not written in a formal, neutral encyclopedic tone). I got this comment from the reviewer (Purely promotional. See WP:COI.) I reviewed the tone and removed any promotional language, sticked only to sentences stating facts. yet the same rejection came for the second time with this comment (This is still promotional, and you have not responded to the COI query here and on your talk page.)

As far as I understand the COI comes if i have a relation with the person I'm talking about and I don't. I'm not sure what is the COI query mentioned or what is it that i'm supposed to do next.

Zamo icm (talk) 10:40, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Zamo icm Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I think the question has come up because you in essence posted Mr. Thoma's resume and accomplishments, which isn't necessarily what an article is for. An article must summarize independent reliable sources, not simply tell about what the person has done. If you don't know him, how did you come to write about him? If you have no conflict of interest, you simply need to say so on either your user talk page, or the draft talk page. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. I just wrote about him because of the impact his company is making. all what I wrote is referenced from the news, media and his public profiles. As for your comment about posting hisresume, I only emitadet the topics from similar personalities here on wikipedia.
In the Draft talk:Adly Thoma page I mentioned that. Is that what you mean or should I do it in a different way? Zamo icm (talk) 10:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Zamo icm That's why you are writing about him, but doesn't answer my question as to how you came to write about him; how did you discover the impact of his company? If you imitated other articles, the ones you are imitating are also problematic. If you want to use other articles as a model, use those classified as good articles. Please read other stuff exists. 331dot (talk) 11:05, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I got to know about him 1st from the media and attended a panel for him once. I thought he should be highlighted here as less impactful already have articles about them here. Plus I thought it was a good entry point for me to wikipedia Zamo icm (talk) 11:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Zamo icm. You say "referenced from the news, media ahd public profiles". Thatis a good start, but it is not enough. Just looking through your citations, it is obvious that many of them are not independent of Thoma. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.
One other point: "I thought he should be highlighted here". First, that assumes that a Wikipedia article is for the benefit of its subject: it is not, except perhaps incidentally. Wikipedia is not interested in whether an article benefits, or even hurts the subject, as long as it is a neutrally written summary of the reliable independent sources.
Secondly, in my opinion "he should be highlighted here " is in itself an indication of conflict of interest, whether you know him or not. In my view, we write and edit articles to improve Wikipedia, and if we have even a slight thought of wanting to benefit the subject, that is a conflict of interest. This doesn't mean that we should not do it, but it means we must take extra care to make sure we are writing neutrally. (This is a personal view, and broader than "conflict of interest" generally means on Wikipedia). ColinFine (talk) 11:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I get your point, however when I said "I thought he should be highlighted here" I didn't mean it to his benefit only, but in my mind Wikipedia mentions everything important and his work is important. So in a way in my mind it was for Wikipedia's benefit to include his work specially the his intellectual property initiative alongside his benefit too.
Anyway I get your point of a broader concept of COI. I want the article to be neutral also and I'm not in favor of being biased but again main main question is what's next? Zamo icm (talk) 11:45, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Zamo icm Declined (now twice), which is not the same as a more severe "Rejected." For "What's next?" I recommend a lot of cutting. Harsh, but I recommend deleting all of "Public Speaking, Panels and Judging" Ref'd or not, that is just useless download of CV content. David notMD (talk) 13:31, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Zamo icm You have uploaded a photograph of Thoma to Commons, which you apparently obtained from the website of geminiafrica.com, the company of which he is CEO. However, the home page of that website says that it is "Copyright © 2021 All Rights Reserved - Gemini Africa". This means that the photo is also under copyright and cannot be hosted anywhere on Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:24, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"List of pedophiles"

Why is List of pedophiles protected from creation? Suh a list would be very important for Wikipedia. 2A01:36D:1201:54A:C48A:D7CA:F13E:9EAD (talk) 11:54, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reason was left by the admin that issued the protection- quite correctly. It would be a WP:BLP nightmare. 331dot (talk) 11:59, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We do have categories like Category:People convicted of child pornography offenses and Category:People convicted of child sexual abuse. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:12, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And the latter category alone contains 372 articles. Lists are redundant if they simply duplicate the categories, as well as being impossible to maintain. Shantavira|feed me 12:31, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The deleted List of pedophiles was three weeks old and only listed five people. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The log says it has been deleted and salted since 2012. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:19, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I mean it was three weeks old when it was deleted in 2012. Just saying there was nothing established or valuable there. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:36, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. Thanks. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:53, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse lurker here. How can you tell if a page is salted? Is that the red box at the top? I mean no challenge remotely, just genuinely interested in the more technical side of Wikepedia Equal Inequity (talk) 12:21, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think lists like this are inherently problematic. Someone's name could be on the list, and surely many people share the same name (and maybe the same DOB) So we need geographical info or something to disambiguate, but some of these people might move, to escape a stigma, or be in jail, and if they get moved to a different jail, how do we keep up with that?
And if someone's name is not on the list but should be, what does that actually mean? It's messy. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:09, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Information Removed Problem

Hi Tamzin , Recently I removed an information from a Mallikarjun Kharge page [6]. But the same information has also been removed by another user [7]. Meanwhile, no user had added this information to the page. ( Was it some technical problem or some such problem happens to everyone ) PravinGanechari (talk) 14:37, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PravinGanechari Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You are welcome to ask your question here, but if you want to communicate with Tamzin directly, you may use their user talk page, User talk:Tamzin(perhaps you meant to?) 331dot (talk) 14:41, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi 331dot , It would not be appropriate to ask this question on the Talk page. This would be a problem with everyone. And the answer to this question can be expected only from senior admin . That's why I pinged Tamzin PravinGanechari (talk) 14:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PravinGanechari, there are almost no questions that require an admin to answer, and most of the workers here at Teahouse are not admins. Admins aren't necessarily experts at anything. They're just editors who have undergone WP:RfA, which confirms they are trusted by the community to use a few extra tools. There are any number of non-admins who are more knowledgeable about almost any topic you can think of than the average admin. Valereee (talk) 17:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry for the mistake I made by pinging And I won't make this mistake again. ( Tamzin mam, I'm Sorry For Pinging You ) PravinGanechari (talk) 17:35, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @PravinGanechari, an IP had made these unsourced edits in these two diffs: 1, 2. Kpddg (talk) 14:44, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kpddg , When IP added information. That's when I removed. After that no user has added this information back, yet another user has removed it. [8] PravinGanechari (talk) 14:59, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PravinGanechari, that is becuase, the IP had added this in many places in the article. First, only a part of it was removed. Then in a following edit, it was completely removed. Kpddg (talk) 15:00, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No technical issue. The content was repeated in two different sections of the article. Slywriter (talk) 15:01, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Slywriter , Yes , i just looked down[9] . the IP had added the same information in two places. I'm sorry for bothering you all. PravinGanechari (talk) 15:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, somewhere in the archives you will find me having this exact same confusion. In that case it was the prose and the infobox had the same unsourced information. Slywriter (talk) 15:43, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Slywriter , I have had this problem in another page. Now I have removed a source from one place and added it to another place[10]. But it is not showing on the source Porki page. PravinGanechari (talk) 16:25, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
sorry again. just after i updated the app (Google Chrome) the info started showing. PravinGanechari (talk) 16:30, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can this citation work?

Hello, I wanted help in understanding if I can use this link for citation - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Sustainable_Economic_Welfare for this page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Sustainable_Economic_Welfare for this part - The calculation of the ISEW in the United States from 1950 to 1986 was done by Cobb and Daly in 1989. Since it is not cited, I feel this link could be added. but I wanted to check if someone can check if it is alright to use as citation. Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 16:10, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ANLgrad. You're asking if you can use a Wikipedia article as a reference? The answer is a resounding No: see WP:Circular. What you can do is to use the sources referenced in that Wikipedia article - but ideally, you should not cite a source unless you've seen it yourself and verified that it supports what it is supposed to be supporting. If the information you want to source isn't itself sourced in the Wikipedia article: that exemplifies exactly why you shouldn't cite the article. ColinFine (talk) 16:22, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ColinFine thank you for helping. Yes, I was not sure, and felt I should ask here first because every time I have asked doubts, I have got very insightful replies. Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 17:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ANLgrad That article is poorly cited but the WP article on the main author of the index, John B. Cobb has much better sourcing, from which it is apparent that the citation should be to his book For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, Environment, and a Sustainable Future, which I found on Google books in the 1994 edition where you can search inside for "index" and find that the key chapters are 3 and 19. This is typical of the sort of sleuthing that needs to be done to track down "missing" citations: we usually have them somewhere if you look carefully. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:59, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael D. Turnbull wow that is an amazing find and observation. Great. I have a question here though if you can help with please. Will his book For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, Environment, and a Sustainable Future not have any conflict if we used that? ANLgrad (talk) 17:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ANLgrad I'm not entirely clear what you want to do. If you are telling our readers who first calculated the ISEW, then it is perfectly OK to quote the book as the WP:PRIMARY source. On the other hand, you may want to show that the index had an impact that made it of wide interest. In that case you need a WP:SECONDARY source that cites the book. The easiest way to find such sources is to use Google Scholar and examine a few those sources that mentioned the book. These are to be found at this URL. There are over 8000 citations, which itself shows the impact the book had. Which one (or more) of these you use depends on what point you want to make. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:23, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming an article

Can somebody rename the article Baby Ameya to Ameya Anilkumar. This is the original name of this child actress. For your reference, see Shalini. This actress was credited as Baby Shalini. 2409:4073:416:F257:0:0:1377:D8A5 (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@2409:4073:416:F257:0:0:1377:D8A5: We use the more commonly used name as the article title. See WP:STAGENAME. You should discuss on the Talk:Baby Ameya page. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:11, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HI, is there anyone who could help me to polish two articles?

They need in particular a more impartial language. I do not think to be able to do that better... Could you, please, help me? Gingeksace (talk) 23:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It would help if you told us what the articles are!! --Bduke (talk) 23:56, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that Wikipedia is not for promotion: "I think we should concentrate on that and help an author that seems making a honest and strong carrier earning a position." Best regards, User:Gingeksace.--Quisqualis (talk) 00:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

G47 Nenjiang–Dandong Expressway infobox error with the Chinese language

Hi. I'm trying to write "47", the route's number, in Template:Infobox road's "route" parameter. What this is supposed to do is autogenerate the expressway's full Chinese name, which is "嫩江–丹东高速公路" (Nenjiang-Dandong Expressway). However, since this is a new highway, the template fails to register, and instead, I receive the error message [undefined] Error: {{Lang}}: no text instead. The help page doesn't seem to be of much use, either, since that would entail having to modify the template itself, which I'm nowhere near experienced enough to do.

So what should I do? Dennis Dartman (talk) 00:27, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated for deletion. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I had an article marked as an X11 while not submitted for review

Hello,

So I have a draft article here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Duchess_International_Hospital - and approached the wikipedia help channel (https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.libera.chat/wikipedia-en-help?nick=MagentaZebra90) for an initial review and this contributor +Jeske_Couriano, immediately marked it as an x11. If I wasnt sure, I would have said this person (I really think it was bot, as the conversation was quite aggresive) did this cos the article was 'Nigerian' - and I dont want to think so.

So I'm hoping someone else can provide help on how to go about this; it seems this contributor/admin is obviously just wielding their power. After I had provided feedback on how aggresive and unhelpful this person was in providing actual things to be done, I had gotten this threat - "Keep it up and I will stop this source search right now and leave you in the lurch." Nuel Olatunji (talk) 00:54, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nuel Olatunji. If you go to List of hospitals in Nigeria you will see that there are 14 with Wikipedia articles, so not all Nigerian hospital articles are being declined. Most of those article are rather short, but the best ones seem to be: Lagos University Teaching Hospital and Imo State University Teaching Hospital. You may want to carefully study those articles to see how they are written, and what type of references have been cited.
I see that our article draft is being considered for speedy deletion, so I suggest you go to your draft article, click on the blue box stating “Contest this speedy deletion” and politely write that you are working on rewriting the article so that it does not read like an advertisement, and that you are searching for better references.
Writing a Wikipedia article is hard work, for there is a lot to learn, and it is best to first spend at least several months editing articles to gain experience before attempting a new article. I hope that you are able to improve your draft article. I have no knowledge about writing about a hospital, so I’m not able to help you with specific ways to change what you have written. Best wishes on improving your draft article. Karenthewriter (talk) 05:04, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

how do i create a page?

self-explanatory TigerMax1 (talk) 04:03, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @TigerMax1 and welcome to the Teahouse! You will want to go to WP:AFC and select "Click here to start a new article". It will guide you through the steps to creating a draft article and which once you are finished with it will be reviewed after a while. Happy Editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 04:21, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your draft Draft:M. Kai Manchester will not be acceptable as an article unless you can provide references verifying his notability as an artist. This means what people with no connection to him have published stuff about him. His Youtube and Twitter are not not allowed as refs. David notMD (talk) 12:26, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How blocking works

Few days back I was not able to edit. A message was displayed saying This IP address is blocked from editing due to vandalism. But yesterday everything was normal. And today it is showing like this. This IP address is currently partially blocked. Can anyone please explain whats going on here. I have done no vandalism. Then why editing from my phone got blocked. Why cant wikipedia admins block those IP users who cause vandalism. That blocking had nothing to do with me. 2409:4073:40E:E2E:0:0:10FF:A0A5 (talk) 04:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, your IP address is currently part of a range-block, even if it's only a partial block that effects just four articles. Although you have not done anything bad, someone else who also gets assigned IP addresses in the range yours is part of has behaved in a disruptive manner. That's collateral damage that can sadly be hard to avoid sometimes when it comes to IP editors. (One of the reasons why it's often recommended, even if not required, to create an account)
The problem is that which IP is assigned to you can change, sometimes frequently. This means that when your IP address changes, there is always a chance the previous user of it has used that IP to commit vandalism or other forms of problematic editing and got blocked to prevent further harm to the wiki. In addition, because IP addresses sometimes change frequently, there are times when it's needed for admins to block (part of) a range of these addresses to ensure the editor's problematic behaviour is actually stopped, instead of just continuing from another IP address (but the same actual person) in the same range.
Unfortunately, in all of these cases, there is a chance that someone else who gets the specific IP address afterwards—or in case of a range-block, someone else who gets assigned an IP in the same range—will also be blocked from editing, even though they aren't the person targetted by the block. However, sometimes the damage done to the wiki by not blocking is more severe than the harm done by collateral damage. Admins do try to keep the collateral damage as minimal as possible, but it can't always be entirely avoided. AddWittyNameHere 05:05, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, people can share the same IP, so a different person was definitely doing vandalism. You can request for getting unblocked on your talk page. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:06, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see. WannurSyafiqah74, I dont have that much technical knowledge. So I have one more question to ask. IP address is for a device right? Im editing from my mobile which means my phone will be having an IP address. If this is the case, why cant the admins block that devices alone so collateral damages can be avoided. Correct me if Im wrong. 2409:4073:41C:F221:0:0:25CD:90A5 (talk) 05:44, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's not possible - I don't think Wikipedia admins have overcomplicated, specifically coded technology to even detect someone's device. Read WP:UNBLOCK instead, and if you are done, use Template:Unblock on your own talk page, explain why and add your signature. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If they decline your block, you can easily avoid rangeblocked situations like this in the future by simply creating an account. Just remember that these can happen when IPs are used for long-term abuse. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:55, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is both not technically possible and would be forbidden even if it were, as MAC addresses can be considered personally-identifying information. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 06:41, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That too. I agree, by the way. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 07:11, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's important here to mention that the obvious solution to having your IP address blocked is to register as a Wikipedia user. You actually have more privacy that way. HiLo48 (talk) 06:48, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for inactivity, I'll try to not be rude at anonymous users next time

An old thread was archived, so I didn't want to reply again there. @Polyamorph I apologize for being rude a week ago.

P.S. I'll only watch out for ones that definitely are using Wikipedia for anything but factual writing. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:09, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@WannurSyafiqah74 Hello, when writing to a specific user, you may wish to start a new thread on their talk page instead. Thanks, Blanchey (talk) 07:26, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Is it okay to archive/remove this then? Whichever works. Will move this too, thanks. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 08:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Don’t worry, you can leave it here and it will be archived automatically at some point, if you want, you can always copy this message over to the talk page and say that you copied it from the teahouse, or just write a new message too.@WannurSyafiqah74 Blanchey (talk) 08:36, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did that. I might as well leave it here, too. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 08:44, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I remembered you can close threads. I forgot people can do that. Is that okay too? Or is leaving it here better? WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 08:45, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just leave it, this page has a lot of traffic and is archived pretty soon. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Izin Hash

Hello, somebody please create an article on Izin Hash. I can't create one. He's an internal model and an actor. Who is the main character in Nizhal (2021 film). There are so many international articles about him online. See,

The article Izin Hash is currently redirected to Nizhal film. 117.230.186.228 (talk) 05:32, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can make a new page at Draft:Izin Hash and add references there. If it doesn't get qualified for a mainspace submission, feel free to discuss why. However, you have to be wary articles can get deleted if they feel like they're WP:CRUFT, so please do mention you wanted to find citations, not to support on why your articles need to stay on Wikipedia. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 05:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If your article is voted for deletion, please remain civil and discuss why with the other users. Do not use your point of view to justify why the article should stay (e.g. "It's a good article on an Indian actor, so please keep it.") I know you're not active, but I figured I should say this. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 07:10, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request for unlock

Hello! Is it possible to unlock me in kk-wiki? An illiterate admin blocked me, because I asked him frequently not to input intentionally mistakes in articles and not to be jealous to other users' contribution. Ерден Карсыбеков (talk) 08:48, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ерден Карсыбеков You will need to make that request on that Wiki. Blanchey (talk) 08:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What 331dot said. And before you do that you could perhaps think about your actions and if you at any point stepped out of line. If so, you would have to address it and convince the unblocking admin that it wouldn’t happen again. Blanchey (talk) 08:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ерден Карсыбеков (ec) We cannot help you with issues on another language version of Wikipedia; each version is a separate project. You will need to request unblock there using whatever process exists there to do so. As a tip, insulting the admins here or there isn't likely to help you. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can't write there at this moment. --Ерден Карсыбеков (talk) 08:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ерден Карсыбеков As I said, we can't help you with this. If you are saying that you do not have access to your user talk page on that wiki, and they have no off wiki process to request to be unblocked, there's not much that can be done. Maybe a Steward could help(see this page) but I'm not certain. 331dot (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ерден Карсыбеков You could always email them? Blanchey (talk) 09:37, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can I use the Wiki logo?

Hello, I am producing a poster and am referencing what I found from Wiki in a search. I cannot copy 'black head and raised arms on white in an open sphere', but it would fit a gap and be appropriate. If I can, can you send a usable logo? ThirdCVS (talk) 09:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Financing of Wikipedia ? Tax-Deductible in UK/ Germany

As above, are financial contributions to Wiki.deductable in UK and Germany? ThirdCVS (talk) 10:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ThirdCVS I don’t understand what you are trying to ask. Explain in more detail please. Do you mean paid editing? Blanchey (talk) 11:25, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see what you mean about what you said above. I don’t think that I will personally be able to assist you on this one although I’m sure someone else will. Also, for future reference, it is a lot more easier for readers if you post your replies/additional comments in the original discussion instead of starting a new one. Thanks! Blanchey (talk) 11:27, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ThirdCVS. We can't give you legal or financial advice but since Wikipedia is based in the States I think that is unlikely. If you are donating, you might be interested to read about Wikipedia finances. Shantavira|feed me 11:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ThirdCVS I don't know about Germany but in the UK I think that the relevant policy from HMRC is this helpsheet on Gift Aid. That makes it clear that Gift Aid only applies to donations to charities based in the UK and EU + some minor other places. As the WMF is a US-based organisation, they won't qualify. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For Germany, I will stick to German: "Spenden an im Ausland ansässige gemeinnützige Organisationen sind nur dann steuerlich absetzbar, wenn der Spendenempfänger die deutschen gemeinnützigkeitsrechtlichen Vorgaben erfüllt und der Spender dies gegenüber dem für ihn zuständigen Finanzamt durch Vorlage geeigneter Belege nachweist." Essentially, it has to fit the German non-profit regulations and has to be certified. German tax law being rather byzantine...this could mean yes or no :). Lectonar (talk) 12:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ThirdCVS: Germany and the UK are not listed at donate:Tax deductibility but that only applies to the Wikimedia Foundation which runs Wikipedia from the US. The bottom of the page says: "The Wikimedia Foundation supports local independent chapters across the world". See https://donate.wikimedia.org.uk/ for Wikimedia UK and meta:Wikimedia Deutschland#Donations for Germany. They say you can make tax-deductable donations, or something which sounds equivalent for the UK. The chapters have their own budgets and spending. They may focus more on local matters. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As PrimeHunter says, by donating via the UK link you can use Gift Aid for the purposes of getting UK tax relief. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:28, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General newbie question re images - rules on fair use/ the right policies to look at?

Hi all. I'm sure this question gets asked a lot, and I may be being a bit lazy on posting the question here, but can you point me in the right direction for a basic understanding of Wikimedia policy on the use of images? Always looking for ways to contribute, images wasn't one I have explored as of yet but there are a few minor pages I've been editing or viewing that lack images I have realised I may be able to source. Copyright of course would be a big and understood one, but I'm not super clear beyond that? Many thanks! Equal Inequity (talk) 12:56, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Equal Inequity and welcome to the Teahouse. I suggest you start with Wikipedia:Images. Shantavira|feed me 13:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Right, the moment I posted my question I realised this was hopelessly generic and not much use for more specific advice so let me try to give a few examples of what I'm thinking of. Basically they all surround primary sources, about which some of the generic policies are a bit unclear. In all cases I'm not sure how I best cover bases to demonstrate right of use of images before uploading them to Wikimedia, or other factors I should consider before introducing them to a Wkipedia main page/offering to the community on a talk page.E.g.:
1. My partner used to be a photographer and has a bunch of (un-copyrighted and unused) images that I think could have merit and he'd be more than happy to donate.
2. I personally know a small number of notable people with wikipedia pages where those pages have outdated images/no images. I have never been tempted to edit those pages myself given the conflict of interest, but have an avenue to get better images - either from them directly or from myself with their sign-off for use of their likeness - and offer them to the community.
3. I also have some connections within museums, galleries etc. This one I think could be useful for some scientific pages in particular, again with relevant permissions and descriptions. Equal Inequity (talk) 13:43, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]