Wikipedia:Teahouse

Tenryuu, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2–3 days.

To read the newest questions, skip to bottom
About the Teahouse

Most recent archives
1226, 1227, 1228, 1229, 1230, 1231, 1232, 1233, 1234, 1235, 1236, 1237, 1238, 1239, 1240, 1241, 1242, 1243, 1244, 1245

Good movie websites

Elaborating on my last question, which is now archived, which movie websites would be good? IF you can, provide a list of good and bad websites. 3.14 (talk) 21:00, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the answers you got last time are adequate, particularly in view of the fact that you are vague about what constitutes a "movie website". I suggested Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic. Newspaper reviews from notable reviewers are also good. It isn't clear exactly what you are asking for if you have to ask it again in the same vague manner as before. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:04, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but can you provide the answers from last time? In all honesty, I might have forgot all of them. 3.14 (talk) 20:26, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1232#Slavitza Jovan translated. The answer from ColinFine below is much better, however. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:01, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. 3.14 (talk) 18:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 3.14. Have a look at WP:WikiProject Film/Resources. ColinFine (talk) 21:07, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, excellent, I wasn't aware of that comprehensive list. I never looked at that Wikiproject page before. @3.14159265459AAAs: at the bottom there is also a short section about sites to avoid. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:13, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen it before either, @Anachronist: I just had a hunch it might exist. ColinFine (talk) 22:09, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

چ 2.147.219.6 (talk) 12:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could anyone take a look at this?

Template:Did you know nominations/Europapa Sekundenlang (talk) 16:46, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, that's handled via WP:DYK. Please go there for more information about the process. 331dot (talk) 16:50, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sekundenlang It can take a few days for those who follow up on DYKs to get to new nominations. It is a bit unusual for someone not involved in editing an article to nominate it for a DYK but, no doubt, you had good reasons to do so. For what it's worth, I prefer the ALt0 to ALT1, as the former is more "hooky", IMO. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ALT1 is a reference to how Joost Klein wore Klein blue. - Sekundenlang (talk) 10:37, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resubmitting a rejected bio

After making corrections requested by the reviewing editor, I am ready to resubmit Draft:Cristina Eisenberg. However, the reviewer claims she is not notable. I disagree: she holds a named chair at a major institution, and she is the lead author on a major White House report in her field. Plus she is an Indigenous scientist, so including her can help address the gender and Indigenous gaps in Wikipedia. Can I make this argument somewhere in the draft so the next reviewer can see it? I don't want to risk this getting rejected again. Thanks for your help! Bodhipup (talk) 21:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was declined NOT rejected, rejection would mean no further chance, but declined means you can improve it and re-submit. Theroadislong (talk) 21:36, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great, good to know, thanks! Bodhipup (talk) 22:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Theroadislong, just to let you know that I clarified the bio to emphasize her endowed chair (with source) and added a paragraph (with source) to call attention to her federal-level leadership in her field. Are you the person who would respond to or remove the comment in the draft about not meeting notability criteria? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cristina_Eisenberg Thanks! Bodhipup (talk) 04:28, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article itself needs to state these details, with citations to verify them. Being an Indigenous scientist does not sound like a detail of notability, unless you can find a ref that discusses it (are Indigenous peoples rare or under-represented in this field, has she been profiled in a way that highlights this aspect, etc.). The article says she is, and we know about the coverage gap, but that's not a basis for inclusion if she's not actually notable for other things. DMacks (talk) 21:37, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The opening sentence states her Indigeneity. The details of gender and Indigenous gaps are not material for a bio, in my understanding. The second paragraph states her academic position, with citation. What more is needed, specifically? Bodhipup (talk) 22:34, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This helps, thanks! Bodhipup (talk) 23:44, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bodhipup. Notability, in Wikipedia's sense, does not depend much on what the subject is, does, says, or creates, but on whether independent people have published enough material about the subject. If somebody is notable in the ordinary sense of the word, it is likely that there has been independent material published about them, but not always. It is the writer's responsibility to find and cite those independent sources which cover the subject in depth. Source written, published, or commissioned by the subject or their associates contribute nothing. ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am following https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics), where it says that any one of the 8 criteria simply has to be verified by a reputable source for the person to be considered notable. #5 is holding a named chair. That is stated in the article, and a reputable source is cited. Bodhipup (talk) 22:30, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bodhipup I don't see a citation to a named chair, only one that says she is "the Maybelle Clark Macdonald Director of Tribal Initiatives", which I don't think is equivalent (and for which no Wikipedia article exists to show that endowment is itself notable). If you believe this meets academic notability #5, then comment on the draft to point this out for the next review. I think you should use named references. At present, many of your sources are duplicates. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, this helps clarify. Bodhipup (talk) 19:41, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, I just converted duplicate sources to named references. Thanks for the heads up. Bodhipup (talk) 04:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile view

Something changed within the last few hours. It used to be so if I was viewing a wiki page on my cell phone, and clicked the language button to go to a different language version, I would see the mobile version. Now I see the standard version instead. Batrachoseps (talk) 00:49, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the URL, it should read as en.m.wik... If you remove the m, it should revert you back to desktop view. ✶Qux yz ✶ 01:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but I hardly think I should have to do that every time. Batrachoseps (talk) 01:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

at the very bottom of the page, you can see the "desktop view" at the rightmost part, click it and it will switch the default view back to desktop so you don't need to keep changing it on the url. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 10:55, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out, I wasn't aware of it. To clarify, I was talking about when I was using a cell phone and wanted to use mobile view, but it showed desktop view instead. In any case, it doesn't seem to change the default view.

It used to be that it always redirected to mobile view when you were using a cell phone. Is that no longer the case? Batrachoseps (talk) 06:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check the links you are clicking. Usually search engines like Google will give you the appropriate version, however, occasionally it will flip-flop. Also, I believe that direct links brings one directly to the linked version, but I am not sure how that works on mobile. ✶Qux yz ✶ 11:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow, the problem has been fixed. It now redirects to the mobile version. Batrachoseps (talk) 16:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone make a page about “حي البحيرات“ in Mecca ?

Because right outside of it is Masjid Al-Taneem and it’s a place people go around by car before Hijra…

so… can somebody make article? Please? Bebo12321 - Talk 10:45, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bebo12321 well, yes, we all can make such an article but it isn't likely anyone will do so unless they are interested in the topic. We are all volunteers here. If you want to give it a try, I suggest you look at this general guide to the process and note that this is the English Wikipedia, so all our articles and titles need to be in English. Google translate says that the title might be "Lakes district (Mecca)". Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:13, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bebo12321: One place to request a page like this is on Wikipedia:WikiProject Saudi Arabia/Article requests. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration on edit?

How can I seek arbitration on an edit? An article about a song has endured the continuous reversal of a small edit, an edit that is based on a valid and substantive citation / reference. An editor added a detail to the article’s infobox, based on this source some time ago, and it has been removed a number of times by editors with little or no editing history. I’ve restored the small edit several times over the last couple of years but editors who seem particularly focused on this specific article keep removing this cited detail. Any help in settling this edit would be appreciated. 1987atomheartbrother (talk) 11:03, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@1987atomheartbrother Assuming this is about Yet Another Movie the standard process of collaboration (see WP:BRD) is to start a discussion with other editors at Talk:Yet Another Movie, which neither you nor anyone else has done. If that doesn't solve the issue, then proceed to dispute resolution. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:08, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1987atomheartbrother: if you do open a discussion there, you could start by withdrawing your accusation of vandalism. Here on Wikipedia, "vandalism" does not mean "expressing an opinion I disagree with". See WP:VANDAL for what it does mean. Maproom (talk) 15:32, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1987atomheartbrother Further to the correct responses above, your edit summaries, and your comment here, claim that the fact you seek to add is "cited", but you don't include a citation of any sort (much less one that is both independent of Carin, and reliable) in your edits. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:12, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maproom@Michael D. Turnbull@Pigsonthewing - I’ll start a discussion on the page shortly and am happy to initiate a discussion about the cited item. Any of the editors who have removed this reference can make their case there too, no problem (but they haven’t). The article cited includes perspectives from more than Carin. So I think it’s worth the discussion. Thank you. 1987atomheartbrother (talk) 23:12, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You again say "The article cited", and yet you did not cite any article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page of company

Hello this Rahaf Alansari from MAHAM Group

“We have been trying for the past three months to create a Wikipedia page for our company, Maham for Services and Information Technology in both Arabic and English. Unfortunately, each time we attempt to publish, the page is deleted immediately after submission. What is the solution to this issue?

It is important to note that this company is very well-known in Saudi Arabia, and the owner has made significant contributions to both the Saudi and Emirati communities. The owner is a highly influential figure in their field, with excellent relations across various departments within the Saudi Entertainment Authority. He holds numerous certifications and accolades, has many exceptional qualities, and is a self-made individual.”

This message clearly explains your situation while highlighting the importance and recognition of the company and its owner. 188.53.176.43 (talk) 11:15, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It does not seem that there has ever been an article titled "Maham Group", "MAHAM Group", or "Maham for Services and Information Technology", or a draft titled "Draft:Maham Group", "Draft:MAHAM Group", or "Draft:Maham for Services and Information Technology". Even if you can provide reliable, disinterested sources for what you say here about the owner of the company, this wouldn't contribute to the notability of the company he owns. As for the company itself, being "very well-known" also doesn't constitute notability. Have reliable, disinterested sources written about the company in some depth? -- Hoary (talk) 12:03, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rahaf Alansari. I suspect your submission is being deleted for being promotional. Promotion of any kind is not allowed on Wikipedia, which is an encyclopedia, not a business directory. Before trying again I suggest you read WP:BACKWARD and WP:YFA. Please note that being well-known, with significant contributions, being highly influential with excellent relations, having numerous certifications and accolades, and many exceptional qualities are all completely irrelevant to us. Instead we need to see significant coverage in multiple reliable sources completely independent of you or the company. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:30, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You asked your question without being logged onto an account. The IP 188.53.176.43 shows no activity other than this query. Have you created an account? Has your account received any comments on its Talk page? David notMD (talk) 12:57, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given your first sentence, WP:PAID applies. That means you are limited to creating and then submitting a draft to the AfC process (after declaring your paid status on your User page). David notMD (talk) 03:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse. In addition to what's been said above, please refrain from using LLMs to forge answers. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article Submission declined

I'm a new editor and my submission was declined for this reason;

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

How do I cite my sources using footnotes, and what does that mean. Here's a link to the draft: Draft:Isaac Damian Ezirim

ErinayoObialo (talk) 12:36, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You were instructed to see Referencing for beginners. That has instructions on how to format website references (your list) and how to insert those into the text. The ref software replaces the inserted ref with a superscript number and shows the ref under References. David notMD (talk) 13:09, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ErinayoObialo Note that for biographies of living people, the rules for using citations are very strict. You must back up every fact with an inline citation that directly supports the information. See that link for details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:13, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1) Find the end of the sentence that you are referencing, and place your cursor there.

2) Go to the button at the top of the editor that looks like a quotation mark. It looks like this --> "

3) Click on it.

4) Add your source link, or manually add it.

5) The source will appear as a bracketed number at the end of your sentence. But you're not done yet.

6) Click the button that looks like this ----> +

7) Click "more"

8) Find references list, and click on it. Move this down below your "references" header.

9) Make sure that in the future you search the swathes of wikipedia content that are out there specifically for learning how to make an article, there are a lot of good things out there.

10) Don't be discouraged, this happens to everyone at some point. Guylaen (talk) 05:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do you edit

I am strugguling 80.44.231.197 (talk) 12:55, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In your one edit as this IP you removed a section title and image from an existing article, now reverted. What were you trying to do? Are you also editing logged into an account? David notMD (talk) 13:03, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! See WP:TUTORIAL for a quick overview on how to edit. Sincerely, Dilettante 20:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Academic Subject Capitalisation?

Hi everyone,

I've been looking at the entry for Edwina Currie. In the section on her early life her entry claims that she studied for a degree in "Philosophy, politics and economics". Should politics and economics be capitalised? I don't want to "correct" it and annoy people.

Kind regards, Puffin123 (talk) 13:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Puffin123 That degree at Oxford is usually referred to by the acronym PPE but Wikipedia's article on it is titled in sentence case, so I would leave it alone. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:47, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Politics and economics are common nouns, and would not normally be capitalized. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:19, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If that's correct, why is "Philosophy" capitalised? It appears mid-sentence. AndyJones (talk) 12:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AndyJones Now corrected to "p". Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:25, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resume-like page flag removal

Hi there, I am a staff member for a scientist whose page was just flagged to be "like a resume". We are hoping to get this flag removed. I have checked the page against the guidelines and am not sure what needs to change. Everything on the page is true and written with unbiased language.

Here is the page: Bruce M. McLaren

I could use help figuring out what specifically to change so that I can go ahead and make these edits. Thank you! Danielpo22 (talk) 14:24, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Almost everything in the article is referenced with information published by McLaren himself or groups he is associated with. A Wikipedia article should summarize what sources independent of the subject have to say about them, not what the subject has to say about themself. Recon rabbit 14:33, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Danielpo22, I've removed the resume material. -- asilvering (talk) 14:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Danielpo22 If you wish to contribute to the article, then it is mandatory under Wikipedia's terms and conditions that you declare yourself as a WP:PAID editor in relation to that article, as you are a staff member. See that link for how to do that. Afterwards, you should not edit the article itself, owing to your conflict of interest but may make suggestions about content on its Talk Page. There is an edit request wizard to use which makes that fairly easy. Make sure you back up your suggestions with reliable published sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:41, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected the template error on their user page as a courtesy. --ARose Wolf 14:54, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Danielpo22 (talk) 14:58, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike,

I've undone my change in order to adhere to the guidelines. Now that other editors have removed the resume elements, I've made a suggestion to remove the flag. Is it possible you could go in and remove the flag now that it is changed?

Thank you! Danielpo22 (talk) 14:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of my major concerns when I first look at the article is that better than 95% of the 63 sources are all written by the subject. We want to know what independent sources say about the subject. --ARose Wolf 15:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I've just pointed out to you elsewhere, our COI guideline does not, as you claim above, mean that User:Danielpo22 cannot edit the article at all. Indeed, one of the ways in which it says that COI editors may contribute to is to "add independent reliable sources when another editor has requested them". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:02, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I appreciate you making the changes to the article. Is it possible you could remove the flag now?

Thank you! Danielpo22 (talk) 15:03, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making the COI declaration and reverting your removal of the flag. I haven't made any edits to the article as it is not really one of my interests. Others are now working on it. To my eyes, it is still quite resume-like: for example the first paragraph about McClaren's career is entirely based on his own website entry. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:12, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At Bruce M. McLaren a suggestion that Selected papers be reduced to fewer than ten. David notMD (talk) 23:38, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Forum

Greetings, is there a place to discuss AfD issues? An article about a company was G11-deleted last month, and the same author has created another article about the same company under a slightly different name. The new article still looks pretty promotional and non-notable to me but I was wondering if there was a place to go to get an experienced eye to take a look at it. Celjski Grad (talk) 16:45, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Celjski Grad: I guess you're looking for either WT:AFD or WT:CSD, although in this case you may be better off asking here. C F A 💬 17:02, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks CFA — the old article, deleted 23 July was 1440: The knowledge company for the intellectually curious. The new article, created the next day by the same person, is 1440 (company). Since the old article isn't accessible I can't compare them. I can also post at WT:AFD if no one here responds. Celjski Grad (talk) 17:11, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't qualify for G11 speedy deletion, because the prose itself is not wholly written in a promotional tone. Whether the article was created to promote the company doesn't really matter. As to whether the company is notable: I'm not really sure. A lot of the sources out there (and in the article, for that matter) seem to be reposted press releases, which don't count towards notability. There's this article in the Press Gazette and this article in Snopes, though, which may be enough to meet WP:NCORP. Nominating it for deletion may be the best course of action here to get broader input, but that's up to you. C F A 💬 17:28, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for taking a look. Celjski Grad (talk) 17:29, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I could compare them. The deleted article had the same content but with a lot of promotional language. That language was omitted in the new article although some original unsourced sentences remain. I have moved it to Draft:1440 (company) because it's hard to determine notability with all the citations to the company's own publications and press releases.

I also blocked the author for failing to answer about undisclosed paid editing; instead she simply created the new article. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking. The speed of approval of the new article was surprising to me given its history (and the author's talk page). Celjski Grad (talk) 09:15, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Silent Disco Origins and History - How to correct the record?

This isn't going anywhere, and the requester has ignored the good advice they have been given. The section is no longer being used to make a request for help, but as a soapbox. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:30, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I would like to correct the wikipedia page about silent disco, Silent disco more specifically the history of silent disco.

It has been a frustrating experience every time i look at that page and i try to share the truth about the origins and history of the silent disco.

1st, i claim to be the one that came up with the concept, before most of the entrances i see there. Only a fiction movie came first.

2nd, The attribution to eco activists the organisation of silent disco is false. They were not having a dance party or a disco with headphones, they were listening to life bands. NOT PARTY.

3rd, Saying that watching a Football game at a festival using headphones has anything to do with history of silent disco makes no sense. Watching a football or watching a life band, has nothing top so with disco.

4th, IT IS IN THE NAME - silent disco is a disco, is a party. It has nothing to so with football or concert

5th, The Walkman street dance i had with friends in Portugal is much more similar to silent disco than any of the above. Actually is not only similar, IT IS A SILENT DISCO. If a group of people dancing with their Walkmans / headphones is not a silent disco, then what the heck is a silent disco?

But even thou it is a silent disco and it took place long before any of the other events described in the article, it has no right to be there. Why is that?

Silent disco is part of my life history. I write about it here in German https://silentdisco.de/silent-disco-urspruenge-geschichte/ and here in english https://silentdiscotheque.com/silent-disco-history-origins-invention/

6th, So not only was the concept robbed from me by nico okkerse, now wikipedia since years does not allow me to correct the record.

Who are you to deny my life history?

Not enough sources? Well how can i have any other source if you keep since years denying the truth? Vibronix2 (talk) 16:48, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vibronix2: Welcome to the Teahouse. Anyone is free to edit Wikipedia, but claims need to be cited to reliable sources. To put it bluntly: Your random blog is not a reliable source. If it was, then anyone would be able to buy a domain, publish whatever they want, then use it to cite that information on Wikipedia. You may also wish to see Wikipedia's policy on promotion and Wikipedia's policy on citation spam. C F A 💬 17:17, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a random blog or blogs, that is my life story where i detail the origins and part of silent disco history.

So because it is my own blog or part of my life story and the truth about silent disco, it has no right to be there?

I see

How can the page claim to describe facts about the history of silent disco and me, the one that basically came up with it, has no right to be mentioned.?

40 years ago there were no smartphones to make pics of the events , you know that right?

Im also the one that brought it directly to the ears of the one that labeled and commercialized the concept, but wikipedia writes in the history of silent disco , a story about watching football with headphones? what the heck is that for silent disco?

Also wikipedia lie about the eco activists, they were not having a party or a disco. They were LISTENING to life bands. Spor the difference?

How can that be the history of silent disco?

The label silent disco was given by the guys in Netherlands, nico okkerse and thats why he also got the silentdsico.com domain

He was able to commercialize the concept after i shared it with him. Trying to get him as a partner.

See thats history of silent disco, not watching football or a life concert Vibronix2 (talk) 17:49, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is how wikipedia describes a silent disco

A silent disco or silent rave is an event where people dance to music listened to on wireless headphones

Having parties with walkmans in the 80s, like we did, is a rave with headphones.

watching football with headphones is not part of silent disco history

listening to a life band with headphones by eco activists is not a party. its not a rave.

the name silent disco originated in the netherlands not in some festival, like you describe in your article. it was named stille disco - silent disco in dutch. Vibronix2 (talk) 17:58, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vibronix2, you may want to read WP:Verifiability, not truth and WP:Reliable sources. Wikipedia only includes (summaries of) information (other than uncontroversial facts) that has been published in Reliable sources independent of the subject in question. Bear in mind also that sometimes two or more people come up with the same idea or invention independently. There is an old saying: "Steam engines appear when it's steam engine time." {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 18:37, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is only one person in the World claiming to come up with the concept of silent disco and a wikipedia page that distorts the truth. There is nobody else out there claiming to have birthed the silent disco. if it is show me?

There goes your steaming machine argument.

Ive been claiming it since years but every time i try to correct it in wikipedia, someone just keeps deleting it and in place lets the garbage that is there.

Your page correctly describes what is a silent disco, but then it goes on to present football game as part of silent disco history. Then it even spreads a lie of activists having a rave or party with headphones, when they were just fucking listening to a life band with wired headphones. how the fuck would they dance with wired headphones?

I dont have the connections or the money or the power to go look for reliable sources. To write a book or what whatever

Nobody documented me under 4 eyes sharing the concept with the dutch silent disco guys. NOBODY was there making photos of our walkman parties in the park.

So if i would pay a reporter on BBC 100000 euros to write the story then you would accept it as reliable source... wtf Vibronix2 (talk) 18:49, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any outlet what would write a story in exchange for a bribe like that wouldn't be a reliable source either. MrOllie (talk) 18:56, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you can convince the BBC to take a bribe, then yes, we probably would. But good luck with that. C F A 💬 18:57, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

see, thats what i mean, if the story show up on bbc then you dont complain, you would just accepted as truth-

knowing what i know about the silent disco, your page about it is just a shame.

It is spreading a lie since ever.

Just like that Nico Okkerse was spreading his lie for many years, till i told him to stop lying. Till i posted my articles in the pages i shared with you and send it to all his friends and workers.

Then he stopped spreading the lie that it was his brainchild.

But Wikipedia? well it keeps spreading BS.

Ok dont publish or mention my part of the deal but at leat dont claim that you know anything about silent disco story when you put a fucking activist group listening to a band as a fucking rave. get real Vibronix2 (talk) 19:09, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here more food for thought

the first silent disco parties as you know them now, happend in the netherlands in 2000s and were stille discos, then when it became international, it changed in silent discos.

see i know more history of silent disco, then your page claims.

the reason that i know it is because i been there all the way, since the 80s in protugal with our walkmans and then in the 2000s in the netherlands with the guy that stole my concept and commercialize it.

Thats the true history of silent disco, not the garbage false bs in your page Vibronix2 (talk) 19:25, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your question has been answered above. Random or not, a blog is not a reliable source by Wikipedia's definition. You need to find those sources before making those edits. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:37, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are no sources about what im telling you or what i write in my webpages. Thats the source.

Nobody was with smartphones 40 years ago taking photos of our walkman dance parties.

Nobody documented me sharing the concept with the silentdisco.com man

the wikipedia page does not even have the fucking basic story.

For example, why is it called silent disco, ? do you know, do your users know?

because it was called stille disco - silent disco in dutch

Why is it that the story of the name is not there? there are reliable sources out there about it

Why is a football game described as a fact in the history of silent disco, A PARTY WITH HEADPHONES?

Never mind, just keep your false narrative over silent disco... you win Vibronix2 (talk) 18:58, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only person besides me that ever was claiming to create the silent disco was Nico Okkerse, you still can see articles about it everywhere or from his achieved webpage.

The reason that you dont hear from him anymore about it? No he is not dead

The reason he stopped his false narrative was because i told him to stop. Because he knows i that i know and i was the only one person in the world that could tell him to stop lying

That is why you dont see so many stories about him claiming to be the papa of silent disco.

He had a free run for 10 years and then i said enough

But you wikipedia people need me to tell my life story to BBC or CNN and then is all fine

They are not the source, i am

the problem is that, that you have a big megaphone and everybody is coming to your page and spread the damn false facts that you put there as truth Vibronix2 (talk) 19:39, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been answered, numerous times, and you are basically saying WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT.

A source must be reliable and independent. Your own blog about your life is just your word and not independent of you. If the BBC were to perform actual journalistic fact checking about what you say, and report on it, then we'd use it. Otherwise, the article must rely only on what published reliable sources say, even if they disagree with you.

Your path forward, if you want to change what Wikipedia says, is to convince those sources to make corrections first. Only then can the Wikipedia article be changed accordingly. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no, its you that is not listening. You dont have to take my word for it or talk about my personal story or have other reliable sources to change the article.

This is how wikipedia describes a silent disco

A silent disco or silent rave is an event where people dance to music listened to on wireless headphones.

How can a silent disco be a rave where people dance with music delivered with headphones and your wikipedia article then go on to describe the history of the silent disco by naming the sources.

1 - describe a eco activist usage of headphones to listen to a life concert, not to distrub the nature, as a rave? Not only it say that it was a party, which is false in it self, a concert or life band is not a rave. THERE WERE NO people dancing with headphones at that Eco event. THEY were listening to life music. spot the difference?

2 - how is watching a football match while wearing headphoines a rave? but that is what you say its the history of silent disco.

3 - how is listening to a band or Djs, a rave or people dancing? but that is what your article defines as the history of silent disco

4 - you say that i need a reputable source to write about my story. Ok why is this a reputable source https://megduguid.com/section/149646-Dance-with-me.html what does this page be a reputable source and mine not?

5 - the term silent disco has been in use before 2005, it was in dutch. Thats part of history too or history is only history when is made in america?

is that the reason that https://megduguid.com/section/149646-Dance-with-me.html is a reputable source, because it happened in america and not in portugal in the 80s when the sony walkman came out?

6. what has the following to do with the history of silent disco?

As interest increased, more companies organize parties and provide events with wireless headphones. Some companies have offered home kits.

7. the fact that you dont have the guy that labeled this type of event silent disco claiming that he was the great creator of silent disco, is exactly because i told him to stop lying about it. He has all the right to be mentioned as the one that commercialized the concept. He stopped spreading teh lie of being the concept creator because it was me that told him about the concept and he could not destroy my truth.

If it was not me bring the truth to him, i am very sure that today, everybody would be praising him as the great creator. He was very effective at spreading story till the point i stopped him

Wikipedia history of silent disco is full of shit that does not belong there and what belongs there is not allowed Vibronix2 (talk) 07:34, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SUMMARY: Vibronix2 added a paragraph about origin, citing own blog. Reverted by MrOllie as not a valid reference. Separately, there is a lot above about what does not belong in the article (silent theater, silent street shows, etc.). A better place for that would be the Talk page of the article. I suggest this discussion here at Teahouse be closed and hidden, as it is not productive. David notMD (talk) 09:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correct David notMD‬. I got it, I cant cite my own blog as a reliable source. https://silentdisco.de/silent-disco-urspruenge-geschichte/ and https://silentdiscotheque.com/silent-disco-history-origins-invention/

But lets forget my story and blog even thou its a detailed story. Why is this own blog accepted as a reliable source? https://megduguid.com/section/149646-Dance-with-me.html why? What is in there that is so reliable?

where did you verify its reliability?

Iets go further

why is this part of the silent disco history?

A series of silent discos taking place in cathedrals and historic buildings around the UK and Europe was organised in 2024;

are you kidding me?

United States

Why is united states a part of history of silent disco, when the concept originated in Europe and there is nothing that reflects it? All i see in your article makes me believe the concept came from the US. is total garbage

Silent discos increased in popularity, and were depicted in television shows including NBC's....??? really

All the direction of this history article gives a false story of silent disco history. ALL OF IT

The term "silent disco" has been in existence since at least 2005 with Bonnaroo Music Festival ?? AGAIN USA

NO MAN, the term silent disco originated in EUROPE, in the Netherlands before 2005

All the article narrative is meant to give the impression that silent disco came from the US.

STOP IT! stop lying to your users Vibronix2 (talk) 10:11, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not say that (silent theater, silent street shows, etc.) dont belong in the article. You distorting my words.

What i said is that listening to a life band or a dj, is not part of silent disco history. It is not a rave, it is not a party and aas your article say, a silent disco is a rave with headphones.

What i said is that watching a football with headphones on is not part of silent disco history. Thats nothing to do with silent disco. Vibronix2 (talk) 10:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No no, dont turn it on me. It is you that is ignoring what i say and dont supply any answer to my questions

Why is this OWN blog accepted as a reliable source? https://megduguid.com/section/149646-Dance-with-me.html

The argument that you use to delete my section is that my blog is not a reliable source.

So what is it?

watching a football game with headphones on, is not a rave. Why is it in the history of silent disco? Why?

Why did the name silent disco originated in the netherlands but its USA that gets the credit for it? You wonder why silentdisco.com is from the netherlands and not from USA? NO`?

etc etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibronix2 (talk • contribs) 10:47, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can a page have multiple requests for page move?

Can multiple controversial moves be requested for pages including a page on which there is already a request to move is present? Could anyone suggest a solution? Neutralhappy (talk) 17:36, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Neutralhappy welcome to Teahouse! No, a WP:DISCUSSFORK makes little sense and can be disruptive. If you have a different target/proposed title, then suggest it at the original requested move discussion. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 20:57, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I would like to edit here, but I don't how to cite a source. Can someone please help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.29.178 (talk) 17:38, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! Try WP:TUTORIAL, and you might want to take a look at WP:REGISTER. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:00, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

reFill

What's up with the tool reFill? I get "403 - Forbidden" when I go to the site (https://refill.toolforge.org/). TwoScars (talk) 19:31, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TwoScars. WP:ReFill says: "If the above link is down, please instead use https://refill.toolforge.org/ng/" ColinFine (talk) 19:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can lists be nominated for DYK?

Hey there! I guess its' a big strange that a host is asking a question, but we've all got room to learn. I just recently had a list published via AfC, and so I was wondering if lists can be nominated for DYK. I quickly skimmed over the guidelines, but I never saw anything about it. Thanks! Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 20:49, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir MemeGod Learning and hosting are two-way process always! I would imagine not. For example, recently promoted WP:Good Articles can be nominated for WP:DYK, but lists cannot be promoted to GA. If a list becomes WP:FL, it can be nominated at Wikipedia:Today's featured list so I follow from that, that newly created lists cannot be nominated at DYK. It is not explicitly mention and perhaps criteria can be updated, but the fact that lists are excluded from WP:DYKPROSE further supports intent of criteria to exclude lists in my mind. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 20:54, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that makes sense. The prose would 100% be the biggest issue. Thanks for the help, I've been just around everywhere but to no avail, instead of preparing it for DYK I'll just work it to FL. Thanks again! :) ~~Man, we really need a good list rating.~~ Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 20:58, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Someone needs to write List of Featured Lists on Wikipedia and get that to WP:Featured List rating for maximum inception. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 22:54, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There may not be a point to a list article like that, given that we already have Category:Featured lists. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:07, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you can write a good "hook" for a list (and I cannot imagine what would hook anyone into browsing a list) then you should give it a shot for DYK. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible. I specifically remember List of individual body parts being featured on DYK. C F A 💬 23:10, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, unlike many other lists I've seen, that one has a lot of prose in it, so I can see pulling some amazing fact out of it for a DYK hook. Similarly @Sir MemeGod: your List of Illinois tornadoes might have an interesting fact in it for a hook. Give it a shot. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:24, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would something like "Did you know... that there have been ______ tornadoes in Illinois since 1950?" work? Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 14:40, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. Is the number unusual compared to surrounding states or to states in Tornado Alley? I looked at your list and it seems tornadoes are rare, although based on File:Tornado_Alley.svg Illinois doesn't seem to be unusual compared to surrounding states. If there's something interesting about a particular tornado, that could be used as a DYK hook also. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:50, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this permitted or a copyright violation?

This film/TV episode was very dear to my heart so please be kind. Can I make it an article, or would it violate copyright? TIA User:Allthemilescombined1/SandboxNo3 Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 02:17, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Allthemilescombined1: Wikipedia has many articles on TV shows. As long as you don't copy material from the show or other places, and write in your own words, it is not a copyright problem. RudolfRed (talk) 02:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may, however, want to make sure that it's notable. I have no idea whether or not it is. McYeee (talk) 02:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No doubt with good intentions, McYeee is sounding rather too kind. The first thing you must do, Allthemilescombined1, is to check that you will be able to demonstrate that Ask Me Again ("90-minute episode of the PBS series American Playhouse that aired on February 8, 1989) really is "notable" (as defined by and for Wikipedia). If it is, good; go ahead. If it isn't, the draft won't go anywhere. -- Hoary (talk) 02:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. Notability is, as you point out, really quite important. McYeee (talk) 03:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at American Playhouse, many of the plays that were in time filmed and broadcast on the American Playhouse TV show are subjects of Wikipedia articles. The better ones can be models for your attempt. David notMD (talk) 03:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I didn't think of that! Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 21:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Email and password is sockpuppet

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Email and password not have. has have only IP address information for CheckUsers 122.53.42.251 (talk) 09:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can Create new account as not a sock? Email and a password not bad? 122.53.42.251 (talk) 04:37, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you are asking. Multiple accounts are allowed in some cases. See WP:VALIDALT. If an account has been blocked as a sockpuppet, then that needs to be resolved before attempting to create any more accounts. RudolfRed (talk) 04:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are asking if "sockpuppet" is a good password, it is not. You can see some guidance for passwords at Wikipedia:User_account_security RudolfRed (talk) 04:41, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RudolfRed Hello why CheckUsers can see a email and password to accounts? 122.53.42.251 (talk) 04:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is they do not have access to passwords, only IP address information. RudolfRed (talk) 04:46, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RudolfRed have access to Emails for CheckUsers. this is last reply 122.53.42.251 (talk) 04:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not certain what you are asking, have you previously had a Wikipedia account? Tollens (talk) 07:20, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tollens im 0 Wikipedia accounts thanks! 122.53.42.251 (talk) 07:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ref URL Is Dead and All Archives Are Bad

On 52nd Oklahoma Legislature, this URL is used and is marked dead and has an archive-url but all 3 snapshots on Wayback Machine and 1 snapshot on Archive.today are of error pages.

How should the ref be marked if an alternate link can't be found? Vasusrir429 (talk) 04:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can always try to find an entirely different source to support the same content; there's no requirement that you replace it with an archived copy of the same source. In this case, my search turned up https://oksenate.gov/sites/default/files/2019-12/2009_legislative_summary.pdf, which on page 53 supports the information in the article. I'll replace the reference with this one. Tollens (talk) 07:47, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What's the hurry here?

I proposed a move for this article. It was closed by a non-admin within three days, don't understand what's the hurry here. - Talk:2012 Delhi gang rape and murder#c-Soni-20240820064100-Requested move 17 August 2024.

I'm unfamiliar with a relisting. Can anyone help in relisting this requested move? This abrupt closure appears like a hurried attempt. Thewikizoomer (talk) 05:50, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me like it was closed only after the consensus was already apparent. The snowball clause was applied because it didn't seem plausible that the conversation would go any other way. But of course, there might be extra information or reasoning that the previous participants weren't aware of and if that is the case, then a new discussion might be appropriate. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:18, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why the asssumption though, if we look at a similar discussion, multiple inputs are coming even now. So a relist would appear more appropriate I think. - Talk:2024 Kolkata rape and murder incident#c-2A00:23EE:1928:8C3:951B:C401:3A56:519A-20240816151700-Requested move 16 August 2024 Thewikizoomer (talk) 06:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're not in a rush you could always wait for that to be closed and then have a new precedent to work off of for a new discussion. Alternatively, if you want to solve for the general case then you could try for a Request for Comment. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting users who don't use edit summaries

Is there a way of dealing with editors that don't use edit summaries at all, and refuse to engage on their talk pages? The users in question are Captain Cornwall (talk · contribs) (97.8% with no summary) and Mauls (talk · contribs) (81.5% with no summary). I know at least Mauls is active on their talk page, as they engaged with another editor immediately after I posted there, but have ignored myself completely... any advice? Danners430 (talk) 07:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to the consensus policy, all edits should be explained. So you could try to nudge people on their talk-page (in a friendly way) to use them, trying to emphasize the positive aspects of using edit-summaries (linking to Help:Edit summary will provide some context). I do not think that there is a way to force people to use them, though, and I can't remember a single case where lack of using edit summaries alone has led to a block or such. It would probably fall on their feet when they try to become administrators, though. So my suggestion is: stay friendly, be positive, mention that we are a collaborative project, and using edit summaries is both useful and polite...but do not insist too much. Lectonar (talk) 08:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly I was actually involved in a case, not brought by myself I might add, where a user was taken to ANI purely because of their refusal to use edit summaries…! Not that I would want to take that course of action myself, I feel that’s too far… but just saying that I am aware of a case when it was done. Note that the result wasn’t any action, but the user undertaking to use summaries. Danners430 (talk) 09:09, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, but that's the the vicissitudes of life. And yes, ANI is a bit too strong imho, but in the end you must decide for yourself what to do. I gave my 2c, but I am known for using softer approaches when tackling things. Others may, and probably will, disagree. Lectonar (talk) 09:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Typically all I do is put a {{uw-editsummary}} template on the user's talk page. For completely nonresponsive editors who don't ever engage in communication on any talk pages and persist in never using edit summaries, they eventually get blocked. This is a collaborative project and they aren't collaborating or communicating in any way. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mass watchlisting pages

Hello there, Is there any way to mass watchlist certain pages in one (or not many) click(s), such as every episode article in a TV series, or every politician in a political party? Reply by VisualEditor is fine. Thanks very much! Mr Sitcom (talk) 08:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, sorry. -- asilvering (talk) 09:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I'll need to do a lot of clicking, then. Thanks for the reply! Mr Sitcom (talk) 09:19, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr Sitcom: I don't know if this helps, but you can edit the watchlist by simply adding page titles to it, via Special:EditWatchlist/raw. You would still need to know the exact titles you want to add, but if you can figure that out then this would at least save you having to visit each page individually to watch them. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:41, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr Sitcom: See Wikipedia:User scripts/List#Categories for scripts to watch all pages in a category. I haven't tried it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for your responses, I will take a look at the suggestions. Mr Sitcom (talk) 12:42, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My article has been Blocked for using a wrong Username

Hi My name is Tom Henderson (TomH300). I quite innocently made an error when I wrote my article on Vectar Project, by using the name Vectar project. I was asked to login as a new user (tomH300) and I now find that the page is still blocked. Can you please help TomH300 TomH300 (talk) 08:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, TomH300, there's no block. The draft remained at User:Vectar Project/sandbox. I've just now moved it from there to Draft:Vectar Project; you're free to work on it there. Happy editing! -- Hoary (talk) 09:10, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your help, Tom TomH300 (talk) 09:20, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See the note on your talk page about undisclosed paid editing. You must respond to that before you make any more edits anywhere. Bear in mind that if you are an employee of Vectar Project, or a consultant and they're your client, you are considered a paid editor even they aren't paying you specifically to edit Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Review Article

Hello is there any admin who can review this article Muhammad Ali Swati ? He is an famous award winning Pakistani rescuer. the articles included the strong rereferences from BBC, Telegraph, Independent, Arab News. Janabanigu (talk) 09:10, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Janabanigu, the article isn't under review. It's up for a deletion discussion. Unfortunately I don't think you'll be able to save it - we don't tend to keep articles on people who are notable for only one event. See WP:BLP1E. -- asilvering (talk) 09:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering thanks but he is a notable not only from one event but also more different things which are already mentioned in the article history, Janabanigu (talk) 09:20, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It has been marked as reviewed, but it is now nominated for deletion. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot yes i see . but, we can expand to add more references regarding the entity. The entity meets the GNG. Janabanigu (talk) 09:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "we"? 331dot (talk) 09:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

talk about the wiki editors Janabanigu (talk) 09:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References have been added after the start of the AfD, but the article is still about a person who was featured in the news for one event - rescuing people in a stuck cable car. His role in the rescue could be better described at an existing article about the event 2023 Battagram cable car incident. David notMD (talk) 10:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He is already mentioned in that article's last paragraph; this could be expanded, Janabanigu, provided that it does not become disproportionate in relation to the mentions of others involved in the rescue, which could also be enlarged on. We must not unduly promote one rescuer (with a related commercial interest) over and above the others. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 15:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Evaluation for the Account

Hi, Can someone please evaluate this wiki article Muhammad Ali Swati , might be this meets GNG. The person is a award winning social worker. He rescued more than 600 people during Naran Flood in August 2024 and also crucial role in the dramatic rescue operation of a group of children trapped in a cable car in the Battagram district of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, in August 2023. IN 2023 Prime Minister give him a award and also in 2024 he receives the High Achiever of Pakistan Award from the Current PM Shehbaz Sharif. he already setup South Asia Longest and World Highest Zipline in Naran. Janabanigu (talk) 18:42, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your question has been answered above. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:03, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shantavira the question is different, Janabanigu (talk) 19:09, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Janabanigu This will be determined at the current AfD discussion. You should contribute at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad Ali Swati if you wish to influence this, making the points you have made here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:01, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading my first article - question

Hi,

I'm trying to upload my first article - Draft:Titan Wealth - and I want to make sure it's going through the review process. I did click 'publish' a couple of weeks ago but I'm unsure if it's actually being reviewed, especially as it still has 'Draft:' in the title. Can anyone help me or reassure?

Thank you BLWright236 (talk) 09:20, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BLWright236 Hello. I fixed your link, the whole url is not needed. You have not submitted it for a review, and you lack the information to do so- I will add it shortly, but if you were to submit it, it is not likely to be accepted, as it just tells about the company and what it does. An article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company.

You must disclose your connection with this company- see WP:COI and WP:PAID. You claim that you personally created, and own the copyright to, the logo, and have made it available for anyone to use for any purpose with attribution. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Restarting mode

this is in restarting mode please help me work it out so that it can be normal 197.215.23.40 (talk) 11:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi ip user and welcome to the Teahouse! do you have a question regarding Wikipedia? 💜 melecie talk - 11:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this relates to the device/system you're using/viewing WP on, please contact the manufacturer (and/or their support line) or a computer-repair forum/outlet. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 07:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC reviewing of draft

Hi, Sir MemeGod here (again), with another issue that I have asked far and wide about but with no answer. I have been working on Draft:2020 Cookeville tornado, which I submitted and was recently put under review by a reviewer, but they went sleepy night night and haven't done anything since. It's been over 12 hours, and I have no idea whether they'll review it or not. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 12:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir MemeGod Wikipedia has no deadlines, in general. Given the reviewer has made a commitment and placed an "under review" tag on the draft, I think you should wait at least a couple of days before reaching out politely on their Talk Page if the review is not complete. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gelp

Hi. I made the requested corrections; is that okay?done. if that's ok, can you move it from this section?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Praeterintention Joseph77237 (talk) 14:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph77237 You have re-submitted the draft, so it has gone back into the pile to be reviewed. Meanwhile, you need to take a look at our manual of style since it doesn't conform to guidelines on bolding of section headings (we don't!) and other aspects. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:34, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Joseph77237 (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I made the requested corrections; is that okay?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Praeterintention

Hi. Joseph77237 (talk) 15:31, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I made the requested corrections. Regards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Praeterintention Joseph77237 (talk) 20:40, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question About IRC

I am currently a user who is blocked indefinitely on the Japanese Wikipedia. And now, editing the conversation page is also prohibited. Currently, I'm trying to ask someone to unblock the talk page with the free browser version of IRC, but it doesn't work. Every time I log in to IRC, the comments I wrote before that disappear. I looked at the guide on how to use it, but it hasn't been solved. In addition, it is currently not possible to see the past log. I can only rely on this English page anymore, so I decided to ask a question here. I understand very well that I am a sinful person, and I will try not to make comments excessively even after the conversation page is released. If you are familiar with it, please give me some advice. Thank you. チューボー (talk) 14:31, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are unlikely to be able to help you troubleshoot your IRC client. Fortunately, the guide to appealing blocks says that you can also use the Japanese mailing list. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 14:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The mailing list is too depopulated, and the hope of cancellation is low... チューボー (talk) 14:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would be very happy to ask users who have used IRC. Also, maybe it's affecting the fact that I'm using the free browser version now? チューボー (talk) 15:11, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are users who normally use IRC to achieve cancellation in the same way, so I understand that something is wrong. Anyway, it's a situation where I can't find any hope for the mailing list anymore. チューボー (talk) 15:03, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upon reviewing the archives, I can see that the mailing list is indeed dormant. My only other suggestion would be to try using a different client and internet connection. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 15:28, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll talk about the IRC malfunction, so I'd be happy if you could give me some advice.

I'm sorry for being so persistent, but in order to do something about my place, I have no choice but to get some advice here. Originally, it was because I repeated inappropriate behavior in the Japanese version, and I think it's a really brazen behavior. To be specific about what kind of trouble is occurring, first of all, I succeeded in logging in to IRC, but I don't know how to look at the past log, and every time I log in again after browser back, the message I posted in the past suddenly disappeared, and only "〇〇 participated in this" is displayed on the top screen. There is no one using the Japanese mailing list anymore, so I have no other means but IRC. I will reflect on my past behavior and definitely change the problems of the reason for the block, such as the lack of courtesy in the future. I feel that the fact that I'm asking a series of questions here is exhausting the community, but it's a really desperate situation... Could you please tell me the solution to the problem of IRC? チューボー (talk) 15:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Chupo. I know nothing about IRC. Perhaps there is something on WP:IRC that will help? ColinFine (talk) 19:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at it.Thank you very much. チューボー (talk) 21:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to know the probability that a user who has been indefinitely blocked due to a scandal will be reinstated.

Courtesy link: WP:Teahouse § Question About IRC

I haven't used the English version much, so I don't know, but I'd like to know how many users have been indefinitely blocked on English Wikipedia in the past, and then successfully persuaded other users to return after requesting the ban be lifted. Sorry for the silly question, but I've been indefinitely blocked on the Japanese Wikipedia under the name "Second Generation Chance Two," and as you can see, I'm in an extremely hopeless situation, as I can't even use the talk page. That's why I decided to ask this question. I'd like to hear from people who have dealt with many users who have been indefinitely blocked. チューボー (talk) 23:05, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure anyone will be able to give you an actual figure. In any case, it would probably underestimate the possibility of having an indefinite block lifted, since most people who are indeffed aren't trying to get their blocks removed. If you leave for a while, then come back later and apologize, you're quite likely to get a second chance. However, you really should not be using multiple accounts at the same time, especially when blocked. See WP:SOCK. -- asilvering (talk) 23:11, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. My current account was the first one I made for the English version, long before "Chance Two II."

So, just because I'm using different accounts for the Japanese and English versions, will I be subject to being arrested for using multiple accounts?

Can I avoid this by adding the words "This is the same as Chance Two II. I will no longer be using this account" to my "Chubo" account and then logging in on the English version under a new name "Chance Two II"? > チューボー (talk) 23:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A block on the Japanese Wikipedia isn't a block on the English Wikipedia. If your Japanese Wikipedia username is a global account, you are not globally blocked and you can still edit other Wikipedias. See if your blocked username on the Japanese Wikipedia works here. It is never a good idea to create new accounts after being blocked. However, it isn't uncommon to use different accounts on different Wikipedias, as long as you don't have more than one account on the English Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't create a new account, personally, but you can if you want to. If you do that, you'll want to abandon all of your old accounts. The important thing is that you're editing under only one account, not which account you use to do that. Making a note about your abandoned accounts on your user page to be up-front is a good idea. Don't use any account to evade a block or ban - so, for example, don't log on to Japanese wikipedia and start editing with this account, or you'll probably be blocked on ja-wiki on this account too. Don't repeat whatever behaviour caused you to get blocked on ja-wiki on any other language wikipedia, and no one else will have any reason to block you here or anywhere else. -- asilvering (talk) 23:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. I'm going to throw away this account and log in to the English version as "Second Generation Chance Two." チューボー (talk) 23:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) User:チューボー, the usernames you quoted do not exist. When asking questions here, please use a wikilink to link them, or if you don't know how to do that, please spell the pagename exactly as it appears, whether here, or on Japanese Wikipedia. For example, there is no such user on Japanese Wikipedia as ja:Second Generation Chance Two (talk · contribs), and there is no Chubo (talk · contribs) account here at English Wikipedia. So, please be specific about what you are referring to. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chubo is the account they're using right now, チューボー. I haven't gone looking for the others. -- asilvering (talk) 00:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but there was a problem because I used Google Translate. "二代目チャンストゥー" exists in the Japanese version. チューボー (talk) 00:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Thanks for that; yes, user ja:二代目チャンストゥー (talk · contribs) exists there, and from your Japanese user Talk page^{[in English]} I can see that you are blocked there, and lack talk page access. However, you are still allowed to appeal your block there, and the instructions are given how to do that. Mathglot (talk) 00:15, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I have two options, "IRC" and "mailing list", but the latter hasn't been used at all for the last few years, so by process of elimination I have no choice but to use IRC.

But there aren't that many people on IRC either, and I'm not sure if anyone will bother me since I've caused a lot of problems in the past... チューボー (talk) 00:43, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@チューボー, Well, whether if the IRC is that active or not, the Japanese Wikipedia and the English version of Wikipedia are different so you will have appeal your block with either of those choices given, as the English Wikipedia can't do anything about it.

In courtesy in Japanese: ここでは何もできませんので、日本版の方で控訴しないといけないです。 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 01:03, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since even conversation pages are prohibited in the Japanese version, I had no choice but to seek advice through the foreign language version. チューボー (talk) 01:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, "Chubo" is translated into Japanese as "チューボー". チューボー (talk) 00:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much to everyone for your valuable opinions. チューボー (talk) 01:12, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was unreasonably blocked on IRC, and I felt like I was being tricked.

I am a Japanese person who was blocked indefinitely on the Japanese Wikipedia, and I previously asked a question about IRC.

Since then, I have been successful in IRC and was able to talk to a user who I believe has the authority to block others, but as a result, that user has also blocked me from IRC #Wikipedia-ja.

At first, I briefly explained why I was blocked and what I would do after unblocking the conversation page, and added, "Please do."

In response, the user did not give any specific reason why he could not allow me, and simply refused, saying that there was nothing I could do on this IRC at the moment, given my history.

After that, when I made excuses again, the user further told me to "come back in a few years" and "leave."

So I asked, "What specifically is the reason why you cannot release me?" The user must have gotten fed up with me, because he blocked me without any warning. The individual user messaging function was not blocked, so I asked the user "Why did you block me?" and "Did I do something that deserves blocking?", but the user ignored me. I thought that was strange, but then I found out that the user had disappeared from Libera.chat.

So does this mean I was tricked? I'm sorry for being a bit persistent, but even if I was tricked, I'm very curious as to why such a user had the authority to block. Or is it just a stupid assumption that I was tricked? I'd really appreciate your thoughts on this, whether you're familiar with IRC or not. チューボー (talk) 11:11, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@チューボー This is the English Wikipedia. We cannot help you with any issues regarding the Japanese Wikipedia. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:37, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said before, I am currently blocked from Japanese Wikipedia and cannot even edit talk pages. This is an extremely urgent situation, so please understand that...??? チューボー (talk) 12:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We understand it. But there's nothing we here at English Wikipedia can do about it. If I could read Japanese (I can't) and really wanted to help, I might go to Japanese Wikipedia and try to find out why you were blocked there. But I still wouldn't have access to what happened on IRC. Maproom (talk) 13:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If even IRC has been blocked, there's no way to legally return... Should I just give up? チューボー (talk) 23:06, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can't stay logged in

When I log in, I click the "stay logged in for a year" box. Yet when I return to the site after some time I'm always logged out. This happens in 3 different browsers. In Firefox, which I use most, I have Wikipedia on the "always allow cookies" list, but it makes no difference. Reggie Pepper (talk) 15:03, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Reggie Pepper, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you allow cookies at both wikipedia.org and wikimedia.org? Is your browser set to not delete cookies when the browser is closed? PrimeHunter (talk) 15:29, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And are you using the regular mode of your browser(s), or is it possible you are using "incognito" mode (it may be called different things in different browsers)? This would also discard your cookies when you are done, and have the same affect as PrimeHunter alluded to. Mathglot (talk) 00:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete a category?

Hi, I found this Category:Triller and it makes no sense. It is not a category, as far as I can understand. If it should be deleted, how should I go about proposing that it be deleted?

I found Wikipedia:Proposed deletion but that does not seem to apply to categories.

Should I make a Triller disambiguation page for the useful information here? Isoceles-sai (talk) 15:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Isoceles-sai: I nominated it for deletion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 22#Category:Triller. Feel free to reply and add your reasoning there. C F A 💬 16:19, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ! Isoceles-sai (talk) 16:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not commenting on deletion but it looks like a normal category for Triller (company) and its activities. I have added a parent category and marked Triller (company) as the main article by sorting it under a space. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:30, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notability for a musician

Hello, I submitted a draft Draft:Waltteri Väyrynen to AfC for a musician of my favorite band, a prominent progressive metal band. I thought I had established notability through the inclusion of several reputable, independent, non-trival sources, but the draft was rejected for Notability. However, the musician and at least 2 of the bands he was/is a member of satisfy most of the "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" in the Wikipedia Notabiltiy (music) article. I cited sources, and even did not list this musician as a member of a prominent band which he was a member of because I could find no reputable, independent sources. The argument could be made that the subject of this draft is an individual member of a prominent band, and may be more properly subject to a redirect. However, part of the reason I created this article was due to the release of "Future material". The frontman of the band releasing the material has cited this musician as a direct influence on the sound of the release, and this band's past 6 releases have charted in the Billboard top 100. People may be searching for information on this musician.

I am not affiliated with this musician or any of his projects in any way whatsoever. I am just a fan who noticed the drummer of my favorite band didn't have a page. I am very new to creating and editing articles on Wikipedia, mainly because I don't have anything to add. This is the first time I've had a chance to really contribute, and I'd like to be able to.

Would greatly appreciate any thoughts on next steps here. Thanks. Zymologist (talk) 17:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy pinging the reviewer, @Utopes: TheWikiToby (talk) 17:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zymologist: Notability is not inherited from the band. Band members must have had significant coverage in independent, reliable sources that go in-depth about them specifically. Otherwise, they should be redirected to the band article. AfC reviewers expect the references to be in the draft in order to accept. Source 1 is mostly an interview transcript that mainly focuses on the band. Source 2 is another interview transcript with no secondary coverage. Source 3 is a database listing and is not reliable according to WP:A/S. Source 4 is another interview transcript. Source 5 is a reposted press release. Source 6 is another interview focusing on the band. Source 7 only offers a trivial mention of Väyrynen and focuses on the band. Source 8 is essentially the same content as source 1. Source 9 is a headline namecheck and a quote (not significant). Source 10 focuses on the band, not Väyrynen. Source 11 only offers a trivial mention. Source 12 is another interview transcript. Sources 13-16 are all non-independent. Basically, we're looking for independent significant coverage about Väyrynen, not the band. WP:AFCHD is generally a better place for AfC questions. C F A 💬 18:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your time. Zymologist (talk) 19:37, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is self-published work a reliable and usable source of info about themselves?

There is a dispute at Talk:Microsoft_Windows#Privacy_features_addition_reverted and I'm looking for a second opinion. Is self-published work a reliable and usable source of info about themselves, such as "Person X says"? ("about themselves" include their personal view of other people or matters, whether it's explicitly stated, as in "I believe that" or not)

According to case 3 of Wikipedia:Identifying_and_using_self-published_works#Acceptable_use_of_self-published_works the answer to the question is yes. (the statement concerns the source itself) An example is given there: "For example, for the statement "The organization purchased full-page advertisements in major newspapers advocating gun control," the advertisement(s) in question could be cited as sources, even though advertisements are self-published."

The concrete case is this: Digital Confidence, a software company in the field of metadata stripping, has published in its official website an analysis of the built-in metadata stripper in Windows. This is a self-published work and therefore cannot be used as a source for the assertions made in the analysis. But I think it can certainly be used as a source for the simple fact that Digital Confidence has published such analysis. So Wikipedia cannot say that "the built-in metadata stripper is flawed", but it can definitely say that "According to Digital Confidence, the built-in metadata stripper is flawed", and use the analysis on Digital Confidence website as a reliable source for this statement. Another editor thinks I'm wrong. Any more thoughts would be appreciated. Sovmeeya (talk) 18:22, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sovmeeya. I haven't looked at the dispute, but from your description above, I agree with you.

However, dispute resolution isn't about proving that you're right and another person is wrong: it's about how you can collaboratively come to a consensus. ColinFine (talk) 19:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, this amounts to 'Company A (who sells a competing product) has criticized Company B's product' in an article about Company B's product. MrOllie (talk) 22:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sovmeeya, you're correct, the source could be used in that way and is reliable for a statement like "according to Digital Confidence, the built-in metadata stripper is flawed". But just because it's reliable doesn't mean we ought to say it. Many times, the question comes down to WP:DUE. You may want to try listing the issue at WP:3O for an uninvolved third editor to have a better look and provide their opinion. -- asilvering (talk) 23:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Filter

I attempted to edit an Article, but the Filter didn't publish my edit. What should I do? Cagliari in Serie A (talk) 19:15, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You blanked an article and replaced it with "uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu" which the filter caught and stopped. What you should do is stop making unconstructive edits. C F A 💬 19:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CFA Now I was patrolling recent changes! Cagliari in Serie A (talk) 19:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cagliari in Serie A is globally locked. Cullen328 (talk) 20:19, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FTP URLs

When we link to FTP URLs, should we generally also link to HTTP archives of them. Given the general lack of browser support I expected that IAbot would do this, but it doesn't. In the article Code page 775, I'd like to add archives to the sources cited as "Code Page CPGID 00775 (pdf), IBM" and "Code Page CPGID 00775 (txt), IBM", but since IAbot didn't do it I thought I'd ask here. If the consensus is to include the archives, is there a bot that can do it? McYeee (talk) 19:16, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is established consensus on this, but in my experience fixing bare URLs, FTP links seem to die the quickest. An HTTP archive would be fine, or you could just replace the FTP link with an HTTP one altogether. C F A 💬 19:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The URLs aren't bare in the articles I'm looking at, but I'll swap them anyways. There doesn't appear to be much of a consistent citation style. McYeee (talk) 19:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No Box to Publish Article

Hi, I'd like to publish my article Draft:List of circus accidents. It doesn't have the box at the top that usually allows you to submit it for review. I originally created Draft:List of fatal circus accidents, but wanted to change the name when I widened my scope. Since I couldn't figure out how to do so, I just made a new page. I don't know how to delete the one I no longer want, but it does have the correct box at the top. How can I submit the correct one for revision? Thanks! Gnat8 (talk) 20:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the submission template; if you use the article wizard I believe it's provided automatically, but you can add {{subst:AFC draft}} to a draft if need be. 331dot (talk) 20:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Submitted, thanks! Gnat8 (talk) 20:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Next time you can't find a submit button, please feel free to try the AfC submission wizard. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gnat8, I notice there are some obviously unreliable sources in the references. You should have another read of WP:RS, and you might want to enable this handy userscript as well: User:Headbomb/unreliable. -- asilvering (talk) 00:01, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do I edit an article to add a new section?

I understand how to create a section heading and how to edit within an existing section; what I can't figure out is how to edit at the level that would allow me to add a new section to an article. Thanks for any help you can offer! Don Q314 (talk) 20:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Don Q314 Click edit at the very top of the article. In the visual editor click the first dropdown and choose what what section level you want to add. For the source editor add a section using == on each side, adding more of them to each side changes the section level. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 20:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! Don Q314 (talk) 20:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When can I remove draft status of an article I wrote?

I wrote and submitted a bio for review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cristina_Eisenberg The article was declined once with comments. I made the corrections. I am an autoconfirmed user, but I'm unclear about whether it's ok for me to remove the draft status. Can anyone point me to clarification? Thanks! Bodhipup (talk) 20:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bodhipup: Yes, since you are autoconfirmed, you are able to move this to article space yourself with the "Move" tab. Articles for Creation is an optional process for autoconfirmed users that do not have conflicts of interest. It's up to you if you want to skip the additional review. C F A 💬 21:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bodhipup, I've accepted this draft, but I'm not totally convinced that her position is a "named chair" in the sense we're looking for. If you can find and add some academic reviews on her books, that would be helpful. -- asilvering (talk) 23:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My name appears on Wikipedia

My artist name has been mentioned in an article. I wish to add a new article to reference myself on wikipedia, so that people can click on my name, and actually see the work that I've done and how I've contributed to my particular craft within my culture. Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 21:50, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. If you're an artist or creative professional, you would need to meet the definition of a notable creative professional, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources, to merit a Wikipedia article- your name being in another article is not grounds by itself for you to get one.

Be aware that an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. It's highly discouraged for people to write about themselves, please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 22:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Elayne, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I am also mentioned in a Wikipedia article, but I am aware that I do not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (because not enough independent material about me has been reliably published) and so I do not expect there to be an article about me.

If you meet the criteria (which are not about what you are, what you have done, or what you have said or created, but, again, depend on what has been published about you) then there could be an article about you. However, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write it yourself - see Autobiography. ColinFine (talk) 22:06, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. I'm not mentioned by name anywhere. On the other hand, my Wikipedia username has been mentioned in a couple of reliable sources but not enough coverage for an article about me with my username as a title. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have reviewed all the links you shared... interesting and important. Personally, I am cool with positive and negative articles to be referenced in an unbiased personal Wikipedia page, but will hang back until someone else feels the need to do it. I simply presumed it was a professional thing to do, to be honest. Seems I was wrong... Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 22:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What's your artist name? One thing we can do is turn it into a red link, which increases the likelihood that someone else (someone from WP:WIRED, for example) will create an article on you. -- asilvering (talk) 23:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Her user name is her real name, and she's known by another name as described by her profile on the Irish Museum of Modern Art website here: https://imma.ie/artists/elayne-adamczyk-harrington/ ~Anachronist (talk) 23:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not finding either of those names anywhere, so this is where I give up. -- asilvering (talk) 23:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Temper-Mental MissElayneous Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 00:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Anachronist, would you say that one counts as independent in this context? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:44, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if a museum that profiles an artist whose work is on display at the museum would be considered independent. I could see making an argument analogous to one of the WP:MUSICBIO criteria, in which an artist whose work is displayed in two notable museums might be considered notable. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Anachronist Thanks. I will try to make this one on GNG grounds. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://misselayneous.com/news-archives

https://misselayneous.com/interviews

Thanks for your help everyone. It's been interesting to learn about these processes. I am in the process of formally documenting past media coverage, etc, for posterity or whatever. (Above I attach links to my progress on compiling articles & news, plus published interviews)*

It's incomplete at the mo. But getting there slowly & surely. And even if a Wikipedia page is not warranted, at least I can resume collating all media converage together in one place on my website.

Thank you all for your assistance

-E Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 07:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a start. See WP:Golden Rule for what we expect in sources. Interviews don't count toward notability. Some of those sources look like they may be OK although they are all from the same place, hotpress.com. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

excellent. Thanks - will do!

Browsing today I found other items so far. Some are blogs and amateur kind of stuff, but a lot of the sources of coverage are reputable I.e. Irish Examiner and Irish Independent. I am trying weed out as we speak.

Interestingly, I have been invited to contribute to the UCD James Joyce Irish Poetry Archive, so this Wiki endeavour has really helped me to gather and organise that aspect of my career.

However, I have a physical archive of newpapers and such...much of what actually isn't digitised.

For example, I have the physical newspaper matching this online article:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/artsandculture/arid-40246097.html

But many of the newspapers and magazines I have are not online, i.e.; The Ticket 2012 I was featured on the front cover for a St. Patrick's Day special, having being commissioned to write a piece on Irishness for the occasion.

(I presume I can't share the scan as an image here)* Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 18:58, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no requirement for sources to be online as long as they are properly cited, so that anyone who wants to verify can go to a library or use a subscription digital archive service to access the source. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:24, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the interested, Elayne Harrington. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gråbergs Gråa Sång triumphs again. @Elayne Adamczyk Harrington you are very fortunate to have attracted his interest. Your next step is probably to upload a selfie to Commons so the article can include your picture. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A triumph indeed. I certainly am fortunate. It's an excellent composition so far! Absolutely...I have a few photos. Not sure which to go for. Reviewing the suggestions again Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 23:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All that in a day? Wow. Excellent work.

@Elayne Adamczyk Harrington: all it needs is a picture of you. It can be a selfie you upload and release to the Wikimedia Foundation under a free license. If it's a picture taken by a photographer other than you, then the photographer would need to release it to the Wikimedia Foundation under an acceptable free license. See WP:CONSENT for the communication template that needs to happen from the photographer, regardless of who it is. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've not been here that long (2ish years) but I don't think I've seen this before. @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: what a nice thing to do for the artist. Knitsey (talk) 23:39, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding an explanatory note

Hello

I've been trying to add an explanatory note to Joseph Barbera in the Early life section about his ethnicity but it's not appearing, although I used the template which appeared automatically after typing efn! could anyone tell me why is that and how to fix it? Thanks in advance Whatsupkarren (talk) 09:30, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Whatsupkarren. I have fixed some issues in the note and added {{notelist}} to display it.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 10:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are most drafts declined

Why because a lot of them I have seen are 86.97.103.231 (talk) 10:03, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are many reasons why they get declined, but the most common issue is simply a lack of notability, poor formatting or a lack of good citations. If you have specific pages in mind then feel free to post them here and we can take a look at why they were declined. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 10:08, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor. The decline reason is always given by the reviewer and can be seen at the top of the draft. So, for Draft:O with open top which you contributed to, it was for the simple reason that it cited no sources. All Wikipedia articles must be backed up by reliable, published sources which demonstrate the notability of the topic. Mere existence is not enough to have an article: see WP:NOT. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IP user. Doggo and Mike have given the demonstrable, factual reasons. I would like to give an answer at a higher level: because many drafts are created by people who do not understand Wikipedia's policies and practices, and have not spent time becoming familiar with them before they try to create an article.

I also observe that a lot of drafts are created by people as the first thing they do after creating an account, which gives rise to the suspicion that their purpose is to promote the subject of that draft (though they often don't realise that what they are doing is promotion according to Wikipedia's view).

Finally, I remember from my own early days editing, nearly twenty years ago, when I so much wanted to "make my mark" by adding a new article. I have no direct evidence that that desire is at play, but I'm sure it must be. ColinFine (talk) 11:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another way to frame it, is that even slightly experienced editors don't need to use the AfC process - so you dont see the articles they create getting approved or rejected. -- D'n'B-t -- 13:03, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The opposite is also true. I'm an experienced editor of 18 years, and admin for a dozen years, and even I have submitted a draft for review to get a second set of eyes on it. This has been helpful. In one case the reviewer convinced me to completely refactor the draft to be about an author's books rather than the author, and the result was a much better article that my original submission.

That said, AFC is the only venue available for an IP address who wants to publish an article, and it's the only realistic venue available for paid editors or COI editors. I have seen a COI editor publish an acceptable article without going through review, but it's extremely rare. Usually such attempts end up getting moved to draft space anyway. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why ask Why?

Why Women Kill Isiskhpri (talk) 10:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? -- D'n'B-t -- 10:49, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because that is the series title. Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:49, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Compare this edit by the same username. "Not here", perhaps? -- Hoary (talk) 12:47, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok to add this quote?

Regarding Next Stop Wonderland, is it appropriate to add this: A quote by Ralph Waldo Emerson figures prominently early in the film. "Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" means, to Erin, that predictable men aren't worth dating. At the end of the film, Erin learns that the correct quote is "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds". https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/353571-a-foolish-consistency-is-the-hobgoblin-of-little-minds-adored. With this new perspective, Erin realizes that if a dating prospect has his heart in the right place, that can make up for his lack of adventurousness. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 11:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Allthemilescombined1. As usual, it depends on the sources. If an independent commentator has discussed this quotation and its role in the story, then the article could summarise what the commentator says. If it is your own observation, then it is original research, and doesn't belong in the article - and the inclusion of the quotation then becomes trivia, and should probably not be there. ColinFine (talk) 12:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 16:39, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is ‘that you own the copyright to’?

What is ‘that you own the copyright to’? What are some examples of this? Please tell me or give me a link where I can read more about it. Олена Бєляєва (talk) 13:21, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Олена Бєляєва I suggest you start by reading our article on copyright. Wikipedia cannot, in general, use material that has appeared in publications (books, websites etc.) which are still under copyright. It is the job of Wikipedia editors to summarize and paraphrase any such material to be included in our articles, with citations to the sources where we obtained the information. Copyright is a complicated legal area, so please be more specific if you have further questions after reading the links I supplied. See also this page about copyright of Wikipedia's articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:39, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Олена Бєляєва: In the context of Wikipedia, this literally refers to text or images which you yourself have created (or in very limited cases, where you have purchased or inherited the copyright from the person who did so). Note that (again, with very limited exceptions) this does not include taking a photograph of a work in which someone else owns the copyright. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General question

Are comments by IPs valid in any AFD? Youknow? (talk) 14:59, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Youknowwhoistheman Yes, see WP:AFDFORMAT, which says Unregistered or new users are welcome to contribute to the discussion, but their recommendations may be discounted if they seem to be made in bad faith. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Youknow? (talk) 15:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, comments by SPAs (WP:Single-purpose accounts) are often not valid, and these are often made by IP addresses or new accounts because of off-Wiki canvassing. When I evaluate an AFD discussion, I generally ignore SPA comments in my judgment unless they are well-reasoned policy-based arguments (which is almost never the case with SPA comments). ~Anachronist (talk) 00:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you are right @Anachronist. can you check the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E. A. Jabbar - Wikipedia? Youknow? (talk) 07:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moving Roar (vocalization) to Roar

I wanted to move the page Roar (vocalization) to Roar (which would mean Roar is moved to Roar (disambiguation)), without doing a requested move. Using my best judgment, I don't think there would be opposition to this move. When I tried to move the page I got an error message saying The page could not be moved, for the following reason: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. I also can't find anything in the archives about requests to move these pages. I could try to free up Roar by moving it, but every time I a move page it creates a new page as a redirect. What should I do, and would a requested move be more suitable? Svampesky (talk) 15:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Svampesky. You need an admin to do that sort of move. Please request it at WP:RM/T (as long as you're confident it won't be controversial) ColinFine (talk) 16:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly confident, but I'll prepare an RM nomination if it gets challenged or reverted. Thanks :) Svampesky (talk) 16:19, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I could technically do this move as a page mover, but I wouldn't consider it uncontroversial because I don't think there's an obvious primary topic here. For example, Roar (film) has had 18 000 page views in the last month, while Roar (vocalization) has only had 2 000. You'd have to start a requested move discussion to gather more input. C F A 💬 16:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this after I made the technical request, but I'll prepare a requested move nomination if it's declined. Svampesky (talk) 16:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the move subpage it lists the disambiguation as the move request and the move I was nominating at the bottom of it. This doesn't align with the rationale. I tried switching them around on the talk page, but it didn't change on the move subpage. How can I switch them around? Svampesky (talk) 17:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like using page views to determine titles. The vocalization has been the understood meaning for centuries, and will still be that way after the movie is long forgotten by future generations. I recall seeing a policy or guideline somewhere (I can't remember which one) that says we need to account for history and longevity, not just popularity. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I struggled to find this. I remember writing about it in one of my Signpost pieces, I thought it would be under WP:LONGTERMSIGNIFICANCE, but that is a red-link. Svampesky (talk) 01:31, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fount it! Wikipedia:Disambiguation#LTS. I couldn't remember the phrase "long term significance" and searching the Wikipedia namespace for that phrase turned it up.

My point is that we don't get to pick and choose what parts of the rules to follow, we need to look at the whole. On the whole, I would say that long term significance trumps whatever common name might be the current fad based on popularity. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I made that redirect. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:31, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That's as it should be. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article Denial

My article, Draft:Chernoh Alpha M. Bah has been denied twice; first due to insufficient coverage and second because of unreliable sourcing. The topic has had some pretty widespread coverage and recognition, but the sources are primarily African news outlets. Can someone help me identify what may be the problem and if it's one that can be resolved considering the subject matter? Thanks. Gnat8 (talk) 15:59, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gnat8, and welcome to the Teahouse. I haven't looked right through the list of sources in the draft, but I can see that several look as if they might be problematic. No 1 is published by his university, so is not independent and cannot contribute to establishing notability; Number 3 similarly, and 4 looks very much as if it is based on his words, not independent ones. 2 and 14 don't seem to mention him, and so contribute absolutely nothing to an article about him. 7 looks like a blog site, and does not appear to have any evidence of being subject to editorial control, and so is not a reliable source. I haven't looked further.

Please understand that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

You need to look at each source critically according the the triple criteria of reliability, indepedence, and significant coverage: see WP:42. Any sources which are not reliable, or which do not mention him, should be removed (together with any information in the draft which is verified only by these sources). Any sources which are not independent of him and his associates, or which contain only passing mention of him, may be retained, but do not contribute towards establishing notability. ColinFine (talk) 16:24, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at WP:Golden Rule. Identify three sources that meet all three criteria at the same time. If you can't, then it's hard to make an argument that the subject merits an article on Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does this influencer meet the requirements for BLP-Notability? [German required/preffered]

I’m looking to write an article for a BLP, and have limited experience with the notability requirements for BLPs.

WP:Three are [1],, [2], and [3], originating from 20 Minuten. There is also some additional coverage, such as [4], [5].

I think we’re on the safe side of borderline notable, but am looking for a second opinion. FortunateSons (talk) 16:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FortunateSons, and welcome to the Teahouse. On a quick look, I don't see much independent coverage. Apart from 2 and 3 (which appear to be the same link, but require registration, so I haven't looked at them) the rest are largely based on her words. See WP:42. ColinFine (talk) 16:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ColinFine, thank you. My apologies, I fixed the link, it should work now.

While some parts are based on her words only (which obviously don’t count for notability), much of the other content is descriptive of her content and/or making claims in their own voice, enough to be considered SIGCOV if you struck every quote (IMO, but I could be very wrong). Obviously, everything coming directly from the subject would be covered by the usual restrictions. What do you think? FortunateSons (talk) 16:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, too busy giggling at "Shitstorm ist rasch entfacht" to provide a helpful opinion. -- asilvering (talk) 19:19, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That’s definitely a good excuse in my book FortunateSons (talk) 19:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, having managed to control myself: I don't think you're on the safe side of borderline, but I agree it's borderline and not an obvious no. I'm encouraged that some of the coverage goes back to 2021. And is this her too? But I don't like that most of the coverage originates from the same core story, and I'm not encouraged by the results of the "Kennst du die Tiktokerin Franny?" poll on #3, where only 7% of respondents on an article entirely about her say that they've even heard of her. But she's young and in a public-facing career, so she's pretty likely to become more notable as time goes on. It might be worth spinning up a draft, and checking every six months to see if there's anything you can add to it. -- asilvering (talk) 19:47, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it’s probably her, based on her design education and the uncommon name, but I’m not great with faces.

Yeah, I’ll definitely keep her in mind, she’ll likely keep growing, with my judgement slightly based on the fact a third person independently sent me one of her posts today. There was also SRF, which will be nice for aboutself background (she speaks pretty clearly, but I’m not the right person to transcribe Swiss German).

I think I’ll add her to my “needs one more article to be ready” list, thank you very much for your time! FortunateSons (talk) 20:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unable to edit

Hello. Around 10 years ago I was very active from dynamic IPs. Lately either my range is blocked or the pages (articles) that I want to edit are protected. Even AN and ANI are currently protected but not teahouse. Why is that so? 2409:4081:1D9C:D478:0:0:4C0B:D90C (talk) 16:29, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, why are so many ranges blocked, and why are so many pages protected? This used to be considered unusual back in the days. 2409:4081:1D9C:D478:0:0:4C0B:D90C (talk) 16:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP, I can't really speak to whether there's been an overall trend towards protecting more pages, but we've been experiencing some really persistent disruption from a very determined vandal over the past few months, so that might be affecting your experience. Sorry about that. The easiest solution would be to create an account, but if you don't want to do that for whatever reason, you'll have to work through Wikipedia:Edit requests for now, I'm afraid. -- asilvering (talk) 19:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Australian or Papuan language Wikimedias

Are there any Wikimedia projects written in indigenous languages of Australia or Papua? (I know about the Tok Pisin Wikipedia but that doesn't count.) If not, are there are any that are in the incubator, proposed, or have been shut down? 73.170.137.168 (talk) 17:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP, I'm not sure about the answer to this question myself, but you'll be able to figure it out by looking at List of Wikipedias. -- asilvering (talk) 19:10, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That page does not appear to include incubator projects. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See meta:Meta:Noongarpedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for showing me this link. Though the website seems to be mostly in English. Even though it talks about Noongar culture, I don't really understand the purpose of this. I will try to research the language more. 73.170.137.168 (talk) 17:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess each of these languages is too small for an effective Wikipedia. They're probably all smaller than the Cree Wikipedia, which is already in danger of being shut down. But somehow the Atikamekw Wikipedia seems fairly successful even though the language is tiny? 73.170.137.168 (talk) 17:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reads like an ad vs appropriate sources

A new entry has been rejected due to "reading more like an advertisement" and problems with the references. Are both of those problems equally important or does using appropriate sources carry more weight? CBathka (talk) 17:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CBathka, the issues are equally important because they relate to our three core content policies. Problems with the references relates to Verifiability and possibly No original research. The advertising concern relates to the Neutral point of view. Cullen328 (talk) 17:57, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does this refer to Draft:Microsoft Azure Quantum? I've never seen an advert that looked like that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:21, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

There are now three articles on the topic of aliasing: Aliasing, Aliasing (computing), and now Aliasing (factorial experiments). They reference each other in their hatnotes. I have two questions:

1. Shouldn't the first of these be re-titled Aliasing (signal processing)? There is no reason that it should simply be called Aliasing, without a modifier, as though that application is the main meaning of the term. In point of fact, it is historically the second, and was probably influenced by the term in statistics (see Aliasing#Historical_usage).

2. Should there be a disambiguation page for the term Aliasing?

To whom should these questions be directed, and who makes the call? Johsebb (talk) 18:09, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Johsebb, the place these questions get decided at is usually WP:RM. You propose a move to the title you think is appropriate, other editors weigh in, and after a period of discussion the page is moved (or not moved) to whatever consensus is reached. I wouldn't open a move discussion for this, though - we prefer to avoid parenthetical disambiguation when possible, so if the topic currently at Aliasing is the main meaning of the term, it's correct that it doesn't have any disambiguator there. When there are only two or three possible meanings for a term, and one is the clear main topic, we usually don't create a disambiguation page, but rather sort it out with hatnotes like these articles do. The details on all this are discussed at WP:DAB.

If you read WP:DAB and think there's a good case to rename the articles, my advice would be to start a topic on the talk page at Talk:Aliasing, rather than immediately starting a move discussion. That way, you'll (hopefully) get some input from other editors who are familiar with the topic. -- asilvering (talk) 19:08, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I understand the desire to avoid disambiguation. I guess my only thought is that Aliasing is not the "main meaning" or the "clear main topic" of the term "aliasing" (nor is Aliasing (factorial experiments)).

I would be happy to start a topic at Talk:Aliasing, although my experience with talk pages is that they sit there indefinitely without attracting any attention. I would prefer to actually propose the move at WP:RM in order to subject it to editorial discussion. But if you feel that this step is to be avoided and posting a topic at Talk:Aliasing is more appropriate, I'll try that. Johsebb (talk) 03:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you get no attention, then you can go ahead and propose the move. I suggest asking on the talk page first mostly so that you're more effectively targetting "people who know about the topic" rather than also pulling "people who know a lot about article titling conventions, but not much about this topic". -- asilvering (talk) 04:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually going to go slow, but it appears that another user has already created Aliasing_(disambiguation). I'm not sure where this goes from here, and I think this is above my pay grade. Johsebb (talk) 13:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree that was not helpful. I suppose now the best course of action is to start the RM discussion to sort this all out. -- asilvering (talk) 18:49, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Johsebb:

1. Yes.

2. Yes.

I've created Aliasing (disambiguation), but I suspect there is WP:NOPRIMARY, so that the article currently at Aliasing should be renamed Aliasing (signal processing), and the new disambig page repointed at it. Most of the hatnotes at the articles should be simplified, and probably just point to the Disambig page for other uses. Feel free to propose the move for #1; I'support such a move. Mathglot (talk) 09:38, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Aliasing (disambiguation)~~

Wikipedia Commons copyright forum. Try your questions there. If you repeat your question there, you might want to clarify what you mean by "errors and fake SVG" files. Good luck, Mathglot (talk) 08:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)P ,that's a lot of questions, and questions about the laws and copyright issues about images of various types would be better handled at the c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Mathglot (talk) 10:00, 25 August 2024 (UTC) struck cruft meant for another section. Mathglot (talk) 17:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not say anything about "errors and fake SVG" files, or laws and copyright issues. Was this meant for someone else? Johsebb (talk) 13:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Johsebb, I beg your pardon, I've struck that part of the message, which as you surmised, was a part of my response to another user, that somehow got pasted on to my response to you. Very sorry for the confusion.

Back to your Aliasing issue: I believe the new Aliasing (disambiguation) page will catch a lot of searches, and also the hatnote at the top of the current Aliasing page (which I agree should be renamed, to add parenthetical disambiguation to the title) can be simplified to refer to the disambig page. Mathglot (talk) 17:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Need help in page publishing

Dear Administrators, Volunteers and Contributors Greeting of the day

I am writing in regard of my recently edited page but I faced rejection from Mr. @Saqib. I have made every effort to ensure that my submissions comply with Wikipedia’s content policies, including verifiability, neutrality, and notability. However, despite these efforts, he repeatedly rejected my page. I kindly request you all please suggest me a better way to publish my page.

here is the link of my edited page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dr._Mahboob_Ali_Sial Latifayazsiyal (talk) 18:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Latifayazsiyal Please read the helpful messages on your talk page. The draft appears to be promotional. I am not seeing your peacock words such as prominent, exceptional, or exemplary in the references you have provided. The article should reflect only what reliable sources say. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Latifayazsiyal, according to the page history, no one has ever declined or rejected this draft before. Did you create another version earlier under a different name? -- asilvering (talk) 19:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering It was created directly in mainspace and subsequently draftified by User:Saqib. Among other things, the title should not have "Dr.", per WP:TITLESINTITLES. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw that. My question remains. -- asilvering (talk) 20:21, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think they forgot to mention that they are also working on an autobiography at Draft:Ayaz Latif Siyal, which both @S0091: and I rejected. I'm unsure why they would single me out in this situation. Maybe it’s just because we’re from the same country? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 21:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

eh, it's not uncommon for new editors to mistake reviewers/patrollers for one another, and you two both have names of about the same length that start with S. Easy mistake. -- asilvering (talk) 21:33, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Latifayazsiyal.

Please understand that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. Most or all of your sources are either not independent of Sial, or just mention his name. We require several sources that are reliable, wholly independent of Sial, and contain significant coverage of Sial (specifically - not just of his organisation). Only if you have several such is an article about him possible. ColinFine (talk) 20:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Long Island Sound Crossing

Article misspells the name of the road in Rye, NY where bridge would be located in Westchester County. Correct spelling is "Manursing", not "Mansuring." I used to live on Manursing Way. 2601:184:300:21:9899:BD7A:52F5:B1E8 (talk) 22:31, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What article has this problem. It is not clear. Bduke (talk) 23:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's Long Island Sound link. ayakanaa ( t ) 01:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, after consulting Google Maps. (Thank you for pointing this out, but anyone could have done what I did.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How can i view all image uploads from a specific user on Wikimedia?

Hey all, as the title suggests, I would like to view all Wikimedia Commons image uploads from a specific user. I cannot find any filters for this.

Regards. HoldenFan1104 (talk) 01:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles. Just add user name Moxy🍁 01:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much HoldenFan1104 (talk) 09:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HoldenFan1104 Alternatively, just navigate to the user's page or talk page on Commons and use the menu on the left which has both "User uploads" and "User contributions". You can get there very quickly from looking at any image and clicking through to the user page listed as part of the File history. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate the information, thanks. HoldenFan1104 (talk) 02:57, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for mysteriously DELETED PAGE - "Draft:Hotcakes & Outtakes (Little Feat album)"

I was working on a page yesterday, linked it, added credits and footnotes. I was told it didn't meet standards, UNKNOWN WORK? or something like that. Bad source (Discogs.com - verified data, from orig album source. ("Little Feat" American Rock group from the 1970s-90s)

TODAY it is all gone. DELETED.

I can't even access to copy data to utilize for my own use.

DELETED PAGE is - "Draft:Hotcakes & Outtakes (Little Feat album)"

> I thought I had 6 months to figure out how to use your 'system', so as to correct my dirty little deeds - apparently this is not true.

ANY assistance would be of help, I just don't know how to connect / access people who know about these things. Stumbling around a rabbit hole of 'links' that don't relate to "FINDING out WHAT happened to a page I was working on." Don't want to FILE some LEGAL document for such a small trial page.

THANKs for your TIME and expertise!

(Apoplogies IF this communication is in a TOTALLY wrong place. It was the only place I could find to ASK A QUESTION 'to the ether'.

cheers Rklund (talk) 03:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I expect that 331dot will soon be along to explain, and perhaps restore. Meanwhile: (i) "Deletion" doesn't actually mean deletion. (ii) The "deleted" draft appears to reproduce a review, in toto. Credit is given for this, and the fact that it's a quotation isn't obscured. Thus the intention isn't dishonest -- but all the same, this isn't satisfactory. (iii) The "deleted" draft has an excessively long list of credits. (iv) No, you don't want to file some legal document. (v) The more CAPITALS one uses, the less persuasive one becomes. -- Hoary (talk) 03:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to a link from your Talk page, an author (you) asked that it be deleted. If not true, expect the draft to be restored. David notMD (talk) 06:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rklund I assumed that this comment was made by you and in this comment it was said "you can delete this page whenever you choose" so I interpreted that as a deletion request. Since that apparently was not the case I will restore it. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have a time limit on editing the draft as long as it's active- so you have as long as you need, not "six months", the six months is only if the draft is completely inactive for that time. 331dot (talk) 08:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese dynasties

.. Can anyone please assist with Japanese dynasties,and the role they played in modern Japan...

... Immortalising their roles & impact on current Japanese society...

.... I do love facts like the 1st three years of Japanese schooling are only about Discipline and Respect,how can such a great culture curriculum be applied to African school systems... 121Joe (talk) 03:47, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello from Tokyo. On the monarchy, read T. Fujitani's Splendid Monarchy (U California Press). I sense that you are deluded (or joking) about Japanese education. NB this page is for questions about the use of Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 04:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you have done research about this then you can write that from yourself, If you write an article about that or you can expand articles like Imperial House of Japan and History of Japan.–– kemel49^{(connect)(contri)} 04:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

String theory

Space object connections have not a single atmosphere chain locks, it's working only in english reactjs string. 62.181.56.1 (talk) 04:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your posts to artocle Talk pages have been reverted as nonsensical. Do you have a question? David notMD (talk) 06:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't provide a picture over internet without language package. 62.181.56.1 (talk) 08:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a manual of style section for masculine/feminine nouns?

Is there a MoS for using nouns such actor/actress etc? It has come up at the article Amy Poehler and I've sometimes seen editors change nouns when the article subject is female.Knitsey (talk) 05:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Knitsey, Perhaps this? MOS:GNL. Also, I believe that the word "comedian" should be used as seen in, e.g. Lucille Ball. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 05:18, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's applicable here? Thank you though. It's not the gender of the person that's in question, it's whether we use the male or female noun to describe their profession. Correct use would be actress or actor, Comedienne or comedian. I generally use the male version, actor, to describe both male and female artists but that's just me. Knitsey (talk) 05:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Knitsey, This might be what you were looking for: [2] at WP:WAW. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 06:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Use of "actors", "comedians", "chairmen", "waiters", "executors", etc to refer to groups of both male and female artists is not just you, Knitsey. And classifying "actor", "comedian", "chairman", "waiter", and "executor" as "male nouns" (or "male versions") is rather odd. Wikipedia:Gender-neutral language may be what you're after. -- Hoary (talk) 06:10, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's a little clearer, thank you. I'm still not sure though if you would refer to, for example, Emily Atack as a comedian or comedienne. The article describes Atack as an actress and comedian. If someone changed it to comedienne would this be acceptable.

Just to reiterate, I've no interest in changing any of this, it's more about whether it should be reverted or not. I've seen changes like this before and wondered if it was ok. Knitsey (talk) 06:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My guess, Knitsey, is that the relationship of "comedian" to "comedienne" is in practice not the same as that of "actor" to "actress". Putting aside questions of whether or not use of this or that term is, or could be, sexist, "comedienne" is alone among the four in being at least a little unusual. Imaginably a number of writers of articles here don't even know of it. (I speculate that its uncommonness has something to do with its odd morphology: it looks like a straightforward loan from French whereas "comedian" does not.) So I'm not surprised if one writer, or one group of writers, calls a woman an "actress" and a "comedian". The combination does strike me as slightly odd, and I might want to regularize the description. There are of course two ways of doing this: (A) changing "comedian" to "comedienne", XOR (B) changing "actress" to "actor". Wikipedia:Gender-neutral language would prescribe (B), not (A). -- Hoary (talk) 09:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Knitsey, this is a very interesting question with a lot of implications. My initial egalitarian instinct is to use gender neutral terms to describe careers. Not "waitress" and "stewardess" but wait staff and flight attendants. "Nurse" instead of male nurse. But how about actors and actresses? We could just call them all actors, but the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences still calls them "actors" and "actresses". Meryl Streep is described as an actress. And when Linda Hunt brilliantly played the male character Billy Kwan in The Year of Living Dangerously, she was nominated for an Oscar for "Best Supporting Actress" not "Best Supporting Actor", and she won that Oscar. So, caution and flexibity is in order, along with a dedication to accurately summarizing what high quality reliable sources say, favoring newer over older sources of similar quality. We are not linguistic innovators and we are not linguistic laggards. We need to do our best to reflect and follow the best contemporary sources. As for "comedienne", I think that is outdated terminology 99% of the time. You see how I hedged my bet? Cullen328 (talk) 09:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hoary I didn't think about looking at the etymology. I don't think I've seen or heard anyone use comedienne for a long time. I listen to a lot of BBC Radio 4 which seems to be the last bastion of RP (fast dwindling thank goodness) and I can't recall hearing comedienne being used.

Cullen328 That's an interesting point about Linda Hunt. I take your point about innovators/laggards. Hedging bets is always advisable.

I would probably revert comedienne but it's not a bright line for me. Thank you all for the advice. Not totally clear but I'm a little clearer on expectations. Knitsey (talk) 09:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Knitsey I would also suggest tasking in to account how the person describes themselves. For example, if a female actor regularly described themselves as an 'actress', I would tend to go with that description of them here. So, I'd look at their own website, writings or biographical notes on a book to see what term they prefer to use when writing about themselves. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Moyes now that you've said it, that seems really obvious. I didn't think of that. That is the first thing we do when describing someone who is non binary, but it kind of slipped my mind when it comes to someone who is cisgender. Thank you for the reminder. Knitsey (talk) 17:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Knitsey That's a common sense comedienne has rarely used even in real life, why we need such a terminology. Comedian is a gender neutral word, that's why I reverted their version and they included an inexistence module. -Lemonaka 11:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lemonaka I would use comedian too, looking at what sources outside of Wikipedia say about gender neutral nouns, particularly job titles, then comedian is the gender neutral term whilst still being the masculin noun. I certainly wasn't complaining about your revert, I was probably have reverted it myself if I had seen it first, per WP:BRD.It's something I told myself I would ask about the next time I had an example to give. Knitsey (talk) 16:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Language change is a language universal. When you've lived long enough, you can see it happening. Questions like this one have a definite factor involving language change over time. One illustrative example is to compare airline steward,airline stewardess, and flight attendant until around 1965, and then compare the same terms since then. Comedian has always been far more popular than comedienne since Shakespeare's time (no surprise there), and for a hundred years (1900-2000) was about ten times more popular, but since 2000, 'comedienne has gone into a slow, steady decline. Mathglot (talk) 08:50, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You did graphs! Thank you Mathglot, that's a really interesting comparison and fits with what other users are saying, particularly in relation to the use of comedienne. Knitsey (talk) 11:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Linking to interviews in BLP

More of a general question: I have seen some BLP articles which contain many external links to extensive interviews with the subject of the article. I reviewed the Wikipedia:External links page and it includes detailed interviews as an example of an acceptable external link, but I am wondering at what point it is considered excessive? If an author has done an extensive interview every time they have released a book, is it considered acceptable to link each interview? Should these be condensed down to a few choice interviews, and how is that decision made? Mintopop (talk) 05:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding hundreds of interviews to an article would certainly be spammy. A better solution would be to start an RfC or a discussion to build consensus with other editors related to the article and add only the important ones. GrabUp - Talk 07:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mintopop, in cases like this, I always look to existing practices in Good articles and Featured articles about similar topics. So, I took a look at a Good article about a renowned actress Meryl Streep and saw no interviews of her in the external links of her article. I then looked at the biography of a famous actor, Lawrence Olivier, which is a Featured article. No interviews in external links. So, I looked at biographies of authors. William Gibson is a Featured article with one external link to an interview. Ursula K. Le Guin is a Featured article with external links to four interviews. Kurt Vonnegut is a Featured article with no external links to interviews. So, I think that the established practice is that external links to a a very small number of interviews is OK, but more than a handful is not OK. As for how to select the best interviews, those would be the ones that cover the person's entire career as opposed to their most recent commercial release, and those that are conducted by notable interviewers and published in highly notable periodicals. In the end, the selection comes down to well-informed editorial judgment, which is a precious commodity. Cullen328 (talk) 08:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, this makes sense and I appreciate your insight. I am finally biting the bullet and trying to just "Be Bold!" with my edits, but at the same time trying not to go too crazy. I keep your idea in mind of cross-referencing against articles deemed good by the community :) Mintopop (talk) 16:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GrabUp Thank you! I have often noticed this on pages that seem to be less generally popular and have had the majority of their edits done by fans. It is sometimes difficult to tell if it is worth trying to start talk/rfc discussions on pages where it seems that no one is looking at it frequently. Is it Wiki practice to do it anyways, regardless of the perceived traffic levels? Mintopop (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Be bold. If someone disagrees with you, engage in a discussion. That’s all. GrabUp - Talk 16:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Education Minister

Publish the copyright Law in your License format,graphics,photographic, and files wat is he in copyright Law in 9 1. The Laws in company 2.publish and attribution 3.copyright law for in License 4.Errors and Fakesvg 5.JPEG or svg 6.the knows in images in copyright Laws? 7.Raster and vector versions other in 8.Author the gives copy to commons in Wikipedia or Wikimmedia edia commons 9.copyright law in the United States 2A02:CB80:4225:8D68:E817:ADF4:1B11:D6B5 (talk) 08:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This makes little sense to me as a Wikipedia editor with 15 years of experience. I simply cannot comprehend what question you are trying to ask. Please try to write like a human being instead of a robot. Thank you for your humanity. Cullen328 (talk) 08:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP ,that's a lot of questions, and questions about the laws and copyright issues about images of various types would be better handled at the Wikipedia Commons copyright forum. Try your questions there. If you repeat your question there, you might want to clarify what you mean by "errors and fake SVG" files. Good luck, Mathglot (talk) 08:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to make photo

Hi, I have a question that how to make a photo like of country template photo? कङञ (talk) 09:59, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand "country template photo". Perhaps you could link to an example in order to explain what you mean. -- Hoary (talk) 10:46, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

कङञ responded here. -- Hoary (talk) 21:08, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consistent spelling/grammar errors from IP

There is an IP whose edits I've been following for a bit, as they make a lot of spelling and grammar errors(I suspect English may not be their first language) though I try to just fix up some of the more obvious errors. However, they often will go back and revert my edits without explanation anyway. As far as I can tell they have never used a talk page, so discussion with them would likely be pointless, but I also don't want to start getting into an edit war with this person. Is there something I can/should do in this scenario? LaffyTaffer (talk) 14:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need to use their talk page; in case your assumption is incorrect. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could anyone take a look at this article

I created a draft and it was rejected please help me get it published here's the link Draft:Lean Savage. Blueman17 (talk) 14:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Blueman17. Your draft has not been Rejected, which means "no hope of qualifying for an article, please give up": it was Declined, meaning "not up to standard yet, please carry out improvements." This implies that the Reviewer does think that the Draft can potentially be improved to Article quality.

The Reviewer has advised that the draft does not (yet) demonstrate the subject's Notability – that is, that the subject has been sufficiently written about in published Reliable sources independently of him: in this case, the career-specific Wikipedia:Notability (music) is most relevant: please read it carefully and determine whether the subject meets the criteria there. If you think he does, you need to show this in the text.

I notice also that, outside of the two references for the Lede paragraph, the rest of the article is entirely unsourced. Every fact in a Wikipedia article needs to be cited to a source, at the end of a sentence or paragraph in which it (first) appears. (Usually, one source will cover all or most of the several facts in a sentence or paragraph, but either can have multiple sources.) You included all these facts because you know them: how do you know them? Unless you have some relation to the subject (or are the subject, but see WP:Autobiography) you must have read, heard (radio?) or seen (TV, etc?) them somewhere. You need to say exactly where using citations, as you did in the Lede. If you only know them from personal experience (see Wikipedia:No original research), without their having also been published, then they cannot appear in the article: this is all necessary because of Wikipedia's basic requirement of WP:Verifiability. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 17:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's harsh

Thanks I'll try to dig deeper

Would appreciate it if you help with the research Blueman17 (talk) 17:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It may seem harsh, but it's necessary to maintain the quality of this encyclopedia.

Generally, Help Desk and Teahouse responders do not also engage in collaborative research with new editors, and I myself have no interest or expertise in this particular type of subject. Someone else reading this, however, may want to, in which case they will probably respond on your own Talk page, or the Talk page of the Draft. Good luck. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 17:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Biographies

I've been looking at the biography of a living person, Gabriele Scheler. All concerns of the editors were addressed. The only exception is still insufficient documentation on early life. Yet the article was declined completely. What to do? PowerUser22 (talk) 14:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. While you've edited the article about Fritz Scheler, you've never edited Draft:Gabriele Scheler. The draft was resubmitted for a review. All information about a living person must be sourced, see the Biographies of Living Persons policy. What is the source of your interest in this topic? 331dot (talk) 14:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Either add references or delete content. A question - have you been editing not signed in, as IP 79.199.170.144? David notMD (talk) 02:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Tenuta Pantanacci" page deleted

Hello All, i've just created the article "Tenuta Pantanacci" but it has been cancelled. May i know the reason? Who can help me? Tenuta Pantanacci (talk) 14:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. First, are you Tenuta Pantanacci? Second, you wrote in Italian, and this is the English Wikipedia. You need to go to the Italian Wikipedia if you want to write in Italian. 331dot (talk) 15:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations.

I keep getting declined becase of “Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations.” I have included 4 footnotes and used them all in the article. What am I doing wrong? This is the link Draft:Yeidy Eish Eahelms1 (talk) 15:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Eahelms1, I think the answer to your question is "sometimes, reviewers screw up". I'll take a closer look for you. -- asilvering (talk) 02:46, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, having looked into it some more, what you've done wrong is... you didn't resubmit it after fixing the problems. You're doing fine. Just resubmit it for another review. -- asilvering (talk) 02:55, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Need some help with writing about a Political Organization in middle east

I need help with finishing an article I am writing about a political group in middle east, it was rejected so i want to know how can i improve? any advice would be highly appreciated. it is important to note that i'm making this article as a project for my degree. i major in International Relations and during one of my recent studies i encountered this issue, and i decided to dig deeper, but still my information is not complete. so if you also know about this matter and you are from middle east, please tell me more!

Draft:The Covenant. Lilyish134 (talk) 15:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You asked this question at the AFC Help Desk, please only use one method of seeking assistance at a time, to avoid duplicating effort. Many of us follow all the Help pages. 331dot (talk) 15:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IT was Declined. "Rejected" would have meant the the reviewer saw no potential to succeed. David notMD (talk) 02:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

significance with characters

alr hi this comes fresh from the discord >:3 ive been trying to bring Serial Experiments Lain to GA since before my wikibreak, and a user on the discord pointed out NFCC 3a (the article has 4 non free images.). whilst going to look at these images, and check which ones are the least significant, i noticed that 2 of them are directly correlated to the main character. i have no idea when singular characters are considered significant, but it made it seem easier to clean the article.

idk im clueless. astral ▪️ he/him ▪️ >:3 16:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AstralAlley, I'm counting 5?

This one will cause no issues as it directly depicts the subject: File:Serial Experiments Lain DVD vol 1.jpg
These three are up to discretion: File:Lain hacker small.jpg, File:Lain Haircut.JPG, and File:Lain Split Personnalities.JPG. All would be allowed under fair use, but Wikipedia's NFCC is stricter. They are all depictions of the same character, and someone could argue that NFCC says we should choose one.
This is the only one that I think that majority of editors will object to: File:Serial Experiments Lain (TV) Screenshot 01.jpg It would be allowed under fair use, but is illustrating a very minor point in the article.

Have you done a GA before? If you ask questions at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations, you will likely get some input from regulars. Also, the images are not going to be a deal-breaker for a GA nomination. An article can pass with zero images, and some GAs currently have no media. Finally, and completely unrelated, Arisu was in the wrong and it's been years since I've watched this anime but I still get angry about her attitude at the end of the show.

Good luck! Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 21:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

with 2nd bullet point, since all 3 are of lain, and since a bulk of the articles characters talk about her specifically, i feel like i could hypothetically do that. just dont know if this all marks significance. idk ill work on it 2nite. astral ▪️ he/him ▪️ >:3 23:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article Expansion

Hi, can someone please see this Ehsan Zafar Abbasi article. I'll be more happy if someone evaluate this and expand this. Janabanigu (talk) 17:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Janabanigu, you may also want to solicit input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pakistan and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 21:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

Hello! I'm having trouble with this redirect. When I click the link Hogwarts#Slytherin on the redirect page, it takes me to the correct anchor on the Hogwarts page. However, if I type "Slytherin" into the WP search bar, then click the Hogwarts page that pops up, it doesn't take me to the anchor. If I'm editing a page in the VE and want to provide a link to Hogwarts#Slytherin, and I try to do this by typing "Slytherin" in the link finder, it doesn't find Hogwarts#Slytherin. Any thoughts? Wafflewombat (talk) 19:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure about the VE part, but when I search for Slytherin, the redirect works correctly. Maybe a browser issue? I am using Edge. RudolfRed (talk) 19:17, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wafflewombat: The link tool in VisualEditor finds page names (including redirects), not section or anchor names. If I click the chain icon in VisualEditor to make a link and write Slytherin then the first option for me is "Hogwarts" which just links the article Hogwarts as it should. The second option is "Slytherin" which links the redirect Slytherin. If I write Slytherin in the normal Wikipedia search box at top of all pages then I see no Hogwarts option in the drop-down below the search box. The search results page [3] has an entry saying "Hogwarts (redirect from Slytherin)". You have to click "Slytherin" to use the redirect and go to the anchor. "Hogwarts" just goes to the article. This works as intended. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now the link tool in the VE works exactly as you described. But the search bar at the top of the page still provides the Hogwarts page in the drop-down. If I don't click that link or any other link in the drop down, but rather just enter "Slytherin" and hit "enter", then I am directed to the Slytherin anchor. But there's nothing I can click in the drop down that gets me there. *Sigh* Maybe it's just my browser. I'll try a different one. Wafflewombat (talk) 20:11, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wafflewombat: I use the Vector legacy skin at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering but can reproduce your result in Vector 2022. It's discussed in phab:T306150. You can follow a redirect by clicking the search button or pressing the enter key, but you cannot see whether there is a redirect or you will get a search results page. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citing a Podcast as Source

Hello! Someone recently deleted an entry by suggesting that the source was a podcast and paywalled, and took issue with the reliability of the source. The person was interviewed on a well-known US based podcast. That has validity in my opinion. Can anyone else comment on this so I can challenge his deletion? Satyagraha108 (talk) 19:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Satyagraha108: We have template {{Cite podcast}} so you can cite it. Behind a paywall is not an issue, see WP:PAYWALL. If the source is not reliable for other reasons, then that is a different problem. I suggest you discuss it with the other editor to get clarity on their concerns of reliability, or you can ask at WP:RSN RudolfRed (talk) 19:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The concerns described at Talk:Eknath_Easwaran#Podcast RudolfRed (talk) 19:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Saytyaraha108, and welcome to the Teahouse. "Well-known" is not the same as "reliable". The Daily Mail is well-known but not reliable; many sources are reliable but not well-known.

The question is whether that podcast is reliable by Wikipedia's standards: does it have editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking? If in doubt, ask about it at the reliable sources noticeboard. (It would have been helpful if you would actually tell us what source it is. I'm guessing it is one in Eknath Easwaran, but I can't be bothered to work through the edits identifying it). ColinFine (talk) 19:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it's the "Conspirituality" podcast, and it doesn't appear to have been discussed on WP:RSN. But, while it's not impossible that a reliable source (a source with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking) should publish on Patreon, it seems a bit unlikely, and my presumption would be that this is an audio blog, and so, not reliable. ColinFine (talk) 20:08, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The person interviewed is sharing her mother's story and grew up at Easwaran's ashram. It seems reliable. Satyagraha108 (talk) 22:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, thank you for your insights! Satyagraha108 (talk) 22:10, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue isn't whether the subject of the interview is being reliable(and no, people aren't always reliable about themselves, either accidentally or otherwise), but the podcast itself. Does it perform fact checking and have an editor examine the podcast for accuracy before it is posted? Most do not. 331dot (talk) 22:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying this. Satyagraha108 (talk) 23:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It raises an interesting issue on the entire page though, because most of the biographical information about the person in question, Easwaran, is all based on his own accounts of himself, such as meeting Gandhi or his teaching positions in India. It's quite circular, he said it, someone else wrote it down, and now they can point to a source where...he said it about himself. Satyagraha108 (talk) 23:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That does indeed sound as if it may have problems establishing notability. Are there any sources which meet WP:42? ColinFine (talk) 08:32, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I use the userpage of a user that doesn't exist anymore?

Hello!

As many of you know, an official dark theme has recently been released, and with that release, I'd like ti change my user signature to be more accessible for dark mode users.

I only have 1 character to spare as is, and basically the only solution I can think of is to have some sort of shortened page redirect to my userpage.

I was thinking about User:QQ, but I noticed that it was an actual account that later renamed to User:UU, and was subsequently banned.

I'm not sure whether or not doing so is allowed, or whether it would cause confusion; however, the account has been banned for over a decade now... QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 20:18, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Something like this:

[[User:Qtacc|‪Quokka's test account‬]] ([[User talk:Qtacc|talk]] | [[Special:Contribs/‪Quokka's test account‬|contribs]])

, which would look like this: ‪Quokka's test account‬ (talk | contribs) 20:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quokka's test account (talk • contribs) [reply]

Hmmmm... SineBot thinks it's unsigned. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 20:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok you can opt out of SineBot so that's not a concern. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 21:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's default signatures have a refreshingly high signal-to-noise ratio. -- Hoary (talk) 21:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@QuickQuokka: but your custom signature already has dark background? It's honestly easier to read it in dark mode since the whole page has a dark background. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC) Ping: QuickQuokka, 21:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid confusion and putting you on a bad spot as the username intend to use is banned, it's better you change your username to something else Tesleemah (talk) 05:23, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reference ideas box

Hello, another question! I found a very useful template which I've implemented on this talk page. Right before the discussion threads is a box with a link to "references to use". I linked it to a separate page, which is good because it doesn't clog up the talk page with a long list of references. Does anyone know how to accomplish the same thing but without making the box film-specific? Is there a more generic template without the film icon and the link to the film WikiProject? Wafflewombat (talk) 00:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wafflewomabt, I don't think exactly what you're asking for exists. Here are several close things:

First, {{Refideas}} is made for this purpose. It doesn't use a separate page, but is collapsible. Using the list above as an example:

Reference ideas for Wikipedia:Teahouse

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Second, {{tmbox}} is the template used to make talk page message boxes. You can place anything inside it, like this:

References to use in this article.

And even use other icons like this:

References to use in this article.

Or this:

References to use in this article.

Finally, any article can have a "Further reading" section (MOS:FURTHER). A lot of editors will place references there which also makes it available to the non-editing readers, who don't open talk pages.

To see how either banner works, click on "Edit source" for this section. If you have questions, feel free to reach out, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:42, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is awesome. So many options! Thanks! Wafflewombat (talk) 13:44, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I use this?

I am working to expand "Platte Lake (Minnesota)" and am wondering if this video could work as a source, because it is made by Plattelake.org, so.. Platte Lake Improvement Association - History of Platte Lake Video Deerare2good (talk) 03:33, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Deerare2good, and welcome to the Teahouse. I haven't watched the video, but from your description, it sounds as if it is a self-published source, so it may be cited, but only for limited purposes, and does not contribute to establishing notability. ColinFine (talk) 08:36, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the Infobox picking up this dead web site?

Hi. I am confused (not for the first time, and probably not the last!) Looking at the article Ditmar Award, the Infobox shows a link to a dead website (splints.customer.netspace.net.au/ditmar1024res/calldit1024.html). I found a usable archive at web.archive.org/web/20240404220132/http://splints.customer.netspace.net.au/ditmar1024res/calldit1024.html. So I tried to fix the error, but when I opened the editor I found that the code for the Infobox does not have a website listed at all. So I am at a loss to see where it is picking that up from. I looked for an {{official website}} entry in case it was picking up from there somehow - but it does not have that either. Can somebody please put me out of my misery, and tell me where I need to fix this? Gronk Oz (talk) 06:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gronk Oz: It appears it's coming from the Wikidata entry (wikidata:Q906455#P856). Updating it there should change the infobox here. Tollens (talk) 06:48, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tollens: - ah, thanks! Now I have a follow-on question, beacuse I am not familiar with how Wikidata works. The Wikidata entry for "Ditmar Award" says it is "described by" the Science Fiction Awards Database at www.sfadb.com/Ditmar_Awards. And when I check there, it lists the old web site. So my question is - do I somehow need to get it updated on that Database site, or just manually update it in Wikidata (so they will then be out of synch)?--Gronk Oz (talk) 07:05, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The "described by source" property is essentially the equivalent of a "Further reading" section here on Wikipedia – it is just a link to somewhere else with some information. You can directly change the link in Wikidata, no automated process will notice the discrepancy. Tollens (talk) 07:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tollens: - Sorry to be a pain, but I am still having trouble. I tried just over-writing the old Wikidata entry with the archive address but it gave the following error message:

Could not save due to an error. The save has failed. Note: How to update the official website:

If the item has a new site, add an additional statement with preferred rank. How to set preferred rank? See Help:Ranking#How_to_apply_ranks.
If a website is no longer valid, you could also:

 - qualify the URL with end time (P582). If you don't know the exact date, use the year or "unknown" as date
 - add the qualifier archive URL (P1065) to link to the former website at web.archive.org

Do not delete or replace the former URL.

So it looks like I need the last option, to "add the qualifier archive URL (P1065)..." but I have no idea what that is asking me to do. Do you have any idea how to do that?--Gronk Oz (talk) 09:22, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gronk Oz I think you're right. You can add the qualifier by clicking "edit" next to the current official website and then clicking "add qualifier". Then enter "P1065" in the new "Property" box and choose "Archive URL" from the single-item list that pops up. Then another input field will appear and you can put the archive URL in there and click "publish". --bjh21 (talk) 10:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bjh21:@Tollens: - Thanks, that seems to have worked to update the Wikidata entry. But the Wikipedia page has not changed as a result... Is there some trick, to make it pick up the archive URL from Wikidata instead of the obsolete one?--Gronk Oz (talk) 11:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gronk Oz: Why don't you just add the archive URL in the |website= field of the infobox? That will override whatever's coming from Wikidata (of which I'm not a fan). Since the URL is doubtless rather long, you should probably give it a name, such as "[URL Official site (archived)]" to avoid expanding the width of the infobox. Deor (talk) 14:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done @Deor:@Bjh21:@Tollens:- Thanks for all your help. As Deor suggested, I hard-coded it. It is still very wide, so expands the Infobox a lot - for some reason, when it came from Wikidata it would wrap in the Infobox, but now the same text doesn't wrap. But I think it will be okay.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Finding a photo

I don't think this actor is notable enough for his own page, despite my wishful thinking. I would like to find a photo of him, though. I apologize if this is not appropriate to ask here.

Robert Bruce (born 1953) is a Canadian actor who appeared in Alone in the Dark (2005), Da Vinci's Inquest(1998) and Stargate SG-1 (1997).

2006 Family in Hiding · as Defense Attorney

2005 Alone in the Dark · as Crewman Barnes

2003 Barely Legal · as Coop's Dad

2003 D.C. Sniper: 23 Days of Fear · as Montgomery County Councilman

2001 Animal Miracles (TV Series) · as Danny

2001 Just Cause (TV Series) · as Cop

2001 The Lone Gunmen (TV Series) · as Resident Surgeon

1999 Aftershock: Earthquake in New York (TV Series) · as Jury Foreman

1998 The New Addams Family (TV Series) · as Mr. Bates

1998 Da Vinci's Inquest (TV Series) · as Police Constable #4

1998 Cold Squad (TV Series) · as Larry

1997 Stargate SG-1 (TV Series) · as Local

1995 Mysterious Island (1995) (TV Series) · as Zachary

1992 Grampire · as Truckie

1989 The Freeway Maniac · as Terry "Robert Bruce". Plex TV. Retrieved 25 August 2024.

1989 American Playhouse "Ask Me Again" · as Nelson Rodker

"Robert Bruce (VI)". IMDb. Retrieved 25 August 2024. "Robert Bruce". TCM. Turner Classic Movies. Retrieved 25 August2024. "Robert Bruce". IMDb. Retrieved 25 August 2024.

Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 10:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, please remember that IMDb is not a reliable source. See WP:RSPS. Ahri Boy (talk) 10:16, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I know this page will never make it out of my sandbox. I just want to see his picture when he was young because of nostalgia I have for an appearance of his. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 10:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Allthemilescombined1 Teahouse is not a place to post lengthy content that you have no question about nor intent to incorporate into an article. David notMD (talk) 11:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BLP on Talk pages?!!

I fully agree with and appreciate with the BLP policy as it applies to mainspace articles. But I'm seeing cases where editors seem to feel that this applies to the Talk pages associated with those articles, as well. Is this a policy change that an old-timer like me just missed, or are newer editors adding in restrictions of their own? Additionally / related, is it acceptable that editors simply remove talk comments? This seems to me to defeat the entire purpose of having a Talk page! How can we achieve consensus if some views are suppressed? --Eliyahu S ^Talk 12:32, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Eliyahu S Yes of course it applies to talk pages. Please see WP:BLPTALK. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I should clarify. If the discussion doesn't impugn the Living Person, but rather disagrees with a topic,, is that still grounds for deleting? To give a perhaps less contentious example: in a bio page about a Wiccan, should a Talk comment that questions whether the Wiccan faith and classical witchcraft are synonymous, and hence should the word "witch" be used in a particular place, be simply deleted, and not discussed? (That wasn't the case, but is analogous.) --Eliyahu S ^Talk 14:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, BLP applies to every type of page on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 12:42, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No that can't be right. It's about Biographies. You can say that it applies to "Living Persons" everywhere, but I'm not sure that's correct. Applying such an extreme interpretation would mean that we couldn't even discuss either side of a contentious issue unless all parties involved are dead, lest someone dispute anything said about anyone alive. In particular, there are many public figures who are involved in public disputes and we couldn't even mention the dispute under that reading. --Eliyahu S ^Talk 14:14, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

331dot is right. BLP applies to all pages on Wikipedia. You cannot make a contentious claim about a living person anywhere on this site - not without citing a proper source. Public figures involved in public disputes will nearly always have such sourcing available, so that case is not a problem. MrOllie (talk) 14:17, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Eliyahu S: Read the very first line at WP:BLP RudolfRed (talk) 20:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Bevan

Was there ever a page of this Australian journalist in Draft namespace? If so, can it be revived? Doug butler (talk) 13:58, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug butler That page was deleted twice, both times for being an abandoned draft, this occurs when a draft hasn't been edited for 6 months. You can see those deletions here. You can request that the page be sent to your userspace here. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 14:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks CD. Doug butler (talk) 14:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How find the information listed by using {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} in the articlr

"The {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template provides incorrect information. The reference cited does not support the information mentioned." Hobbywriterae (talk) 14:01, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason this question is asked in "quotes"? Are you quoting a message another editor gave you? If a reference doesn't support WP:V, it can be removed, along with the claims. Please link to the article you are talking about; it is difficult to help people when the questions don't give hard examples. Cremastra (talk) 15:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Vizhinjam International Seaport Thiruvananthapuram, similar question asked at the Help Desk, but I didn't understand it there either. @Hobbywriterae Please use one venue only and expand on your issue so we can help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:14, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, there's no reason behind quoting it. The problem I face is that I tried to remove the {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} under the 'Further Reading' section because the information mentioned is incorrect, and the reference does not support it. However, it showed an error. I don't know how to remove or correct the information

here is the link to article :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vizhinjam_International_Seaport_Thiruvananthapuram Hobbywriterae (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hobbywriterae, please don't use that template directly on this page, it messes up the formatting. Instead, put <nowiki> tags around it so that people can see it but it's not an active template. (I've now done this for you, twice). Maproom (talk) 16:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hobbwriterae. The template {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} simply says "display the references that are tagged as 'lower-alpha' here". If you want to alter or remove one of those references, you need to find where it is actually cited in the text, and edit it there.

It is in fact cited just above, at the end of the previous section, "Further reading".

Section 3.2.4 of that source says The depth required for maneuvering and berthing of cruise ships is naturally available at the proposed location and will not involve any capital dredging, which seems to me to support the text that it is cited for. But I may be missing something. ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete account created by a minor with a school email address

I am trying to delete an account my son created with his school email address. I cannot find any way to do this. I would greatly appreciate any help. Maximopinera (talk) 15:05, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maximopinera Wikipedia accounts cannot be deleted. E-mail addresses can be easily disconnected from an account, however. Go to Special:ChangeEmail and leave the input box blank. If your son wants to, account vanishing is an option, but accounts can't be "deleted" just renamed and/or abandoned. Cremastra (talk) 15:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maximopinera: Welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, accounts can't be deleted for reasons related to attribution. Unless the account name uses the email address, no one but him will know what it is. You could try asking for a courtesy vanishing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject skateboarding isn’t inactive?

I don’t really know if the Wikiproject Skateboarding is inactive. I think it is an active WikiProject. Minecraft6532 (talk) 20:17, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Skateboarding

Last talk page message is from Sept 2023 and the todo list has not been updated since 2021. RudolfRed (talk) 20:21, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the last message was almost a year ago and the last non-automated message was over 4 years ago, but you are free to change the {{WikiProject status}} if you're planning on reviving it. C F A 💬 20:24, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citation replacement on the 1994 Cook County, Illinois, elections page

Citation 2 on 1994 Cook County, Illinois, elections is a Chicago Tribune article sourced from newspapers.com, however you can just find the article online here I have noticed that for whatever reason the actual author isn't attributed on that page, though it is in the original citation. Here are some questions:

Do I change the citation to the accessible link?
Do I change the author to Chicago Tribune Staff if I do since it doesn't specifically mention the author and just says Chicago Tribune.

Ztormtrooper (talk) 22:42, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ztormtrooper, first question: yes, do please change the link. Second: Newspapers.com is giving me contradictory messages about my access to their version of the article (I can, but I can't, but I can, but I can't), so (i) I can't check to see whether the author's name really appears in the article or whether instead the name is in error, and (ii) I'm sufficiently annoyed with Newspapers.com to want the link to go elsewhere. Anyway, for an article such as this, I think that the name of the author is of little importance. For a Chicago Tribune article to be attributed to "Chicago Tribune staff" says very little; I'd skip that too. -- Hoary (talk) 23:48, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply Hoary. I'll replace it and skip listing the author in the citation. Ztormtrooper (talk) 00:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Little League World Series Asia-pacific and Middle East Region

Could someone fix my mistakes please? I don't know how I accidentally deleted something, and a flag needs to be added and the gray for runners up for 2024 in llws results. Thanks. Knoote96 (talk) 23:55, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article is Little League World Series (Asia-Pacific and Middle East Region). What is it that you have accidentally deleted, and what other mistakes have you made? -- Hoary (talk) 00:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How much citations does an aircraft accident need?

My draft was declined mainly because of not enough information, so how much would I need on a crash like this? I've tried adding as much information as I could find in the sources included. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 00:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would check out WP:GNG. Most likely it needed more independent secondary sources. Ktkvtsh (talk) 01:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or more specifically, WP:NEVENT, which requires coverage beyond routine reports and database listings. C F A 💬 01:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i added more sources, not sure if it helps but yeah Bloxzge 025 (talk) 02:46, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Bloxzge 025, two or three high quality sources is usually enough. It seems that there are no sources that weren't published the day of the accident, indicating it may have no lasting significance. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with Draft:2023 Jet Rescue Air Ambulance Learjet 35A crash, Bloxzge 025, is not the number of sources cited but the paucity of material in the sources cited. Is the crash covered in depth in three or more sources that are independent of each other? If not, how else is the subject notable? -- Hoary (talk) 01:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your right, thanks. If any new notable sources are published I'll try again Bloxzge 025 (talk) 01:54, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added new sources Bloxzge 025 (talk) 02:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I'll ping the reviewer TheBritinator, but one issue I can see is that flightsafety.org and baaa-acro.com seem to be databases, which don't provide the kind of in-depth coverage that a Wikipedia article needs. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:53, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bloxzge 025, this crash is already covered in Learjet 35, along with many other crashes of similar planes. That may be a better outcome than a freestanding article. Cullen328 (talk) 02:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

your right, I just wanted to create a plane crash article, including my draft with more info. I still want it as an article since I've already put hours into researching/finding sources, but if not that's okay too Bloxzge 025 (talk) 02:20, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was my concern too. I did not many sources to establish the event as notable. I figured it could probably be merged elsewhere, but I see you have already figured that all out. Thanks. TheBritinator (talk) 07:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Article Rejected

I am confused by the rejection of my Draft Article on Jeffrey Barrick: Draft:Jeffrey Barrick

I am a subject matter expert. I carefully cited external references to substantiate all points. The subject, Barrick, now leads a major experiment with extensive coverage on Wikipedia and in the news -- as one example, the leading journal science Nature reported when Barrick took over the experiment (as linked in my entry). The subject himself has authored many highly cited papers in Science, Nature, PNAS, etc. I didn't tout the fact, but merely cited those papers that are relevant to Barrick's research and discoveries, which I describe in the entry in neutral, scientific terms with links to relevant references.

The subject has also won awards and honors, including an NSF CAREER Award and others. The only substantive change I can see making would be to reduce the number of papers noted in the "Selected works" section. I could also perhaps remove a few of the subject's lesser known awards. Is this something you would advise?

Thank you for looking over this and, I hope, providing concrete advice. I believe this entry, as well as my first one published yesterday, are substantial, neutral, accurate, and enhance the content of this valuable website.

Factsnfigurestoo (talk) 02:26, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft wasn't "rejected", it was declined. Rejected means stop, don't go on. Declined means it might be accepted with revision.

The draft looks as if it was written to praise the subject. It isn't written in a dispassionate neutral tone, with phrases like "rising through the faculty ranks" (meaningless, omit it), and "key mutations" (omit "key"). Wikipedia isn't a CV, so there is no need to list so many publications, they mean nothing to a general audience and give the appearance of puffery as a CV would have. That entire section can be removed without degrading the article.

Finally, see Wikipedia:Golden Rule and adhere to it. We need multiple sources about the person, not so many citations to his works. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, anachronist. I'll work on all those points. I would like to be clear that refereed articles in major scientific journals -- articles that that have been cited dozens and even hundreds of times -- are, in general, as reliable as any source that I know. They are not remotely like the "Not: tabloids, discussion boards, fansites, social media, or most blogs" cited as unreliable sources at the Golden Rule page.

I do have mixed feelings about removing the "Selected works" section. Many entries have them, and I think they are extremely useful to students looking to learn more about a topic. (And the works I selected are only a small fraction of Barrick's >100 papers, with an H-index of 54. So nothing like an actual CV.) Anyhow, I will cut the number way down and, if you insist, I'll remove them all. But doing so would, I think, make this encyclopedia entry less useful, not better.

Thanks again. Factsnfigurestoo (talk) 03:15, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean to imply that sources written by him are unreliable. The problem is that they are primary sources; they are not independent of him. See WP:PRIMARY. We prefer WP:SECONDARY sources if possible. You say he (or his work) has received extensive news coverage. Be sure that coverage is cited.

You can have selected works. The problem is that section is far too long. As I said, this isn't a CV and your draft comes across as one. You're a subject matter expert, so that lengthy list of selected works may be meaningful to you, but you are not writing for an audience of subject matter experts. It isn't meaningful to anyone else. From my perspective (as someone with a scientific background in a different field) it just looks like an unnecessarily long list that could be summarized in a few sentences without mentioning any of those works. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:24, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again Anachronistic. I think I've hit most or all of your points. I still list a few selected works, but not many. Many news stories cover the LTEE project (which is a clear focus of Barrick's work in the entry), so I'll try to copy some of those over in the days ahead, but I hope the article is close enough now. I've put a lot of effort into it, and I hope to do more entries in the weeks ahead for some other scientists in and near my field whose work is interesting, important, and deserves more attention. And having read many, many Wikipedia articles, and having written biographical and other entries for old-school subject-matter encyclopedias, I think this entry is solid. Factsnfigurestoo (talk) 04:12, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That looks quite good. The last major task, before you click the 'resubmit' button in the pink banner at the top of the draft, is to convert those bare URLs into actual citations. See WP:CITE for instructions on using the citation templates. The templates {{cite journal}}, {{cite news}}, {{cite magazine}}, or {{cite book}} would likely be needed. Click on any of those template links I listed to see the instructions for those specific citations. Journal citations should have at least one author, title, publication date, journal name, volume, issue, and doi parameters. Newspaper and magazine parameters are similar but with the newspaper or magazine name in place of the journal name, and no volume, issue, or doi. Book citations would typically have a year instead of a date, the publisher name, and ISBN instead of DOI. Including the 'url' parameter isn't necessary with journal articles because the 'doi' parameter typically takes care of that, but is useful with the other citation types. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:39, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The draft looks promising, to me. I've made some minor tweaks. Some suggestions:

Avoid phrases like "as well", that mean nothing and seem promotional.
Don't use multiple citations for uncontroversial statements of fact. It gives the impression that you're trying to get away with something dodgy; or maybe just boost the reference count. But references are assessed on quality, not quantity.
Cite sources properly, with bibliographical details, as for the first one.
Avoid the word "recently". Wikipedia articles are permanent. Maproom (talk) 07:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to format references, as URLS are not proper. Of greater importance, most of refs 8-31 are just links to journal articles. As noted above, these add nothing to establishing notability. Delete all those refs. Retain text content if there are refs for what people have published ABOUT Barrick. David notMD (talk) 10:27, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving a Chat at on Talk Page

Since I do not know how to archieve a chat on my talk page can someone who knows do an automated archiving of the chat on my talk page.Thanks. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 02:32, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See User:lowercase sigmabot III and follow the instructions. See the talk pages of other active users for examples. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you check to see if I did it right at my talk page. Thanks. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 04:16, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cookiemonster1618!

I fixed the archive for you by following the instructions over at Help:Archiving (plain and simple). Have a nice day! Polygnotus (talk) 05:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cookiemonster1618: I replaced Polygnotus' fix (edit conflict) with a new template and archive box. Either way has the same effect. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Musical notability & sufficient content

Hello! I want to ask for advice about musical notability criteria for this draft. This draft is about 3Racha, an in-house producing team of Stray Kids. The draft recently got declined because of "not meeting the musical notability criteria".

For musician element, 3Racha only officially released multiple non-commercial mixtapes. They only have 4 officially released songs but released as part of side-track on Stray Kids albums (credited as Bang Chan, Changbin, Han)'s song rather than (3Racha). But has collaborated once and the collaborations officially credited as 3Racha. Although because of that, I understand they may have not established enough notability in the musician factor.

I believe that 3Racha may be considered notable in composers and lyricists factor. They were credited as 3Racha on almost all Stray Kids' "considered notable" songs. 3Racha also had been awarded in the Best Producer category in South Korean award ceremony, they had been nominated twice in the similar category from two different award ceremonies.

Can you give me example of how should I improve the draft? Should I make the "Works and musical style" section like what it is in the Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart article for the "insufficient content"? Actually I'm confused of the criteria because it seems like focused on composers like Mozart and Paganini who composed a sonata. It would be great if you can guide me to article of a modern music producer who is notable but only wrote for others so I can understand better of the implementation for the criteria (if there's any because songwriters that I knew got considered notable for because of their musician factor rather than songwriting factor like Bumzu and the songwriter Kenzie article seems not so strict for her article) Thank you in advance!— ~~Shenaall~~ (t ♣ c) 04:44, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shenaall!

I think the main reason the draft was declined was because there are not enough reliable sources from independent sources like newspapers and magazines. While I see some citations there, there are in Korean. I will suggest that before you resubmit it, you add more references.

Also, if they have a major record label and have win a gold medal, this will further establish their Notability, else, I will suggest you wait till they meet some Notability guide before you send it again for review.

Best! Tesleemah (talk) 06:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, some things there are not very neccesary. You can remove the part you explained how names are derived in hangul. Remove contents you can't find enough sources for too, at least, the article can stand as a stub. Tesleemah (talk) 06:39, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit conflict] Hi, Shenaall! The key point is that to Wikipedia, WP:Notable doesn't generally mean "the subject is important (or influential, or prominent, etc.) in the field in which the they work", it means roughly "the subject has been extensively written about (not merely listed) in published Reliable sources independently of any direct input from them or their associates." A Wikipedia article should consist mostly of summaries of the material in such sources.

This means that, however many writing or production credits 3Racha has/have, those do not in themselves contribute to 3Racha's notability. (Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for composers and lyricists, point 1 says ". . . may be notable if they . . . [have] credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition.", but 'may be' is not definitely 'are', and obviously the Draft reviewers did not think this criterion was sufficiently met.

In short, you really need to find at least three different and independent published articles, or at least several paragraphs within three such articles, specifically about 3Racha. Hope this helps {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 06:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Add a certificate to a Wiki page

I wish to add a certificate (from a Public Prosecutor's Office) on a website that exonerates the gentleman concerned of any crimes. I don't know how to add the PDF certificate to the site. One has to jump through so many loops. Thank you Xander Fir (talk) 07:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Xander Fir.

First question: has this certificate been published? If not, then it may not be cited and no information from it may be used in the article (unless the information is also in a published source, of course, in which case why is the certificate relevant?)

Second point: if it is published, then it may be cited, but it will be a primary source, from which only uncontroversial factual information may be cited. So the article could then say something like "The Public Prosecutor's Office stated that ... ", but must not attempt to draw any conclusions from that statement - that would be original research, which is forbidden in a Wikipedia Article.

I suggest you have a look at WP:RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS - Wikipedia is not the place for advocacy, no matter how worthy the cause may be. ColinFine (talk) 09:16, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vito Roberto Palazzolo website

I edited Palazzolo's wiki page, and my edit was removed. Added to which I want to upload the document from the Public Prosecutors Office at the Court of Palermo (Sicily) that exonerated him of all crimes. Can anyone help me do this, and why was my edit removed? Xander Fir (talk) 07:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article's history shows that Frost has asked you to argue persuasively in Talk:Vito Roberto Palazzolo for your proposed changes. Please do so. This "document": Where is it published? -- Hoary (talk) 07:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the Talk site, listing our old arguments. I couldn't find anything referring to my latest edit, where I want to add the fact of Palazzolo's exoneration - of all criminal charges - by the Public Prosecutors office in Palermo. What I want to add is something new, and uncontestable. I don't need to argue "persuasively", but present the document. It's over now. Xander Fir (talk) 08:24, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where have you found this document? And wherever it is, hasn't it been adequately summarized by reliable Italian news websites? -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at what you added. Here's its second half: {{Expert needed}} I need an expert to help me upload the document from the Public Prosecutor's Office in Palermo, that exonerates Palazzolo of all criminal charges. Almost certainly no such upload would be appropriate, let alone necessary. If it were appropriate, then an article would be about the least appropriate place to ask for help in the enterprise. So Frost was entirely right to make the deletion. -- Hoary (talk) 08:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why would an authentic document exonerating a man of his crimes (after 40 years) not be "appropriate", or "necessary"? And why if it was appropriate, as you suggest, would "an article...... be about the least appropriate place to ask for help in the enterprise." I don't understand what you mean. Xander Fir (talk) 08:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say the document would be inappropriate (though I suspect that it would be). I said that uploading it would be inappropriate. Xander Fir, if you can point me to one or two other articles here within which "I" describes his or her needs and appeals for help, please do so. But until you do, I'll maintain that an article is a highly inappropriate place for such an appeal. Post it on the article's talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for replying. Apologies, but I still don't understand what you mean. A document (not an article) was recently released (30/11/23) exonerating a man of his crimes. After 40 years that's BIG news. How can I add a very brief explanation of that on his Wikipedia page, and for autheticity's sake, upload the document? And then we can lay it to rest. Xander Fir (talk) 09:23, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it is "BIG news", then you should have no trouble providing news sources which have reported on it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are there no independent reliable sources that report on this man being exonerated of a crime? It shouldn't be necessary to use a primary source. 331dot (talk) 09:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Head of Certification Service at the Public Prosecutor's Office in Palermo is a "reliable source". Could there be anything more authentic, original and reliable than this? Xander Fir (talk) 09:32, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It may be reliable, but it is not independent. Are there no news reports of this man being exonerated of a crime? 331dot (talk) 09:33, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'll get back to you ASAP with that. Thank you Xander Fir (talk) 10:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How is the Public Prosecutor's Office not independent of Vito Roberto Palazzolo? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Preventing a previously deleted article being readded

Today, I noticed an obvious troll article, Wikipedia:Dante Antonio Muñoz Carriman, has been deleted multiple times now but the LTA behind it continues to use sockpuppets to readd the article. It is easy to remove but it would be nice if there was a way of blacklisting the article from being created in the first place? Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 09:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Foxy. Yes, an article title can be SALTed. I don't know the procedure, but that page will no doubt tell you how. ColinFine (talk) 09:17, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic Mr. Fox I deleted that the last time- I considered salting it- and it might happen- but often a user who does behavior like that will just evade the salting. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Display Title

I've published my first article with the wrong display title. Is there a way to change it? Thank you. SH8989 (talk) 10:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First, "Publish" means 'save'. Your only activity is at User:SH8989/sandbox. This is therefore an unsubmitted draft. If, in time, you submit it to Articles for Creation (AfC) for review and it is moved to mainspace, the reviewer will give it a correct title, i.e., the person's name. David notMD (talk) 10:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SH8989: I have added a box with a Submit button to User:SH8989/sandbox. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not submit yet. Some of your sections do not have references. For a living person, all content needs to be verified. Secondly, it is unlikely that this person meets the criteria for academics described at Wikipedia:Notability (academics). David notMD (talk) 12:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About my draft

I have submitted a draft previously and it got rejected 21st August 2024, I made the asked edits and resubmitted it, I want a professional to check and let me know if it is ok or not.

Link- Draft:Abhiishek Mohta Solveitabhinav (talk) 10:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was Declined, which is less severe than Rejected. There are no 'professional' people here - Reviewers and Teahouse hosts are all unpaid volunteers. You have resubmitted it, and in time a review will take place. David notMD (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding citations for awards at state competitions for AfC

Have a draft that am trying to get created and I believe it needs additional criteria. I'm trying to add the awards that the band has won but they're stored on a proprietary database by organiser (Band Association of NSW) - https://bandnsw.com/ContestResults.php . What's the best way of adding the list of awards and provide adequate proper citations ? 203.220.221.175 (talk) 10:58, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Next move?

A bit silly, but: I'm stuck knowing what to do next in a content dispute with a specific editor; mostly, I think, because it's across a number of pages and they are fairly unresponsive. Here are some recent diffs: PCC556's change in March; my July restoration; article talk – Talk:Odo of Metz#Lead change; User talk:PCC556#July 2024. Other pages where we've interacted: Justacorps, Caravel, Frog (fastening). There's a kind of POV around Asian or non-Western cultural influences, or something(?!) See, for example, these edits: 1 violin; 2 vaquero; 3 Art Nouveau furniture; 4 tiara; 5 cast iron; and this, immediatlely reverted, but quite startling one.

My version(s) might be wrong, and of course I could just leave it, for other editors – if and when they see a problem. I don't see how this would be a matter for any of the ANI-type boards, either: There's no "slightly worrisome" noticeboard ...

I guess what I'm asking is what do you do when someone just won't engage? Just leave the poorly sourced or unsourced edits alone until more editors see them? A little advice would be appreciated; second opinions on whether I'm imagining the POV thing would be helpful, too. AukusRuckus (talk) 11:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Close the Duplicated RfCs

==

Dear Wikipedians,

Could you please officially close the two RfCs below that have the same purpose: to decide on a new Trump profile picture?

1. RfC: Trump infobox photo 2. RfC: Trump photo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2024_United_States_presidential_election#Alternative_options%3F Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:52, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the Source of A file

Hello, I have uploaded a file as my own work because I misunderstood the statement. I do not know how can I change this. I would appreciate some help with it. Istarek (talk) 11:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to edit the description page on Wikimedia Commons to change the source and author to their correct values. You'll also probably need to change the licensing info, and note that the image can only stay on Commons if it has been released under a suitable free license. J11csd (talk) 12:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To clean or not to clean?

Heya. I was wondering if this page qualifies for cleanup as I believe it may be a violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY..? I'm not sure, that's why I'm asking here! Opinions are much appreciated. Scuffedsherm (talk) 12:04, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]