Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cordless Larry, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

Can't edit this page? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

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.

Help Wikipedia

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

The Teahouse is frequently semi-protected, meaning the Teahouse pages cannot be edited by unregistered users (users with IP addresses), as well as accounts that are not confirmed or autoconfirmed (accounts that are at least 4 days old with at least 10 edits on English Wikipedia).

However, you can still get direct assistance on your talk page. ; a volunteer will reply to you there shortly. Alternatively, you can contact an experienced editor by visiting your homepage and clicking "Ask your mentor a question about editing".

There are currently 1 user(s) asking for help via the {{Help me}} template:

make article

i may be slow but how do you make an article Conesfortheworld (talk) 19:21, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Conesfortheworld, I've left a welcome message on your talk page with some links. Help:Your first article might be of use? Knitsey (talk) 19:25, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Conesfortheworld, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 21:40, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

My article has been rejected again and again - but why, really?

I have been trying to post an article about Dr. Alexander Meystel (deceased), a world-renowned roboticist and foundational researcher in the fields of control systems, machine learning/machine intelligence and robotics. Nothing too dissimilar from his colleage James Albus, who already has an article on Wikipedia.

The only difference, I guess, is that I happen to be his son (only child, now ... ahem ... we'll call me .. "old"), and there is no one else left to speak for him or his lasting legacy on the fields I mentioned (his works are still being taught around the world, referenced in patents and papers, etc.

It is very burdensome to go through this process thrice++. Can someone please help me? Thank you.

Michael Meystel Meystel (talk) 20:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello! Getting an article approved for submission can often times be a slow and frustrating process. I would recommend going through the notes on your talk page. Each time a submission is denied, they will list out any reasons why. You are also given tools to seek assistance either from the reviewing contributor or other sources available to new contributors. The Tea House is certainly a good place to start, but WP: Articles for creation Help desk may be more specialized for what you're asking. S1mply.dogmom (talk) 20:56, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Meystel, and welcome to the Teahouse.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what several people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about him in reliable publications, and very little else.

While your COI does not prevent you from creating and submitting a draft (and thank you for disclosing it), it may make it harder for you to write an acceptable article, because you may find it difficult to forget every single thing you know about him and write a summary only of what those independent sources say.

(I'm overstating the case slightly: your knowledge about him is absolutely inadmissable, except where it is corroborated by reliable published sources; but non-independent published sources may be cited in limited ways - see WP:SPS. But such information will not contribute to establishing notability, and so may as well be omitted until the draft has been accepted). ColinFine (talk) 21:47, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

What to do about an semi-absent GA reviewer

About two months ago, my GA nomination of Equality was picked up, but since then, the reviewer has been periodically disappearing. I believe them when they say they are trying to make time for it, but given their reasons for disappearing, I'm beginning to think it would be better for everyone involved to let them off the hook. I'm not sure what to do. – Farkle Griffen (talk) 20:24, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

I think formally speaking you're probably allowed to withdraw the nomination. Not sure how to change the templates/notices to account for that, but the person reviewing your article might know. Just say you'd like to withdraw the nomination. If no one is actively nominating it, the review must end, formally. Mrfoogles (talk) 03:36, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Interesting to see a GA nomination for a topic as fundamental as Equality, though. Don't see those a lot. Mrfoogles (talk) 03:37, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Help with improving very niche subject

Hello. First of all sorry for my English. I am currently writing my thesis on this subject, and I have trouble switching to a different style than my usual one, so I can't improve the subject myself out of fear of being wrongly accused of plagiarism (or of simply using Wikipedia instead of doing my own research on current academic consensus). However, I can provide the necessary sources for the improvement of pages relating to the Muisca confederation: All of them are publicly accessible and I hope a devoted editor has the time and energy to read them, and then to change the Wikipedia page(s) on the Muisca for the better. Indeed, there have been many changes in Muisca scholarship recently (this does not mean that the traditional historical narratives are necessarily wrong). Here are the sources, they will contextualise everything and are fairly easy to read: https://www.banrepcultural.org/biblioteca-virtual/credencial-historia/numero-44/los-senores-muiscas (for this link you will have to refuse options for it to work); https://www.academia.edu/22398553/Mercados_poblamiento_Muiscas ; and https://sites.pitt.edu/~ccapubs/pdfdownloads/PITTmem09-Langebaek_1995.pdf (the last one will take some time loading). I know this demand might be bizarre, but it comes from the heart. It hurts seeing niche subjects cite almost only short museum pages/blogs/tourism pages instead of the detailed studies that exist about the muisca just as they do about the Aztec and Inca. I don’t have much time to argue about it a lot, and as I said I am not able to do the changes (big) myself (though believe me, I would love to, and I will probably one day). If a devoted user speaking basic Spanish and English with the time and energy necessary would have the kindness to read the three sources, I will be eternally grateful. There is MUCH more to this than 2 studies and a short article, but this can be a good way to improve Wikipedia by being informed about the muisca. After having finished, I am sure the editor in question will have the exact same eagerness as I have to improve Wikipedia pages related to the muisca. Maybe other editors with knowledge of niche subjects know what I am talking about. Kind regards, 80.187.115.196 (talk) 22:19, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

You may wish to bring this up on the article's talk page and the talk pages of the related Wikiprojects. The ones for Colombia and Indigenous peoples of the Americas may be particularly interested as the article is ranked top and high importance in those Wikiprojects respectively. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 23:25, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the link! I will re-post my original message there then. Regards, 80.187.115.196 (talk) 05:05, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Alternate to peer review for a potential good article nomination

Hello,

I've been working on an article for quite a bit of time now and want to nominate it for good article status soon, but I was wondering if there was an alternative to peer reviewing to get a bit of feedback. I'm not looking for an in-depth review like the peer review option would give me, but just a bit of constructive criticism on what I can improve before submitting a nomination. I've been doing alright improving the article based on its previous good article nomination + the various pages with tips and tricks, but I've never nominated an article before and I'm really not 100% on if I should do it now. Is there anything like that on Wikipedia? I've spent quite a bit of time looking, but found nothing (though, I am a bit new here)

Thank you! Reverosie (talk) 23:12, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't think there's an explicit alternative. You may want to ask on the talk pages of the related Wikiprojects for the article. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 23:27, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

I already asked on the article's talk page itself, but I'll probably ask at the respective wikiproject too. Thank you! Reverosie (talk) 23:30, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Talk pages are pretty dead unless it's for something like a country, major war, or famous person. Might save you a bit of time in the future. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 23:33, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I just went looking, and the talk page for middle ages (where my article best applies) is abandoned to say the least. I'm not sure where to go from here and might even submit the article as a nomination tomorrow regardless since I've spent quite a lot of time at it. (though, I'm not sure how to do that either!) Waiting for a peer review would be useless at this stage since I had the article's failed GA nomination to guide me. Reverosie (talk) 23:41, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Moving drafts to the article space

Hello!

I'm so sorry to ask another question so soon after the previous one, but it's unrelated: My account is now over 4 days old and has nearly 300 edits, so can I move my submitted draft into the article mainspace? If so, how? If not, can I delete my draft and re-create it as a new article that won't need a review? or do articles still need reviews even from verified accounts?

Thank you! Reverosie (talk) 23:16, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Your account should be autoconfirmed, and thus you should be able to move a page. There should be a blue "Move" button on the right ToC just under the header "Tools". If you feel the article meets notability guidelines, then by all means you are permitted to move it into mainspace. Be warned that it may be moved back to draftspace if another editor feels it is not ready. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 23:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much! The article is moved :) Reverosie (talk) 23:46, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

@Reverosie Interesting article. Just one minor point: in Sibylla (wife of Bohemond III)#Marriage and conflict you seem to have an excessive number of "would"s. Why not just use the past tense of the relevant verbs? Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:26, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much for pointing this out! I've edited the article and fixed this problem Reverosie (talk) 15:15, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Help with biography

Hey guys, thanks for your support. I need a hand with Draft:Paulo Otto. Anybody could help me in the way to publish it? Allyssonallan (talk) 00:39, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

The reviewer gave feedback as to why the draft was declined - you have not shown notability with reliable, secondary sources. Every source you have used was partially written by the subject of the article. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 03:42, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your support @Notcharizard This Professor is low-profile and it is difficult to find his awards elsewhere. Allyssonallan (talk) 13:19, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Since he was a professor, it is possible that his notability can be based on WP:NPROF. The usual options are either that his publications are highly-cited and impactful (relative to the standards of his field), or that his professorship was the equivalent of a named or distinguished professorship. AfC reviewers are often completely unaware of NPROF, which is an extremely unusual deviation from the sourcing requirements of Wikipedia generally, so you may need to draw their attention to it. Elemimele (talk) 16:21, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Can someone accept my edit request

I made an edit request at the Samaria article, can someone respond to it Emukettu (talk) 03:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

@Emukettu: You need to have patience. Please see this. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 03:35, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Use of sources

Can a television advertisement be used a source for dating a products availability to a decade when you can not find the exact release date of a product Sharnadd (talk) 04:20, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Sharnadd, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't think this would be acceptable: in my view it would be original research. ColinFine (talk) 09:37, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

@Sharnadd Wikipedians can be remarkably good at finding sources if you give them key pieces of information. So, you could mention that you want to get an approximate date by posting on the talk page of the article, if it has lots of watchers, or maybe in one of the WP:Reference desks. One possibility would be to find a published newspaper advert for the product and cite that as a date it was certainly available. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:19, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

great advise will do that thanks sure it must be out there somewhere Sharnadd (talk) 16:05, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

@ColinFine and Michael D. Turnbull: The difficult thing about this situation is that this information from the advertisement seems to have just gone unnoticed from people that have written about ketchup chips. I did a lot of research when I was trying to make this a GA and even after. I read a book about Canadian snack food history. I went through every mention of "ketchup chips" at newspapers.com. I haven't come across this before and it's important because it throws another country into the mix for "had this the decade it was invented" (people are unsure about whether they were invented in Canada or the United States first, just that it happened around the same time). It's frustrating when sources seem to have an obvious blindspot but there's not really much one can do about that other than hope someone does actually write about it someday. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 13:15, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Sometimes this sort of product will have associated patents which could be used to get approximate dates. However, Google Patents doesn't seem to have any useful hits for the keywords ketchup + chips. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:50, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

And the English company that did them in the 70s got taken over by walkers 20 years ago Sharnadd (talk) 16:45, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I want to post this Artcile. Can anyone help me

Article draft

Thug Life - Reel and Real A Life Lesson for ever ......... Thug Life - Is it a tattoo - a meme or a Rebellion pose?? Is it waking up every day, staring failure in the face and saying — “Not today, da.” Now let’s talk the reel and real Thug Life. But the present version - ageing like our Amma's filter coffee and still tasty. 🎬 Kamal Haasan. Mani Ratnam. A.R. Rahman. Simbu. 4 men. 4 different battles. 1 loud message: “We’re still here. And we’re not done.” After a big setback with Netizens almost trolling him to the core - a never before for Indian 2- Kamal Haasan at 70, walks into Thug Life not like a man trying to prove something but confident of doing a new thing irrespective of anything. And Mani Ratnam? He’s nearing 70 too. He made a 30-year-old Kamal play a 60-year-old don in Nayakan. Now? He’s flipped the script. Making the same Kamal act like he’s 30 — with fire in his eyes and rebellion in his walk. That is Thug Life - I feel. It’s not about pretending to be young. It’s about refusing to grow old inside. 🎶 Then comes Rahman. Nearing 60 soon, still creating music like he’s got something to prove. He doesn't rest on Grammys. He reinvents. Every. Single. Time. Thug Life? It’s the beat that keeps playing even when the world hits pause. 🔥 And Simbu. Written off. Doubted. Questioned. But Mani Ratnam didn’t just cast him. He trusted him when others didn’t. That trust? Simbu’s paying it back with every frame. இனிமேல் நான் தான் Rangaraya Sakthivel Naickan. (Here after Iam - Rangaraya Sakthivel Naickan) - Simbu Roaring like a Lion in the Teaser He’s acting, roaring and also thanking in Audio Launch. That’s real thug gratitude. So what is Thug Life? Is it the life you flex on Instagram. Is it the life you fight for when no one's watching. It is Kamal screaming “action” at 70. Mani rewriting rules at 69. Rahman composing thunder at 59. Simbu proving doubters wrong at 42 They didn’t drop a film. They dropped a message: THUG LIFE Don’t let your age, your past, your critics—or your own fear—decide when your story ends. Because legends? They don’t age. They evolve. If they’re living their Thug Life at 60's and and 70s Why not you - Most happy to hear your thug life moments - irrespective of your age . VS Balajee (talk) 07:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, VS Balajee. Please read a number of the very many articles that it already includes: doing so should give you an understanding of what an encyclopedia is. -- Hoary (talk) 08:09, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Image help

I tried adding an atlas to the Halfmoon Township, Pennsylvania page but it won't go in the history section for some reason. Could someone explain why this the case and help me fix it. Thanks!!! Goonsnick (talk) 09:25, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

It appears to show in the history segment on mobile. The infobox may be forcing it down and thus out of the history section of the article. You can go into advanced image setting and move the image to the left side so it appears in history on a computer. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 10:38, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

It's an effect of standard layout process, where an image cannot be displayed higher than the population-box because the population-box is higher than the image in the page's source. DMacks (talk) 14:11, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! @DMacks You are incredible! Goonsnick (talk) 10:12, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

 • blush • glad to help! DMacks (talk) 12:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Create new article for a company

Hello,

I would like to create a new Wikipedia article for a company. Can anyone please tell me what kind of rules and regulations have to be kept in mind? Especially in regards to copyright infringement/violation and disclosing my identity as working for the company.

Please note that the new page will be written from a neutral point of view, citing proper sources of information. 167.103.2.169 (talk) 09:40, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Probably a good idea to read WP:BOSS first and then WP:YFA. Creating an article is the most difficult task there is here, creating one with a conflict of interest and zero experience is ten times harder. Theroadislong (talk) 09:50, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

You also appear to be evading a block on User talk:Sunehagh. Theroadislong (talk) 10:42, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Changing your username

Greetings, dear Wikipedians! This is my first question in the teahouse. I'd like to share a question about changing your username on Wikipedia.

Imagine you feel bored and you want to change your username on Wikipedia because of some random reason, is it possible to do so? Or is it not possible and you cannot change your username anymore?

Thanks for awnsering my question!

EpicSalmon (talk) 11:32, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

@EpicSalmon It is possible, please see WP:CHUS. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 11:35, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

I have an idea that I think is better, EpicSalmon. Allay your boredom by contributing reliably sourced, referenced material to one or two of en:Wikipedia's existing articles. (This is something that you don't seem to have attempted for seven months.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:21, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia readers, let alone occasional or irregular contributors, are welcome to create accounts—it allows them to use gadgets and user-defined styles, for example.

They are also welcome to change user name, should they wish to.

You should not address any Wikipedia user in that fashion; much less so on The Teahouse, which is intended to be a welcoming environment for the less experienced. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:48, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Attitudes like this probably explain why some people don't contribute 🤔 —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {u - t? - _uselessc} 13:06, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

That's a fair cop. I'm in a contrite mood. Sorry, EpicSalmon. But look, you say: "I really love Delft and its history and inventions." Seconded. And while en:Wikipedia's article on Delft looks good at first glance, it quickly reveals itself to be defective. As an example, it implies that the "Superbus" project is alive but hints that it might not be; though poor, the article Superbus does succeed in showing that the project has been dead for five years. The latter article has (well deserved) "citation needed" flags; and for me (and I'd guess other readers too), it also raises other questions, among them: (i) How did the/a "Superbus" get into a narrow shopping street (even if only once, for a photo op)? (ii) What happened to the "Superbus(es)" in/after 2020? This is material for absorbing research, especially suitable for somebody who (like you, unlike me) can handle sources in Dutch. -- Hoary (talk) 22:42, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Collaboration Request: Creating English Wikipedia Article Following Wikimedia–Ringier Event

To Whom It May Concern,

Previosuly, a Wikipedia page with my name was available in English but no longer publicly accessible. I would kindly like to ask for your advice or help in restoring or recreating an English-language Wikipedia page that meets the notability criteria.

I am a senior expert in GenAI, AI&Society, tech foresight /policy with international recognition. I am an Associate Professor, a transatlantic Horizon Europe Research Project Leader, an invited expert for the UN, EU, and several leading academic and policy organizations, and a Fulbright alumna. I am the first who published a comprehensive summary/monograph of GenAI, Media and Society by Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group as the founder of AI Media Research - global hub, beyond several D1-Q1 publications in the emerging AI trends and strategic foresight.

If helpful, I am happy to collect and provide verified sources (academic publications, policy contributions, international media mentions, Google Scholar, ORCID etc.) to support the article’s credibility.

Would it be possible to be connected with a volunteer editor who could help review or re-upload my article? Thank you in advance for any support you can offer.

I’m highly motivated to contribute, as I recently participated in a Ringier–Hungarian Wikimedia event aimed at improving the underrepresentation of women on Wikipedia, where I was encouraged to connect with a volunteer editor to collaboratively work on an English-language article.

Thank you for your collaboration in advance, Katalin Feher PhD Zenefuleimnek (talk) 13:20, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

The article was Katalin Fehér and was deleted after discussion in June 2022 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katalin Fehér. You may request it be undeleted and moved to "Draft:" space, where you can work on it to show that you now meet the criteria listed at WP:SCHOLAR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:41, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

@Zenefuleimnek On the English Wikipedia we use a set of possible notability requirements for academics, listed at WP:NACADEMIC. Which of these criteria do you think you may meet? Your Hungarian article is far too much like a resumé and entirely unsuitable here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

I expect Zenefuleimnek thinks "an invited expert for the UN, EU, and several leading academic and policy organizations" meets "The person has had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity." Do you not? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:51, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Regent International Center, maybe the most populous building on Earth

Hello everyone, I was looking for the biggest building on Earth in terms of population : some sources were pointing to the Regent International Center, which had no Wikipedia article except in Chinese. I was enthusiastic about creating an article in English (although it is not my mother tongue). I marked it as a stub, knowing that the community would improve it after a while. But soon after I created it, it was deleted and replaced by a "Draft" : Draft:Regent International Center. I don't know how to improve it to pass this step, because of language problems (not so fluent in English, I am afraid) and the lack of sources others than tiktok videos and tabloids. If someone could help by editing this article, I would appreciate. Damouns (talk) 14:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

@Damouns I think the best way forward would be to include your references and a picture in the main article on Hangzhou. Please read this help page on how to format your two sources correctly. I don't think that it will be easy to demonstrate individual notability for the building, although we do allow Chinese-language sources if that's what are mainly available: see WP:NONENG. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

The formatting of sources was not incorrect, albeit not optimal. I have improved them, before seeing your comment. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

You need more citations, from reliable sources, independent of the building's architects or owners, showing Significant coverage of the building. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:57, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Article about Bring Back Euro Trains

Hello,

I would like to write an article about Bring Back Euro Trains, a campaign that was formed following the withdrawal of Eurostar international trains services from the Kent stations Ashford and Ebbsfleet, Kent, UK.

I believe this is notable because there is still a lot of misinformation about whether or not international trains are actually stopping at the stations that are labelled "international", that is to say: Stratford International, Ebbsfleet International, and Ashford International. The services were widthdrawn during the pandemic and were never reinstated, and many AI language tools that scrape the internet for information about these stations are misinformed. As a novice contributor, I would value someone's feedback on whether such an article would be valuable.

I am connected with Bring Back Euro Trains (as a volunteer) so I would like to write an article which could be edited by someone independent. Could someone advise me whether this would be the right approach?

The aim of this article would not be to criticise Eurostar in particular. Several competitors are vying to use the line and the organisation has a broad remit to inform as well as to campaign.

I hope someone can advise me on this. StephanieChicken StephanieChicken (talk) 16:01, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

You would need to show that the organisation meets the criteria at WP:GNG.

You could start an article at Draft:Bring Back Euro Trains, declare your CoI on your user page, and submit the draft when ready via the AfC process.

Another option would be to ask on the talk pages of relevant articles, like High Speed 1 for someone to add a section to those articles. If and when there is enough material, it can be split off into a separate article. Again, you should declare your CoI.

I have left some other, more general advice, on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:11, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick reply and for your welcome, much appreciated. The High Speed 1 page correctly (and very briefly) mentions the lack of Eurostar at Ashford and Ebbsfleet since the pandemic, but not the impact this has had on Kent and the wider south east. I doubt if London St Pancras High Speed (as the company is called now) would be interested in a section on this. I will try drafting something independent, declare my CoI, and see if I can work within the guidelines. StephanieChicken (talk) 16:30, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @StephanieChicken, and welcome to the Teahouse.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia.

Your text above shows some misunderstandings about Wikipedia, (unsurprising in somebody who is new to it). You say "I believe this is notable because there is still a lot of misinformation..." - this is a complete non-sequitur. Notability is roughly about "is there enough wholly independent reliably published material about the subject to base an article on?" And whether or not "London St Pancras High Speed (as the company is called now) would be interested in a section on this" is 100% irrelevant to Wikipedia, because the company have absolutely no control or ownership of the Wikipedia article about them, any more than BBET would have any ownership or control of a Wikipedia article about them.

The fact that you have created an account and immediately started writing about a campaigning group suggests you are likely to fall foul of WP:NOTSOAPBOX. Please be aware 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 exclusively 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. ColinFine (talk) 18:49, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine I really appreciate you taking the trouble to explain this. I realised almost as soon as I had pressed Send that companies have no ownership of articles about them, and therefore part of what I said was irrelevant! I understand the non-sequitur which you have explained well. Of course I am biased, but I also have experience of journalism and of writing from a neutral standpoint. But Wikipedia is a very particular environment which as you say I need to learn to navigate. So I will start by looking around at my subject of interest and see where I can add or correct information. Does that sound like a proper plan? StephanieChicken (talk) 20:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, it does, @StephanieChicken. But make sure that any information you add comes from reliable published sources, not solely from your own knowledge, however expert you may be. ColinFine (talk) 22:11, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

How can I publish my own article without COI

I am an independant film actor from bangladesh. I have lots of news references about my works. How can i publish my article in wiki. I have created an account today. Actor Farhan Khan Rio (talk) 17:42, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

You should declare a conflict of interest on your user page. You can find the information about declaring one here. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 17:54, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Actor Farhan Khan Rio, and welcome to the Teahouse. You are very strongly discouraged from creating an article about yourself or your works (see WP:autobiography) but not forbidden.

In order to write such an article successfully, you would need to

1. Find several places where people wholly unconnected with you, and unprompted by you, have chosen to publish material about you in reliable publications (without several such sources, no article is possible); and
2. Write a summary of what those sources say. What you know, believe, or think about yourself is irrelevant, and should not be mentioned in the article unless it is corroborated by independent sources.

Do you see why this is difficult? ColinFine (talk) 18:55, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Opinions about a page

Hey

I created this page: Draft:Special Operations Group (Estonia), should I release it or edit it more, as im not the best in everything yet. Keep in mind that I translated most of it, but I have some sources that I can use to improve it, but I would like to do that 1 step at a time after the page has been released. Minaolenkarl (talk) 17:43, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

The best way to get feedback on your draft is to press the blue button that says "Submit the draft for review!" that is located just above the start of the draft. I will note, just by a quick skim, that the sections "Formation" and "Activity" are completely unsourced - you need a source for each claim made in the article. I highly doubt the article would be accepted at this time, but you just need to find reliable sources that back your claims. Best of luck! PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 17:53, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, its nearly impossible to find sources for said topic, other than a book, that I have as well. Can I do anything about it? Minaolenkarl (talk) 18:01, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

You can cite the book, though if you cannot find a source for every claim then you cannot have the claim in the article. It may help if you see what sources your book used. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 18:07, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Minaolenkarl. To add to what PhoenixCaelestis says, you may cite the book if it was published by a reputable publisher. If it was self-published, or through a vanity press, it is unlikely to be regarded as a reliable source.

Note that the existing of an article in another language version of Wikipedia is no guarantee that the subject meets English Wikipedia's criteria for notability: each language version is an indpeendent project, with its own policies and procedures. ColinFine (talk) 18:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey, the publisher is reputable, as one of the authors is the unit commander himself, and the book is published by Rahva Raamat, one of Estonians biggest book stores/publishers. Though now im wondering if I can cite individual small talks, that i have had in real life? Minaolenkarl (talk) 19:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

What is the name / ISBN for the book? Peaceray (talk) 19:01, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

"Sog. Eesti eriüksuse lugu" Minaolenkarl (talk) 19:08, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Here is the footnote that I would recommend using:

<ref name="Saksatamm 2021">{{cite book |last=Saksatamm |first=Markus |title=SOG: eesti eriüksuse lugu |trans-title=SOG: The story of the Estonian special forces unit |publisher=Rahva Raamat |publication-place=Tallinn |year=2021 |isbn=978-9916-14-017-8 |oclc=1301998812 |language=et}}</ref>

This should render in the footnote section as:

Saksatamm, Markus (2021). SOG: eesti eriüksuse lugu [SOG: The story of the Estonian special forces unit] (in Estonian). Tallinn: Rahva Raamat. ISBN 978-9916-14-017-8. OCLC 1301998812.

If you are going to be using different pages as footnotes, then I recommend using shortened footnotes like so:

{{sfn|Saksatamm|2021|p=}} for a single page or {{sfn|Saksatamm|2021|pp=}}for multiple pages and

*{{cite book |last=Saksatamm |first=Markus |title=SOG: eesti eriüksuse lugu |trans-title=SOG: The story of the Estonian special forces unit |publisher=Rahva Raamat |publication-place=Tallinn |year=2021 |isbn=978-9916-14-017-8 |oclc=1301998812 |language=et}} for the full citation.

Peaceray (talk) 19:25, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

If you are going to use shortened footnotes, I would put the full citation under a new ===Sources=== subheading under ==References==. Peaceray (talk) 19:33, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

P.S. You use {{sfn}} instead of <ref></ref> tags. Peaceray (talk) 19:36, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I really only use visual editing, as source editing is a hassle if it can be done easier(imo). Thanks though, I will edit as said. Minaolenkarl (talk) 15:23, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello again, @Minaolenkarl. If the book is published by a reputable publisher, that's great; but if it is coauthored by the commander of the unit, that's not so good.

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 exclusively 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.

The article must be based almost entirely on independent sources, which does not include a book by the commander.

And as for your personal communications, I'm afraid they cannot be used or cited in a Wikipedia article: verifiability is a core policy. ColinFine (talk) 22:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I used the book still, and submitted the page for review, though, I can still edit it if theres something urgent that is currently problematic. I fixed most of the citations as well. Minaolenkarl (talk) 18:27, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I moved the page to Draft:Special Operations Group (Estonia) as there should always be a space before before a left parenthesis. I also did a number of edits to the draft that were improvements or indicated what needs to be done. Peaceray (talk) 19:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia random article button?

Does Wikipedia have a random article button that'll choose a random page in a dedicated section/category?

For example if I'm looking at marine animals is it possible to have it show me articles just about marine animals? 91.150.188.87 (talk) 18:40, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

See Special:RandomInCategory. Peaceray (talk) 19:03, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Help requested fixing citations at Jose Maria Quijano Wallis

I've been trying to fix citation problems (going through everything under Q in Category:CS1_errors: periodical ignored sounded like fun), and I'm kind of stumped by Jose Maria Quijano Wallis. I'm not entirely sure what reference [2], the one currently with the error message, was supposed to point to. I think it might be a reference to a book, confused with a reference to a library's website, which is now a deadlink. If the original book was this, which is my best guess, then the dates in the article don't agree with the dates in the source. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 19:19, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

The Wayback Machine is no help.

The editor who added it hasn't edited since 2018; but you could try dropping them an email.

You can contact Luis Ángel Arango Library via [1].

If you don't speak Spanish, you might ask at WT:WikiProject Spain or es:Wikipedia:Embajada Local for someone to help you.

The Spanish version of the article has the same issue. If you find the answer, please fix it there too, or notify es:Wikipedia:Embajada Local. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:24, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

I fixed the problem with that second citation based on the Internet Archive link that you provided. The full citation now is:

• Posada Carbó, Eduardo (1994). "Historia de las ideas en Colombia [History of ideas in Colombia]". In Melo, Jorge Orlando (ed.). Gran enciclopedia de Colombia: tematica [Great Encyclopedia of Colombia: Thematic] (in Spanish). Vol. 5 Cultura [Culture]. Santa Fé de Bogotá: Circulo de Lectores. p. 24. ISBN 978-958-28-0330-8. OCLC 164755392 – via Internet Archive.

These two citations have the same ISBN & OCLC #. The OCLC is to another text unrelated, & the ISBN is for ESTUDIOS, DISCURSOS Y ESCRITOS VARIOS, DE J.M. QUIJANO WALLIS.

• Estudios, discursos y escritos varios [Studies, speeches and various writings]. París: Nabu Press, Tip. Italo-Oriente. 1908. ISBN 1246238489. OCLC 1246238489. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
• Tres discursos en los festejos del Centenario (1910) [Three speeches in the centenary celebrations (1910)]. Bogota: Nabu Press, Tip. Italo-oriente. 1908. ISBN 1246238489. OCLC 1246238489. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)

It seems that this would be a better citation for the first one:

• Estudios, discursos y escritos varios [Studies, speeches and various writings] (in Spanish). Paris: R. Roger y F. Chernoviz. 1908. OCLC 903480537 – via HathiTrust.

Peaceray (talk) 20:50, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

This would be the citation for that last one:

• Tres discursos en los festejos del Centenario [Three speeches at the Centennial celebrations] (in Spanish). Bogotá: Imprenta de El Nuevo Tiempo. 1910. OCLC 891372472. Retrieved 2025-05-28 – via Universidad Eafit.

Peaceray (talk) 21:03, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I think the references in "Selected works" are correct now. The article is still missing a source for the birth and death dates that agrees with the birth and death dates in the text. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 21:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Why is everything protected?

Not just Donald Trump, but almost every article I try to click on?Astrocond (talk) 21:50, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

@Astrocond: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I know trying to edit a page and finding out you can’t can feel frustrating. Pages here are protected, or limited in who can edit the page, usually based on vandalism, other disruptive editing, or because it is recognized as a contentious topic. If there is a page you are interested in adding to that is protected, you can use the Edit Request Wizard, and this will add a request so that other editors who can edit the page can evaluate your request. cyberdog958^Talk 22:02, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

@Astrocond Your account will become autoconfirmed in a couple of days and then there will be many more articles you can edit directly. Not surprisingly, articles about Donald Trump and US politics in general are WP:Contentious topics and you should be aware of the extra rules that apply to these. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:06, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Clarification of Milner's National Background and Sourcing in Lead

Hi all,

I recently edited the lead of Yuri Milner’s article to include the descriptor “Russian-born,” based on multiple reliable sources (e.g., major press outlets and biographical coverage). This change was reverted with the summary “unconstructive change to nationality and removal of sourced material.” I’d like to clarify the intent and reasoning: Nationality/identity: Describing Milner as “Russian-born” reflects his widely reported origin (born and raised in Moscow, educated in the USSR) and is relevant context, especially given his later emigration and renunciation of Russian citizenship. This is supported by [WP:LEAD] and [WP:ETHNICITY], which allow for origin when it’s notable and well-sourced — which in Milner’s case, it clearly is.

Removal of self-sourced material: I removed a reference that was from Milner’s own website, which described his citizenship status and identity. Per [WP:SELFSOURCE], self-published sources should not be used to support material about living people if the claims are in any way contentious or tied to self-representation. In this case, I believed it gave undue weight to Milner’s preferred framing without balance from third-party sources. I’m happy to discuss or adjust the language or sourcing further, but I believe these edits were made in good faith and are in line with Wikipedia’s core content policies (NPOV, VER, BLP). Looking forward to other editors’ input.@Bb3 user Factcheckeralex (talk) 23:34, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

I believe the current/original wording of "Soviet-born" is as he was born in the Soviet Union. Besides, him renouncing Russian citizenship isn't important enough to warrant an entry in the lead - it's literally just one sentence in the body. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 00:40, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Adding a reference

He

I am brand new and am making some changes to a page that involves a project i was involved with. I have added the correct info but the page will not let me add a reference indicating where I got that information from....HELP!!!

I don't know if this is the right way to go about asking questions here- if not- my apologies.... if so... HELP!  :-)

Thank you and I look very forward to anyone who can help giving me some info.... Have a great evening- or day- depending on where you are. HOTROD213LA (talk) 01:15, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

It's a good place to ask, HOTROD213LA. I'm guessing that it's to do with your addition of "[13]" within this edit. Assuming for a moment that this is so: If you want to add a footnote that should be numbered "13", then you should forget about the number, add a footnote, and let Wikipedia's software arrange the numbering accordingly. (In this automatic renumbering, the software resembles word processing software such as Microsoft Word.) If you're editing "source", then: An assertion that seems to call for a footnote.<ref>Footnote that verifies the assertion.</ref> HTH! -- Hoary (talk) 01:36, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

THANK YOU.. but I already took that out and still can not get the reference list to open so that I can add the referenced site.

Any ideas?

There is also something else I am tracking down to use for a reference that I would like to add so that information is verified and not removed..... I am sorry if I am being a bother but your help is much appreciated! HOTROD213LA (talk) 01:53, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

No apology needed! You say that you "still can not get the reference list to open". But there is no such openable list. Crossfade (American band) currently has over a dozen references, listed (for the reader, not for the editor) under the heading "References". But if you want to edit this section, then all you'll see within it is {{Reflist}}. This is as expected: nothing is wrong. ({{Reflist}} means something like "Collect all the references specified above, and dump them here for display by browser software".) -- Hoary (talk) 02:15, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

i really appreciate it.. but when I do that the only thing i can do is edit a current reference- not add new ones.. Let me try again.....thanks again and I appreciate your help. HOTROD213LA (talk) 02:20, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

OK-- I SEE THE items on the left of the page.... but what do I need to put next to the name Randy Staub to get the info I add to cover that reference.. I am adding his discogs page. HOTROD213LA (talk) 02:24, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I Think i messed up but the #12 reference is not even still on the page.. Darn it. I need a tutor on this..... :-( HOTROD213LA (talk) 02:28, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

@HOTROD213LA WP:TUTORIAL has good info on referencing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:44, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

HOTROD213LA, the name Randy Staub only appears once, within after a re-mix from [[Randy Staub]], an award winning Canadian producer/engineer. I changed this to after a re-mix from [[Randy Staub]],<ref>TESTING!</ref> an award winning Canadian producer/engineer. I clicked "Show preview", whereupon I was shown something like:

5. Ruhlmann, William. "Crossfade > Biography". AllMusic. Macrovision. Retrieved September 13, 2008.

6. TESTING!

7. "Crossfade Myspace". Myspace.com. Retrieved September 2, 2008.

-- though of course with links and italics. This was what I'd expected to see. (And then I clicked "Cancel", of course.) Is the process different for you (when editing "source")? -- Hoary (talk) 08:54, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Article ready for review??

hello, I have been working to get a page together on an Australian poet, Jim Gordon.( Draft:James Gordon (poet))

I have been working with Fritzmann2002 as a mentor but have not heard from him for quite a while.

My last message to him was to ask if he could have a look at the latest draft and advise if he thought it was ready to be put up for review - would be happy for some feedback on this as it's been sitting around for a while now.

many thanks

RomeoHT RomeoHT (talk) 02:06, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

It's fascinating, RomeoHT, but I regret to say that the references are formatted most oddly. I thought I'd have a go at explaining what has gone wrong and how to fix it, but I quickly realized that I was too tired to do this effectively (or perhaps to do it at all). I encourage some other person here who both (i) knows their way around referencing and (ii) can devote twenty minutes or longer to diagnosis and explanation, to have a try. Once the references are fixed, there's some humdrum editing work to be done. (As an example: You'd call the subject "Jim" when needing to distinguish him from one or more others surnamed Gordon. Otherwise, he's "Gordon". Thus not "Leigh is holding Jim's scrapbook" but instead "Marchant is holding Gordon's scrapbook". Though of course if you quote something that refers to him as "Jim", you leave this as is.) After the needed work has been done on this draft, it should qualify as an article (and a very readable one too). -- Hoary (talk) 09:39, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

@RomeoHT For general referencing help, see this page. You are going to want to use a lot of {{cite news}} templates for the references from The Irrigator. I believe that that newspaper has been digitised and it would be great if you could link out to the digital copies for your references. Several references cite letters. I'm afraid that these can't be used unless published somewhere (even if in an obscure library). Verification by readers is a key Wikipedia policy. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:59, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

The Irrigator is available at newspapers.com:

• "The Murrumbidgee Irrigator Archive". Newspapers.com. Retrieved 2025-05-29.

Peaceray (talk) 17:52, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Please see my comments at Draft talk:James Gordon (poet). It seems that among the linked data sources, he was better known as Jim Grahame. The draft should be renamed to that name. Peaceray (talk) 17:49, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Serious lack of correct information for Chad's administrative divisions

Wikipedia's coverage of Chad's administrative divisions (i.e. provinces, departments, etc.) has essentially been frozen since 2012, even with the major changes that have taken place since then, including a major name change from regions -> provinces, with the last change happening in 2024. I've updated what I've been able to do so on my own, such as updating Chad § Administrative divisions to match the current number, but there are a significant number of pages that need moving, renaming, new descriptions and more, and it's too much of a task for one person. Even the map at Provinces of Chad is severely out of date compared to the map used by the government here. I checked Wikipedia:WikiProject Chad but it looks to be defunct. I'd like help with figuring out whom to contact and where to go to start truly fixing this. Thank you. AG202 (talk) 02:19, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi, while I'm sorry I can't help more specifically, try also WP:AFRICA and perhaps WP:GEOG. Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 04:04, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

James Bond as a role

James Bond a a role/office I know James Bond is not political, but just like on the fandom site, they have shown the actors with the officeholder infobox, which I agree is a great schematic. Sean Connery was in the role from 1962-1967, established the role and succeeded by Lazenby, then a non-consecutive second term in Diamonds Are Forever. That was one exmaple. See, the Bond role is so coveted, only 6 (6!) actors got the job. They passed it on. It's extraordinary how in 25 official movies 6 actors too on the role. Let's have the infobpox officeholder for the actors. DoubleDouble7 (talk) 06:32, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

DoubleDouble7, the James Bond character is many things but he is definitely not an officeholder. And this is not Fandom or anything like it. This is an encyclopedia. Bond may be best known as a movie character now, but he became famous in novels for nine years before the first film was made. Plus the character has also appeared in television shows, short stories, radio dramas, comic strips, comic books and video games. That is precisely why Template:Infobox media franchise is the appropriate choice. Cullen328 (talk) 07:14, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

That's an interesting idea, and of the top of my head it could apply to characters like The Doctor, Jack Ryan and Hannibal Lecter as well. However, I don't think you'll be able to convince Wikipedians to treat JB as an "office". You can try suggesting it at Talk:James Bond. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:16, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

@DoubleDouble7: you asked this question, and received a negative response. You then went forth and made the change four more times (here, here, here and here). Why ask the question if you're not going to listen to the answer? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

New article for review

I would like couple of reviews for my first article draft on my user page Dahej Bhavnagar railway sea link bridge, from editors with civil/mechanical/physics background having high regards for original ideas. Kingcircle (talk) 06:52, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Kingcircle. Your userpage is not the appropriate place for developing new content. Your userpage is to tell other editors about your accomplishments and plans as a Wikipedia editor. Instead, you should move this content to your personal sandbox space or to draft space. Cullen328 (talk) 07:20, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

What part of Wikipedia:User pages makes you think that? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:58, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Actually Wikipedia Article Wizard directed me to develop my article draft on my user page. Kingcircle (talk) 15:22, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kingcircle. One of the references in the draft is to a Wikipedia article. Please note that Wikipedia isn't a considered a reliable source for the purpose of writing other Wikipedia articles. See WP:CIRCULAR. If there are sources cited in the existing article that verify the material (and you've checked that they do), then you should cite those instead. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:06, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I have cited both, besides the Wikipedia article I have cited is also about transportation between the same locations which are in my article. Ghogha is a suburb of Bhavnagar. The existing article is about existing Ferry service and my article is about future rail road bridge. The existing RO RO Ferry service ran in to trouble due to siltation problems from river near Dahej. So they had to abandon the Dahej port and shift the operation to Hazira in Surat which is way south. Gujarat state government also ran into financial problems due to ferry service operation. I am not citing Wikipedia article as a reliable source. But I must cite it for the reasons given above. Kingcircle (talk) 15:17, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

There is no "Must". Do not cite Wikipedia (except in a handful of rare instances, on articles about Wikipedia). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:38, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Ok. I will not cite Wikipedia article. Kingcircle (talk) 15:53, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I have removed reference to Wikipedia article. Kingcircle (talk) 17:05, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Difference between Ping and "reply to"?

Hi all. I am new to Wikipedia, and was wondering what is the difference between "Ping" and "Reply to". For instance, if I am discussing an article for improvement with a Wikipedian called "X", which is better- @X: or @X: [In visual, both are appearing as @, but in source they both appear different]? Kindly advise. Or can we use both? I tried searching if this question had been asked before, but could not find it? Thanks.Neotaruntius (talk) 14:40, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

@Neotaruntius {{ping}} is actually just a redirect to {{reply to}}, meaning they're the exact same template. Which one to use is entirely up to you. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 14:44, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

CanonNi Thanks. I did this simple experiment, which probably will appear very basic to experienced Wikipedians like you [for me it would solve a very basic question]. I went to source code twice in turn and each time wrote your name [CanonNi] and then added "reply to|" and "ping|" turn by turn. Both times, your name appeared as a hyperlink in visual format! This means both are synonymous. Is that a right understanding? Kindly explain. Thanks. Neotaruntius (talk) 14:55, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Not quite. In order to use a template in source mode, you need to use double braces ( {{ ) instead of brackets ( [[ ). So for example, in order to use the template to ping me, you would type {{ping|CanonNi}}. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 15:00, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

On talk pages where you can use the "Reply" option when responding to someone's previous comment, there is an icon that pops up on the right (a head-and-shoulders with a + sign). If clicked, that provides a drop-down list of all the people who have previously commented on that thread. Hence I can @Neotaruntius mention you and generate an alert but the software doesn't use a template: it places @[[User:Neotaruntius|Neotaruntius]] into the text. From that, you'll guess that typing the same string directly works fine provided you also "sign" with four ~ (tilde) characters. The reply tool is useful because it does the conventional indenting and signing automatically. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:07, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) They are synonymous but your experiment doesn't guarantee this, it merely makes it plausible. There could have been circumstances where they behaved differently. When you write {{ping|X}} you are using Template:Ping. The heading of that page is "Template:Reply to", and a little below it says "(Redirected from Template:Ping)". It is this redirect which guarantees that they actually are synonomous. By the way, the notification is caused by having any user page link in a signed edit so you will also be notified by this edit when I just write User:Neotaruntius near the end without using a template. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:13, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi. May I ask how many articles (and type) would be needed for notability?

Would like to ask how many articles and news clippings would be needed to determine notability of a subject...wouldn't want to put too many as it'll seem spammy, and wouldn't want to do too little to fulfill the requirements. Please help? Malaysianforchange (talk) 16:16, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

@Malaysianforchange Quality of references is more important than quantity. The best need to meet all of the golden rules. See also this essay and this one. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:25, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi Mike, thank you so much. I will revert with changes. Malaysianforchange (talk) 17:36, 29 May 2025 (UTC)