Wikipedia:Teahouse

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


How to follow the active debate on Wikipedia bias? [edit]

EDIT: Thanks all I got some helpful resources here and I’m going to continue the conversation in some of the more targeted venues. Thanks again


How can editors follow the active debate over alleged left-leaning bias[1] on wikipedia? What teams are working on it? Are there RFCs or projects helping to research, understand and assess? Specifically, who is addressing left-leaning bias that affects reporting on [2]over political issues like Communism, Far Right and how we associate biography pages with these political affiliations.

This question is more about understanding the process & people involved than finding a conclusion to whether Wikipedia is biased at all.

Some areas I’ve searched[edit]


Are there projects or committees that are actively addressing this topic? I see lots of discussions on talk pages, but those can be chaotic, hard to follow , and don’t seem to lead to a conclusion or decision.

Tonymetz 💬  21:03, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your question seems to have as a premise that Wikipedia has a left-wing bias. This is a strange notion.126.255.97.137 (talk) 22:12, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The allegations may be unfounded but they are certainly not strange. Greater critics than me have raised them and they are worth addressing even if they are wrong. Tonymetz 💬 23:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here’s a good example discussion [1] with no clear resolution
What I’m asking for is how editors can follow those types of discussions and understand any resolution. And who is responsible for those resolutions? Tonymetz 💬 00:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tonymetz I see lots of discussions on talk pages, but those can be chaotic, hard to follow , and don’t seem to lead to a conclusion or decision. That is, however, our process, so if you're looking for discussion of these issues on Wikipedia, that's where you're likely to find it.
In addition to what other editors have mentioned, your question seems also to be based on the premise that, because it has been claimed by outside commenters that Wikipedia has this or that bias, there must be some central authority that (a) takes that claim seriously, and (b) has the responsibility of formulating a response (either to the allegation, or to the bias).
None of those things are true. The content of any given Wikipedia article is the product and responsibility of the editors who contributed to that article. There is no editorial board overseeing their work, and there is no approval process for "publication" (other than some peer review, if an article under pending changes protection is edited by anonymous or inexperienced editors). In short, There is no cabal, not even the Cabal to Eliminate Political Bias.
Plenty of people discuss Wikipedia's purported systemic biases, often at great length and with furious passion. But it's rarely discussed on Wikipedia, because discussing anything in the context of "all of Wikipedia" is just too broad to be useful. Specific accusations of a particular instance of biased content would most appropriately be discussed on the Talk page of the article in question. Any discussion anywhere else would most likely be directed there. FeRDNYC (talk) 11:20, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’ll call this “the wikipedia myth” . In reality, less than a fraction of a percent of Wikipedia accounts are editors [2] Among those, only a sliver participate in editing controversial pages. When a minority change is made, it’s usually overridden / reverted. When there’s an edit war, the page is locked.
Again, I’m not here to argue in favor of the bias. My question is about how any controversial topic is managed and resolved. There’s a lot of content on the early phase of conflict resolution [3], but little info on how resolutions and decisions are made. Tonymetz 💬 18:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In reality, less than a fraction of a percent of Wikipedia accounts are editors A more accurate statement is, "less than a fraction of a percent of Wikipedia accounts edit pages". But don't take that to mean that the rest of the accounts have some other responsibility BESIDES editing pages. In truth, all accounts are editors (anyone can edit), heck even non-accounts are editors, since you can edit English Wikipedia without being logged in.
Most account-holders don't, or only rarely, avail themselves of that ability, though, it's true. (And it's something many people are always looking for ways to improve.) The rest of them either use their accounts only for reading, or don't use their accounts at all. (There are metric bit-tons of abandoned accounts.)
When changes are reverted, those reverts are nearly always performed by peers (other editors) — just like anyone can edit, anyone can revert someone else's edit. That's not an administrative/managerial action, it's an edit like any other.
When pages are protected, that's an Administrator action which any user can request. If the article's edit history shows a pattern of disruptive editing, it's protected to prevent further disruption. It's most definitely not a decision to lock the content in any particular state. In fact, administrators are well known for protecting The Wrong Version of the article. FeRDNYC (talk) 06:34, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You made some good points thanks for your thoughts and help on this. Tonymetz 💬 16:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tonymetz Perhaps some of these article will be of interest to you: Category:Wikipedia content. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:32, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Larry Sanger is deeply biased against Wikipedia and has been glaringly wrong about online encyclopedias for over 20 years. Nothing he says should be taken at face value or given much attention. Cullen328 (talk) 02:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks! this 2nd degree link was helpful Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wikipedia along the lines of what I've been looking for. Tonymetz 💬 16:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but it's a common allegation and often discussed . I'm asking how to follow the debate. Tonymetz 💬 02:36, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tonymetz: There's Talk:Ideological bias on Wikipedia, but that would just be discussing how to improve the article Ideological bias on Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 03:39, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That’s a great resource thanks. Do things ever resolve from the talk page? A decision or RFC ? I find the talk pages overwhelming. Tonymetz 💬 04:57, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tonymetz, there is no index of places to watch; there is no committee working on it, for or against. Wikipedia is a volunteer project where nobody has more authority over content than anyone else. The bias, where they are there, are there 1. because the world itself has bias and Wikipedia is a tertiary source and/or 2. because of the makeup of the editorbase working on an article. It would not be an organised group of editors or an editorial committee in or outside of Wikipedia deliberately working to make it so.
People who come in with the notion that they're going to fix Wikipedia get into trouble very soon because there are no heroes and villains here. Wikipedia is just what happens when you build a wiki encyclopedia on the internet under the United States laws in the early 21st century. That said, to provide you the information you are looking for with the understanding that how you use it is your sole responsibility, you probably want to start by watching the reliable sources noticeboard and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics, government, and law, perhaps WT:USA as well if you're an American. The first two pages will give a list of discussions most of which will get clear resolutions. The discussions are evaluated by editors who are not involved in those discussions, as explained at WP:CLOSE. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:40, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The idea that there is no authority or status is a bit disingenuous and almost a myth here. There are committees e.g. for WP:ARC , WP:SPI and others. Plus older and higher volume accounts end up having more authority when edits are accepted, and when new articles are published. Some articles are only editable by certain users. Not anyone can write an WP:RFC or edit WP:MOS
What I’m aiming to do is understand how resolutions are made and enforced.
The resources you’ve shared are helpful and thanks. Tonymetz 💬 18:40, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a visualization of the hierarchical structure I'm referring to WP:Administration#Human_and_legal_administration Tonymetz 💬 21:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ensuring the harmonious implementation of the project's editor consensus-developed protocols governing the creation and development of all types of pages are editors elected or appointed to certain roles: i.e., functionaries like stewards and the Arbitration Committee, alongside bureaucrats, and administrators, all of whom ultimately derive their own authority from the Wikimedia Foundation.

from WP:Administration#Human_and_legal_administration Tonymetz 💬 21:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tonymetz You can try to search the talk-space for whatever:[3]. WP:SIGNPOST may have content you find interesting. Perhaps the archives at User talk:Jimbo Wales too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for WP:SIGNPOST that’s helpful ill have a look. Tonymetz 💬 18:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
are two resources that come close to model for what I was looking for. thanks again for your help , you pointed me down the right thread. Tonymetz 💬 21:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He’s not alone. Visit controversial pages on politics and popular science you will see a vigorous debate over this. Tonymetz 💬 19:01, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Help updating wiki with COI tags[edit]

Hello, my wife's wiki page is very out of date, incomplete and inaccurate. I tried to edit it myself and was told that was a COI, which I fully understand now (I've never edited a wiki before). It was suggested that I post here to get help from other editors to update it with COI tags and proper sourcing. I have an updated entry ready to go, any help would be greatly appreciated! Here is her page:

Susan Mosher Nycwriter2 (talk) 15:39, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We appreciate your making full disclosure of your conflict of interest. Post on the article's talk page, explaining what changes you'd like. DS (talk) 15:51, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I posted my request on the talk page but have gotten no responses. Am I supposed to notify editors here in the Teahouse? Or should I use the Edit Request Editor? Sorry for my confusion. Nycwriter2 (talk) 14:30, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nycwriter2 One advantage to using the wizard is that your suggestion ends up in a template ({{edit COI}}) which alerts editors who work on these requests: see the template link. Some articles have very few watchers, so no-one may otherwise notice your request. You'll get faster responses if you make things as simple as possible for others by adding one edit request per suggestion and use a format like "Change X to Y, please, based on such-and-such reference". Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Be sure to provide reliable sources which corroborate the information you want to add or change. Please note that sources that host user-generated content without editorial oversight are not considered reliable. In particular, neither IMDB nor BroadwayWorld are considered reliable; see WP:RSP for a list of commonly discussed sources. CodeTalker (talk) 16:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nycwriter2: You may also wish to use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Advice about a editor[edit]

after many years I need advice about the editing of user: Zacwill, who has decided that a quote referenced by many is not a quote and should be removed for the third time. The article in question Sir Charles Trevelyan, 1st Baronet. I have removed a quote from houses of parliament via the independent newspaper which the editor described as a blog and have produced 3 extra references and a wikilink but the quote was once again removed with the summary of ‎(see previous edit summary). Advice on the suitability of the world renowned quote, the references and further steps to take. Once I know how to take this matter further I will obviously notify the editor. With thanks. Edmund Patrick confer 19:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Edmund Patrick, and welcome to the Teahouse.
The very first step in any content dispute (which is what you have) is to discuss the matter on the article's talk page, according to WP:BRD - as far as I can see that has not happened yet.
If the various editors involved are unable to come to a consensus, dispute resolution tells you what further steps to take.
If the issue is about the reliability of a source, WP:RSN is where to get that resolved. ColinFine (talk) 19:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks, a constructive RfC now up and running. Edmund Patrick confer 12:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting information regarding copyrights status of image[edit]

Hello, this is my first post/comment/question on Tea House.

Well, I have a question, I have been working to develop an article, and recently it was proposed on March 21, 2024, for deletion: Baris Ozgur, and now I have received a notification that the image that I have used in the article (I had uploaded it at Wiki Commons) is violating copyrights as the same picture is being used by a person on LinkedIn (I assume the subject of the article is on LinkedIn).

However, the subject of the matter is that I have not taken this photo from LinkedIn but from another source, i.e., https://filmfreeway.com/BARISOZGUR. Now what is the way forward. Can I use this? as I thought this photo was publicly available in a public database.

If not, what is the way forward? Do I need to get permission from the subject or anybody else? Thank you. Sibtehassanbutt (talk) 19:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The site seems quite specific that it isn't a free resource based on their about page, which says that creators retain 100% of the rights to the things they upload. You would have to get permission from the subject to use their image or ask them very nicely to upload one to Wikipedia themselves. CommissarDoggoTalk? 19:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I am also following the instructions laid out here WP: UPI. I hope I am going in the right direction. Sibtehassanbutt (talk) 19:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sibtehassanbutt, to be perfectly clear, you cannot upload any image to Wikimedia Commons unless you have written evidence that the image is freely licensed, or convincing evidence that the image is in the public domain, or you are the photographer and are willing to freely license the image in a legally acceptable way. Otherwise, do not upload any image because you are at risk of violating copyright law. Cullen328 (talk) 10:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
COMMENT: Alright, thanks for your guidance. I have a few questions here:
  1. I want to use my own picture for my user page, do I need to give Wikimedia Commons written permission?
  2. Wikimedia Commons is blocked in certain areas of the world (see: Censorship of Wikipedia) by the local authorities, and on top of that, Wikipedia doesn't allow logging in through VPNs. What is the recommended course of action in such a situation? Sibtehassanbutt (talk) 12:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sibtehassanbutt, if you upload a selfie to Wikimedia Commons, you are the copyright holder and you will need to freely license the image in writing. This happens during the upload process. If someone else took the photo, then it would be best for that person to upload the photo. As for dealing with restrictions on VPNs, please read Wikipedia:Open proxies. Cullen328 (talk) 19:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thank you. Sibtehassanbutt (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On Creating a draft[edit]

I've been working today on a draft for a youtuber known as blackpenredpen link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Blackpenredpen and I'm looking for reliable sources. Also if an experienced editor were able to take a look at the article and give me feedback I'd very much appreciated it.

Thanks Geordie.Obrien (talk) 02:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Geordie.Obrien. You can see Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/1 for a beginner's guide on referencing with the visual editor. CanonNi (talk) 02:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Geordie.Obrien, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't want to sound unwelcoming, but to be honest - you're the one who wants to write this article, so it is your job to find the sources, and if you can't, to give up on the article. (That's why finding the sources should be absolutely the first task in creating a new article). You query might stimulate somebody here to help you, but unless it is an interest of theirs, why should they, if you can't find them? That's not a service that Teahouse hosts normally provide. --ColinFine (talk) 09:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry I fully understand, I'm quite new here so I'm still learning how everything works, thanks for the patience. Geordie.Obrien (talk) 23:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unclear on the editor bar for scientific articles with numerous peer-reviewed sources cited.[edit]

Hello...my original draft was declined by an editor. It appears the key points to improve were: formal tone, including independent sources (which I had, all my sources are peer-reviewed for claims and statements), and removal of 'peacocking' terms. I've scrubbed and re-worked the article, but I'm not sure if it clears the bar for the three points above. Can someone please let me know if this article now still falls foul of the guidelines? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Differential_Hall_Effect_Metrology_(DHEM) Semiconengineering (talk) 04:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Semiconengineering: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you have resubmitted your draft, so now the yellow box at the top of your draft states "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order." Eventually, someone will review the draft and let you know if the draft is now ready to become an article. You may continue improving the draft while you are waiting, or use your skills to improve other articles. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response. I guess what I'm trying to convey is that is the 'bar' or 'standard' written down someplace for me to compare and ensure, or is it 'tribal' knowledge? Semiconengineering (talk) 04:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Several relevant standards are WP:TONE, WP:RS, and WP:PEACOCK. I don't know much of anything about this article's topic so I can't comment on the sourcing specifically, but a common mistake among WP editors is thinking that being a peer-reviewed journal article is the qualification for being a reliable source. DMacks (talk) 06:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's also the question of independent sources: in order to meet the bar of notability, any subject must have been written about by people unconnected with the subject. When the subject is an academic theory or approach, this means that people unconnected with those who originated or publicised the subject need to have written about it. (I haven't looked at the particular article to see how far that is the case; but it is an additional criterian that DMacks did not mention). ColinFine (talk) 09:25, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The draft as written presumes a readership with degrees in electical engineering. Large wads of text - up to entire paragraphs - are without references. As a small example " Development of next-generation semiconductor technologies comes with escalated costs due to ever increasing technical challenges and extended development cycles needed to meet such challenges." - is that your thinking or a referenced source? David notMD (talk) 11:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. This is common knowledge within industry that certainly needs to be supported by an independent peer-reviewed reference. The articles on other measurement techniques e.g.: SIMS (Secondary ion mass spectrometry) and Scanning probe microscopy, contain many such industry knowledge statements - I guess when those were published the bar was different. I have made the updates to the draft. Semiconengineering (talk) 05:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate all your input in making the article better. Semiconengineering (talk) 05:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the article clears the notability bar, references are from a wide variety of authors. The references are from high-quality peer-reviewed sources so it would also clear the reliable scholarship bar. Thanks again for the pointers and suggestions. Thanks for making this article better. Semiconengineering (talk) 03:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slow Visual Editor[edit]

Is it just me or is the Visual Editor extremely slow when handling large pages? I was trying to add a link to Geneva in the Switzerland article, and the page was unresponsive for 10 seconds after I clicked edit, and when I clicked link on Geneva the page just stopped responding once and for all. Not the only time this happened Pksois23 (talk) 09:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I managed to figure out the Switzerland article but it was still very slow Pksois23 (talk) 09:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Pksois23 This usually happen only if your network
suddenly becomes slower during when you opened the editor. So the only solution for such problem, is to exit the editor or refresh the page, then check your network before you proceed again else you will keep getting forever load.
Hope this helps? Feel free to ask if you got more concern.
Thisasia  (Talk) 11:19, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I tried again going into Soviet Union and adding a link (not saving the edit) and it still just loaded forever. I checked my network on speedtest and its at 270 Mbps download/61 Mbps upload which I think is fast enough to avoid any issue? Pksois23 (talk) 12:29, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pksois23 Neither of those articles is slower than usual for me and I've got a much slower speedtest. It is a disadvantage of the VE that it seems to be slow even if you click to edit just a section of the article. In the source editor, things always seem much faster and by using Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets and checking the "Add an edit link for the lead section of a page" box you can even edit just the lead. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Got it thank you I guess I will stick with the source editor when I can Pksois23 (talk) 23:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Pksois23 sorry for the late reply, since your network isn't the problem then I suggest maybe you should use a different browser, or perhaps clearing your browser data and log in again. Because pretty sure that this is definitely not a Wikipedia site issue.
Thisasia  (Talk) 18:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Public Parbatia Thakurbari post[edit]

Dear Editorial Team,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to submit an application for the creation of a Wikipedia page dedicated to "Parbatia Thakurbari," an important cultural and historical site.

"Parbatia Thakurbari" holds significant cultural and historical value in our region, and its documentation on Wikipedia would serve as a valuable resource for individuals interested in learning about its heritage, architecture, and contributions to the community.

Here are some key points that I believe should be included in the Wikipedia page:

1. Introduction: A brief overview of Parbatia Thakurbari, highlighting its historical significance and cultural relevance.

2. History: Detailed information about the history of Parbatia Thakurbari, including its founding, notable events, and any significant figures associated with it.

3. Architecture: Description of the architectural features of Parbatia Thakurbari, including its design elements, construction materials, and any unique characteristics.

4. Cultural Significance: Exploration of the cultural significance of Parbatia Thakurbari within the local community and its broader impact on the region's cultural landscape.

5. Current Status: Updates on the current status of Parbatia Thakurbari, including any restoration efforts, ongoing activities, or cultural events hosted at the site.

6. References: Citations to reliable sources, including books, articles, and official websites, to ensure the accuracy and verifiability of the information presented on the Wikipedia page.

I am willing to collaborate with other editors and contribute to the development of this page, providing additional information and supporting evidence as needed.

Thank you for considering my application. I believe that creating a Wikipedia page for Parbatia Thakurbari will not only enrich the platform's content but also contribute to the preservation and promotion of our cultural heritage.

Best regards, Uttam Kr. Mahato (Uttam Kumar) Uttam Kr. Mahato (Uttam Kumar) (talk) 16:35, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:REQUEST. CommissarDoggoTalk? 16:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Uttam Kumar, and welcome to the Teahouse. Is this different from Jorasanko Thakur Bari? Perhaps you could add to that article. ColinFine (talk) 17:24, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Uttam Kr. Mahato (Uttam Kumar): You have already written Draft:Parbatia Thakurbari and submitted it for review by the Articles for Creation team. The review is pending; please be patient and wait for the comments of a reviewer. Deor (talk) 00:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correct redirect category template to use for a slight rewording of a disambiguated title[edit]

Suppose there is a page with the title X (Y) because X is an ambiguous term and (Y) is a disambiguating noun. Suppose I create redirects from Y-adj X (where Y-adj is the adjectival form of Y, if needed), X Y, or X (function word) Y to X (Y). What redirect category template should I use for this in conjunction with {{Redirect category shell}}? The closest I can think of that definitely seems appropriate is {{R from modification}}, but I'm not sure if perhaps another category is more appropriate. {{R from alternative punctuation}} seems like it might also be appropriate but I'm not sure if the parentheses used for disambiguated titles are consider punctuation for the purposes of this category? Any advice would be appreciated.

More concrete examples:

  1. Bob painterBob (painter)
  2. Painter BobBob (painter)
  3. Bob the painterBob (painter)

What might be the correct category in each of these cases? Brusquedandelion (talk) 17:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You might need Template:R from ambiguous sort name for some of these, or Template:R from name with title. In general I think you're stuck with Template:R from modification, since everything else is more specific. -- asilvering (talk) 06:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ReCaptcha keeps refreshing[edit]

I’m not sure if its a mistake on my part, im trying to publish my changes to Plymouth, Wisconsin but after i filled in the recaptcha and press publish, the recaptcha refreshes so i have to fill in the box again this keeps on repeating for me so I cant actually publish it DouglasGraham01010 (talk) 17:36, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @DouglasGraham01010 you may have to check if you are filling the recaptcha properly as the recaptcha characters sometimes won't be clear enough to understand immediately. Note that in as much as you fill in an inaccurate recaptcha codd, the page will surely refresh and your changes won't publish. But i suppose the recaptcha will give you an error message?
Thisasia  (Talk) 17:56, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for your help, turns out the autocapitalisation of my first letter prevented me from publishing. Quite a wee bit of a rookie error, DouglasGraham01010 (talk) 01:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hello there[edit]

I'm new to wikipedia and I need some help I'm looking to add my name and my picture to wikipedia I really need your help I Alsop have articles that have been published that I will like t add Geraldoquinones (talk) 18:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Geraldoquinones, and welcome to Wikipedia. It sounds like you might be trying to write an article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If you'd like to start working on content that isn't about yourself, then check out Help:Getting Started ---- D'n'B-t -- 19:21, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

I installed this: {{subst:iusc|User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js}} on my common.js but it apparently doesn't work. Can anyone help? Thank you very much 14 novembre (talk) 19:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@14 novembre: You're supposed to be pasting the code into your common.js as it appears when viewing User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft, as it deliberately contains markup to prevent substitution from working on the documentation page. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Victor Schmidt thanks for your answer, but isn't that what I did? Did I make a mistake? Thank you so much 14 novembre (talk) 19:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Suggestion: You could try using Enterprisey's script installer. Once you have it enabled, you can go back to the script's page and click Install. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tenryuu Thanks for your answer. I did so, but it still doesn't work. Could you kindly check User:14 novembre/common.js to see what's wrong? Kind regards. 14 novembre (talk) 22:02, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@14 novembre Maybe try deleting lines 2 and 3 of your common.js NW1223<Howl at meMy hunts> 23:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+1 I just installed it and I can see the new link right underneath "Move". @14 novembre: What skin are you using? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with a script[edit]

I have most certainly installed it, but it doesn't work. Any suggestions? Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 22:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding myself to a wiki edu class[edit]

I was in a wiki edu class last fall. I am in another this semester, so I cannot figure out how to add myself to the new class using my already established wiki ID WikiTikiTavi63 (talk) 23:02, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiTikiTavi63 If you are currently enrolled in a WikiEdu class and require assistance, it's advisable to reach out to your instructor for guidance. If you're unable to contact them or need further assistance with WikiEdu you can try reaching out to the people involved in Wiki Education Foundation for assistance by clicking on the provided link. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Education_Foundation#People_involved Leoneix (talk) 07:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tracking visits to articles?[edit]

Hi, is there any way to track visits to a particular article--including those I have edited (like The NEXT Museum - Wikipedia) and those I have not edited? Thank you LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 23:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LoveElectronicLiterature: I'm not sure what you mean by "track", but if you want to see the number of times a page has been visited over a period of time, go to its history page and click the link "Pageviews" near the top of the page. Deor (talk) 23:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can also use things such as XTools and the Traffic Report. I don't know whether most people have access to it or whether it's something I enabled in the preferences, but if you go onto a page and click the "Page" dropdown at the top right of the page then you can go to "Analysis" to see the various tools, including the two I suggested. CommissarDoggoTalk? 00:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thank you!!! @CommissarDoggo@Deor LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 01:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COI templates and edits[edit]

Hello, I am new here, but plan to propose edits to the Talk page of an article to which I have a COI. Can you please confirm that the allowances for directly correcting minor hard fact errors like an incorrect date, spelling or grammar mistakes, or updating the organization’s existing link is still acceptable? (I would include an edit summary to any such changes.) Thank you! Oshentree (talk) 23:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oshentree Since you have a COI, any edits that you want to make to that page have to be done via an edit request, supported by a reliable source. You can use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard for this. Let us know if you have any other questions ‍ Relativity 23:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your quick response Relativity. I was referencing the advice given here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FAQ/Article_subjects that says updating my organization's existing url, or making minor factual edits to spelling or grammar is allowed, despite COI. Is it incorrect then? Thanks again for your time! Oshentree (talk) 00:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshentree The FAQ page is correct: there are some things that you can change directly rather than by edit request via the Talk Page. However, note that (at the top) it says you still need to disclose your COI. You can do this in the edit summary or on your own userpage. One of Wikipedia's core principles is to assume good faith but we want editors to be open about any COI. The guidance at WP:COI points out that having a COI is a description of a situation, not a judgment about that person's opinions, integrity, or good faith. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Yes I posted COI disclosure on my userpage shortly after creating an account and prior to the teahouse query. I fully intend to follow all guidelines and protocols to become a trustworthy, successful contributor. I appreciate the clarification and advice regarding the FAQ as I continue to read through guidance documentation. Regards, Oshentree (talk) 19:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DOB issue - Don Spencer OAM[edit]

Hello - there is an ongoing issue with accuracy on my listing and I have been told to write here in the hope you can solve it. My dob has been wrong for a long time and I now, someone on the Wiki team has changed it so it shows I am born between 1936-1937 and my age is between 86-88. My dob is 22 March 1937. I am 87. I have offered to send in a photo of my passport with me holding it to prove it is correct. The last person trying to help didn't know if this would be allowed. Can someone please resolve this as I get interviewed regularly on radio and they also state the wrong information as they take it from Wikipedia. Can you please let me know the simplest method. Thank you ... Don DONALDRSPENCER (talk) 23:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DONALDRSPENCER, welcome to the Teahouse! Technically, going off of the statistics you provided here, your date of birth is not incorrect in the article, since your actual date of birth is between 1936 and 1937 and your age is between 86 to 88. However, should you wish to fix it, you cannot use your own legal documents to prove it. Wikipedia is based off of reliable, independent sources, and if you want to add a piece of information to that article, you are going to have to provide one of those. If you find a reliable, independent source, please make an edit request on the talk page of the article in question because you have a conflict of interest. It may also help Teahouse hosts if you tell us what article you're talking about, since all of the names listed on Donald Spencer are not born between 1936–1937. Let us know if you have any further questions ‍ Relativity 23:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind about the title of the article— looks like it's Don Spencer ‍ Relativity 00:00, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DONALDRSPENCER@David Tornheim Don, it appears you have a personal website. IMO, the simplest solution is that you add your full DOB on this page:[4]. Or if the DOB already is somewhere on that website, please point us to it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I find the basic area to find articles to help?[edit]

I swear that there was a spot I could go to find a bunch o' articles that just needed some help and to be reviewed. Where can I find this page? Thank you so much. Fastpaier (talk) 00:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this what you're thinking of? BaduFerreira (talk) 00:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fastpaier: Or maybe Special:Homepage. Click your username at top to find it or a link to it, depending on settings at the bottom of Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

how many Mexicans are sent back to Mexico when they arrive illegally in the USA?[edit]

Please answer this question! 158.222.91.254 (talk) 00:26, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to a page that offers "help with using and editing Wikipedia". Do you have a question about editing or otherwise using Wikipedia? -- Hoary (talk) 01:22, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoary: For questions that aren't related to Wikipedia, you could try asking at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. GoingBatty (talk) 04:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of Image of Anime Characters Wearing Bloomers in Bloomers article which has a 'Bloomers in Japan' section: Clarification on Non-Free Content Criteria[edit]

I've added an image of anime characters wearing bloomers to a gallery under a section about 'Bloomers in Japan' on Wikipedia. However, there's a dispute over whether the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content. The concern raised is related to WP:NFCC#8, regarding "contextual significance." I believe the image adds value by visually representing the cultural phenomenon of bloomers in Japanese media. How can I address this concern and ensure that the image meets the criteria for inclusion? Are there any steps I can take to strengthen its contextual significance within the Bloomers article or more specifically the section called, Bloomers in Japan? TreeElf (talk) 01:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TreeElf, the image does not visually represent bloomers, bloomers in Japanese media, or (as far as I can guess its meaning) "the cultural phenomenon of bloomers in Japanese media". It's an image of girls wearing knickers, aka panties. As it happens, in Japanese these are called burumā (or buruma), words derived from the English word bloomers. Their commoner referents are not bloomers, and the relevance of these referents to this article are tenuous at best. (It's as if fr:Menu (restauration) were to have a section on menus gourmands with a subsection on the anglophone sphere, illustrated by an obese "gourmand" [in the English sense] perusing a "menu" [ditto].) So its dubious copyright status aside, this picture doesn't belong in the article. -- Hoary (talk) 05:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your guidance. TreeElf (talk) 05:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My guidance doesn't seem to have been effective, TreeElf, in that the article on bloomers is now illustrated with a picture of a woman who's not wearing bloomers but instead is wearing a garment whose common name (burumā) in Japanese happens to derive from the English word "bloomers". Should the article on Naples be illustrated with a photo of naporitan? -- Hoary (talk) 11:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do I avoid taking issues to ANI unless absolutely necessary[edit]

I want to be sure I have exhausted all available avenues before going to ANI. In all my years of editing I don't think I've ever had to use it. I have been trying to resolve an AGF issue I'm having with another editor for months (since Aug). The few times we interact it seems like they always end up accusing me of things on article talk pages. I have tried to convince them that we need to use personal talk pages to make personal remarks/warnings and they seem to just ignore me and change the subject, or continue to focus on getting the answer they want while refusing to acknowledge there might be an issue. I've told them that I'm willing to take responsibility as well in order to show I am not trying to put all the blame on them, but they seem to continue ignoring the issue. I tried telling them it's getting to the point where I don't want to participate when they get involved in discussions. I pointed out that instead of criticizing my arguments they tend to criticize me. I have been to their talk page multiple times but nothing I say seems to get through to them. I told them I don't want to take it to ANI because I don't want to waste admins time on something as basic as AGF. What else should I do? DN (talk) 04:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DROPTHESTICK. Life is too short to do anything else. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you don't think I should take it to ANI, and there's nothing else to do but let them keep accusing me of being disruptive? DN (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean that in a cynical manner, I'm just trying to get some more clarification and detail. Cheers. DN (talk) 20:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If this person seems to be impossible to avoid and nearly always gets involved in discussions you're involved in, playing devil's advocate each and every time, making assertions and remarks about you all the while, it's harassment of a user, and constitutes ANI. If this person is avoidable, drop the stick. — Mugtheboss (talk) 21:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. That makes sense. DN (talk) 01:06, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category where the only member is a subcategory[edit]

Hi. I noticed that the Category, Cemeteries in South Yorkshire‎ has no articles but has one subcategory, Cemeteries in Sheffield‎. (there is a similar situation with Cemeteries in Merseyside). It seems unhelpful to have a category with one member so in this case wouldn't it make more sense for one of those levels to go? My feeling is that it would be best to move all the articles up a level, and then delete the more granular category as unnesersary, does that make sense? -- D'n'B-t -- 09:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DandelionAndBurdock: This often happens with systematic categories. Category:Cemeteries in Sheffield is also a subcategory of Category:Geography of Sheffield. I wouldn't mess with the system. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks PrimeHunter, I wont go pulling on any loose threads. ---- D'n'B-t -- 10:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing an Article[edit]

Hi,

I am facing problem in publishing an article on wikipedia.

I have tried many times to publish the article by making changes regarding the instructions given in the wikipedia, even though the article is not published . Can you please help me with this issues why am i facing and suggest me what can i do. Sakshi gilada (talk) 09:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sakshi gilada and welcome to the Teahouse. Could you specify which article you are referring to? CanonNi (talk) 09:52, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is regarding BBG, its a real state company. I want to write about them Sakshi gilada (talk) 09:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Sakshi gilada, and welcome to the Teahouse.
Steps you should take:
  1. If you are employed or retained in any way with the company you must make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor.
  2. Look for several published sources which are wholly unconnected with your company, and which talk in some depth about you company. Nothing written, published, or commissioned, or based on interviews or press releases from your company or any of its staff or associates. Evaluate any sources you find against all three of the criteria in golden rule
  3. If you cannot find at least three, give up and devote your time to something more valuable. There cannot be an article.
  4. If you can find at least three sources, then forget everything you know about the company, and write a draft based entirely on what those indpendent sources say.
ColinFine (talk) 11:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome. If you are referring to Draft:BBG (Building Blocks Group), it was deleted as blatant promotion. Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about the existence of a 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. The draft mentioned niche industry awards- these do not contribute to notability unless the awards themselves merit articles(like Nobel Peace Prize or Academy Award).
If you work for this company, the Terms of Use require that to be disclosed, please read about how to do this at WP:PAID. You should also read conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You appear to have taken an image of the founder of the company. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yes we have taken the picture Sakshi gilada (talk) 10:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you work for this company? 331dot (talk) 10:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Sakshi gilada (talk) 09:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then you are required by the Wikipedia Terms of Use to disclose that. You should attempt to do this with one of your next edits. Instructions are provided on your user talk page, you may also see WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
okay Sakshi gilada (talk) 09:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that WP:BOSS might have the guidance you're looking for. ---- D'n'B-t -- 12:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On your Talk page you have been repeatedly warned that your account may be indefinitely blocked unless you address your PAID or COI connection to BBG. You must do that before any attempt to again create a draft, either as a draft or in your Sandbox. If there are not valid references then there is no reason to try again. Also, please stop using "we". Each account must be from one person. David notMD (talk) 15:28, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have NO memory of editing an article about a contentious topic and the recently deceased.[edit]

User talk:MisteOsoTruth#Welcome!

I have NO memory of editing an article about a contentious topic of the recently deceased. How recent is recent?

I also have no knowledge of how to bring material facts to the attention of a chief editor. in fact i feel that such facts are being dismissed outright. MisteOsoTruth (talk) 10:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MisteOsoTruth The note on your talk page actually says living or recently deceased people - I'd imagine it's refering to your edits to on the talk page for Sweet Baby Inc. regarding the inviduals that work for that studio. It's also just a general notice and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. There is no "cheif editor", but you can continue to discuss the article on the article's talk page. ---- D'n'B-t -- 11:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OOOH ooh. i see.
tjhank you MisteOsoTruth (talk) 14:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, MisteOsoTruth, and welcome to the Teahouse. The large blue notice on your talk page is because you have edited Talk:Sweet Baby Inc., which says at the top that the associated article is a contentious topic. It's not saying that you have done anything wrong, just warning you to take care.
For the specific message about your posting on User talk:Codename Noreste, please remember that one of the foundation policies of Wikipedia is to assume good faith.
I think you might also find it useful to read WP:RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS. ColinFine (talk) 11:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to add a photo gallery?[edit]

Hello, I am trying to add a photo gallery to the Hanuman page and I cannot figure out how to use the template to do that. Can someone help me? Hemmingweigh (talk) 12:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hemmingweigh See Help:Pictures#Galleries. Note the guidance at the top about checking whether your proposed use is in line with image use policy. You could try out the proposed gallery in your sandbox, where other editors could assist if needed. Ask back here if you get stuck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:38, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hemmingweigh, if you do decide that a gallery is right for that article, then when you use the gallery tag you can just leave out the square brackets - like this:
<gallery>
File:Hanuman Brings the Gandhamardhana Mountain odisha tala patra.jpg|"Hanuman Brings the Mountain of Healing Plants"
File:Punjabi manuscript with illustration of Hanuman.jpg|Punjabi manuscript with illustration of Hanuman.
</gallery>
---- D'n'B-t -- 12:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion process & COI Concerns[edit]

Hello,

There is an article for which I have declared a COI on my user page:

Techspressionism

This page has recently been nominated for deletion. I am not very familiar on the deletion process, and was wondering if anyone here could take a look at the discussion for deletion, which has been ongoing and lengthy.

The subject of the article involves a term that I invented years ago (Techspressionism), initially to describe my own work that has since developed into an active artist community that I have had a role in developing.

Since the article's nomination for deletion, I invited some of the other artists in the community to weigh in, as I know the community's deletion from Wikipedia is an issue that would be important for them to learn about.

I have been told that this is considered "canvassing", and that these people are SPA's - the discussion for deletion is here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Techspressionism

Also, I am an artist, and it has been brought to my attention that making any edits on the page about me is a COI so I have declared a COI on my user page for this article as well. Both the page on Techspressionism and on myself were created in collaboration with an editor who is part of the artist community, who offered his assistance - he has also declared a COI for these articles, and revised the sourcing, but the COI templates remain on both articles.

The article is here: Colin_Goldberg

An experienced editor let me know that some of the sources were good, and some are questionable, so I have created a draft in my user sandbox using only the sources they identified as valid and requested a formal request for edit on the article talk page at this editor's suggestion: Talk:Colin_Goldberg

Does this seem like a proper way to move forward? I was directed here to the Teahouse by another editor who weighed in on the discussion for deletion for Techspressionism, and I would appreciate any input, guidance and advice that can be offered with regards to these articles, their sourcing and notability, which appear to be the primary concerns, and the best way for me to proceed, if I should do anything further at all. I would like to remain an active member of the Wikipedia community, but this experience has been quite frustrating, and I have been trying to navigate it as best I can.

Thanks, Scribe1791 (talk) 15:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Rape of the Sabine Women[edit]

Dr. Suess has a version as well and I don't have enough skill to add him to the wiki page. Is this where I request help? Mjoseff (talk) 15:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, artwork related to a given subject should only be mentioned in an article when there is coverage of the artwork in a reliable source. Remsense 15:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that there is, in this case, significant coverage there's many examples at the bottom of this page. ---- D'n'B-t -- 16:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. I just wanted to specify. Remsense 16:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mjoseff, I'll take a shot at putting it in.---- D'n'B-t -- 16:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted the addition of text, image and ref. Please first make a case for it on the Talk page, as to me it feels too minor compared to the other artists' inclusions. And wouldn't his art still be copyright protected? David notMD (talk) 11:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absurdity of a page[edit]

The first sentence of Wikipedia:Edit lock is blatantly false. Page protection is a software tool which locks an article from editing. I don't know how such obviously false information is allowed to stand, especially in a Wikipedia namespace page that will be viewed by novice editors. Kk.urban (talk) 16:23, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And in the very next sentence it says "Page protection is never to be used for closing down an article's normal development and community editing." That is the main point. Page protection prevents users below a certain edit count and amount of days on the platform, it doesn't create an outright edit lock for all users.
This is not an insurmountable problem in the majority of cases either, where semi-protection will be used; preventing accounts that are younger than 4 days old with less than 10 edits and IP users. An example of this would be on controversial pages or those with high levels of traffic/editing - see Crocus City Hall attack, which has been under semi-protection for the majority of its short life. These page protections aren't even outright bars to people editing the pages under protection, you can make edit requests if you don't have the necessary user permissions level.
There are no outright edit locks, the page protection system is little more than "You must be this tall to ride". CommissarDoggoTalk? 16:35, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be assuming some particular meaning of "edit lock". This is not clear. Page protection creates "an outright edit lock" for some users, not all users. For a typical user, it doesn't matter if page protection was used "for closing down an article's normal development and community editing", or for some other purpose - whatever the case, they can't edit the article. Many of the most visible pages are either semi-protected, or extended-protected. The first sentence needs to be changed. Kk.urban (talk) 16:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then... Change it. That's the joy of Wikipedia. CommissarDoggoTalk? 16:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the confusion is because that page is all about what editors can do if they want to indicate the article is WP:INUSE (which is its shortcut). Viz This page is about templates used while an article is undergoing a major edit. Page protection is something else. You could edit the WP:INUSE page to make this clearer. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:46, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"lock" on that page means Lock (computer science) but many people don't know this term. Wikipedia uses lock icons for page protection which is something different so there is certainly potential for confusion. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I made some edits to the page which I hope will help clarify things. Cullen328 (talk) 18:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks everyone! Kk.urban (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kk.urban: Just like articles, Wikipedia namespace pages have dedicated talk pages for discussions on how to improve the pages. You may wish to start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Edit lock with your concerns and suggestions. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy Project[edit]

I'm having trouble just searching community discussions. I seem to get in a loop of further pages or tutorials. I was interested in something along the lines of a 100 year legacy project within Wikipedia where pages are carried on? I don't see anything on deceased Wikipedians Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians/Guidelines - Wikipedia. I know there are pages on thanatosensitivity (word corrected) and digital creations living on, but specifically within Wikipedia. I'm a retired librarian, so I'm frustrated I can't navigate or search community discussions better. FelixaCulpa (talk) 16:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind explaining some more about what you're looking for specifically? Are you looking for a discussion on a specific topic or are you looking for an easier way to search for discussions in general? CommissarDoggoTalk? 16:48, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, to both. 1) where is the direct link to community discussions in general? It seems I search & get results that are more tutorial pages on editing/creation/guidelines. 2) Yes, I'm interested in the specific topic, and have been told that there was a 100 year legacy project within wikipedia that had something to do with the idea of content living on. I haven't found anything that sounds like that specifically. Thanks for quick response! FelixaCulpa (talk) 18:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@FelixaCulpa We don't have an article on thanosensitivity but the standard search box allows searches across many namespaces. So this search finds "thanosensitivity" in one place it currently exists: namely, here! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! And I left out part of the word, it's thanatosensitivity, which does have a page, as well as the page on Death & the Internet, Death and the Internet - Wikipedia, both are close, but don't mention anything about a 100 year legacy project within wikipedia. FelixaCulpa (talk) 18:08, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, FelixaCulpa. It's not clear to me whether you are looking for something that you believe already exists called a 100 year legacy project, or whether you are saying you expect there to be one.
If you are looking for one, you could use the advanced search facility to search for that string in the Wikipedia: namespace. If you think there should be one, then WP:VPP might be a place to bring it up. ColinFine (talk) 18:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe the idea of 100 year legacy project for Wikipedia (which has been discussed somewhere or I wouldn't have been asked about it.) It reminds me of LOCKSS, which in the library world preserves data on servers at multiple locations in case of disaster. It's referred to as "dark archive" which isn't really "dark," but just an ingestion & preservation of information. Maybe a 100 year legacy project for Wikipedia would be something like that, a preservation system for keeping entries alive well into the future? I'm not sure I'm asking the right questions, but it was very specific idea supposedly within Wikipedia using words "100 year legacy" FelixaCulpa (talk) 18:26, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@FelixaCulpa: Does the Internet Archive and similar projects perform this activity for websites, including Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 21:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@FelixaCulpa My suggested search (above) can be modified to look for 100+year+legacy and although there are hits, I don't think that any are what you seek. There's nothing on Meta-wiki either, which is the other obvious place to look. Incidentally, Wikipedia welcomes people who want to download the whole database and you could do so with the intention of storing this somewhere for a 100 years! See WP:DOWNLOAD. I don't think that there is any doubt that versions will be available in 2124. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daquq town not actually being called daquq town[edit]

Daquq is apparently a town in kirkuk,but in most sources its called Tavuk Kasabasi(its real name daquq is just the district name) and they mentioned that its majority Shia turkmen with kaka'i kurd minorities (page says kurd and turkmen majority) and its included in the kurds and kurdistan category which is wrong due to the demographics of the town. Kirkukturk3 (talk) 18:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kirkukturk3, and welcome to the Teahouse. If there is a change you think should be made to a Wikipedia article, please open a discussion on that article's talk page, arguing for the change you want to see, and citing reliable sources for any information you want to add (or to remove, if the information to be removed appears to be supported by citations). ColinFine (talk) 18:20, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I already know that but there is a problem, there is an editor which is very known for their vandalism(altered many city and town pages demographics which is not acceptable) guards it.Who can I ask to check their edit? Thanks. I aslp just now checked that it's not allowed to start a discussion in the talk page for some reason?

Kirkukturk3 (talk) 12:05, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kirkukturk3 The Talk Page Talk:Daquq currently only contains Project banners and a reminder that this is a contentious topic. There is nothing preventing you starting a discussion there in the normal way by clicking on "Add topic". Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:45, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why I don't see the add topic button anywhere,I've refreshed many times it's still not appearing, is it an issue with my device? Kirkukturk3 (talk) 20:47, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to tell if an IP address is blocked[edit]

Hi! I have recently reverted an edit from an IP address that appeared to be an opinion. I went to their talk page to warn them about it. I found the anon block template at the top. However, it seems to have been up for a long time and the edit I reverted was very recent. How can I check to see if the IP editor is actually blocked? QwertyForest (talk) 18:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check their contributions page, it'll normally show it right at the top. I'm making a rather small assumption that this is who you're on about, so here's their contributions page. Normally it'll show up at the top with a red box for a full block or yellow for a partial block. If it's a partial block, it'll show what pages/areas they're blocked from. That IP user has neither. CommissarDoggoTalk? 18:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@QwertyForest: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can go to Preferences → Gadgets → Appearance → check Strike out usernames that have been blocked and enable that. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done! QwertyForest (talk) 18:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That IP has been blocked several times. The most recent was a two year block imposed on April 6, 2017. Cullen328 (talk) 19:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@QwertyForest: If you see such a template on an IP's talk page, and the block is long expired, feel free to remove it, and even to blank the page Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:44, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to create a wikipedia page for my card game[edit]

Hi all, I invented a card game and trying to create a wikipedia page for my game. See the game here: https://skypiggames.com/products/products-card-game

Any help would be greatly appreciated! Heienicklea (talk) 23:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's awesome. Some things to keep in mind, Wikipedia is not a advertisement site. If the game is popular enough, an article could be created. Hope this is helpful. Cwater1 (talk) 23:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see the general notability guidelines, there's a good chance that a newly created card game will unfortunately not meet them. You'll need to wait until enough reliable, secondary sources report on the game to make the page.
For more information, please see your first article and our recommendation to not work backwards. CommissarDoggoTalk? 23:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also see WP:MADEUP. CodeTalker (talk) 00:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're kind of in a conflict of interest, you know? Writting about your own game? If the game is relevant enough, there'll be sources from reliable third parties about it. It'll be a test of its relevance : other people creating pages about it with multiple sources about it without your influence is a show of a popular game. 142.170.60.247 (talk) 00:06, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stub[edit]

Hi,

Just a quick question, the article Nothorhina is very very short and I am thinking of adding {{beetle-stub}} into it. Category:Beetle stubs says I should add it into a subcategory. I wasn't sure of which category would fit for Nothorhina. Could someone give me a suggestion? Myrealnamm (talk to me) 00:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Myrealnamm Spondylidinae stub seems good, couldn't find any other subcategories I could fit it into. Klinetalk to me!contribs 01:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I will add that. Myrealnamm (talk to me) 13:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Myrealnamm I salute you for your attention to this. Recently, I personally moved literally hundreds of stub articles off the pages for beetle stubs and for insect stubs into subcategories. It was a weeks' long project. Uporządnicki (talk) 16:02, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Myrealnamm While we're at it, the species Nothorhina punctata is also very short. Since you brought it to my attention--thank you--I've just put it into the same stub category. Uporządnicki (talk) 19:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image wrapping[edit]

Hi, I'm wondering if someone can tell me why text doesn't wrap more closely to images. For example, go to this page and scroll down until you see a black-and-white photo of George Lucas from 1986. There is a chunk of white space below the image, which is clearly enough room for another line of text, but the text doesn't wrap that closely, making the end result visually unappealing. Why does this happen, and is there anything I can do about it? I tried moving the image around in the section, but in every position the same thing happened. Wafflewombat (talk) 05:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you can look at WP:IMAGE as well as some of the relevant image policies/guidelines? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:07, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wafflewombat: White space adds to readability, and can be important for WP:ACCESSIBILITY. Ad hoc styling is not recommended.
Separately, I have moved the image to conform with MOS:IMAGELOC and resized it to conform with MOS:IMAGESIZE. Bazza 7 (talk) 09:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Citation reference from an Interview[edit]

Hello! Can anyone tell me if we can / we should not use a source content that majorly involves an interview? For example, for a movie article I found the producing director's interview about the movie production. Can I use that for the production section of the movie? Especially for a certain information that only the production team will only know (like the casting process, how many camera were used for the production, etc.) Please guide me for this. Thank you in advance! Shenaall (talk) 06:52, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shenaall WP:ABOUTSELF is your guidance here. In general, the director is good for basic facts about the movie (we started filming in 2022 yes, it's the best film ever no), but keep the amount of it reasonable, and such a source probably doesn't add to WP:N. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Shenaall. Assuming for the sake of discussion that the notabilty of the film has already been established, then limited use of non-independent sources like an interview with a producer or a director may have some value. But your examples concern me. Every film goes through a casting process which results in the cast list in the article. If the casting process was so unusual as to deserve extra mention in the article, then it will have been discussed by reliable, independent sources. Similarly with regards to the number of cameras. Most films are made with single camera setups although it is not uncommon for three or four cameras to be used especially when filming prolonged conversations among multiple actors. So, when should an encyclopedia comment on such a common element of filmmaking? When a reliable source entirely independent of the producer/director discuss it. Cullen328 (talk) 08:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Gråbergs Gråa Sång and @Cullen328, the details regarding my question is in Draft:My Sibling's Romance#Production. The draft is still very rough and only contains direct translation from the article for now because I just started it not long ago, so pardon me if it's confusing to read.. The subject is not a movie to be exact, it is a reality TV program where the casting process was not an audition but rather the production team dm-ed 1500 people and they used 100 cameras behind one-way mirrors when filming which can be included in the production section, or am I wrong? But, my concerns was the said information can only be found in this citation article in Korean where the content is full QnA interview of the producing director about the production process and the idea of the show. For the other section like popularity or overview already has a reliable secondary source. The subject, in my opinion, is notable enough for an article. What do you think? Shall I include the information from that interview contents or just not include it at all? Shenaall (talk) 02:22, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Shenaall, I would include it only if reliable, independent sources discuss this aspect of the production. Cullen328 (talk) 04:08, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photographs[edit]

Should I include a photograph of my person when drafting an article in my sandbox? How do I determine if a photo is royalty-free and meets requirements for common licensing? TrevorGlynLocke (talk) 09:56, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TrevorGlynLocke, a photograph is very unlikely to be royalty free unless the photographer themself says so. If you took the photo yourself then it's up to you if you want to release it to commons. I would not worry too much about including a photograph on a draft article - check WP:FIRST for guidance on getting your article off the ground. ---- D'n'B-t -- 10:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TrevorGlynLocke The basic assumption is that any random pic you find online does not have a license we can use. For example, this website [5] states "Copyright © Royal Literary Fund 2024" and that is almost always the case. WP, and the sister-site we keep most pics on, Commons, are both very careful about copyright. More at Commons:Licensing.
Now, if "your person" is dead the situation is different, but I don't think this is the case. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, TrevorGlynLocke: in addition to what the other replies have said, note that the presence or absence of a photo will not affect whether the draft is accepted.
I suggest you concentrate on finding reliable independent sources on Leeming, because your article should be based on what they say, not on what you know. ColinFine (talk) 11:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What to do when a recent article is almost entirely copyvio (since creation)[edit]

This new article, HBC (filipino cosmetics retailer), is mostly copyvio: [6]
I'm not sure what to do here, because I'd have to blank the article and ask all revisions to be deleted if I was to use the template.
2804:F14:8093:5F01:AD1F:D79E:FFC5:945B (talk) 11:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. The page has been nominated for speedy deletion under G11. If an admin finds the article to meet the criteria for deletion and nobody contests, it will be deleted. CanonNi (talk) 11:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moving episode synopsis to below lead section per MOS causes issues[edit]

On Backrooms (web series), I tried to move the Backrooms (web series)#Episodes section to be right above the lead to coincide with MOS:TVPLOT, however, the table was moved below the infobox creating this giant ugly gap. What would be the best way to solve this issue? I fear changing the width of the table would not work as some desktop users may have a zoomed in view that still causes the gap. (Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 14:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Not0nshoree WP:Manual_of_Style/Television#Parent,_season,_and_episode_article_structure specifically says that when the episode table clashes with the infobox it can be placed lower in the article, so it is probably best where it is/was. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, I did not see that, thanks for the response. (Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 15:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

I would like to upload some images for the article Draft:Villa Fabbricotti on which I'm working. I did the photographs with a mobile phone. There are no people visible in the images. Can I upload them or is it illegal? Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 15:00, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@14 novembre I'm not sure why you think that uploading your own photos to Commons would be illegal! That's what our sister Project is for. Use the Wizard at Commons:Special:UploadWizard and give the information requested. note that the presence or absence of photos in drafts will not alter the chance of the draft being accepted: they don't help with wikinotability. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael D. Turnbull Thanks for your answer. I add that the images weren't to establish more notability, but simply to give more information to the reader. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 15:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@14 novembre Actually, there is one legal consideration: see c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Italy#Freedom_of_panorama, which suggests which license to use, if relevant, under Italian freedom-of-panorama rules. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael D. Turnbull Well, the image I am seeking to upload does not represent any architectural or artistic relevant subject, but only some plants in the park of the villa. Does that still apply?
Thank you so much and kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 15:15, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd assumed that an article on the building would have its picture and hence that was what you were asking about. Pictures of the park/plants will be fine but might not be relevant to the topic. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.... note also Commons:Category:Villa Fabbricotti (Livorno). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael D. Turnbull Thanks for your answer. The image I wanted to upload was an image of the park quite different from all the existing ones on commons. Anyway, my question is, does an image of the park/plants still go under the legal concerns you previously expressed. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 15:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ps: most certainly I'll also use some of the images in the category you helpfully indicated. 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 15:31, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's about art and architecture: see the linked FOP page regarding Italian copyright laws. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See Freedom of panorama#Italy. nbsp; Maproom (talk) 16:04, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Maproom @Michael D. Turnbull This is the image:
. Is it ok?
Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 17:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@14 novembre: That looks fine. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:19, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pigsonthewing Perfect. Thanks for your answer and kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 19:20, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to bring back an AFD page?[edit]

Hello everyone,

I am new to Wikipedia and have just started to learn how things work around here. My motivation for starting to write on Wikipedia was a Wikipedia page called "Keramikou 28" which disappeared out of the blue. I thought of recreating the page as I assumed that the previous creator(s) had deleted it.

However, I recently found out that the page wasn't deleted by the creator(s) but rather via AFD (Articles for Deletion). I have already created the page with some corrections to the previous one and am now waiting for it to be reviewed. Is it possible to bring back an AFD page?

Any further advice is more than welcome! IlEssere (talk) 15:16, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be under WP:UNDELETE. CommissarDoggoTalk? 15:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@IlEssere Based on the deletion discussion there were lots of different versions of the article while its future was being debated. Hence I don't think you will find it helpful to retrieve anything but should simply work on your own Draft:Keramikou 28 about the building and how it meets notability requirements. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:36, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your guidance. I'll focus on developing Draft:Keramikou 28 according to the notability requirements. IlEssere (talk) 15:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

recovering deleted page[edit]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Vedette Lim

Hello, I recently created my first page and tried publishing but it was deleted due to copyright issues. Is there a way to recover the deleted page so I can update the text? It took me a long time to create the page and now it seems to be gone? Freshkicksfreshkicks (talk) 15:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Freshkicksfreshkicks Administrators can in theory recover deleted pages, but of it was deleted for copyright violations, it cannot be retained. You should restart the article writing it with your own words and citing the sources you used to find the information. By the way, what was the title of the article? Ok I suppose it was Draft:Vedette Lim. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 15:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it was Draft: Vedette Lim. The issue is that the "copyrighted" material was copyrighted by me, I copy and pasted it from a website that I published myself so this is all my original writing. How do I recover the deleted page so I can update the text so it differs from my original text? Freshkicksfreshkicks (talk) 16:02, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Freshkicksfreshkicks, if you copied the content from your own web site, you can copy it from there again, rather than ask a WP admin to knowingly break the law. Maproom (talk) 16:07, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But before doing that, @Freshkicksfreshkicks, make sure you place the text on your website under a compatible license, or your effort will likely be deleted as a copyvio again. 57.140.16.57 (talk) 16:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Freshkicksfreshkicks, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please note that copying text from an external website, even if the copyright allows it, is almost never an effective way of creating a Wikipedia article. There is no reason why an external website should conform to Wikipedia's core policies such as verifiability, reliable sources or neutral point of view, and indeed https://entertainment.ie/person/vedette-lim/ has no sources cited, seems unlikely to be from sources independent of Lim, and uses peacock terms.
In fact, if you start with the text you have, you will be writing the article BACKWARDS, as so many inexperienced editors do, and give yourself a lot of frustration and disappointment.
I recommend you start from scratch, following your first article. Your absolutely first task (assuming you are not associated with Lim: if you are, your first task will be declaring your conflict of interest or your status as a paid editor, as appropriate) is to find the reliable, independent sources which discuss her at length, because if you cannot find those, you will know that she does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and you will be wasting your time doing any more on this draft. ColinFine (talk) 16:57, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was content on the page that didn't have copyright issues, namely the filmography, how do I get that work back? Freshkicksfreshkicks (talk) 17:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You could try and ask the administrator who deleted the draft to offer a partial refund, but generally revisions containing copyrighted content are removed entirely. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:20, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How do I contact the admin that deleted? Freshkicksfreshkicks (talk) 18:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Freshkicksfreshkicks: That was User:Rmhermen; use their talk page. If they can't undelete the page, they should be able to email you the content. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for page creation[edit]

Is it possible to request someone to create a page for us so that it is unbiased? I was attempting to create a page for the Excelsior Citizen an online news publication for Excelsior Springs, MO but I'm too closely involved and the entry I created was too promotional. Sjasoncole (talk) 16:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There is a means for doing so, Requested Articles, but it is backlogged in the extreme. Wikipedia articles are not for merely telling about something, an article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. If your publication is truly notable, and covered by appropriate sources, someone will eventually write about it. Trying to force the issue doesn't usually work. Just go on about the business of your publication as if Wikipedia didn't exist. 331dot (talk) 16:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
331dot's "backlogged in the extreme" is an understatement. It's more like a graveyard with no visitors. Maproom (talk) 23:35, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I might actually keep that analogy in mind, thanks. 331dot (talk) 23:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned on the talk page for discrimination, I feel that the Types section aligns with many progressive PoVs, but has some contention in the conservative PoVs. As a result, it seems that progressive understand discrimination as a "bad" thing, and anything else that is could fit under the definition of discrimination is not real discrimination. It is my viewpoint that either discrimination is labeled as a progressive aligned term, or we need examples of discrimination that are not progressive.

I have not done a survey (or know how to do one) of the non-progressive groups, so I can only guess right now what some examples would be. Polygamy? Homeschooling? Subanark (talk) 16:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Subanark, and welcome to the Teahouse. I see you have begin a discussion at Talk:Discrimination, which is the right place for it. Nobody has yet replied to you, so that might mean that nobody disagrees, or that people haven't yet had time to see and consider your post there. What you could do is to look through the history of the article, and see which editors have contributed to it (especially those who have made contributions that you do or don't agree with) and ping them on the talk page.
If you and other editors are unable to achieve consensus, then follow the steps in dispute resolution. ColinFine (talk) 17:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Potential future WikiProjects[edit]

Here are some ideas for future WikiProjects that I have been wondering about. They are:

  • A WikiProject that reveals the actual meanings of euphemisms, it could be called a decypherium of decipheria (as in decyphering/deciphering)
  • A WikiProject that compiles crossword clues.
  • A WikiProject that is written in Middle English (á la John Wycliffe and Geoffrey Chaucer.
  • A WikiProject that is written in Early Modern English (á la William Shakespeare).
  • A WikiProject that is written in Classical English (á la late 16th century to late 19th century).
  • A WikiProject that is written in the vernacular English for each decade of the 20th century.
  • A WikiProject that proposes new ideas for scriptwriting of potential TV shows/films.

Brudelman (talk) 17:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Brudelman, welcome to the Teahouse. These don't sound like WikiProjects as the term is generally defined here; they would be other projects under the overall Wikimedia umbrella (like, for instance, Old English Wikipedia, or Wikisource). Proposals for such things are made over on Meta - here are the instructions for new language projects, for instance. 57.140.16.57 (talk) 17:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikitionary is a project that has meanings of euphemisms. ---- D'n'B-t -- 18:57, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles about case law that are Good Articles[edit]

Hi,

I'm somewhat of a new editor that doesn't have much experience making large improvements to articles, but I'd like to improve Redfearn v United Kingdom. Are there any Good Articles about case law that I can use as inspiration? Any other help and advice would be much appreciated. Thank you! MajesticRZ (talk) 17:15, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MajesticRZ You'll find some in this set https://wp1.openzim.org/#/project/Law/articles?quality=GA-Class Nthep (talk) 17:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! MajesticRZ (talk) 17:52, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating protected articles for deletion[edit]

I saw an article that had no sources and was not notable. However, I just found out that the page was protected (restricted), so I can't tag it for deletion.

For reference, the article in question is ''The Odyssey'' (Smith). It was protected because new editors (myself included) kept overlinking it to other pages. I want to nominate it for A7 speedy deletion. GenericUser24 (talk) 17:42, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GenericUser24, for reference the article is The Odyssey (Smith), the italic marks don't work in links. Songs are not one of the things eligible for A7 deletion. A9 can apply to songs, but in this case since the composer has an article that would not be applicable either. So once you become autoconfirmed (not tough to do; wait a few days since you've already made the required number of edits), if at that time you still think deletion is warranted you could utilize the proposed deletion or articles for deletion processes, but it's not eligible under any speedy deletion criteria so far as I can tell. You also could make an edit request for someone to make the edit on your behalf, but really it's simpler to just wait a few days until you can do it yourself. You could use that time to see if you could find any suitable reference material that could be used to improve the article; deletion is only indicated when such material cannot be found to exist, not just because the article is currently in a poor state. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! GenericUser24 (talk) 21:11, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By the way I could not find any references that are not listings of the music on sale. GenericUser24 (talk) 21:15, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abbreviations in citations[edit]

What is the Wikipedia policy on abbreviations in citing journal titles? For example, is Am J Public Health an acceptable title, or should it be written out? The obvious help articles don't seem to deal with this, but I'm probably missing something. Johsebb (talk) 18:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Johsebb, Wikipedia does not have the space limitations that restrict printed journals, and unlike journals, is published for a general audience. Always use the full title. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:36, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Scientific citation guidelines#Citation format. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Johsebb Writen out (I can't for the moment find the MOS for this but someone else will supply that). If you use the WP:Citation expander gadget, it will do this for you automatically just from the digital object identifier. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:36, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question about mentorship[edit]

Can I claim as a mentee a user I know personally, which has registered today? Thanks 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 19:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can. Ruslik_Zero 20:05, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ruslik0 Ok thank you very much for your answer. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 20:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

how to move a page Semen2 (talk) 19:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:MOVE. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 🇮🇹 19:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help emailing a Wikipedia photo contributor[edit]

I need assistance emailing the person responsible for posting a photo to Wikipedia. I am using a wikipedia commons photo in a book and need information about its source. AP Photos wants to charge me $310 to use the same photo. I need assurance that it is not copyrighted. The photo I would like to reuse is posted here:

File:Butterfly Ballot, Florida 2000 (large).jpg

There is a talk page for Anthony but I don't see an email. There is a link labeled Special:Emailuser/Anthony but again no email provided.

Thanks. WikiPhotoFinder68 WikiPhotoFinder68 (talk) 20:15, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, WikiPhotoFinder68. To contact the editor by e-mail, you'll need to write your message in the text box at Special:EmailUser/Anthony. There's no way to reveal the user's address because that's protected by Wikipedia. If WikiPhotoFinder68 decides to reply to you, it will come from their address and you'll then have it, but that's the only way to find it out. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:18, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for responding. I do not see a text box on Anthony's talk page. There is a text box displaying the last message he received, but I cannot write to it.
Under the link that says Special: emailuser/Anthony it says: This page is a soft redirect. When I get to the link these is no text box. What am I missing here?
Thanks
WikiPhotoFinder68 WikiPhotoFinder68 (talk) 20:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WikiPhotoFinder68 I suspect you have not "added and confirmed an email address in your user preferences" (see Wikipedia:Emailing users) which is why you cannot see an "Email this user" option, which I can see. Please note that User:Anthony's last edit was 17 February 2018, so I suspect you may be out of luck in any case. - Arjayay (talk) 20:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiPhotoFinder68 This may be because of a possible user-setting that disallows e-mails from brand-new users. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the uploader, Anthony, said that the image was "in the public domain because it was ineligible for copyright". If this correct, then you don't need permission. However, @Pigsonthewing has just challenged this, and nominated the picture for speedy deletion. See C:File:Butterfly Ballot, Florida 2000 (large).jpg. ColinFine (talk) 21:18, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion question[edit]

hi!


Draft:Jbs vidyadhar


I am unsure to how that qualifies for promotional content Avempati1015 (talk) 20:16, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23, care to comment? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since I can see the deleted material, I can certainly tell you. is a distinguished former Indian badminton player ("distinguished" is puffery and editorializing), was marked with various achievements (like?), he participated in prestigious tournaments ("prestigious" is puffery), Notably, Vidyadhar represented (do not tell the reader what is "notable"; let them decide that), Some of his remarkable performances ("remarkable", more editorializing and puffery), On the international stage he was highlighted by his gold medal triumphs (skip the flowery language; just state that he won X number of gold medals in that tournament), and then the rest is essentially a CV which is inherently promotional. So, I agree that the entire article was essentially talking about how great this person is, and was correctly deleted as such. Articles should stick to only specific facts from reliable and independent sources, and should be entirely neutral in tone, without any editorializing, needless adjectives, or "talking up". Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article alerts + recognized content not working?[edit]

So I want to generate a recognized content list and article alerts for WikiProject Apps. I've inserted the code and transcluded the pages. However, it seems no content is being generated. I've already tagged some pages with the project's tag. Why is this not working? Thanks, TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 21:13, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TrademarkedTWOrantula I've not checked whether you've actually followed the process correctly, but I do note you added that section yesterday, and that the template states that the bot updates weekly on a Saturday. Are you therefore not being a little premature with your question? Nick Moyes (talk) 22:57, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Racism?[edit]

Hi! I came upon an article during my vandalism training, that isn't really vandalism, but IS super uncomfortable. It's shrouded racism, couched in historical sources that were only online for like one day (seems fishy). Namely the first one for the Smithsonian online tracked for one day on wayback. Not sure how to handle this one. She wasn't really notable and wasn't really a sculptor or a scientist, not provable anyway. Thoughts? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_Koller Slacker13 (talk) 22:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slacker13, I don't see the Rose Koller article as racism, shrouded or otherwise. And it's certainly not vandalism. It does make it clear that its subject was racist. Maproom (talk) 23:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The Wayback Machine only has an archive of this page on one day" does not mean "the page was only online for one day". They don't archive every page on every site every day (some pages just never get archived, which is very frustrating). If you don't think the Koller article meets notability, you're welcome to nominate it for deletion. DS (talk) 23:52, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Based on Wikipedia policies/guidelines, which would be the better source?[edit]

I want to source the information in this doctoral thesis. The doctoral thesis has also now been published as a book

As per the description of the book:

This book is the publication of the thesis of my PhD by Prior Publication, titled “Satanic Abuse, False Memories, Weird Beliefs and Moral Panics: Anatomy of a 24-year Investigation.”

Which source would be better, or does it matter? The thesis can be accessed open source, so it is easily verifiable, but the book (I believe) matches technically more closely what Wikipedia actually wants for its sources. ← 𝐋𝐞𝐟𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 22:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any information on Prior Publication. Is it self-publishing or vanity press? RudolfRed (talk) 00:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see what you mean. The term "PhD by Prior Publication" refers to a specific type of doctoral degree, which is not a reference to a publishing company named "Prior Publication." Instead, it indicates a route to earning a PhD based on previously published work. In this context, the capitalized "P's" in "Prior Publication" are used to emphasize the specific route of achieving a PhD, not to denote a company or organization. It's odd phrasing, and it could have been clearer, but that is what it means. Candidates for this type of PhD must demonstrate that their already published works collectively constitute a significant and original contribution to knowledge in their field, meeting the standard expected of a conventional PhD thesis. ← 𝐋𝐞𝐟𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 00:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lefthandedlion: Your wording is still confusing to me, since the thesis is from 2014 and according to Amazon the book was not published until last year. I suggest using {{Cite thesis}} and follow the guidance at WP:SELFCITE RudolfRed (talk) 01:22, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies. It seems the author had previously published their thesis in 2014, and then published the book last year containing their thesis. They earned their PhD via prior publication, which means they used their years of investigative journalism to prove a unique contribution to the field for the PhD. Then they published that thesis as a book last year. I don't believe self citation applies since this isn't my work, but appreciate the template for cite thesis. ← 𝐋𝐞𝐟𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 01:45, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lefthandedlion: What does this mean: This book is the publication of the thesis of my PhD ? RudolfRed (talk) 01:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, it seems you copied that from somewhere, leading to confusion. RudolfRed (talk) 01:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Using Pronouns[edit]

Greetings to all,

I am a new editor and wanted to know if there is any kind of policy/guidelines regarding the use of Pronouns for the 72 genders? As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and sometimes it gets confusing, in the context.

P.S. I mean no offense to anyone. I am just trying to understand and learn. Thank you! CheezyMom (talk) 23:20, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please clarify— in articles, or otherwise? There's MOS:PRONOUNS. (72?) 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 23:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would say: use the pronoun that you think most obviously applies to someone unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise. "This person has expressed a preference for X pronoun" counts as a compelling reason, as does "this person is trans" and "you've made a mistake there". DS (talk) 23:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Higher quality image needed, unsure if it's copyrighted[edit]

Hello!

I am trying to update the Puget Sound and Pacific Railroad's article and need a new image for the logo,

the current image is of VERY low resolution and I went to the PSAP's website to get a higher resolution logo.

There is one on the website, but it isn't uploaded to Wikipedia yet and I was going to upload it, but I'm unsure if that falls under fair use or not.

I'm not sure what to do here, the PSAP is a subsidiary of the Genesee and Wyoming, and other subsidiaries have their logos in full high resolution, so do I upload it, ask permission for it, or something else? HaloSpartanCats (talk) 00:00, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HaloSpartanCats: Welcome to the Teahouse. Per Wikipedia's guidelines on logos, particularly if they have a copyright:

Company logos may appear in articles on those companies, but note that, if challenged, it is the responsibility of those who wish to include the logo to prove that its use meets Wikipedia non-free content criteria. Logos uploaded to Wikipedia must be low-resolution and no larger than necessary.

Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:14, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

American Mental Health Foundation[edit]

Made bold changes so as not to read as an ad. I think we succeeded. If yes, please remove "reads more like an ad." Thank you. Mentalhealthwriter (talk) 00:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why "we", Mentalhealthwriter -- are there more than one of you? And I see that you have removed the template from the article American Mental Health Foundation. ¶ Sample: Recently, the foundation has aspired to and initiated higher levels of female leadership (unreferenced). We're not normally concerned with the mere aspirations of subjects of articles. Rather, what have they verifiably achieved? -- Hoary (talk) 01:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I made a start at some depuffing, but it needs a lot more work, so I've put that back. Mentalhealthwriter, you probably oughtn't to be the one who removes it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 02:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do I find pages with specific maintenance tags?[edit]

For example pages tagged with "Needs more sources," or "needs copy editing," "NPOV" etc? Looking to find pages that need editing by tag searching etc, to help with cleanup.

Any tools or pages that help direct towards articles on WP that are tagged for cleanup/improvement would be great. Thank you very much. Comintell (talk) 02:45, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Comintell: Welcome, and thanks for wanting to help. Checkout WP:BACKLOG, I think it is what you're looking for. RudolfRed (talk) 02:59, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Comintell: If you're looking for tagged articles within your areas of interest, you could try the WikiProject Cleanup Listings. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:14, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And another option is Template:Category tracker. Many of the options have subcategories once they are clicked on. --Tbennert (talk) 04:21, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I put information about myself and someone is criticizing it[edit]

I added myself as the first female mayor of Miami Shores and someone has questioned whether I should be there since it is called the Village of Miami Shores. However, it is a part of the numerous municipalities in Miami Dade County. When I was mayor I represented Miami Shores in the Miami Dade County League of Cities. This person bookworm, ce thinks I am not eligible. How do I remedy this? I added my name as I am considering asking to be considered a notable graduate of my high school alumni class and why I wanted to make sure my name showed up there. The person who questioned whether I should be on there even cited the Miami Herald article from when I was elected. Please advise. KKirbyMiami (talk) 03:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @KKirbyMiami and welcome to the Teahouse. You edited the article List of first women mayors (20th century), adding yourself to the list without a proper source. In addition, it's highly discouraged to write about yourself, per WP:COI. CanonNi (talk) 03:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How would I get the information updated if I did not add it? Also I was not trying to do anything wrong I did not know I had to add a source but am happy to do so. I was the first woman mayor elected there in 1985. There were very few female mayors at that time and also I was only 35 years old. Tell me how to remedy this please? I heard my high school is adding people to their list of graduates who contributed through work or political office and I want them to be able to see that in fact I was the first woman mayor of my city. I was not trying to mislead anyone. KKirbyMiami (talk) 03:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you wish to have yourself added to the list, you must provide a credible source proving that you were, in fact, the first female mayor of a municipality. Any unsourced content will be removed per WP:PROVEIT. CanonNi (talk) 04:02, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended content
What are the municipalities in Miami-Dade County?
Miami-Dade County is comprised of 34 municipalities: Aventura, Bal Harbour, Bay Harbor Islands, Biscayne Park, Coral Gables, Cutler Bay, Doral, El Portal, Florida City, Golden Beach, Hialeah, Hialeah Gardens, Homestead, Indian Creek, Key Biscayne, Medley, Miami, Miami Beach, Miami Gardens, Miami Lakes, Miami Shores, ...https://www.miamidade.gov/information/library/at-a-glance.pdf KKirbyMiami (talk) 04:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The PDF you provided has no mention of your name. CanonNi (talk) 04:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are the municipalities in Miami-Dade County?
Miami-Dade County is comprised of 34 municipalities: Aventura, Bal Harbour, Bay Harbor Islands, Biscayne Park, Coral Gables, Cutler Bay, Doral, El Portal, Florida City, Golden Beach, Hialeah, Hialeah Gardens, Homestead, Indian Creek, Key Biscayne, Medley, Miami, Miami Beach, Miami Gardens, Miami Lakes, Miami Shores, ...https://dpanther.fiu.edu/sobek/FI18052712/00001/marc KKirbyMiami (talk) 04:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://dpanther.fiu.edu/dpService/dpPurlService/purl/FI18052712/00001 This source is Florida International University. If you read down the page it mentions I was first female mayor.
Permanent Link:
http://dpanther.fiu.edu/dpService/dpPurlService/purl/FI18052712/00001
Material Information
Title:
Mayor Karen Kirby
Series Title:
Miami Shores Woman's Club activities
Publication Date:
1991-10-31
Subjects
Subjects / Keywords:
Mayors Woman's Club Women--Societies and clubs Municipal officials and employees Halloween Howl
Coordinates:
25.8631515 x -80.1928253
Notes
Abstract:
Karen Kirby First Female Mayor of Miami Shores at Halloween Howl 1991 ( en )
Funding:
This project has been funded under the provisions of the Library Cooperative Grant program, administered by the Florida Department of State’s Division of Library and Information Services.
Record Information
Source Institution:
Brockway Memorial Library
Holding Location:
Brockway Memorial Library
Rights Management:
http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-RUU/1.0/
Resource Identifier:
FI18052712 Organizations & Clubs Binder
dpSobek Membership KKirbyMiami (talk) 04:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Permanent Link:
http://dpanther.fiu.edu/dpService/dpPurlService/purl/FI18052712/00001
Material Information
Title:
Mayor Karen Kirby
Series Title:
Miami Shores Woman's Club activities
Publication Date:
1991-10-31
Subjects
Subjects / Keywords:
Mayors Woman's Club Women--Societies and clubs Municipal officials and employees Halloween Howl
Coordinates:
25.8631515 x -80.1928253
Notes
Abstract:
Karen Kirby First Female Mayor of Miami Shores at Halloween Howl 1991 ( en )
Funding:
This project has been funded under the provisions of the Library Cooperative Grant program, administered by the Florida Department of State’s Division of Library and Information Services.
Record Information
Source Institution:
Brockway Memorial Library
Holding Location:
Brockway Memorial Library
Rights Management:
http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-RUU/1.0/
Resource Identifier:
FI18052712 Organizations & Clubs Binder
dpSobek Membership
Here is my source. Florida International University is a state of Florida university.
I put the miami dade county link to show that Miami Shores is indeed one of 32 municipalities in Miami Dade County. KKirbyMiami (talk) 04:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The women named in that list either have Wikipedia articles about them (names appear blue) or there is a confirming reference. That is why your self-addition to 1985 was reverted. The second hyperlink you provided https://dpanther.fiu.edu/sobek/FI18052712/00001/marc states that you were mayor in 1991, not that you were elected in 1985. Do you have a newspaper clipping from 1985? David notMD (talk) 04:27, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I showed them a link and they are still disputing. Why would I want to lie about something like this? I am 74 years old and was 35 when I was elected. I just want to e added as I was submitted as an outstanding graduate of my high school in Tampa, Florida due to my political history. This is ridiculous. KKirbyMiami (talk) 04:39, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No one is disputing that you were first mayor. For that information to be included in 1985 - I am presuming the year you were elected - needs a ref confirming that fact. It does not have to be available online as long as you can name the paper, date and page number. David notMD (talk) 04:42, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://records.msvfl.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=90869&dbid=0&repo=MiamiShoresVillage&searchid=84d849a7-98ee-44b6-887e-8a9bd7bf666c It is the council meeting minutes where it states I received the most votes and by tradition I was elected mayor by the council members. I don't know what more needs to be done. Thank you so much for your help. This is very upsetting to me. KKirbyMiami (talk) 04:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the source in this edit. CanonNi (talk) 04:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for clarifying this for me. It is much appreciated and done in a very respectful way. I feel like I was undergoing trial. KKirbyMiami (talk) 05:04, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a Wikipedia page[edit]

how to create a Wikipedia page Astroboy-tomorrow (talk) 06:18, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Astroboy-tomorrow and welcome to the Teahouse. You can check out Help:Your first article for a beginners' guide on article-creating here on the English Wikipedia. CanonNi (talk) 06:20, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I strongly recommend that you spend quite a time editing and improving pages before you think about creating a Wikipedia page.Bduke (talk) 06:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]