Wikipedia:Teahouse

ColinFine, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help

Wikipedia

Not essays

A reviewer moved my article back to draft, because, " Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because Wikipedia articles are not academic essays.". Does that mean it needs to be "dumbed down"? Any elaboration appreciated, if known. Fixingthingsguy (talk) 20:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Fixingthingsguy, I guess this is about Draft:How the PET bottle became ubiquitous. No, dumbing-down is not the issue. But there's a lot of things wrong with that draft, which would prevent it trom being accepted as a Wikipedia article:

• It's not an article about a subject, it's an essay about how (in your view) something happened. I assume that's what the reviewer meant.
• It uses capitalisation and italics in seemingly random ways: "Polyethylene Terephthalate", "glass", "2-Liter".
• It says "50 years ago" rather than giving a date. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and hopes to exist for at least another 50 years, it's not a newspaper. "Today", likewise.
• The punctuation is chaotic. Some periods are mid-sentence, some sentences have no period. Punctuation should always followprecede references, not precedefollow them.

The last three items will be fairly easy to correct. But while what you've written is not about a notable topic, it has little chance of being accepted. Maproom (talk) 21:17, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, that's very helpful. Fixingthingsguy (talk) 21:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Fixingthingsguy: a Wikipedia article should be a summary of what reliable sources have said about a subject, nothing more. It should not present any argumentation or conclusions at all, except possibly summaries of arguments or conclusions presented in one single source. It could summarise (separately) arguments or conclusions from two or more different sources, but should make no attempt to compare or reconcile them. ColinFine (talk) 22:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks . I'm getting a better picture of what I need to do. My grandson is likely never to ask, how did the plastic-like beverage bottle get ubiquitous! But if he was super observant, he might ask, how come all these beverage bottles in the grocery have a weird shape in the bottom. That might be a subject of interest. In which case I would tell him about these super smart people who tossed around various ideas and came up with a petal like base, that ensured the Coke bottle or Pepsi bottle would stand a lot of jostling around from manufacture to the dining table and stand upright at all times. How did they do that, grandad, and I would say, they made a preform that looks like a syringe with the small end closed, and shoved a burst of hot air that made it into a form that ends looking like a beverage bottle. And they received patents for that from the US Patent office. And, oh, by the way, they made trillions of these and now are struggling to find a way to recycle them without becoming a hazard for future generations.

How does that sound. Thanks in advance for any feedback

Regards Fixingthingsguy (talk) 00:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

That sounds like a great blog post, but like it wouldn't quite fit on Wikipedia. However, that doesn't mean the information you've collected wouldn't be useful, or couldn't be incorporated into Wikipedia!

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. A good way to think of it is that the title of a Wikipedia article should be a noun: Wikipedia articles should describe a single thing, rather than try to answer a question (like "how did X happen").

Once we've chosen a thing, we find and summarize all the information there is related to that particular thing. For example, your article could probably be split up and included in our article on plastic bottles or polyethylene terephthalate! –Sincerely, A Lime 01:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll note your suggestions as I rework the draft. Fixingthingsguy (talk) 21:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

@Fixingthingsguy Do not rework the draft. It is a blatant essay and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an essay hosting service. Hasn’t your WikiEd teacher thing taught you that already? 48JCL^TALK 00:54, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @48JCL, I think your comment might have come across sounding harsher than you intended it to (the use of bold comes across as shouting)—just a friendly reminder of Wikipedia:BITE.

@Fixingthingsguy just to clarify, I believe JCL is saying that the material you've written is not well-suited to a standalone article. Instead, it should probably be merged into a different article after some revision. –Sincerely, A Lime 01:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@Closed Limelike Curves Terribly sorry, I completely forgot. 48JCL^TALK 01:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

No worries, internet communication is hard :) –Sincerely, A Lime 03:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Maproom: On punctuation and reference indices: Really? 126.33.112.247 (talk) 22:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom is mistaken here. Punctuation should always precede references, except in limited circumstances. See MOS:CITEPUNCT. Adam Black ^{t • c} 00:42, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

You're right. Now corrected. Maproom (talk) 07:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

In anser to your question, not good. Articles consist of facts and references, not "telling". And are you aware that Polyethylene terephthalate has a section on bottles? Perhaps you have referenced content that can be added there versus a separate article. David notMD (talk) 00:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Ignore All Rules

Hey editors, I hope you all are well. I want to know when one should use WP:IAR at AfD. It is obvious that the creator of this rule knew it could be misused to save articles. So, what are the limitations of this rule? When can't someone use this guideline? GrabUp - Talk 15:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

@Grabup It seems to me that AfD is a discussion intended to decide whether or not an article should be deleted. As such, rules shouldn't need to be relied upon (or ignored). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

@Grabup: You could use it in your post at AfD but it isn't really meant for discussions and the closer may put little weight on your post. AfD is not a straight vote and IAR is a lousy argument by itself. Do NOT use it to bypass the AfD process, e.g. by hiding links to hte discussion, posting from multiple accounts, changing or removing posts by others, closing the discussion too early or against consensus, damaging the article in hope of getting more delete support, or canvassing. Personally I almost never use IAR and only when a rule wasn't written with the specific circumstances in mind, almost everybody would probably agree with my action, and it doesn't seem important enough to start a discussion. I never use it in discussions. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your detailed information. Another thing I wanted to ask is why this rule was created. We have rules such as GNG, NPOL, NACTOR, and others, so why is there another rule that just skips them? GrabUp - Talk 17:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

It essentially exists to say "it's OK to use common sense". Policies and guidelines shouldn't be interpreted as laws – they exist only to describe principles that the Wikipedia community thinks are generally good, and are intended to help Wikipedia, not harm it. Occasionally, some action that would be indicated by a policy might be so obviously bad for Wikipedia that nobody would reasonably agree with the policy in that scenario, so in those rare circumstances there's no good reason to follow the rule.

Think about it like how a police officer would obviously not expect a doctor to obey a law against jaywalking if someone was having a medical emergency on the other side of the road and there were no cars in sight – the rules don't need to carve out every possible exception, as long as everyone uses common sense. Tollens (talk) 17:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed answer. I was asking about it because I had a small discussion with a person who is likely to use this rule at normal AfDs at the recent RFA. His question was Q26. You can see the discussion if you search for Q26 or see this diff. GrabUp - Talk 18:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

In my 18 years on Wikipedia, the last dozen of which have been as an administrator, I have never had to invoke IAR. I consider it a cop-out. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I didn't say I'd use it personally, I just said I think it would be justifiable in that specific situation. To my knowledge, I've never invoked IAR at AfD. You can scrutinize my votes here, but I'm fairly sure I haven't. Cremastra (talk) 22:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

If you ever have to say you're invoking IAR, you're doing it wrong. It's either for cases where what you're doing is so obviously correct no one would disagree with it even though it may technically contravene a rule, or where there's a really weird corner case there's no rule at all for and you're muddling through it the best you can. As an example of the first at AfD: There are zero independent sources about humans, as every single one (or at least every single one we know of!) was written by a human. But if you nominated that article for AfD on the grounds of failing notability, even though strictly it does, that would get SNOW kept enough to bury Mount Everest in a drift. Everyone pretty much just knows that applying the rule literally in that case would lead to a ludicrous result, so it just gets quietly ignored in that instance, without anyone even having to say so. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I no longer have access to some pages

Hello, I can no longer access some pages that I have been working on for several years. These include: Cardano (blockchain platform). Can anyone tell me what's happened? GreyStar456 (talk) 09:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@GreyStar456: The article you linked has been EC protected since 2021. But your account is already extended-confirmed, so you should be able to edit it. Could you describe the situation with more detail? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. I have made edits to this page many times, most recently 23:34, 26 March 2024 diff hist  +82‎  Cardano (blockchain platform). Now, I see the EC padlock. I noticed it this morning. That's all I know. I've made 1,173 edits since 20 April 2020. GreyStar456 (talk) 10:13, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Does it save your edits when you click "publish"? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 10:15, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Panic over. There's now no problem. I don't know what happened. Apologies for bothering you. Thanks again. GreyStar456 (talk) 10:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

That's good. No problem at all. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 10:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi @GreyStar456: - I see the issue has been resolved. What might have happened is that you tried to edit the page without being logged in. Madam Fatal (talk) 18:15, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I was logged in. The page would not open to edit. I then opened and edited a non-locked page. After that, I went back to the Cardano page and it edited fine. I tried reproducing the error but cannot. No problem since.GreyStar456 (talk) 21:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Extract info from author interviews to add to entry?

An author who died in 2022 has book reviews but little else written about his work. His WP entry is rated as a stub. He has been interviewed by CBC Radio several times. The articles on the CBC website provide some information but also links to the radio interview recordings. Can information from these interviews be referenced as a reliable source to provide more information for his WP entry? Similarly, can the author's lectures and interviews posted on YouTube by the organizers of the lecture series be reliable sources? If not, are these sources properly classed in the "External Links" section of the WP entry? Marjimac (talk) 03:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, interviews can be used! I would recommend you have a quick look at WP:IV. I believe the lectures and interviews on YouTube should be fine as well. (These doesn't quite fit the bill, but WP:ABOUTSELF and WP:PRIMARY may be useful. I'm not sure if there's a specific policy regarding lectures published by an organizer.) Hopefully this was at least a little helpful! Best, ayakanaa ( t ) 05:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ayakanaa Thank you for the great article referrals! I appreciate your time. Keep up the good work! Marjimac (talk) 22:42, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Marjimac: interviews with the subject may be used to support uncontroversial information about him. But they will generally do nothing to help establish that he's notable enough to warrant an article. Maproom (talk) 09:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom Editing an existing article, so someone else believes author to be noteworthy. Thanks for your guidance on the use of interviews. Marjimac (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Help with copyright violation

I happened across the article Lluís Farré and it appears to be a copyright violation of this webpage (note: I already performed some copyedits of the article before I noticed this problem - the violation is more clear in the original revision here). I've read through the relevant guidance but I'm none the wiser as to what I ought to do about this. I was going to post it to Wikipedia:Copyright problems for review, but I can't even wrap my head around how to log an entry on that page. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. Another Day Wiser (talk) 10:05, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Another Day Wiser Yeah, that doesn't look great. I can't find any evidence that their page is older than ours, but given the promotional nature of the text, I feel pretty confident that our article is the problematic one. I'll nominate it for speedy deletion as a blatant copyright violation. I see the creator's page is littered with these copyright warnings as well, so I'll file a CCI request. Thanks for flagging this, and sorry you didn't get a response until now! In the future, you can always send pages to copyright problems. I agree that the listing process is a bit complicated, however, so I (and most other users there) use a third-party script- but you can always ask me or somebody active in the Copyright Cleanup project to help you list something in the future. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Another Day Wiser (talk) 08:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Search for all articles that contain a particular source?

I'm trying to look at the reliability of a certain source (newspaper/website) and it would be really useful if I could perform a search that pulls up all the articles with this source in the reference. Is there any way of doing this? Orange sticker (talk) 12:35, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Orange sticker - you need to perform an "insource" search, with the name of the newspaper/website as the search parameter - please see H:INSOURCE for the details. - Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 12:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks exactly what I was looking for, thanks @Arjayay! Orange sticker (talk) 12:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Orange sticker: You can also try Special:LinkSearch for online sources. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

There's also Special:LinkSearch, which searches partial URLs that exist in articles, either in sources or as external links. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

What a great suggestion! PrimeHunter (talk) 23:48, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Recreating deleted page?

I've been going through pages that are part of Danielle Steel's body of work as every one I've looked at has virtually no sources, if it has any at all. I've upgraded several of the film adaptation pages this month, and today I've been working on Full Circle. It already had a section for the film adaptation, so I searched AfD and found that back in 2010, Full Circle (1996 film) was turned into a redirect to Quidam.

Since the other adaptations do have their own pages, though, I'm not sure how to proceed. I'm putting all the info on the current page, structured under the pre-existing section.

Do I create a new page (Danielle Steel's Full Circle; a lot of the telefilms are referenced that way in the professional reviews)? Do I undo the redirect on the old page and add all of the info once I've made sure it passes NFILM? Do I leave it all on the current novel page, and if so, how do I handle the naming there?

I don't want to run afoul of a regulation I haven't seen (because I haven't had this particular issue previously). But it seems odd to me to add Wikiprojects to the talk page of a novel for films and television, which I will do if that's what I need to do, not to mention adding film categories to the bottom of a page that has "novel" directly in its title.

Thanks in advance for any advice on how to proceed. OIM20 (talk) 14:16, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

The redirect of "Full Circle (1996 film)" seems to me a little odd (though apparently valid), because the Quidam article itself has absolutely no mention (that I can see) of that so-titled short documentary film about the CdS show. anyone thus redirected might be a little puzzled.

Since the CdS film appears to be fairly obscure I suggest that, assuming you have the Reliable sources for a valid article about the film of the Steel novel, you remove the redirection from the page, insert the new article material, and add a Wikipedia:Hatnote saying something along the lines of ". . . for the 1996 documentary film about the Cirque du Soleil show, see under Quidam." You might also want to WP:Move the page to "Full Circle (1996 TV film)".

There is, as you may already know, a disambiguation page Full Circle in which both films are listed along with several others; those entries would need tweaking.

You might also place a suggestion on Quidam's Talk page suggesting that someone more au fait with the subject might like to add material about the related film.

I'm not particularly knowledgeable about cinematology, so others may have better suggestions. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.67.173 (talk) 16:01, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate the response. I've found three reviews, but they're all from different countries, so I don't think that qualifies for NFILM-1. I mean, Variety is known in the U.S. and The Age is known in Australia, so to each country, that's nationally known, but I still don't know that it passes. So I've opened up a discussion on the novel's talk page.

If it comes to making a page for the adaptation, I do think your suggestion of "1996 TV Film" will solve the problem.

And I'll look into the CdS documentary to see what I can find. I don't see a mention of it on the Quidam page either.

Thanks again! OIM20 (talk) 09:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Citing Presentation Slides (And other sources)

Hello! I have a question about how nitty-gritty our citation types get, and how to cite a particular type of document.

I'm working on cleaning up bare URL citations and ran across reference 56 from Flash memory. It appears to be a set of presentation slides from a conference talk. Do we have a particular template for this use case? I wasn't sure if the Web Page template would be sufficient, or if it would be better to use something that can indicate what slide in particular the information comes from. The presentation video is not currently available to view that I can tell from a cursory search.

In a bigger sense, is there somewhere that I can see all the kinds of citation templates there are on Wikipedia? I see the list on Wikipedia:Citing sources, but is that all types currently supported or are there any other more obscure ones? Beanut H Butter (talk) 19:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Beanut H Butter The full list is at WP:CT. There is one for conferences but not specifically for slides within a presentation, I think. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:28, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the list! On a closer look it does appear I can use the Page modifier for a webpage, so I'll use that for now. Happy Friday!

Beanut H Butter (talk) 20:22, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

hi

Im new to wikipedia can i edit anything — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Ssrbluver (talk • contribs) 22:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ssrbluver: Almost anything. There are some articles that are protected until you get more experience. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ssrbluver, if you haven't, you can set up your homepage and it will automatically produce assorted tasks for you. There is also several editing drives. The current one is one to verify all claims on Wikipedia. ✶Quxyz✶ 00:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Nothing to edit.

It feels like there's nothing to edit. Almost every article has correct punctuation and grammar, is complete, and even those that aren't complete are about some niche thing I don't know anything about. So why bother making an account, if there's nothing that can be made better by beginners? Defaulterror0 (talk) 22:44, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

There is a lot to do! Check ou the Wikipedia:Task Center, or visit your homepage for ideas! Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 22:55, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Defaulterror0: Sorry, forgot to ping you :) Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 22:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Ha ! I get low sometimes because theres too much to do and too much I want to do and not enought time, and other things to do with my busy life ! Matilda Maniac (talk) 22:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Same; for me it feels like there's no time to edit instead of there's nothing to edit ;) Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 23:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, there sure is a lot to do :) Defaulterror0 (talk) 23:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Defaulterror0 If you have a particular interest and it has a WikiProject, you could always look at their list of stub and start class articles. That's always a quick way to find things to improve. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 09:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@Defaulterror0: if you are interested, Wikimedia Commons (Wikipedia's image bank sister site) could use help in categorizing images. For example many bulk imported images like those in c:Category:Images from the National Archives and Records Administration need better categories, and there are plenty of others: images needing category review, images needing categories. MKFI (talk) 08:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

New to Templates

I recently created a template Template:NIRSA National Soccer Championships, but when I add the link to the articles (such as at NIRSA National Soccer Championships and 2023 NIRSA National Soccer Championship nothing appears. Why does it not appear? Does the Template: page need to be reviewed first? What else have I not done correctly? a little nudge in the right direction would be awesome. Matilda Maniac (talk) 22:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Now I found the problem which was some "noinclude" text that I had in the Template from when I copied it over from my Sandbox. Phew ! Matilda Maniac (talk) 23:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Where to review a draft?

The only way I see of doing this is submitting the draft, which would imply it's done. And peer review is only for articles and NOT drafts. So?? Defaulterror0 (talk) 00:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@Defaulterror0: Yes, you work on the the draft until it is ready, and then you can submit it for review. Perhaps I am not understanding your question? RudolfRed (talk) 01:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Submitting a Draft only implies that you think it's done enough to pass muster as an Article. No Wikipedia article is a finally finished product; they all continue to be 'works in progress' and many will hopefully be improved further as more sources are found and information added, or more things happen that are relevant to them. Unless you think it's really below par (in which case you should have ideas of how to improve it), submit it and get reviewer feedback – this is quite normal. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.67.173 (talk) 01:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

So if I understand correctly, the draft has to be in a "finished" state first before it can be reviewed by someone? Defaulterror0 (talk) 02:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Defaulterror0 - The draft has to be in a 'good enough' state before being submitted. That means content and references. However, there is strong advice to put in time improving existing articles before attempting to create and submit a draft.

Hi Defaulterror0. A draft need not be "perfect" to be accepted as an article, but it should be reasonably understandable and (more importantly) clearly establish how the subject of the draft meets Wikipedia:Notability. Formatting mistakes, grammar errors, spelling mistakes, and other copy editing needs are generally considered to be fixable "problems" and thus not considered a sufficient justification for declining a draft, unless they are so bad they can't be fixed without a lot of time and effort being expended. However, it matters not how well written a draft might be if there's nothing demonstrating that the subject has received WP:SIGCOV in WP:SECONDARY WP:RELIABLESOURCES; unclear/questionable Wikipedia notability is too much to WP:OVERCOME and is probably the main reason why drafts are declined. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Reporting an I.P.

How do I report an I.P. who has been disruptively editing the article Elliana Walmsley? 70.50.199.125 (talk) 04:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I see one IP edit other than yours in the last month. How is that disruptive? RudolfRed (talk) 04:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Because this is the third or fourth time they have changed Walmsley's nationality to Greek! Walmsley is not Greek! But I reverted the other I.P's edit, but I just know that they will do it again. Considering they've done it 3 or 4 times beforem 70.50.199.125 (talk) 04:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

There is a persistent history dating back many months of IPs starting with 2a02 editing her being Greek, and being reverted. A request that the article be semi-protected would stop IPs from editing. David notMD (talk) 10:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Can I write an article by myself

Can I write an article about a known person? Sairagav311 (talk) 08:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Writing a new article is the most challenging task to perform on Wikipedia; it is usually recommended that new users first gain experience and knowledge by spending time editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Using the new user tutorial is a good idea too. Users who dive right in to creating articles often end up disappointed and frustrated as they don't understand the many aspects that are being looked for, and get angry when things happen to their work that they don't understand. I don't want you to have bad feelings here, so I would suggest you edit existing articles first.

If you still want to attempt to create a new article now, first determine that the person is notable as Wikipedia uses the word, gather independent reliable sources that provide on their own significant coverage of the person, you may then use the article wizard to create and submit a draft for review by another editor. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

"Critical reception" section of All 'n All

I think that section of the article is a bit too much. Like reviews are written word for word. Wouldn't it be better to just write the number of stars they received instead words from the reviews? Soapforduck(Say what?)(Did what?) 09:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

If you think you can improve an article, then either be WP:BOLD and make your edits (and if somebody disagrees, they'll revert you and then you can open a discussion on the talk page) or (especially if you think your changes may be controversial) go for the discussion on the talk page first. ColinFine (talk) 13:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine Well I was thinking of finding a way of shortening it but was worried that it might be better to leave it like that. Maybe I should start a discussion on the talk page? Soapforduck(Say what?)(Did what?) 13:42, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Improving Article

Hey editors, I'm currently working on an article that is a recent incident spread from April to June 2024(the incidents are still ongoing). The topic is very popular in India, and also has gained international media attraction. But the article on it doesn't seem to attract editors, as others do. Can you suggest some tips to improve the article? Redmyname31(talk)(Contribs) 09:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Guessing this is about 2024 Indian bomb hoaxes. The article was created 10 days ago, Be patient. In time, it will receive more viewers and more contributors. David notMD (talk) 10:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

yes, but please suggest some tips to improve the article like suitable templates, thanks for your time.Redmyname31 (talk) 11:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

The first thing that I can tell is that it is written in prose line. This is acceptable but it doesn't help give out enough information or tell about the details. Wikipedia is about giving information about a subject, not spreading out a timeline of that information. Please read, WP:PROSELINE, for more information. Thank you, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 16:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

noted, will be working on it. Thnx Redmyname31 (talk) 18:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Page Image

Why the page image for Jamia Millia Islamia is not appearing during search, the image/logo satisfies all requirements of a page image, I also checked that it is the page image in Page information link Redmyname31(talk)(Contribs) 12:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Redmyname. I believe it is because it is a non-free image. Since one of the conditions for using such an image is "minimal use", they are deliberately not used in previews and searches. ColinFine (talk) 13:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Non-free images are used in popup previews like on Jamia Millia Islamia where only one article is shown but not in search results where lots of page images might be shown. These API queries show that it's returned as page image if you ask for any image but not a free image:

https://en.luquay.com/w/api.php?action=query&prop=pageimages&titles=Jamia_Millia_Islamia&pilicense=any

https://en.luquay.com/w/api.php?action=query&prop=pageimages&titles=Jamia_Millia_Islamia&pilicense=free

By the way, your signature should link to your user page User:Redmyname31 and not the non-existing article Redmyname31. If it's a deliberate trick to link a non-existing page then don't, it's disruptive. You are allowed to omit a link on the name when you do link your talk page, but it would be annoying. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

about the signature, it was a mistake, thx for info Redmyname31 (talk) 14:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Editor asking me to contact off-site

There is an editor who recently reached out and asked for help on some articles (which I'm completely fine with), but they recently asked me to contact them off-site, which is something that I'm a bit hesitant about. Do I just tell them no, or report them, or something else? They seem genuinely nice, it's just that I've had some extremely negative experiences meeting people off of a main website. Thanks! (Also the messages can be found at the bottom of my talk page). WxTrinity (talk to me!) 15:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@WxTrinity I'd say just say no, there's no compulsion for you to interact with people off of Wikipedia if you don't want to. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 15:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I'll just do that. Thanks! WxTrinity (talk to me!) 15:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@WxTrinity I think that there is a big difference to meeting people and interacting with them by, say email. I have found email very useful for exchanging copyright source text that another editor has access to but can't be shared on-wiki, so we can work together on articles/drafts. I would have no hesitation in working like that, while I would be very cautious about meeting people. Your Userpage has an "email me" button and anyone who uses it will have their email address supplied to you (as a "reply-to"). There is no obligation for you to reply to any email if you don't want to and no-one will know your address unless you do. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Gianna Bryant notability?

Hello, I'm new to wikipedia. I read an article about the Wikipedia Project Women in Red, and jumped in to try to help. One of the women on the list in red was Gianna Bryant. I tried to submit an article, but it was declined.

I went to the talk page of the person who declined it, and they said if an article was declined that you could come ask questions here. I also looked at the page he suggested with debates last time about whether Gianna was notable.

And it seems many people are saying that she's only notable because of her dad/many articles are led by Kobe (e.g. "Kobe and his daughter Gianna").

She's had 2 Nike shoes come out in her honor. She's on numerous murals with Kobe and had a number of tributes and honors that either included her deeply or were specifically for her (e.g. The University of Connecticut who was already recruiting her in middle school honored her by leaving a seat open for her during a game; that was an honor purely for her, not involving Kobe.)

She was also an honorary member of the WNBA draft class that year.

I believe she had enough honors and enough coverage to warrant her own article. She has indeed been covered at length (not just in passing) by many reputable sources. Yes, sure, maybe her death or her dad were big reasons that her notability rose, but people's notability rises from tragedy or nepotism all of the time, so even if those were the reasons, it doesn't make her *not* notable.

Also, there were many victims in that crash. Not all of them were covered to the extent that she was. Her extensive coverage leads to the argument about her notability.

And even if she often paired with Kobe in coverage, again, that doesn't make her *not* notable. Certain notable people are paired in their coverage all the time because of relationships or business deals etc. Even if one is more famous than the other, if they both are often in coverage, it doesn't make the other one *not* notable.

I truly believe all the evidence points to her being notable enough in her own right to deserve her own page. Is there a way to argue that she is notable enough in her own right to deserve a page? MoreWomenOnWiki (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Gianna_Bryant -- D'n'B-t -- 18:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

MoreWomenOnWiki, it appears that an article about this subject was previously deleted by consensus at this discussion, and by pretty clear consensus too. The concerns was that she was primarily only notable for one event, and that the rest of the reference material was not sufficient to merit an article. Now, of course, that was four years ago, and certainly things could have changed since that time, but I would suggest that you read that discussion and be prepared to answer the question "What's changed since the last time it was discussed?". If the answer is "There's been a whole lot more comprehensive source material written about this subject, look here and here and here", maybe it's time to reconsider that. If the answer is "Not much, really", well, then the question's already been answered, and that answer was a "no", so if that's the case it's probably better to find a different subject to work on instead. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Nike's dropped 2 different shoes (one on what would've been her 16th birthday and one on what would've been her 18th) to honor her: https://www.complex.com/sneakers/a/victor-deng/nike-kobe-8-protro-mambacita-release-date For instance the article above describes the shoes coming out in honor of what would've been her 18th birthday: "'Gigi' is stamped on the left heel, while her jersey number is printed on the right shoe."

Additionally, her name is on an award given yearly by the WNBA intended "to honor someone in the basketball space for their continued advocacy for girls and women’s basketball around the country." https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/basketball/wnba/2024/02/18/kobe-gigi-advocacy-award-ann-meyers-drysdale-wins-honor/72646790007/

Add that to the stuff that happened at the time of her death with being an honoree member of the WNBA draft class, etc., I'm wondering if that might be enough?

Granted, I am new, so maybe I don't understand the ins and outs, but even if she is only notable for one event, isn't that the case of a fair number of people? Aren't there Olympians notable for one Olympics they were in? Or even for instance, the 'Bus Uncle' has a page because of a viral video: https://en.luquay.com/wiki/The_Bus_Uncle

I guess I don't have to completely reopen the whole discussion, since people much more experienced than me seem to have already had it, but to what you've said above, do you think there is any merit that with the release of 2 Nike shoes (in '22 and '24) and in 2022, a yearly WNBA award having her name added, that she has crossed the threshold of notability? Or still no, for now?

Thank you for your help MoreWomenOnWiki (talk) 19:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @MoreWomenOnWiki. I took a look at the page and it looks more like a WP:MEMORIAL than as an encyclopedic person entry. While she does meet notability, you had not showed anything about her before her death with her father. It looks and reads as if it's a memorial page. I do believe she is notable under WP:1E but it doesn't really read as an encyclopedic article. Thank you, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 19:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the guidance. I tried taking all the notes and resubmitting, so hopefully the article is better now. Thank you! MoreWomenOnWiki (talk) 22:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

References for translating pages

When translating pages, should I try and find sources in the target language or put the references all in the source language? What if the topic does not has many or any at all reliable sources in the target language? Do I not translate it? Mestre Aranha (talk) 19:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Mestre Aranha, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer is that if there are good-quality sources published in English, they are preferred; but if not, then reliable sources in another language are quite acceptable. See WP:NONENG. ColinFine (talk) 19:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much, to clarify tho, if I'm translating to Portuguese does that same rule apply? Mestre Aranha (talk) 22:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

If you're translating into Portuguese, Mestre Aranha, then I imagine that you're writing for Portuguese-language Wikipedia. And if you're doing that, then the policies and guidelines of English-language Wikipedia don't necessarily apply; those of Portuguese-language Wikipedia do apply. So start looking at pt:WP:Verificabilidade and follow the promising links from there. -- Hoary (talk) 03:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Why tho?

Why do other editors keep reverting my changes even if the changes are fine and do not cause problems? Yournamehere. c o m (talk) 20:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Because these changes aren't fine. If you're here in Wikipedia in order to amuse yourself, you're at the wrong website. -- Hoary (talk) 23:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Second to your non-useful edits, your Edit summaries are not useful. Briefly, describe what you did. David notMD (talk) 03:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Your spelling is another area for improvement. Editors (and users) want to see useful, well written content, that cites sources and makes a meaningful contribution. So if that is what you want to do, then stick around. Otherwise? -Jcbutler (talk) 03:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

ПФК ЦСКА София

Защо в страницата е заличен Директора на Академия ЦСКА -Костадин Ангелов? Той не е уволнен и в момента е действащ на поста си. При положение че нито един играч на ЦСКА все още не е махнат, защо са заличени МАхмутович, Кох,Каранга и Юрген Матей ? Защо го няма третия вратар Орлинов. 62.73.100.119 (talk) 21:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Google Translate translates the Bulgarian for us: PFC CSKA Sofia / Why is the Director of CSKA Academy Kostadin Angelov deleted from the page? He has not been fired and is currently serving in his post. Given that not a single CSKA player has been removed yet, why were Makhmutovic, Koch, Karanga and Jurgen Mattei removed? Why is the third goalkeeper Orlinov gone?

Please bring up the matter at Talk:PFC CSKA Sofia. -- Hoary (talk) 23:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

There was announcment here in which it was declared that the coaching team was declared vacant and that there would be restructuring of the management and playing teams. I assume it was in reflection of that news. - Bilby (talk) 00:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

How to Get Back to the Initial Page When I Signed Up?

Hi, sorry if this is a dumb question, but when I very first signed up (just like last week haha), Wikipedia had this little slideshow-type thing I could click through with suggestions - e.g. articles that needed more internal links, articles that needed more copyediting, etc. But I don't see that anywhere anymore.

Do you know if it still exists anywhere so I can have a launchpad for whenever I'm looking to do smaller edits instead of write pages from scratch? MoreWomenOnWiki (talk) 22:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I think you're talking about Special:Homepage? miranda ^:3 22:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

On Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal, if you scroll down to the bottom, you can enable "Display newcomer homepage", which should set that page as the default when you click your username at the top of the site. miranda ^:3 22:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

establish my biography page

Aubrey Milunsky, MD DSc FRCP FACMG DCH

Aubrey Milunsky, MD DSc FRCP FACMG DCH

     Dr. Aubrey Milunsky is the founder of the non-profit Center for Human Genetics, now celebrating the 42nd anniversary year. He is a Co-Director with his son. He was Professor of Human Genetics, Pediatrics, Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Pathology at Boston University School of Medicine. Boston University named the Aubrey Milunsky Chair in Human Genetics. He was honored by inclusion in the 2022 book A Century of Achievement that selected the biographies and accomplishments of 101 physician scientists from South Africa, including 5 Nobel Prizewinners, who made significant contributions to Global Medicine over 100 years (1890-1990).

    He was born and educated in Johannesburg, South Africa and is triple board-certified in Pediatrics, Genetics, and Internal Medicine. He served as a medical geneticist at Harvard Medical School and the Massachusetts General Hospital for 13 years before his professorial appointments at Boston University School of Medicine. The Center’s laboratories are a major International Referral Center for molecular diagnostics and for prenatal genetic diagnosis, now located in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

He is the author and/or editor of 27 books, including all 8 editions of the world’s major reference work, Genetic Disorders and the Fetus: Diagnosis, Prevention, and Treatment (2021), (1400pages), now co-edited with his son, Jeff, who was Professor of Pediatrics and Genetics and Genomics at Boston University School of Medicine. This book received the “Highly Commended” Award Certificate in 2010 from the British Medical Association. He has published six books for the lay public, the last two being Your Genes, Your Health: A Critical Family Guide That Could Save Your Life, and I Didn’t Know, I Didn’t Know : Avoidable Deaths and Harm due to Medical Negligence. An earlier book (Know Your Genes) appeared in nine languages. His is the author or co-author of over 450 scientific communications.

     He has given hundreds of invited lectures in 35 countries and the Vatican. In 1982, he was honored by election as a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of England. In that year, his alma mater, the University of the Witwatersrand School of Medicine, conferred the D.Sc. degree for his work on the prenatal detection of genetic disorders. He is an elected member of the Society for Pediatric Research and the American Pediatric Society and a Founding Fellow of the American College of Medical Genetics. He has served on the Editorial Board of PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS for over 3 decades.  

He originated and directs an annual conference on Obstetrics, Gynecology, Perinatal Medicine, Neonatology and the Law, dedicated to advances in medicine, standards of care, and the avoidance of errors and medical negligence. January 2024 was the 39^th YEAR of this successful continuing medical & legal education conference.

     He has led the teams that first located the gene for X-linked Lymphoproliferative disease, first cloned the PAX3 gene for Waardenburg syndrome, first demonstrated the 70% avoidance rate for spina bifida afforded by folic acid supplementation, first determined newly recognized genes for Chronic Intestinal Pseudo-Obstruction and first recognized the increased prevalence of narcolepsy in the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. He and his team have made the first prenatal diagnosis of various genetic disorders, including tuberous sclerosis. Amilunsky (talk) 01:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Amilunsky, you appear to be attempting to direct people here to "establish [your] biography page". Not going to happen. -- Hoary (talk) 01:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

If OTOH you are announcing that you are about to "establish [your] biography page", you still have the wrong idea. Please read Wikipedia:Autobiography, carefully. -- Hoary (talk) 04:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Amilunsky Your academic career may qualify for Wikipedia notability, per WP:NACADEMIC. You are allowed to try. What is essential is a need for references ABOUT you. Referencing your books and important journal articles are valid contributions, but do not establish notability in the Wikipedia sense. Use WP:YFA as a guide for creating and submitting a draft. David notMD (talk) 13:22, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Follow-up question

Can I nominate articles to GA status as an IP? 47.153.138.166 (talk) 04:22, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you can. However, you need to be registered to review GA nominations. See Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Create?

After MrBeast surpassed T-Series in subscribers to become the most subscribed channel on YouTube, can i create a page about "T-Series vs MrBeast"? I will add good sources. Bakhos2010 (talk) 04:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

If rivalry between any two anythings becomes notable (as defined by and for Wikipedia) and can't be satisfactorily dealt with in the articles of the two whatevers, then one might create an article about the rivalry. Note that such well-documented rivalries as Gladstone–Disraeli, Coca–Pepsi or Anquetil–Poulidor haven't required entire articles. -- Hoary (talk) 07:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Also, pay attention to the quality of sources. I have seen deletion nominations on pop culture hinged, not on the quantity of sources, but the quality (e.g. several are advertisements or content farms.) ✶Quxyz✶ 20:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Systemic bias?

Hello. I've read a lot about the problem of systemic bias on Wikipedia. I'd like to help address it. How can I get started? RomanBathhouse (talk) 05:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

@RomanBathhouse WP:BIAS is a great essay about the topic. You might also be interested in joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias, though it's not very active. Also see Help:Getting started for a beginner's guide. Happy editing! '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I agree with CanonNi. If you're concerned about a certain type of systemic bias, you might be interested in other WikiProjects as well. Here is a WikiProject directory. Feel free to ask more questions. Pecopteris (talk) 06:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Userpages of IPs

Given the problem with vandals creating userpages or subpages (like sandboxes) for IPs, can we just prevent all non-autoconfirmed users and IPs from creating them? Is there a technical limitation that prevents this? Air on White (talk) 05:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I'd expect this to be easy to implement. We'd then need to document it, and to explain to IPs why they weren't allowed to make sandboxes. And I don't see what harm it does; registered editors have valid purposes for making user pages, and so have IP editors. Maproom (talk) 10:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Not every IP is a vandal and Wikipedia:Perennial_proposals#Prohibit_anonymous_users_from_editing Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

@Air on White Isn't this what Special:AbuseFilter/803 does? Where have you seen new users/IPs creating userpages? Sam Walton (talk) 12:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

This is about new users creating userpages or sandboxes for IPs. There is at least one LTA known for this. Air on White (talk) 19:02, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Hindi Language User Page Spam

I've recently been getting into editing wikipedia, and a few weeks ago, I got a notification that a user page had been created for me in the Hindi language wikipedia. The content appears basically to be spam, and I would like to remove it and/or get rid of my Hindi-local wikipedia account. I am not sure why it was created. Allegory.of.the.blank (talk) 12:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

@Allegory.of.the.blank Unfortunately this can happen if you visit the Hindi Wikipedia whilst logged in here. I agree this can be annoying but other than ignore the message this is something you will need to take up with Hindi Wikipedia. There is nothing we can do about it. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:05, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Allegory.of.the.blank, welcome to the Teahouse. hi:Special:Logs/Allegory.of.the.blank shows your account was created at the Hindi Wikipedia 8 April, probably because you clicked a link to the wiki while already logged in at another Wikimedia wiki. Somebody posted a Hindi welcome message to your talk page hi:User talk:Allegory.of.the.blank. This causes a notification at other wikis. Local accounts cannot be deleted but you can blank the talk page. It's just information and links about the Hindi Wikipedia. I don't know their rules for deleting user talk pages but the user cannot do it on their own. I once suggested at meta:Welcoming policy to disallow welcome messages to users with no edits if their account wasn't originally created at the wiki. It didn't get any significant attention. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

They got rid of the edit I did in the Adolf Fredrick article.

My recent Edit to The article About Adolf Fredrick, I was told that it was changed back to what it was before. Even though the facts were true.. I had done some research to get the facts. So why were they erased and changed back to how they were before. Those facts aren't true!!! 140.141.142.210 (talk) 16:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Adolf Frederick of Sweden Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 17:22, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I suggest bringing it up with User:Rusty4321 on why the user reverted your edits. In addition, make sure to cite your sources as-well of where you found the accurate information otherwise it will be reverted. This doesn't only apply to this one article but all articles on Wikipedia. Soafy234 (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

The existing sentence "Adolf Frederick died suddenly in Stockholm on 12 February 1771 with symptoms resembling either heart failure or poisoning.", followed by text that describes the unconfirmed story that his death was a direct result of consuming a very large meal, are supported by the existing reference. Any change to that text requires a valid ref. And given that your contribution was reverted twice, start a discussion on the Talk page of the article, to reach consensus there, before any change to the article. David notMD (talk) 20:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Format help needed

The Atlantic#See also - the first entry is not correctly formatted and I don't know how to fix it. Thank you. deisenbe (talk) 18:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

@Deisenbe I've removed it seeing as the web page is already linked in the infobox, but if you want to place an external link into text in the future then head to WP:EL#How to link. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 18:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Deleting a page

Does anyone know how to delete a page? Someone made a page about my son and it is causing a lot of problems and for safety as well. Thank you 228coffee (talk) 22:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)