Wikipedia:Teahouse

331dot, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
A friendly place where you can ask questions
and get 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 3 days.
Please remember to sign your posts by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.

Help

Wikipedia

How many references needed to satisfy notability guidelines when creating a new article for a novel by a well-known author?

Hi, this is my first article Draft:The Phoenix Code. I sent it off for review and the article was declined. The comment left by the reviewer said that my topic does not meet the notability guidelines. My question is: how many references do I need? Is there a specific number, or is it a subjective judgment? The Phoenix Code is a novel by American author Catherine Asaro. She is famous, but not "very" famous. She is quite prolific and has published over 30 books. The Phoenix Code is one of her lesser known works. Huggykoala68 (talk) 00:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Huggykoala68 and welcome to the Teahouse. A good rule of thumb is "at least three high-quality independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic". But that is subject to some variation. A single book-length study, entirely devoted to the topic, probably establishes notability on its own. And if the sources are a bit marginal in their coverage, four or five might be better than three. Catherine Asaro is still active, and much discussed among SF Fans -- I suspect there might be additional reviews out there, perhaps on tor.com or similar sites. I haven't read The Phoenix Code myself, but I suspect it is notable. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:47, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you DESiegel. You answered my question. Huggykoala68 (talk) 01:19, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Huggykoala68. The most important factor by far is the quality and reliability of the cited sources. In your draft, you cite Thomas M. Wagner, a blogger who runs a self-published science fiction review website, and "Mrs Giggles" whose reliability appears to be close to zero by Wikipedia's standards. A reliable source will have professional editorial control and a reputation for accuracy and fact checking. In my opinion, neither of these sources are acceptable for establishing the notability of a book. Not every book needs a freestanding Wikipedia article. Notable books will have been reviewed in publications that are widely seen as high quality and reliable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Cullen328 for your frank advice. Huggykoala68 (talk) 12:55, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey @DESiegel:, it might well be noticeable, but quote stronger sources, there’s this one for example:

https://www.theguardian.com/childrens-books-site/2014/jun/15/review-secret-of-tombs-phoenix-code-helen-moss

Find more like this of a book and you can be sure it remainsFthobe (talk) 11:22, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey, Huggykoala68. It might be a good idea to try editing some existing articles first. That will give you a feel for what is good in an article. PJvanMill (talk) 18:02, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks PJvanMill. Huggykoala68 (talk) 19:44, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

professional wrestlers

Why did you removed the moves of professional wrestlers from their bio i feel that it is important when learning about a wrestler is the moves that he uses. It like when you list the powers of a superhero. You learn much about the person when you list their moves. Brad Essex (talk) 06:42, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Brad Essex, please tell us which article(s) have the moves removed.--Quisqualis (talk) 07:42, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Basically all of them. They have championship but no moves. Like i said pro wrestlers are like superheros and should have their moves like asuperheros power listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bessex (talk • contribs) 08:35, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I have asked WikiProject Professional Wrestling to assist with this question as it relates to the project's style guide. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:04, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

You can read the whole discussion here --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:16, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Summarized version. In wrestling sections were hard to keep. Several people included moves just because wrestlers used once or twice. The section was signature moves, but we haven't sources to call a move "signature". It's not like superhero attacks, or Son Goku attacks, where you have every move sourced. People just included moves basd on TV reports, which violates WP:SYNTH. Instead, we have created the pro wrestling style and persona, where we include character and moves. See Gran Metalik or Jon Moxley. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:25, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Basically, the project members said, "Sometimes people don't take off their shoes when they come inside. The only logical solution is to burn down the house". Then they dug in their heels when people opposed the decision, so they refuse to discuss it anymore because pwning the Redditors is more important than including content in an encyclopedia. For the record, much of the information deleted was properly sourced. A few articles have had some of the information restored in clunky prose that's difficult to understand, but this still leaves all articles without a useful discussion of wrestlers' moves, and it leaves thousands of articles without any discussion of the moves at all. It's basically the equivalent of removing any references to Rickey Henderson's speed because someone said in a different article that Ron Kittle was a home run threat. If there's an opinion statement in Kittle's article, all baseball fans need to suffer, right? GaryColemanFan (talk) 14:56, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Contributing to the talk page of an article about myself

Hello,

I've recently begun to suggest possible changes on the talk page of a wikipedia article about myself. I'm aware that there are guidelines about editing pages,I have declared the conflict of interest on my user page. My aim is to work with and seek advice from impartial editors to make positive contributions to this article, hopefully leading to its improvement.

An academic book has been written about my work. I contributed a chapter to this book and am credited as an editor. I would like to add something about it on the article about me. I think the book would help many people researching interfaith dialogue and art history because there aren't many other books like this on the market.

I'm still very new to wikipeida. I hoped that someone could please advise me as to whether this would be a reasonable suggestion to make on the talk page, and if the following references would be suitable? It's the page on the publishers website, and two reviews in journals. Any help or advice is greatly appreciated!

NicolaGreen72 (talk) 15:16, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

References

NicolaGreen72, it would be reasonable to make your suggestion on Talk:Nicola Green. Whether other editors on that page will find your suggestion reasonable, I have no idea, but that is where discussion of your suggestion would take place.--Quisqualis (talk) 18:25, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for your help NicolaGreen72 (talk) 09:09, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

New Page: Michelle Knudsen (Manager/Producer)

Hello! I am looking to create a page for Michelle Knudsen, the manager/producer from MXN Entertainment whose credits include QUEEN & SLIM and WHEN WE FIRST MET, amongst others (IMDB page: https://pro.imdb.com/name/nm3082630/?ref_=instant_nm_1&q=michelle%20knudsen). I noticed that there is already a Wikipedia page for a book author by the same name, and you are thus immediately directed to her page when searching "Michelle Knudsen". I have been trying for weeks to publish an article on the manager/producer Michelle Knudsen but am having little success with the actual publishing, despite including sources for every piece of information. I am new to editing on Wikipedia and would love any assistance on how I can publish this article! Thank you so much. Emilyafoster95 (talk) 20:31, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Emilyafoster95, hello! Usually, in these situations, you can use the page title "Michelle Knudsen (Producer)" and then a template can be used at the top of the other page to link to the other page (i.e. "this page is about the x, for the y, see ..") Ed6767 talk! 20:33, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Emilyafoster95 and welcome to the Teahouse. The name of the prospective article is the least important aspect of the matter. That can be handled easily enough. The issue is whether Michelle Knudsen the producer is mnotable I suggest that you create a draft, perhaps Draft:Michelle Knudsen (Producer) as Ed676 suggests, and attempt to get sufficient sources cited that the draft can be approved. The approver will handle the final naming if it is promoted to article status. Below are some suggested steps to follow. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:48, 11 June 2020 (UTC) @Ed676: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:52, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

• First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our specific guideline on the notability of film-related topics. Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
• Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
• Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
• Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
• Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
• Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
• Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request here or at the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

DES, the draft already exists, at Draft:Michelle Knudsen (manager/producer). --ColinFine (talk) 20:59, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine I missed that. However the advice above about sourcing still stands, Emilyafoster95. I hope this will be helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:14, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I have commented on the draft's talk page about the sources currently cited, which in my view are not sufficient yet. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:36, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey, Emilyafoster95. It might be a good idea to try editing existing articles first; that way you'll learn naturally. Also, you might want to review the WP:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 18:15, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Emilyafoster95: I agree. Please note: Two of us have commented on your draft here: Draft_talk:Michelle_Knudsen_(manager/producer)#Sourcing. --David Tornheim (talk) 07:44, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

album cover images policy question

Hi, I can't find anything specific detailing the use of album cover images on wiki (if it is somewhere that you can direct me to, thanks!). Wiki rules say not to use copyrighted images without permission. There are many thousands of copyrighted album cover images on Wiki - was permission explicitly obtained for each one separately? Or is their usage as a whole, as a class of images, allowed? When creating a page for a new album, are we allowed to simply upload an image of its cover? And does the sourcing of the image matter? Because these images are found in many places... Amazon, Genius, AllMusic, Target, the artists' sites, etc. Thank you! Pleasant27cat (talk) 22:53, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Pleasant27cat: This might help (or not) WP:TAGS/FU The other questions Experts will answer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamuyi (talk • contribs) 23:04, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Pleasant27cat: You can use album cover images on articles about that album - see Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images. GoingBatty (talk) 23:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

The vast majority of these images are used without permission, but instead citing "fair use". See Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images, which tells us that the US legal concept of "fair use" covers "Cover art: Cover art from various items, for visual identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary)." In practice, this is stretched considerably in Wikipedia; as an example, see Les Dudek (album), for whose use of an image this is claimed: "The image is used for identification in the context of critical commentary of the work for which it serves as cover art." Whether or not this article uses the cover design for identification, it has zero critical commentary that I notice. I'd urge you not to follow this lazy practice, which risks getting Wikipedia into trouble. Instead, wait until an article has one or more substantial paragraphs of critical commentary before appealing to "fair use" for the addition of an image. -- Hoary (talk) 23:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Actually, Hoary the bit about critical commentary is one of the places where current written Wikipedia copyright policy is intentionally stricter than US copyright law requires, and I would favor changing it to conform to the very common practice of allowing a (reduced resolution) image of a work under a fair use claim on the primary article about that work, including allowing an album cover art image on any and every album image, commentary or not, provided that other NFCC conditions are fulfilled. The ISFDB links to or hosts cover art for any and every book it lists, normally under a fair use claim, purely fo9r identification, and has not faced any copyright claims yet. Pleasant27cat I do not ever recall seeing an otherwise compliant album cover removed for lack o0f critical comment, and I would object to any attempt, to do so. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:36, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I sit corrected! (Though I'd still urge anyone thinking of creating an article about an album to create an actual article about that album, rather than just a lazy stub listing tracks and personnel. I plead guilty to having created stubs in the past, but I have ever less patience for them.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

That I would agree with, Hoary. If there isn't more to say about an album than a title and track list, we don't need an article about it, it can be mentioned in the artist's article if there is one. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 04:54, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

I disagree somewhat with you, DESiegel and will also ping Hoary. The mentioned Les Dudek album article is entirely unreferenced so how do we know that this album is notable? If this album is not notable, then we should not be hosting this stub nor should we host a non-free image of its cover. The main way that albums, books, movies, stage plays, TV shows and similar creative works become notable is because journalists write reviews of them which are published in reliable sources, and those reviews constitute critical commentary which should be referenced in the article. Winning a major award or major charting for albums and other recordings are also types of evidence of notability but that inevitably generates published critical commentary, the best of which should be cited in the article. So, I cannot imagine a case where an album cover should be included without some form of critical commentary. I think that is the minimum baseline for an acceptable article about a creative work. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:47, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Cullen328 I agree t6hat we should not have articles on no-notable albums (or any non-notable topics), and that reviews, which constitute critical commentary about the album, are a very common way to demonstrate notability. (Not the only way: awards and widely reported tours can also lead to notability in the absence of reliably published critical reviews.) But most reviews of an album do not contain critical commentary about the cover art which is what the standard quoted above in theory calls for. Most of our album articles do not discuss the cover art at all, although they do include critical comments on the music. That is (IMO properly) the standard if NF content is to be included on an additional page. But if an album is notable, I think a single image of the cover art, with suitably reduced resolution, for identification of the album, should be acceptable on the article about that album, even if the cover art itself is not discussed in the article. If the topic is not notable, we should not have an article at all, so the question of an image becomes moot. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:27, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel, please take another look at the guideline about cover art and especially the associated footnote. My interpretation is that critical commentary of the work (album, book, movie) is all that is required in an article about that work in order to include cover art. Critical commentary about the cover art is required only when it is used in another article, such as a biography of the photographer. See Ethan Russell who was a photographer for Beatles, Rolling Stones and Who albums for an example. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:32, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the followup, Cullen328 The relevant sentence from [[Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images]] reads: Cover art from various items, for visual identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary). had interpretyed that to mean commentary about the art, and I think that is the most natural way to read the sentence. However, I now see a footnote which says in part NFCI#1 relates to the use of cover art within articles whose main subject is the work associated with the cover. Within such articles, the cover art implicitly satisfies the "contextual significance" NFCC criterion (NFCC#8) by virtue of the marketing, branding, and identification information that the cover conveys. which seems more reasonable to me. So I may have been in violent agreement with te3h gui8deline all along. It is still the case the US copyright law and US case law do not require "critical commentary" (about the image or the overall work) as a condition of fair use, although it may go toward the "nature of use" prong of the 4 fair-use factors. This is a Wikipedia policy, and stretching it does not put the foundation or the site at legal risk. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:01, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@DESiegel and Cullen328: I think you’re both right. Cullen328 is right about WP:NFC#cite_note-3, but DES is also right about infobox images for stand-alone articles about albums. All WP:NFCCP need to be met for each non-free use, but a little broader interpretation seems to be applied to WP:NFCC#8 when it comes to non-free images being used for primary identification purposes at the top of or in the main infoboxes of stand-alone articles about the subject the image identifies.

For example, even though it would be ideal for there to be critical commentary about the cover art of an album in a stand-alone article about said album, in many cases there isn’t. My understanding is that over the years the general consensus has been that this is OK per policy since extra weight is being given to the primary identification value of using the image. It also might be because any discussion of an album’s cover is likely best suited for an article about the album as opposed to another related article. This standard seems to be applied to not only non-free cover art, but also non-free logos, non-free images of persons, etc. where a little extra weight is given to primary identification as being sufficient to just meet the contextual significance required to satisfy NFCC#8. WP:NFC#CS is something still required for main infobox images, but just interpreted in a slightly different way. — Marchjuly (talk) 19:13, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

About the title and content of the article.

I would like your help in the following:

1) Does the title "Relativistic and non-relativistic interpretation of experimental results" that I intend to use meet the conditions?

2) In the article I am writing I use references to 10 already published scientific articles, in order to aggregate information from these articles, and I simply quote these information without any additional comment or conclusion. Any comments or conclusions contained in the article will be exactly what are mentioned in the already published articles and will be written in italics.

Does everything I tell you here meet the requirements for writing an article?

Konstantinos Patrinos KPatrinos (talk) 01:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

This is about User:KPatrinos/sandbox/Absolute Reference System Hypothesis. Asked and answered at Wikipedia:Help desk. Please do not use volunteer editors' time to ask the same question in more than one place. David notMD (talk) 01:11, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@KPatrinos: For future reference, please see WP:QUOTE regarding how and when quotes should be used. Please also see WP:ITALICS regarding use of italics; if I understand you correctly, your text that forms the body of the article should not be italicized. The rest of that page (WP:MOSTEXT) describes other text formatting concerns as well. At the top right, there is a directory of the Wikipedia Manual of Style, as well as a search box that searches within it. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Correcting past information and building Wiki Page!

Hello! I am an Oscar nominated songwriter. It was brought to my attention that I was not properly credited on at least two songs here on Wikipedia. I made an edit on the main body of text, but the side bar that mentions the writers name is missing my name, as is the bottom link to other songs written. How do I edit those sections.

I would like to connect with someone that could help me to update my main page, as well as the pages for songs that I was not credited for. It's effecting my work.

thx 143istheAnswer (talk) 05:14, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

As you wish to do justice for yourself, you have a conflict of interest. Please read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. On the talk page for each song, request addition of the information, presenting independent, reliable, published sources for what you say. -- Hoary (talk) 05:21, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

The article is fixed, 143istheAnswer. The credit was in a good source already cited in the article, Hoary so no additional source was needed. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 05:36, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Deleted Page - Manoj Pillai

Hello, one of my pages titled Manoj Pillai (a page about a living filmmaker) was deleted yesterday citing A7: No credible indication of importance; G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manoj Pillai).

However, after the initial deletion, i had recreated the page with multiple news articles and other references to support the biography and achievements of the concerned persion mentioned in the article. But i was told the page reads "PROMOTIONAL" in nature. As of now, it stands deleted.

Kindly guide me on how i can rewrite / recreate this article so it can stay on wikipedia. Any help will be appreciated.

Thank you.Krithikamanohar (talk) 05:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Krithikamanohar: welcome to the Teahouse. The article Manoj Pillai was deleted two days ago after a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manoj Pillai (which you also participated in). When an article is deleted following a deletion discussion it is never appropriate to simply create it again; what you should have done instead was contact the administrator who closed the deletion discussion. I see that you have contacted the administrator who deleted the article after you had re-created it, and it is probably best if you wait for their response, rather than open new discussions in several places.

Since all your edits have been about Manoj Pillai, it appears that you may have a conflict of interest regarding him. Please read the information linked here and here. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 06:10, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bonadea: Thank you for your reply. In your openion, what should my next course of action be? The page "Manoj Pillai" is not a Paid-contribution. I did speak to the administrators and they adviced me to get in touch with you at teahouse to figure the way forward. Kindly let me know. Thank you. Krithikamanohar (talk) 06:24, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Krithikamanohar, wait for the deleting administrator's Cryptic response. ~ Amkgp 💬 07:02, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Krithikamanohar: yes, as Amkgp also advises, wait for the administrator to respond. The Teahouse is great for asking questions about editing, but sometimes the best answer we can provide here is that you need to contact another editor, in this case the deleting admin. The article title has been protected so it can't be recreated, and you should not create it using a different title. Please be aware that most people in the world (including most filmmakers) are not notable according to Wikipedia's definition of notability, and no amount of editing can fix that. There were three different editors in the deletion discussion who argued that Manoj Pillai does not appear to be notable (plus two users who have since been blocked as sockpuppet accounts; their arguments can be ignored but the consensus was still that there was a lack of notability.) Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 07:52, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Krithikamanohar, I see that Cryptic has declined to restore the article and has pointed you to Deletion review (DRV). Cryptic also points out that the sources added in the recent recreation were not helpful to establish the notability of this person. Give that, a DRV discussion will probably endorse the deletion. If there are better quality sources available. Not press releases, not blogs, not passing mentions or directory entries, but several independent articles published in reliable sources that discuss Manoj Pillai in some detail then you might use them to create a draft (Draft:Manoj Pillai) emphasizing those sources and leaving out press releases and similar weak sources, or most of them. Once you have that draft (and i would advise asking an experienced editor tom check it over), then (and only then) post at WP:DRV and ask for the lock on creating the article ("salting") be removed, pointing to the draft. If the sources to create such a quality draft are not available, then you really ought to drop this, as it can't go anywhere desirable. That is my personal advice. Bonadea would you agree? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:49, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi i need help with a draft

 Aloder27 (talk) 08:20, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Is this about Draft:JackSuckAtLife (Jack Massey Welsh), a joke draft which has no chance of being accepted as an article? Maproom (talk) 08:28, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

I think there is a problem with this article

Hallo, Dean Phoenix is supposedly a porn actor but his name is linked to the GayVn award page. is it a mistake? does it need to be deleted? thank you --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 08:39, 12 June 2020 (UTC) AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 08:39, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@AlejandroLeloirRey: no, there is no mistake. The article was redirected to the section of GayVN Awards that mentions the actor's name, because although he was not sufficiently notable for there to be an article about him, anyone who typed his name into the search box would find the award listing. --bonadea contributions talk 08:58, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Stan Frederick

Difficulty creating an individual page

Quicksilver1959 Quicksilver1959 (talk) 09:54, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

You've had difficulty? Sorry to hear of it. What kind of difficulty? Which page? -- Hoary (talk) 10:04, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy - There is no article Stan Frederick and Quicksilver's Contributions show no Sandbox or Draft on that topic. David notMD (talk) 10:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Publishing new article

Hello! I'd like to create the page "TCO Certified" and I have written a proposal for the content in my sandbox. There is a conflict of interest. Am I allowed to? Ellasoderberg (talk) 11:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

hi @Ellasoderberg:, I am great fan of circular economy. If you create a page on your own profile with some sources and citiation (newspaper articles, et cetera,...) I can take a look at it over the weekend and maybe complete your article as long as it meets notability guidelines.Fthobe (talk) 11:18, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll work on it some more then to make sure to add good sources. Ellasoderberg (talk) 11:19, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to how to create a page on wikipedia for my website?

my website page on wikipedia i want to create a page for my website on wikipedia, the information that i want to share will be used with my facebook page (related to the sameproject), my question is how to do that? and its possible in wikipedia or not?.

thank you Issa.3esa2 (talk) 12:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps you failed to read the answer to your previous question. Wikipedia is not for promotion. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

add in your own words went a little off the deep end

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldine_(1953_film)

HI I ran across this film and noticed that the plot that is written is not a normal Wikipedia plot, It is funny and amusing but has no normal movie format. I didn't want to change it as it might be a test but I just wanted to let someone who knows what they are doing take a look and fix — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.60.181.160 (talk) 13:04, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

I have removed the plot summary, however I would appreciate if someone could add a proper summary otherwise I suspect that the IP in question will just add it back again. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:11, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

The IP who had created that "plot summary" has not edited anything since doing that in January. No hurry. David notMD (talk) 13:34, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

This might help. Best Pesticide1110 (talk) 13:35, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

IMDb not considered a Reliable Source. David notMD (talk) 14:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Wiki-linking website in a citation

Is it okay to link the website to its corresponding wikipedia article in the citation template? Make sure to ping me in your reply so that i can know. Regards Pesticide1110 (talk) 13:32, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Pesticide1110. If you are using {{cite web}} or {{cite news}} (or any o0f several similar templates) to cite a website as a source there is a |url= parameter to link directly to the page cited. If there is a Wikipedia article about the web site (or perhaps about the publication it is a part of) the |website= or |work= parameters can contain a wiki-link to that article. If that is not what you meant, then I failed to understand your question. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:33, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

I just wanted to know if wikilinking publishers in the citation template is discouraged or not. Pesticide1110 (talk) 15:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Pesticide1110: Template:Cite web#Publisher states that the publisher "may be wikilinked if relevant". I would add a wikilink if I thought there would be a benefit for the reader to click on the link to understand more about the publishing company. GoingBatty (talk) 23:16, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Fixing typos on talk pages

Is it okay to fix the typos on talk pages or forums like The Teahouse itself? Make sure to ping me in your reply so that i can know. Regards Pesticide1110 (talk) 13:37, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Pesticide1110: You generally shouldn't mess with others' typos, though you can, of course, go back and emend your own, as long as you don't change the meaning of your post after it has been replied to. See WP:TPO. Deor (talk) 13:42, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Fine. You can now close the discussion. Or if you want, i can too. Thanks, Pesticide1110 (talk) 13:47, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Help on notability guidelines

Hello, I've been working to improve the content and breadth of references on the page for Ida Schuster. Is this considered sufficient to remove the notability tag, or is more work needed? I've read the guidance, but being so new to this I'd appreciate an experienced eye. Thanks! Isaksenk (talk) 15:47, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Done. David notMD (talk) 17:21, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

How do I change my username?.

I chose my real name (Athel Cornish-Bowden) before realizing that most people don't. I'd like to use "athel" instead (still pretty obvious, of course) Athel Cornish-Bowden (talk) 16:27, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

hello Athel Cornish-Bowden and welcome to the Teahouse you can find details at this page Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple, hope that helps. Theroadislong (talk) 16:33, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

I think it did! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Please Help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why isn't my article getting approved? I have added proper citations and references, though my article has been rejected the second time. Please tell me, what shall I fix exactly in the article? Here is my article:- Raja Oellinger-Guptara

Eagerly waiting for your reply! Thank you very much for your time and attention. Stay Safe!

Best Regards, Gaurav D. Gauravldhande (talk) 16:43, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Gauravldhande Your draft has no independent sources, Wikipedia requires there to be significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability. Creating an autobiography is also strongly discouraged. Theroadislong (talk) 16:58, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

The draft is also promotional - refs are for his book and his apartment building. David notMD (talk) 17:26, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey, Gauravldhande. It's a good idea to work on some existing articles first before trying to create new articles. Also, you should review the WP:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 18:30, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Castle nectar

How do I create a good article Deanhansen2 (talk) 16:55, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Deanhansen2, welcome to the Teahouse, please have a close look at /Help:Your_first_article, almost anything you need to write a good article is explained to over there. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:40, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

And, specifically, Deanhansen2, please carefully read the pages at the blue links in the grey square in the pink box at the top of your draft. Especially note the material about using references to reliable sources. All articles are required to include the sources used to write them.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:36, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

posting a picture

I am having a hard time posting pictures, I keep getting denied. can someone send me simple instructions on how to post Chrishosek406 (talk) 17:01, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Chrishosek406. It is not possible to give you simple instructions on posting a picture because this is a very complex matter. The only simple thing to say is "do not violate copyright laws". Here are important factors: Did you take the photo? If not, who did? When and where was the photo first published? Where did you find the photo? What is the subject of the photo? Has the photo been uploaded to Wikimedia Commons? On another matter, I see that you are editing Texas Alliance of Energy Producers. If you are an employee or subcontractor of that group, then you must complete the mandatory Paid editing declaration. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:17, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Help for an old guy

Have logged in and attempted to edit the Pour le Merite page for the following /* German air force */ add Eric Lowenhardt 3rd highest ranking ace, 54 victories, died in combat August 10, 1918. Obviouysly don't know what I am doing as it does not post. Eric's nephew is my good friend and is still building an aircraft at age 84. Their are several articles on line about Eric and his pictures match photos that are in my frien's possesion. If a kind and computer competent sould could verify and then make the addition, it would be greatly appreciated. I have tried the various help articles attached to no avail. Sincerely, Fairchild37 (for the airplane I fly) Fairchild37 (talk) 17:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Fairchild37. Wikipedia already has a biography of Erich Loewenhardt. Note the minor spelling differences. And he is already included in List of the Pour le Mérite (military class) recipients. So, I am unsure what you are hoping to accomplish other than that. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:24, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Stuff I posted keeps getting deleted by other users.

I edited MADDEN mobile and fifa mobile and real racing three and some other user deleted the stuff saying that it was irrelevant or something like that. What did I do wrong? ThanksSport.07GamerDet (talk) 17:18, 12 June 2020 (UTC) Sport.07GamerDet (talk) 17:18, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sport.07GamerDet and welcome to the Teahouse - well, I do not see in your logs any edits on these kinds of articles with this account...perhaps you can name the exact article to which you are reffering?! CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:44, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

CommanderWaterford, Oops sorry, I forgot to mention that I did them with the account Sport.07gamer, which was my old account. I forgot the password for that account so I created this one. If you could help me i would be grateful. And by the way the articles that I mentioned before are the ones that I edited. Thanks Sport.07GamerDet (talk) 18:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sport.07GamerDet: Because this is a collaborative project, your individual edits could be removed or changed for a range of reasons. To find out why, you should always look at the 'View History' tab of an article which lets you see subsequent edits and check the 'edit summary' each person should leave which explains why something was added or removed. In this case it looks like your edits to Madden NFL Mobile were removed as part of a much larger cleanup, taking out 'cruft' (aka trivial waffle), as well as deleting content that spoke with a non-encyclopaedic, instructional voice (using 'you', especially). Your own, unreferenced edits were simply part of that larger cleanup. If you check the View History at FIFA Mobile for yourself, you will find your additions were removed because you failed to support them with any references. We really don't want stuff added that you "happen to know" - we want stuff that others can verify for themselves. For that you must use Citations to WP:Reliable Sources. Does that make sense? (oh, and next time you ask questions here, please do try to give the proper links to the articles so that we don't have to go searching for them. And now that you've got a new account, please don't try to use the old one again, even if you happen to remember the password. We only allow one account per user, except in special circumstances) Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:19, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

All right thanks, by the way those edits were made before I forgot the password to that account.thanksSport.07GamerDet (talk) 18:48, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah - I realise that. I wasn't tying to suggest you'd done anything wrong; just avoiding a potential future problem with some simple advice. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:25, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sport.07GamerDet: As you edit, you'll experience the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. You boldly made some edits in good faith, and another editor reverted them. The last part of the cycle is for you to start a discussion on the article talk page (e.g. Talk:Madden NFL Mobile, Talk:FIFA Mobile) and work with other knowledgeable editors to come to a consensus as to the best way to improve the article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:24, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the idea i hadn't thought of that Sport.07GamerDet (talk) 00:04, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Help with submission

I have submitted my draft for Draft:Snoqualmie Valley Record, I have added lots of new references and cleaned up to meet MOS standards and I continue to get rejected. I am reaching out for some more guidance as I took on this page as a project for WikiProjects: Newspapers. If anyone could point out specifics and help me with seeing what I should look for, add or take off that would be amazing. Have a great day. NoahRiffe (talk) 17:44, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Adding some more info: This paper is in the LOC and Chronicling America, I have cited these and more local sources. I just don't know how many more sources I can find about a small town newspaper. NoahRiffe (talk) 17:54, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello NoahRiffe. Sadly, there exist subjects which do not have "significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject." The Record appears to be one of those subjects. Wikipedia has had to make some hard choices in its evolution, one of which was that content must come from independent, published reliable sources. This causes some subjects to be left out of the encyclopedia, along with unreliable, unencyclopedic content arising from the crowdsourced nature of Wikipedia. Your best bet might be an article about newspapers in that part of Washington.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:27, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

NoahRiffe, I added a few sources and removed some of the less useful sources. Notability, if it is there, is very thin. I've asked an AFC reviewer to look at it. If they turn it down, I'm afraid it's probably time to stop as I gave it a very deep search for sourcing.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:33, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Change introductory text

Change introductory text The introductory text for the page on List of biochemists reads "Articles about notable biochemists include:". This is too vague, and explains to some extent why the page was in such a dreadful condition when I first looked at it: no mention of many of the major biochemists of the past half-century and earlier, such as Daniel Koshland and Otto Warburg, of whom I counted at last 60, but plenty of people with no serious claim to be called biochemists, such as the father of an actress and at least two purveyors of quack medicine. I'd like to change the introductory text to be similar to what is at the top of the List of chemists: "This is a list of chemists. It should include those who have been important to the development or practice of chemistry. Their research or application has made significant contributions in the area of basic or applied chemistry." However, there doesn't seem to be a button to edit the introductory text (probably there is, but I haven't found it). Athel cb (talk) 17:48, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Changing the Lede paragraph calls for clicking Edit in the top menu, which actually opens the entire article for editing. David notMD (talk) 17:58, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Athel cb, welcome to the Teahouse! Use Edit/Edit source at the top of the page, OR see Preferences > Gadgets > Appearance > Add an [edit] link for the lead section of a page. Being WP:BOLD is fine, but be prepared to talk if someone disagrees with you. Happy editing! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:05, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

CSD/PROD

Hello everyone, how can I participate in CSD/PROD tagging, AfD and AfC discussion. Ugbedeg (talk) 18:49, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ugbedeg, and welcome. First off, don't rush to delete stuff you happen not to like. It's important that you read and fully understand the different purposes of these three deletion processes for removing content that is not notable enough to remain here. So, as well as understanding our General Notability Guidelines you would need to read through these:

• WP:CSD
• WP:PROD
• WP:AFD

I suggest you start by looking at AFD discussions and watching how they turn out, and eventually participating in those discussions before you ever nominate something for deletion. (There's a list of current deletion discussins, divided by major categories at the top of WP:AFD) Either give your reasons (based only on our policies) why something should remain here, or why something should be deleted. Never rush to delete stuff - but do rush to defend it, research it for sources, and than agree to delete if its retention really cannot be justified. Read WP:BEFORE which explains what you need to do PRIOR to putting any article forward for a deletion discussion. You might also like to look at the essay Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions.

Having understood CSD and PROD rationales (especially noting the extremely strict interpretation needed for CSD A7), you can enable Twinkle in your Preferences and use that to nominate pages for deletion. Let me know if this seems to make sense, or not. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:18, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Nick Moyes:, I have carefully studied CSD and PROD and have a good understanding of it but the confusion is how to have access to articles that may require CSD and PROD. Please if you have the link to where I can participate in this discussions kindly provide it. Thanks. Ugbede (talk)

@Ugbedeg: There is no participatory discussion over whether to proceed with deletion via CSD or PROD. If you've read those pages you should appreciate that. Nor, almost by definition, would there be any list of articles that deserve CSD or PROD notices to be placed upon them. It's simply a case that editors stumble across them and perhaps use WP:TWINKLE to place a deletion template on them, and to notify the page creator.

What we do have are pages listing articles that have had CSD or PROD templates added to them. You can find them at Category:Candidates for speedy deletion and Category:Proposed deletion. Anyone with an understanding of the PROD procedure is welcome to go through and remove any PROD notice that they feel is unjustified and, ideally, work to improve the article to prevent it being put up for an AFD discussion instead. I would be a lot more careful looking at the CSD category - these are mostly checked and used by administrators, though if you see an undeniably wrongly CSD-ed page, you can remove the template after checking the nomination, the sources and explaining your reasoning in a clear edit summary, or you should follow the link in the template and leave your reasoning for an admin to look at. Does this answer your question? Nick Moyes (talk) 21:57, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello Ugbedeg. Unlike AfDs, PRODs and CSD tags do not lead to discussions, as a rule. They lead to deletion, or are declined and there is no net effect at all.

There is not, unfortunately, any list of articles that might need to be tagged with a PROD or CSD. Many people use Special:NewPages to find recently created articles or pages that may need action of some sort, including deletion. See Wikipedia:New pages patrol for the organized group that does this, and who have access to some extra tools. But any user can look through the list of recent pages and tag ones that seem to have problems, or work on them. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @Nick Moyes: and @DESiegel: for these comprehensive explanations. I do understand that most CSD and PROD tagging are done by new pages patrollers because they have access to new pages feed. But I was surprised when my request to be granted New Pages Reviewer right was declined because I had not tagged any articles with CSD or PROD and was told to get involved in AFD or AFC discussions before I could be granted the new pages reviewer right. I understand that this is not part of the requirements for new pages reviewer right but I can't understand why this was used as a criteria for declining my request. I have a good knowledge of WP:GNG and I can help in new pages review to reduce the backlog of articles waiting for review. @Nick Moyes: and @DESiegel: kindly check my request at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/New page reviewer to review our discussion. I will appreciate if you can help grant me the right at least for a few weeks of trial. Once again thank you. Ugbedeg (ugbedeg|talk

You need to read the criteria closer, Ugbedeg. You have to demonstrate a working knowledge of notability. That would mean you completely understand PROD, CSD and AFD and have demonstrated that by correctly nominating multiple articles with each deletion process, and by voting correctly on multiple AfDs you didn't nominate...all the while not making many incorrect nominations and demonstrating a knowledge of all the numerous notability guidelines by giving solid policy based rationales in all your nominations and !votes. You should enable the logging features of Twinkle, as records of your work make it easier for you to demonstrate your competence. And logged or not, the ONLY way to demonstrate the requisite knowledge is to participate in deletion process. Being an AfC reviewer can also, but that requires permissions too. They are slightly easier to get than NPP permissions, but in turn will be quickly revoked if you demonstrate a lack of competence. Hope this helps. John from Idegon (talk) 23:18, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

I must agree with John's reply above, Ugbedeg. The onus is on you to demonstrate your competence by having a good quality CSD and PROD log, which you can enable via Twinkle, as John says. You can currently demonstrate no experience at AFD, and I feel User:Rosguill was quite right to turn down your request at this time. To your credit, you've contributed a huge amount since you joined us in January, but having NPP reviewer rights is a great responsibility and needs to be given to those with a demonstrable track record at AFD and via CSD/PROD logs, amongst other things. Sadly, right now, you don't have that evidence to offer, although I am pretty sure you will soon do so as you seem rather desperate to get that editor right. For my part, I can't understand why you don't seem able to accept the reasoning behind being turned down at this time. As a reminder, this is part of what the WP:NPP page says: "At its core, new page reviewing is about deciding whether a new article will be marked as approved and accepting it onto Wikipedia, or initiating one of several deletion procedures. Uncontroversial deletions can be proposed using PROD, while most other deletion proposals are resolved in a discussion at Articles for deletion. In a very narrow set of cases, an expedited WP:CSD or WP:BLPPROD can be placed to delete material which is unambiguously not an improvement to Wikipedia. " Simply gather the evidence to demonstrate your experience of notability and deletion policies, and you'll be sorted, even if it takes a few months. All the best, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:43, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Citing multiple authors in visual editing mode

Hi, I'm don't know how to add multiple authors in visual editing mode. Two fields appear, one for last name one for first name.

The help says this: "The surname of the author; don't wikilink, use 'authorlink'; can suffix with a numeral to add additional authors"

Don't know how to add the suffix, trying things like this: Alan Islas (talk) 18:56, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Alan Islas. To be quite blunt: forget trying! Visual Editor is utterly dire for adding more than one author, or indeed for adding any additional field that's not present in the original form. It's so bad that I always, always switch over to the WP:Source Editor and use the Cite button there, which very simply allows you to add multiple authors to all cite template (little green + button next to the names field). To switch over to the other editor, click the thick black pencil icon next to the blue 'Publish Changes' button on the top right of the page (assuming your not in mobile view, that is). Let us know how you get on, or check WP:ERB for a short video I made on using the Cite button in Source Editor. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:05, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Nick, that was very helpful! To be honest, I hadn't seen that Cite menu in the source editor, only the "Reference" button which just places the tags, that's why I was trying to to this in visual mode. --Alan Islas (talk) 00:49, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

For the benefit of anyone reading this who does want to use visual mode, there should be a button at the bottom of the citation dialogue that says Add more information. Hit that and you get extra fields to add like "Last name 2", etc. But I’m glad that the classic source editor suits your needs, Alan. Pelagic ( messages ) Z – (20:15 Sat 13, AEST) 10:15, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Question

I have recently requested a name of a article I wrote last year to be changed. I tagged the request move tag on the talk page and gave My reason why I think the article name should be changed, but I am afraid that no one might answer and give their consensus because the article is not edited and visited by many people. What do I do? BigRed606 (talk) 18:57, 12 June 2020 (UTC) 

Your request has automatically been listed at WP:Requested moves#June 12, 2020. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:06, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes but I am afraid no one will take a look at it since it’s not a well visited article. BigRed606 (talk) 19:08, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, BigRed606: the purpose of listing it at Requested moves is to bring it to people's notice. It will remain open for seven days, and if there were no other contributions, somebody would come along and either close it or relist it; and if there had been no opposing !votes, they would either decide to relist it, or treat it as agreed, and make the move (see WP:RMCI#Determining consensus). However, I have just weighed in with a Weak oppose for the reasons I explain there. If there are no other contributions, I suspect that a closer will still accept the move, though I don't know. --ColinFine (talk) 19:31, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

ColinFine I just did some research and if you read the sources I provided down near the bottom, it appears that the Next Generation Combat Vehicle program was changed to Optionally-Manned Fighting Vehicle, and now I think the name should be change Optionally-Manned Fighting Vehicle. Sources:https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/R45519.pdf https://breakingdefense.com/tag/next-generation-combat-vehicle/. What do I do? BigRed606 (talk) 20:04, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Note that I currently have request to change the name to Next Generation Combat Vehicle. Do I cancel the request and put in a new request to move or do I edit the request to say “Change name to Operationally Combat Fighting Vehicle. BigRed606 (talk) 20:13, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

You can post your discovery and revised opinion in the move discussion, BigRed606. There is no need to cancel and restart. But remember that Wikipedia follows WP:COMMONNAME not official names. If the vehicle is still commonly known as a "next generation combat vehicle" then the article title should not change because of an "official" name change. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:36, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

How do I add a new section on a page?

how do I add a new section in a article? Like if I want to add something for a biography or something like that. For example adding "personal life" to someone's page.

Sport.07GamerDet (talk) 20:44, 12 June 2020 (UTC) Sport.07GamerDet (talk) 20:44, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sport.07GamerDet: In WP:Source Editor, you simply start a new line with two equal sign (==) then add the heading text, then end with two more == signs (or click 'Advanced' in the tool bar then select 'Heading')

In Visual Editor, the toolbar has a drop down selector, displaying 'Paragraph' by default. Just position cursor at the right place, select 'Heading', then start typing the heading title. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

This will give me what these questions show up as on the TeaHouse page? Sport.07GamerDet (talk) 20:57, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

If I understand your question correctly, yes. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:06, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

All right thanks a lot!!! You've been a big help. Thanks for all that you do for Wikipedia. Sport.07GamerDet (talk) 22:43, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

translation of a page

I have translated an article from english to french. Can I create a new page and insert a link to the original page ? Thanks for your help  Mluynes (talk) 20:47, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Salon de Thé, Mluynes. Your question is a little unclear to me. In an article on English Wikipedia, you can certainly link to an article on another language wiki that doesn't yet exist on en-wiki. You do this with the {{illm}} template (interlanguage link). Thus linking here to mention, say, the Tonkin Army or Corps du Tonkin on French Wikipedia, you would use Tonkin Army. Equally, Corps du Tonkin would do the same job, depending on how English Wikipedia would wish to call it. The article down't exist here yet, so is redlinked; the French article does, so it's a blue subscript link. If you edit this to reply, you will see the source code I've used. I advise against trying to use this in Visual Editor. Does that help? Nick Moyes (talk) 21:02, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

You'll find advice at WP:Translate us. The French version would need to be saved in the French Wikipedia, and would need to satisfy the requirements of that Wikipedia. You will probably need to include attribution to show the English article from which you have done the translation. If the translation to which you refer is in your sandbox, the first obvious problem is that you have not included any references, and you also have no wikilinks to other articles, but of course the latter can more easily be included once you have move your draft from enwiki to frwiki. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Wasting my time updating Wikipedia!

Hello, I've just updated the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lungern about the village in Switzerland where I live. With English as my mother tongue I felt I could improve this page on a village in A German speaking part of the world which has inconsistencies in the stated population, referred to a cable car and ski area that has been bankrupt and closed for 10 years or more as a highlight for tourists and failed to acknowledge the economic impact of the industry in Lungern and its effect on the local economy whilst incorrectly focussing on agriculture. These changes were wound back by CLCStudent who has probably never visited Lungern and most definitely is not an authority on the village, its people, its economy and its attractions. 217.162.162.160 (talk) 22:50, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

It would have been helpful if the person who reverted you had explained why. They had good reason: your additional paragraph, valuable though it might potentially be, didn't cite any independent sources. You can't report on company achievements merely on the say-so of the company. This doesn't discriminate against the industries of Lungern; it's a policy that applies across English-language Wikipedia. I have tentatively reinstated what you added. Please add independent sources for the new material. Other editors here (or I) will help you with this. Happy editing! -- Hoary (talk) 23:22, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The info was reverted because it was unsourced. However, another editor restored some of your contributions. Thanks for trying to improve the encyclopedia. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:25, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

You, CLCStudent and other editors are welcome to discuss improvements to the article in Talk:Lungern. -- Hoary (talk) 23:38, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, editor with IP ending in 162.160. see that your edits to Lungern were reverted by CLCStudent. Unfortunately, CLCStudent did not give a reason in the Edit summary. Doing so is not required, but is good practice. There were some problems with your edits.

1. You provided a new population figure, but did not cite any source. True, the previous figure was also unsourced, but there is always some suspicion of new unsourced statistics.
2. You included several external links (links to sites outside of Wikipedia) in the body of the article. As per our guideline on external links that is not done. External links are used in reference citations, in the "External links" section, and in a limited way in info boxes, and not elsewhere. You may have intended these as reference sources, but did not format them using <ref>...</ref> tags, or in any other way normally used for references.
3. You included a link to https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasser_Felstechnik formatted as a wiki link. This would not work -- a wiki-link cannot be to a URL, and links to other language versions of Wikipedia are not done via ordinary wiki-links anyway. Nor are other Wikipedia articles considered to be reliable sources.

I suspect that seeing these issues CLCStudent simply reverted, which was in my view not the best way to handle this, but perfectly within acceptable standards.

Do understand that all of your edits are preserved in the history, and can be reinstated if there is consensus to do so, and particularly if sources for them are presented.

You wrote above ... who has probably never visited Lungern and most definitely is not an authority on the village. Please understand that most articles on Wikipedia are written by people who are not "authorities" on the topic -- instead they summarize and combine what the reliable sources say. And that Wikipedia cannot accept facts (even if they are accurate) based on what you personally know, because no other reader can verify them, and we have no way to know that you really do live in Lungern and are an authority on it. I presume that you are, but I can't confirm that. That is why you and others like you must cite published sources even for things that you know personally.

Finally, when an edit of yours is reverted and you disagree, the best way is to follow the bold, Revert, Discuss cycle. After the revert, open a discussion on the article talk page. Invite the reverting editor with a ping. Other editors may join the discussion and with luck, a consensus will form.

I hope you don't think you time was so wasted now., DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:47, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Question

I wanted to make an article on a separate au of Undertale which is a fictional game and the article I am writing is also fictional but I have seen wiki pages on things like underfell etc so am I allowed to make a wiki page on my own Undertale au? Undertale AU geek (talk) 00:47, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Undertale AU geek and welcome to the Teahouse. Undertale is not a fictional game, it is a real game with a fictional setting, just as The Lord of the Rings is a real novel with a fictional setting. "Fizbin" is a fictional game, as is Klin-zha. Undertale is notable: It has been publicly released, widely sold, gotten awards, and been written about extensively by independent sources.

Is your "AU" version of Undertale notable? Has it been publicly released? Has anyone independent written about it in a reliable source? If the answers are no, there cannot be a Wikipedia article about it. If yes, then it depends, but if you are the creator, you have a conflict o9f interest and are not the best person to write about it. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:13, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Is AU ="alternate universe", Undertale AU geek? You might try searching for sites that specialise in hosting fan fiction. Pelagic ( messages ) Z – (20:24 Sat 13, AEST) 10:24, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

how do i create a new page for a business owner?

hi everyone, im new to this end of wikipedia and have no experience in code. How do i create a page for a business owner? please can you help. Chaz86 (talk) 02:40, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

A good reference on helping with your article creation can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Your_first_article. Having said that there is a rule here that the subject of the article MUST be notable. That is to say there must be good coverage of the subject in reliable, third-party sources. Unfortunately, not every individual or business has the notability to be included in Wikipedia. I hope this is of help to you. Regards,   Aloha27  talk  03:43, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

First, you start by amassing independent, reliable, published sources for what the business owner has achieved in their life. And then you write up the article, scrupulously linking each assertion to its independent, reliable, published source. This is not easy. I strongly recommend that you get plenty of experience in improving existing articles before you try to create a new article. Oh, and if you are in any way related to the business owner, be sure to read and digest Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. (Even plainer and simpler: If you're in any way related, don't attempt to create the article.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:45, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Chaz86, and welcome to the Teahouse.

• First of all it would not be a "page about" this business owner. Wikipedia has neutral articles that provide factual information about notable people and topics.

• Has this "business owner" had multipe independent published reliable sources each devote significant coverage to him or her? See Wikipedia's Golden Rule.
• Can this person pass WP:NBIO and WP:GNG? Most business owners can't.

• Secondly, if such an article were created, it would not belong to the subject, nor to you. Anyone in the world could edit it. It would be Wikipedia's article. If there are negative facts about the subject, supported by reliable sources, it is likely that they would be added to and remain in the article.
• Thirdly, if you have any close relationship with the subject, that is a Conflict of Interest, and should be disclosed before you start. If you would be creating an article as part of you job, or expect to receive payment or compensation for it, that is mpaid editing and 'must be disclosed promptly.

In short it is not as easy as you might have thought. Please follow the links in my comments above for details of the various policies and guidelines that apply here. If you do want to continue, please also read Your First article and referencing for beginners, and start with a draft under the Articles for Creation project. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:48, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

P&S or VP&S on Virginia Apgar ?

Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons short form given as "VP&S". should i follow it on Virginia Apgar Vishnuvardhan leela (talk) 09:02, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I say No. Apgar was a student and later faculty at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons many years ago. Only in 2017 was Vagelos added to the name after a LARGE donation from that family. You can use "P&S" as long as it is Wikilinked to the current name of the medical school. David notMD (talk) 09:21, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

 Done hello David notMD i will not change it. Vishnuvardhan leela (talk) 10:38, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Need references

On my page, Draft:Languages of Central Asia, I have 5 references, which is not enough for the size of the page. Do you know any strategies for finding references? Bumsowee (talk) 13:29, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Bumsowee, and welcome to the Teahouse. In your case, I'd check the refs in the WP-articles you are linking to, google books and archive.org (need to register but it's free). In addition, we don't put WP-links in headings (or flags I think), and you should cut down on the External links and See also per WP:EL and WP:SEEALSO. Consider also if it's better to improve Central Asian Languages instead of writing a separate article. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:45, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Bumsowee, and thank you for your efforts to contribute to Wikipedia. However, I would like to suggest that you are setting about writing an article in the wrong way. You have created a long draft (based presumably on what you personally have learned over a long period) and are now seeking sources to support what you have already written. Doing it like this makes the task much more difficult than it needs to be.

Instead I suggest that you start again with a blank page, re-read only the Reliable sources that you have already found, and summarise only their content to create the beginnings of your draft with citations of the sources in the appropriate pages.

When you've done this, look for more reliable sources, and add their information to the draft, citing the sources as you do so. All important information in every article should be cited to reliable sources, and even trivial information must be cited to some source. (For example, the current number of a subject Company's employees is often sourced from the company's own website, which is an unreliable source because it isn't independent of the Company.)

You may find this approach a little frustrating, because you personally know a lot more facts about your subject that you have learned over the years and want to include, but you cannot immediately remember exactly where you learned them or find a reliable source that they can be cited to: I often encounter the same problem when answering Ref Desk questions about subjects I've been interested in for 50 years (there are several). Nevertheless, using this method ensures that everything you put into the draft will be properly cited and will likely not be challenged or removed by other participating editors once the draft becomes an article.

While building the draft, it would be perfectly acceptable to include material you haven't found a source for yet, but are sure you will be able to – you can flag such material with the tag: another editor might even see this, find a citable source for you and add it.

I hope this advice proves helpful. Good luck and happy editing! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.41.14 (talk) 16:29, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Display problem in mobile

Many pages are not displayed properly in mobiles. Sometimes pictures / maps are left-aligned instead of centre.

Sometimes text appear on the left side -- one letter per line.

Suggest that all paragraph should be "justified". ANUPAM DUTTA 14:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Anupamdutta73 Both the app and the mobile version of Wikipedia(in a browser) do not have full functionality and do not display things in the same manner as the full version of Wikipedia does; you can view the full version in a browser on your phone, if desired. 331dot (talk) 14:25, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Anupamdutta73: Could you give some links to the articles you’re referring to? I’d be quite interested to take a look myself, thanks. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

How do I post pictures on Wikipedia?

How do I upload a picture onto wikipedia? Like if I have a picture that would look good in a page, how do I get it on? Or if there is a picture on a different page how do I put that picture on another page that it could go with?

Sport.07GamerDet (talk) 15:31, 13 June 2020 (UTC) Sport.07GamerDet (talk) 15:31, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sport.07GamerDet: you should visit Wikipedia:Images. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:45, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sport.07GamerDet: See also Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, but be sure you understand the copyright of the image before you upload it. GoingBatty (talk) 21:22, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I am new here

i need someone to help me i have an assignment in which i have to edit an article. i really want to perfect this act. Please help me Funmilolo (talk) 15:42, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Answered by another editor on op's talk page. See also WP:Introduction. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:56, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

If by "assignment" you mean from the place you are employed or interning, that is a horse of an entirely different color. See WP:PAID. David notMD (talk) 19:16, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

How to upload latest pictures in Wikipedia

Hi! ... first of all, thank u for inviting me in this group,I'm very grateful for this . And I would like ask u a question. Can u teach me how to upload latest pictures in Wikipedia especially the copyright part ( I don't understand that part clearly). I want upload a artwork of Taylor Swift'sLover.

(Tyler Swift Boii) --> }} Tyler Swift Boii (talk) 16:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Tyler Swift Boii and welcome to the Teahouse. When someone takes a picture, that picture is (in most cases) automatically protected by copyright at the moment it is made. The copyright will be held by the photographer in most cases, although in some cases it will be held by the photographer's employer, or it may be transferred to an employer or client shortly afterwards. Much the same is true when someone draws, paints, or uses a compute to create art. It is protected by copyright.

In the case of art associated with a commercial song, the copyright is very likely to be owned by the publisher (although it may not be). Such copyrighted images cannot be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, which takes only images free for all to use. Wikipedia does allow limited use of images under a claim of Fair Use. Such images must be uploaded to en.Wikipedia itself, not to commons, and must fulfill all of the requirements at WP:NFCC.

As discussed above in the thread #album cover images policy question, cover art for albums is usually permitted in an article about the album, provided the other criteria are complied with, but other related art is not. Is the art you have in mind in some sense "cover art" for the song, officially distributed with the song? Where did you get it? This makes a significant difference to whether it can be used and the needed steps. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:40, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

how to verify my reliable sources

i tried to write an artical about myself but its rejected on not reliable source basis but i have my all certificated issued by Indian government . How may i do submit all documents for verification CA Mukesh Rathi Jodhpur (talk) 16:39, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: User:CA Mukesh Rathi Jodhpur/sandbox/CA MUKESH RATHI

Hello, CA Mukesh Rathi Jodhpur. Routine government documents are not reliable, independent sources for the purpose of establishing notability on Wikipedia. Please read about why trying to write an autobiography is a bad idea. Please also read Your first article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:48, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Firstly you should read the advice against Autobiography. Secondly you need to understand that what is needed to demonstrate notability is significant coverage in multiple published reliable sources independent of the subject. Unpublished sources are of no use to Wikipedia, see WP:Verifiability. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:49, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, CA Mukesh Rathi Jodhpur, and welcome to the Teahouse. I am afraid the simple answer is "You don't."

• First of all, Wikipedia uses only Published sources, so any source that you would have to "submit" is not acceptable.
• Secondly, government documents including certifications are normally primary sources, and for establishing notability, secondary sources are usually needed.
• Thirdly, simply being a registered accountant and valuer is not in itself enough to make a person notable, although specific positions might change that.
• Fourthly, To establish notability, multiple independent published secondary reliable sources are normally needed, each of which discusses the person in some detail. See our guideline on the notability nof individual people, and our general notability guideline. See also Wikipedia's Golden Rule.
• Fifth and lastly, such an article would be an autobiography. our guideline on autobiography strongly discourages writing an autobiography on Wikipedia. Any such author surely has a conflict of interest which should be publicly declared, and which restricts the author. If you are actually notable, someone else, with no connection to you, may well write an article about you in due course.

Please read the various linked policy, guideline, and help pages above, which explain things in more detail. If you go ahead, please also read Your First Article and Referencing for Beginners. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:57, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Adding information

If I want to add some information to the page about my own community. Why cant I do it?  Susamd29 (talk) 16:52, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Susamd29 The issue is not that it is your community, it is that your edit is not sourced to an independent reliable source. Please discuss your proposed edit on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 16:56, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Help with red links

Hello, I'd trying to figure out how to create a red link on a name for which several other pages exist (but not for the actual person.) In the Elizabeth Maitland, Duchess of Lauderdale page, I'd like to red link the name of her mother Catherine Bruce, as no page exists for her. How can I do that so it doesn't point to other existing pages? Thanks for your help! Isaksenk (talk) 17:04, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Is the Catherine bruce you're talking about this one: Lady Catherine Bruce of Clackmannan? In that case, the article exists and you can make a link to it like so: Catherine Bruce - in wikitext, [[Lady Catherine Bruce of Clackmannan|Catherine Bruce]]. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 18:47, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

That can't be the right person, PJvanMill. Look at the dates. Elizabeth Maitland, Duchess of Lauderdale was born in `1626. Thus Lady Catherine Bruce of Clackmannan born in 1696, cannot be her mother. Our article says that Elizabeth Maitland was the daughter of William Murray, 1st Earl of Dysart His wife Catharine Bruce, granddaughter of Sir Robert Bruce of Clackmannan and Margaret Murray of the Tullibardine family is mentioned but not linked. I must conclude that no article about her on Wikipewdi currently exists. You could create an article, Isaksenk but only if you ncould find sufficient sources to establish that she was notable. Remember that simply being the wife of one notable person adn the mother of another does not make a person individually notable, and that if she is not, no article about her can be created. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Excuse me, that is indeed not her. PJvanMill (talk) 19:15, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, correct definitely not her. I want to create a page about Catherine Bruce as I have access to records which detail her notable activities during the English Civil War. In the meantime, I'd like to red link her. Could anyone help me do that please? (Thanks from a total newbie :-) Isaksenk (talk) 21:21, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Isaksenk: You need a potential unique page name to make a red link. For "Catherine Bruce, Countess of Dysart", it would be [[Catherine Bruce, Countess of Dysart|Catherine Bruce]] to produce Catherine Bruce. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:10, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Back Market

Draft:Back Market/2.

I have read here@Robert McClenon:: "In this specific case, my opinion is that we should stub the draft on Back Market and accept it, stripped of the promotional material." . Can you explain it, please?. Ready to edit what is needed. On the other hand, I swear I recieve no money and nothing for editing Wikipedia, from Back Market and from no one related to both, directly or indirectly. I am independent, fortunately. BoldLuis (talk) 17:54, 13 June 2020 (UTC) BoldLuis (talk) 17:54, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Note: BoldLuis added the entire exchange above, including Robert McClenon's post. @BoldLuis: it is difficult to understand what is going on here. First of all, where does that exchange come from? It is not present at Draft:Back Market/2. Secondly, what's the deal with the two alternative drafts, Draft:Back Market and Draft:Back Market/2? I notice that both versions have been rejected, not merely declined. Thirdly, what is your question to the Teahouse volunteers? Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 18:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Ah, now I see – this refers back to an old Teahouse discussion, here. --bonadea contributions talk 18:17, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

BoldLuis in future, please do not copy old discussions as you did here, but instead link to such an old discussion, so that context is more fully preserved. Thank you. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:48, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you a lot for your help. I did not know how to do it. The link: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1063#Draft:Back_Market/2 . I have a doubt: can I edit it there. Or must I put here?. BoldLuis (talk) 19:13, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Technically you can edit there – but you shouldn't, it's an archive. And if you did, likely no-one would see what you wrote. What you can do is to make requests and ask questions here, while referring and linking to that archived discussion. What you should not have done is copy Robert's posting here, with his signature at the end, making it appear that he has posted here when he hasn't. Maproom (talk) 19:41, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Improved. More sources:

• https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/04/12/not-all-iphones-are-same-these-cost-less-are-better-earth/
• https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/back-market-raises-48-million-to-create-a-global-leader-in-the-fast-growing-refurbished-electronic-device-market-300665456.html
• https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/back-market-names-amazon-exec-as-coo-to-guide-continued-global-expansion-of-refurbished-electronics-marketplace-300930359.html
• https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2020/05/05/back-market-champion-de-l-electronique-reconditionnee-leve-110-millions-d-euros_6038768_3234.html (in French)
• https://cincodias.elpais.com/cincodias/2020/05/04/companias/1588620588_836822.html (in Spanish)
• https://www.xataka.com/moviles/moviles-reacondicionados-conoce-a-fondo-de-donde-vienen-y-tus-derechos-antes-de-hacerte-con-uno

BoldLuis (talk) 19:51, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Some comments on the sources listed above.

The first and sixth, in my opinion, may help to establish that Back Market is notable.

The second, third, fourth, and fifth don't. They are all based on statements made by representatives of the company, and so are not independent. The second in particular is so far from independent, I would describe it as nauseatingly promotional. If you include a reference to it, you will reduce the chance of the draft being accepted.

Finally, some advice. There are two rival copies of this draft. That is never helpful, and often causes confusion. You should get rid of one of them. Maproom (talk) 21:13, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Annoyed Comments

What happened twelve days ago is that a paid editor provided two drafts of Draft:Back Market. Then my inference as to what happened is that User:BoldLuis decided to help the paid editor with a gimmick of providing a template asking the reviewer to propose better wording on Back Market. I don't know whether User:BoldLuis is also being paid by Back Market or just sympathizes with paid editors and wants to help them. I Rejected the draft, because I was disgusted at another gimmick intended to get volunteer editors to write an article that both satisfies the corporate client by being positive and satisfies neutral point of view. (I don't know if that exists, or if it is a contradiction.)

So I will now ask User:BoldLuis whether they have a conflict of interest with Back Market. If not, why are they trying so hard in such a clueless and annoying way to help Back Market?

I will say that I think that paid editors often think that they are being treated unfairly because they are not supposed to edit directly and they do not get help in writing an article that is both neutral and promotional. I don't know if an article can be neutral and promotional, meaning that I haven't seen one yet that really is both, and I think it is sort of like a unicorn.

Robert McClenon (talk) 20:50, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

False accusations to honest editor

I say and repeat I am not paid by anyone. Can honest people as me edit Wikipedia?. The phrase: " I don't know whether User:BoldLuis is also being paid by Back Market or just sympathizes with paid editors and wants to help them." is biased. Paid? . What ?. Sympathizes?. False affirmations. I have put in several places and sworn I am not paid or helping to none. This is not important. I usually help people in my city without being paid. Why do you say it?. I only want to see a NPOV article about this topic. Can I see a neutral article in Wikipedia ?. BoldLuis (talk) 21:11, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

User:BoldLuis - Okay. Please try to understand that some of us are deeply distrustful of paid editors and paid editing, and of aggressive tactics used by paid editors to try to make Wikipedia into an organ for cheap advertising masquerading as neutral coverage. I don't know whether the template was your idea or that of the paid editor. If it was your idea, then you annoyed some of the experienced editors by helping paid editors. If it wasn't your idea, then I apologize for thinking that it was your idea. In the future, if you want to work on an article that also has paid editors, ignore them and work on the article yourself, so that no one thinks you are one of them. Now that it appears that you and other neutral editors are trying to work on a neutral article, I will stay out of the way. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:49, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon:: I am not paid editor or sympathizes with paid editor. Really, I *anti*pathizes with them. The motivation is clear: I work and in the free time afer working, I read Wikipedia and sometimes edits it to correct typos or help to improve it.I apply the same to me as to the others: I do not want false information. And I want to know neutral, well based information. I saw in the Internet information about refurbished electronics and Back Market. I tried to search more information in Wikipedia and found the Draft. I thought it was in draft because it was new information and needed to improve. I deleted what I thought it was for me like-an-advertisement. And this was what I did.12:47, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you help fix the taxonomic box errors for both Achaenodon and Helohyidae please?

I can't seem to fix these errors so I can't do it sadly. Also, can you add more sources and references for Achaenodon too please? DinosaursRoar (talk) 18:07, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I've had a look, and I've no idea what causes the error messages, what they mean, or what could be done about them. All I can do is suggest you ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mammals.   Maproom (talk) 19:31, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, DinosaursRoar. Please see Template:Automatic taxobox/doc#Creating and manipulating. It explains what this means (the relevant template doesn't yet exist) and how to create it. If you don't feel up to that, either try Template talk:Automatic taxobox, or follow Maproom's suggestion. --ColinFine (talk) 20:06, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine and Maproom:, Being the AfC reviewer for Helohyidae, I will post for help at the above mentioned talk page places. Thank you all. ~ Amkgp 💬 20:18, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Arzamas (website)

Hello, can I request to move this article into the main namespace (at least as a stub)or does it require reviewing first?--DonGuess (talk) 19:18, 13 June 2020 (UTC) DonGuess (talk) 19:18, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

It has been submitted to Articles for Creation (AfC - the information at the bottom of the draft), and given that this is your first attempt at an article, I suggest you wait for it to be reviewed. AfC review can take days to weeks, sometimes months before a reviewer decides to review it. David notMD (talk) 19:29, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

creation of a wiki page for a renowned writer

My mother late Mrs Chandra Kiran Sonrexa was a world renowned writer of Hindi fiction. I would like to create a biographical article.

Kartika Sonrexa Houston

Hi @Ksonrexa: and welcome to the Teahouse. I would recommend studying the following article Help:Your_first_article and Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest and the links I left on your user talk page before starting creating this article. If you have any further questions please feel free to ask. CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:07, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

This source http://thebookreviewindia.org/22824-2/ should help to establish her notability. &  Maproom (talk) 20:26, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Can I help someone to appeal a block

My question is that can I help some to appeal his/her block or send him/her up to arbcom. Tbiw (talk) 20:35, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

User:Tbiw - Are you saying that an editor has been blocked and that you would like to help them get unblocked? If, like most blocked editors, they have the use of their talk page, they can post an unblock request, and you can concur with it, on their talk page. Have they been blocked for a short period of time, a long period of time, or indefinitely? If they have been blocked for a short period of time, it may be better to serve out the block. Who is the blocked editor, and for how long were they blocked? Robert McClenon (talk) 22:35, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Indefinitely I don't like it.Tbiw (talk) 11:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

is 'universal basic share' notable?

I wanted to start I nice discussion on Reddits political discussion on universal basic share. But i can't find a good resource that collects the different implementation, ideologies and ideas behind it. It's very scattered :-(

Is it noticeable enough so I can write up an article on it? Or a section in the UBI page? Or is it just not something for Wikipedia? Peterklogborg (talk) 20:48, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

If you have been unable to find a good source, it probably isn't yet notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Maproom (talk) 21:34, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

KKK

Why does your article on the KKK not mention they were democrats? 2600:8803:D000:747:281C:17A5:15C9:7EE9 (talk) 21:33, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

The final two paragraphs of Ku_Klux_Klan#First_KKK make it pretty clear that they were Democrats. Maproom (talk) 21:38, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Notable Article Help?

I wanted to create an article on a game (Airport CEO; www.airportceo.com) as I could only find mentions (on English Wikipedia) of it as parts of lists, with links that go to nonexistent pages. I have verified that there is no page on the subject, however am unsure as to whether it is 'Notable' in accordance with WP:N, as there are few 'notable' sources. I could only find webpages such as Gamepedia (airportceo.gamepedia.com), Steam (store.steampowered.com/app/Airport_CEO) and various review websites which had non-primary source information on the subject. The largest source by far is the official website and their DevBlogs, but I am not sure if these are sufficient as citations. As for the actual creation of the article, I have read through the Article Creation guidelines thouroughly and had practice with editing and using the Wikipedia Editor, and think that I would be able to handle the creation of the article.

Any help on this issue would be greatly appreciated; many thanks in advance. Closingbracket (talk) 21:52, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Closingbracket. Generally when assessing notability, the best place to start is at WP:GNG; however, sometimes it might not be completely clear how WP:GNG applies to some subjects, and in those cases it can be helpful to look for guidance in a more specific notability guideline like WP:NGAME. If then things might not be as clear and in those cases it can help to ask for input from the members of a relevant WikiProject. So, maybe you should try asking about this at WT:VG since the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games might be able to help. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:28, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Song Venus

 2601:C2:C300:8C90:85B0:589F:CD42:DC3B (talk) 21:53, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 2601:C2:C300:8C90:85B0:589F:CD42:DC3B. The Teahouse is a place for asking questions about Wikipedia. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia in general or about editing a specific article? It will be so much easier for a Teahouse host to try and help you if they knew what kind of problem you might be having or what you want to ask. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:33, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Climateactivist in Cizre and Göle

Dear Teahouse, I am asking for a solution for the weather data at Cizre and Göle. Since 2017 an editor is mentioning that the climate data in Cizre and Göle is not correct. Usually he removes the climate data without leaving an edit summary, but since some weeks he communicates with other editors, mainly me. I would like to find a solution, either we just leave the weather as he wants it, but his edit summaries are nonsense. He writes he is against climate data, but if we bring another one he is also against this one. I have noticed that climate data is quite wrong if it refers to to the climate table, but it is correct if it refers to the daily climate data. I have asked Femkemilene and Materialscientist for help, but there was no solution. So what can we do?  Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:49, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Paradise Chronicle. It sounds like your having a content dispute with this other editor, and the best way to try and resolve a content dispute is to follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Try starting a discussion about this on the article's talk page (if you already haven't) and invite the other party to discuss things there. Perhaps you can find some middle ground that addresses both of your concerns or one of you will be able to establish a WP:CONSENSUS in favor of yourr position. Once a consensus is established one way or another, the other side will be expected to honor the consensus even if they don't agree with it because not doing so is going to be considered to disruptive or otherwise problematic, and then their behavior may come under some serious scrutiny by other editors.

Sometimes we don't always get things to go our way on Wikipedia, but Wikipedia is not really about winning; the real goal is to try and figure out what's best for Wikipedia. It's OK to disagree on what this may be, but it's not really OK to keep disagreeing and trying get things your way once the Wikipedia community has decided to another way is better. So, assume good faith and try and engage this other editor. Give them a chance to resolve things through discussion; if they refuse to, then try and get others involved as explained in WP:CONTENTDISPUTE. If even at that point the other editor still insists on forcing their version into the article, then that might indicate behavior matter that may require for administrator intervention. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:43, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Back in April, you made a courteous attempt to start a discussion in both Talk:Cizre and Talk:Göle. A quick look in the recent histories of both articles suggests that Atsizat is the sole participant who removes this information and that three or more editors have been restoring it. I invite Atsizat to either to state their case on both talk pages or, better, to state it in just one of the two and briefly refer to it in the other. -- Hoary (talk) 00:23, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Uploading a new entry

Many thanks. I created a new page "Umami (film)" and uploaded it (regarding our Gerard Depardieu film to be released next year). Is there anything extra I need to do to have it go live? I am a main producer of the film and have authority to do it. Loliverfrost (talk) 22:51, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

You're talking about User:Loliverfrost/sandbox/Umami (film). I hardly know where to start. Please read up on product announcements, conflict of interest and reliable sources. -- Hoary (talk) 23:07, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Loliverfrost. The first thing you need to do is to carefully read through Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Your connection to the film doesn't give you any special authority when it comes to Wikipedia; so, if you fail to comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you're going to found yourself running into to lots of problems trying to add or edit content about the film on Wikipedia. I also suggest that you take a look at Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for reference as well because nobody associated with the film has any sort of final editorial control over anything written about it on Wikipedia, which means Wikipedia is not really the best place for you to try and promote the film (even indirectly). This doesn't mean that there can never be anything added about the film to Wikipedia; it just means that anyone connected to the film such as yourself might not be the best person to do so.

My suggestion to you would be to bring this up for discussion at WT:FILM to see whether someone from Wikipedia:WikiProject Film might be interested in creating an article about it. The may consideration is going to be whether the film meets WP:NFILM or whether it just might be WP:TOOSOON for any article about it to be added to Wikipedia. Films seem to be quite a popular Wikipedia genre as things go, and there are lots of editors who work on Wikipedia articles about them; so, it shouldn't be too hard to find someone as WikiProject Film to help your figure out what is what.

If you do, however, decide to try and write such an article yourself, you should follow the advice given in WP:DECLARECOI and work on a draft first. When you think the draft is ready to become an article, you should submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review. An AfC reviewer will look over the draft and see if it meets the basic criteria for articles. If it does, the reviewer will approve the draft and upgrade it to article status; if not, the reviewer will explain why and make suggestions on ways to improve things. For some general reference on writing articles, you might want to look at Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners. I also suggest looking at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything for a general overview of Wikipedia as well. Good luck to you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:15, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I will add no references, and IMDb is not acceptable as a ref vis-a-vis establishing notability as Wikipedia defines it. David notMD (talk) 06:49, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Could somebody add a article about a football team to Elswick, Newcastle Upon Tyne?

Elswick Rangers FC were a football club who existed only for about 10 years in the late 1880s, they also competed in the FA Cup 3 times. http://fchd.info/ELSWICKR.HTM http://www.statto.com/football/teams/elswick-rangers/ (this are two links about Elswick Rangers)

Wonder if any editor would add an section about them in the article?Pizza Slayer (talk) 23:09, 13 June 2020 (UTC) Pizza Slayer (talk) 23:09, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Pizza Slayer. If you believe the team to be Wikipedia notable (particularly per WP:TEAM and WP:FOOTYN), then you can be WP:BOLD and create such an article yourself. However, if you've never created an article before, my suggestion would be for you to work on a draft instead and then submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review once you think the draft is ready. You can find some pointers on how to write a Wikipedia article at Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners. You might also want to take a look at WP:FOOTY#Manual of style for suggestions as well.

Another thing you might want to try is asking for help from the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Football since that's where you find editors with experience in writing articles about football teams. Just post a message at WT:FOOTY and see if you can find someone to give you some more specific advice. Good luck to you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:30, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

On the other hand, Pizza Slayer, perhaps you're simply asking about the addition of a paragraph or more about the team to the existing article Elswick, Tyne and Wear. If so, I suggest that you go ahead and do it, citing your source(s). If you think such an addition would be worthwhile but you don't want to add it yourself, then make the suggestion at Talk:Elswick, Tyne and Wear. -- Hoary (talk) 23:47, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Pizza Slayer: if you can dig up some more sources I'd be happy to create the article. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 12:15, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Move

Hi, can you tell me how to "move by overwriting"? I believe that I once did this a few years ago, but I've since forgotten. Thank you. ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 23:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Simply, if you're not an administrator, you can't. See this explanation, which tells you where you should go. -- Hoary (talk) 05:59, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

This is not 100% correct. If the move target is a redirect to the current page and has only one item in the revision history (the redirect) even non-Admins can delete by overwriting (See my user logs for example) Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:27, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Victor Schmidt mobil above; @Hoary: please see LoveMyWikis1234's move log. I believe that I've done this too. Also, extended movers and file movers can move without leaving a redirect. Can somebody tell me how to move by overwriting? ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 14:48, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Cedrus atlantica glauca

 2600:1700:E690:AC30:C5BA:AFB6:82F8:62 (talk) 00:14, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

What? ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 00:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Cedrus atlantica (Atlas cedar, a tree species) is an article. Glauca is mentioned as a cultivar; glaucous meaning blue/grey in color. David notMD (talk) 06:54, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Blue Cedar is a redirect to Radar, Anti-Aircraft No. 3 Mk. 7. Most people searching for "blue cedar" would be better served by a redirect to Cedrus atlantica. There may be justification for creating an article on the 'Glauca' variety. Maproom (talk) 08:15, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Technical problem with table

The table for cases and deaths per million in COVID-19 pandemic by country and territory is a mess, even though it should be simple for someone technically competent to fix it. See Talk:COVID-19 pandemic by country and territory#Cases and deaths per million. Can anyone help? Dudley Miles (talk) 08:54, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Dudley Miles, welcome to the Teahouse. Asking the question where you did was far better than here, and it does look like you're now getting responses there. The only other places I could suggest to raise concerns if it doesn't get resolved would be at the Wikiproject for Covid19 see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject COVID-19, and/or the talk page for the template full of that data which is at Template:COVID-19 pandemic data. (It does strike me that a 'date last updated' field might have helped for each country, though it does sound like it is being populated by some automated process), Anyway, I hope this helps a bit. Stay safe. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:56, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

1 Newton meter per second squared , what second is measured in squared in this formula

 2402:3A80:937:D6B7:8129:60C1:C672:500A (talk) 09:11, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. This is an editing help desk for those wanting to improve and contribute to Wikipedia articles. I'm afraid we're not a general Q&A forum. Try looking within Wikipedia for your answers, especially Acceleration and Metre per second squared. And if that fails, search on Google. May the Force be with you! Nick Moyes (talk) 09:47, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Want to edit a page to make it full of information

I'm from Bangladesh and I really want to contribute to Wikipedia. I'm here to know some information. There is a page List of colleges in Bangladesh link:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colleges_in_Bangladesh But that page doesn't have much information. It's empty so to say. As I am a student and blogger from Bangladesh i have the list of names of all of the colleges in Bangladesh. And i also have a reference page from official website of "Ministry of education of Bangladesh" which have the list of all of the name of the colleges in Bangladesh. So I'm willing to edit that page and give the list of all of the colleges of Bangladesh. I want to know if it's there any problem doing that work? Md Maruf Parvez (talk) 09:12, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

List of colleges in Bangladesh is not an article, it's a list. It's not the place to put information about the colleges. If you want to add information about the colleges, you should add it to the articles on the individual colleges. Maproom (talk) 09:35, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

My recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive

My contribution was more than constructive.

Wiki’s entry For typographic points is written: “In digital type, letters of a font are designed around an imaginary space called an em square. When a point size of a font is specified, the font is scaled so that its em square has a side length of that particular length in points.”

If the font is to be scaled to the specified point size of a font, it can’t be “imaginary”.

So, I edited the first sentence to;

In digital type, letters of a font are designed in a space representing the vertical distance any typesetter will move with no additional line spacing, also known as leading. The square of that vertical distance is called an em square.

So then; When a point size of a font is specified, the font is scaled so that its em square has a side length of that particular length in points.

Makes more sense.

How is that not constructive? 2601:18E:8200:6919:7950:34D:47D5:DE64 (talk) 10:30, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you truly feel that your edit was needed, you should start a discussion on the article talk page to explain why, and/or ask the other editor directly as to why they feel that way. 331dot (talk) 10:44, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Should I keep writing the draft

Hello, I started Draft:Arzamas (website) and some people except me have participated too, but it was declined because it looks like an advertisement, with I agree with and it’s my fault, but the problem is that it looks like there are only three English-language sources about Arzamas so it could be impossible to write a proper article. What should I do? DonGuess (talk) 11:59, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi DonGuess. Sources used for Wikipedia only need to be reliable, published and reasonably accessable; they're not required to be in English as explained in WP:NONENGLISH and they're not required to be online as explained in WP:SAYWHERE. So, if you believe there are non-English sources which satisfy English Wikipedia's definition of a "reliable sources", then you can cite them in articles. However, please understand since this is English Wikipedia and articles are expected to be written in English, sources written in languages other than English might be a bit harder to verify. So, you can help out by providing as much information about the source as possible when you cite them. There's a way to cite non-English sourcing using templates such as {{cite web}} and {{cite book}}, etc. that involves using parameters like |language=, |quote=, |trans-work= and |trans-title=, etc. If you're going to cite a non-English source, it's going to be assumed that you've got sufficient language ability yourself to understand what the source is saying; however, the AfC reviewer reviewing the draft might not have the same ability. So, you might be able to help clarify the source if you can provide a rough translation/summary of it on the draft's talk page or possibly a link to an online translation of it (perhaps using something like Google Translate). Machine-based translations are not really considered good enough for content added to an article, but a machine translation of the the source might make it easier for reviewers to assess the source. You might be able to add a link to an online English translation of the source (if you can find one) to the actual citation syntax using the | parameter. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:20, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

What's wrong with this article?

Hello everyone, I spent 3 weeks to source for sources to create this article- Draft:Tiwalola Olanubi in main space and has been there waiting for review for about 10 days but just discovered that this article has been moved to draft space and the reason provided by the mover is that the article is "under sourced". This article has 12 sources. Of the 12 sources 4 are from printed newspapers with 2 ISSN while the other two printed newspapers do not print their ISSN but Vol & No which I included in the citations. I work in a newspaper section of a library where we file newspaper pages based on their coverage, for instance political stories, business, oil and gas etc to make it easy for researchers. This makes it easy for me to have access to offline sources for this article I created.

But I'm so surprised that this article is moved to draft space. I know that to create an article you must provide at least 3 sources. If this article has issues why was it not flagged for those issues? If the editor that moved this article to draft space felt that the subject does not meet Wikipedia notability guideline why did he not flag it for notability issue? But I know that the subject is notable because it has independent media coverage. I spent days reading about Wikipedia general notability guideline before moving to create this article. So I think I have a little understanding of Wikipedia notability guideline.

I have checked through the edit history of the editor that moved this article to draft space and discovered that he has moved hundreds of articles with at least 7 sources each to draft space for "under sourced". But I'm baffled that most of the articles this editor created have average of five sources. Why is he moving articles with higher number of sources than his own articles to draft space?

The editor that performed this action describes himself as "deletionist" and he is truly deleting articles. This editor wrote on his userpage that he is disappointed in the editors that "ignore common sense in place of process". This clearly shows that this editor does not observe Wikipedia editorial policies but uses his own common sense. But if everyone here uses 'commom sense' Wikipedia will become a lawless place where people behave the way they want. And the result? Wikipedia will lose his reputation. If this editor continues this way a lot of new editors will turn away. Maybe this editor alone made Wikipedia what it is today. I urge you all to address this issue. Best regards. Maco Paco (talk) 12:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Whatever the editor (Lapablo) calls himself, he hasn't deleted your article. (But "Maybe [Lapablo] alone made Wikipedia what it is today" -- we should erect a statue!) I looked at the draft. It's very short. Your biographee is a businessman, but I have trouble discerning his notability. I clicked on one of the many sources: this one. It's really lightweight stuff, with a total of three sentences about your man. He works in advertising and he seems to be successful; but just what he's done remains a mystery to me. -- Hoary (talk) 13:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @Hoary:. This is an issue of policy. The notability guideline says independent media coverage of the subject and the subject of the article has same. Why did he not flag the article for notability concern? Does moving it to draft space confer notability on the article? Of the 12 sources cited you draw your conclusion from a single source? Did you look at these: [1] [2] [3]. You said that the article is too short but if I wrote more about him you would say it is promotional. He has won a reputable award, the company he founded has won awards too. Is notability no longer established by independent media coverage? Or the subject must be a governor, federal lawmaker to be notable? Maco Paco (talk) 15:11, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary, Maco Paco, and Lapablo: This is not the best sourced article that I have ever seen. But I think that it has sufficient sourcing that it would survive at an AfD, which is the standard for an AfC approval. Specifically:

• news-af.feednews.com's "Meet Social Media Strategist, Tiwalola Olanubi" has several paragraphs about Olanubi and seems to be an independent source, although it is hard to be sure, it could be based on a press release.
• The Nigerian Pilot article is not linked to, but seems to be about Olanubi winning a significant award.
• The BellaNaija article has more marketing Buzz-speak than I like, but devotes six (short) paragraphs to Olanubi , and I think must count as significant coverage
• The article "Three Individuals Reshaping The Future" from Guardfian Nigeria is not really in-depth coverage, but is more than a passing mention. I would count as 1/2 of a solid source for notability purposes. Saying that his company is ... arguably the foremost social media marketing company in Nigeria. is not trivial.
• The article "Disrupting the future" from Guardian Nigeria devotes 9 paragraphs to Olanubi . This is significant coverage by an independent and reliable source, IMO.
• The Business Day NG article "DottsMediaHouse CEO bags Future Awards nomination" devotes 5 full paragraphs to Olanubi, one of which is a quote. This is the same award the Nigerian Pilot article was apparently about. This describes the award as Recognized by Forbes as the “Most important awards for outstanding young Africans”. which suggests that this is not a trivial award, and contributes to notability. This article also seems to me to be solid coverage.
• Two other sources are about this same award, but the "12 outstanding youth nominated for Future Awards". article from Vanguard Allure includes four paragraphs devoted to Olanubi, and is IMO significant coverage.

All together I think this would be more than enough to support a Keep view at an AfD, so draftification was neither needed nor warranted. A maintenance tag requesting additional sources might have been justified. But draftication should mean that the alternative is speedy deletion, or at least an AfD where deletion is expected. Newither of thesae is in my view the case here. Therefore I intend to move thiws back to mainspace as it stands. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

how is a title edited?

 Palisades1 (talk) 14:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Palisades1, see WP:MOVE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:39, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

What steps should I take in merging and formatting an article?

I am a relative newcomer to Wikipedia, but I am jumping in the deep end in my planned first major edit of merging Cosmetic surgery in Australia to Plastic Surgery. My major concern is about formatting guidelines for this kind of a topic. I like the way that the procedures under "Types of Cosmetic Surgery Available" are formatted in the Australia article, but am not sure how I can properly replicate it in the general Plastic Surgery article, or even if such formatting is appropriate for this section? I don't know if it would make the article too lengthy or complicated. (I don't think so.... but also I'm so new that this is all very daunting!)

Honestly, I envision "Cosmetic Surgery" as its own separate article that outlines the history of cosmetic surgery (as distinct from reconstructive plastic surgery) in modern times. This article, similar to the "Cosmetic Surgery in Australia" article would have lists of procedures, a brief description of their history and layman's explanation of the procedure, as well as indications, benefits, and complications of the procedure (cited from various PubMed articles and plastic surgery textbooks). The procedures may or may not link to individual articles about the procedure depending on if they already exist on Wikipedia and the information available about the the specific procedure. However, in the meantime as simply merging is daunting enough, I do not plan on doing this until I have a more robust list.

I suppose I have several questions.

1) What is the preferred formatting for a section of an article that is primarily a list and a brief descriptor? Should I use a bulleted list such as in the general Plastic Surgery article, or one with bolded subheaders (if that's the appropriate term) from the Cosmetic Surgery in Australia article?

2) How can I easily replicate this formatting when I merge an article? Are there templates available that I should use?

3) What steps should I take in merging an article with a section that will likely need to be split off in the future? Should I merge and then split? Or create a new article and then merge information from the two articles I have mentioned into it? Is my thought process appropriate for why Cosmetic Surgery should be its own article?

Thank you all in advance for the help. Marcia Barnett (talk) 14:47, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Donald Trump And racism

The article on Donald Trump and racism TRUTH is best served first instead of errors of attitudes. So why isn't what Donald Trump has said and proven about himself printed first? And those who follow slander of Hillary Clinton and the media as exactly that of lies slander, opinion maglignancy to try to win a presidential race. There is no truth to this. An encyclopedia is supposed to give facts. 2600:1700:5D10:9B0:201B:FB00:5E6C:9DDE (talk) 16:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

WP:TRUTH Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:49, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello

 Ellipzys (talk) 16:47, 14 June 2020 (UTC) hi

@Ellipzys: Welcome to Wikipedia! Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:49, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

How to upload an write up

Actually, the article which i published yesterday based on my research and investigation. its very useful information for the petroleum engineers. Finding free gas at pump intake using CFD & Sub pump software. Please support me if you can upload the date if possible Ellipzys (talk) 16:50, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

No. Sorry, but Wikipedia does not publish original research - please see the policy at Wikipedia:OR. --CiaPan (talk) 16:58, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Forgot to ping: Ellipzys. --CiaPan (talk) 17:00, 14 June 2020 (UTC)