::{{re|IntellectuallyOlder(Alt. Account)}} I released the filter restrictions a bit. The filter was not intended to prevent account cration, rather to slow-down spammers. However, your problem might mean that we will have a problem with sleeper accounts, soon (creation of 4 accounts in 5 minutes should not trigger the filter if no other IP actions were performed in this time period). [[User:Ankry|Ankry]] ([[User talk:Ankry|talk]]) 19:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
::{{re|IntellectuallyOlder(Alt. Account)}} I released the filter restrictions a bit. The filter was not intended to prevent account cration, rather to slow-down spammers. However, your problem might mean that we will have a problem with sleeper accounts, soon (creation of 4 accounts in 5 minutes should not trigger the filter if no other IP actions were performed in this time period). [[User:Ankry|Ankry]] ([[User talk:Ankry|talk]]) 19:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:::If an IP is blocked, we need to know at least the block # in order to go on. If you do not wish to provide it in public, you can contact an active admin vi email asking for help. There is also help address <wikisource@wikimedia.org> served by VRT (former OTRS), but unsure id it is announced anywhere. [[User:Ankry|Ankry]] ([[User talk:Ankry|talk]]) 19:28, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:::If an IP is blocked, we need to know at least the block # in order to go on. If you do not wish to provide it in public, you can contact an active admin vi email asking for help. There is also help address <wikisource@wikimedia.org> served by VRT (former OTRS), but unsure id it is announced anywhere. [[User:Ankry|Ankry]] ([[User talk:Ankry|talk]]) 19:28, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
::: and we need the name of the account that is supposed to be blocked at oldwikisource: neither the User IntellectuallyOlder(Alt. Account) nor the ser IntellectuallyOlderer registeres there. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] ([[User talk:-jkb-|talk]]) 22:07, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
::: and we need the name of the account that is supposed to be blocked at oldwikisource: neither the User IntellectuallyOlder(Alt nor the user IntellectuallyOlderer are registered there. [[User:-jkb-|-jkb-]] ([[User talk:-jkb-|talk]]) 22:07, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
I came across the article Outline of chocolate, and it struck me as kind of odd. I've been editing for a few years, but this is a style of article I've never come across - it's almost a list, but it isn't, and it's not a general overview of chocolate like you'd expect from the, well, chocolate article. One of the headers is just a question, which I don't think is in the manual of style.
I'm familiar with generic overviews that then link off to more detailed articles - Japanese clothing is one. I suppose it's just an article titled "Outline of ___" that's stumped me.
Sorry if this seems like a silly question - but do we really format generic outline articles like this? It seems like its content ought to be subsumed elsewhere, is all. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 14:24, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We have loads of "Outline of..." articles. There was a handful of editors who liked doing them, led by User:The Transhumanist, who did most of this one. This is typical in getting very few views, av. 17 per day. I've never found them any use myself, & I think production of new ones has now largely stopped, but arguably they do little harm. Johnbod (talk) 14:41, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I quite like it! If you imagine someone wrote a book on the subject of chocolate, this outline would be the contents page. But I suppose these things are a matter of taste; I personally don't find categories useful, but a lot of people adore them. Anything is probably good, if it helps some group, somewhere, find the information they want. Elemimele (talk) 17:12, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnbod: - thanks for the explanation! What struck me was that the subheading style just seemed too informal for Wikipedia proper - questions are deprecated I think pretty much everywhere else, and it did strike me as possibly a relic from an earlier time. Were I someone with more time, I'd maybe propose reworking the layout and style guide to possibly bring it more in line with what we see elsewhere on the project today. Thanks for the help!--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 16:24, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why we need a separate article. Most of the headings correspond to a section in chocolate article, as well as having other articles for specific things. Don't see any value to this outline article. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:30, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
why my article does not meet the criteria of notability?
In short, your article does not show that Gonzalez meets the English Wikipedia's threshold of notability for a businessman. The references you have provided merely tell us what he does and do not give details about him to the detailed extentinreliable sourcesthat are independent of him that are required. The Spanish-language wikipedia is totally separate from the English one and may well have less demanding standards. There are over 6 billion people on this planet going about their everyday business and very few of us merit an article here. Note that autobiography is strongly discouraged. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:15, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Diegordeto: You have re-submitted the draft without making a single change, as far as I can see (another editor has removed some material). This is a waste of everyone's time: it will just be declined again. To add to your (slim) chances of acceptance you need at minimum to make the references as more than bare URL — see WP:REFB. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:59, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Listing characters with aliases
I've seen characters with aliases being written both ways multiple times, but I want to know which one is right.
Where can I express my sincere love for the encyclopedia?
There are good days. There are bad, but overall, I just love you all. Thanks for doing all of what you all do. The hosts, the contributors. Everyone. Feel free to revert this after posting. Just wanted to say a great big ole "Thanks!" to all of you. ♥Th78blue (They/Them/Their • talk)♥22:17, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Th78blue: There's no need to revert that. It's a great sentiment to hear, and one I can wholeheartedly support. We all have our off days and all have our "this is brilliant days". With your 9,000 edits to date, you've made a great contribution here. So, "thank you", too. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:59, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks both of you! I love it here, and plan to stay. I was a LONG time wikipedia reader, but only made an account not that long ago. I am quickly racking up the edits though given how obsessed I have become with the whole thing we have going on here. It is addictive. The only discouraging aspect can be interacting with controlling or grumpy editors that feel they "own" a page or a process. Other than that though, I'm in love! ♥Th78blue (They/Them/Their • talk)♥14:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
google knowledge graph shows a competitor
Hello,
I am in need of urgent help, and I wish to create an article about A' Design Award & Competition, however I am involved and thus I am not sure I am the right person to write this article, normally this would not be a problem however the Google knowledge graph is taking a competitor business from Wikipedia when keywords "a design award" or "adesignaward" is searched for, this is creating us financial and reputational damages, plus many of our esteemed laureates are asking why we do not have a Wikipedia article, in the past I tried to create an article but it gets deleted each time, perhaps because I am too involved and passionate about the topic, or because I am not a native speaker of English, or because I lack the etiquette to write a proper article in compliance with Wikipedia quality standards, however I am now scared about writing an article and I don't know what to do, all I know is that Wikipedia knowledge graph as displayed by Google is wrong, and I think the only way to fix it is to provide the right article, I need desperate help from admins to write an article about "A' Design Award". I right now have 3041 current links from 649 media publications within the last few years that I was able to export myself from the website uploaded here https://competition.adesignaward.com/ArticleURLsForWikipedia.csv so I have a significant number of sources, plus A' Design Award & Competition organizes World Design Rankings, and operates designers.org we are actually constructing a larger design museum here in Como, Italy, our laureates include Google themselves, Disney, Pepsi, Lenovo, among many other prestigious brands and we actually manage http://idnn.org/ which means we publish winner design news in 109 languages, plus the jury is 211 persons and entries are blind peer reviewed, and the competition is being organized since 2009, we published 47 hardcover books, all printed in Italy. I would like to humbly ask if you could please kindly help me write an article? Everything I write sounds like an advertisement and I am too biased and I should not write this article, I love A' Design Award & Competition therefore I need your advise or help on what to do forward. I don't know if it is relevant but here I am also providing a list of information here in case:
I feel I shall not write the article, given my involvement and style, I am asking you if anyone experienced could please help us write a proper, non-biased article that does not sound like an advertisement. 93.56.160.117 (talk) 22:56, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia has no control over how Google uses Wikipedia information in its search results, you will need to contact Google to correct any search result or knowledge graph errors. 331dot (talk) 23:02, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but no. Wikipedia is a volunteer project, where people do what they can when they can. The backlog at Requested Articles is severe. To be frank, and I apologize- Wikpedia is only concerned with summarizing what independent reliable sources say about topics that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. We aren't concerned with how a lack of an article affects your business. There are actually good reasons to not want an article. 331dot (talk) 23:12, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, this was your edit. Thank you for your modesty in adding it to the end of a list, but the list is, or should be, in alphabetical order, so this entry should go at or near the front. When you make this move from the bottom to (near) the top, please remove every link to the company itself, to Facebook, Instagram, or any other example of "social media". What's needed is a small number links to reliable sources (sources with editorial oversight and high standards) that are independent of the company -- sources that cover the company in depth. Also, please remove fluff such as "laureates include Google , Disney, Pepsi, Lenovo, among many other prestigious brands". (If a brand is prestigious, the reader will know this and therefore saying it is unnecessary.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:34, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much Hoary for your suggestions. I have removed the fluffy words, and moved the A' Design Award top of the list, removed social media links and hopefully correctly referenced sources. However I did leave a large number of links, shall I reduce them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.56.160.117 (talk) 19:20, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can I get my old edits back?
Greetings, fellow collectors of knowledge.
I had already made a couple of edits before I decided to join up and create an account. Now those edits are of course associated with my IP addresses (which apparently changed between edits). Is there any way to reassign those old edits to my account? Herr Hartmann (talk) 23:28, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, Herr Hartmann. No, there isn't, but if you're willing to publicly associate your account with the IP(s), you can make a note on your user page along the lines of, "Used to edit as [insert IP addresses]." Wikignome Wintergreentalk23:55, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Herr Hartmann @Herr Hartmann I don't believe so. In severe cases, admins can rename the user associated with specific edits, but there are no easy ways to merge account edits. If you need special WP:PERMS you can request so (for example a prior registered account had 500 edits for WP:ECP status. Do you have a more specific reason why? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 00:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
adding to the above, unfortunately if these edits were ip edits, they cannot be considered for ECP status since ips can be used by multiple people and we would have no way of telling who edited which. happy editing! melecie t - 04:42, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the infos, everyone! It's not really that important, I'm just a big fan of keeping things organized, and having my contributions scattered over three or four different IPs is definitely not organized. Especially now that I have a perfectly good account that could hold them instead. It would have been nice if it could be done, but it's not really worth making a big fuss about it. I guess it's really my own fault for editing without an account in the first place. Looks like I'll just need to keep making edits and let those early ones fade away in the background. Herr Hartmann (talk) 06:09, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Why is an Earls wife called a countess
An Earls wife is called a countess because of king George I brought over the title of count from Germany. Instead of creating a new title however he kept the title “eaorl” just update the spelling to the modern title “earl”. He chose to keep the female version of count (countess) as the female equivalent of Earl.
Lord JAS MOD EOC (talk) 00:20, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[Draft:Softacom] <-- "draft" is the keyword here. This means that the article is/was under development and was going to be rewritten, thus "draft".
I am still gathering information about the company. My final post will be no different than that of MicrosoftorOracle. Upon review, those pages may also be subject to Speedy Deletion for "Unambigous Advertising."
I am not receiving payment for my entry nor do I have a vested interest in the company.
If you conduct your own research, you'll realize that Softacom plays a significant role, worldwide: assisting client-facing companies to modernize applications.
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, Kaunitzj. I'm afraid your draft has several problems. First, it should have been written in draft space or your sandbox, not on your user page. Second, it appears to be an autobiography. Third and most importantly, it has absolutely no reliable, independent, published secondary sources backing up its facts; every single statement, especially in a biography of a living person, needs to be backed up with an appropriate source. I recommend you take a look at WP:FIRST, WP:AUTO, and WP:Verifiability. Wikignome Wintergreentalk02:55, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It also appears to be copied almost exactly from the site located at the included external link. I don't see any copyright statement on that site, but lacking a statement that the text is under a compatible license, I think your draft may be a copyright infringement, and might end up quickly deleted. Wikignome Wintergreentalk03:00, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments. Although I must confess I don't completely understand. I have created the article in my sandbox but moved it to a separate page to give it a title. I can move it to the Draft space it that is what I should do.
The article is supported by the references at the end all of which are published secondary sources that verify the content of the article. Can you please explain what the problem is. There is no article on Wikipedia for Adaptive Noise Cancelling that explains the concept or points to the history of its invention. The article is intended to address this deficiency. THE ISDE website I refer to is my website so I am not sure what needs to be done to alleviate any copyright concerns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaunitzj (talk • contribs) 04:29, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaunitzj If someone who owns or manages a website which they are citing as a source, they would need to place a permanent statement on that website (or on the relevant pages, at least) releasing that content under a CC-By-SA licence, permitting its re-use, even commercial. Only then may it be copied verbatim into Wikipedia. Nick Moyes (talk) 04:46, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see you mean User:Kaunitzj/Adaptive Noise Cancelling! I'm sorry, I thought you were talking about what you'd posted on your user page. Unfortunately, you still need to work on your referencing; you should back up everything in the article with inline citations, not just a few sentences here and there. Also, I see that the first three references cited are apparently your own work, which may be a problem - see WP:SELFCITE. I'm not sure if adaptive noise cancelling is notable as a concept. If you just want to submit it anyway, you should move it to a draft and then add {{subst:submit}} to the top.Wikignome Wintergreentalk04:47, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Alternatively, Kaunitzj, you can simply place {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} at the top of your user space draft and the reviewer will move it to draft space for you (see Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft). Or you could simply move the article directly to mainspace yourself, but I think you'd run into some problems - it may get moved back to draft or proposed for deletion. Submitting it to AfC is generally safer. Wikignome Wintergreentalk05:14, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaunitzj I advise against submitting your draft for review at this time. The following need addressing:
The lead is way too detailed. It should be a succinct summary in two paragraphs (See WP:LEAD).
The main content is way, way, way too long and far, far, far too technical.
WP:NOTABILITY needs to be based on sources independent of you, the author of these references. Show me how the ‘world at large’ has noticed and written about this concept. The only source ‘’not’’ written by you is a book mentioned in the last few sentences. Find three others that talk about it, and base the article on them, not on scientific papers or websites you’ve published.
Aim your language at a 16-17 yr high school student, not at someone who has already immersed themselves in a subject for a lifetime.
Your own userpage makes your WP:COI fairly evident, but is written in the 3rd person, not the first person. Please fix that, and make it a single, brief paragraph, not a detailed biography.
I would echo Nick Moyes' recommendation that you word it as though you were trying to retain the attention of a high school student who didn't have a particular interest driving them to your subject. A normal conversational tone that's neither too dry nor too boosterish. Right now, it reads as though you're writing for a patent examiner, which is its own, very specialized, tone, and not the one you want to strike here. But it's an inherently interesting subject, so I think an article is warranted, and it will be good reading when you're done. Bill Woodcock (talk) 14:13, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How to write in an encyclopedia tone?
Hi, my Wikipedia submission is rejected due to it being written in a promotional tone. To me, I'm just stating the facts that I found, and I couldn't see the promotional tone of it. It would be appreciated if someone could teach me how to write in a more appropriate tone. For example, is it because of the types of words I used?
Theonlysamantha, your draft starts Natural8.com is a skin of the popular GG "Good Game" Network. According to Poker Listings, Natural8 is one of Asia's highest traffic online poker sites that focuses mainly on the recreational player experience. Why say that the network is popular? What (if anything) does it mean to say that a site "focuses mainly on the recreational player experience"? (Is its main focus really this and not, say, that of making money for its proprietor(s)?) And is your subject a skin, or a site, or a room? (It is, or seems to be, described as each of the three.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:46, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Theonlysamantha. Your draft begins with Natural8.com is a skin of the popular GG "Good Game" Network. According to Poker Listings, Natural8 is one of Asia's highest traffic online poker sites that focuses mainly on the recreational player experience. You include an external link in the opening part of the body of your draft, which is incorrect. External links belong only in designated sections. You say that the "Good Game" network is "popular" but do not provide a reliable, independent source for that assertion. What makes you think that "Poker Listings" is a reliable source? It looks extremely promotional to me, and I am completely unconvinced that it is reliable. The types of words that you used are promotional and problematic, but even more so, the sources you use are unreliable and overtly promotional. The bottom line is that Wikipedia is not a venue for any type of promotional content. That is forbidden. Cullen328 (talk) 07:57, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Am completely disappointed in how wikipedia reviewers handle musical artists articles. Am starting to believe there is bias and wikipedia favours articles about politicians. For the last few years, I have created articles about politicians in Uganda but even with limited coverage and citations, the articles would be reviewed and not tagged. Problems always arise when I work on an article outside politics, its quickly tagged and the reviewers quickly note that the artists are not notable enough to be on wikipedia. This is soo disappointing, you have to keep in mind that artists especially from countries like Uganda and other 3rd world countries usually have fewer mentions in print media however notable they are, they only get mentions from smaller websites which a reviewer might not put into consideration as he reviews an article. Am generally disappointed with the way artists are treated on wikipedia, at one point I had considered to only write about politicians because for them, somehow reviewers dont over emphasize notability. I need advice, way forward and a look into my article Abaasa and how it can be improved. Bear in mind that I dont have any conflict of interest! It's just a general observation about how my different articles have been treated. Alvinategyeka (talk) 07:50, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Alvinategyeka Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I am sorry for your difficultly. The difference in editing about politicians and editing about musicians is the definition of notability. Most politicians that hold office are notable, per the definition of a notable politician, while not every musician is notable per the definition of a notable musician. These days it is not difficult for almost anyone to create music and post it online, or perform it in a local club(these are just examples), meaning that Wikipedia must be more selective. It is also true that the availability of reliable sources varies from country to country, resulting in a systemic bias. This is unavoidable, as article content, especially about living people, must be sourced to independent reliable sources that can be verified. I would suggest that you move the article into Draft space(or ask that someone do it for you) where you can work on it and take your time, looking for proper sources to summarize and demonstrate that the person meets the definition of a notable musician. 331dot (talk) 08:02, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Alvinategyeka, To extend 331dot's comment, let's do a breakdown here and see what's wrong with the article, hope it's fine.
The article has several capitalization problems. "kiremire", "prof.", "parents school school" (duplicate school?), "he" in "he later joined", "technology", "muyonjo", "Uganda music Awards", "club music video awards". Also some typing problems like "StudioAlbums", "O'level", "A'level". Songs should also be in quotes unitalicized. I can of course fix all this, but I'm pointing this since I assume you edit on mobile, and hopefully you can pay attention to these issues more. It's not a really big problem of course, I do this too a lot, but just thought me pointing it out might be helpful.
All sections are title case. So instead of "Music Career", it's "Music career"
"Early life and Education" paragraph 1, "StudioAlbums", and "Voice inside ft Patrobas" are not referenced.
Your list of references don't really determine notability. Sofar Sounds is a database; Spotify is a streaming service; Chano8 is a gossip website; New Vision has a server error in my place; BigEye is another gossip site; SongLyrics.com is a database; Spurzine is another gossip site; so is Ugandan Buzz and Northern Buzz. The other sources look good, but if the subject is actually notable then I'm sure you can get other sources replacing these ones that I pointed out. I would never cite gossip sources.
Web Links should be External links.
I know it may feel like I'm just being a critic here. And I know how harsh the WP environment may be. Trust me, I've been there. But if you really think the subject is notable, and you try look for more sources and try to improve the article just a little bit more, I think you'll get those tags erased. GeraldWL08:24, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Capitalization problems and the like are irrelevant to notability. Alvinategyeka, I agree with 331dot. And yes, there is a systemic bias. If Abaasa were, say, British, then it would be very likely that he'd eventually get a total of three or more articles in sources such as The Guardian and The Independent. If he did, and if these weren't mere interviews, they'd add up to satisfy the general criteria for notability (and failure to meet the criteria for notability as a musician wouldn't matter at all). I suppose that the population of Uganda would be about 45 million. If the nation lacks anything similar to theguardian.com this is a great pity (not just for Wikipedia-editing purposes, but for the population as a whole); however, it's not at all surprising. To get the coverage that would ensure [Wikipedia-style] notability, Abaasa might have to gain a following somewhere like Hamburg, Paris, or Milan. (You think that this is absurd? Yes, me too.) I'm delighted to see that you're passionate about human rights; it shouldn't be hard to continue editing in that area. -- Hoary (talk) 08:44, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My article was deleted without giving me the chance to figure out what the issue is...
We have written an article about a cooperative council established last year, but it was tagged as promotional, and I didnt have time to figure out which part of the content is promotional before it was deleted.
Can i have some help please? Not sure how to proceed. Wikiabudhabi (talk) 09:24, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikiabudhabi welcome to Tea House! Who is "we"? On your talk page User talk:Wikiabudhabi it says to contact the Admin who deleted it, if you have a good reason to restore it. That admin was User:Jimfbleak. You're free to recreate a new article, but it cannot be WP:PROMOTIONAL and needs to be reliable, SECONDARY sources. No primary sources or original research. Otherwise it will be deleted again. Please read WP:YFA. Creating your first article is one of the hardest things you can do, but if you take my advice to heart, you'll have much more success in the long term. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 09:42, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Wikiabudhabi. It might help you if you understand that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. --ColinFine (talk) 12:32, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
asking for a review
i have added the necessary sources to get this article approved, all of the sources now are reliable enough. Thanks
Draft:مطاعم ليمونه Abodiiyi (talk) 09:40, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Abodiiyi Welcome to Tea House! In its current state it will almost immediately be deleted. We do not do reviews here on Tea House, rather we provide specific answers to specific questions. The article name itself must be Anglicized, see WP:TRANSLITERATE and we need extensive reviews of the restaurant, beyond mere links proving it exists. Please read WP:YFA and edit for a few months before attempting to create an article. Your content is less likely to be marked for deletion then. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Spotanus Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You can't, only administrators can delete pages. There are a few methods of proposing the deletion of a page or article, see WP:DELETE. If you would like to tell us what page or article you want deleted, we can be more specific. 331dot (talk) 11:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Spotanus Welcome to Tea House! Paraphrasing User:Hoary, You don't mark it for deletion. Rather, you first read Wikipedia:Deletion policy to see if policy requires that it should be deleted. If it does, then you carefully follow the recipe for suggesting deletion that you'll find at {{AfD}} in 3 steps. Then if other users agree with you that deletion is appropriate, if the consensus is that yes it is, then the article is deleted. (If this sounds horribly complex, yes it is. But practice will speed up your part in the process).
Only admins can carry out the actual deletion on a technical level. If it's obvious spam/harmful, you can always submit it to WP:AIV. Which article are you trying to delete? Happy editing ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Wikipedia, whatever I edit on different pages, on the other day my edit is removed by the moderator, I only give genuine information related to the page then why my all edits got removed by other users, if my any of the edits remove or undo next time, I feel like I have no more be a participant in Wikipedia and quit Wikipedia, I am not a spam person, I am an original person and want to share only real information related to any topic, I hope you understand and help me in this problem. Hasi j (talk) 11:33, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Wikipedia, whatever I edit on different pages, on the other day my edit is removed by the moderator, I only give genuine information related to the page then why my all edits got removed by other users, if my any of the edits remove or undo next time, I feel like I have no more be a participant in Wikipedia and quit Wikipedia, I am not a spam person, I am an original person and want to share only real information related to any topic, I hope you understand and help me in this problem. Hasi j (talk) 11:36, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at your contributions, it seems to be because you're adding links to a website that you claim to write for - That's self promotion and it isn't allowed on Wikipedia. If you'd like to add information, you need to add to the prose of the article itself, while citing reliable sources. ThadeusOfNazerethTalk to Me!11:45, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're right that this is sort of strange looking, however, you shouldn't need to click on the subsection title to go there - If you use the table of contents, it will take you to that section. It may be better to add a sentence beneath each heading explaining what the mental disorder is, and have the link there instead (it'll look a bit cleaner, at least) ThadeusOfNazerethTalk to Me!11:46, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
HiNewton Euro. It generally not considered good practice per MOS:HEAD to add links to section headings for various reasons, and there's almost always a better way to provide the same links within the body of the corresponding section or as a WP:HATNOTE like Template:Main located directly below the section heading. This type of cleanup is usually non-contentious; so, if you want to be WP:BOLD and incorporate the links in some other way, then that's should be OK. If, however, someone reverts you, then you'd be better off following WP:BRD and engaging that person and others on the article talk page instead of running the risk of an edit war by reverting back to your preferred version. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:55, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
However, since you've already gone ahead and queried about this at Talk:List of mental disorders in film#Problem of this article, you might want to give that discussion some time to play out and see if anyone else has an opinion. If nobody responds in a reasonable amount of time (e.g. a week), then it should be OK to assume WP:SILENCE and be bold in making the change. If you try to do so at the moment, someone might accuse you of acting in bad faith by asking for input and then acting boldly all in one fell swoop without waiting to see if anyone replies. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:02, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Marchjuly: The problem is that most of the time no one responded to the questions & suggestions mentioned on article talk pages. I feel if I didn't fixed the problem instantly, I'll forget the article and it'll remain same.Newton Euro (talk) 12:37, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
@ThadeusOfNazereth: in response your suggestion, most of the folks use android phone, we have small place to click. Newton Euro (talk) 12:40, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
unfortunately the draft article Lingaro I submitted was deleted. The message I received:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
The question: is the problem only in the style, manner of writing that it looks like an advertisement? Or this means the topic is not notable - not enough trustful sources were linked to this article?
The company "is a technology solutions provider". Does this mean that it provides software? If not, what does it mean? It provides "a wide range of enterprise software development advisory and support services, particularly with respect to data analytics and direct-to-consumer solutions". Does this mean that it provides software for tracking web visitors and for retailing? If not, what does it mean? Et cetera. "Lingaro is driven by its Core Values": this is mere corporate puffery. As for sources, many are cited, but most are unfamiliar to me and sorry but I lack the energy to investigate them. However, I do notice two references to prnewswire.com. This should not be cited. -- Hoary (talk) 11:59, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How can I use a skin from another mediawiki on Wikipedia?
Hi, I am trying to customize my wikipedia to make it look nicer, and there is another skin over at another wiki called WikiFur that has a really nice skin called BentoFluid that I would really like to use for browsing this wiki. Is there any way that I can get the CSS from that skin and use it here? I know that you can use custom CSS for a wikipedia skin, but I'm not sure if it's as easy as copying and pasting BentoFluid's CSS From D0nk M3m3s (talk) 12:48, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@D0nk m3m3s Welcome to the Teahouse. I have to be careful how I phrase this, but you can get your hands on four skins that you can choose from. They'll be viewable in your personal 'Preferences' settings. Because every one needs to be tested whenever an update is made to the Wikimedia software we use here, we don't offer any more. Users with the right skills (i.e. not me) can make minor alterations via CSS, I believe. Please read Wikipedia:Skin to learn more about what can and can't be done. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:01, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Newton Euro Welcome to the Teahouse where our purpose is to guide editors who need help in editing Wikipedia. Unfortunately what we don't take on is directly fixing issues in the 6.2 million plus articles we have. If you do have concerns over accuracy or neutrality, you are best advised to raise this on the article's own Talk Page (in this case Talk:List of mental disorders in film, or attempt to fix the issues yourself if you feel confident to do so. Thank you for raising the issue, though. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:52, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
International Association of Project Managers template removal
Slywriter Ok, thanks. I have removed LinkedIn. Unfortunately, I'm not sure what you mean with the other one. Aren't the secondary sources enough? Tertiary sources in the PM field only seem to exist for giants like PMI or scrum alliance.GilbertPotter (talk) 16:57, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can't seem to find source referred to, so not sure what i meant. Doesn't change that the article relies too heavily on the subject for information and what other sources remain do not come across as reliable as they are sales sites selling testing materials for certification or passing mentions. So while the article may have secondary sources, none of them are what wikipedia would consider reliable. It's going to be tough to find but at the end of the day, Wikipedia isn't about what's true, it is about whats verifiable and covered by reliable sources. Slywriter (talk) 17:16, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
asking to review changes/remove flag
Hello, I cited (what I think are) good secondary sources on [[1]]. Could someone verify this and remove the flag? Or, if the sources are insufficient, can you explain why and what sources would be better? I tried reading through the help pages but they were kind of confusing. The sources I cited are interviews, but the interviewer makes value statements about the interviewee's work, so I'm citing the interviewer's questions more than the interviewee's answers (which I think would be classified as a primary source). Thank you :) Carmensandiegoedits (talk) 13:26, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) It's difficult to see how, Slywriter, (though I haven't looked at your sources). Questions are questions, not statements; and it's hard to regard statements about the interviewee's work, made during an interview, as truly independent. I guess it will depend partly on how searching the interview seems to be. --ColinFine (talk) 15:49, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaleeb18 Welcome to the Teahouse. You may not use an autobiography to support factual statements, which actually need to be written about by good quality secondary sources. That said, you may use it as a source for minor trivial information, though even things like birthdates and parents names can be prone to being lied about. So it's best to ignore them completely if you can. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:24, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
hello everyone,
thank you so much for inviting me here! i'm excited to hopefully be a member of the Wikipedia family.
Arabic is my first language, and i enjoy translating articles and i would consider myself pretty good at it. specifically English to Arabic. and i have a decent amount of experience since I've translated a good sum of articles in other websites. in addition, i am a big fan of BTS. and one thing that i have noticed is that there is a very little amount of content related to BTS here in Wikipedia in Arabic. which is unfortunate..
my question is, i really want to contribute in translating bts-related content that is already here in Wikipedia to Arabic, and maybe even add to it. where should I start? i already did some minor changes in existing articles like the Arabic page of Black Swan (BTS' song) but this article is not reviewed yet. and by the way, i have some drafts of articles about bts here in Wikipedia that i translated to Arabic myself but i did not publish any of it. how can i know if the article is good and can be published here as an interlanguage/interwiki link?
sorry for the long entry.. and thank you again! Evenwhenimsad (talk) 16:32, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for wanting to contribute, Evenwhenimsad. If you are mainly going to create articles in Arabic, you need to aware that each language-specific part of Wikipedia is independent and they will have their own standards and processes for accepting new material, whether translated or not. As I know no Arabic, I can't help but you should consult their equivalent of this Teahouse/Helpdesk to get your answer. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:40, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Evenwhenimsad Welcome to Tea House! We can only help you here with English Wikipedia, but once an article is created in other language Wikipedias, you can link it with Wikidata, see d:Help:Linking Wikipedia pages. For specific questions about Arabic Wikipedia please visit ar:ويكيبيديا:بوابة_المشاركة which is the Arabic Tea House equivalent to this one. Also note there is a closely related but distinct Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia. Keep in mind the content/sourcing/notability requirements may differ in each language edition of Wikipedia. Happy editing and translating! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 16:41, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do also note that some monitors (such as my monitor for my PC which is the same model as the image on computer monitor) have the ability to allow you to see the resolution of a monitor by just pressing a button to go into a monitor menu. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654520:29, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi.
...My name is Timothy McDonald. I’m a former professional football player. The picture on the Wikipedia site is of Guy Macintyer. Is there any way to put a correct picture of me on there? 68.119.129.133 (talk) 18:21, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Linked to the article in question above. A simple google search does make the IP's concern plausible. The person in the picture does not look like Tim from what I have googled and does look more like Guy McIntyre. --ARoseWolf18:34, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello IP and welcome to the Teahouse. Since we can neither confirm nor deny who you say you are I assumed good faith on your part and removed the image pending a discussion on the article talk page. As this article's subject is a BLP we should err on the side of caution. Thank you for bringing it to our attention. As you would be considered to have a significant COI in regards to this article I would suggest discussing any potential edits on the article talk page rather than you doing them yourself. Any image added to the article would have to come under a free license from copyright according to fair use guidelines. See WP:COI, our policy on managing conflicts of interest, and WP:C which pertains to images as well as text. I hope this helps and I am sure some of the other hosts could be more helpful than I. --ARoseWolf18:52, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strange - that file was originally named "Tim McDonald at 49ers Family Day 2009", but was renamed on December 2nd with the reasoning, "Criterion 3 (obvious error) · This is a picture of Guy McKinteyer not me Timothy McDonald". It was renamed to... "Tim McDonald". Maybe Jelican9 can explain, since they did the rename. Wikignome Wintergreentalk19:56, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi everyone. Usually, we only use a first and last name combination for photos without any crowds. If you think there is a mistake in the name, please request a correction. --Jelican9 (talk) 20:48, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Well, since the person who uploaded the file doesn't seem to be around any longer, there's not much more we can do, unless - I guess? - Timothy McDonald signs up for a Wikipedia/Wikimedia account, gets officially verified, and says "That is definitely not me!" Wikignome Wintergreentalk20:58, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
These user warning templates would be used when a user compromises their account with user scripts.
Template:Uw-compromise1 would display: Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute here, but you appear to have compromised your account with your [[User:Teahouse/common.{{{lang}}}|user {{{lang}}} page]]. Your edit to your user {{{lang}}} page has been reverted. Compromising an account is making it do things it does not have permission to do. Thank you!
Template:Uw-compromise2 would display: Please refrain from compromising your account. Your edit to [[User:Teahouse/common.{{{lang}}}|user {{{lang}}} page]] has been reverted. Thank you!
Template:Uw-compromise3 would display: Please stop. If you continue to compromise your account, you may be blocked from editing.
Template:Uw-compromise4 would display: You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you compromise your account.
Template:Uw-compromise4im would display: This is your only warning; if you compromise your account again, you will be blocked from editing without further notice.
The reason "may" is replaced with "will" is because a user may perform a very serious action that can result in removal of all groups with that right. Faster than Thunder (talk) 18:57, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Please help with citations for a new article.
Citation and new article help
I am trying to create a biography for a living person, Sir Edward Banayoti Sawiris.
This is my first Wikipedia article, and I am lost.
There is a suspect page about him that someone has published here as a revenge mechanism. The content is not accurate.
I have references and fact-checked everything. Can anyone, please help me upload it?
Thank you
J.S. Wolfe JSWolfeAuthor (talk) 19:40, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
i added the truth about bhatia rajputs on bhatia caste page but why it was discarded.
I backed it with relevant sources.
It feels bad, without any reason you hv discarded the truth Yodhheya56 (talk) 19:54, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a way to use the {{filepath}} magic word for other wikis? Like, if I need to link to the url of an image on a Fandom wiki from Wikipedia using filepath, is that possible? JediMasterMacaroni(Talk)20:51, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm creating a table for a filmmaker's awards and nominations, how do I merge cells that are formatted with the "won" transclusion? Gallagerm (talk) 21:04, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gallagerm: We don't do that. I don't know whether it's possible in VisualEditor. In the source editor it could be done by writing rowspan="2" {{Won}} in the first cell (donot insert a pipe) and removing the second cell (including the pipe before its content). But don't actually do it. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:43, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mybirdhouse: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're absolutely inclined to write an article (not just a "bio"; it should be have encyclopedic value), you should read Help:Your first article. A reviewer will give it the correct disambiguator in parentheses should it be accepted. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a way to suppress repeated requests for donations
Hi - I donate to Wikipedia every year but recently have noticed I am being "hounded" on every page I click on. I support Wikipedia and understand you need $ but is there a way to acknowledge your existing supporters via a cookie or something similar? Thanks 120.21.170.65 (talk) 04:06, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am trying to create the article for the company Nelo Group, as an unpaid contribution and freelancer.
But in my last review I have a comment that says
'Does the author of this draft have any sort of financial or other connection with the subject of this draft? Please read the conflict of interest policy and the paid editing policy and make any required disclosures.
You may ask for advice about conflict of interest at the Teahouse.
If this draft is resubmitted without addressing the question about conflict of interest, it may be Rejected or nominated for deletion.'
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, Lilbiz. What you need to do is answer the question - yes or no. If it's "no, I have no conflict of interest", then all you need to do is say so on your talk page, and things can proceed (see WP:COI for what counts as a conflict of interest). If it's "yes, I do have a conflict of interest," then you need to put a declaration on your user page - see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#howtodisclose - and things can proceed. The important thing is to carefully consider your situation with respect to our policies, and be honest. Wikignome Wintergreentalk04:38, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@PQR01 In the notability guidelines WP:NCOMPANY it says that being WP:LISTED in stock exchanges is not enough to establish notability. Please read the helpful comments left at the draft. In general at the Tea House, we are not interested in directly editing the 6 million existing articles or countless drafts proposed. Rather we focus on pointing you in the right direction in the sea of policies and guidelines. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And it gives you certain extra access privileges. For example, you have to be autoconfirmed to create new pages in article space, move pages, and edit semi-protected pages. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:32, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
how do you stop the constant funding calls?
for people
who are incredibly poor and can barely access a computer, these are really dismaying. has wikipedia considered looking into contacting wealthy individuals?
I hope no one is making phone calls to you soliciting donations for Wikipedia. If you are referring to the message banners that appear, Wikipedia has no way to know the financial status of users. If you want to suppress the messages, you may create a (free) account and turn them off in the account preferences. Wikipedia does not want you or anyone to donate if they are unable to. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I notice that there are two ways people tend to handle internal linking: sometimes by replacing the link with a complete word, and sometimes by breaking the word halfway through. For instance, if I were discussion Parisian people, I could either link to the article Paris like so: Parisians or like so: Parisians. I recognize that Wikipedia special-cases the latter, to make the difference invisible to readers, so this is more a question of editing style than anything else.
If you link plural to singular without 's' then I recommend [[woodcock]]s for source readability. Don't change existing uses to [[woodcock|woodcocks]]. Other than that, it doesn't matter much. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:49, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
grey rectangles
Ok, I'm not a new user. But this question is best asked in context:
what causes the grey rectangles on the lines above and below my response to the previous question?Maproom (talk) 11:48, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I recently reached out to the copyright owner of an image for permission to use the image in a Wikipedia article. They said they would be OK for it to be used in the Wikipedia article, but wanted to make sure that it didn't involve "irrevocably releasing the source material" as per suggested by Wikipedia in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission I would appreciate some advice as to what my next steps should be with regards to this image. Should I just upload it under 'fair use'? Does that mean that the original copyright owner can be sure that they retain the copyright to the image, and it isn't under a free license?
For specifics, the article I am working on is Raoul Whitfield's. I reached out to the copyright owner of the covers of the Black Mask, a magazine he wrote for. I asked for permission to use a cover of an issue that featured an illustration of his story. They said OK but under the aforementioned conditions. I would love to be able to use the image for the article, but of course I want to make sure I am going about it in the proper way.
Hello, Kting97. If the copyright owners are not willing to license the image under a licence such as CC-BY-SA, then the only way it can be used is under Fair Use, and their permission is irrelevant. But Wikipedia's version of Fair Use is very restrictive: if you wish to use an image that way, you must ensure that the image and its use meets all the criteria listed in the WP:non-free content criteria. It is possible that a magazine cover might be shown in that way. You will need to explain the justification in detail when you upload the image (to Wikipedia, and not to Commons, which does not accept non-free media). See image use policy. --ColinFine (talk) 14:25, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kting97 Welcome. First things first: Unless you want the illustration for an article on the subject of a photo, my understanding is that 'fair use' does not apply. Fair use images can be uploaded to English Wikipedia (not Wikimedia Commons), but I don't think fair use would apply to a picture of a magazine cover to which that person once submitted their work, unless the article was about that magazine. As ColinFine has just noted, context and purpose is everything.
Over at Wikimedia Commons (who have their own rules and far more knowledgeable admins wrt copyright), once an image is released under a Creative Commons licence, that release licence is indeed irrevocable. However, the author still retains the rights of that image, and thus there is an obligation on anyone using it in the future to credit the creator, even if they use it commercially. One way round anyone's fears of losing control of a high quality image is for them only to release a small, low resolution version (72dpi) for display on a monitor, but unsuitable for publication in a printed work. This is something that so few people seem to appreciate, and would often suffice to allay their fears of losing control of the main image.
My understanding is also that the copyright owner cannot email you that image with an "it's OK' for you to upload it" note for you. They would need to email it in themselves to our image volunteer teams (called OTRS) who then check it has come from a legitimate source, suitably licenced (including for commercial re-use) and they'd do the uploading for them. (Or you upload the image, get them to make an OTRS declaration, and leave a note on the uploaded image that an OTRS submission has been made)
The folks over at Wikimedia Commons seems to like hiding the details of this process away, so that nobody can understand it at a glance - or even find it in their Help Center page- so every time it takes me ages to find the guidance. Try https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Email_templates as the starting point for granting CC-BY licencing permissions. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 14:37, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you ColinFine for the speedy reply and for the links to the appropriate Wikipedia page, will read through those links and hopefully the image with my written explanation falls under Wiki's guidelines (and, more importantly, the law itself) for fair use. All the best, Kting97 (talk) 14:39, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Nick Moyes for replying to my question! The cover of the issue I specifically asked them about is an illustration of the story he wrote. I thought it may work similar to the cover of a novel. It was actually novelized but I also figured it might be easier to reach out to the copyright owner of the now-defunct magazine versus the publisher of the book (Knopf Doubleday). His works don't have separate Wikipedia pages, and would probably not fulfill the notability requirement for stand-alones, so I thought illustrating at least one of his works through an image in the article would be appropriate. Noted on the points about Wikimedia Commons and the image quality. I don't know if I would be able to convince them to upload the image themselves and explain the nuance of the copyright... my initial e-mail was based on one of the templates, which is how their questions about copyright and the irrevocable release of the source material came up, so I will try my best with a fair use upload with a low resolution image. All the best, Kting97 (talk) 14:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia's Donation
Wikipedia's Donations
Why won't you donate to wikipedia? I know that I haven't even donated myself, but i'm only 13 what can i do? Nothing, and thats where you come in, if you donate to wikipedia then they can keep giving us knoledge. They have fed us with a bunch of knoledge, and what have we done? Nothing. Notice the loop? The word Nothing has been said twice! Twice to many. If you donate your feeding them energy to help support us!
-HL 74.196.165.160 (talk) 14:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse. You are going to want to create an account, go into your preferences, navigate to the Banners tab, and uncheck Fundraising. Wikimedia Foundation does not track the identity of IP addresses, so it doesn't know your age, income level or whether you donated in the past. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Galacticitis No worries. Here's a first tip for you: If you reply via the 'reply' link at the end of someone's post, your own reply will be automatically indented and signed for you, which makes life quite easy. But if you reply by clicking 'edit source', it'd then help if you'd force your reply to be indented by place a colon (or one extra colon than the last reply contained) at the very start of your reply. This forces the text to indent one level, then simply sign your post with the four tildes (~~~~) as usual, which adds your name and timestamp. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:33, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Shantavira @Galacticitis My apologies to you both. I had so forgotten I'd set this as an optional preference, that I'd totally not appreciated it wasn't something automatically available to everyone. I suspect it will be in time. I must remember these things when I'm giving newcomer tips that turn out to be useless (it's for that reason I maintain a separate account purely for demonstrating Wikipedia to others, as it keeps all the default settings seen by a new user. I probably need to use it a bit more to remind myself what everyone else actually sees!) Sorry again, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:20, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Geanard My own gut reaction is to suggest that a hyphen (or equivalent dash) helps show that the creator of the table wasn't just forgetful, but knew the contents were not known. When editing tables with WP:Source Editor, it also makes it easier to search (Ctrl-F) for empty cells. I haven't gone off and checked WP:MOS for you - maybe someone else will - but I'd be quite OK to see a dash in place of unknown data at this moment in time, and assuming there isn't some prior established consensus on this issue. Hope this 'one man's view' is of some help. Either way, you won't have committed some heinous editing sin. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:45, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
New productions not reflected on WP Netflix templates
Hi Teahouse,
The templates of "Netflix original series and films" and "Netflix original ended programming" don't reflect newer films/movies and series shown on Netflix; an example being Barbie films from 2020 onwards. I've been a regular visitor on those templates and it's currently making me mad!! Please Help/Advise!!! Polygork (talk) 16:09, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Have you tried being bold about editing? If you feel that there's something that needs to be done, go for it. It doesn't matter what you do, so long as you contribute to the wiki in some way. Life is too short to be checking over your Wikipedia edit, just do it (without being reckless, of course.) Explodicator7331 (talk) 16:42, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
removing an archived post
Can an archived post that was declined on [2] be removed, as the post is listed twice and the edit request was granted on the second request? The grammmar was in fact incorrect and needed to be changed. I do not know why basically the same post is needed and was hoping there are extenuating circumstances. 73.167.238.120 (talk) 16:22, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That is an incredibly long archive. Please provide a link to the individual sections within it. My gut reaction is to leave archived posts there, even if duplicated, as going back to edit minor errors makes archives look like they're OK to fiddle with. Perhaps the only rationale, normally, would be to remove copyright infringements that are subsequently unearthed after the posts are archived. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:36, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know how to provide a link to the individual sections. The heading is Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2020, and as you can see, the heading and edit request show up twice. I did mean to add to the section already created and did not intend to create a new section. Two of the same sections seem to be taking up space, and the edit was indeed changed. Any advice you have is appreciated. 73.167.238.120 (talk) 17:08, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the desire to tidy things, IP, but archives should not be modified without a very good reason, such as the one outlined by Nick above. Tidying is not generally considered a good enough reason. Please do continue tidying other areas of Wikipedia, though! Wikignome Wintergreentalk19:02, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also, how you link to a section is by adding a # (hashtag/pound symbol) and then the name of the section exactly (special formatting and article links should be omitted though). For example, if I were to link to this section I would type [[WP:TEA#removing an archived post]] (I use WP:TEA as it's the shortcut for the teahouse and easier than writing out Wikipedia:Teahouse) ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654519:06, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Warfter Well, why not? Welcome, anyway, to the Teahouse - a place where we help new users with editing problems they encounter on Wikipedia. Do you have a question you need help with? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Will redirect cause a problem?
I am currently researching a new article on the 19th century children's magazine The Little Corporal. I checked Wikipedia to see if there is already an article with this name, and discovered Little Corporal redirects to the Napoleon article. If I name my article The Little Corporal will that be redirected to Napoleon? Would it be best to add (magazine) to my title, to avoid redirects? Karenthewriter (talk) 17:13, 8 December 2021 (UTC) Karenthewriter (talk) 17:13, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Karenthewriter Welcome to Tea House! Currently The Little Corporal is a red link, so whatever you do with it, it will not redirect to Napoleon. This is a good example to add a WP:hatnote on either articles, once they're both live with a template like {{See also}}. If you have more specific questions about redirects, you're welcome to contact me on my talk page or ask here again. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you 🦝 Shushugah. Since many public libraries are doing away with printed reference books (a librarian told me to go online for information) providing accurate articles on classic children's magazines is my main good deed Wikipedia project. Until I started researching The Little Corporal I had no idea that Napoleon Bonaparte had a nickname that would cause me trouble. Karenthewriter (talk) 19:06, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I was thinking of creating an article on Avyay ―Hindi language topic. I had a doubt on whether it would be accepted here that we create articles on another language's grammatical topics (the topics must be notable to the native language Wikipedia and can be translated) here on english Wikipedia. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs)17:52, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Lightbluerain Welcome to Tea House! There's no requirement for anything published on English Wikipedia to be published elsewhere. What are two-three best sources you have on Avyay to establish its notability? Otherwise, editing an existing article like Hindi (language) might be easier. You can ask for feedback at WP:WikiProject India too. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:33, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! So while browsing through recent changes, occasionally I will come upon a user who is basically on their last warning making an edit that is vandalism or unconstructive and I revert it, report them, and they get blocked, and then inappropriately use their talk page. Is there any specific place I should go to request a user's talk page access to be revoked? I don't think WP:AIV would be an appropriate place since the bot there simply removes reports if the user is already blocked. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654519:17, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Blaze The Wolf That's good advice @RudolfRed has given. I couldn't easily see which IP it was that you had reported and had then editied their talk page after being blocked, but any serious misuse of a talk page is quite likely to result in any administrator removing TPA if they see it. Good question. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
About a year ago, whenever I made a change to an article concerning my daughter, and the circumstances relating to her death, it kept being removed. When I drew this to your attention via Teahouse, you looked into this, and stopped it. I am about to arrange a major edit based on an academic paper published in a well-respected law journal. I expect that this will also be taken down by the same person or someone sympathetic to him. How can I stop this? Also, my understanding is that whenever you cite a reference, it must be an independent source and not a blog website where an individual is giving his views or interpretations. This article has many references to a particular blog website, which I propose to have removed. Where there are independent sources that deal with the point being made by the blog website, I intend to use them instead. I get the distinct impression that references to the blog website are being used as a way of promoting the blog website. Is it ok for me to do this? Obviously, if there are any issues with my alterations where they do not conform to Wikipedia's rules, I am happy to amend accordingly. RobinEllie (talk) 20:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello RobinEllie and welcome back to the Teahouse. I've provided links to the page in question and your previous post here. This is the first time you've revealed that you have a connection to the subject of the article; that means you have a conflict of interest and should not be editing the article directly except to make small, uncontroversial changes. I've placed more info on your talk page. You can post concerns and requested edits on the talk page of the article (Talk:Death of Eleanor de Freitas). I'm short on time today, so perhaps someone else can address your other questions. Wikignome Wintergreentalk22:01, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm back to ramble on a bit more. As far as protecting the article against "mischievous edits", RobinEllie, there are a number of options. If you see some suspicous editing, it's probably best you don't try removing it yourself (unless it's really outright, obvious vandalism), since you have a conflict of interest. You can:
A) Post about it on the talk page, perhaps pinging McPhail, since they created the article and seem to have an interest in maintaining it; they're also quite active and experienced, which is good. See here for what "pinging" is and how to do it: Help:Notifications.
B) Holler for help here on the Teahouse, but that's not the ideal solution, since this is a place to answer newcomers' questions and we don't want it cluttered up with content disputes or requests for admin action.
C) Go to WP:ANI if the disruption is persistent, but the process of reporting things there is... not simple.
D) Post on the page of a friendly, active editor you know and ask for their help.
Your choice; I'd recommend option A to start out with. As for the blog, that's something you should bring up on the talk page. Blogs are generally iffy but occasionally usable. McPhail might be able to help sort out whether this is a valid use (or replace it with different, better sources, since you say you can provide them). Wikignome Wintergreentalk23:25, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Block
I'm not sure if this is the correct place for me to post this, so if it isn't please redirect me. I was banned from making an account until 6th of June 2022 and I don't know why, since I haven't done anything wrong. The last thing I did was make a page in the greek version of Wikipedia, which was about companies. Could I get unbanned? I do not know what the ban is about, nor the previous ones. I haven't even visited these pages in the past. This is the information the sign-up site shows:
Your username or IP address is blocked from doing this. You may still be able to do other things on this site, such as editing certain pages. You can view the full block details at account contributions.
Start of block: 01:51, 6 December 2021
Expiration of block: 01:51, 6 June 2022
Intended blockee: 2A02:587:0:0:0:0:0:0/32
Block ID #12237660
If you believe you are seeing this message in error, you may submit an appeal on the administrators' noticeboard, on your talk page, or by UTRS.
Hello IP! Welcome to Tea House! The instructions posted were good. You can either post an appeal at WP:AN if the block is mistaken or alternatively register an account, so that you can edit without restriction. See WP:REGISTER. Hopefully you can resume back to editing ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 22:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Shushugah: Registering an account isn't possible from an IP address that is blocked from doing so. Otherwise, if it's an editing block, a registered account doesn't bypass an IP address range block. You need the "IP block exempt" user right to bypass the block, and that user right is generally given only to trusted established accounts, not new accounts with no history. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I accidentally created this article in the mainspace. A kind person turned it into a draft. But it doesn't have the AfC template needed for when I get to submitting it. Can anyone add the correct AfC template for me please? CT55555 (talk) 22:12, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@CT55555: Done. For future reference, the template is Template:AfC submission, and you can read about the template's documentation there. There's a helpful shortcut to insert an un-submitted banner, which is {{subst:AfC draft|username}} (replace "username" with whoever created the draft). ◢ Ganbaruby! (talk) 22:30, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Chess puzzle and chess problem seem to be the same thing, despite what chess puzzle says. So maybe merge chess puzzle into chess problem?
But chess puzzle is more often used than chess problem, so maybe move chess problem into chess puzzle (chess puzzle doesn't have much information)?
It seems quite silly to put both a merge proposal and a move proposal sign, but if I do nothing it'll probably take a long time before someone notices (last talk page post was 15 months ago). What should I do? AltoStev (talk) 00:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Whether an organization is for-profit or not-for-profit is irrelevant. All organizations need to meet the criteria: significant coverage in multiple reliable sources (of at least regional scope) that are independent of the organization. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:29, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Whitewashing. Sockpuppetry?
It appears that certain users are continually removing anything that could be construed as negative. For example the adware and dark pattern "claims" which are actually facts that are backed up by more than one citation and reference. Anyone care to elaborate? What usually happens when certain users repeatedly try to whitewash an article? While there is no direct evidence of sockpuppetry yet, these users appear to be associated with the article's subjectmatter in some way. The article in question is MacUpdate. Bigmaaac (talk)
@Bigmaaac: I think you need to back off. The edits you are reverting are grounded in Wikipedia policy. Removing citations to blogs is OK. Removing tangential negative information is OK. Removing statements that misrepresent the cited source is OK. If you want to include that stuff, see WP:BURDEN; the burden is on you to gain consensus to include it. The material removed looked pretty questionable to me. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:37, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Anachronist: The things you are saying may be rooted in wiki policies but IMHO the material removed did not fall into those categories; that said I would assume removing statements what misrepresent a subject in a *postive* way is ok too? By that I mean on Wikipedia in general, not just macupdate or whatever. As in material that is borderline marketing copy lifted from a press release? There seems to be a bit of that floating around the site.
@Bigmaaac: You should certainly remove PR puffery from articles on-sight. However, when removing or adding content, please do not mark your edits as "minor" (as you did here for instance) - "minor" edits are corrections of spelling, table formatting etc. which do not change the information a reader would acquire by reading the article.
Hi , I am totally new to wikipedia , my head has tasked me to post our company's profile to wikipedia and i would like what are the steps to post and do i need to have prior knowledge on coding as i am not trained in this area. Zolandani (talk) 01:36, 9 December 2021 (UTC) Zolandani (talk) 01:36, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:PAID and comply with it. You entered into a legally binding obligation to disclose your paid editing status when you created an account here.
Is your company notable? That is, does it meet the requirements in WP:CORP? If not, then it doesn't merit an article here. See Wikipedia:Golden rule for a good overview.
If you have read, understood, and complied with all of the above and still believe you want to write an article, go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation and follow the instructions to write a draft article and submit it for review. Absolutely do not attempt to publish the article yourself; it will likely be deleted and your account might be blocked. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:41, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Zolandani: And to all this, one might add: If an article about your boss's company does one day pass muster to appear in Wikipedia, it will NOT be in your boss's control. Anybody can change it, and if the changes are properly sourced, they will appear--whether your boss happens to like them or not. Uporządnicki (talk) 01:52, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Zolandani: if would be helpful to read Your first article and Citing sources. When you write your draft you will need to have independent references sources. Don't use information from the company website, or documents written by anyone connected to the company, for those references would be seen as being biased in favor of what you are writing about. Have there been newspaper and magazine articles written about the company? Not articles that just mention the company in passing, but ones that primary tell about what the company does. You'll need at least three good references. Keep a neutral tone when writing (don't make it sound as though you are trying to promote the business) and don't add anything that can't be referenced.
You don't need to know coding, for the above listed how-to articles will explain what you need to know, but at first it is rather complicated. It would be very beneficial for you to first do some editing of published articles to learn just how Wikipedia "works." Your employer assigned you a difficult task, and I hope he or she will be understanding if your article is reviewed and declined. Many newcomers attempt articles when they are not prepared to do so, and their hours of work can't prove that their subject is notable enough to warrant an article on Wikipedia. Best wishes on your project. Karenthewriter (talk) 03:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if this is the right place to ask about this, but I'm not able to add the Seven ages unsure and WikiProjectAutomobiles infobox on my user page. Can someone help? Galacticitis (talk) 03:19, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Galacticitis I was able to learn that posting User WikiProject Automobiles in double brackets {{}} to your user page will add you as a member of the project. I wasn't able to find a project called Seven ages. I hope this helps. Karenthewriter (talk) 04:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nine dimensional space was commonly used by physicists in models exploring superstring theory - it was posited that 6 imperceptible spatial dimensions exist in addition to the standard 3 dimensions of length, width, and depth. Later, an extra spatial dimension was added once the concept of membranes was introduced and study of superstrings evolved to M-theory. To both the 9 spatial dimensions of superstring theory and the 10 spatial dimensions of m-theory, the temporal dimension of time was added requiring equations that handled 10 dimensional geometry for superstrings and 11 dimensional geometry for m-theory.[1]
@Spotanus: If you're looking for things that you might want to write about have a look at WP:Requested Articles. There are also a load of WP:Wikiprojects dedicated to specific topics, e.g. WP:Women in red is dedicated to increasing our coverage of women. I would advise that you avoid biographies of living people and medical articles when getting started, as both those topics have special sets of sourcing requirements. 192.76.8.80 (talk) 18:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Editing request
Hi there,
I have requested for some additional information to be added to the article Ezhava with proper citation. Nobody is updating it. Who is responsible for this addition?
Hello IP, I don't see an edit request on your contributions page, but I do see an edit request at Talk:EzhavabyMalayalee0121. If you are the owner of the account, please remember to log in. To answer your question about "who is responsible", the answer is nobody. Everyone here are volunteers (like you) that have certain interests and topics that they are comfortable editing, and not everyone may feel knowledgeable enough in that subject to edit about it. ◢ Ganbaruby! (talk) 06:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My article is at the two month threshold to be reviewed.
Hello, fellow Wikipedians!
As the title says, my article has been waiting to be reviewed for 2 months now. Is there any way to expedite the process? I have been very much patient with my efforts. I understand Teahouse is not for reviewers, but can anyone give me a timeframe on how long I could be waiting since it has already been 2 months. The article did get declined once 2 months ago, but has since been fixed to the best of my knowledge. Godsentme1 (talk) 06:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary I just previously made an edit about 2 hours ago and removed that by a mistake. Can you assist on reverting it back, thanks for the catch appreciate it highly.Godsentme1 (talk) 07:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary I fixed that on my own, however, one thing I noticed about Wikipedia is you guys only respond to the negative. Still, my question has not been answered about how long can I be waiting for a review since it has been 2 months. Instead of answering the question, you go look to see what error you can find lol. I can assure you that was a mistake when I made an edit previously and it's fixed now the box is back never intentionally removed it. Now, how about actually answering the question I originally asked? Or I can't get an answer about that because it's not negative?Godsentme1 (talk) 07:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Godsentme1, thank you for readding it. The simple answer is, I don't know. And nobody else does, either. Somebody is going to regard themselves as qualified to evaluate it, and will then evaluate it. I don't, so I won't. You seem somewhat annoyed: if you are, then since God sent you, you might ask Her to smite me. (I believe that smiting is Her thing.) Good luck! -- Hoary (talk) 08:05, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also, being extremely hostile to AfC reviewers, badgering and attacking them and making baseless accusations, is a) the exact opposite of "very much patient", b) not something that will help expedite a review, and c) likely to get you blocked if you should post anything like that again. Being patronising is not a blockable offence, but it certainly doesn't make it more likely that people will review the draft you created. --bonadeacontributionstalk08:13, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary I was not annoyed. I apologize if it came off that way. Not here to make enemies thanks for your help in any way appreciate you! thanks and bonadea I was not rude to Hoary did not use foul language I asked a simple question. I did not attack him as well just asked a simple question again not here to make enemies so thank you for the information given.Godsentme1 (talk) 19:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Godsentme1: Well, your response to Hoary was not exactly polite, but the unveiled hostility and the patronising tone I mentioned was on the user talk page of the AfC reviewer – I linked to it in my post. Rudeness does not equal foul language, however, and you should be aware that you are skating on thin ice below, where you are again badgering people, making unfounded claims, and repeating yourself over and over. You have submitted the draft for review. Somebody will review it today or this week or next week or in a month's time or at some later point in time. The Teahouse is not the venue for that discussion, and you have two constructive choices if your aim is to improve Wikipedia: keep improving the draft, or forget about that draft and edit other articles. --bonadeacontributionstalk20:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Godsentme1: I suspect one of the issues here is that there are lots of references but many that are not very useful under the WP:GNG rules. So here’s a trick to expedite the review: find the best three sources for the article and say which you think they are (either below the submission comments, or on the talk page of the article). (Do not remove other references, just say which three are most likely to establish notability.)
As the link explains, that makes it easy for the reviewer to check notability (as they only have to check three sources instead of 28). The flip side, of course, is that if those sources are found insufficient, you do not get to propose three more and the draft is toast. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact)14:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And, —Godsentme1, there is no "two month threshold": that is an estimate, based on the number of drafts awaiting review. As others have explained, the actual time depends on whether and when a reviewer chooses to pick up a particular draft. --ColinFine (talk) 16:33, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tigraan Ok I hear you about the 3 references but please tell me how can these criteria be ignored https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles The subject meets criteria one for musicians by having being published in several magazine articles not to mention the subject has also recently appeared on the Billboard charts. My issue now is why are we making this a problem when the subject meets the criteria for notability under those rules. How can we disregard that is what I'm trying to ask? I'm not being rude or hostile I'm addressing my point. My thing is yes there is 28 references but why are we making this that they have to be narrowed down to the top 3. Again please take a look at Wikipedia guidelines for notability here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles I never made these terms Wikipedia put these in place. I think we can't ignore these don't you agree?Godsentme1 (talk) 19:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tigraan Written from Wikipedia's criteria it says: Under criteria 1 the subject is notable already under these Wikipedia guidelines. There is no need for the draft to be toast because we can't ignore this. How can we ignore these criteria terms set by Wikipedia? Again take a look below what I pasted from Wikipedia "Has been the subject of multiple nontrivial published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published and are independent of the musician or ensembles. Wikipedia wrote these terms into place so my question now is how do we overlook these. Again I'm not being hostile or rude in any manner I'm proving my point now. Also again the subject has recently appeared on the Billboard charts at position 9 of 25. I would like for a serious reviewer to view my claims and see that the draft gets published seeing that the subject meets the criteria for notability. I think we all can come together and agree on this and publish it today. I've shown and spoken my case about how is the subject notable and I have high valid points.Godsentme1 (talk) 19:38, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria.
1) Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.[note 1]
This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries[note 2] except for the following:
Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.[note 3]
Works consisting merely of trivial coverage, such as articles that simply report performance dates, release information or track listings, or the publications of contact and booking details in directories.
Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases.
Also Tigraan how I believe it should be is that a reviewer should review all the references because we all know the subject is notable. If he was not then I do not believe you would be even saying to narrow it down to three. You would have just said the subject is not notable. Instead of us playing a game of Russian roulette where you want to have me place 3 references on the talk page then if I don't pick the right ones then the draft is toast? All links should be looked at. Again we all know that the subject is notable so why play Russian roulette to get the draft taken down purposely? It does not make any sense why was that even mentioned when again the subject is notable per "Wikipedia's" guidelines. I'm not attacking or being rude in any way just simply explaining my point. The draft should be published as it highly meets the criteria https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles
And I believe you know that it meets the criteria. So instead of being so hard on me please just take the time to look at my points they are very valid.Godsentme1 (talk) 19:56, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Wikipedian my Article declined due to Non-notable!!
First, Shakeelahmedseo, decide if there are any better sources. If there aren't, you won't get anywhere, so just stop. If there are, read up on how to add references. (You've added them in the wrong place.) Move the references. Then add more and better references. -- Hoary (talk) 06:49, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Citing Wikipedia to Help Clarify Mathematical Convention Confusion and Demonstrate Internal Consistency
Hello, I am working on a new draft article at Draft:Gallery_of_Atomic_Orbitals. In the article I use a mathematical symbol for a Laguerre polynomial which stand for a certain function which can be defined in a number of different ways depending on the convention choices chosen by a particular author. These different convention choice have led to lots of confusion and edit wars on some other pages on topics related to my new draft article. To curtail this confusion I have explicitly called out the possibility of different convention choices on my page and stated which convention I am using along with references to some textbooks and peer-reviewed articles which use the same convention. In addition, to establish even more consistency with other important references, I have cited some important places that readers will likely encounter the convention I have chosen before they find themselves digging in old textbooks. One of these places is the Laguerre polynomials Wikipedia page. I have gotten the feedback on my page that I should not cite Wikipedia because it is user generated. Does this advice apply in my case even though I am citing Wikipedia to establish internal consistency on a matter of convention?
@Twistar48: Don't worry about cross-page standardization. As long as you choose a convention that is used in sources and stay consistent, you shouldn't run into any problems. If you really want to, use {{efn}} and {{notelist}} and mention other notation in notes. You may also want to go to the talk pages of relevant WikiProjects, such as WikiProject Physics, to ask if there's a convention that editors in that field have agreed on. On a separate note, I don't know if your draft is notable enough apart from the atomic orbital article to have a standalone article. Have you considered improving that article instead? ◢ Ganbaruby! (talk) 08:22, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ganbaruby: Thanks very much for your response. I could see changing the convention discussion to be a note and removing the wikipedia citation, leaving it instead as a link perhaps. I will look into this. Regarding notability of the article: Yes, I know if it is very similar to atomic orbital article. I see my article as being complementary to that one, similar to Spherical harmonics and Table of spherical harmonics. The table or gallery page is strictly for showing a large number of examples of a topic (equation, orbital) on a separate page so as not to not clutter the main page with too many figures. Meanwhile, the main page can focus on textual exposition about the topic. Thanks also for the WikiProject Physics talk page link, I can ask about this idea there. Twistar48 (talk) 08:41, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"reliable sources" for topics which do not get mainstream coverage
What would be considered a "reliable source" for topics which don't really get mainstream coverage of any sort? I'm in particular asking about game console homebrew - I feel like I could add to this topic on several pages, but I cannot figure out if I'd be allowed to - most of the sources that are treated as "reliable" in the community exist on various wikis or random tweets from people who work on this stuff. Radostin04 (talk) 07:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the following process: (i) Look for articles on similar subjects. (ii) Look near the top of the talk pages of those articles for the templates of "WikiProjects". (iii) Choose the single WikiProject that (a) is related and (b) has a talk page that seems lively. (Unfortunately, most WikiProjects are more or less moribund.) (iv) On that talk page, ask about "reliable sources" for your proposed subject. Good luck! -- Hoary (talk) 08:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Radostin04: Fortunately, WP:VG is one of the more active WikiProjects. It has a collection of reliable sources at WP:VG/RS and even a customized Google search that allows you to search through those sources. I would suggest you start seeing if you can find anything in those sources already considered reliable. If not, you can ask at WT:VG/RS about specific sources you wish to use. Regards SoWhy11:19, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@AnuragHitech: You are wasting the time of all those volunteers here who try to assist in building this encyclopaedia. You have deleted two "declines" from your draft, by KylieTastic on 2 December and by CNMall41 on 7 December, leaving just the latest decline from Eagleash on 8 Decemeber. The draft itself purports to be a biography of a living person (you?) but fails completely to demonstrate that this person is one of the few of the seven billion+ people on this planet who are noteworthy enough to merit an article here. Use social media, if you wish, to promote Anurag Chrimar, not Wikipedia. The one substandard reference you cite for Chrimar is based on an interview of him in a newspaper article that isn't even about him, so not independent of him and not significant coverage. Give up! Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What are the notability criteria of apartments & buildings? Is there any such page on Wikipedia which is not historical architecture just a building where people live? Behind the moors (talk) 10:24, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, could anybody give input on the Draft:Vishwananda. It was previously submitted for immediate deletion. I didn't quite understand that, as the article was certainly not in any way a kind of promotion of the subject, it was instead rather critical. But I rewrote it, really paying attention to the sources, to have more reliable secondary sources. Vishwananda is quite well known in Germany, but he also has Ashrams in the UK and USA. He is very popular in eastern European countries, like Poland or Czech Republic. So I guess notability is given. He even just bought a new Ashram in Germany, which owns it's own lake! There was an article about him in the Times of India, but also in many German speaking newspapers or TV stations. Any input from your side is appreciated. Hanumandas (talk) 11:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've had a look at some of the sources cited – not all, because I'm somehow unable to access most of the German-language ones. The numbers below refer to the references cited a few minutes before I posted this.
1 is, like Wikipedia itself, not a reliable source.
3 is based on what the subject said, so not independent.
Rastinition and 头号发吹, I think you got off to a wrong start but otherwise it looks like a fairly standard content dispute. I would encourage you to discuss on the talk page of the article.
头号发吹, please take a moment to review WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF - please refrain from accusing others of "sabotage" just because they disagree with what should be written in an article.
Rastinition, your approach of wholesale reversion and immediately escalating Twinkle templates was unnecessarily confrontational. In particular, instead of this revert, you should have only removed the Instagram link (the subject of the article is known for Youtube, so having a Youtube link to the channel is OK). You should not have made the accusation of spamming just based on an edit filter, when manual inspection reveals the actual edits to be well-intentioned. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact)14:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply.If he explained that at the beginning, we could do better.I think our problem is invalid communication, so I came to the teahouse.I think the communication is more effective than before.Because I only follow Youtube now, Youtube’s problem is solved. I don’t have the motivation to edit in Chen Yifa. In addition to what you mentioned above, is there anything else I haven't noticed? Rastinition (talk) 14:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
头号发吹：I'm sorry I called your strange edit "sabotage". You're right about instagram/Youtube/forum as references. Those info is removed already. You may want to write your reason of editing clearly without using some random confusing abbreviation.
By the way, my ID has nothing to do with Chen Yifa, although I watched her live stream often. This doesn't violate WP:COI. Stop making nonsense speculation/accusation with zero evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 头号发吹 (talk • contribs) 13:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What to do about permanently dead link?
Hey, folks. I recenetly came across the article for Bam Thwok and noticed that it had some dead links, so I decided to find archives of them, but one seems to have been excluded from archive.org, and no other archives of it seem to exist. Seeing as a lot of the information in the article is attributed to it (including direct quotes), what should be done here? On a related note, should the article have the "featured article" tag if it can't be verified? ArcticSeeress (talk) 11:55, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
HiArcticSeeress. With respect to dead links, please take a look at WP:DEADREF and WP:ELDEAD because there are different ways for dealing with them depending upon whether the link is question is for a citation or for an external link. Generally, dead links that are citation are removed just because they're dead because there still may be some value as a source for keeping them as is. For external links, the link loses it's value fairly quickly once it becomes dead and thus replacement or removal is more often done than in the case of citations. As for question about WP:FAs, only those articles which have gone through the FA process should be marked as such; generally, you should be able to find out whether an article is an FA by checking the top of its talk page because there's usually a banner and other information about such things. Just for reference, the current version of an article might've be a bit different from the one that was assessed when the article was undergoing its FA review. For this reason, sometimes an article is re-assessed and downgraded if the change has been for the worse. Bam Thwok is still currently listed as an FA, but whether it still meets the criteria for an FA is probably something you should discuss at WP:FAR if you have concerns about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:35, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Re. the FA process, Bam Thwok was made a Featured article in 2007 and doesn't seem to have been reassessed since; the process has become a lot stricter since then so it is quite possible that it would not be considered up to today's standards – I see a {{citation needed}} tag on it, for instance, which would need to be addressed.
Re. fixing dead links, I was able to find a source to replace the dead Aversion link in one case (here) – editors more familiar with the subject matter might be more able to help in the other cases. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 12:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the replies, both of you! I'll see if I can I can find any other sources to to replace the dead one. Seeing as the dead reference had been brought up before on the talk page, maybe I'll see about bringing it up for review. ArcticSeeress (talk) 15:16, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia as a one Whole System.... How it works and how to study about it.
You might like to start with the in-house magazine WP:Signpost, which has sections on published academic studies on Wikipedia. You could also look on Google Scholar or similar for relevant material. Note that this Teahouse is really intended for new editors who have questions about how to edit Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is it permitted to use template infobox: spy and template infobox: philosopher for the same person? (removing some headings so that the infobox: spy simply describes their espionage career)
Hello, I am hoping I might find an editor or editors who are willing to do an independent review of my article on Byron Adams in order to satisfy any concerns over bias / quality and remove the COI template at the top of the article. Any help with review or further guidance as to how I could better request is greatly appreciated. Vivwest (talk) 14:04, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The COI tag is valid, as you confirmed a connection on your user page, and since March of this year increasd the length of the article by nearly 3X. David notMD (talk) 15:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Josedimaria237, and welcome to the Teahouse. WP:BRD applies to project pages just as to articles - but you need to assess whether your change is likely to be controversial in the context of a Wikipedia guideline in deciding whether to be bold and edit, or to discuss on the Talk page beforehand. --ColinFine (talk) 16:41, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It means that you might go ahead and make the change yourself, if you conclude that it is not likely to be controversial, Josedimaria237. If there is already a discussion going on, then that is obviously not the case (you didn't mention that before). --ColinFine (talk) 21:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ColinFine Yes, a discussion is still going on but I think it is unlikely a consensus will be reached which would make an admin make the necessary changes. I am asking because these changes will affect some articles I nominated for RM.
Why is "Request from - via cp5011.eqsin.wmnet, ATS/8.0.8 Error: 502, Next Hop Connection Failed at 2021-12-09 15:10:49 GMT" generated for autoconfirmed users? Kent Dominic·(talk)15:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Kent Dominic Looks like a problem with some of the servers on the Internet path from you to Wikipedia (ATS = Apache Traffic Server), rather than with Wikipedia or that particular article. I think you've just had bad luck but if the error persists, try the WP:Village_pump_(technical) where the geeks hang out. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
LyndashipWP:RICHMEDIA doesn't specifically ban such links but the real problem in that article is that the references are mostly bare URL that would be much better if properly expanded, with authors/publishers credited. I tried the "Expand citations" bot but it didn't help much. You would be greatly helping by being WP:BOLD and working to improve things there, if you're interested. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:06, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Someone made a suggestion in a comment on my draft page. I've changed the article to accept their suggestion. Should I respond/How to respond to the comment?
I'm working on a draft page at Draft:Gallery of Atomic Orbitals. A user left a comment for me which I addressed in a recent edit. I would like to respond to their comment letting them know I have accepted their suggestion. (a) would this be appropriate and (b) how, mechanically, do I respond? Twistar48 (talk) 15:51, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Twistar48: Yes, that's a good idea. The best place is probably at the Talk Page of the Draft, Draft talk:Gallery of Atomic Orbitals so any future reviewer and/or reader will see it. You can "ping" the particular user to the new comment in the same way as I've pinged you here (look at the source code). Make sure you sign that edit, or the ping won't work. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:12, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Help at Shinola (retail company)
Hello. John here on behalf of Shinola (retail company) to suggest some updates and corrections to the company's article. I've disclosed my conflict of interest on the article's Talk page, and I understand I should let other editors review my requests instead of editing the article on my own. However, I'm not getting editor feedback using the "request edit" template as suggested. Can someone here help or at least confirm I'm submitting requests correctly? Thank you! JS at Shinola (talk) 16:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JS at Shinola: The request has been made correctly but I'm afraid there is always a backlog and I'm not a subject expert, so can't help. Your next step might be to politely ping one of or two of the editors who have worked on the article, below your edit request, but even that may not elicit a response. Use the ping mechanism as I did here (see source code) and be sure to sign that edit so the ping will take effect. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:18, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Architecture Firm, New
Getting my architectural page approved - Thank you to everyone who collaborated on a response to my questions on my page. Thanksgiving week has thrown me off schedule a little, but I’m trying to jump back into this and really dig in on this. One giant clarification, yes, I am a paid employee of SJCF, but I am not attempting to write this page because I am being specifically paid to. It is a labor of love for me, as I am now one of the old timers here.
I have taken all of your suggestions and am re-doing another draft. It’s difficult…we’ve been in business for more than 60 years, and we have breadth of coverage in the media, spanning a large amount of time, but not depth in articles. Bob Schaefer (our original ‘Schaef’) was a humble man who eschewed publicity..he liked for our buildings to speak for him. Even to this day, in many articles in our local media, you’ll see ‘courtesy photo’ under one of our renderings…and it is driving me crazy as I attempt to pull this together. Additionally, while the NY Times might have an architecture critic, most Kansas papers do not, and so in-depth architectural coverage is largely non-existent. Another clarification on the article one of you mentioned that talks about ‘reusing furniture’…that article also talked about the challenges presented in managing a school bond issue during the great recession in 2008. Thank you everyone for the help, the critique, the suggestions. I love that a group of writers comes together to do this and do it well. WikiLDMR (talk) 16:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your appreciation of our editors, WikiLDMR (though I was not one of those who helped in this case). I'm not clear whether you are asking a question. Note that Wikipedia does not differentiate whether you are specifically paid to work on this: you have a COI as an employee, and you are paid as an employee. But you've made the declaration, so that is fine. --ColinFine (talk) 16:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy Draft:SJCF ArchitectureWikiLDMR - You have made no edits since the draft was Declined on 22 Nov. MANY of the references confirm that SJCF was the architecture firm, but provided little to nothing about SJCF. I recommend you focus on finding more content about the firm and reduce the list of projects. David notMD (talk) 18:13, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WikiLDMR I did some searching of news sources, and I'm skeptical that the firm qualifies for an article. What you need to qualify for an article here is "depth in articles" in newspapers/books/journals. So if there has not been that (for whatever reason), the firm isn't going to qualify. I did see one reasonably good article to add to your list: Graham, Sherry. 2002. With 45th anniversary, new location schaefer johnson a firm on the go. Wichita Business Journal 17, (15) (Apr 12): 5, https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/with-45th-anniversary-new-location-schaefer/docview/229727072/se-2?accountid=196403 (accessed December 9, 2021). But you'll need more like this, and probably more that are not purely local per WP:CORP. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
conflicting articles
If there are two Wikipedia articles with conflicting information on similar topics, how do you know which Wikipedia article to make corrections to? Does someone want a specific example to help them answer my questions? Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 16:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The answer, always, is "what do the sources say?". If one is consistent with the sources and the other not, you know which one to alter. If the sources say differently, and both appear reliable, it may be appropriate to edit both to say that the sources are inconsistent. If it is a matter of interpretation of the sources, you probably want to start a discussion either on one of the articles' talk pages or on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject; in either case, it's worth adding a note to the other talk page(s) linking to the discussion. --ColinFine (talk) 16:52, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is the date of the death sentence for Dylann Roof should be the same across articles. So either use the date the jury recommended the death sentence, the date the judge formally sentenced Roof to death, or both dates and indicate which is which. [6][7] Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 18:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Puffer Dave, if you're referring to Draft:PufferfishDave, any such request would be rejected. It cites no sources at all. It doesn't even have any content, just a heading. Wikipedia is an encyclopdia, with articles on notable subjects; it's not social media. Maproom (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It did have far more content, but I tagged it for speedy deletion and it was deleted, it has been recreated though with less content but would still be rejected outright. Theroadislong (talk) 18:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Puffer Dave Be advised that Wikipedia is not a free hosting service for anyone to post nonsense biographies about themselves. See WP:NOTWEBHOST. Please don't try and do that or the Draft will be deleted again and your account could have its editing privileges withdrawn. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. You might wish to find another platform for your 'fun facts'. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:09, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
i'm having trouble adding subtitles to an OGG file
hello all, i need help
i was trying earlier today to add subtitles to an ogg audio file that i used in an article via the wikimedia commons. i tried using the same format shown in the template "the subRip format" but the ccs in the audio were very delayed and out of order..
@Sevencosmoi Welcome to the Teahouse. For technical queries like this, you might be better of asking at WP:VPT - our place for very technical queries. However - and this is a biggie - I have already nominated two of your uploads for deletion from Commons, and must ask you to stop doing any more, or face having your editing privileges there withdrawn. As far as I can see, you have been taking copyrighted music clips and releasing them to Commons under a Creative commons commercial reuse licence. I doubt you own the rights to this music so, unless you do, you would be breaking national laws and risking damaging Wikimedia Common's reputation for only hosting legally-released content from their owners. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:29, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Today, while I was going to create a local account for WikiSource, I was informed that my IP address or username was blocked, even though I have no blocks on any blocks that I know of. Can anyone inform me why this has occurred?
RudolfRed, he just told you his username or IP address is blocked and you tell him to post a question on their noticeboards about why he can't post questions on their noticeboards. Catch-22. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 18:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@IntellectuallyOlder(Alt. Account): I released the filter restrictions a bit. The filter was not intended to prevent account cration, rather to slow-down spammers. However, your problem might mean that we will have a problem with sleeper accounts, soon (creation of 4 accounts in 5 minutes should not trigger the filter if no other IP actions were performed in this time period). Ankry (talk) 19:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If an IP is blocked, we need to know at least the block # in order to go on. If you do not wish to provide it in public, you can contact an active admin vi email asking for help. There is also help address <wikisource@wikimedia.org> served by VRT (former OTRS), but unsure id it is announced anywhere. Ankry (talk) 19:28, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
and we need the name of the account that is supposed to be blocked at oldwikisource: neither the User IntellectuallyOlder(Alt nor the user IntellectuallyOlderer are registered there. -jkb- (talk) 22:07, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How do We suggest a Canadian Public Figure to be added to Wikipedia?
Hello! There is a Canadian public figure who is a young singer/songwriter and actress who should be added to Wikipedia. How does this happen, and how can we help? Jmartins88 (talk) 18:51, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmartins88 Welcome to the Teahouse. The criteria for whether or not a young musician or, indeed, a musician of any age, can be found at WP:NMUSIC. Unless the criteria there can be met, it could well be TOOSOON for such a page. Who is "we"? If you represent the artist or are a family friend, you would have a Conflict of Interest were you to try to create such a page yourself. Only one person may use a Wikipedia account, as we do not permit sharing. Assuming this person does meet our 'notability' criteria, it is likely that an up-and-coming artist would quickly attract interest from someone else who wanted to write about them (based upon Reliable, independent sources). They could submit the name and some sources to WP:REQUESTED ARTICLES, but the list there is huge, and there is no certainty anyone would pick up on their name and run with it. If you told us who this person is and point us to the best sources which talk about him/her then we might be able to offer some practical observations on the chances of success. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
RC Patroller question
Hi, I am not so new at wikipedia but new enough to need to ask questions. On the page about RC Patrolling says if vandalism should be tagged or deleted, how would I tag? Msaskiw (talk) 20:49, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Msaskiw Welcome to the Teahouse. It's great that you're doing RC patrolling ( I used to do a lot myself). Basically, if it's vandalism, just delete it by reverting the edit. Then warn the editor with a rising scale of warnings. First offenders usually get a 1st level warning, and so on. The best way to do this is to ensure you have WP:TWINKLE enabled in your Preferences. Having done so, the TW menu at the top of the screen will allow you to leave an appropriate warning for that user. If they continue to cause problems after their final warning, then and only then is it the time to report them to WP:AIV. You can use Twinkle to automate that process, too. My tip with troublesome editors was to keep a tab open for each one and keep coming back to see if they've editing again. So revert and warn; watch, revert and warn again; until final level warning is exceeded. For bad vandalism I'd ignore the first level warning and judge whether or not to start with a 2nd level or (rarely) a 3rd or only warning - but do that only sparingly for the very worst, offensive abuses. Does that answer your question? Nick Moyes (talk) 20:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Blaze The Wolf If you read the RCP page, you'll see the OP has slightly confused what is required. There's no mention there of tagging vandalism. However, bad edits can be tagged with such things as [who?], [according to whom?], [clarification needed],[citation needed], [failed verification] etc according to how poor the edit is, and assuming it's not so bad that it would be best to revert it. All vandalism should be removed immediately it is detected. There are times when one can't be sure whether or not it's vandalism, so tagging a poor edit can be appropriate. Of course, going to the editor and asking them to address it themselves is something we often forget we can also do. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:18, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Msaskiw - @Nick Moyes Yah that helps alot! Thanks so much! Excited to start Patrolling Correctly!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Msaskiw (talk • contribs)
@Msaskiw: You really should learn how to reply properly on talk pages (by pinging) and to indent that reply (and to sign your reply, of course) before you start engaging with other editors via RCP, or you'll cause quite a bit of confusion if you drop by a users page with a personal note and forget to sign it with four tildes (like this: ~~~~ ), and Preview before publishing it.
My tip for good Recent Change patrolling is not to lurk at the top of the list all the time (everyone does, it seems), but look much lower down the list for things like changes to school articles (they get lots of vandalism); edit summaries like "fixed it" or "fixed typo" are obvious flags to be checked (use Ctrl-F to search the list for these keywords).
Use the ORES colour indicators to spot the most likely issues, and check the contributions of all editors who you revert, as one bad edit can reveal a pattern of many others. Keep monitoring their contributions, and even consider temporarily adding an article to your watchlist for a week to keep any eye on subsequent edits they might come back and make there.
Here are my favourite Recent Changes settings which filter out the least troublesome edits and flag up only the most likely to be problematic.
I also strongly advise enabling 'Navigation Popups' in Preferences>Gadgets] as this lets you very quickly view diffs, hist, IP contributions and other information just by hovering over the relevant link on the Recent Changes page - something the default mouse hover function does not offer you. And finally, don't fall into the trap of assuming all IP editors make bad edits; they don't. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 21:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nick Moyes, thanks for the tip on talk pages, For Recent Changes Patrolling I use wikiloop doublecheck so the advice on RC Patrolling so some of the advice doesnt apply but yes I will be sure to apply the others! Msaskiw (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, this is in response to User:Scope creep. The first article I have contributed "Gregg Hill (jazz composer)" has been flagged for "notability" and "needs more citations from reliable, independent sources" and was moved to draftspace. I have cited 2 independent articles on the composer (a newspaper article and liner notes of a major commercial jazz release by Rodney Whitaker who has his own Wikipedia page. So at the very least Gregg Hill(jazz composer) should be connected to that page if he doesn't yet merit his own article, correct? Can you tell me if the sources I have are indeed not appropriate, or where the issues are in the article in terms of content and tone if any? Please advise the best course of action or connect me with someone who can help this article meet standards before submitting for review? I have posted my query on the Teahouse but have not gotten any response. Perhaps User:Cordless Larry can assist or suggest someone to help? Thank you in advance so much for your help! EroniousThunk (talk) 21:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I decided to make a new account on wikipedia and wondered if there is a limit to editing pages. If there is, please reply. If not, you can ignore this question. Many thanks in advance! 👍 Blocks72 (talk) 21:24, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Blocks72: It depends on the situation with your old account. Depending on that, the answer is 100% yes, or 100% no, or somewhere in between. Please explain. Also, not sure what you mean by a "limit". Also, somewhat concerned that you named your account "Blocks", which has an unfortunate connotation here ... --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:32, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
♥Th78blue (They/Them/Their • talk)♥ 22:17, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy link: User:Kaunitzj/Adaptive Noise Cancelling melecie t - 04:37, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute here, but you appear to have compromised your account with your [[User:Teahouse/common.{{{lang}}}|user {{{lang}}} page]]. Your edit to your user {{{lang}}} page has been reverted. Compromising an account is making it do things it does not have permission to do. Thank you!
Please refrain from compromising your account. Your edit to [[User:Teahouse/common.{{{lang}}}|user {{{lang}}} page]] has been reverted. Thank you!
Please stop. If you continue to compromise your account, you may be blocked from editing.
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you compromise your account.
Done. For future reference, the template is Template:AfC submission, and you can read about the template's documentation there. There's a helpful shortcut to insert an un-submitted banner, which is 
