Their names and at least a brief description must have been published in a reliable academic publication to be recognized as correct or valid. — WP:SPECIES
As far as I can tell, none of the academic journals you cite mention a species named Tarsomys orientalis. That's probably the issue. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think a name appearing in a preview in an "advance articles portion" of a journal's website counts as publication in a reliable academic publication. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jp2593 The draft in its current state is already acceptable. The notability standard for species is simply proof of existence and a proper scientific name. Both of which are established by the first published description in a recognized academic journal. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:21, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jp2593 You've cited quite a bit of sources. With your 800 edits you should have access to wp:lib, specifically the oxford academic and this source, which is I believe what you are looking for:
Rickart, Eric A; Rowsey, Dakota M; Ibañez, Jayson C; Quidlat, Roselyn S; Balete, Danilo S; Heaney, Lawrence R (25 May 2024). "A new species of the endemic Tarsomys clade (Muridae, Rodentia) from eastern Mindanao Island, Philippines". Journal of Mammalogy. doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyae051. ISSN0022-2372.
I think your main problem is that you're citing a Facebook post for a lot of the content, which is self-published. If you can instead cite that stuff to the study, which the agency's Facebook post draws on, you're probably OK. That's what I'd do. Mrfoogles (talk) 03:48, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In order to be a good article, it must be nominated following the process laid out at WP:GAI. Any significant contributor to the article who believes that it fulfils the Good Article criteria can nominate it. (You do not appear to be a significant contributor, and so should not nominate the article without discussing it on the article talkpage first). I haven't read the article all the way through, but at a minimum the lead is currently way too short and does not sufficiently summarise the content given the length of the article, so I do not think it would pass as-is. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 09:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Skinnyshark. You'll have to be clearer with your question. Who is "we"? What do you mean by "moderate"? In what sense is it having "too many updates"?
The only article you have edited recently is Pawan Kalyan - is that the one you are referring to? There has been a flurry of activity on that article recently, but how is it "too many"?
Skinnyshark, on Wikipedia, there is literally no such thing as too many updates! unless you can provide solid evidence of disruptive editing. Do you have such evidence? Cullen328 (talk) 08:01, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Appreciate your response, "too many" means when multiple people update same source without any citations! Anyhow, I'm updated a picture on that page "Pawan Kalyan" and somebody else updated on top of mine with a very bad picture, now i can't update anymore as its saying "check update histy", no how do i update it good picture? Skinnyshark (talk) 21:17, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of quality, it's important to 1) discuss with the other editors (WP:CONSENSUS is how "many updates" leads to what many editors generally think is a reasonable result) and 2) not ever violate our WP:COPYVIO policy by uploading pictures found on other nonfree websites but instead 3) only use free sources and always give credit to those sources. DMacks (talk) 00:30, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, been a while since I contributed and was hoping anyone could offer some guidance?
I am trying to add one fairly straight-forward factual sentence to a long existing Wikipedia page. The sentence includes 5 hyperlinks to existing Wikipedia pages, and 4 external citations. I am ready to post, however at top of page I have the following message:
Script warning: One or more {{cite web}} templates have maintenance messages; messages may be hidden (help).
When I try to click on the links at top of page, it says my edits may not be saved if I click on those links. I have been unable to find any specific help on multiple Wikipedia and Google pages for this warning.
Can someone please let me know best way to see the actual "script warnings" they are stating? And / or how to edit / fix?
Hello, CBrookUM, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's hard to know what's happening when you haven't given us much information. But in most browsers there is a way to pick on a link and open it in another tab (or another window) - sometimes by the middle mouse button (or wheel) if you have one, and more generally by right clicking, and picking "Open in new tab". That way you can look at the message without losing the work you are doing in the first tab or window.
In fact, you can pick on the links in the warning that you've included in your question above, to see what they are telling you - it appears that at least one of your citations uses a {{cite web}} template, but does not have any named parameters. ColinFine (talk) 20:33, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CBrookUM, which article are you trying to edit? You might see that type of message for a citation error for a cite that's already in the article, not just added in your edit. Schazjmd(talk)20:57, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
CBrookUM, it may be that your citations are fine and that there were pre-existing errors on the page, in which case you may go ahead and save your edit as written. Try this: edit the page, and *without* adding your new sentence, hit the Preview button. Now look at the top of the page. Do you see the same errors noted there as before?
NO (there are no errors now): this means there was an error with your citations which needs attention. Hit Cancel and seek further assistance.
NO, BUT (there are some errors, but not as many as before with your sentence): there were pre-existing errors, but your sentence also had some errors. Hit Cancel and seek further assistance.
YES (exactly the same errors as before): there was no problem with your citations; go ahead and add your sentence with the citations, and hit Publish, ignoring the error notice you see there.
Thank you all for the help and guidance, greatly appreciated. After following suggestions it "appears" the very small issue / recommendation listed at top of the existing page I edited (adding one sentence to page) has been corrected. CBrookUM (talk) 02:21, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Blps Template not Activating
Hi Mods :)!
I copied the Blps template onto my sandbox -- and the template won't show up when published :(. Am I missing a step or another function before the template shows up?
hi @Eleniofillyria and welcome to the Teahouse! I'm assuming you directly typed {{blps}} while using VisualEditor, which it interpreted literally as having been the text itself intsea of a templtae call. that being said, {{blps}} is the wrong template to use in this case, as it is intended for use in talk pages of BLP articles instead of drafts. you may be looking for {{AfC draft}}, which I've gone ahead and added to your draft page.
I'm not particularly skilled in VisualEditor myself as I primarily use the source editor (which is probably harder to learn if you don't already have a programming background), but to insert templates in VisualEditor you may press Insert > Template to paste a given template. happy editing! 💜 melecietalk - 02:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Melicie & Primehunter :)!
Thank you to you both for such a quick reply to my query :).
This is actually the specific kind of template I'd like to open on my sandbox page (the one with the picture on the right side of the page): Template:Biography - Wikipedia
In Visual Editor, I don't see the code or words I need to insert. How do you write it out so that this kind of layout shows up on my sandbox page?
In Source Editing, do I just type the blps code on the 1st line? I don't think the {{AfC draft}} is what I'm looking for since it's too general :(?
Again, thanx for your advice! I await your clarification.
Warmest regards,
Eleni
P.S: I'm also not adept yet at Visual Editing Melicie ;). But I do have some vague familiarity with the earlier versions of HTML, so I can do a few troubleshoots now and then ;). Eleniofillyria (talk) 03:23, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why it's so difficult to write on that AFC template :(! Why is there a box there and it's so hard to replace the words in the box :(. Could I just have a template on Biography as I had indicated in my previous message?
Some of the words are confusing on the template. If I just have the biography template, I certainly will be "substituting" the words there for the text of the article I have already written on MS Word.
Please, please help :O!
I await your pleasant but speedy reply Melicie or PrimeHunter :)!
@Eleniofillyria: In VisualEditor you have to follow the procedure at Help:VisualEditor#Editing templates to add templates. Click the "Insert" menu, click "Template", write subst:Blps (without curly brackets) in the the box, click "Add", click "Insert". Template:Biography uses {{Infobox person}}. If that's the template you want then replace subst:Blps with Infobox person (most templates don't use subst:). {{Infobox person}} has a lot of parameters. You can fill out some of them between clicking "Add" and "Insert", or you can come back later to do it. There are many different infobox templates, also for different kind of people. What or who do you want to write about? PrimeHunter (talk) 11:48, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi PrimeHunter :)!
Thank you for responding so quickly ;). I will attempt to open a biography template again today following your instructions. Pray that I am successful -- or I will bother you again for instructions -- har har ;)!
Regarding subject of article, I would like to write about this accomplished person in the space exploration and development industry who can be a great inspiration to the youth, particularly the less privileged young people in the third world. I believe I have enough resources and references to fulfill the requirements stipulated by Wikipedia -- but that is for the editors to determine ;).
Again, my profuse thanks PrimeHunter for your help! Chat again soon, of course, on less troublesome topics :).
@Eleniofillyria: I was writing a reply while melecie answered. I will still post it in case it's helpful too:
You used VisualEditor. Most of our documentation is written for the source editor where you can write {{subst:Blps}}. If you try to write that in VisualEditor then it automatically adds undisplayed code to deactivate the template call and merely display the code of the call instead. See Help:VisualEditor#Editing templates for how to add templates in VisualEditor. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:24, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanx PrimeHunter for the quick reply :)! Please do check my answer to Melicie above which I addressed to you both ;).
There is a semi-protected page I wish to edit, but my attack account lacks sufficient... establishment. How can I meaningfully build up enough contributions without just making bogus edits?
10 edits isn't a lot but I'd feel bad just farming them on my userpage or something, but I also don't know how I'd track down things to meaningfully improve. Kisequé (talk) 03:31, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kisequé, just edit productively and do not try to game the system. Please explain why you are in such a rush to edit highly controversial articles? That often ends badly. Cullen328 (talk) 08:08, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not in a rush and it's not a "highly controversial" article, just minor protection because of persistant vandalism some 10 years ago. I don't use Wikipedia a massive amount so I don't come across opportunities to make edits very frequently, which is why I was seeking ways to more efficiently build up credibility. Kisequé (talk) 16:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kisequé: Sometimes I'm thinking of a similar word and type that down instead of what I meant to say. For editing comments that have been replied to, best practice is to follow what WP:REDACT says:
Any deleted text should be marked with <del>...</del>, which renders in most browsers as struck-through text, e.g., deleted.
Any inserted text should be marked with <ins>...</ins>, which renders in most browsers as underlined text, e.g., inserted.
Assistance Needed for Varun Choudhary's Draft Rejection
Hi Wikipedia Teahouse,
I recently submitted a draft article for Varun Choudhary, the National President of the National Students' Union of India (NSUI), which is the student wing of the Indian National Congress. The draft was declined with the feedback that it does not meet the notability criteria under WP, and the references do not show significant coverage in reliable, secondary sources.
Points of Coverage:
- Varun Choudhary's significant role as the National President of NSUI, India’s largest student organization.
- His involvement and leadership in major national student movements and political protests, including the NEET exam rigging controversy.
- Multiple references from reputable news sources such as The New Indian Express, Economic Times, Money Control, and others.
- An external link to the official Indian National Congress website confirming his position.
Concerns:
- The feedback mentioned that the references provided do not show significant coverage or that the coverage is not sufficient to establish notability.
- I reviewed Wikipedia articles of previous NSUI Presidents such as Neeraj Kundan and Fairoz Khan to ensure consistency and compliance with Wikipedia standards.
Request: Could you please help me understand how I can improve the draft to meet Wikipedia's notability standards? Are there specific types of sources or additional information that would better establish Varun Choudhary’s notability? Any guidance on addressing the feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Itsmickeymouse, you cannot assume that existing articles meet Wikipedia's standards. Very many do not. You say that there are "Multiple references from reputable news sources" but what's needed is coverage in some depth. Here (right here, in the "teahouse") please provide links to what you regard as the three best sources on VC: sources that are both informative and reliable. (They must be disinterested, meaning that they shouldn't be based on interviews with VC.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hoary,
Thank you for your feedback. I would like to provide three sources that offer in-depth, reliable, and independent coverage of Varun Choudhary:
This article discusses Varun Choudhary's involvement in the NEET exam rigging protests, demonstrating his active role in addressing significant national issues.
This article covers Varun Choudhary's involvement in protests against proposed constitutional amendments, showcasing his influence and participation in national political discourse.
Additionally, to further establish his notability, here is a reference about his election as the youngest Secretary in the history of the Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU):
This article provides information about his election as Secretary in DUSU, highlighting his early leadership roles.
I hope these sources provide the necessary depth and reliability to establish Varun Choudhary's notability. If there are any additional guidelines or specific types of references that would strengthen this submission, I would appreciate your guidance.
Money Control - https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/politics/congress-appoints-alka-lamba-chief-of-its-womens-wing-varun-choudhary-to-head-nsui-12007311.html This one is very odd. As I view it, all it says about VC is "Congress appoints Alka Lamba chief of its women's wing, Varun Choudhary to head NSUI / Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge also appointed Varun Choudhary as the head of the party's students' wing National Students' Union of India (NSUI)." There's what looks like a button that will have me jump over the advertising and gossip junk and will let me "READ MORE"; but when I click on it, nothing happens (and I'm shown no more).
Indian Express - https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/nsui-sweeps-dusu-polls/ Here's what this says: "Varun Khari and Varun Chaudhary of NSUI were elected vice-president and secretary,respectively. [...] Varun Choudhary polled 15,605 votes,defeating ABVP's Ritu Rana by 2,617 votes." That's all.
Conceivably there's significant coverage in the first or second of these four. There isn't in the third or fourth. -- Hoary (talk) 11:22, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first only quotes Choudhary, among many others. The second announces Choudhary's appointment, a single sentence; the rest is about Lamba only. Neither provides significant coverage. Schazjmd(talk)12:35, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
I have found some more sources that provide coverage of his activities and impact:
Hello Teahouse. I'm currently using Wikipedia on mobile, but I can't seem to make minor edits. The "button" isn't there when I click publish. I normally use VisualEditor on phone, but I'm pretty sure that using Wikicode and VisualEditor doesn't have the "button" to make minor edits. Is there a way to turn it on or is it normal on phones?
HiStadionK, welcome to the Teahouse. Help:Minor edit says: "Users who are not logged in to Wikipedia or are in mobile mode are not permitted to mark changes as minor because of the potential for vandalism." However, I do currently have the minor edit checkbox when I'm logged in on mobile. Are you logged in? PrimeHunter (talk) 11:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@StadionK: On mobile I see the minor edit box and a watch box in VisualEditor but neither in source editor. That is odd. If you made a source edit then you can switch to VisualEditor on the pencil icon to the left of the blue ">" button before using that button. I don't know why this is apparently needed to mark an edit as minor. Maybe somebody thought a source edit is more likely to screw up code seriously while making an apparently minor change. Maybe it's an accident that the features aren't synchronized. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:40, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter I don’t have any buttons in the source editor AND the VisualEditor. (When I mean Wikicode, I mean source editor. It’s because I’m from another Wikipedia.) StadionK (talk) 14:53, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter Yes. I also don’t have the box in other Wikipedias. When I click the “>” button, it takes to a box, where I need to summarize the edit with no “This is a minor edit” box. StadionK (talk) 19:16, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A conflict of interest?
Hello,
I am John Seitz, communications editor for the Jay and Susie Gogue Performing Arts Center in Auburn, Alabama. Our venue is relatively new (it opened in 2019), and I believe creating a Wikipedia page for the Gogue Center would help to further establish its social and cultural presence. My question is, as an employee of the Gogue Center, is it a conflict of interest for me to create the Wikipedia page myself? I am brand new to Wikipedia, but have several years as a professional editor and one of my duties in my current job is to provide accurate, useful information about the Gogue Center for the public. Is it okay for me to create the page myself, or should I wait for an independent third party to feel inspired to create a Gogue Center page on their own?
@John Seitz 88 Welcome to the Teahouse and thanks for disclosing your COI. In fact, you will be considered a paid editor and should read and comply with those requirements. Once you have done that you can try to use the WP:AfC process to draft an article. Beware, however, that this is quite a difficult task for newcomers. Your main task will be to show your venue is notable in the quirky way Wikipedia defines that. Please read all these links. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Mike. This is informative and helps point me in the right direction. As a newbie offering up his first vulnerable inquiry, I appreciate hearing your warm, welcoming response coming out of the cold, anonymous void of the internet. John Seitz 88 (talk) 16:59, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@John Seitz 88 I'd like to add a +1 to Mike Turnbull's suggestion: taking pictures of the center with your own camera and uploading them to the Wikimedia Commons is a great idea. Pecopteris (talk) 23:12, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@John Seitz 88: Greetings, and welcome to the Teahouse. To take your points in order:
I believe creating a Wikipedia page for the Gogue Center would help to further establish its social and cultural presence. That would be promotion, which is not what Wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which does not have "pages", per se, but articles on notable subjects.
My question is, as an employee of the Gogue Center, is it a conflict of interest for me to create the Wikipedia page myself? Yes, absolutely. Furthermore, as an employee, per Wikipedia's terms of use you are required to disclose this connection as noted above.
...one of my duties in my current job is to provide accurate, useful information... This is all well and good, but what we need most of all is verifiability. All articles need to be based on verifiable references to reliable sources which are independent of the subject. Without this, there is literally nothing upon which a proper encyclopedia article can be based--we care relatively little about what the subject of an article has to say about itself.
Is it okay for me to create the page myself, or should I wait for an independent third party to feel inspired to create a Gogue Center page on their own? Most definitely the latter. It's not prohibited for you to create the page yourself, but it's not recommended. Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, doubly so when there is a conflict of interest involved, since you effectively need to forget everything you know about the organization and base the article solely on third-party sources. If you do want to proceed, then the article should be created as a draft, which, when completed, can be evaluated by experienced editors via the Articles for Creation process. But in any case, it is recommended for any prospective Wikipedia editor that they poke around, edit on existing articles, and generally get a better grounding on Wikipedia's policies and procedures before they embark on creating entirely new content.
Hello, John. I would add to what the others have said, that to "establish its social and cultural presence" is absolutely not part of the purposes of Wikipedia: indeed, writing with that purpose is precisely promotion, and forbidden. ColinFine (talk) 23:08, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to agree with that, and add another layer to it. Maybe you disagree with the following. If so, please let me know, so I can adjust how I think about this sort of thing.
Editors have all sorts of reasons for editing Wikipedia. For instance, on articles about modern politics, many editors want to promote information about politicians/candidates/issues that they care about, or denigrate politicians/candidates/issues that they find objectionable. That is self-evident, and it's not necessarily a problem. Per AGF, we do not interrogate editors about the reasons for their edits if they are good edits, and we are not in the business of accusing editors of thought crimes.
The only thing that matters is the content of the edits. If @John Seitz 88 is able to write a solid article that neutrally summarizes verifiable information published by reliable sources, more power to him, even if his inner purpose is to promote something that he cares about. Likewise, if the draft that John writes is not a good article, per the above criteria, it will be rejected, regardless of his internal thoughts and motivations.
Yes. My intention in asking the question about COI was to understand definitively if, as an employee of the Gogue Center, it was strictly forbidden for me to contribute an article. If this were the case, naturally I would abandon the undertaking and save myself the time and effort. My employer is a nonprofit performing arts center on the campus of an R1 level university. It is not unusual or inappropriate for such institutions to have a dedicated Wikipedia article. The Jule Collins Smith Museum of Fine Art, which is located across the street from the Gogue Center, already has an entry. I suppose the ideal would be for an independent third party to take it upon themselves to submit an article; however, the Gogue Center has now existed since 2019. I thought it might be time to craft an article myself, if allowed. I would do my level best to create an article that adheres to Wikipedia's editorial standards and practices. If it is rejected on those grounds, so be it. I asked my original question simply to clarify if any article on the Gogue Center that I submitted would be rejected automatically because of my status as an employee. But from what I can surmise from the wealth of feedback I have already received, it is appropriate and worth my time to pursue this endeavor, provided that I follow the correct protocols. Thank you to everyone for your well-informed advice and caveats—they have been genuinely helpful, and on balance, encouraging. John Seitz 88 (talk) 14:28, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted and warned the user (about the hijacking and the LLM usage). Their response was to hijack the redirect again (this time accidentally leaving it in place at the top of the page).
As they're a new user, I don't want to jump to ANI, so this seems to be the place to come to ask for help on their behalf... and also to ask for their AI-generated article to be reverted again as I don't want to edit war. 81.187.192.168 (talk) 16:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi IP editor - this is a place for newcomers to ask questions about using or editing Wikipedia, not a place to report disruptive editing. If they're not responding to warnings or attempts at discussion, ANI is the place to go; you could also request page protection at WP:RFPP. 57.140.16.48 (talk) 17:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reluctant to dump a brand new editor directly into ANI. And it's because they are a brand new editor that my first thought was that someone here, on the board for brand new editors, might be willing to help them before it reaches the whole bounce-them-out-the-door stage. But perhaps not then. 81.187.192.168 (talk) 17:41, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, that's fair reasoning. I've striked out that comment so more experienced editors can help.
PS: I noticed your contribs :D thanks for your positive edits to WP! You should consider making an account so you can properly be thanked. GoldRomean (talk) 17:53, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps, Snipertron12, you want help translating bits of the article ja:重音テト into English in order to augment the article Kasane Teto. If so, better to say so (and good luck with that request); if not, better to say what you do want. -- Hoary (talk) 23:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ugly mobile interface
So I decided to go on my ipad and use wikipedia to see how it was like and EVEN THOUGH I was on the desktop version, the info boxes are STILL in mobile format. Really ugly. please help 48JCLTALK20:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you using the Desktop mode of your browser or the 'Desktop' button at the bottom of the page? Only the latter will switch to the desktop rendering version for infoboxes and such. WelpThatWorked (talk) 21:57, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This looks identical to the Desktop styling, so I'm not really sure what you're expecting, and unless you have some on-wiki script or off-wiki extension that's only loaded on your desktop, I'm not sure what the cause of the discrepancy would be either. WelpThatWorked (talk) 22:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you could specify what, specifically looks different I might be able to give more insight, but as is I have no clue what you are referring to. WelpThatWorked (talk) 22:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WelpThatWorked, sorry I was referring to the fact that in the past the like basic format was in 2022 vector but the info boxes and other templates like article history and WPBS were in 2010 style. wondering how I can ge this back 48JCL • (📲/📝) 22:30, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you mean you want to mix the old with the new, then you would need to find what the CSS rules were prior to the change, then copy them to your custom common.css or vector.css. The easiest way to do this is probably to load up the page with the legacy skin, find the rules you want in the inspect element panel, and copy them over. WelpThatWorked (talk) 23:02, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyan-Lime There has been an update to the appearance, yes. I'm not sure where exactly to find the changes, but the ones I noticed are the infoboxes changing and I think the sidebars moving closer to the side. CommissarDoggoTalk?21:30, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You do not currently have permission to upload Files. You will receive this permission automatically after your account reaches at least 4 day of age and 10 edits. WelpThatWorked (talk) 22:04, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i am working on writing an article and have references but they are not online or linkable. Can i just state the source ( authir, date, publication ) without a hyperlink? 122.150.145.49 (talk) 22:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at {{Unbulleted list citebundle}}, but didn't see a way to use named references inside this template. Is there a similar template like this one that can handle named references in bundled fashion? Trying to avoid the hidden text clutter of citing them all over again when the named references already exist, thanks. --GoneIn60 (talk) 22:31, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I understand your use-case. Maybe you could do a mock-up of what you'd like to see? A "Bundle" is just a multi-entry list in the footnote associated with one in-body reference mark. What it sounds like you are describing would put reference marks in the reference itself (in-body would be "[1]" and at the end of the article would list "[1] [2][3][4]" rather than in-body "[2][3][4]". DMacks (talk) 21:54, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
^Brown, Rebecca (2007). "Size of the Moon". Scientific American. 51 (78).
^Yamada, Hanako [山田花子] (2005). Taiyō no netsu 太陽の熱 [The Sun's Heat]. Gakujutsu shuppansha (学術出版社) [Academic Press]. p. 2.
The downside is, that you *must* refer to the LDR-defined refs somewhere in the body (or lead) or you will get an unused citation error. There may be a resolution by moving it into the body, but I haven't tried it, because I don't know what your actual use case is. HTH, Mathglot (talk) 01:33, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for responding DMacks and Mathglot. Yes, that example above may actually work. As Mathglot mentions, named refs are being fully cited using the |refs= parameter in the References section as described at WP:LDR. Then at the end of a lengthy sentence that may contain multiple claims, I'd like to bundle the named refs together and specify which refs support which claims. It's not always easy (or doesn't always work) to insert them mid-sentence.
Hope that makes sense. Doing it this way will also help avoid the massive amounts of clutter in hidden text when editing prose (most citations have an archived URL, so they get pretty lengthy). I will give it a shot. Appreciate the help! --GoneIn60 (talk) 15:16, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a problem with the Wikipedia article for Iowa County, Iowa. and I don't know how to fix it. There is a map of the state of Iowa which should show the location o the county in red. However, it shows the entire state in red. It looks to me like the "infobox U.S. county" infobox is supposed to automatically display an image file from Commons that shows the location of the county. But apparently, no such image file exists. I looked at other county articles which did not have this problem, and I found out what the name of the file for Iowa County should be. But Wikipedia Commons will not allow me to upload a file with that name. So I don't know how to proceed. Any help would be much appreciated. PopePompus (talk) 22:54, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like the file was generated programmatically, and so was confused by the county having the same identifier as the state. However, I do not currently have the permissions needed to fix it at the moment. If anyone else wants to, just replacing the first instance of id="Iowa" with id="Iowa_S" or similar ought to do it. WelpThatWorked (talk) 23:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Baseball Bugs: It's in the source text of the original file at File:Map of Iowa highlighting Iowa County.svg. SVG files use readable text and not binary code like most image formats. You can edit the file with a normal text editor like Windows Notepad but you still have to download the file, edit it and and upload the new version. Commons requires autopatrolled right to overwrite files. You have it. I don't. Will you make the change? PrimeHunter (talk) 10:21, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Baseball Bugs:File:Map of Iowa highlighting Iowa County.svg is used in dozens of wikis and should be fixed. SVG files are just text files. You can right-click the file on your PC, select open with and pick a text editor like Notepad, maybe after choose another app. Or temporarily rename it to a txt ending and doubleclick it. id="Iowa" is only a few lines in. I will make a Commons request if nobody fixes it within a day. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:29, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated it but I don't think that actually fixes it. It seems like these SVGs were poorly coded and for some reason Commons just previously rendered them fine? Ugh. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:40, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Elli: It looks like you are right. Another county File:Map of Iowa highlighting Wayne County.svg displays correctly for me on the file page and in Wayne County, Iowa. I tried to diplay it here at one of the common sizes 250px which is probably cached, and two rare sizes 245px and 255px which probably have to be generated for my request. Both of them only display the county for me and not the borders of all the other counties. I don't know how to fix this. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:19, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like the issue is the clip-path in the SVG is improper, and at some point the handling of it changed. The clip-path seems to care only about it's valid first descendants [1], so the <path> inside of the <g> that defines the state is ignored. Loading the file up in an older browser, it seems use the nested path anyway, so I suppose this was "fixed" at some point, breaking these images?
I see the table of contents in the left-hand pane. It's no longer beneath the lead section like I was accustomed to seeing for many years. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:10, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For me it's visible only when I click the bulletted hamburger menu next to the article title, which IMO isn't obvious at at all. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if this helps, but just to say that there are two different 'hamburger menus', one for the Wikipedia main menu, the other for the page contents menu. Both can be independently of each other toggled between the hamburger and the left panel. When hamburgers, the main menu goes to the extreme top-left corner next to the Wikipedia logo, whereas the contents menu goes to the left of the page title. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To expand on DoubleGrazing's answer, the dropdown button for the table of contents is that is located next to the page title, and the dropdown button for the main menu is in the top-left corner of the page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:53, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By default for unregistered editors the table of contents is expanded in the left margin. I checked using Chrome and don't see any problems there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:22, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess you refer to your signature but I'm, not sure how you want it to look. [[User:Snipertron12|<span style="color:#296dff">'''Snipertron12'''</span>]] [[User talk:Snipertron12|<span style="color:#296dff">''Talk''</span>]] produces Snipertron12Talk. Is that what you want? PrimeHunter (talk) 09:47, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Please read the postings on your user page, and the polices linked to therein, carefully. In short, you shouldn't write about yourself. 331dot (talk) 12:04, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Im trying to protect this page from getting deleted. I created this board as a way to get attention for some articles for example Teto Kasane. How can i defend this right? I WILL BE ACTIVE IN 3 HOURS TO CONTINUE DEFENDING WPPICADILLY.
Snipertron12Talk12:31, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Im only accepting requests for new articles however - currently, there are no supporters for WPPicadilly so I can not take any requests. Snipertron12Talk18:05, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps instead of creating a page to draw attention to an article like Kasane Teto, it would've been better off to work on improving that particular article to more clearly establish the subject's Wikipedia notability per Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) and WP:GNG. I've got a feeling that as soon as the "Wikipedia:Piccadily" page has been dealt with, many of those who participated in that MfD discussion are going to shift their focus to the Teto article, and it's likely going to end up being draftified or nominated for deletion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:58, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ive already stated multiple times that Wikipedia:Piccadilly was founded not to bring attention to a single article but to bring attention to multiple articles that have suffered the same fate as the one for Kasane Teto's. Snipertron12Talk17:46, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
YouTube time stamp
Quick question: I have used the YouTube Time Stamp template in my sandbox here: User:Maineartists/sandbox (reference 5 &6) "... or maybe I'll just teach you how to make soup."[5][6] But whenever I click on the link, it does not bring me to the correct time stamp. Is it because it is in my sandbox? or perhaps because my computer is bringing me to a previous history save? Thanks in advance. Maineartists (talk) 13:19, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You've specified time twice, once in the link, and once in the template parameter, so it is obeying the first one given (the one in the link). Removing the &t=XXs segment from each reference link should get the behavior you want. WelpThatWorked ([[User talk:VideoonYouTube|talk]]) 13:39, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just tested that and removing the time segment from the link results in the video starting at the beginning. The fix is to change the time segment in the URL to match the timestamp where you want it to open (in seconds). For example, the 2d url, change the seconds in the url to 1224 and the video opens at her closing "soup" statement. Schazjmd(talk)13:42, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The result is currently identical with the way the template is coded and YouTube parameters work but but that may not always be the case. The id parameter of {{YouTube}} is only meant for the video id. The time is not part of the id so use the first version. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:56, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SaxorTheGreat: Welcome to the Teahouse. It looks like you've resubmitted your draft, but looking at it I can tell it's going to be declined. There are no inline citations, and you're referencing the homepages of a school board's website, which definitely do not establish wikinotability for your subject. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:02, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi SaxorTheGreat, besides what Tenryuu said, it appears that an article already exists for the Four Corners outdoor game. Your title may be useful as a redirect but otherwise it would only become a duplicate and eventually be merged anyways.
I want to publish an article. Does the content meet Wikipedia's guidelines?
Founded in 1996, Premium Guard Inc. (PGI) specializes in oil, air, cabin, fuel, and transmission filters in the aftermarket automotive filtration industry. PGI has expanded its offerings to include heavy-duty, power sports, and specialty automotive applications, delivering a comprehensive service solution. Currently, several brands fall under Premium Guard Inc.’s umbrella:
PUREFLOW®
HIGHFLOW®
PWR Steer®
Silblade®
ECOGARD®
Premium Guard®
Interfil®
== References:[[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ambuj0070/sandbox&action=edit§ion=2 edit source]] ==
# [https://www.aftermarketnews.com/premium-guard-launches-three-new-websites/ Aftermarket News]
# [https://www.autoserviceworld.com/premium-guard-acquires-auto-7/ Auto Service World]
# [https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/premium-guard-inc-introduces-innovative-new-cabin-air-freshener-for-cars-301506953.html PR Newswire]
# [https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201102005683/en/Premium-Guard-Inc.-Acquires-Global-Aftermarket-Filters-Business-from-Tenneco Businesswire]
== External Links:[[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ambuj0070/sandbox&action=edit§ion=3 edit source]] ==
[https://premiumguard.com/ Official Website]
Please check the above content and let me know all the references & the above content meeting the Wikipedia guidelines or not. Ambuj0070 (talk) 14:50, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely not. It cites no sources at all, let alone reliable independent sources with extensive discussion of the subject, such as are required to estblish that the subject is notable enough to warrant a Wiipedia article. Maproom (talk) 15:03, 14 June 2024 (UTC). Maproom (talk) 15:03, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PRNewsWire and BusinessWire are both just places to post press releases - so they'll only ever be as useful a source as a company's own website. AfterMarketNews and AutoserviceWorld are trade magazines that probably do some of their own journalism, but in this case have also just reprinted a press release (this isn't uncommon in trade magazines, it's understood that they need some copy to space out the ads). So no, none of these source are significant, independent or reliable. Do you think that this company is notable enough to warrant a wikipedia article? Why did you chose it to write about? -- D'n'B-t -- 07:17, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Making an article for Deji Olatunji- requires administrator privileges!
Hi!
I have been trying to make an article for Deji Olatunji, who has in my opinion achieved notability several times over since his article was deleted/redirected to KSI's wikipedia article in 2015. The redirect page is here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deji_Olatunji&redirect=no
When trying to edit the redirect, you are informed that administrators are the only ones that can edit the redirect. I am unsure why that is the case.
A second problem I am facing. When you type in "Deji" and go to the disambiguation page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deji, the article redirect is now pointing at a notable fight he was a part of rather than at KSI! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floyd_Mayweather_Jr._vs_Deji which is not only confusing but I think also highlights the need for his article to be created, if there is no consensus on a redirect location and if he has taken part in a clearly notable fight!
It looks like the redirect page is protected because of several instances of a poor quality article being created. And a consensus being established that the article could only be created via AfC. There's a draft at Draft:Deji Olatunji that you'd be free to work on and submit when you think it's ready. But I'd maybe read all the comments on the draft and this discussion before proceeding. You won't need an admin for any of that, only accepting the submitted draft would require elevated privileges. -- D'n'B-t -- 15:22, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can look at Category:Wikipedia administrators. I am one, for example. However, an administrator likely wouldn't edit in your behalf. An administrator can move the draft over the protected redirect, but only after a reviewer agrees that it's ready for publication. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:38, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
renaming from sergey to serhii
suddenly my renaming from sergey to serhii in dedicated serhii bubka wiki page was canceled saying "changes did not appear constructive". someone please explain what should i do with that, because by that time person's name mistakenly continue to be sergey 159.224.197.118 (talk) 16:02, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IP user. Your edit to Sergey Bubka certainly isn't vandalism, and perhaps Robertjamal12 would explain why they reverted the edit and described it as vandalism?
However, the edit is a bit problematic, because our policy WP:COMMONNAME says that we should use the name most used in reliable English-language sources, and I see that (unsurprisingly) only the more recent sources transliterate his name as Ukrainian rather than Russian.
This was proposed and declined back in 2017. at the time, the Edit summary was "GuzzyG moved page Serhii Bubka to Sergey Bubka over redirect: It's the proper spelling, yes, but this move has been discussed and failed. All the english sources describe him as "Sergey" and he himself uses it on his own official website, thus..." While his website no longer exists (?), most of the search results use "Sergey". David notMD (talk) 17:08, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What was up with infoboxes yesterday?
I saw they were stuck in a mobile-esque view for most of yesterday but are reverted now. Was it some sort of technical issue or is Wikimedia testing out another style change? Krisgabwoosh (talk) 17:18, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a new volunteer and I thought I'd help by fixing bare URLs. There are two on the page of Princess Margriet of the Netherlands. I can identify the people in the photos, but I don't have access to the citations in the Visual Editor to do so. I found them in the Source Editor, but don't know the proper codes to use to edit them there. I'd prefer to use the Visual Editor, if possible. Please advise me.
HiWintilde, welcome to the Teahouse. You could use the source editor to temporarily remove {{Div col}} below the "Foreign honours" heading. Then VisualEditor works normally on the following content. Restore {{Div col}} before saving. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:46, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have a reference using a template like ref name=example {cite web |etc} /ref. I would like to reference it again elsewhere in the article, but append a modification to the template like ref name=example {quote blah} /ref. Is this possible? Thanks Tule-hog (talk) 18:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I found a photo of a magazine on eBay that happened to be the title page of a certain short story when it was first published. The magazine was published in the US before 1929, so it's clearly in the public domain (in my opinion). However, I'm not sure if the seller or eBay owns the copyright to this photo. Could this be considered "a mere 'record' photograph of a 2D work of art"? CyanWisp (talk) 18:50, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no specific threshold for something to be in consensus, the aim is just to find the solution which best addresses the sometimes-opposing concerns of all editors (or the closest we can manage). If only one editor is working on an article, then (for the time being) they have a consensus with just one editor. WelpThatWorked (talk) 19:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, if anything I'd say you're being excessively cautious. Like it says in WP:CON, you can establish a new consensus through editing, not just discussion. If you're worried about making a mistake, don't be, reverts are cheap, so there's no real way to break things permanently. WelpThatWorked (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi
Do you think MarketScreener is a good source for citations? Seems to keep pretty much up to date. Also they do not plagiarize from Wikipedia. Thanks Malevan (talk) 20:08, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can ask at Reliable Sources Noticeboard if you'd like it to be looked at in depth. But my two minute assesment is: I looked at a few random articles from marketscreener.com's home page and while they're mostly repostings from Reuters, surrounded by stock tickers and ads, there is some original content that might be useful. I wouldn't mind using it specifically for citing things within the field of stocks and shares, so long as it's not about themselves, "Surperformance SAS" or "Factset, Morningstar and S&P Capital IQ". Whatever those are. (Not related to reliability: It's fustrating how the registration wall comes up very quickly, but it's no higher than a 12ft lader so the site is useable, if kinda ugly). -- D'n'B-t -- 20:47, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
IP address issue
I really don't know what I'm doing here, so apologies if this an inappropriate forum for my inquiry. I only made an account because of an alert I received that some of "my" edits - associated with my IP address - had been undone, edits regarding a personage hitherto unknown to me ("Sedat Peker"). The edits are not the issue. The issue is why my IP address was associated with these edits. Is there any way I can avoid this happening again? Will the creation of a user account do the trick? Thank you to anyone who can help. Gumptiousconscience (talk) 23:47, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HiGumptiousconscience, welcome to the Teahouse. See MediaWiki:Sp-contributions-footer-anon which was probably displayed at the bottom of the page if you clicked the alert. It says: "Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users." You cannot prevent others from using an IP address but if you are logged in then you should not get alerts about it. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:56, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Inaccurate reference numbers
I recently created an article, Sivananda Sena, in which I added a note stating his birthplace is disputed by historians. I provided two different references suggesting two different places of birth, and included the respective reference numbers along with each. Later, after the edit was published, the reference numbers, despite the digits remaining the same, started alluding to different references, and not the ones I originally intended as citations for the claims. I tried fixing this issue twice but in vain. How do I solve this problem? Dissoxciate(talk)00:42, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HiDissoxciate. Does [2] give what you want? I suspect you tried to look at the displayed reference numbers in the rendered article. Never do that when editing. They are generated automatically after saving and cannot be used to make references. When you use ref name="...", you have to match another ref name="..." in the source text of the page. The name in ... can be almost anything, e.g. an author name, but VisualEditor makes a lot of ref names like ":4". That does not refer to the reference with number 4 in the rendered article. A ref name is only used to refer to the same reference multiple times. The source text said: <ref name=":4">{{Cite book |last=Stewart |first=Tony K. |title=The Final Word: The Caitanya Caritamrita and the Grammar of Religious Tradition |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2010 |isbn=9780199889372 |location=USA |pages=377 |language=en}}</ref>. I therefore referred to that reference with <ref name=":4" />. I use the source editor and don't know how to do it in VisualEditor. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:52, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello PrimeHunter, thankyou for the response! Yes, that's exactly it. Thanks for your help. I generally prefer VisualEditor for editing, except in select cases; hence went with the same for this edit as well. I did indeed look at the displayed reference numbers in the rendered article, and included the numbers that I thought the requisite references were assigned. My bad. I'll keep this in mind the next time. Thanks for the heads-up! Dissoxciate(talk)12:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dissoxciate: Ref names are not visible to readers so they don't have to be meaningful but the numbered ref names made by VisualEditor annoy many editors. If you want to make it more editor friendly then you could change them to something useful like the author or work, e.g. ref name="Stewart". If you do this then remember to change every occurrence of the ref name. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:29, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have a quick question regarding reliability. Does "self-published" as a detriment to reliability count if it comes from a library? I am trying to write about Mundelein, Illinois, and the most comprehensive history is a blog series published by a librarian from the Cook Memorial Public Library Districthere.I currently have it in the further reading, and I am wondering if this is an acceptable source for the "history" section that needs expansion on the article.
P.S. where can I find a "reliable source" for roads inside a city that doesn't count as "original research"? And what are some great sources for finding about towns besides local newspapers? Thank you! SeymourHolcomb (talk) 02:41, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @SeymourHolcomb: from your description, a blog like that (by a writer representing, at least unofficially, a reputable organisation, rather than just someone's own private ramblings) is probably reliable enough to support at least non-contentious factual information, ie. matters of historical record, descriptions of geography and environment, that sort of thing. But as we often say, the wilder the claim, the better the source needed to support it. So if this librarian says Mundelein was founded by aliens from planet Zurg, we would need independent verification of that; and if they say Mundelein is the greatest place in the world to live... well, that's just opinion, and not worth the paper it's not printed on. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:55, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How to Delete a Citation on VisualEditor?
As indicated in the heading above, what do I have to do to delete a numbered citation in my draft? I can't seem to find the function for that in the guide :(.
I want to bring to your attention an issue that has been annoying me for some time, but I don't know how to handle it myself. This relates to the birds of New Zealand.
I need to find someone with a good understanding of the relevant science to perform these merges without introducing errors, and is willing to apply WP:BOLD. Please consider helping if this sounds like a good fit for you.
Talk:Little_penguin: Merge discussion opened August 2023, closed with result of merge April 2024. As of today, the actual merge hasn't happened yet.The taxonomy is nuanced, as discussed in the merge discussion.
Talk:Yellow-eyed penguin: Merge discussion opened October 2023. I believe that the result is a merge consensus, but the discussion hasn't closed yet and the merge hasn't happened.
Talk:New Zealand raven: Merge discussion opened November 2023. I believe that the result is a merge consensus, but the discussion hasn't closed yet and the merge hasn't happened.
Talk:Xenicus: Merge discussion opened November 2023. I believe that the result is a merge consensus, but the discussion hasn't closed yet and the merge hasn't happened.
Draft:Stephan Schultze general feedback + specific question
Hello! I just submitted Draft:Stephan Schultze for review, but I want to make any improvements that I can even though it's been submitted. It's my first draft submission and I'm also fairly new to wikipedia editing. I've gotten it as close as I can to the Wikipedia guidelines, do you guys see anything I should fix or could improve? I'm just one person trying to evaluate my own writing so a second set of eyes would be immensely helpful in identifying any issues. I also have a specific question but I am especially looking for general feedback/identifying issues I haven't spotted.
Additionally, one of the main sources I referenced for the subheading Zaki Gordon Institute for Independent Filmmaking is a blog/news website run by one person. However, the author cites existing news articles for everything that I've used-- his website appears to be a self-published news outlet for news specifically relating to Yavapai College, which is where ZGI was located. Many of the news articles are not available to me directly since they are cited for the print version in Sedona AZ and I am located.. nowhere near there. I didn't realize that the site was run by 1 person until after I had written much of the segment. Do you think the site is reliable enough for use, or should I rewrite the section to stand without referencing the site?
Will do! Most of the information besides filmography can be confirmed elsewhere anyways. Is there anything else i should change while I'm at it, before resubmitting? Thank you so much! Iloveschiaparelli (talk) 08:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well it sort of is. Because if people’s articles are being rejected and then admin folk from wiki are going through those articles and approaching people in the public eye to get money from them to secure their page, that’s a problem. Where can I report this? BeacHal1 (talk) 08:44, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BeacHal1, which "admin folk from wiki" are "approaching people in the public eye to get money from them to secure their page", and what evidence do you have for this? -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BeacHal1: I believe you've mixed up two unrelated Teahouse threads. The discussion you started is right below this one. CanonNi's was asking the IP 49.36.71.141 who started the discussion above this one a question, not you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:53, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve been waiting for my recent article to be approved after a slightly harsh assessment that I did t have enough inline citations. And then the assessor stepped off before I could rectify leaving the article in a resubmission holding pen!
However, the person the article was about reached out recently to say that someone had offered to get it published for money! Can you let me know why this is happening? Seems very dodgy. BeacHal1 (talk) 08:33, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right to be suspicious, as nobody can get your draft published for money. Please see WP:SCAM. The assessment was not harsh. Everything in a Wikipedia article needs to be cited to a reliable source. Please read WP:YFA. Shantavira|feed me08:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I was told it was harsh last time I talked to teahouse because my citations were okay in the original. Obviously I’ve improved them a lot now. BeacHal1 (talk) 08:46, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @BeacHal1: RE your comment "the person the article was about reached out recently", it sounds like you have some sort of an external relationship with this person. I will post a conflict-of-interest query on your talk page, please read and respond to it. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:49, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BeacHal1: if the person you're writing about knows that you're writing about them and knows how to get hold of you to discuss the matter, then I'd say those are pretty clear signs of an external relationship. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:55, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m just trying to do good things on here. Not in it for any other reason. Just want to create articles about people that are underrepresented and don’t have PR or pay marketeers to do it. BeacHal1 (talk) 09:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, it is dodgy! You can read WP:SCAM for more info but basically, scammers look out for recently declined drafts and approach the subjects to solicit money. They will sometimes try to subvert the approvals process or just take the money and run. You can report this to paid-en-wpwikipedia.org, but as they have no connection with Wikipedia, there's only so much that can be done. If its identified as someone with a Wikipedia account then obviously they'll be banned. It's unfortunate, but the public nature of Wikipedia's editing process does mean that it gets targeted by bad actors.
Most importantly, don't give anyone any money. If you follow through the AfC process then your article will get reviewed again, and when it's ready it'll get aproved. -- D'n'B-t -- 08:52, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any way to speed up the review of the draft?
Hi, I submitted Draft:Wat Paknam Japan about a month ago. I understand that review takes time, but as far as page views are concerned, hardly anyone has seen it, which makes me a little nervous.
This article is my translation of the Japanese version of the article I wrote, which was selected for the top page in the Japanese version as kyouka-kiji(enhanced article, similar to DYK5X), so I do not see any major problems with the structure of the article.
If comments are made on the article, I am prepared to respond to them, but so far I have received no comments.
The draft has been published, but I would appreciate continued advice and clarification (if there is another appropriate place, please direct me to it).
I have removed one of the points made, the section on access.
However, the other point, "promotional," is one part I understand and one part I don't. There are a few parts of the deleted section that do not seem to be promotional, and yet seem to be valuable information.
Before I go any further, let me clarify my position: I am a non-religious person and have no vested interest in this institution. Also, the University of Tsukuba paper that forms the core of this article is an architectural thesis and probably has no vested interest in this facility.
I see some people may feel that the flow of worship is unnecessary, but I think it is exceptional for a Thai temple because it incorporates a way of worship that is rooted in Japanese ideas, even though it is a facility for Thai people. The source of this method of worship is a paper, and I guess it was described in the paper because the researcher thought it was worthy of special mention.
As for Differences from Thai Temples, I think it is one of the most distinctive sentences in the paper, showing how Thai culture has changed to adapt to Japan. I have no idea what in the world is promotional about this section. I really don't understand this and would appreciate if someone could elaborate on this if possible.
I am also not sure why the statement regarding the relationship with the community was removed. When a new religious institution from a different culture is established, it is not uncommon for it to cause friction with the local community, and information about its relationship with the community would be useful. The fact that the local government introduced a poem composed by a citizen to the local community also gives us some insight into the relationship between the facility and the community.
The fact that the information about fulfilling the requirements for receiving the precepts by the five monks was removed also does not make sense to me.
I personally consider the point that whether or not an organization can clone itself to be of mortal importance.
I have no idea what is advertised about this statement either and would appreciate an explanation if possible.
Hello, 狄の用務員. The Teahouse is not an appropriate place to discuss the content of an article: that should be done on the article's talk page, possibly notifying an appropriate WikiProject if there seems to be a need to involve more editors. --ColinFine (talk) 16:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I need to create a reference a library collection on the individual that I am writing about. Smith Library papers, SSC-MS-00282, Sophia Smith Collection,Mary Conway Kohler papers. Smith College, Northampton, MA: Open full Biographical Note. Henrybardklein (talk) 13:14, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HiHenrybardklein. Use of citation templates like {{Cite}} is not mandatory. You can hand-write a citation by placing anything inside <ref>...</ref>. If SSC-MS-00282 is a designation for a collection of papers then try to make it clear which paper it's about. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:27, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
{{Cite archival metadata
|author=Ellice Amanna
|date=18 June 2019
|title=Finding Aid to Mary Conway Kohler papers
|url=https://findingaids.smith.edu/repositories/2/resources/1071
|repository=Sophia Smith Collection (SSC-MS-00282)
|location=Smith College, Northampton, MA
|accessdate=15 June 2024
}} ⟶
Ellice Amanna (18 June 2019). "Finding Aid to Mary Conway Kohler papers". Prepared for the Sophia Smith Collection (SSC-MS-00282), Smith College, Northampton, MA. Retrieved 15 June 2024.
There isn't currently a parameter for the SSC identifier, but I could add one, if you let me know where it should appear in the output. Hope this helps! Mathglot (talk) 17:05, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Abandoned Draft.
Hello. Last year, I was in the process of drafting a Wikipedia page for William Graham Sumner's masterwork Folkways: A Study of the Sociological Importance of Usages, Manners, Customs, Mores, and Morals. I abandoned the draft; and, I suppose, after several months of desuetude it was deleted.
I'd like to get back to working on it (the desideratum being from that actual draft I had composed). Is this request of mine practicable? Or do I have to start from scratch? I'm sure there's a record of it somewhere. (is anything really lost on Wikipedia?)
I'm currently working on creating my first article here, about the Bucolic War between Egyptian herdsmen and Roman authorities, as I noticed that Isidorus has a red link for the Bucolic War. However, I also noticed that the article for Isidorus goes into great detail about the Bucolic War, perhaps rendering a whole article about the war unnecessary. I'm unsure what to do here since I'm still quite new to editing. Should I continue to work on my article? Should I stop and try to create an article about something else? Should I try to split the article about Isidorus? Zemmiphobia007 (talk) 16:36, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It may still be worthwhile to keep working on your article. Isidorus doesn't provide as much detail as a full Bucolic War could and should provide, plus an article titled "Bucolic War" is a more likely target for someone who is looking for specific information on that event. It's also listed in List of peasant revolts. Reconrabbit16:55, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Zemmiphobia007, there are a few principles you should look at here, starting with WP:Notability, and in particular, § Whether to create standalone pages. One issue here is to figure out whether there is sufficient content in reliable sources to fill out two separate articles on the two topics, Bucolic War, and Isidorus. If there is, then you can continue on your present path. If there is not (see https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Bucolic+War%22), then per WP:PAGEDECIDE there should only be one article, and probably that one should be Isidorus, and you could add a new section to the Isidorus article entitled "Bucolic War", and add your new content there, instead of in a new article, which is likely to become a WP:PERMASTUB if created.
Finally, your article consists almost entirely of a long quotation from a primary source. While there is no copyright issue regarding material copied from antiquity (there might be from a modern translation, but this one appears to be out of copyright), Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a repository of primary source content. Instead of adding that long quote, just summarize it in your own words, and add a citation. Alternatively, you could add the entire content of the work to Wikisource, which is a repository of primary source content, and link to it from your article summarizing it. Someone has already uploaded three chapters of Cassius Dio there; see s:Dio's Roman History, which has the same Cary translation as you are quoting. If the content you wish to link to or summarize is not there, you are welcome to add it to Wikisource. If you have questions about adding source content to Wikisource, please see the Wikisource:Scriptorium (like our Tea house). (edit conflict) Mathglot (talk) 20:11, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see Wikipedia has a mobile app in the Google Play Store for Android devices, why isn't there a link directing users to that app here somewhere on the website to show it's authentic/official? Usually websites with a dedicated mobile app would have a link posted on their website. Bzik2324 (talk) 19:19, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Bzik2324, and welcome! The apps are linked at Help:Mobile access. I have heard a few people say, however, that the experience on the apps is rather poor quality, and most folks that I'm aware of usually just edit in their browsers on mobile (for one, the apps have communication issues that are not so much an issue on the web version). As a result, the apps are not as well utilized as might be expected. Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 19:28, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bzik2324: The Android and iOS apps are made by the Wikimedia Foundation which runs Wikipedia. The wiki pages are made by volunteer editors who generally have low interest in the apps, and dislike interference from the Foundation. But maybe we should mention the apps a little more. I have added a hatnote [3]toApp with a link to List of Wikipedia mobile applications for readers who actively try to search for an app. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How do I defend myself against false accusations and false allegations?
I have been the subject of some certain sabotage by user @Southdevonian for a mistake I did recently. I am not exaggerating this, although the topic does otherwise, but still I feel personally offended and threatened at the same time by this user’s actions, which for the sake of understanding I don’t know whether it’s intentional or just a misunderstanding. I really don’t have someone here to defend or support me in any way or to seek advice regarding this sort of inflammatory stuff that are being levelled against me. Also this is not because I am worried about me getting banned or cancelled, this is about reverting edits I have made a month ago, which were found to be “AI generated”, although I wasn’t aware of any AI apps until a week ago this month. I have asked @Southdevonian about why he would revert edits for the reason that have nothing to do with AI or a simple mistake in citing a source, but instead he tries using them as a weapon to justify his actions. Although I have no personal vendetta against him, I think might have one against me. Davecorbray (talk) 20:01, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Davecorbray, I see that Southdevonian asked you on your talk page whether you had used AI to create Wikipedia content, and you admitted that you had. He then explained why you should not do that. I see no "sabotage" or threats. Maproom (talk) 20:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know @Maproom that he had asked me that whether I used AI or not, and yes I admitted. I admitted it. Yet, he didn’t say anything about the fact that I used it only recently, about a week ago editing the article Spencer Perceval, even then I only used ChatGPT only for paraphrasing long sentences and simplifying texts that are unclear or sources like books or online websites. I have apologised for the irrefutable errors and the damage caused by it. But he used this as a justifiable excuse to revert the rest of edits. Also, what I mean by “threatened” (not threats btw) is that he accuses me of being a sock puppet or whatever it is, that is what I called sabotage. So even this does not give any credibility whatsoever for my point. Davecorbray (talk) 20:20, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look at John Russell, 1st Earl Russell#Economic policy, a section which you created. I read there "In addition to the Bank Charter Act of 1844, Russell's government pursued monetary policies aimed at maintaining price stability and supporting economic growth. The adoption of the gold standard, as enshrined in the Bank Charter Act, provided a framework for the regulation of the money supply and the stabilisation of the currency." But Russell was in opposition throughout 1844. I think Southdevonian is right to be sceptical about the value of your contributions. Maproom (talk) 20:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I know he has the right to be skeptical because of my grammatical mistakes and especially if I did something that is clearly wrong, yet he can’t revert whole edits just because of small details can he? What I meant to say there is that he was in co-operation with the Banks Charter Act of 1844, which was passed by Robert Peel, the then Prime Minister from 1841-1846 (in case if you think I don’t my history). But, again, does that give him a right to employ false allegations against me, accusing me of being a “sock puppet”? As long as I been here on Wikipedia, I’ve been told that because of a simple mistake, whether grammatical or reference wise, a user couldn’t be blocked or removed. And edits cannot be removed due to this kind of error. Davecorbray (talk) 22:25, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Davecorbray, if I understand right, you accuse Southdevonian of harassing you. This is hardly a matter for the teahouse. "Dealing with harassment" tells you how to deal with harassment. Please read that page (and not only its "dealing with" part) and act according to its definitions and recommendations. If you do bring up the matter elsewhere, you should consider exactly what you're saying before you click on "Publish changes". As an example of how not to go about it, above you talk of "certain sabotage" (and add that you're "not exaggerating"), but then say that you don't know whether this is "intentional or just a misunderstanding". To put it kindly, your description of what happened is very confused. -- Hoary (talk) 01:23, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it’s a personal feeling and it might get emotionally exaggerated for the reasons that I feel that my contributions are being removed and distorted, all of them, due to accusations of AI generated, which is being used to revert edits that are not a even remotely being written by me using any artificial support. Again, You doesn’t seem to understand the fact that I am unjustly being accused of being a “sock puppet” or what is that, which really made some damage in a way that has led to many of my contributions being either removed entirely and partially. If I can’t address my concerns here, where should I take case? Davecorbray (talk) 01:44, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You appear to be claiming that you are being harassed and you want to know how to deal with it. For the second and (at least from me) last time: read, digest, and act in accordance with Wikipedia:Harassment. -- Hoary (talk) 02:01, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If there's no notice that this is freely licensed, 7s3s, then there's no reason to believe that it's freely licensed. Is there such a license? Though I suspect that what you're asking is instead: If O'Brien is removed from this image, leaving the logo alone, would the logo meet the threshold of originality, or would it fail to do so and thereby fall in the public domain? -- Hoary (talk) 01:32, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox - How do edit values that don't show up in source code / visual editor?
Hey. I have never edited an infobox and cannot figure out how to edit the source ("Quelle") label here: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%BClz_(K%C3%B6ln). The semi-optimal solution would be to update it to 2023. But actually, that source label makes little sense, since it only refers to the area and population and not all the other info. Could someone first tell me how to update/delete the source label? I suppose I can then add references in individual infobox fields just as in the text? Grawiuton (talk) 01:43, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grawiuton: Someone might be able to help you here, but questions for the German Wikipedia should be asked there de:Wikipedia:Fragen_von_Neulingen. I tried to edit the page so I get get your answer but between not being able to read German and the German Wikipedia forcing me into Visual Editor, it did not go well. RudolfRed (talk) 02:06, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is this a question, or a request, or just a statement? If it's a question or request, please rephrase it. (For a start, which "article map"?) -- Hoary (talk) 02:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On my end maybe on other ends when i enter a county article any county in the us article and I go down under the first image to the map the map instead of showing te states outline with the county lines and the red highlighted county it is just the red highlighted county on a white background 2601:246:CF00:CD60:D26:36F9:683F:9C95 (talk) 02:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Political Candidate Article
I’m an unpaid volunteer for a Congressional campaign in West Virginia. Our candidate won the primary race and will be on the November ballot. The other candidate for the same Congressional seat has a Wikipedia article and it seemed in the public interest for our candidate to have one as well. As Thomas Jefferson wrote to Richard Prince on January 8, 1789, “… wherever the people are well informed they can be trusted with their own government.” (https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/jefferson/60.html)
This is my first Wikipedia article and the review I received tells me my submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. I accept that as true. In the process of writing the article, I came to understand just how challenging it is. As such, I have no intention of becoming a regular Wikipedia contributor or reviewer. And I admire those who are.
So my question is this…
What’s the best way to get help editing the article I wrote to add the supporting citations needed?
I did looked over your draft that you linked. My only suggestion is that users will have different interests of what they want to edit and such. If you want this to be an actual article that lives on this Wikipedia, then it needs additional citations that are reliable and trustworthy.
So I noticed this user changed the redirect on the TheReidOut wiki page. Instead of it being redirected to Joy Reid, it got changed to Hardball with Chris Matthews. Does this redirect make any sense or no? I just want to make sure before I go onto their talk page about making incorrect redirects (if this make any sense).