Wikipedia:Teahouse

Stormy clouds, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

Crazy

There's something somehow crazy about Wikipedia on article's citation and notability. A notable article I created with references but had been earlier deleted is even being denied dratification talk less of undeletion, see, while another article that I moved to the draftspace for further improvement as the article creator failed to cite any source was returned to mainspace. What do you advice me to do to the latter article as I can't find enough references (for now) to improve this article. Jõsé ^hola 07:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237 I'll comment just on Demas Akpore, which was the one you draftified and was restored to mainspace by an admin. That article was first created in 2010, when Wikipedia didn't have the strict requirements for inline citations in biographies of living people it has today. (Actually he is dead but the same principles apply.) It is not correct to say it has no sources, however: they are listed in a separate section of the article. The article has many faults but the individual would probably pass our political notability requirements. So, what is needed is someone motivated to improve the article, not to draftify it as a route to deletion (which it would be by a bot if no-one edited it after six months in draft). We have a policy that says older articles—as a rule of thumb those older than 90 days—should not be draftified without prior consensus at AfD. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237 With most articles that don't get accepted, having too few references is not the problem, but rather having the wrong kind of references. When a person writing a new article hears there is some problem with references, they tend to assume that giving larger and larger numbers of low-quality references will fix it, and that's never true. The key is learning which kind of references are the good ones, for the kind of topic you have. (For example, good references for an article about some kind of machine are quite different from good references for an article about a person.) When your references are all good ones, you don't need a large number of them. TooManyFingers (talk) 15:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

@TooManyFingers: Looking at this article, do you think the references are good? Jõsé ^hola 08:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

No. There is nothing to show that he really works at a university (it doesn't even say which university!), and there are no independent sources describing his work. We need to see recognition of his work from people who don't know him, and who are not involved in the same causes as he is. Right now we see only his friends and supporters, and we don't care what his friends and supporters say about him - of course they will say only good things! For example, we want large reports about his life and work (not interviews with him, but to see that outside reporters are saying a lot about him) from people who are not part of the Nupe community, or at least we can see they are not his friends and do not know him or work with him, and that they are trustworthy published sources.

If my friends write great things about me, you should not believe everything they say. If reporters from major newspapers in far away cities write great things about me, then you will start to believe it. TooManyFingers (talk) 13:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I think you have done what they call "writing the article backwards". You seem to be saying things about him because you know him, and that will never work. If you want to write an article about a person, it would be better for you to write about someone who is not from your country. TooManyFingers (talk) 13:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

It is not a bad thing to see what he has written himself, but those are not references. If you hear that I wrote fifty or a hundred books, you will not become more interested in me, because you don't know yet if my books are good. (I could be brilliant, but I could be only a hard worker who didn't write anything useful.)

But if you see articles in three major newspapers or magazines from different cities with my name in the title, THEN you might be interested, because you know I can't be friends with all those reporters and editors. TooManyFingers (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

After reading a bit more carefully, I'm sorry to say it's even worse. He has strong ethnic opinions and he wants to rewrite the history books.

Maybe you didn't understand, but people from other ethnic groups will be allowed to rewrite your article and you cannot try to stop them.

And Wikipedia rejects ideas for changing the history books. Wikipedia will only say what is already in the history books. If a person wants to change the history books, they have to finish doing that first. THEN Wikipedia can tell the world. Changing the history books is a very hard task, and people who succeed are normally only written about after they die. There can be exceptions of course, but it's unusual. TooManyFingers (talk) 15:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237: to sum up my response, it seems like you know this man, or you support him, maybe you even work for the same organization, AND he seems like he's probably involved in ethnic controversy, AND the references are very poor. This could turn into a disastrously bad article, even the kind of article that makes him look like a bad man, and I honestly recommend that you stop trying. Let a person from a neutral place far away write this article instead. I recommend that if you want to write articles, do not write about any person from Nigeria, but choose a completely different kind of topic. I hope this helps. TooManyFingers (talk) 19:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay thanks.

Actually, I am doing this because of a campaign on Nigerian educators. Personally, I hardly create biographies and I do not try hard to do so. @TooManyFingers: This particular article has been deleted earlier but it is named as an article that needs to be created at WP Nigeria and may pass GNG. Jõsé ^hola 20:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Honestly, the man is somewhat notable but like you said, there are no external sources confirming his notability because I can hardly find any online (a major problem with articles related to underdeveloped countries) and I DON'T KNOW OR SUPPORT HIM, I am only doing so because of the WikiProject nomination. Jõsé ^hola 20:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

If you really don't support him, and if you can find real references (showing for sure where he works, and showing that third parties have published stories that are all about him), then it could work. But right now the article unfortunately looks just like something his friends might write, and that can't work. I hope you understand, and I'm sorry that I immediately thought of you being his friend. Most of the time, people involved in ethnic or political controversy get written about by their supporters. TooManyFingers (talk) 20:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Was I the one you were referring to in multiple comments at different time? @TooManyFingers: Jõsé ^hola 20:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes it was. How did you find the information you wrote? Surely his enemies do not keep careful lists of his books ...

And how do you know he is a professor without knowing which university? A professor without a university, is not a professor. TooManyFingers (talk) 20:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

A question of not so much importance

I have long searched for a picture I saw once about how excrement longer than a certain length must be lowered by hand into the toilet. It was on one of the advisory pages of wikipedia, possibly a humor page. I can't find it :( 75.142.254.3 (talk) 15:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

IP editor: the file is this one. Finding it via the advanced options in Special:Search is an interesting exercise. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

I commend your competence and bravery. -- asilvering (talk) 23:07, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I could not find it. 75.142.254.3 (talk) 08:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

what is the fastest car on the planet?

What is the fastest car?

81.98.226.73 (talk) 17:31, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

• Hi there! The teahouse is mainly about Wikipedia-related questions (for future reference) but to answer your question, the fastest production car (that’s not a race car) is the Koenigsegg Agera RS. Hope this helps! :) Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 17:42, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

The above answer is good, but another answer is that people don't all agree which things count as a car and which ones don't, and people don't all agree about the best way to do speed tests, so it's hard to give an answer that satisfies everyone. TooManyFingers (talk) 17:46, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

@Sir MemeGod: The Teahouse is for questions about how to use Wikipedia. For general questions, use WP:Reference Desk. Land_speed_record might be what you are interested in. RudolfRed (talk) 19:12, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

The fastest car on the planet is the ThrustSSC, but it isn't a production car and cannot be purchased. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:19, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

ThrustSSC is a single vehicle which broke the land speed record in 1997 and is in a museum so if "is" implies currently operating then it also fails. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Plus with those engines it makes a lot of people say "that's not really a car", or "yeah, but that's not what I meant". It's easy to prove that it's technically a car, but it's sufficiently weird to raise questions. TooManyFingers (talk) 21:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Heh. When I see those engines I say "I want a car like that!" ~Anachronist (talk) 23:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

My daughter is the last of famous bloodline

Hello, my daughter is the last bloodline of General Gordon Meade. I want to add her to his page. She is 12 and I want her to be proud of her family and learn all the history Amcraig82 (talk) 01:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Amcraig82, whether you have in mind General George Meade, the poet Gordon Meade, or somebody else, your daughter is most welcome to read the article, to learn from it, and to be proud of her family. But she has no place in the article (unless reliable sources with no connection to her have described her and her relationship with the subject of the article). -- Hoary (talk) 01:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Yup, I'm from the bloodline of Charlemagne, King of the Franks, and I don't add my name to his article. See WP:NOT. tgeorgescu (talk) 01:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Not to mention that Matthew Fox and Mark Rockefeller, both related to George Meade through his daughter Sarah Wise Meade, would likely be surprised to find out that neither they or their children actually exist. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 02:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Since you want these things, you should just tell her yourself. TooManyFingers (talk) 13:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Sir, your daughter has not personally done anything notable (at least yet). It is fine for her to read his article, but it is not fine to include her in it due to nepotism. Drdr150 (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I gonna admit

Wikipedia donations are NOT NEEDED, you may say why? Well Wikipedia earns 154,7 millions dollars as of 2022. All that money goes to the ones that maintain Wikipedia, however the ones who converted Wikipedia in what it is today are THE USERS. The users, admins, and stewards who have created many articles don’t receive nothing. The donations only end up in the ones who maintain Wikipedia engine, but not it’s articles, which let’s gonna admit is not too hard to maintain. Wikipedia has just text, and the images aren’t even of Wikipedia but they are of commons. With this I’m not disrespecting this wonderful encyclopedia nor it’s users who have created this wonderful articles. Just that I feel that the users should gain something, because they are spending their time editing and fixing Wikipedia and they are not receiving nothing. That means that They are WORKING FOR FREE. The Wikimedia ones also are working but by less time that the users, and the Wikimedia ones are getting all the money, and the users nothing. I already said this but I gonna say it again, IM NOT DISRESPECTING THE USERS NOR THE PERSONS WHO WORK TO MAIN THE ENCYCLOPEDIA. But rather I’m saying this because all reasons gave above, truly disappointing. Protoeus (talk) 05:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Donations go to the Wikimedia Foundation which hosts, amoungst many other things both Wikipedia and Wikicommons. I'm not super knowlegeable about web severs and whathaveyou but I'm glad someone is keeping an eye on them. You're under no obligation to donate to that if you don't want to. What do the editors get out of it? They get Wikipedia. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Protoeus, the Teahouse is a place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. It is not the place for a rant against the Wikimedia Foundation, which has no day to day involvement with developing content on Wikipedia. If you do not like the WMF, then don't donate any money to them. As for me, I donate time to improving Wikipedia as opposed to donating money to the WMF. Cullen328 (talk) 06:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

The purpose of donation is to keep the Wikimedia projects alive. But it's not necessary to donate as the WMF has sufficient funds to run for one and half decades. Ahri Boy (talk) 12:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Yeah, I feel that it’s better collaborate to edit to Wikipedia, instead of donating for them. I knew the teahouse wasn’t for this, but I needed that some important people here know that. Protoeus (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Protoeus, for a better understanding of the depth and breadth of the Wikimedia Foundation's activities and responsibilities, you might find these articles helpful:

On the English Wikipedia: Wikimedia Foundation

On Meta-Wiki: meta:Wikimedia Foundation

If you'd like a better understanding of the motivations, viewpoints, and advice of volunteers who create, monitor, and maintain the actual content; you could spend many evenings reading over 2,000 essays that they have written on a wide range of Wikipedia-related topics.

— Scottyoak2 (talk) 07:09, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

And yet, where do they get that money from? Donors. Drdr150 (talk) 21:18, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Redirection pages to a page that merely mentions the title

This is a general query. I found a redirection page Palki Sharma that redirects to Firstpost. The Firstpost page does not even have a section about Palki Sharma. It merely mentions her as Managing Editor once. Is this standard? I don't think so.

There are far too many names of people (Even on Firstpost) who don't have an independent pages. I think it is not advisable to create a redirection for them, unless they at least have significant mention on the related page or a section dedicated to them.

There are mentions of Executive editor and Deputy executive editor as well who don't have a redirection. Managing editor, also is not a significant role for a redirection. Although, she has wide media presence, we can create an individual page for her. Just curious about the redirection to a page that merely mentions her name. Waonderer (talk) 11:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm just going to provide a general answer to your general query: When it comes to redirects, a mention is better than nothing and redirects are cheap. I would just like to mention that you should always check both 'what links here' and the page logs (I suspect your question may have been a bit different if you'd seen them). -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 12:04, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Agreed with the "redirects are cheap" point. I was just thinking if that's allowed then many such wikilinks can be created by people that just fool people. You click on reach an article that barely talks about the title you wished to read more about.

By "What links here", do you mean on the redirection page (here Palki Sharma)? Even that doesn't seem much. Waonderer (talk) 14:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

If you wish to read more about Palki Sharma, I suggest doing a Google search. If you believe this redirect should be deleted, you should nominate it at WP:RFD, following the instructions there. If you wish to create a Wikipedia article on Palki Sharma, start the article in draft space via WP:AFC, and then nominate it when you are satisfied with it. Softlavender (talk) 14:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Special:WhatLinksHere/Palki_Sharma shows for example a previous AfD discussion. I'd also note there is at least one extant draft, and one refundable draft (of course you already know this). I don't know where a deletion proposal for the redirect would land. I'd estimate about even odds. Personally I don't take great offence from these types of harmless redirects for borderline people. They may encourage more content, or provide some information to the end user, both of which may plausibly exist. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Previous deletion discussion: WP:Articles for deletion/Palki Sharma. -- Softlavender (talk) 02:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Religious institutions

Can we add a list of all churches, temples, synagogues, mosques, etc. to an article about a city? 73.170.137.168 (talk) 20:04, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

No, that's not appropriate for an encyclopedia article. Might be a better fit for the city's entry at Wikivoyage, but you might want to ask first.https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Main_Page RudolfRed (talk) 20:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

OK. 2601:644:9083:5730:B42B:A5F0:DBF7:4CD (talk) 21:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

It depends. Wikipedia is not a guide for religious institution, however if a specific institution is notable in Wikipedia terms, e.g Cathedral of St. John the Divine is rightfully so linked in Morningside Heights (a neighborhood within New York City that's appropriate. A list is another possibility like in Synagogues of Kraków ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:38, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Why would you want a list like that? What would it be good for?

Somehow I think I sense "We want more recognition for our church, and we think we can get it on Wikipedia, but how can we keep it from being deleted? We need a clever strategy against deletion... I know! Let's add all the other churches in town too!" TooManyFingers (talk) 23:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Because it's a relevant feature about a city? You could ask: Why would you want a list of highways in a state? Why would you want a list of schools in a town? Why would you want a list of villages in a tehsil? 2601:644:9083:5730:1D92:8684:37CF:EE71 (talk) 05:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Wikipedia isn't concerned about that, as it is not intended to be a directory. WikiVoyage is a potential alternative, as RudolfRed pointed out. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@TooManyFingers: Please assume good faith; doubly so here at The Teahouse. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

You could check that they all have entries in Wikidata (and expand any that already exist), and take photos of each and add them to Wikimedia Commons. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm new

As the title says, I'm new and nervous, and even the newcomer pages don't help. I worry about even clicking on the edit button. The reason why is because I'm afraid (make a big mistake) to get banned from Wikipedia and plainly just is confused going through a tutorial. What is your number one advice to get over this fear? Tri Comment (talk) 00:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tri Comment: Welcome to the Teahouse. Just make tiny edits to start out. As a new user, you should have a homepage enabled at Special:Homepage, which should show you some suggestions for "easy edits" like correcting a typo. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tri Comment Just be bold! If you believe a change is right, do it. Explain the reason in the edit summary, if an editor disagrees, they'll explain why instead of reverting without reason. As Tenryuu said above, start by making small edits. You'll get more comfortable over time. If you have any other questions don't hesitate to ask. Regards, win8x (talking | spying) 01:00, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Edits may be reverted (reversed, undone) - often for not providing a reference in support of added content - without the erroneous editor being blocked. Blocking offences include stuff like vandalism, threatening other editors, threatening to start legal action... David notMD (talk) 01:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tri Comment: Further to the good advice given above by others, you can make some practice edits in your sandbox. Please do! Also take our short tutorial. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi! You asking how to overcome fear is the first step to overcoming it. There is nothing to worry about here. As others have said previously, see videos and check the edit guides.

In addition, try to join the Wikimedia affiliates in your community for offline guidance. You can also come here to ask questions you are not sure of, you can also reach out to me on my talk page as I'm open to guiding new editors Tesleemah (talk) 12:19, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I have a general critique about Wikipedia use of language for defining 'racism'.

I have been personally experiencing this problem, via cancel culture. So, understanding the problem I have a critique on the use of language and lack of facts on theories that are used to define racism. I feel I'm introducing a new, or if not new, ignored point.  The Misuse of Academic Language: How Complex Theories on Racism Become Tools for Discrimination.

Academic theory, particularly from left-leaning scholars, has developed complex and 'nuanced' definitions of structural or systemic racism, often presenting these theories as indisputable fact. This approach has, in some cases, led to what can be seen as a narcissistic phenomenon, where contradictions about reality and truth in human behavior justify discrimination against white men. As per these definitions, white people, seen as the top of a power hierarchy, cannot themselves be discriminated against. This mirrors a narcissistic method of control, wherein 'academic language' is used to push philosophical theories as fact, misleading people into interpreting structuralism and related concepts of 'implicit bias' as conclusive proof of racism. Basic social behaviors, like homophily—our tendency to trust those similar to us—are misconstrued as racism. Using unequal outcomes as proof of discrimination is problematic. When the intricate definitions of 'structural' or 'systemic' racism are distilled into everyday understanding, they often translate into the oversimplified belief that 'all white people are racist and don’t realize it.' This, as Noam Chomsky has pointed out, shows how postmodernist language, when reduced to plain terms, reveals the philosophical theory as fantasy. In this way, left-leaning academics have created language that can be used narcissistically to abuse or vilify individuals based on skin color or sex. AstroSQ (talk) 01:36, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

hi @AstroSQ and welcome to the Teahouse! are you intending to have this theory posted onto the Racism article, or is this intended a critique on Wikipedia or certain academic papers that Wikipedia uses as sources? 💜  melecie  talk - 01:45, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I did make an attempt to post it on the Racism article. I thought I submitted it. But I was directed to use Teahouse. So here I am. AstroSQ (talk) 02:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

You posted the above content on the Talk page of the Racism article and it was reverted (removed). Talk pages are the proper place to debate/discuss/reach consensu when editors disagree. It is not aplace for your thoughts on the topic. A note to this effect was left on your Talk page. If you believe that the content belongs in the article, then references are required. David notMD (talk) 02:46, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

What kind of references are required?  AstroSQ (talk) 02:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

WP:RS is the very basis for how Wikipedia works. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 11:16, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

• AstroSQ, you are free to post your personal musings on a blog, forum, social media, or published article/book, but Wikipedia is not a forum and thus it is not the place to post such personal theses -- not on a talkpage, or Teahouse, or userpage. You might try some place like Reddit. If you are here to build an encyclopedia by adding cited facts to articles, then welcome. If you are here to soapbox your own views, then you will not last long. Softlavender (talk) 03:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

  So, citing for a past published public policy as accounting for the history of laws governing race would be very relevant to the article, as far as I can tell. If I were to collect stories of hundreds of people who have experienced racism relative to a philosophical theory that claims to seek to reduce racism but in fact increased racism, would that be relevant to Wikipedia as the history of racism? AstroSQ (talk) 04:45, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

  No, that would be Original Research and possibly also Synthesis, neither of which belong on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not the venue you are seeking. Find a venue which supports and allows the posting of original research. It's fairly clear that you are not here to add facts to an encyclopedia, but rather to put across your own viewpoint, which is not what Wikipedia is for. Softlavender (talk) 05:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

As for "What kind of references are required?", the article has more than 250 references. Look at existing content and references. Are there reliable source references that support your idea that "...a philosophical theory that claims to seek to reduce racism but in fact increased racism."? David notMD (talk) 11:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

My draft has been rejected because it "requires a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic"

I have written an article about a scholarship there is little information about outside its primary sources: Draft:Georgia Rotary Student Program (GRSP)

It has been rejected and it says it meets the criteria for speedy deletion because it sounds promotional. I am unsure how I can rewrite it to make it sound more neutral or "encyclopedic". I used the Rotary Youth Exchange wikipedia website as a guide. Can anyone provide me with examples of how i can rewrite a sentence to sound more neutral? or what should I change to get it approved? Wikiproject2024 (talk) 04:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Please abandon this idea as what you are trying to do is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Please start by reading Wikipedia:Golden rule. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Rotary Youth Exchange has multiple significant flaws, for which it has 'tags' at the top. This makes it a not-good model for your effort. David notMD (talk) 11:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I am aware, but it exists and is allowed on wikipedia and it is a pretty similar kind of program, which is why I used it. Wikiproject2024 (talk) 16:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

That article is "allowed" on Wikipedia in the sense that somebody created it twenty years ago, when we were eager to get Wikipedia populated, and didn't worry so much about standards. In an ideal world, every one of the thousands and thousands and thousands of seriously substandard articles we have would have been looked at by now, and either improved or deleted; but this being a volunteer project where people work on what they choose, this tends not to happen. But we have higher standards for new articles. ColinFine (talk) 16:57, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Wikiproject2024, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that if you have a subject where "there is little inhformation about outside its primary sources", then almost by definition it is impossible for the subject to meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article is possible. Therefore every single moment you spend on trying to get an article on this subject is time and effort wasted. Sorry. ColinFine (talk) 16:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I understand. Thank you so much for your help! Wikiproject2024 (talk) 00:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I would like to apply for one month of editing time for the geji entry

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

 Courtesy link: Gējì, Talk:Gējì

I'm really sorry.This entry is not perfect now. I have been slowly improving it, but due to controversy, I cannot edit it now. The sexual issues of this group of female performers are being held up. Some people must define them as sex workers and must think that all of them are prostitution.For the specific situation and explanation, please read all I said in the discussion forum, if it is convenient.[[Talk:Gējì|https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:G%C4%93j%C3%AC]] I hope someone can have a discussion and define the identity of this group of female performers, rather than them continuing to be exported as they are now.I know this is presumptuous, but if anyone could help, I'd really appreciate it, thanks.Sorry to bother. Now some people even think that all the contents of this entry, even the name of this entry, should not exist, and that the entry must be given a wrong definition.

I want to apply for a month to complete this entry, and then come back to it if there is any problem. In the current situation, this entry may be locked for life. So I really hope someone can take a look at this question, thank you very much.

清风与明月 (talk) 07:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

added courtesy link since the intended link used nowiki 💜  melecie  talk - 07:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

It's a little difficult to parse this request, but if I'm interpreting your question correctly, there is no mechanism for "applying" for exclusive editing time for a live article. Your edits have no special priority over any other editor's edits. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 11:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

This issue is at WP:ANI#User:清风与明月 Continued Tendentious editing. and is outside the scope of the Teahouse. My suggestion is when multiple people ask you to refrain from editing, you comply with such requests regardless of correct you [may think you] are. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 11:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Based on this post, I have proposed an indefinite block. This simply isn't working. —Wasell^(T) 17:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

The answer is No. Cullen328 (talk) 17:30, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Some of my students cannot post external links to my talk page

This problem is affecting only a minority of my students; as far as I can tell this is pretty random, as in, it affects only some students. Many students with new accounts can do this, but a few cannot. The links are the same (they need to take a screenshot of the training for students page, upload it to imgur or such and link it in their post). We already had a similar activity last semester and no student reported this problem back then. Some of the affected students include Poeyal (talk · contribs), Xukeying2022039098 (talk · contribs) and Hee Jung, Yoon (talk · contribs) (there are more - see my talk page if you need more data and look for student posts without links). FYI my first thought was that this is some security feature affecting just created accounts, but this does not appear to be the case, looking at the logs I see that students who created accounts today could send me links, but others, like Poeyal, who created an account few days ago, could not. I also had them try alternative browsers and even computers, which did not help, so it is not the fault of their PCs but rather some weird account issue. What's up?

PS. Ping @AlphaBetaGamma - perhaps this is related to the issue you reported on my talk page? (But the students should be logged in...) _{Piotrus at Hanyang| reply here} 08:27, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Piotrus at Hanyang. New users have to enter a CAPTCHA when they add external links. This is no longer required when the account becomes autoconfirmed after four days and ten edits. You could try asking them to disable "Enable quick topic adding" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing. They still need a CAPTCHA but the inferface may be different. I don't know how CAPTCHA interacts with quick topic adding. AlphaBetaGamma referred to old issues in the logs.[1][2] There is only one log entry since June and that was an IP. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Huh. I thought I saw an IP triggering "prevent new users from editing other's talk pages" filter in your talk page. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 10:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Help with checking any COI and Notablity issues

Hi, I'd be grateful if an editor can lookover article Nick Jordan (artist) and check for any specific COI issue or problems with sources that don't meet notability guidelines. I have answered question on the article's talk page, giving several examples of secondary sources, and no speicific COI issue has been identified. However, the templates are still present on the page after many months, and I'm hoping these can be removed if article meets guidelines. any help or improvements much appreciated. Jorbert30 (talk) 16:33, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

The COI should stay. Your account and two single-purpose IP addresses 84.92.55.233 and 130.88.238.61 have made the great majority of edits to this article (and also to the related Jacob Cartwright and Nick Jordan article.) You have declared COI for this one. IP 84.92.55.233 and 194.74.185.34 each deleted the COI tag (reverted). Have you also been editing as these three IP addresses? If that is from forgetting to log in, Stop. If deliberate, and continues, then sockpuppetry and grounds for being indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 17:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

{{COI}} should never have been placed there; the template's documentation is unambiguous (highlighting in original):

Like the other neutrality-related tags, if you place this tag, you should promptly start a discussion on the article's talk page to explain what is non-neutral about the article. If you do not start a discussion, any editor will be justified in removing the tag without warning. Be careful not to violate the policy against WP:OUTING users who have not publicly self-disclosed their identities on the English Wikipedia.

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

What qualifications does one need to approve Articles for Creation?

Title. What do I have to do to approve and decline articles on Wikipedia:Articles for creation and Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects? Drdr150 (talk) 21:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Drdr150, I'll put this as gently as I can: if you cannot figure this out yourself, you are not yet qualified. -- asilvering (talk) 21:22, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

thank you. sorry, I am relatively new to the site as a whole. Drdr150 (talk) 21:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. Everyone starts somewhere. Glad to have you around! -- asilvering (talk) 21:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

You can see qualifications for reviewing Articles for Creation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants and for New Page Reviewer at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers. Tsarivan613 (talk) 22:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Section header singular vs. plural

If an article has only one person listed in a section called "notable person", shouldn't the header still read "notable people"? I think I am right, but I can't find a relevant part in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. I am looking at Arkabutla, Mississippi. Tsarivan613 (talk) 22:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Tsarivan613: I don't know of any specific guideline for "Notable people" lists; but MOS:NOTES says about reference sections "the heading should be plural even if it lists only a single item", and it seems logical to extend that to other sorts of lists. Deor (talk) 22:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Are there plans to add more people? If the list only contains one entry, then maybe there is no need for a list. If sources mention the person in connection with the town, perhaps the person could be mentioned in prose somewhere, and possibly in the lead if the person contributes to the notability of the town. Perception312 (talk) 22:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Point taken. From my standpoint, more notable people could have existed even if Wikipedia hasn't recorded them, and in any case, the number could soon change. Better to have it as plural. Tsarivan613 (talk) 23:33, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

East Bay Regional Park District

I see some job descriptions listed at East Bay Regional Park District#Staff members. Should they be removed? 2607:F140:6000:816A:ED02:ED81:4C2:7E3E (talk) 23:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Absolutely. -- asilvering (talk) 00:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

How to add an item to a semi-locked page?

I would like to add to the Pornography page the following information but don’t know how? Sexart is an attempt to replace the outdated terminology of ‘porn’ and ‘pornography’ with a description that emphasises the artistic elements of the erotic arts. ButIsIt (talk) 23:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

You suggest the addition in a new thread at the foot of Talk:Pornography, of course providing a reliable source for what you say. -- Hoary (talk) 00:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

ButIsIt Please review comments I left on your page regarding the decline of Draft:Sexart. Unless you can provide sourcing that demonstrates the addition would be sufficiently notable, it isn't suitable for inclusion. ~Liance^talk 00:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

ButIsIt, your first attempt at a user page (since deleted) had a one-sentence description of "sexart", followed by "Www.SexartWorld.com". This address redirects to https://sexartworld.wordpress.com/about/, which has what it titles a "Business Pitch". This reads in part "How long before billions of people are surfing to www.SexartWorld.com as opposed to another outdated porn site?" There's something mildly amusing about the copywriter's suggestion that what's advertised is just "another outdated porn site"; but that matter aside, are you here in the hope that billions of people will surf there? -- Hoary (talk) 02:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Drafts and Redirects

Hi, I hope someone can help me. I am new to Wiki and have made a few errors as I've been learning. I submitted my first draft of an article but it was rejected because I didn't do my citations correct. I thought I fixed them and resubmitted but then haven't heard anything in months. I tried to edit the original article but then I just decided to start over. I entered {db-userreq} (but with double { }) at the beginning of the article to delete it (I found this in a wiki article on how to delete a draft).

I wrote a new article in my sandbox, made some improvements from the first article and redid all my citations, and then tried to move it to the mainspace and I'm not sure what happened. Even though I thought the original page was deleted, it said I already had an article with that name so I tried changing the name of my article. Then somehow I ended up with a bunch of redirects and now I think I have two articles with similar names.

The link below is the article I want to submit. I'm lost though...

DeAnn L. Prosia (Artist). CrissCollab (talk) 04:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I turned the duplicate at Draft:DeAnn L. Prosia into a redirect to the existing article at DeAnn L. Prosia (Artist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), which is waiting for a new page patroller to review it. If you leave the other redirects alone, a bot will come along and fix them as needed. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 05:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I have two other questions. When I go to my sandbox and click on the user page it redirects to the article - is that correct? I didn't think my sandbox was supposed to redirect to an article.

Also, I can't seem to remember how I submitted my last article. This article doesn't show as a draft - do I need to move it somewhere first to submit it for review? Thanks again for your help. CrissCollab (talk) 15:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Any page move you do will create a automatically create a redirect at the old title; this is to avoid breaking any wikilinks to the old title. For example, the "(Artist)" page now has a redirect, so any wikilinks to "(Artist)" still lead to the intended article.

In the case of your sandbox, breaking wikilinks is not really a concern. You can go to the redirect itself at User:CrissCollab/sandbox and replace it with something else ({{User sandbox}}, for example).

As for the article, you bypassed the submission process entirely. That's fine when the article creator has no conflict of interest with the article subject. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh, hmmm, not sure how I did that. Do I need to submit it somewhere or everything is fine? CrissCollab (talk) 18:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

If I just google "DeAnn L. Prosia wikipedia", the talk page comes up - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:DeAnn_L._Prosia

But if I go to wiki and then type "DeAnn L. Prosia" into the searchbar the regular page comes up...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeAnn_L._Prosia

I guess I'm just not sure if the page is live or if I still need to do something else. Thanks so much for all of your help and support. I'm a learn as I go kinda person and I've realized wiki doesn't really operate like that. CrissCollab (talk) 18:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

do I need to move it somewhere first in short: I would refrain from any more page moves unless someone else suggests it. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay thanks! I got confused and thought I needed to move it to the mainspace in order to submit it for review. That's how I ended up with all the redirects. CrissCollab (talk) 18:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

For that matter, I moved the article back to DeAnn L. Prosia because [the English-language] Wikipedia prefers the shorter title whenever posible. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 05:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much! CrissCollab (talk) 15:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment moved to restore threading

Actually, if I type the page name into wiki it says the page does not exist and to make a draft and submit it, but then the page also shows below: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=DeAnn+L+Prosia&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrissCollab (talk • contribs) 18:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Please excuse the moving of the above; I try to avoid this per the rules on editing other people's comments. However, the comment was interfering with the threading—affecting readability. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Sometimes clearing your browser's cache or page's server cache solves the problem. Usually problems do not persist beyond a day. As for appearing on search engine results, that will occur after ninety days or after a new page patroller marks the article as reviewed (details at WP:NOINDEX). Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Confusing redirects

I noticed "municipal home rule" redirects to Home rule in the United States but "home rule municipality", "home rule town", and "home rule city" redirect to Devolution. This is confusing but I'm not sure what to do about it. Disambiguation? Also, "Charter city" is synonymous with "home rule city", as far as I know, and I've proposed merging Charter city into Home rule in the U.S. Thoughts? Seananony (talk) 04:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to teahouse! I do not see how Disambiguation would help here. I would edit change the targets of the 3 redirects Home rule municipality home rule town home rule city to Home rule in the United States. The redirects were created in 2006, while Home rule in the United States was created in 2010. Regarding your merge, I see you started a discussion at Talk:Home_rule_in_the_United_States#Merger_proposal:_Charter_cities which is the right way to go. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Close discussions

Do I need to log in to close discussions? 2001:4456:C7F:EF00:9061:DDFC:B88A:4496 (talk) 09:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Can you give more information? Which discussion do you want to close? 331dot (talk) 09:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I'd also like to add that you may want to check out Closing discussions, a page about how and when to close discussions. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

George Russell composer

George Russell (composer) As George Russell's biographer, I want t0 edit his Wikipedia entry. Can anyone tell me how to do this? I am not techie, so please keep it simple. Dr. D. A. Heining (talk) 10:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Dr. D. A. Heining Hello and welcome. I edited your link to the article, the whole url is not needed. Please first declare your conflict of interest on your user page(User:Dr. D. A. Heining). If you write out a statement, that will suffice. Please see WP:COI for information on best practices, and also see edit requests for how you can propose changes to the article. You should do that on its talk page(Talk:George Russell (composer)). 331dot (talk) 10:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I've added information to your user talk page, which provides some more explanation. 331dot (talk) 10:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, being new to this I am not sure what my conflict of interest might be. The article contains errors, is incomplete and it seems strange that it includes no reference to the only official biography on Russell. Dr. D. A. Heining (talk) 11:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

You wrote that you are his biographer. I take that to mean that he designated you as such before he passed. That is clearly a conflict of interest. This does not mean that you cannot contribute, only that you do so as I described. 331dot (talk) 11:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Does that mean that I cannot amend the entry? That seems strange. If you look at Grove, for example, many of the musicians' entries are by their biographers. Likewise, the entry for Biography in Britannica was written by the doyen of biographers Paul Murray Kendall, author of the Art of Biography. Dr. D. A. Heining (talk) 11:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is different from other websites. Articles are typically written by independent editors unaffiliated with the subject. (example, White House staff shouldn't be editing the Joe Biden article directly) As I said, your conflict of interest does not mean that you cannot contribute. it only means you will need to propose your changes in the form of an edit request on the talk page(unless they are the most minor like fixing spelling). If you find doing so too challenging, please post on the article talk page anyway, proposing a single change you want to see, and I can mark it as an edit request for you. (it's better to propose a change at a time than a wholesale rewrite or many changes simultaneously) 331dot (talk) 11:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Templates

Are articles or entries based on pre-established templates or can they be contributed using p-lain English prose? TrevorGlynLocke (talk) 13:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

You can edit it with plain English as long as it is constructive to the article. TypoEater (talk) 13:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Help with page moves at Hard Rock Cafe

Hello! Matthew here with Seminole Hard Rock Support Services at Hard Rock International.

Over on the Hard Rock Cafe talk page, I've proposed splitting the Hard Rock Cafe page to Hard Rock International and Hard Rock hotels and casinos, in order to separate out text about the restaurant brand from the parent company and Hard Rock's properties. I've saved Draft:Hard Rock International and Draft:Hard Rock hotels and casinos to show what the pages would look like. Another editor has supported the split but suggested I seek help with the page and section moves. I've asked for assistance at a few pages and an editor recommended I come here.

Are any editors here at the Teahouse able to help? Thanks! MattHardRockInt (talk) 13:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Subject: Help with Writing an Article for Wikipedia

Message: Hello, I am Vinod Kumar Chaudhary, and I have achieved 20 Guinness World Records, including surpassing Sachin Tendulkar's 19 records. I have also been involved in social work and run an institute that helps students gain skills in computer training and typing. I want to create a Wikipedia article about my achievements, but I need help ensuring that the article meets Wikipedia's guidelines for neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sources.

Could someone please guide me on how to properly structure my article and ensure it complies with Wikipedia's core content policies? I would also appreciate advice on how to cite reliable sources for my accomplishments. WorldTypistMaster (talk) 13:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. My advice to you is to abandon this effort. Writing about yourself, while not absolutely forbidden, is highly discouraged, please read the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone says about themselves, or merely documenting their achievements. Wikipedia articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the subject, and summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability, like a notable person. You would need to set aside everything you know about yourself, all materials you put out(like interviews), and all mere documentation of your activities, and only summarize what other choose on their own to say about you. Most people have great difficulty doing that. The best indicator of notability is when an independent editor takes note of a topic in reliable sources and chooses to write about it.

Also be aware an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. There are good reasons to not want one. If you just want to tell the world about what you see as your achievements, you should use social media or a personal website. 331dot (talk) 13:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Uploading a Film Poster

Hi! I want to learn how to upload a film poster on an established wiki page. Can someone guide please? Albertan2014 (talk) 14:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Files for upload/Wizard. NotAGenious (talk) 15:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure but I think film posters are usually "fair use" images. 331dot (talk) 15:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Correct (non-free). NotAGenious (talk) 15:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Albertan2014 So see WP:NONFREE and ensure you follow all the guidance in doing the upload. You can look at how others have done their upload to see what details are needed: for example at file:Godse (film).jpg. A bot will reduce the pixel size automatically if you upload a high-resolution version. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, but I need to know where do I start? Is there any tutorial? Albertan2014 (talk) 15:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't think there is any tutorial for uploading film posters, Albertan2014, but I'll leave a message on your talk page in a while, explaining briefly how you can upload them. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Source self-published by awarder of prize

Hello all, yesterday I appended additional info and a citation to the (previously unsourced) listing of the award Premio Cinema Ludus in the "Selected filmography section" of Emmanuelle Riva. I see that this generated a tag "citing a blog or free web host" on my edit in the revision history for the article. It's true that the source is self-published on Blogger by the entity that awarded the prize. I think that's acceptable in this instance, because they're not really making a claim about the person (Riva) but rather a claim about themselves, namely the inarguable assertion that they have awarded this prize to Riva. But I'd like to hear others' takes on this. Thanks in advance for your input. Monkeysoap (talk) 15:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Monkeysoap. I agree that a SPS is adequate for supporting that claim; but if you can't find any independent sources about that award, I wonder whether it is really encyclopaedic? Not all available information about a subject necessarily belongs in an article about it. ColinFine (talk) 16:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

If the award doesn’t have its own article showing notability it shouldn’t be mentioned. Doug Weller talk 19:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Source insufficiency related en:Draft:Thind

Hi I eventually found a topic which I think need an minimal to brought this topic in limelight due to lack of source certainty and impartiality to relay on a single source is not an solution so I would like some genuine intervention from other wikipedian for better assessment showcasing Thind clan origin 38.25.26.28 (talk) 16:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I'm having difficulty understanding exactly what you are asking, but I think you're saying that you think there should be an article about the Thind clan, but you can't find much in the way of sources?

If you can't find any (or very few) sources which are reliable, independent, and contain significant coverage (see 42) then almost by definition, the subject does not meet Wikipeda's criteria for notability, and no article is possible. If you think the subject does meet those criteria, it is up to you to find the sources: it is unlikely that anybody else is going to be willing to do this fundamental part of the work on the article. ColinFine (talk) 16:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I drafted a page in wikipedia sandbox and published

I drafted a page in wikipedia sandbox and published, how long will it take to approve i Gorinu (talk) 16:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Your draft at User:Gorinu/sandbox has not been submitted to Articles for Creation (AfC) for review. ("Publish" means save.) David notMD (talk) 16:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Abdulla Al Nuaimi, submitted and Declined. David notMD (talk) 19:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

First Article Support Needed

Hello - I'm in the process of writing my first submission and would value support/feedback before I publish.

Is there someone available to do that? Staceyrich (talk) 16:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Staceyrich, this is exactly what the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process is for! You can write a draft and submit for review, which will be reviewed by experienced editors. Qcne (talk) 17:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The answer you got to a query to an editor was to read Help:Your first article as a way to create and submit a draft for review. An experienced reviewer would either approve, decline, reject or speedy delete. As always, references are required (WP:42). Standard advice is to gain experience improving existing articles before attempting a new article. P.S. "Publish" means save. David notMD (talk) 17:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I replied all at once to the first comment...this is all new to me, appreciate the help! Just needing a bit more clarity as I want to make sure I follow the process correctly. Staceyrich (talk) 17:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you...and as all of this is brand new to me...I'll reply to both Qcne and David notMD...of the 2 recommendations provided, where is the best place to submit it for review prior to publishing. I do have references and have done my best to model the format after what I see available in other published articles, but would prefer to have feedback. Staceyrich (talk) 17:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Staceyrich both I and David's process is the same - you'll end up making a draft article that can be reviewed by editors (just slightly different ways of getting there). :) Qcne (talk) 17:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay, great! And how do I submit that? What format will it need to be in (PDF, copy/paste, etc.)? Staceyrich (talk) 17:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

We don't accept direct uploads. We have our own text editor (similar to the one you used to write this reply) which will allow you to build an article.

I would recommend reading the tutorial on how to use it at WP:VE. It's akin to a word processor with one very important difference: it does not save automatically, so please regularly back up your work (you can copy and paste into Microsoft Word). To save manually you have to press the big blue Publish button. This doesn't publish the article, but "publishes" (saves) your edits. Qcne (talk) 17:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I really appreciate the help and instructions. And once I've "published" it...will it only be viewable by people who can help edit it? I'd like to double and triple check that I'm doing this correctly :) Staceyrich (talk) 17:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Ah, no, so everything on Wikipedia is public (apart from your personal user account settings). This means the draft you create and edit will technically be available to be viewed by anyone in the world. However they won't appear on search engines, and members of the public don't really go around looking at random drafts (of which there are thousands).

Once you are happy with the draft you'll see another big blue button that will say Submit the draft for review! which will put it into the review pile for the reviewers to review. Qcne (talk) 17:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay, gotcha. So is it only available to edit after I've submitted it for review? And how do I make sure if it really needs some work, the editors who see it...don't flag it for being deleted immediately?? Staceyrich (talk) 18:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

We might be having different uses of the term "edit"- any page is available to be "edited", you will create and then edit a draft which you can Publish to save your edits/changes, and then Submit for review in order for it to go to the review pile. Sorry - terminology is quite confusing!

Take a look at our core content policies: as long as your draft meets those it won't get deleted. Qcne (talk) 18:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Once submitted, it can be reviewed in days, weeks or sadly, months, as there is a backlog of drafts and the system is not a queue. You can continue to work on it while waiting, and if Declined, improve and submit again (and again). Each reviewer will give reasons for the declined. David notMD (talk) 19:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

QUAD A - info page

Hi, I am trying to create a wikipedia page for QUAD A , a medical accreditation company. There are several medical accreidation companies on wikipedia, so im unsure why QUAD A is being flagged Janacgodshall (talk) 16:58, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Janacgodshall. You wrote a draft which was overly promotional. This is prohibited on Wikipedia. Please carefully read the following policies:

- Wikipedia:Neutral point of view

- Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) Qcne (talk) 17:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

really - i didnt promote it at all - it was information based saying the programs it had - im not sure how anyone even had time to read or flag it because it happened within miliseconds of submission Janacgodshall (talk) 17:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

That's promotion. Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about something and its offerings. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Not every company merits an article, even within the same field. 331dot (talk) 17:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

We have articles as part of the encyclopedia, not pages. That other articles exist has no bearing on whether an article about this company exists. Each article or draft is judged on its own merits. That one article exists does not mean in and of itself that other articles must exist- not every member of a field gets an article just because one does, it depends on the criteria, like a notable company.

If you work for this company, that must be disclosed, see WP:PAID as well as WP:COI. 331dot (talk) 17:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

well, iw ould like to try again as it is strictly informative and information on what QUAD A is. Janacgodshall (talk) 17:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's promotion. Wikipedia is not a place for businesses to provide information about themselves. We want to know what others say about the business, not what it says about itself. 331dot (talk) 17:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

The Joint Commission and AAAHC have Wikipedia pages. They are identical companies to QUAD A. This is very unfair that both of these can have wiki pages but we cannot.

The Joint Commission: Wikipedia page

AAAHC (Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care): Wikipedia page Janacgodshall (talk) 17:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I haven't examined those articles to know if they meet the criteria to merit an article. It could very well be that they don't, but again, each article is judged on its own merits, not based on the presence of other articles. If you wish, you can initiate a deletion discussion if you truly feel those articles should not exist, or just mark them for attention from other editors- but you will first need to declare your relationship with QUAD A. If you work for them, the Terms of Use require disclosure. 331dot (talk) 17:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Those organizations do not "have pages" that they own and control. Wikipedia has articles about those organizations. Our articles are typically written by independent editors. 331dot (talk) 17:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

well, how can QUAD A have pages that we do not control. I would be happy to just have articles about our organization. How can we proceed? Janacgodshall (talk) 17:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

You need to make the paid editing disclosure, this is a Terms of Use requirement. I will provide instructions on your user talk page.

Your organization trying to force the issue of creating an article is not likely to be successful. The best thing you can do is go on about the work of your business, and once enough independent reliable sources choose on their own- and not based on materials from your organization like interviews- to write about it, eventually independent editors will take note of that coverage and choose to write about your business.

Be advised that an article about your business is not necessarily a good thing. There are good reasons to not want one. Any information about your business, good or bad, can be in an article about it as long as it appears in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. Disgruntled customers could vandalize the article which others could see before it is removed. Think carefully about this. 331dot (talk) 18:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

In sum, a company (or a person) does not "own" the article. Once it exists anyone can edit as long as content is verified by references. References need to be independent, and ABOUT the company. Writing what the company wants to publish about itself is useless. David notMD (talk) 19:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Where is a good place to arbitrate a disagreement?

Another editor and I disagree about the usefulness of some material I added to an article. Is there a place I could get input from a third party if we can't reach an agreement ourselves? Moonreach (talk) 18:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, see dispute resolution channels. 331dot (talk) 18:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Perfect, thank you. Moonreach (talk) 18:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Moonreach, if this has to do with your recent edit to Saturn in fiction, then your first step should be to explain your edit at Talk:Saturn in fiction, and ping the editor who reverted you. The Bold, revert, discuss process is highly recommended. That particular article has achieved Good article status, and interested editors want to maintain its status. Cullen328 (talk) 18:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

It is, thank you. I left a message on the other editor's talk page, but if the conversation continues I'll try to move it to the talk page. Moonreach (talk) 19:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Moonreach, I suggest that you take it to the talk page now. That is the best practice and encourages participation by other editors. Cullen328 (talk) 23:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

wikiconsultancyinc.com

This firm has contacted me and for a fee offered to write a page. Has anyone else used them? Maggie Humm (talk) 19:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Maggie Humm Not to disparage them at all before anyone answers this, but I wouldn't touch anyone coming to you saying they can write a page for a fee with a 10 foot pole. Or any pole, for that matter. Please see WP:SCAM.

People can't guarantee that the page will even pass the notability criteria or the articles for creation process, so trying to extract a fee for writing a page just sounds... Fishy, in the simplest terms. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 19:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

The person who writes an article for pay is required to state that they are paid, and there is no guarentee that an article would not be soon deleted if it does not meet Wikipedia standards. Volunteers in New Pages Patrol try to look at all new articles, and have the option of converting to draft state or even Speedy deletion. David notMD (talk) 19:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

An editor employed by Wiki Consultancy to create or merely work on an article XYZ is required to state conspicuously that they've been paid by Wiki Consultancy (or some minor spelling variation thereof) to do this. But when I search for "wikiconsultancy", "wiki consultancy" or "wikiconsultancyinc", all I find is Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/BrookeCook/Archive#09_January_2024_2. There are various imaginable explanations for this: (i) the declaration was made, but on a page that was subsequently deleted; (ii) the declaration was made (on a page that still exists) but subsequently deleted; (iii) the declaration wasn't made (a breach of Wikipedia's terms of service); (iv) "Wiki Consultancy" (or however you care to spell it) hasn't actually done any work here. Maggie Humm, consider asking them where you can see evidence of their good work. (I expect that you'll get either no response or an entirely vapid response.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

US Census Records

Are US census records considered reliable, published sources? DonL tx (talk) 19:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Depends on the context. In my experience, I see US census records used as primary sources and thus subject to the caveats and considerations on their use. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 22:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, DonL tx. The reliability of national census results is never 100%, and there is always a small margin of error. The 2020 census was especially challenging because it took place in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic which led to increased distrust of government. Here is a link to a US Census description of its statistical accuracy. Cullen328 (talk) 23:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I would like to use specific individual lines in the US Censes for 1900, 1910, 1920, 1930, 1940 and 1950 to provide documentation of a specific location in a specific year. DonL tx (talk) 00:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Request help with edit/approval for Women Scientist bio Judith J. Warren

I created a bio article for Judith J. Warren, Nursing Infomatics pioneer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Judith_J._Warren_(Nursing_Informatics_Specialist), but I am struggling to get help with editing and approval. I have gone to the women in science project, but those talk pages haven’t had anything on them since 2018 and I am wondering if I am looking in the wrong places to post, but I have been pretty thorough in looking and I just keep coming up short. This is my second article and I would like to publish more especially for women scientists. I want to know my mistakes with the article and of course I do want it approved, but I am trying to learn from my mistakes.

Another question I have - can I publish articles without needing it to be approved? I have 31 edits via my account? If so, is there a different type of creation process? Meaning am I using the wrong type of sandbox? Logger67 (talk) 21:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Logger67, have you checked the notability guidelines for academics and the other related guidelines–NPOV, verifiability, etc? There is a backlog of around 1600 drafts, please have patience and enjoy the place. A reviewer will soon review the draft and decide further. Meanwhile you can improve your submission and ask for the help from WP:WOMEN. --Ratekreel (talk) 21:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

New accounts cannot directly create articles; even if you can, it's inadvisable until you get some experience in having drafts accepted. 331dot (talk) 21:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Logger66. I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Citation overkill because it looks to me like your draft suffers from that problem, which can make Articles for creation reviewers suspicious. I see one assertion in your draft followed by nine references. Why? That implies that the assertion is highly controversial. Is it? You made a simple statement of fact In 2003, Warren was elected as a Fellow in the American College of Medical Informatics which is followed by three references. One reference should be sufficient unless there is some kind of doubt about the truth of this statement. Please keep in mind that the quality of the references is vastly more important than their quantity. Six excellent references are far better than 30 mediocre references. Cullen328 (talk) 23:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

For help with writing biographies of women, take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. Jesswade88 is a physicist and an editor acclaimed for creating thousands of biographies of women scientists. Maybe she will have a comment. Cullen328 (talk) 00:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

There's quite a bit of editorializing. Example, "She holds the distinction of being [...]", meaning "She was [...]". And yes, full agreement with Cullen328 (above) on the matter of multiple references. -- Hoary (talk) 01:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Triple: What to ask on the Help Desk, am I a newcomer by now, and what do do for a citation.

I was going to post this on the Help Desk, but I thought this would be a safe option, but then I had thoughts on if I was considered not a newcomer yet, and my original question was on how to add citations. Pardon me if that sentence seems like a run-on. 3.14 (talk) 21:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

3.14, try Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1 et seq. -- Hoary (talk) 22:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thumbnail image that appears when searching an article

How does one get the thumbnail image to appear when typing in a search? CrissCollab (talk) 00:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@CrissCollab: See mw:Extension:PageImages#Image choice. If you are thinking of DeAnn L. Prosia then note the image has to be in the lead section, meaning before the first section heading. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)