From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

dark mode[edit]

We need dark mode, please! One simple switch on top of every page. Thanks 2001:4C4E:29D2:C500:C559:A7ED:A9C4:3DCA (talk) 15:44, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please offer comments at the talk page of Vector 2022. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. We already have a 'Dark Mode' button at the top of every page. However you have to turn it on in Preferences (see here). But you'll need to be logged on with a free user account to change any of the defaults available to you. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, thanks for your suggestion. A technical side-effect of the current skin is that it will be possible to build the dark mode. You will find more information here. Until then, what Nick wrote above is the best solution. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 16:17, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
sorry, i might not be the smartest tool in the shed, but where is the switch for dark mode in the preference pane ? Vincent-vst🚀 (talk) 05:22, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Vincent-vst It is one of the options on Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets in the "appearance" section. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:50, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thank you Vincent-vst🚀 (talk) 13:58, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the answer.
Here is my corrected suggestion:
We need dark mode without any registration, any account, any logging on, please!
Thanks. 2001:4C4E:29D2:C500:BD2D:F6F8:A9:3AD8 (talk) 10:11, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As outlined at the link given above - this link - the devs know that folks want this feature, but it's not currently in development, and may not ever be available to IPs. (talk) 14:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Nick Moyes You said "We already have a 'Dark Mode' button at the top of every page. However you have to turn it on in Preferences".
Then, this link, mentioned above, says the feature is not in development, and further, if it were built, "we would not plan to add an in-browser toggle".
And from the WMF, @SGrabarczuk (WMF) says "it will be possible to build it [dark mode], but until then, what Nick wrote is the best solution". (Emphasis mine.) So the WMF person's answer says it's not built yet, but we should follow your answer (Nick), which says it is available. Why is all this info so confusing?
Even so, I turned the toggle on in Preferences, but I don't see a dark mode button at the top of any page. Why is there even a toggle if the WMF and the linked page says it "will be possible to build" this feature? Please help me understand... David10244 (talk) 08:03, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To clarify, I am in desktop mode on an Android tablet, using the Chrome browser. David10244 (talk) 08:06, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hate to be one of those pushy editors, but ... No one has more info on this apparent set of contradictions, on whether the Dark Mode feature is already "built" or "now it will be possible to build" and "we do not plan to add..."? Thanks. David10244 (talk) 05:41, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@David10244, it's a gadget, not an officially WMF-created dark mode. The latter is what folks keep referring to (it's been added to the latest wishlist, I see). (talk) 22:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, that helps. I thought I was going crazy, seeing the contradictions, with no one mentioning them! David10244 (talk) 08:13, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Linkity link: Dark mode. An experimental work by the design team + various volunteers, apparently. (talk) 22:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Does the checkbox in Preferences actually do anything? Is it part of the gadget? David10244 (talk) 08:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@David10244, that's something I can't answer for sure. It seems the checkbox you're talking about is supposed to make the dark mode toggle available at the top of pages. I'm not sure if it works in all skins, and it's always possible you have some other thing enabled which is interfering with the gadget. Very hard for me to tell how these things work. (talk) 14:53, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, thanks. I'm using the new default skin that so many people complain about, but I like it. I don't have much fancy stuff enabled. But I'm good, thanks for the help. David10244 (talk) 07:18, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello all, I got the following message on the review of the submission. "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources." It seems I have referenced sources adequately and all sources are vetted and reliable. Including sources from reputed national dailies. Please let me know what changes to do, to get the write up published successfully. Could someone please help and explain the reason behind decline in a little more delay? Thank You very very much Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:06, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Mayukhsenkar. If he competed in the Olympics, then why is there no coverage of his results there? Cullen328 (talk) 18:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello @Cullen328 Thank you for replying. He has been covered extensively for participating in Karate at Olympics. The Karate event was an additional event in Tokyo 2020 where it included pre-matches and test events. He may have participated in them.
The athlete has been a part of Olympic 365 community also which has been shown by his correspondence with the IOC. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:38, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mayukhsenkar our article Karate at the 2020 Summer Olympics does not list India as a participating nation. Please clarify. Cullen328 (talk) 18:52, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks @Cullen328 for replying and guiding. On a brief check for Karate Event in Tokyo 2020, it did have test and pre-matches as recorded by various sources :,, The event has been covered by reputed Sports Journals like InsidetheGames also. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mayukhsenkar, none of those references mention Sen. They describe a test event that took place before the Olympics and the world class athletes were not present. Your statement Known to have represented India at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics seems inaccurate and misleading. Cullen328 (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cullen328 None of the test event persons are mentioned , not only him. It mentions local representatives, which according to WKF definition is previous champions. His performance at Olympics has been widely published, also IOC has corresponded to him as Olympic 365 member and mentor, which is given to Olympians.
The statement is well corroborated. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 21:39, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
He did not compete in the Olympics. Olympic Athletes 365 is a developmental program that includes a wide range of athletes, not just Olympic competitors. Cullen328 (talk) 23:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mayukhsenkar Hi there! You wrote "His performance at Olympics has been widely published". Could you please provide three published reliable sources that provide significant coverage of his performance? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:49, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Olympic 365 mentorship is only for Olympians as mentorship is in collaboration with WOA.
@GoingBatty,, two of the sources are primary and one is a national daily, on giving a quick look, there are many more sources which report on his participation. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 07:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mayukhsenkar I asked you to provide sources that provide significant coverage of his performance in the Olympics. The Hindustan Times article is from 2016, so it obviously doesn't say anything about what he did in 2020. The YKA and Read Scoops mention his background and other achievements, but don't seem to contain even a single sentence about what Sen did at the "Olympic Karate Event". Do you have any independent reliable sources that state what he actually did at the Olympics? GoingBatty (talk) 14:08, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@GoingBatty The source of Hindustan Times states about his selection into the Olympics, the other two sources speak at length about his qualification which is inline with the qualification guidelines of Tokyo 2020. I would like to politely make a correction to your sentence where you describe "2020" when Olympic Event happened on 2021. Since the Kata Event which he was qualified for was a round robin according to the Olympic rules, the articles stating his participation are technically correct. An olympic event is not 1v1 where his performance "against" an athlete needs to be shown. The Qualification happened based on ranking, is the basis of ranking. This link could be traced back from archives to check his scores, however, current points on his profile may not reflect what the point were before olympics since, WKF follows a yearly depletion mechanism of points. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 16:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mayukhsenkar I do not see a sentence in the Hindustan Times article that "states about his selection into the Olympics". Thank you for correcting me on when the Olympic Event occurred. I don't understand why the draft would state "Known to have represented India at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics" if he only attended an Olympic Karate Event in 2021. GoingBatty (talk) 18:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The HT article speaks about his previous achievements marking him as a qualifiable athlete as per qualification guidelines.
The Olympic Event comes under the aegis of Tokyo Olympiad which ocurred on 2021. Hence, the athletes representation was passed by the NOC, that means that the athlete was not attending as "Bhaskar Sen" but "Bhaskar Sen(India)" as given in Olympic Organization Rules of 2021 released by LOC. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 20:20, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mayukhsenkar While the HT article speaks about his previous achievements, it does not explicitly state that those achievements mark him as a qualifiable athlete as per qualification guidelines. Your draft should summarize what the published reliable sources state, without you adding any personal knowledge. GoingBatty (talk) 22:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The reliable sources which are mentioned in the draft are primary, i.e. they are primarily obtained from the athlete and the others paragraphs contain information on his qualification trail, which details the stages and route. The published reliable sources state so in full. None of the statements are personal remarks but statements from sources and as released from Olympic bodies. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 08:20, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mayukhsenkar If the sources say that he meets the qualifications for being selected to the Olympics, but do not explicitly say that he was selected, then you are making an inference, which is wp:Synthesis and the source doesn't support the statement. David10244 (talk) 12:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mayukhsenkar Also, don't miss Cullen328's important note: "He did not compete in the Olympics. Olympic Athletes 365 is a developmental program that includes a wide range of athletes, not just Olympic competitors." Olympic development events are not the Olympics. David10244 (talk) 13:06, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The NOC approved Karate India's participation in the Olympics as can be seen in the present sources, also please refer to the Sportdata point system which show he gained points which make him qualify, Olympic Pre-event is under Tokyo 2020 LOC, which means he did participate, the same happened for all other "additional sports" like sport climbing, baseball etc.
I think the reviewers and Teahouse counter-argue-ers are missing the Point. Olympic 365 did not organize the event for which he has been made noteworthy. The event itself is Olympic 2020. Olympic 365 being any program IS a program under the IOC, where mentorship is only for Olympians in WOA. Please consider. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 15:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mayukhsenkar, you have not produced any reliable sources which refer to the subject as an Olympic athlete. You have not even produced sources which directly state that he participated in Olympic-affiliated events. It seems that you are relying on your own original research into primary sources. That is not allowed here on Wikipedia, and will only result in your draft continuing to be declined. (talk) 16:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The original draft does contain reference to the Olympic Athlete, I provide resources and sources here which "corroborate" the fact. The same corroboration is present for other noteworthy athlete who are approved on Wiki. The "original research" was only to corroborate and support the claim. The original research is not "emailing the IOC for a comment on his participation". All sources are secondary in nature. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:15, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mayukhsenkar, please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - the existence of other poorly-sourced articles does not justify including more poorly-sourced articles. So far, you have provided (here) no sources which corroborate your claims. Do you have other sources you haven't presented here yet? (talk) 18:28, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think Olympic qualification happening thru sportdata can not be categorized as poor. Citing qualification rules is not poor, athlete belonging to WOA is not poor, NOC's list for Tokyo 2020 is not poor. The article is not poorly sourced as defined by WP: VERIFICATION, YKA as a source has been listed for other athletes, SK is a regularly cited source, HT is a national daily. WKF is the world body. The said source already sets the claim. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mayukhsenkar, none of those will be useful here. You must provide a reliable source which directly states that the subject represented India at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Not a combination or analysis of other sources which implies it. Do you have such a source? (talk) 18:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Two of the Sources in the article state explicitly he represented India. The Counter-argument here was regarding performance measure, which has been clarified, then the question was regarding sources for significant coverage, which has been clarified again.
'Implying' would be the act of deduction. Which is primary according to WP: Citation.
I have simply corroborated, thru media and Sportdata, which are all secondary. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:49, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mayukhsenkar, please give us, here, the two sources which state that he represented India at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. I assume they are not the same as the sources already posted above. (talk) 18:55, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The two sources are the ones which have been given in the article in question., The sources already cited in this Trail were corroboration of his qualification and endorsement from the NOC. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 09:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. I'll ping @Cullen328 and @GoingBatty, in case they want to review these added sources (I can't access them myself). (talk) 15:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Mayukhsenkar We're going in circles. The YKA and Read Scoops mention his background and other achievements, but do not support the claim in the draft that he is "Known to have represented India at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics". GoingBatty (talk) 15:41, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mayukhsenkar I agree with @GoingBatty that the Readscoops article does not say that he was a competitor in the Olympic games. It implies that he is close. The article has a bit of a rah-rah tone. I didn't read the other article.
Please quote the phrase from Readscoops that confirms that he was an Olympic competitor. David10244 (talk) 08:25, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@ Thank you for making your position clear. Reviewers with the ability to understand and comprehend are welcome. @GoingBatty I think we are not in circles, the terms of reference and context keeps changing here, your previous contention was regarding his performance which I clarified, regarding the Operation of an Olympic Karate Event. The article mentions 1. the place where the Olympic Event Occurred 2. The event which he participated. 3. How he got to represent India.
@David10244 The Readscoops article title and the intro itself contains the lines that he participated in Olympics. I think you are mixing up the sources, I encourage you to diligently "read", by which I mean please provide the paragraph(s) in the news pieces you allege to be out of context. Also, for simplicity please clarify what does "rah-rah" mean, since it is not mentioned as per WP: Citation and looks as a frivolous claim by a Teahouse reviewer.
For the record as requested by @David10244 I can state the sentence "You don’t usually think of karate and that’s where we want to introduce you to someone called Bhaskar Sen, who made the country proud by becoming the only Indian athlete to attend the Olympic Karate Event in Nippon Budokan." Mayukhsenkar (talk) 09:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mayukhsenkar, you have been editing Wikipedia for about a week. If multiple editors with much longer experience tell you the sources are insufficient, chances are they are right. When you say stuff like "all sources are secondary in nature", it shows a lack of understanding of Wikipedia policies. It is entirely normal, but a bit of humility would not hurt.
In the present case, Becoming the only Indian athlete to attend the Olympic Karate Event in Nippon Budokan is not a sufficient source for is representing India. There is a significant difference between "he’s the only Indian attending" and "he was selected by official instances to represent India".
For an extreme example of this, Ian Nepomniachtchi (a chess grandmaster who will be playing in this year’s chess world championship match) is a Russian national. He will be playing under the world chess federation’s flag, because Russia is under sanctions. Presumably lots of Russians feel that he represents them, lots of non-Russians feel he represents Russia, and the Russian chess federation would give its OK for him to play under the Russian flag; yet you will not find a source that states that Ian "represents Russia", because officially, he does not. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 10:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Tigraan Thank you for replying. I think if you track my posts on this page, I have maintained a very courteous outlook to the whole counter-arguments. I doubt that editing many articles makes one gain extraordinary talent in a specific field having different niches and mechanisms. As has been pointed out several times in this thread. I respect the fact that reviewers here have immense experience, however, ignorance on some facts says contrary to that.
I understand the example and your point. The article states "attend" which is the frequently used word in the Karate discipline of Kata, where individual performances are evaluated. If I understand your point, represent( which is the commonly used word for NOC qualified athletes for a certain sport event ) would mean certain qualifications and endorsements by the NOC. Ian's sport is not an Olympic Sport so it is outside the purview and scope of discussion. Earlier in this thread I have shown proof of his qualification and his endorsement thru the NOC which is the legal representative of IOC in the athlete's country. Please refer to above thread where I clarified his Participation as Bhaskar Sen(India) and not Bhaskar Sen. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 15:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
India didn't compete in Karate at all in the 2020 Olympics. It didn't happen, so there is simply no way you are going to find a reliable source that makes this person an Olympian. And he's not going to have another opportunity next year, because the Karate events were dropped from the 2024 Olympics. You're going to have to establish notability some other way. MrOllie (talk) 15:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A Karate Event consists of various events. Attending an Olympic Event does constitute participation. Especially if the athlete has been qualified and the NOC has endorsed, this is as per the LOC Organization Rules. If he would be able to participate in the next Olympics or the next-to-next is out of the purview of this discussion. The notability of the athlete apart from the Olympic Aspect can be established thru his wins at World Championships ( rank 6) which has been corroborated sufficiently in the article. His various previous achievement in retrospect are unprecedented by any other Indian, known in the public domain. This is in the premise of WP: Notability and WP : Sports.
On the notion of him being an Olympian, Please read the thread diligently. Olympic 365 Mentorship is only given to Olympians under WOA, hence his address as an Olympian is well established. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 09:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, you are mistaken. Athlete 365 memberships and/or mentorships are not limited to Olympians. MrOllie (talk) 14:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please read the Statues of WOA, it is by virtue of that membership he was granted mentorship. I think there is clear definition difference between "membership" which you state and the "mentorship". A tertiary skim-through of the athlete365 home page does not warrant a thorough knowledge of the Olympic, NOC and WOA mechanism. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 21:31, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No. He didn't complete in the olympics. The article also claims he ranked in the 2009 World Karate Championships - but there is no such event. That tournament is held every other years - in 2008 and 2010. It appears the entire article is a hoax. MrOllie (talk) 21:51, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Competing in Olympics is thru a verified and well maintained process for which sportdata reference has been given, which is further the core point system used for qualification. The 2009 World Cup is an official event by the WKF. Sudden adrenaline rush to give a shoddy search on Google and random hyperbole here regarding a niche event undermines the credibility of a reviewer and a counter-argue-er on this forum. Suggest you to be diligent on the subject accordingly. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 22:01, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There was no 2009 World Championship. There was a Cadet World Championship in 2009 - the junior league for the teens. The article have as you have written it is simply incorrect - at best you are grossly mistaken. But given your resistence to correction I now think it is likely you are deliberately exaggerating this athlete's accomplishments. MrOllie (talk) 22:05, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please check the reply on the separate thread, ignorance of Sportdata ranking points and non-diligence of Olympic guidelines and qualification criterion shall not be appreciated and shall not be entertained.
The Olympic event includes age group of 16 and above where the sportdata points were transferred from the cadet group. The sportdata link clearly shows his participation. The Sportdata points further sum up to his qualification score which was then endorsed by the NOC. The "resistance" here is not against the correction but due to shoddy overviewing of facts which are due to a non-diligent understanding from a reviewer. Athletes accomplishments are thoroughly vetted by national bodies and world bodies, any exaggeration is baseless as the article is heavily cited by relevant and thorough sources. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 22:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
None of that matters - he didn't participate in the events the article claims he did. Maybe he participated in other events organized by the same bodies, but that is not at all the same thing. - MrOllie (talk) 23:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This brings to question your previous claims and hyphenation seen. Which in turns shows how shallow a diligence of a reviewer can be. The "events" has not been defined by you. Nor the Other "events" has been defined by you. Contention without basis renders it infructuous.
He did participate in the events the article states and so has been aptly and justly corroborated according to the relevant guidelines. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 23:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Moving on from draft[edit]

Hi, We have drafted our page, how do we move it on to get it peer reviewed? I can see lots of third part companies offering to get it approved but would prefer to drive this ourselves. Phil HANTSAR (talk) 18:16, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: Draft:Hampshire Search and Rescue - (talk) 18:18, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Phil HANTSAR: Hello Phil! First, I must ask, who is "we" referring to? Wikipedia accounts cannot be shared by multiple people. Second, I suggest you ignore those third party companies as they are all scams. Third, if this is about Draft:Hampshire Search and Rescue you do not have an AFC template on the page and also have no submitted it which I have done for you. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:21, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Blaze. I could not see a button or a link to submit it so thank you for doing that for me. The us I refer to is the charity, we are not sharing an account. What is an AFC template ?, can you send me a link so I can read up about it please? Phil HANTSAR (talk) 18:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The afc template is the big yellow-ish banner now at the top of the draft, Blaze Wolf added that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:29, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Apologies, I tend to forget that newcomers may not know some of the more technical stuff here on Wikipedia. The AFC template I'm referring to is part of the Articles for Creation process which allows users to create and submit drafts in draft space to be reviewed and either accepted or declined by experienced editors. Specifically the template is {{AFC submission}}. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:30, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
At the risk of piling on, Phil HANTSAR: do you understand the purpose of references? You write certain qualifying members were honoured to be awarded the Queen's Platinum Jubilee Medal in 2022, the medals being presented at a ceremony at the police training college at Netley in July 2022 by the Hon. Hugo Cubitt DL, with one citation that shows that there is such a thing as the Queen's Platinum Jubilee Medal, and the other that shows that according to, Cubitt exists. Meither of these does anything at all to support the claim. (In addition, appears on the list of self-published, and so unreliable, sources at WP:RSP#Self-published peerage websites) The point of a citation is so that a reader in Birmingham next week, or Buffalo next month, or Buenos Aires next year can, in principle check that what the article says is so. ColinFine (talk) 23:04, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Right, @Phil HANTSAR, for the phrase "presented at a ceremony at the police training college at Netley in July 2022 by the Hon. Hugo Cubitt DL" you just need to specify where you got that information about the medal being presented. I'm sure you didn't make it up! Cheers. David10244 (talk) 13:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi David,
I was there and photos were taken but our press release was not taken up by the local media.
Thanks for your help Phil HANTSAR (talk) 22:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Phil HANTSAR Since the information about the medal and ceremony was not published by a reliable source that can be cited (so that other readers could verify the information if they wanted to), it cannot be used in the draft. Press releases, even when they do get published, also do not make good sources, since they are almost never independent of the subject of the article. The draft has many, many other assertions that are not backed up with inline citations. David10244 (talk) 08:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Phil HANTSAR See WP:TUTORIAL on how to add references correctly, and WP:N on what sources are required for an article to be accepted. However, afaict you have avoided WP:COPYPASTE problems, plus-points for that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Recommended reading: Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:47, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is no revision with ID pls edit me Navajcmer (🔔📝) 01:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you rephrase this request/question more intelligibly, somebody here might be able to help. (Punctuation may aid intelligibility.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
op blocked for not here. lettherebedarklight晚安 06:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I found an account which may be doing edits on behalf of a website, but I am not sure how to deal with it[edit]

Account: Gekiclaws

May be editing on behalf of:

Proof for my claim: (post by claiming that "they" fixed Daniel Rensch's Wikipedia page article)

Article diff:

However, this account has only done one edit that is relevant to chess, so I don't know how to handle this. Can someone help me out here? Tube·of·Light 14:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tube of Light I see the diff you mentioned was reverted 20 minutes later. GoingBatty (talk) 14:38, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, but since they only did one edit on behalf of, should the user be warned for unpaid editing or not, @GoingBatty? Tube·of·Light 06:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Tube of Light:, per WP:OUTING, Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person has voluntarily posted their own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia. Personal information includes (...) home or workplace address, job title and work organisation (...) (emphasis in the original). Please don’t do that again. Off-wiki evidence can be used for high-level cases by emailing it to admins etc., but don’t post it publicly.
In addition, it is not clear to me whether someone at actually made the edit, or whether they just used a preview to make a humorous screenshot and then Gekiclaws actually made it for fun after seeing the post. It would have been best to politely ask Gekiclaws on their talk page (with vague phrasing such as "are you employed by the subject of any of the articles you edited?") before rushing to judgement. Finally, as vandalism go, that’s rather mild, so I don’t think a harsh warning is needed either. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, shoot, sorry about that, @Tigraan. And about the possibility of the user editing after the post by, yeah, I hadn't considered that. Tube·of·Light 14:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Once you’ve seen enough randallism, the idea comes to mind easier. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 17:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Film categories: (Soccer)[edit]

I wish all the film categories had the word (soccer) beside association football. (talk) 20:53, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

sorry, i don't understand your question. could you give an example? lettherebedarklight晚安 06:03, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikipedia doesn't grant individual wishes. If you have a reasoned proposal, then argue your case on the relevant talk page and see if you can reach consensus with other editors. Shantavira|feed me 09:25, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not sure where to take this[edit]

but I just undid an edit by and looking at their edit history i believe that they should be blocked. Check it out. Carptrash (talk) 21:31, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism would be the right place, that page also gives some guidance on the procedure (that the user should be warned, etc.) I note from that user's talk page that they have had two warnings recently and not edited since. If the warnings have the desired effect there's no need to block them. (Wikipedia:Sanctions_against_editors_should_not_be_punitive) JeffUK 21:39, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. Carptrash (talk) 18:00, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The edit which you reverted was a correct edit, as you would see from the wikilink which the IP had added. I have reverted your change. David Biddulph (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, but the reference should go where the edit is made not a wikilink away. Carptrash (talk) 18:00, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As I mentioned in reply to your edit on the article talk page, the entire Claires Court School Boat Club#Honours section is unsourced, so you could remove the whole section if you wished. It is, however, not unusual for even featured articles to include embedded lists where the individual list entries are not sourced in the list but presumably are in the linked articles. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I had (have) no desire to revert whole sections or even just one item. I was following a vandal and when they did an unsourced edit I removed it. Carptrash (talk) 20:08, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Blaze Wolf[edit]

Who is Blaze wolf Despacito305276 (talk) 21:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Despacito305276, welcome to the Teahouse. Blaze Wolf is an editor here on Wikipedia. You can get in touch with them on their talk page if you have questions for them - it is at User talk:Blaze Wolf. (talk) 21:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much I appreciate your assistance. Despacito305276 (talk) 21:00, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Blaze Wolf is me! My talk page is currently protected due to persistent vandalism and harassment from IPs, however if you have any questions feel free to ask them here. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Blaze Wolf. I have a question. How do I protect my page?Cwater1 (talk) 17:00, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cwater1: Hello Cwater! You can request page protection at WP:RFPP, however it most likely won't be accepted as I don't see any vandalism on your talk page or your userpage. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:02, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I saw this so I thought I would quickly ask. I was just curious. Thank you for the info though.Cwater1 (talk) 18:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So well my page was Declined.[edit]

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: Draft:Utekontakten Bergen

So Idk why any ideas how You can see why it was Declined? The Norwegian Empire (talk) 22:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@The Norwegian Empire: Welcome to the Teahouse. This is the English Wikipedia, and articles here are written in English. You may be looking for the Norwegian Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The post on your talk page User_talk:The_Norwegian_Empire explains the reason it was declined. JeffUK 22:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also note that the article does not appear to be written in an encyclopedic tone, it reads a lot more like a promotional piece than an encylopedia article (see Wikipedia:Writing_better_articles#Tone). JeffUK 22:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, The Norwegian Empire. All encyclopedia articles on the English language Wikipedia need to be written in the English language, so that is reason enough to decline your Norwegian language draft. But drafts can be translated. I do not read more than a few words of Norwegian. but I used translation software to take a closer look, and your draft appears to be a promotional brochure instead of an actual neutrally written encyclopedia article. So, your draft has (at least) two major problems, and maybe more. Cullen328 (talk) 07:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Norwegian-language Wikipedia are here and here.   Maproom (talk) 08:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Login issues[edit]

I asked the below question on my talk page:

Please help me with...

Hello. I apparently no longer have a username, although I do have a username. This is my page. My name is in red now elsewhere and Wikipedia says I do not exist. I do exist. I'm right here. I am also unable to login, although I appear to be logged in. Crikey.

I'm not a major editor, and there is a lot about Wikipedia which I do not understand. That's why I don't attempt things I don't know about. But I do provide useful work, correcting articles, providing sources and adding hotlinks. I also correct grammar. I am unaware of doing anything wrong that would cause my name to be deactivated.

This is what I see now:

The page "MGHuc" does not exist. You can create a draft and submit it for review, or you may create the page "MGHuc" directly, but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered.

User:MGHuc/sandbox This is the user sandbox of MGHuc. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the... 55 bytes (1 word) - 09:01, 3 January 2020 User:Sam Engleang -´mkenHcg;ykluyxøHmk [TukeRbIeBlRblg ebImin[RKUxøHBitCaBi)akehIy ¬nageqøIyRBmTaMghuc R)ak;mkCamYy¦. dMbUg´bdiesFnignagEtnagenAEtbgçMehIyKMramfaebITuk´Camitþ... 14 KB (1,515 words) - 06:59, 6 December 2008 MGHuc (talk) 04:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC) MGHuc (talk) 04:38, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I received an unsatisfactory answer and replied:

I have never had this issue before where I was unable to login. I just attempted to login like I always do so any edits I make could be tracked back to me should there be any issues with the work I did. I hold myself accountable.

I have no recollection of what the "User:Sam Engleang page" is or any memory of it whatsoever.

I was not logged in when I "made this entry", unless when logging in, Wikipedia, for the first time ever, tells you that you don't exist. I didn't suddenly become an idiot and forget how to login or become confused by the process.

Thank you for taking the time to address my concerns. However, I found your answer to be unhelpful and condescending in more than one area. Perhaps we can get someone in here who will be more helpful to someone who believes in Wikipedia and who is only trying to help contribute to the cause.

Thanks for your effort.


After posting my reply I realized that my initial question was no longer open for replies so I assume the person who did reply will not see my follow-up. I was unable to delete my comment and just start anew here.

I know little about the processes around here but I stick to what I do know and I'm just trying to help out.


MGHuc MGHuc (talk) 22:31, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi User:MGHuc! You do have a user and a username, what you don't have is a user page, you can create one by clicking 'Create' on this page: User:MGHuc . you can learn more about user pages here: Wikipedia:User_pages, note that you do not need a user page at all, it's entirely optional and you are very welcome to continue editing without creating one. JeffUK 22:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MGHuc: Welcome to the Teahouse. It seems you're confused about the existence of a user page (which not every user has). Your name is in red because a user page was never created for it (and by no means is it mandatory to make one). You are currently logged in and you definitely posted this question from your account. If you want your name in blue, just click on it and type something into the page that opens up and click Publish page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:35, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much. I got the gist of this from the other user that replied, but what I don't understand is why I was apparently unable to login and was told that my username did not exist. I want to stress, I have never had that issue before. With the recent changes to Wikipedia's format I wondered if there was some bugging going on.
But thanks to you and to JeffUK. I edited my question in here and said that after clearing my history the matter seems to have been resolved. Thanks so much. MGHuc (talk) 22:43, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much. I got the gist of this from the other user that replied, but what I don't understand is why I was apparently unable to login and was told that my username did not exist. I want to stress, I have never had that issue before. With the recent changes to Wikipedia's format I wondered if there was some bugging going on.
But thanks to you and to Tenryuu. I edited my question in here and said that after clearing my history the matter seems to have been resolved. Thanks so much. MGHuc (talk) 22:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MGHuc Login user-names are case sensitive, so it is possible that you tried to log in with MGHUC or Mghuc or some other incorrect combination, which wouldn't have worked. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My username and password autofills. But again, thanks. MGHuc (talk) 22:51, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, MGHuc. Your username and account have existed for almost five years. Your userpage does not exist because you have never tried to create it. Your account has never been blocked and is in good standing. So, it is difficult to figure out what your actual problem is. Cullen328 (talk) 06:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't know what the problem was, but there was a problem that happened for the first ever. The problem has now been rectified, probably because I cleared my history, something I should have thought of much sooner. Thanks for your help. MGHuc (talk) 19:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Laura Bergt links to Google Drive in the references[edit]

  • The article Laura Bergt links to Google Drive in the references, I'm not sure there's a policy against it but it definitely seems a bit off... I'm not clicking on those references. Is there a policy against this? Isn't that also a copyright violation? Therapyisgood (talk) 23:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Hello, Therapyisgood, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's certainly not usual to link to a google drive (It would have been helpful if you had indicated which reference: the one I've found is Blewitt in Anchorage Times). When I try to follow the link it tells me I need to request access - this is not the same as being behind a paywall. Without seeing it, we can't tell, but I agree that it is likely to be an unauthorised upload, and hence a copyright violation.
    I would recommend removing the links that are to such places (a citation does not require a URL unless the source is only available on the web, and not necessarily even then). It would be worth searching for the source online, eg through WP:The Wikipedia Library, and substituting it if it is found, but otherwise just leave the URL parameter empty. ColinFine (talk) 23:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Hi Therapyisgood. I'm just going to add to what ColinFine posted above by saying that leaving the |url= parameter empty for a citation formatted using the {{cite web}} template (as well as some others) will cause an error. So, if you're going to start removing urls from citations, you probably should make sure you're not creating some extra cleanup work for others by doing so. It might be a good idea to discuss your concerns at Talk:Laura Berg to see if others can help resolve the issue. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to close a RFD discussion[edit]

I nominated two redirects for deletion but later changed my mind and I want to withdraw these nominations. IntegerSequences (talk | contribs) 04:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can strike out you nomination statement, and add a small note about the withdrawal. Carpimaps (talk) 05:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@IntegerSequences Carpimaps (talk) 05:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. IntegerSequences (talk | contribs) 06:45, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Google searches putting the little wikipedia thing on the right of the search[edit]

What is it called when google searches (cache?) the little snippet of a wiki article on the right hand side or a search results? And when did they start doing that? Or all search engines really? Moops T 05:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Moops The little box is called (by Google) a knowledge panel, powered by the Google Knowledge Graph. According to our article it was rolled out in May 2012. Shells-shells (talk) 05:47, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just went to the link you shared. That is really cool. I would have never found that on my own, 'Google Knowledge Graph', neat. TY Moops T 05:59, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Moops: Note that the only part Google took from Wikipedia is usually a text paragraph which ends with a link on "Wikipedia". We get many complaints about errors in other parts and made {{HD/GKG}} to respond. PrimeHunter (talk) 06:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am not familiar with HD/GDK. Tell me more. This is all very interesting to me. :) TY Moops T 06:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Moops: {{HD/GKG}} (Help desk/Google Knowledge Graph) is one of the stock answers at {{HD}}. It was made for Wikipedia:Help desk in 2013 but can also be used elsewhere. A typical complaint says we show the wrong person on an article, usually without saying they saw the image at Google and not Wikipedia. That's why is says "Are you by any chance referring to ...". The article often has never had any image. I give the reply after Googling the name to see what Google shows. Ukexpat made the template but it was based on my help desk posts. It's substituted so it doesn't show on WhatLinksHere. This search finds 99 help desk archives. I thought it would be more by now. Here are 26 Teahouse archives. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That is some nice Wikipedia history right there! TY Moops T 07:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Moops, there is an amusing but very informative essay called Wikipedia:Don't build the Frankenstein. Such errors can be made by human editors or by sophisticated computer algorithms or chat bots. Cullen328 (talk) 07:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I enjoy amusing but very informative essays. TY! I will give it a read. :) Moops T 07:22, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Moops: {{HD/GKG}} was created at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2013 May 6#Wrong photograph. The typical complaint said "the photograph that appears on the page is NOT ME" about a page with no image. Other search engines copied Google's "infobox" idea (right down to the confusing Wikipedia link with no mention of other sources) so we also made {{HD/YKG}} and {{HD/Bing}} in 2015 but Google is more popular. Long ago we got similar complaints about automatically generated Facebook community pages with links to Wikipedia. {{HD/facebook}} was created in 2011, the oldest of the lot. A typical complaint was that some Facebook algorithm had given a wrong geographical location. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:32, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Remove annoying parts[edit]

When I try to edit a semi-protected page it keeps saying note: this page is ...if you need help getting started with editing... and it is annoying, how to remove this? Jishiboka1 (talk) 09:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Jishiboka1. Which page are you referring to? Sometimes a page has been protected and restrictions are placed upon who can edit it. Pages can only be protected by an administrator and there's almost always a very good reason for doing so. If you can provide the name of the page, someone can probably better answer your question. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:47, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No i have autoconfirmed rights, and editing a page that is semi protected there is this red note, i can edit but it is annoying, i've seen it enough that i now know. Jishiboka1 (talk) 11:07, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jishiboka1: You can add this to your CSS:
#semiprotectedpagewarning {display: none;}
Most interface elements can be hidden similarly. The HTML at the note says id="semiprotectedpagewarning". Your browser probably has a view source or inspect option to see it. If it had said class="semiprotectedpagewarning" or included more classes with class="... semiprotectedpagewarning ..." then the code would be .semiprotectedpagewarning {display: none;}. If there is no suitable id or class then it's difficult to hide something. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:07, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, Jishiboka1. Would you be kind enough to link to the page you were having problems with, please? We can probably help you better if we can check it. It's probable that the article was one of the tiny proportion which have needed to be given 'Extended protection', requiring editors to have made more than 500 edits (see WP:ECPGUIDE).
I see you've only made 413 so far. So you would need to make an WP:EDITREQUEST on the talk page at this point in time, I'm afraid. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Nick Moyes: Hi. They are able to edit that page. I think it maybe a default edit notice for all semi protected pages, or a custom one for the particular page. —usernamekiran (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okanagan Game Farm[edit]

Hello, I have some questions about conflict of interest, citing print newspapers as a source, and the use of personal photographs in articles.

  1. I know someone who was a shareholder for the Okanagan Game Farm during the time it was operating. I have heard many stories from them about the game farm, including ones that relate to published news stories. Given this page is a stub and has not had new content added since 2012, and I may be able to access news articles and photographs relating to the game farm that likely would not otherwise be accessible, would it be appropriate for me to edit this page?
  2. If I was citing an article from a print newspaper on Wikipedia, what would be the best way to make the article available for readers to verify the source?
  3. WP:IUP says "Images with you, friends or family prominently featured in a way that distracts from the image topic are not recommended for the main namespace. These images are considered self-promotion and the Wikipedia community has repeatedly reached consensus to delete such images." The photos of the game farm I would have access to prominently feature the shareholder and their family. If the images are labelled in ways that emphasise aspects of the farm rather than the individuals (eg. "a child at the game farm with a tiger cub; animals at the farm were . . ."), would it be appropriate for me to add them to the page?

Thank you very much for your consideration. Oystersauce99 (talk) 11:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello @Oystersauce99 and welcome to the Teahouse. We cite articles from newspapers using the {{cite news}} template, as has already been done in that article. We also assume good faith with editors using WP:OFFLINE sources that the source quoted does actually support the content. Enthusiastic readers could use local libraries or online repositories such as to check sources and that archive is also good for finding more. Your shareholding in the past seems to me to be irrelevant now and the only issue is the photos. If these were taken by you with your own camera, they can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Stick to uploading images of encyclopaedic value, and you'll be fine. Articles only need a limited number of representative images. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"The photos of the game farm I would have access to ..." implies you did not take the photographs yourself. Hence, "No" to your use of them. David notMD (talk) 13:37, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As you can see from these replies, each correct but almost sounding contradictory, whether you can use the images in the article depends on their copyright status. Please see images for more information. David10244 (talk) 08:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you very much for your replies! I will take this into consideration. Oystersauce99 (talk) 20:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Access to an ACM Article[edit]

I need to see a paper: Movie script markup language by Dieter van Rijsselbergen et. al. To add references and new info to an article. The full paper is here: Usually I can find a PDF somewhere but no luck on this one and alas I no longer am an ACM member. I recall there was a resource editors could use but it's been a while and I don't remember where it is (or I may be remembering wrong). Any suggestions would be appreciated. MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, MadScientist. Have a look at WP:RX. It may be that you can get it youself via WP:The Wikipedia Library (I've never used this, so I don't know its scope). ColinFine (talk) 14:51, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@ColinFine, Eureka! That is the link I needed. Thanks. I'll make sure to bookmark it for future reference. MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Content review - rejected updates[edit]

Hello everyone, I'm Lucie, and I work for a company with a Wikipedia page. Unfortunately, most facts and figures are outdated (since 2016). I submitted new content today, and it got rejected. Can someone help me review it and tell me what should be changed? Thank you. LucieG-PR (talk) 14:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Lucie, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for making the declaration of your conflict of interest; however, I'm afraid that is not enough. You are a paid editor, and you must declare that - see that link.
Then please read PSCOI. In short you should not edit Beretta Holding at all, but should instead make edit requests on its talk page. It is helpful to make them as precise as possible, and to include sources for any information you want to introduce. ColinFine (talk) 15:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Looking over the edits you made it is clear that you, like most people, have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is what reliable sources say about a company, not what the company wants to say. You edited that article to read like an advertisement. Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral. Esolo5002 (talk) 20:31, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@LucieG-PR It looks like your edits were reverted. I removed a bit more puffery after that. It doesn't read too badly now, but Lucie, please follow ColinFine's advice and propose updates to the article. An editor will consider each of your proposed changes, check the references you supply, and make the edits if appropriate. Be sure to follow the steps at the link Colin gave. It's pretty straightforward.
We often tell editors that this is not "your company's Wikipedia page"; instead, it is Wikipedia's article about a company -- and of course you might have an affiliation with that company.
If you enter the edit requests, and they are backed up with sources, the changes you seek will probably be made. David10244 (talk) 07:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Advice for running an edit drive[edit]

I'm currently brainstorming an edit drive that aims to make WP:Vital articles more reliable, i.e. removing depreciated sources, adding reliable sources, make sure the text really said what the source has said, etc. I want to make that edit drive both as a place where newcomers can hone their skills while having fun doing so. I know that this question probably doesn't totally belongs to the Teahouse, but I really want to know experienced and new editors' thought alike about this idea. CactiStaccingCrane 15:43, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you haven't found it already, this looks like a great place to start Running Editathons and other Editing Events - Programs & Events Dashboard ( JeffUK 16:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't plan to run an offline editathon, but this is a very good read nonetheless. The drive will probably last about a few months, and would work on each section within the WP:Vital article list one by one (People, History, Arts, etc.), focusing on just getting most of the information cited (80%) with no bad sources left. Once a section is completed, the drive would move on to the next section, while a small group of experienced editors will spot-check about 2-5 sources in every article and use script such as WP:CITEWATCH to find unreliable sources. Ultimately, the drive aims to make a meaningful impact to improving Vital articles and prove to the newcomers that Wikipedia is still capable of doing exciting things. My biggest concern here based on my past experience with the WP:30 kB drive is that interest seems to be unsustainable as the drive really struggled during the last two weeks. CactiStaccingCrane 16:19, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, new user here[edit]

New user here. This whole space is a lot to take in, I would appreciate some help ThePowerWizard (talk) 18:04, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ThePowerWizard: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're referring to the white spaces to the sides of the article, you can get rid of those by either clicking on the OOjs UI icon fullScreen.svg in the lower-right corner of the window, or by going into your preferences and uncheck Preferences → Appearance → Skin preferences → uncheck Enable limited width mode.
If this is a more general question about Wikipedia as a whole, I suggest checking out the tutorial. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, ThePowerWizard, and welcome to the Teahouse! Is there anything specific you'd like help with? Perfect4th (talk) 18:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your draft Draft:Irrational Time Signatures declined once and likely to be declined again for A) lack of reliable source references; and B) topic may be sufficiently covered at Time signature. If you decide to give up on your draft, at the top, inside double curly brackets {{ }}, put Db-author. An Administrator will see this and delete the draft. David notMD (talk) 19:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I declined it again because the topic is already covered in greater depth at Time signature#Irrational meters. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:26, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


How do i make a really Snazzy Userpage. I see all these editors with dope userpages with userboxes and descriptions. How do I make something like that ThePowerWizard (talk) 18:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @ThePowerWizard. I usually direct folks with this question to the User page design center. It's inactive, but still full of ideas. (talk) 18:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikipedia:Userboxes has instructions and a link to a gallery of existing Userboxes. David notMD (talk) 19:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Homepage tab[edit]

Hello, how do I deactivate the "Hompage" tab? The one that displays "Hello, ‪Jerium‬!". Must be a recent thing because I don't remember having that around last year, thanks Jerium (talk) 19:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jerium: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can disable it by unchecking Preferences → User profile → Newcomer editor features → uncheck Display newcomer homepage. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:56, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Tenryuu Thank you, was getting annoyed by that tab. Jerium (talk) 20:00, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How do you make a Wikiproject?[edit]

I am a co-founder of the American Isopod and Myriapod group. We would love to create a project here on Wikipedia for our members; however, I could not find straightforward instructions on how to do so. Nathan Jones Blastcat-iNat (talk) 22:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Blastcat-iNat, welcome to the Teahouse. Have you read the instructions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Creating a WikiProject? I'm afraid your proposed scope is a little too narrow, and you may be better off simply joining a larger WikiProject in the general subject area - perhaps creating a taskforce within it - but the instructions are there if you want to forge ahead. (talk) 22:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for the quick response I agree that a taskforce would be best, thank you! Nathan Jones Blastcat-iNat (talk) 23:00, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feedback Draft:Yayzy[edit]

Hey guys, anybody can help more with ? Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks Jerry3zs (talk) 23:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jerry3zs The draft is in the pile of drafts to be reviewed. David10244 (talk) 08:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for checking and helping with it. Any other tips on how to get it improved to a better grade? Jerry3zs (talk) 12:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I want to know about Barry Diller's acquisition of Universal Television[edit]

Hi, I'm clarifying that Barry Diller bought Universal Television on October 20, 1997 according to news articles and reports, I attempted to edit it and it was reverted back. 2603:6010:3A00:5F1F:948C:F5EB:F094:43B7 (talk) 23:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse! It would have been nice for Materialscientist to provide an explanation in their edit summary to explain why they reverted your edit to the Universal Television article. My guess is that they reverted the edit because the Los Angeles Times reference doesn't seem to specify the sale date was October 20, and you did not provide a new published reliable source for the specific date. GoingBatty (talk) 03:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question about reference[edit]

Hi! I have a question. Can we use a wikialpha, wikitia, and other wiki platforms as reference? Thank you. Bmjc98 (talk) 23:37, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Bmjc98 and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer is no. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources, particularly Wikipedia:Reliable sources#User-generated content. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's what I thought so. Thank you for responding. Bmjc98 (talk) 23:55, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to get rid of a space?[edit]

In Abraham Lincoln and slavery, in the section "Letter to Greeley," is the phrase " [i]f citizens desired 'to avoid the unsatisfactory' terms of the Final Emancipation Proclamation ... " Until I just edited it, the opening quotation mark was on a different line from the quotation beginning "[i]f." I inserted a code that brought the quotation mark down a line. But it leaves a space before "[i]f," and I can't figure out why or how to eliminate it. Maurice Magnus (talk) 00:15, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another editor reverted my edit so that the quotation mark is again on the line above the quotation. I just discovered that clicking the square at the bottom right will fix that in the wider view. But the problem remains in the narrow view that I'd been working in. Maurice Magnus (talk) 01:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done with a {{nowrap}} template. Maproom (talk) 08:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Enforcing Community Guidelines, Terms of Use[edit]

It has always been so impressive to see how well the larger community and/or admins moderate the content which violates the community guidelines. I assume that process is quite time consuming for the various people involved, between the vast uploads, pages, complexities in determining if content is violative, and across the many languages. There are various software solutions which help make that effort more efficient. I was wondering if this platform has any automation to this problem set, or if it is done manually by admins and the general user populace? Max, Not Bill (talk) 00:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Max, Not Bill: Hello Max! The answer is sort of. For vandalism we have User:ClueBot NG which works pretty good for extremely obvious vandalism. I know there are some other bots that handle images, but there's no bots that handle images. Generally things are not automated here because of the varying amount of stuff that can be vandalism and since there are actual humans here, the risk of a false positive is high. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:45, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hey thanks for the response Blaze, very interesting. Do the bots also assist in flagging the harmful content of repeat offenders? I read that either the Wikimedia Community of admin can block or ban user accounts. How do you keep track of those persons? Max, Not Bill (talk) 01:13, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Max, Not Bill: No problem. Usually no they don't, although I wouldn't be surprised if that's partially how ClueBot NG functions. The answer to "How do you keep track of those persons?" is it depends. If they're an LTA (Long term abuse) then we used to create LTA pages on them so users would have information on how they function and what their edits might look like. IF they've been blocked and have created alt accounts to get around their block hen those are usually kept track of at Sockpuppet investigations pages. There are some other processes in which we keep track on users who have been blocked/banned (mainly the Arbitration committee), however most of the time after a user is blocked they either request an unblock or never return so there's usually no need to keep track of them. If a user has been blocked previously their blocks are recorded in their block log. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 01:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hey Blaze, thanks for your candid responses. Do you think the admin community would benefit from some form of platform to manage the efforts you mentioned? Some kind of automated workflow system to become more efficient? And Cheers to your retirement (whenever that is in the near future)!!!! Max, Not Bill (talk) 15:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Max, Not Bill: Hello again Max. I honestly don't think so due to the intricacies of the project and the varying situations in which someone might be blocked. I don't think it would be wise to trust an automated system to block vandals for vandalism because if there's a false positive then it creates a lot of work and can potentially hurt the project by making people scared to edit. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Blaze Wolf The answer is always sort of, right? David10244 (talk) 07:59, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@David10244: Mostly yes. There are some things that are for sure, but automation isn't one of them. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 13:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Extended protection[edit]

Why are some articles (such as Donald Trump) extended protected? Mast303 (talk) 01:54, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Mast303: Welcome to the Teahouse. Usually when an article is given protection it is because it is subject to edit warring, which causes it to be incredibly unstable to a casual reader. You can find out the reason by clicking on "Page information" in the sidebar, navigating down to §Page protection, then clicking "View the protection log for this page". —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(edit conflict) @Mast303: Articles that are extended-protected prevent IP editors and accounts with less than 30 days tenure and 500 edits (30/500 protection). This is usually in response to edit warring, vandalism, disruptive editing etc, from IP editors and new users sometimes even auto-confirmed accounts. These pages are prone to attract attention because of the subject of the article, so in instances where disruption is high, administrators opt for extended confirmed protection instead of semi-protection in instances of editing disputes. For more information read Wikipedia's Protection policy. -- StarryNightSky11 02:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For Donald Trump specifically, this request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is when the extended-confirmed requirement was initiated. DecafPotato (talk) 02:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am trying to simply add; [1] (link would be; under category "U". How do I do this so it is approved? (talk) 02:12, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse. You don't. That category is only for Wikipedia articles. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:15, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
how would I add an article as this is my first time here doing this? Universe residing (talk) 02:18, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I strongly suggest you read Your first article and make sure you have suitable reliable sources for your subject to even warrant an article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In addition check that you are writing from a neutral point of view and aren't personally connected to the subject. StarryNightSky11 02:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much, take care. Universe residing (talk) 02:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I fixed the broken link in the OP's post, in case anyone feels like taking a journey to that (brief) page. David10244 (talk) 09:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not a Sockpuppet![edit]

I was wrongly banned for being a sockpuppet of another account and can no longer log in to my own account. I submitted a ticket well over a month ago and have not heard back. Is there a way I could get an update, such as opening another ticket or directly contacting a steward? (talk) 04:53, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi IP There are several administrators who also answer questions at the Teahouse and perhaps one of them will pipe in and post something about this. Generally, accounts blocked as sockpuppets are, for the most, indefinitely blocked and not eligiblke for unblocking as explained in WP:SOCKBLOCK. The primary account (i.e. the sock master) accused of sock puppetry may be unblocked in cases where administrators feel that the block has served its purpose, but one thing that you should understand is that even posting above like you did here at the Teahouse using a different account (even an IP account) can be seen as a form of block evasion and only further complicates things. The best advice that I can give you is to log in to your blocked account and then post an unblock request on that account's user talk page. You're going to need to convince an administrator that you not only understand the reasons why you've been blocked but also are unlikely to repeat the same behavior. Sometimes as a way of verifying this, you may be given a chance at the standard offer in which you agree to make no edits of any type to Wikipedia for a certain period of time in addition to some other conditions deemed fit by administrators. There's no guaratees your request will be granted, but it's where you're going to need to start. Now, if for some reason your user talk page access has been taken away, you shouldn't use another account to make sure a request. Instead, you should follow the guidance given in WP:UTRS and request an unblock that way. If you really feel this is a case of mistaken identity, then you can say as much in your unblock request. You should, however, be advised that there is a technical way of assessing whether different accounts being used in violation of WP:SOCK are connected. If your account has been blocked based on such evidence, it's going to be hard to get administrators to believe a mistake has been made and the wrong account ended up getting blocked. Finally, instead of posting any more on Wikipedia using IP or newly created accounts (even if it's just to post a thank you here at the Teahouse), you should limit your editing to your account's user talk page from hereon. Once again, if you can't edit that talk page, you should seek assistance via UTRS or even possibly WP:DISCORD or WP:IRC. Administrators can often be found on Discord and IRC, and one of them might be able to answer your questions in real time. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

India: The Modi Question[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The OP has started a discussion about this at WP:ANI#User:Owais Al Qarni attacking Narendra Modi so if anyone wants to comment further, they probably should do so there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:27, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

India: The Modi Question was created by someone working for BBC who wants to defame our dear Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Modiji is innocent. How can I delete this article. Somebody help. This article should not exist 2409:40F3:25:FD00:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 06:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi IP 2409:40F3:25:FD00:8000:0:0:0. You can't WP:DELETE any Wikipedia pages yourself. If you feel there are errors in the page's content or the content is otherwise not in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you can try to WP:FIXIT yourself. If others undo the edits you make, then that means they disagree with them and then from that point on you should follow WP:DISPUTERESOLUTION and use the article's talk page to discuss the matter. If the article is truly beyond hope and is impossible to fix, then you can try to establish a WP:CONSENSUS for it to be deleted. Such a step, however, is considered to be a last resort and articles are only deleted when there's a clear consensus to do so, or there are other serious policy related problems to justify speedy deletion. For what it's worth, India: The Modi Question doesn't seem, at least at first glance, to meet any speedy deletion criteria in my opinion; so, your best approach is to use the article's talk page to express whatever concerns you have about it and make suggestions as to ways in which you think it can be approved. Please understand that article talk pages are intended to be places for discussing how article content can be made to be more in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Article talk pages are not intended to be forums for general discussion about the article's subject, and they're certainly not intended to be places for trying to set the record straight or making claims about other editors and what you guess their motivation might be like you did in your question above. Be also advised that participants in discussions on article talk pages are expected be WP:CIVIL at all times. So, before you start any such discussion, you might want to look at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Behavior that is unacceptable for some examples of behavior not considered acceptable for talk pages. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Marchjulyji, Modiji has managed to delete this violent documentary from YouTube and other social media platforms. Modiji has that much power. I'm sure he will do something to delete this from wikipedia also. BBC is trying to defame Modiji. I can't tolerate that. There is no justice in wikipedia. 2409:40F3:25:FD00:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 06:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Since you've started WP:ANI#User:Owais Al Qarni attacking Narendra Modi, you probably should keep all discussion related to this there and follow the advice given to you there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:25, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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.

article Conversion of non-Hindu places of worship into temples[edit]

Please help me with... in the article Conversion of non-Hindu places of worship into temples, the first reference itself is contradicting what is written in this article and the example of Durga temple in Aihole, India is contradictory to its own Wikipedia article. Trsuyash (talk) 06:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Trsuyash: Welcome to the Teahouse. You have asked this at the help desk already. Please only ask in one place to reduce duplication of volunteer effort. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dilemma of a GA reviewer[edit]

Hi, going through the list of Good article nominations, I found an article page and opted to review it. During this course, I researched on the verifiable sources for the topic to find if there's anything more that can be used to improve and expand the article. It turns out that there's quite a good amount of content that can be added.

The criteria of reviewer to not have contributed significantly to the article has put me in dilemma. Now my question is, since I have taken up the task of reviewing the GA nomination, what will be the best course of action - ask & wait for other editors to improve the article or go ahead with my contributions to article? Anand2202 (talk) 06:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Anand2202. This seems like a question that's more suited for WT:GAN than the Teahouse. The general answer normally given here by a Teahouse host would probably be something like "be WP:BOLD and improve the article as much as you can". Whether that creates a conflict of interest due to the fact you're also carrying out a GA review of the same article is probably something that only GA or FA reviewers can really answer. The first solution that pops into my head would be to see if you can find another reviewer to take over for you. Then, you should be able to make the improvements you feel are needed and also avoid any potentional conflict of interest. I don't know if that's possible, but that might be another thing to ask about at WT:GAN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:48, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
[EC] That's a very reasonable question, Anand2202. I have an opinion, but only a very inexpert one, and therefore I shan't inflict it on you. You might be lucky and get somebody here who can speak from experience, but in your place I'd simply move this question of yours from here to Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations, where it certainly would be read by people who know their stuff. -- Hoary (talk) 06:50, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Anand2202 In a recent GA review I was involved with, the reviewer made many suggestions but these were implemented (in a modified form sometimes) by others. The discussion is at Talk:Thiamine/GA1 and may be a precedent for what you want to do. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Small Q: can I leave this image of a polyhedron?[edit]

Hi, I am editing Compound of four tetrahedra and wouldn't mind leaving the picture I uploaded of the main uniform figure described in the article (uniform compound of four dyadic antiprisms UC23), though it is not the general standard image used for polyhedron articles (usually they are images from Stella4D).

I am going to upload a different standardized image in a day or two, but was wondering if I could simply leave this one here, since some other articles use simpler images like the one I am using, though much less often. Radlrb (talk) 07:53, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Radlrb, I don't understand your question, and I don't know which of the four pictures in the article you're referring to. But I will say that I find the fourth one, a photograph, much easier to understand than the other three. I would like to see that photograph in the infobox in place of the image now there. Maproom (talk) 08:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So, normally polyhedron pages have images like the one on the compound of three tetrahedra which contains little balls at the vertices of the figure, though not always.
Unfortunately, I cannot put that image inside there, because that is not an image of the figure being described (the infobox describes a uniform figure, whereas the picture is of a non-uniform figure).
I'll upload a different image for the main image being shown in the infobox, then. Are you unable to see the one I have there now clearly? Thank you for your help!
Radlrb (talk) 08:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I can easily see the image now in the infobox, but I find it much harder to interpret than the photograph. I see now that the article is about more than one thing known as "compound of four tetrahedra". It's not clear to me how many such things, nor which one is shown in each image. And the wikilink Robert Webb doesn't go where it claims. Maproom (talk) 08:36, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, normally in these articles you'll see that it can be hard to understand what is being spoken of if your background in polyhedral geometry is not strong. I don't think I need to express anymore than I have that all the images are about compounds of four tetrahedra. They are all images of compounds of four tetrahedra, the ones under the heading uniform are uniform compounds, while the photograph is one of a nonuniform compound, under the heading of Other compounds. The Wikilink for Robert Webb goes to the only Wikilink for Robert Webb's Stella software. I'll change that image though, tomorrow or the day after, I have to invest in the right program - it should be alright for the time being (1 or 2 views a day on average; at least an image is there). Thanks! Radlrb (talk) 08:41, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think an animated GIF of one being constructed from its constituent tetrahedra would be interesting, or at least one that rotates. That tends to help make complex 3D shapes easier for humans to interpret than a static image. Can the software you're using to generate them make something like that easily? If not I'll see what I can knock up in Blender when I get home tonight! I think it could generate this procedurally. JeffUK 09:23, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Awesome! Please, feel free. Compound of twenty octahedra with rotational freedom has a nice movement between many images., but I think it is way too large and too grey, for most people to want to fiddle with. However, If you can make an animated gif of the non-uniform compound of 20 octahedra, that would be great. I need to get the right Stella software to generate what I want (just a little short on cash atm), with Antiprism (which is how the images for the uniform forms were generated), it is difficult to do (at least for me). Else, I think I can cook something up in a day or two. Oh, and there is one link where you can rotate the tetrahedra yourself, I forgot to mention (bottom-most external link), ty Jeff
Radlrb (talk) 09:41, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
When I see a mention of Compound of five tetrahedra, I immediately know, and can visualise, what is meant. It seems that Compound of four tetrahedra is much less well defined. It could mean any of several things. An article on it ought to explain what the various structures are, and give evidence that each has been so named. A section for each such structure would be a big help. Maproom (talk) 17:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Correct, that is also in part because the compound of five tetrahedra is immensely much more studied than the compound of four tetrahedra. I won't be able to generate as many images without possibly walking into OR territory, but I'll see what I can concoct that is acceptable from either being already published, or described generally otherwise somewhere else. This compound actually has never really been written about in a formal article journal aside from generalized equations that describe the infinite family of antiprisms that this family is part of. Check also the compound of three tetrahedra, you'll see it is essentially as developed as the article on the compound of four tetrahedra, minus some. It's at least a big improvement from here diff Radlrb (talk) 18:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hey @Maproom, take a look at the article now, let us know what you think! Radlrb (talk) 02:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is much better! I really like the image in the infobox, it's so much better than what was there before (and it rotates at a sensible speed – most such animated images on Wikipedia rotate too fast to be easily understood). I've one comment. There's a section called "Uniform compounds", that gives a good clear account of one such compound, and then describes a class of compounds with an arbitrary angle, still uniform but with a smaller symmetry group (D4h, I think). Are there any other uniform compounds of four tetrahedra? (My guess is that there aren't, but you don't mention it because you haven't found a proof). Just for my own interest – what is the convex hull of the compound found by Webb? I'm having difficulty visualising it. Maproom (talk) 09:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Right! It's like I am hallucinating. Yes, the image before was there for the moment, though I do have a likeness to it if it were larger, and after knowing what the figure looks like, it's a semi 2-dimensional rendering of the polytope at that angle, colored. The image there now though, is another universe of course, too (more palpable for most people, importantly). Do you like the top and side views? Correct, good point, I will add that Dihedrall symmetry, or if you'd like, please do so yourself, just check and make sure (I can too) at Uniform polyhedron compound (UC23 and UC22) and the values p, q and n. It should be D4h. There is one other nonuniform compound of interest, which is the compound of four tetrahedra whose vertex at their altitudes is common between all four tetrahedra. I will make that one now that I have Stella, I was waiting to have it. Uniform-wise, aside from the inifite of that one range, actually no. This is it, just two. Likewise for all compounds of tetrahedra, and of interest compounds of octahedra (as triangular antiprisms) analogously in their categories (both of these have for example, triangular faces and are antiprismatic. I will get back to you on the convex hull in a bit, hopefully! Radlrb (talk) 09:53, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Changes to entry being rejected[edit]

Hello. We work for the organisation we are trying to change as it contains basic factual inaccuracies (not subjective changes) about our name, which was changed a few years ago. How can I override these please? Also, how can I change the name of our entry's page? UWCAtlantic (talk) 12:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is the entry: Atlantic College UWCAtlantic (talk) 12:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The title of the article is dependent not on what you choose to call it, but on what the majority of independent reliable sources call it. Even if the current name might be the new one, parts of your change are obviously incorrect because they refer to the previous history of the subject. As has been pointed out to you on your user talk page, because of your conflict of interest you should not edit the article yourself, but instead you can use the article talk page to suggest changes, backing up your suggestions with references to independent published reliable sources. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikipedia has been a nightmare to use so far... just for your feedback. ISMORTONUK (talk) 13:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Where is the article talk page?? ISMORTONUK (talk) 13:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
At the top of the article there is a link which says "Talk". - David Biddulph (talk) 13:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you ISMORTONUK (talk) 13:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're welcome. As part of your learning curve you do need to read about conflict of interest, and about the mandatory declaration required from those engaged in paid editing. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@ISMORTONUK And please read edit requests. David10244 (talk) 08:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

question re signature links on this page[edit]

this is a very basic question, but I guess that's what this page is for! how are you all generating these signatures, which includes this set of links, here? |talk|C|TB|) thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 13:41, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

additional note: I do see that the user interface says to "leave a teahouse talk back template," but I'm not sure how to do so. thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 13:44, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
wait a second, i guess it does so here automatically? can I add that talkback template on other pages? also, how do we leave one manually? ok, sorry for all these question. I guess in some ways I'm still learning my around, maybe? Face-smile.svg thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 13:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Sm8900, if you are using the dropdown text box that appears after clicking on the '[ reply ]' link at the end of the signature, the accompanying codes to the dropdown text box will append for you automatically. However, if you are editing directly on an article's talk page, i.e. by clicking on 'Edit source' at the top of the talk page, or in this section, 'edit' at the section header, you should append your signature by ending your text with four tildes, i.e. '~~~~'. Example: "This a sample response. ~~~~" will be rendered as "This is sample response. Robertsky 9:XXPM, Today" upon saving of your changes. – robertsky (talk) 14:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Robertsky, thanks so much! I guess it automatically adds a "talkback template," as part of my signature, simply because I'm on this page? thanks very much! --Sm8900 (talk) 16:18, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Template:Teahouse talkback was a template which at one stage we were encouraged to add to a user's talk page if we answered the user's question at WP:TH, but I don't remember seeing anything recently which encouraged such a use. Where on the user interface did you see the instruction to "leave a teahouse talk back template"? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@David Biddulph, the message is no longer appearing, but I think that it appears that most or all of the "Talkback links" that were previously displayed here, in people's signatures, are no longer showing up on this page. ok, so perhaps one of the people who maintains this page is workinbg on some of the technical items here. thanks. Sm8900 (talk) 17:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ok, update, when I typed the reply above, and pressed "publish changes", I got a message box stating "remember to leave a talk back template!", with a blue buttton labaled "OK." I hope that is helpful to clarify this. thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 17:18, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Interesting. When searching I can't find the string "remember to leave a talk back template" anywhere in any namespace on enwiki. David Biddulph (talk) 17:30, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Does this have something to do with the Teahouse scripts (Teahouse/Host lounge/User scripts), perhaps? (talk) 17:44, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm testing it now; it was either when I replied to an existing discussion, or when I posted a new discussion. let me see here...
@Sm8900: In User:Sm8900/common.js you import User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/teahouseTalkback.js which says "Remember to leave a Teahouse Talkback template!". I guess that's the message you actually see. The script was made before we got the Notifications system where you can notify a user by just linking their user page in a post, e.g. with {{reply to}}. Talkback templates like {{Teahouse talkback}} haven't been used much since then. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:04, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ok, that's very interesting to know. and yes, that helps me to know more about these technical things. thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 20:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've always wondered why talkback templates were a thing. I suppose they're still useful for users who have pings and notifications turned off or for IPs since you can't ping them. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rejection of an AFC.[edit]

Is there any way to challenge the rejection of an AFC ? Kashi Narain Mishra (talk) 14:49, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kashi Narain Mishra, your draft was declined, not rejected. You will have to improve the article and resubmit the draft. You can resubmit multiple times unless it is rejected. See the comments the reviewer left you at User:Kashi Narain Mishra/sandbox. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 14:59, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please also read No original research, neutral point of view, and WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. No Wikipedia article should ever use an expression such as "an utter unadulterated lie", except in an explicit direct quotation from a cited source. ColinFine (talk) 18:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My talk page says that it does not exist.[edit]

My talk page says that it does not exist. Casper king (talk) 16:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hiya Casper king and welcome to The Teahouse! Yes, that's correct. The talk page doesn't exist when your account gets created, and doesn't ever come into existence until someone initiates a conversation there with you or you otherwise create and edit it. This is all fine. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, thank you that makes a lot of sense. Casper king (talk) 16:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Created new article[edit]

I created this new article Draft:Feminism, Divorce: Challenging Nigeria's Breadwinner Role but was moved to draft. I have improved it; what else can i improve on it further? Thanks. TruthGating14 (talk) 17:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, TruthGating14. Your draft starts out talking about the "Breadwinner effect" which seems to be a synonym for the Breadwinner model, but we already have an article on that topic. It then narrows in on Nigeria, and brings feminism and divorce into the discussion. Your draft seems like an essay to me and does not explain why divorce in Nigeria is distinctive as compared to surrounding countries or countries around the world. Cullen328 (talk) 18:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


What's the difference between Wikipedia:Sandbox and Draft:Sandbox? Gooze1989 (talk) 17:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Gooze1989. There is no real difference. They are both places for short term testing purposes. Both are cleared out regularly by bots and human editors. Neither are intended for long term work. Cullen328 (talk) 18:11, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What is the difference between the types of link statuses?[edit]

I mostly understand "alive" and "dead", but the other types a bit confusing. Can anyone define what the rest of the statuses mean? - S L A Y T H E - (talk) 18:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, SLAYTHE, and welcome to the Teahouse. They are documented at Template:Cite web#url. ColinFine (talk) 18:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm working on translating some articles in Portuguese. Wikipedia says: "This tool is limited to extended confirmed editors"[edit]

The question is: How can I become a extended confirmed editor? Goliv04053 (talk) 20:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Goliv04053: Welcome to the Teahouse. To become an extended confirmed editor, you need to have made at least 500 edits and an account that is at least 30 days old. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Goliv04053. If you are fluent in both English and Portuguese, you can translate articles without using a tool. Please read WP:TRANSLATE and WP:TRANSLATEUS. Attribution is a legal requirement. Cullen328 (talk) 21:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am fluent in Portuguese and English but use the translation platform as an aid. On the platform I can look at both articles at the same time, work and adapt the translation. Furthermore, the platform helps me translate faster by copying the complete original text and I make adjustments and the translations myself or if I have problems understanding a word or something I use a translator and correct the translation if it sounds and look strange or bad. Goliv04053 (talk) 21:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Revision history[edit]

Why does Wikipedia keep a history of every single edit to every single article/page since the beginning of Wikipedia, apparently going back to the early 2000s? I really appreciate and was blown away by how meticulously everything here is recorded permanently, but my question is why? Gooze1989 (talk) 20:57, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Gooze1989. A slight correction: The very earliest edits in the first few months of Wikipedia used different software and have been mostly lost. The vast majority have been saved. There are many reasons. The free licenses requires that all authors be attributed, and this relate to copyright law. Edit histories allow administrators (and anyone else) to track patterns of vandalism and other forms of disruptive editing. Plus, maximum transparency is part of the Wikipedia culture. Cullen328 (talk) 21:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Backup copies of the earliest edits were found on SourceForge in 2010. You can learn more at History of Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 21:48, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Gooze1989 As well as being very helpful in tracking and reverting vandalism (as Cullen328 has said), I would add that we also have a couple of 'External tools' available in the 'View History' tab that allows you to search for when specified text was first inserted into an article, or when it was last found within it. This is helpful when there are claims that someone has inserted text from another website. We can then use that tool to check whether it was, in fact, that way around, or whether the other website copied it from Wikipedia without attributing the source (which is part of our conditions for re-use). Matching that with the Wayback Machine's archives of some websites can also help. Thus, we can use these recorded versions to prove, avoid (or sometimes even defend against) accusations of copyright theft. To be honest, being able to view the history of edits made to an article are useful in so many ways that I don't think many experienced editors here would manage so effectively without access to it. Thanks for your question, and 'Welcome to Wikipedia'. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It can also be great fun for journalists, see Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, the Creative Commons license being used for all content on Wikipedia requires attribution of authors, and keeping a history of contributions satisfies that requirement. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:40, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, remarkable nuggets may indeed be mined from histories. A recently noted example is this. -- Hoary (talk) 00:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not at all sure he wrote that but who knows. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:05, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Given the context and the date, I think that it is about 99.9% sure that it was written by George Santos. Cullen328 (talk) 17:47, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Signature causing issues[edit]

Hello Teahouse folks. The custom signature of Nilpriyo is somehow causing the "Reply" button to not work. Could someone please help them fix this?

Also it seems that their "Talk" link is misleading, since it goes to WP:Talk. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:44, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello @MrsSnoozyTurtle and welcome to the Teahouse! Would you please provide an example? You can also message them on their talk page. Happy Editing! ‍ ‍ Helloheart ‍ 00:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello errr Helloheart :) Thanks for the welcome. Here is an example where the Reply button is missing after Nilpriyo's message: Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here are two recent examples, [2] and [3], both of which do link to Talk rather than the editor's talk page. I suspect this is the result of manually adding (or editing) the signature rather than a faulty signature as some of the editor's other signatures do have the correct talk page link, and some have no talk link at all. I will post to the user's talk page. Meters (talk) 00:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll also add another one: [4]. Tails Wx 00:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Meters and Wx, much appreciated. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:52, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
MrsSnoozyTurtle, I think Nilpriyo is biased against the deletion of the article and trying to plead an "arrangement" for you... Tails Wx 00:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Tails Wx. Yes, it feels like they are trying a covert campaign to get me blocked. Their behaviour is quite odd for someone who has supposedly only been editing for less than two months. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 09:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Translation to a language[edit]

I want to improve my language and translation skills. So, I decided to translate articles to Papiamentu. Is it allowed to translate a Wikipedia article to another language? Gabpres4 (talk) 01:07, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Gabpres4. Is there a separate Wikipedia project for Papiamentu? This project, for example, is English Wikipedia. Is there a Papiamentu Wikipedia. If there is and you want to create some Papiamentu Wikipedia articles by translating some English Wikipedia articles, then you can do this but should follow the guidance given in WP:TRANSLATEUS. However, if Papiamentu Wikipedia exists, it may have some additional rules regarding editing exisitng articles or creating new articles, and you will need to ask about them on Papiamentu Wikipedia. Now, if you want to translate English Wikipedia articles for some other purpose, then you should also follow the guidance given in TRANSLATEUS, particularly if you plan to publish your translations in any way. The most important thing would be to make sure you properly attribute the original English Wikipedia article that you translate, and don't try to make it seem as if you're the creator of the original work. A translation of someone else work is a WP:DERIVATIVE work and there can be multiple copyrights involved when translating someone else's work. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Página Prinsipal Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:03, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am an originator, but nobody knows about it?[edit]

OK, I'm a clever sausage, I know that parents place their kids in the right places to develop their [my] potential or visibility to the wider world. But how does a shy and forgiving adult express the value that I have given to the entire world?

I am Garry Salter and I gave e-commerce to the world.

How do I tell my story? Nobody knows it. But I made it. I bought it to market. We made sales. We had amazing press. The world noticed. It was a groundbreaking moment.

I saw something that didn't exist and now it's commonplace. And I'm very proud of it.

Nothing is mentioned about this subject? There may be a latent claim, but honestly, nothing existed. Its worth punting the proposition for me, because I think I was the first to think about how everyone can sell on the internet, not just the silicon valley venture-capital-backed mega money startups.

The initial thought was how to buy proper bacon in America as a UK ex-pat?"


"Socialism Man!... What about the rest of Us!"

That was me, our company was Cossax Software Limited, we were based in the UK. Circa 2000. I cannot find historical records on Companies House, and at the time the Law did not understand software as an aspect to 'patent', the intellectual property could only be copyrighted?!?!?!

So we wrote contracts, ((three inches thick, cossting many thousands of pounds Byfield was in on it ))...

I've been editing too much and gotten too precious. What do you think?ant

I am Garry. has anybody got anything that can help? Dude Level (talk) 02:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

E-commerce was invented significantly before 2000. Michael Aldrich is credited with developing it in 1979. The first e-commerce company was Boston Computer Exchange in the early 1980s. MrOllie (talk) 02:28, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello @Dude Level (Garry) and welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have any questions about Wikipedia? If so, feel free to ask them here. Happy editing! ‍ ‍ Helloheart ‍ 02:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Per above and your Talk page, you appear to believe that you or your company are worthy of a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia has a process described at WP:YFA for how to create a referenced draft. First step: references. If there is nothing published about you or the company, then no potential for an article. David notMD (talk) 04:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Companies House keeps pretty thorough records. It would be very odd to not be able to find records there for a company that existed. David10244 (talk) 08:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And the first Software patent was granted in 1962. Shantavira|feed me 10:16, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
FWIW, and I don't know if it helps much: sounds like this company, inaktive since 1999. [5]. One of the shareholders name is "Salter", as is the OP's name. --Maresa63 Talk 11:19, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Horse Extintion in north America[edit]

I would like to reference this article on the BBC website on 28/01/2023 this link, On the article about the Horse extintion in wikipedia the paragraph on Taxonomy and evolution it states as follows "By about 15,000 years ago, Equus ferus was a widespread holarctic species. Horse bones from this time period, the late Pleistocene, are found in Europe, Eurasia, Beringia, and North America. Yet between 10,000 and 7,600 years ago, the horse became extinct in North America and rare elsewhere. The reasons for this extinction are not fully known, but one theory notes that extinction in North America paralleled human arrival. Another theory points to climate change, noting that approximately 12,500 years ago, the grasses characteristic of a steppe ecosystem gave way to shrub tundra, which was covered with unpalatable plants" The article on BBC refutes this theory by this in the article as follows:The Spanish did bring horses to what is now Mexico in 1519, but research by Dr Yvette Running Horse Collin cites written Spanish accounts that place herds in what is now Georgia and the Carolinas in 1521. Proof, she argues, that horses were here before the Europeans: as Collin notes, it would have been impossible for those Spanish horses to have multiplied and travelled so far in just two years. When it comes to the Ojibwe spirit horse, according to the Ojibwe Horse Society, DNA testing shows they are a separate breed from the horses introduced to North America by Europeans. Please correct or confirm if this is wrong or other as both can't be correct. (talk) 03:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We have no article on horse extinction, but we have a section on it in Horses in the United States. It would be best to start a discussion at Talk:Horses in the United States, not here. As for referencing it, be bold and go ahead. If you need help citing sources, see WP:CITE or look at other examples of citations in the article you want to edit. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

11 days ago, I initiated a discussion at Talk:Aasim ibn Abi al-Najud, with no input so far. Should I be WP:BOLD and make the changes myself (that would be significant changes to the article)? How do I get more input to the conversation? The ⬡ Bestagon T/C 06:16, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello The Bestagon, and welcome to the Teahouse. One way of getting more input is to look through the article's history, and look for editors who have contributed significantly to the article, and add to your message on the Talk page pinging them. (Note that you must add text containing the ping and sign it: pinging won't work if you try to add it to existing text.) Another way is by posting on the talk pages of suitable WikiProjects: the only one already in place on the talk page is WP:WikiProject Biography, but that seems a bit general to me, and I think you're not likely to get much interest. So I suggest posting at WT:WikiProject Islam. Don't start a new discussion there - post an invitation and link to your existing discussion.
Having said all that, you're perfectly entitled to be BOLD: if anybody disagrees, they can revert you and join the discussion.
Incidentally, you somehow managed to start your new discussion above the existing item, which is six years old, so I've moved it down. ColinFine (talk) 15:27, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Zelik family name[edit]

What part of Austrial Ottman did the Zeliks come from and are they Jewish background? 2601:240:D780:5FF0:0:0:0:5818 (talk) 06:19, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to a page of Wikipedia where people are free to ask questions about using Wikipedia. As for your question, you might ask it at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. -- Hoary (talk) 06:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A strange edit request[edit]

Hello all! Yesterday I came across an edit request like this Template_talk:2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine_infobox#Extended-confirmed-protected_edit_request_on_23_January_2023, I have read it, but I cannot be sure what they want to change. Would anyone care to help? Lemonaka (talk) 09:47, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This Article is Authantic please Publish it.[edit]

Draft:Anurag dixit Shiwgndf (talk) 10:16, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shiwgndf Hello. I've added the submission information to allow it to be submitted. You've never edited that draft, at least from your account; what is the source of your interest in it? 331dot (talk) 10:18, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sir this all information's are Collected from better sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shiwgndf (talkcontribs) 10:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See WP:TUTORIAL on how to add references correctly. And WP:N on what kind of sources that are necessary for an article to "stick". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:00, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The creator of Draft:Anurag dixit is globally locked. My understanding is that therefore this draft should be Speedy deleted. Even if not for that reason, there are no valid formatted references, and some of what is presented to establish notability - for example, minor awards - is not sufficient. David notMD (talk) 13:58, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


according to Wikipedia Cristiano Ronaldo Suey scores (talk) 10:58, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello IP editor. Welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about editing a Wikipedia article, like that for Cristiano Ronaldo? I'm afraid your comment doesn't make any sense to me as it stands. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

R U Alive ? Have U had a perfect Past ?[edit]

Ref: How much of your 'bad' past would u like to have plastered all over the web for the world to see ? How 'good' or 'bad' do we want Wikipedia to be? Please discuss at Village_pump. (talk) 11:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I dont understand? - From Dents (talk) 13:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean you need to fix it as the way you want it. - From Dents (talk) 13:19, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Are you Paul Hogan? doktorb wordsdeeds 14:16, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

IP is edit warring at Paul Hogan concerning whether a subsection on tax problems should be in the article or not. A discussion is taking place at the Talk page of the article, which is the only appropriate place. David notMD (talk) 14:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Partial italics in article title[edit]

How are italics achieved for one word in an article's title (without italicising the entire title) as is done in the Nassau-class battleship article? Thanks – Olympian loquere 13:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Olympian. {{DISPLAYTITLE:''Nassau''-class battleship}}. It's often done via a template. {{italic title|string=Nassau}} is a general template for it. Some ship templates have code to analyze the page name and automatically try to guess which part to italicize. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, @PrimeHunter! – Olympian loquere 20:41, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Footnote? Reference?[edit]

I'm so confused. I've made an edit to the article Curious George Goes to the Hospital. I have added there a link to an audiobook on Internet Archive, and I added a source using the IA link, which automatically added a formatted reference and placed it in (I think) both the Notes and the References sections. why is that? I've also noticed there already was a reference to a newspaper article, located in the Notes section. Should it be there? I'm quite confused about this all and Help:Footnotes is honestly so overwhelming haha.

What should I do? 3point1415 (talk) 15:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Pi, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's in both places because you put it there - or, more precisely, you added it to the text, which automatically puts in the section where the {{reflist}} template appears - usually "References", but in this article somebody has put it in "notes"; and you also added it to an existing entry in the "References" section. I would suggest removing the References section and its entry, and retitling the Notes section "References".
Having said that, one news story is not enough to establish that the book is notable (the citation to the book itself is not independent, so doesn't count towards notability), so the article is liable to get deleted unless somebody finds and adds some further substantial, independent, sources. (And I wonder whether even that story has significant coverage of the book). ColinFine (talk) 19:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Actually, now I look further, I don't believe that its being released as an audiobook is encyckopaedic (thousands and thousands of books are released in that way), and have removed that sentence and citation. ColinFine (talk) 19:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2 question[edit]

Question 1 I was looking at an article's history and I could not see I all of it the last edit looked like it was from 2017 even though I had edited it just a few days before. is that normal? question 2 how do I follow an article?  Casper king (talk) 16:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Casper, and welcome to the Teahouse. For the first question, I don't understand why you think anybody is going to be able to help you if you don't tell us which article you are talking about!
For the second question, we don't have the concept of "following" an article, but you can add it to your Watchlist - on the desktop it's the "star" icon at the top right (in the default skin) and on the app "Watch" is an option on the 3-dots menu at the top right. ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, the second answer was good. After some poking around I was able to locate the answer to the first question. Casper king (talk) 17:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to add descriptors[edit]

I have a third question how do you add those descriptor things in you bio? Casper king (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your question is unclear. Do you mean Wikipedia:Userboxes? Take a look at that link. Shantavira|feed me 17:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that is it thanks.  Casper king (talk) 17:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can't save my edits to an article[edit]


I have made a few edits to an article, but need to step away, and come back to editing later on. I can't however, save my changes. When I click on "Publish Changes", I see the "Save your changes" option, but I can't click it.

Please help.

Many thanks. Orenbn (talk) 19:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Orenbn, and welcome to the Sandbox. It is hard to know what to say when you won't tell us which article! ColinFine (talk) 22:03, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi ColinFine, thank you for your reply and question. I was editing this article - Business route, when I encountered the issue. In the meanwhile, I abandoned my edits and started again, completed editing the article, and published the changes. However, the question still remains as to how I can save changes I have made prior to actually publishing my changes, so I can leave and then come back to complete my editing work.... Orenbn (talk) 22:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Orenbn If you want to work on an edit that you think will take some time, you could write it out in your sandbox and then "Publish changes" will just save it to your sandbox. Then when you have finished the edit you can copy and paste it into the article. There is no other way AFAIK to save an edit in progress. 331dot (talk) 22:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help restart RfC?[edit]

Hi. I had an RfC going at WP:RSN but it got archived to Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_396#RfC:_9to5Google.com_reliability?. I thought I had extended it indefinitely, but apparently the bot thought not. Could someone help restart or extend it again, so it can continue and be formally closed as requested here: Special:Diff/1135674234? Thanks. -- Yae4 (talk) 21:04, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Magic" References[edit]

A while back, I asked about how to be better at fixing bare references.

I'm now curious about how reFill knows to use things like "auto#" in place of typing a reference out entirely and what I should be calling... whatever this is...

Also, are there standards for the labels that should be used?

DarklitShadow (talk) 22:40, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DarklitShadow: Welcome to the Teahouse! Those are named references, a way cite the same source more than once on a page. GoingBatty (talk) 23:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why was my edit reverted?[edit]

I made an edit to the movie Z (2019) where instead of the one line movie "plot", I wrote out the entire plot to the movie. However, it was reverted as not being "constructive" when literally adding the ENTIRE plot is constructive. Many other movies have the entire plot. I'm confused. Iamglory (talk) 22:59, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Philipnelson99: Could you please answer this question? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Iamglory, and welcome to the Teahouse. It can be discouraging when that happens. But it's the way Wikipedia works: it's edited by thousands of editors, each with their own view on what an article should say, and sometimes different understandings of what Wikipedia's policies mean.
So, when your edit gets reverted, this is not "Wikipedia" saying your edit is unconstructive: it's one particular editor, in this case Philipnelson99, who didn't think your edit was helpful. The thing to do now is to engage in a discussion with him: maybe you'll persuade him your edit was good, maybe he'll persuade you that it wasn't helpful, and maybe you'll come to a compromise. So, start a discussion on the article's talk page, maybe you won't be able to agree, and then there are ways to go further and involve other people. See WP:BRD for more about how this works. ColinFine (talk) 23:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Iamglory. According to MOS:PLOT, a plot summary should be "succinct" and no more than 700 words. Your summary is way too long and way too detailed. Cullen328 (talk) 23:20, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks @Cullen328, I've answered the editor's question below with the same. Philipnelson99 (talk) 23:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, @Iamglory, I reverted it as nonconstructive. MOS:PLOT says plot summary length should be written relative to the size of the other section of the article. You added a plot section that was nearly 7 times more content than what was in the article to begin with, that's why I reverted it as nonconstructive. I hope that helps. Philipnelson99 (talk) 23:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To be more specific, per WP:FILMPLOT, film plot summaries should be between 400 and 700 words - so the previous plot of 12 words was far too short, but equally, your summary of 4275 words was far too long - we need a happy medium - Arjayay (talk) 23:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft: zr saimun[edit]

write an article about living person named zr saimun unfortunately the submission was declined. 2A00:23C5:9198:A901:D1D1:6DCE:CB36:66B2 (talk) 23:36, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You copied the article Amal Clooney and changed it slightly. The references link to the Clooney page. There is no evidence in the article that Z R Saimun even exists. This appears to be a hoax article. If such a person is real, erase everything there, read Help:Your first article and find references, then start again. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]