Wikipedia:Teahouse

AlanM1, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

Can't edit this page? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

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

Help Wikipedia

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

The Teahouse is frequently semi-protected, meaning the Teahouse pages cannot be edited by unregistered users (users with IP addresses), as well as accounts that are not confirmed or autoconfirmed (accounts that are at least 4 days old with at least 10 edits on English Wikipedia).

However, you can still get direct assistance on your talk page. ; a volunteer will reply to you there shortly. Alternatively, you can contact an experienced editor by visiting your homepage and clicking "Ask your mentor a question about editing".

There are currently 0 user(s) asking for help via the {{Help me}} template:

December 30th: Addition?

Though it is mentioned in another article on said date, the Hurricane Creek Mine Disaster which happened in Leslie County isn’t included in the article. I sure do hope it isn’t because of notability reasons. I mean, it can’t be said guideline, it has its own article. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 01:46, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

If you are referring to the December 30 article, I see no reason why you shouldn't add Hurricane Creek mine disaster. Please also read WP:DAYS. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:01, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

OP has not responded, so I have added it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:45, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I was reverted by User:Kiwipete. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:00, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

As @Shantavira has mentioned, please read WP:DAYS, and also as I mentioned in my edit summary, WP:DOYCITE. Thanks, Kiwipete (talk) 19:48, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

DAYS is a WikiProject style guide, not a policy ("An advice page has the status of an essay and is not a formal Wikipedia policy or guideline, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community.", as it clearly says), and DOYCITE is a guideline and again not a policy, from which you removed the text "...editors reviewing unsourced entries are encouraged to check for a suitable source themselves before tagging or removing the entry." Perhaps you can tell us why you did not do that, and why you think it is acceptable to revert edits such as mine, instead of building on them—which is I understand, how Wikipedia is supposed to work. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:11, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

You should also take note of the Page Notice displayed whenever you edit a DOY article, specifically "Citations required: Each addition to this page must include a direct citation from a reliable source. Simply providing a wikilink is insufficient; entries without direct sources will be removed.". This is also the reason for removing that text from WP:DOYCITE. I would suggest that if you have further questions, you raise them at the project's talk page. Kiwipete (talk) 21:52, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

You keep asking me to read different pages/ texts which say the same thing, but which have an equal lack of weight, and none of which refer to a policy or a community consensus.

I note that, leaving my addition aside, 25 of the 30 entries in the relevant section have no adjacent sources (they are of course sourced on the linked pages, as was mine), and yet you have not removed them.

You have still not explained why you destructively removed my addition, rather than collaboratively building upon it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:26, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Just people trying to shove notability up your butt. Don’t listen to Kiwipete. 199.192.122.199 (talk) 19:38, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

HI! I am new here Arseo.0111 (talk) 05:48, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

ههههه 105.37.95.104 (talk) 17:19, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

What the flip? 199.192.122.199 (talk) 17:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Kantara 2022 film's article title

Kantara A Legend was released in 2022. Later, in 2023 a prequel, Kantara A Legend Chapter 1 was announced, and it is set to be released in October this year. In February 2023, the director said the 2022 film was part 2. The page of the first film (Kantara (film)) was moved to Kantara: Chapter 2 in July this year. Should not the first film's article be titled Kantara (2022 film)? The first film is known as Kantara or Kantara A Legend by the audience, the title Kantara Chapter 2 is often interpreted as the 2025 film. Additionally, retroactive titles are not allowed Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning, Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope or Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 1. these are some examples. The current title (Kantara Chapter 2) does not meet the WP:OFFICIAL guidelines, Article titles should be recognizable to readers, unambiguous, and consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources. WP:UCN commonly recognizable names should be used. WP:NCFILM clearly says that this kind of article title is not allowed. I requested a move but it is getting opposed, so what can I do? I do have the option to move the article myself. The film in posters and onscreen, is titled Kantara: A Legend. Optim594 (talk) 15:31, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@Optim594 Since the move request is already under discussion and facing opposition the best approach is to continue on the article’s talk page or requested moves page rather than moving the article unilaterally. Per WP:RM and WP:CONSENSUS, contested title changes require community agreement. You have made valid points citing WP:OFFICIAL, WP:UCN and WP:NCFILM,.... To strengthen your case add multiple independent reliable English language sources that refer to the 2022 film simply as Kantara or Kantara: A Legend and clearly show that “Kantara Chapter 2” creates confusion with the upcoming prequel.

If consensus is not reached you can wait 30 days and submit a new well sourced request. Avoid unilateral moves as they may be reverted under WP:BRD. Continue discussion on the RM page, add strong reliable sources supporting your title and avoid unilateral moves until consensus is reached.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 16:11, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I have added sources but I have one more question, even if it did not confuse, can the title really be changed?, it has not even been retitled, I think apple tv title is because of wikipedia, recently apple tv linked movies to prime video.

An IP user said that it is better to have retitled title than an disambiguation. But Star Wars (film) was retitled and has disambiguation instead of retitled title. Optim594 (talk) 20:59, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

If the film has not been officially renamed Wikipedia’s guidelines (WP:NCFILM and WP:UCN) recommend using the original title... adding the release year if necessary (example, Kantara (2022 film)). Retroactive titles should only be applied when supported by significant usage in reliable sources. As your move request is still under discussion, continue adding high-quality sources demonstrating the common title and avoid moving the page yourself without prior agreement (WP:CONSENSUS, WP:RM). 🐍 Thilio🤖 04:47, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kantara:_Chapter_2#c-DareshMohan-20250811170500-2001:8F8:172B:45CE:E0D6:344D:987D:E91A-20250808155200 what do I do next, please help. Optim594 (talk) 14:12, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I mean when 7 days get completed, what do I do. IP oppose counts or not? Optim594 (talk) 19:40, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

References

Finding sources

How do I find reliable sources for something that only few people know about?

I'm trying to make a page on right minarchism (umbrella term), but it got declined because there was no reliable source of information. So first off, few people know about the ideologies I'm putting in the page, few people follow them, and few people criticize them. I get most my info from polcompball wiki (and it's branched off wikis), and they are a nice community where people know a lot about politics, and put that effort into pages. There is people who criticize eachothers ideologies there, and I'm using that as my basis. I've also experienced the criticism first hand in real life, as a Minarchist myself. And as a Minarchist and political nerd myself, I know what the ideologies believe. kindest regards, MinarchistGuy381 MinarchistGuy381 (talk) 02:42, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

As the link WP:Reliable sources in your draft review says, Wikipedia articles are based on what reliable, published sources have to say about the subject. What you know is not anything Wikipedia can use. What is posted on user-generated sites such as wikis is not anything Wikipedia can use. If there is insufficient material published by independent reliable sources to show the subject's notability then there cannot be an article about it on Wikipedia. Meters (talk) 03:51, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

what if I make a page Of polcompball wiki? Is that possibly allowed? (this is unrelated to the topic at hand) MinarchistGuy381 (talk) 22:02, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

"Whereof. . . ." Hoary (talk) 04:28, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

This. This right here, is why one loiters around the teahouse, even when one does not take tea. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:24, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I assume you've tried places like [1] and [2]? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:22, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Don't use user-generated sources. Go D. Usopp (talk) 06:29, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:14, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for help guys MinarchistGuy381 (talk) 22:04, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Rejected without review

I submitted a detailed COI trying my best to follow the wikipedia process it got rejected without review

I posted a detailed COI request, to the best and most detail possible, Talk:Nithyananda - Wikipedia ; I waited for more than a month, finally i noted a senior admin, and asked him to review. He got angry and rejected it without review. Is there any way to take it forward for a second review? Because the facts were not even read/considered saying it is too long. Should I resubmit shorter request? SurekhaSekar (talk) 17:08, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

You should submit a shorter request, and you should not use an LLM at any point in that process. You should also refrain from pinging individual administrators to look at the request. So long as you have used the request template, your request will go into a maintenance category and patrolling editors will find it. -- asilvering (talk) 17:28, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

thank you, that is what i didn, it was pending for a very very long time; are you able to see my coi request ... ? you can also consider such requests ? SurekhaSekar (talk) 17:38, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

It was likely in the queue for a long time due to the length of the request. If you think that multiple things should be changed, it might be better to break the changes down into several smaller requests. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:47, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@SurekhaSekar, any editor in good standing may consider a request. (Please do not take this as a suggestion that you ask other editors to review it for you.) -- asilvering (talk) 17:59, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

You used an LLM, and said as much in the linked thread. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:16, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

AFC and Reviewed Articles

Shouldn't articles created via the AFC process be marked as reviewed? Because a reviewer at AFC reviewed the article and approved it because it passed Wikipedias main policies and requirements. It would also help lift off work from the New Page Patrollers. 8bit12man (talk) 20:14, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@8bit12man.. Well, At AfC,.. A reviewer checks for notability, sourcing & compliance with core policies before moving a draft to mainspace but that does not count as a New Page Patrol review. NPP includes additional checks such as copyright, formatting & categorization and is a separate process. This is why articles created via AfC still appear in the New Pages Feed and require a page patroller’s review. 🐍 Thilio🤖 20:28, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

AfC reviewers do check for copyright violations and other issues, not just notability & sourcing. It is a quick-fail criteria in the reviewing instructions Tenshi! (Talk page) 20:30, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Tenshi Hinanawi Absolutely you are right but in depth copyright checks done by New Page Patrollers and admins.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 20:45, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Again, disagree. If there's any trace of a copyright violation AfC reviewers need to remove it, request revdel, and decline the draft as a copyvio. Also, what specifically do you mean by an "in-depth copyright check"?. Tenshi! (Talk page) 20:50, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I meant NPP often do a fuller, oops!!, I mean deeper check after the article is in mainspace 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 20:57, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

No, the copyright checks are the same for both AFC and NPP. NPP tends to do some other checks like, as you say, categorization, and also serve as a second set of eyes for (most) AFC reviewers. -- asilvering (talk) 00:58, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@8bit12man, it wouldn't actually lift all that much work off NPP to mark all AFC articles as patrolled - those are already the easier ones that are pretty fast for NPP to handle anyway. But also, it's easier (by design) to become an AFC reviewer, so we want articles that have made it through AFC to get a second look. -- asilvering (talk) 01:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Britt Roberson page

Britt Robertson

I acted, sang, modeled, and danced alongside Britt Roberson at the American Talent Showcase in Charleston SC before she moved to LA. We were clients of Donna Ehrlich at Carolina Winds now Z-One Talent Agency in Chester, SC. She is actually posted as on of their success stories on this page: https://www.z1modelsandtalent.net/about-us. This is where she gained traction and reputable contacts for her move to LA where the bio made it seem like she just took a chance and randomly moved to LA where she got famous which isn't the case. She had to do a lot of local networking to get her contacts in LA. I myself was offered a modeling contract for NY that I never took but this showcase had big connections. If she had never attended that showcase, she would've never been allowed to move to LA to pursue a career on hopes and dreams alone. I edited the bio of course but when I tried to list my references, I feel like failed miserably. How can I site this correctly and orderly as it comes up much earlier in the bio than other information and references? And can I add the photos I have of us at the ATS? I have 2 where we're both in a group photo together? CreativeChaos87 (talk) 21:57, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@CreativeChaos87 Welcome to Teahouse.

Please see the conflict of interest guideline & propose changes on the article’s talk page supported by reliable published sources. For adding photos please see WP:IMAGES to ensure they meet Wikipedia’s licensing and content requirements. Cheers. Good faith edit 🐍 Thilio🤖 22:07, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Because you have a conflict of interest, and you are new here, it would be best if you used Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard to propose specific changes to an article with which you have a conflict of interest. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, @CreativeChaos87, and welcome to Wikipedia editing!

If I'm reading your question correctly, you're trying to add one or both of these as links?

https://www.z1modelsandtalent.net/about-us

https://share.google/hNUdBoOzkZQ8oe36X

You were on the right track, but you wanted web citation. That would take you to this template:

{{cite web |last= |first= |date= |title= |url= |website= |location= |publisher= |access-date=}}

Filled out, looks more like this:

<ref>{{cite web |last=LastNameofAuthor |first=FirstName |title=About Us |url=http://www.z1modelsandtalent.net/about-us |website=Z1 Models and Talent |publisher= |access-date=August 11, 2025}}</ref>

Which gives us the following:

Past the part within the <ref> tags at the end of the sentence (or paragraph) where you mention the information it provides. Good luck!

(and the other user who replied was absolutely correct about reading COI) MilesVorkosigan (talk) 00:41, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Incorrect edit

Hi, someone changed one of my edits on the page saying it was offensive, but I only reported correct information from the latest interviews (source: interviews themselves with the director of the film himself)If they are not aware of the correct and latest information, please do not change when the page contains incorrect material. 93.45.197.125 (talk) 23:56, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hey! I can't speak for the editor themselves, but I can say, you should follow the Manual of Style when making edits! But on you're edits, I see why they reverted for Manual of Style, unsure how they're offensive to my POV. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 00:06, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

You didn't give a source in the article for either of your edits and both included errors in capitalization. If you have a source somewhere that has the director saying he is not trying to follow the original at all, then post the link and you can ask for help with formatting it for the article. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 00:06, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IP user: welcome to the Teahouse. Your edits appear to be your opinions about the film (and your capitals suggest that they are strongly held. It's fine to have opinions, but they don't belong in Wikipedia, which should report only what reliable published sources say. (I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your opinions: I know nothing about the subject.)

If you have a reliable published source that says those things, then you could add "XXX said that ... ", citing the published source. If you're not sure how to cite it, post on the article's talk page explaining what you think should be added, and who said it where. ColinFine (talk) 10:28, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Neither of your edits was described as "offensive". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:50, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

question about userboxes

I wish to add userboxes to my talk page, but I am confused on how to do this. Could you please assist me on this? Thank you :) 76.167.174.124 (talk) 01:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Copy and paste? Incidentally, it's normal to add them to one's user page, but user pages are only for named users. I notice "I plan on creating an account": Please go ahead. -- Hoary (talk) 02:03, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

See WP:Userboxes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:45, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Plane crashes in picture montages

What's up with the excessive use of plane crashes in the picture montages for "year" articles?

I like looking at the Wikipedia articles for each year to see all the events that took place in each respective year. One thing I noticed though is in the picture montages, there seems to be so many pictures of planes that crashed. Yes these are tragic with significant loss of life, but are plane crashes really so important as to define the ethos of a year?

For example I was just looking at the article for "2000" and there are 2 plane crashes in the montage. Here are some others: "1991" has 2. "1992" has 2. "1995" has 1. "1996" has 3. "1997" has 3. "1998" has 2. "2006" has 2. "2007" has 1. "2008" has 1. "2009" has 2. "2014" has 1.

Seems excessive to feature this many plane crashes. I didn't even look at any before 1990 but I assume there are more. I even wonder if it is a single person making the montages who seems to prefer putting plane crash pictures there. What are your thoughts? Airgum (talk) 01:22, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Airgum. There is an editor who is very active on Wikimedia Commons, called User:Nagae Iku. This user seems to enjoy creating these "year" collages and may be the best person to ask. Please be aware that this editor's native language is Chinese and they claim only basic English competency. Cullen328 (talk) 06:41, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Airgum. An example link for courtesy is 1996. That montage has an incredibly long and hard to follow caption!

I think there is a way to create a montage as individual photos, that way it will be easier to swap out events/photos per discussions (like this one), and you could click on each photo to see what it is about.

That would be more of a wiki way, rather than referring to a static grouping made at some point.

To be honest I would need help in figuring if there are any technical limitations or other reasons as to why it hasn't been done that way yet. Commander Keane (talk) 09:58, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

redirect from the article namespace

Hello Wiki I'm trying to publish an article for a local band that has a record deal and some articles about them that I properly cited, but I fear I categorized the article wrong so it go immediately shut down before the review started. Here is the official problem it says:" because it was a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces." But the article is still a draft: "Draft:The Band Solstice'. So what do I need to fix this or is there nothing to be fixed Viscosityc (talk) 01:33, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Viscosityc, all you have to do is to (greatly) improve Draft:The Band Solstice. But before you set out to attempt that, are you sure that the band is notable (as understood by and for Wikipedia)? Incidentally, are you perhaps related to the band? -- Hoary (talk) 02:11, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I thought I did everything correct for the article. I guess the only thing I forgot to add is wiki links. The band is notable as they have been covered by 3 independent news company's. And I am not related to the band in any way. I'm just a second degree friend of one of the band members and find it funny there are 4 different solstice bands, so I'm trying to help a friend of a friend out by giving them a wiki page they deserve. Viscosityc (talk) 16:14, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Edit filtered out: trying to understand why

I recently tried to make an edit to the page for Normal Douglas, changing a section heading "Sexual Encounters with Children" to "Pedophilia". The motivation for the change was accuracy and brevity, and to better reflect the content of the section. I'd like to understand why the edit was inappropriate and how to avoid this in the future.

Below is my exchange on Edit Filter>False Positive>Reports (thanks to EggRoll97 and 45Dogs for getting me this far)

ME: I was changing "sexual encounters with children" to "pedophilia" in the section title because he had sex with kids as an adult, a fact he documented in his own writings (as described and referenced in that section). The original title was misleading, since it allowed for the idea that he was also a child, rather than an adult many decades older than the children, and also on at least some occasions, paying them. REPLY: Not done – The filter is working properly. I'm not sure this is necessary. The current section title already accurately describes the events, and I don't really see the need to change it as proposed

ME: Thanks for considering it. I'm a new editor — is there a guide to language use in sensitive topics? My edit was partly motivated by clarity and accuracy, but it looks liek I missed the mark here REPLY：There is the Manual of Style, but in this case WP:BLP would likely be better to refer to

ME：Thanks for the direction. I had a look at the two guides and also a couple of similar figures (dead, respected for their work, no debate over the fact they were a pedophile) and I have a follow-up question if you have time to answer. Would "Child Sexual Abuse by Douglas" or "Documentation of Child Sexual Abuse" have been more appropriate edits? REPLY：I am not actually sure. I only realized now I might have pointed you to the wrong resource, since WP:BLP is focused on living people's biographies. In my opinion, it would likely be better to err on the side of caution. Both of those are accusatory in nature, even if they are true. Though honestly, it would likely be better to receive other editor's opinions, which you can do at the teahouse or help desk.

My questions are: 1. Is there any guidance for what language to use in cases like this (preferably with an explanation)? 2. Was the language of my edits accusatory? To my mind, you can't accuse someone of something they have said they did (e.g. if I tell you I drank a coffee this morning, you can't accuse me drinking a coffee this morning). 3. I asked whether "Child Sexual Abuse by Douglas" or "Documentation of Child Sexual Abuse" would have been more appropriate edits; I've since thought of a third: "Child Sexual Abuse Allegations". This doesn't seem quite right (because he wasn't alleging them against himself, he was documenting them), but if the other options seem accuratory, perhaps it's a better fix?

Thanks in advance for any answers or ideas you can provide. Sheidou (talk) 02:18, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

If unquestionably reliable sources say he was a pedophile (and actually used the word pedophile), then in my view, we should call a WP:SPADE a spade and use that term in Wikipedia's voice. The edit filter is just an automated response to words that have historically had a high correlation with unconstructive edits, and it acted accordingly. In this case it's a false positive. However, I don't see a problem with the status-quo wording. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:31, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The article in question is Norman Douglas. It is clear that by late 20th and 21st century standards, his sexual behavior with children was reprehensible and horrific. But stating that he had "pedophilia" implies either a specific psychiatric diagnosis or a criminal conviction. If neither occurred, then explaining his behavior that is now considered shocking without use of that term may be better. Personally, I would have no problem calling him a pedophile in casual conversation but we need to use words very precisely when writing encyclopedia articles, especially when social mores have changed for the better. Cullen328 (talk) 06:58, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Mapbox shapes

What determines whether a certain Wikidata id can appear as a shape (versus a simple point) in a mapbox? For example, the infobox on Washington State Capitol correctly shows the shape in the map, but Budd Inlet does not; both have an associated OpenStreetMap relation ID with drawn shape in OSM. OceanLoop (talk) 02:40, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@OceanLoop See mediawikiwiki:Help:Extension:Kartographer/OSM#Limitation —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:29, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

io soi il ve di domande

ala jò a colpâ un cagnin in dare di faim

il graziis al è molt grâs.

Kerry blue terrier - Vichipedie 116.255.2.165 (talk) 03:02, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello. This is the English Wikipedia; please provide an English translation if you can. You may be looking for another language's edition of Wikipedia. Google Translate says this is Friulian, in which case you'll want the Friulian Wikipedia (Vichipedie furlane); otherwise, try https://wikipedia.org or m:List of Wikipedias. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:40, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

"Reading lists" to establish notability

Hello! This question concerns the articles Cryptid Hunters and Tentacles. Both these articles are in quite poor shape, in my opinion, and I'd like to work on fixing them up.

They were sent to AFD in 2010 for reasons editors did not agree with (though at the time they were essentially unreferenced plot summaries), and were kept after the addition of their inclusion on some reading lists, which the AFD discussion indicated passed WP:BOOKCRIT #4. Cryptid Hunters was also nominated for some awards I do not know the notability of (but I suspect a lack of it).

I am skeptical that inclusion on several reading lists is equivalent to being the subject of instruction at two or more schools. I have found multiple reviews of both these books that qualify them as notable per WP:BOOKCRIT #1, so I do not believe their notability is in question, regardless of the state of the articles.

My question is, as I take a stab at improving these articles, is this information worth preserving? Have I correctly interpreted the guideline of WP:NBOOK in my assessment that this is not useful information, or does this actually contribute to their notability? NovaHyperion (talk) 06:48, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@NovaHyperion your interpretation of WP:NBOOK seems generally correct; Inclusion on reading lists may help demonstrate notability under WP:BOOKCRIT #4 but as you point out this criterion is narrowly defined it refers specifically to works being the subject of instruction in at least two schools not simply being recommended or listed for general reading.

If you have located multiple reliable, independent reviews that would satisfy WP:BOOKCRIT #1 making the reading list inclusion less critical for establishing notability... However, the information might still be worth mentioning in the article if the lists are from notable institutions or widely recognized sources as it could provide useful context even if it’s not determinative for notability.

In short,... you can improve the articles by focusing on high quality independent sources for reception and coverage and treat the reading list information as supplementary rather than central to the notability claim.🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 07:12, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thilio Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Based on that, I remain unconvinced that inclusion on a school's summer reading list is a contribution towards notability (in my experience at least, the gap between "on a summer reading list" and "the subject of instruction" is vast) and I do not believe that the information that it appeared on a reading list is serving readers in this case, so at this juncture I feel comfortable excluding it. NovaHyperion (talk) 02:56, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Create pages then blank them?

I don't know if this is the right place to ask this question. Is it OK to create user pages, I don't know if it's the right name for this, for other users then blank them? See this: 1 Qby (talk) 09:33, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@Qby: I don't know if it's against any actual policy, other than the general convention that one shouldn't really edit other users' userpages. If we're talking about a one-off, it's probably not a problem, but if it's being done on larger scale that could be a red flag... for something. I suppose you could always ask the user, to hear what they have to say about this? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

DoubleGrazing I'll tell you what's a red flag, they've amassed almost 19,000 edits since February 25th, that's over 3100 a day. Most of them seem to be deleted redirects. 331dot (talk) 10:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Actually, scratch that, I had my page screwed up. But they do have a lot of edits in a short time. 331dot (talk) 10:45, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed. An interesting edit history – 10 live edits and 18,900+ deleted ones. That's gotta be some sort of record. :) DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:51, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I wonder if they're using a bot.

So the link they provided was limited to the User namespace- it only showed those edits. Their unfiltered contributions. 331dot (talk) 10:54, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The user's history shows over 19K edits, but the deleted contributions is just a hundred or so. Where are the other thousands? on other projects?

This looks like a WP:NOTHERE situation. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:58, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Photographing Medieval Graffiti

Hi, I have always used Wikipedia for lots of information. I am focused on photographing Medieval Graffiti in English churches. I have surveyed hundreds of Norman and Anglo Saxon churches and wish to make them available to users of Wikipedia. This means just adding them to the occasionally low content listing of the church already listed. Often on average 6 photographs would be added. How is this done without making a mistake given I am not that IT savy?Thanks

How to add lots of photographs to English church sites. This mostly capture Medieval Graffiti which is generally not mentioned on the sites but is an area of growing interest. I have surveyed hundreds of Norman and Saxon churches to capture photographs and to add to the knowledge of those that visit churches or the Congregation them selves. It would be good to be able to add some of my images to your existing church listings Proving I do not make mistake while doing it. I am not that IT savy. Kenscontribution (talk) 11:03, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

There are two steps:

1. Upload the images to Wikimedia Commons; a sibling project of Wikipedia (this makes them available to Wikipedias in ~300 other languages, too)
2. Insert them into Wikipedia articles

Help:Images should get you started; please ask again if any of it is not clear.

Two things to remember:

• On Commons, images are categorised. If you are uploading several images from one church, and there is no category for that church, you can make one.
• Six images might be a lot for some articles. In that case, you can use the {{Commons category}} template at the foot of the article to indicate that additional images can be found on Wikimedia Commons.

Thank you for offering to donate these images. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:09, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse, if the graffiti is not mentioned in the articles then it is not clear why we would need photographs of it? Theroadislong (talk) 11:11, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome, but I have been here a while.

Of course we want such images. If a church has mediaeval graffiti and that is not mentioned in its article, that is an egregious omission, which needs to be corrected. The images could well prompt such a correction (or indeed Kenscontribution may wish to make it at the same time). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:16, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Listings of English churches typically show a photograph of the outside of the church only. It might detail the age and style of construction and if it is 'listed' as of historic value and therefore protected from changes to the structure. It is very very rare to add that Medieval marks made by the common man exists and never shows these marks which are of huge value.In case you are unaware, the churches I refer to are often 800 to 1100 years old, and often get upgraded. In doing repairs often these important marks made by the congregation are covered up or damaged by replastering. My aim is to capture these important marks before they become lost to future generations. Hope some of that helps understand why Graffiti is not currently mentioned on most websites.

Ken Kenscontribution (talk) 11:27, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps we need an article called Medieval graffiti? Theroadislong (talk) 11:50, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps. For now, I'll redirect that to Graffiti#Medieval Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

My Draft Was Declined, I need some help knowing what to change

I submitted my article for approval, its the second time it was declined, I am wondering what information to put in, because when I had information that was useful and insightful it was said that it felt biased, but now that I took the information out they said that it was trivial, if anyone could help by looking at the sources, and looking into the content that would be super helpful here is the wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sjonnyon#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation:_TAIT_(August_12) Sjonnyon (talk) 13:04, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

You need to show that the subject meets the requirements outlined at WP:GOLDENRULE. There is additional guidance on suitable sources at WP:NCORP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:09, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Sjonnyon, Draft:TAIT cites 32 sources. That's a lot for you to expect anyone here to check. Which three, in your opinion, do most to establish thet the subject is notable in Wikipedia's sense? They'll need to be to sources each of which is reliable, is independent of the subject, and has extensive discussion of it. Maproom (talk) 08:55, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia page for a Senate candidate

Hi,

Would the candidate of a grassroots US Senate campaign clear the notability requirements?

Thank you Aetsai26 (talk) 15:10, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hey Aetsai26 Welcome to Teahouse.

For that ,....Not automatically.. Wikipedia’s notability requirements for politicians are explained at WP:NPOL. In the U.S., a person is presumed notable once they have held a significant elected position, such as U.S. Senator or if they have received substantial non trivial coverage in multiple independent & reliable sources.

Merely being a candidate even for the U.S. Senate does not by itself meet notability; many campaigns attract little or no independent coverage beyond routine mentions. The key factor is significant in depth coverage from reputable sources not press releases or campaign materials. 🐍 Thilio🤖 15:20, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

How can I make an addition or edit to a Wikipedia page?

I want to add a name to a list of distinguished alumni from my high school, and make other edits on Wikipedia pages, mostly on World War II, my specialty. I have written numerous articles for WW2 History magazine on the subject, and they can be used as citations for various entries on various battles and biographies on this subject. Please contact me to tell me how I do it. Kiwiwriter47 (talk) 15:46, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

see Wp:How to edit Wikipedia. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 15:53, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

We only add people to alumni lists who are the subject of a Wikipedia article.

We recommend that you do not write an article about yourself.

You have a CoI with regard to your own works, but if you think they could be useful, please mention them on the talk pages of relevant articles; or at WT:MILHIST.

Now that you have published your email address here, beware of scams. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:54, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I canked the address. THANKS! 2600:4040:A366:E700:6513:1544:CB85:955C (talk) 00:30, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

The address had already been removed. What you did was to remove Kiwiwriter47's username, which I have restored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:42, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Can i add images found on x.com to work and how do i go about it?

I have been trying to upload image for the Nigerian Armed forces but it has been repeatedly deleted for violating copyright while the image is free to use Nafextreme (talk) 17:37, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

That an image is made available on social media does not necessarily mean that it is free to use. There must be an explicitly given copyright that permits use on Wikipedia, or copyright law in the relevant country must permit it(such as the fact that works of the US federal government are automatically in the public domain under US law). 331dot (talk) 17:44, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Can you link here to an image you want to use on WP and consider free to use? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:47, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

https://x.com/beegeaglesblog/status/1557827062030802950

this is the link Nafextreme (talk) 18:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@Nafextreme That photo has appeared online at least 9 years ago according to a reverse image search. It is likely copyrighted by someone. You therefore cannot use it on Wikipedia. qcne (talk) 18:21, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Nothing there indicates that pic has a license (see Commons:Licensing#Well-known_licenses) we can use. That someone puts something on twitter does not mean it's free to use on WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:14, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Best approach for requesting implementation of a mass move

In order to implement Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism/Archive 2025#RfC on dropping preemptive disambiguation, the names of hundreds of articles related to dioceses and archdioceses need to be named. Those on US dioceses have already been moved (partially through the RM page). However, I don't know how to indicate that this is a task requiring hundreds of articles to be moved. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to phrase it or know any page movers who might be up to the task? Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:20, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

There's User:Ahecht/Scripts/massmove which is available for administrators/page movers, although they'd likely need to do a round-robin mass move because every request at WP:RM/TR about the implementation of this RFC had redirects with history so far. Tenshi! (Talk page) 18:31, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The Rs with history issue is really the only barrier to me taking this up myself. Should I consider requesting temporary page mover perms to fulfill this task without burdening volunteers who might be needed to address more nuanced move requests? Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Page on Barchart

Guidance Needed

All My Edits Removed – Seeking Help Writing Informative Page on Barchart

Hello,

I’m hoping to get some guidance. I’ve been attempting to make edits to related Wikipedia pages in preparation for creating an article about Barchart, a financial data provider. I have already disclosed my connection to the company on my user page and in edit summaries.

Unfortunately, every single edit I’ve made so far has been removed, and I’ve now received warnings that my account could be blocked. I have been following what I believe to be Wikipedia guidelines:

• Writing in a neutral, factual tone
• Citing reliable sources
• Ensuring content fits the context of the page

Despite this, the edits are still being reverted, and I’m unsure what I am doing wrong. My goal is to create a fully compliant, informative article about Barchart without promotional language, but I would like to make sure I’m taking the correct approach to avoid further issues.

Could anyone point me toward specific best practices or examples for creating company pages that meet Wikipedia standards, especially when there is a conflict of interest? I would really appreciate detailed feedback before I try again.

Thank you FintechContext (talk) 20:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

FintechContext, none of your five edits thus far appear to be disclosing a COI, and you do not currently have a userpage, as indicated by your username being a redlink. So step one is to actually make the appropriate disclosures and make sure that they're saved, per WP:COIDISCLOSE. Otherwise, while best practices would have you make edit requests relating to topics with which you have a COI as opposed to adding the content directly, I think the bigger issue here is that you did not present any independent sources to justify that your additions were WP:DUE. In order for it to be appropriate to mention Barchart in a given article, you need a source other than Barchart or its creators to highlight its relevance in a given context. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:33, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The mistaken assertion that you'd already complied with disclosures (and also the fact that you say here My goal is to create a fully compliant, informative article about Barchart when you have yet to try to create a new article at all) makes me suspect that your post here was largely drafted by an LLM. If so, don't do that again. LLMs are not savvy enough to replace communication on Wikipedia and constantly commit errors that will get caught. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:44, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

To add to Rosguill's answer, in these edits, you added Barchart to a list of industry bodies, but unless I'm mistaken, it isn't an industry body. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

FintechContext, best practice for creating a company page is to choose a company that you're not associated with. WSikipedia is an encyclopdia, not a platform for free publicity. Yours appears to be a spam-only account. Maproom (talk) 09:17, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Proper sourcing and notability

Hi all, first time editor here. I have been working on Draft:Anirban Pathak. However I had a few questions about sourcing and notability after my first draft was declined.

Much thanks to the community for helping me out with my improper formatting.

I read that when writing about academics, the subject must pass one of 8 guidelines, one of which is being awarded a prize of national or international importance, another one being a fellow of a Society. Both of which I believe I have now catered to in my second draft.

Another thing I was confused about was sourcing, I am unsure if adding citations after each sentence and linking related wikipedia articles are enough.

Please help out, thanks :D Pustakp (talk) 00:46, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

It's not clear what your questions are.

Your draft was declined again (so needs further work); please see the advice given in the decline notice.

You have clearly found Wikipedia:Notability (academics). The reviewer disagrees that you have shown that Pathak meets this requirement.

Technically, your referencing is fine, although you have some sentences that are still uncited. Either cite, or remove, them.

Do you have some kind of connection to Pathak? If so, please say so here, and see WP:COI Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:38, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

There's a COI disclosure on the draft and the user's page. The Om Prakash Bhasin Award is notable enough to have a WP article and so, IMO, Pathak meets WP:NACADEMIC #2. Whether #3 is also met depends whether the Fellowships are obtained merely by paying a membership fee or require an election similar to the Royal Society. I've made a comment on the draft. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:25, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Having trouble with talk page discussion

It's been a while. But look, I am having problems trying to correctly set up an article name move on Wikipedia. You see, a musician named Adam Feeney revamped his alias from Frank Dukes to Ging. Of course, Ging exists as a redirect, but I don't think I initiated the move discussion on the Frank Dukes talk page correctly. Any help please? DBrown SPS (talk) 01:31, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

It seems to be set up correctly; you already have some replies there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:31, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected page on WikiData

I need to change two images the infobox of a museum as a freelance job, but it appears to me as "semi-protected", so I can not edit the page yet. What are the steps to unlock this "edit" option for me, in this case? Slamoreira (talk) 02:06, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello Slamoreira :). Semiprotected pages can be edited by "autoconfirmed" accounts, which on Wikidata requires a 4-day-old account and 50 edits. Alternatively you can ask another user to do it for you (I can do it), or you can ask to be confirmed manually at their requests for permissions page. The same applies for semiprotected pages on Wikipedia (except we require only 10 edits). Feel free to ask any other questions :). Cheers, Sophocrat (talk) 03:20, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Sophocrat,

I appreciate your help! I just need to change two images currently showcasing in the infobox of this page: d:Q82941

The one representing the buildins (currently this one: c:File:Novo MASP.jpg) should be actually this:

c:File:Vista do edifício Lina Bo Bardi e Pietro Maria Bardi, lado a lado, 2024 Foto Pedro Truffi.jpg

The one representing the new logo should be this:

c:File:Novo logo masp.jpg

Could you update the Wikidata page with those two, please? Thank you so much. I just ask because it's a bit urgent. Slamoreira (talk) 04:00, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

The new logo image is a JPG; the old one is SVG, and SVG is preferred for such simple shapes.

The photograph lacks evidence of permission (i.e. a licence release) from Pedro Truffi, the photographer. Please see c:COM:THIRD for guidance on how to resolve this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Slamoreira: Are you being paid by the museum to edit Wikipedia/Wikidata? If so, you are required to make a paid-contribution disclosure as per WP:PAID, and wikidata:Wikidata:Disclosure of paid editing. You should also read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Also, the Teahouse is for questions about Wikipedia, most of us can't help with Wikidata. In the future, maybe ask wikidata:Wikidata:Project chat? Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:51, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Slamoreira yep, you’ll have to get a few more edits until you can edit that page. HQIQ (talk) 07:02, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Helpful Raccoon: There are plenty of people here with good knowledge of Wikidata, and questions relating to it—especially in relation to how its content is transcluded on Wikipedia—should be welcomed, just as they would be for one asked about how to change an image transcluded from Commons. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:15, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Deleting a page because the business no longer exists

Hi there,

I've come across a page about a business and that business no longer exists - is that page entry worth keeping anymore?

What's the view on that, eg a business that stopped trading over 5 years ago? Is that a legitimate reason to delete the page?

Thanks! Ukdatageek (talk) 11:10, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Once an article exists, and the subject has passed/passes Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), I do not see why we should delete the article. Wikipedia isn't a business directory. And we do not delete articles about people because they have died, either. Lectonar (talk) 11:38, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ukdatageek I hope that you will agree that articles about defunct businesses such as ICI are of interest and worth keeping. You don't name the article which triggered your question but encyclopedias should cover both current and historically-significant topics. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:04, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Lectonar@Michael D. Turnbull My thanks to you both, all noted and understood. Ukdatageek (talk) 12:09, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

You can perhaps improve the article by rewriting it in the past tense and by checking that the business' demise (or takeover) is mentioned and properly cited.

Is it Pricesearcher? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:59, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Ukdatageek; have a read through WP:NOTTEMPORARY. If the company was notable during its existence, that notability is not temporary. So sure, we can keep it. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:47, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I can’t successfully create an article about an artist I like.

Hi, I have been trying to write a biography of a Thai musician, I tried to follow all the guidelines. He has appeared on multiple tvshows and news articles(more than30), which I think would definitely pass the notability guide. But I’m new to Wikipedia and I tried to paste the links of the tv shows but failed, now I can only paste some news article links that Wikipedia approves and it is very frustrating. I having been trying this for months now, I am struggling, I also can’t paste pictures,it would be great if anyone would go and read or check the article in my sandbox that I have written for me, and it would also be very great if they can help me edit it and let it go through to googles for you page(or whatever it’s called) hahaha. It’s not a lot that I wrote but I’m sure I can improve from everyone’s suggestions. Thankyou Assawongkvin (talk) 11:33, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I have moved the sandbox to Draft:Assawongrat Assarangchai; you should submit it to review to get more input; as it is, I do not think the page is ready for mainspace. Lectonar (talk) 11:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou so much, I will try that out, I don’t even know if I’m gonna do it right haha. But Thankyou so much Assawongkvin (talk) 11:47, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi I tried pasting it again where you told me to. Did I do it right or what should I do. Thankyouuu Assawongkvin (talk) 11:56, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I think I did it, but it’s waiting for someone to read, Thankyouuu so much Assawongkvin (talk) 12:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Take a look at this version from 21 July, Assawongkvin. It has a decline notice (by DoubleGrazing). This says "Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted." In the next edit, you removed the notice. Any comment? -- Hoary (talk) 11:49, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes that’s why it is so frustrating, and I don’t know what to do now, I will try to draft everything up again and hopefully this time it would be a success and pass Assawongkvin (talk) 11:53, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

WP:NMUSICIAN explains what we need to show that a musician is an appropriate subject for a Wikipedia article.

You will see that "appeared on multiple tvshows" is not listed there; the closest is "Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or television network.". This needs to be demonstrated through citations to reliable, independent sources. Your draft's section on his TV appearances is currently uncited. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I wrote that before and pasted all the links but unfortunately Wikipedia doesn’t allow any YouTube links, sad Assawongkvin (talk) 13:01, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Assawongkvin. Wikipedia does allow linking to some Youtube sites, but they need to be official channels of reliable publishers/broadcasters, because most of the material on YouTube is not reliably published, and much of it is copyright violations. See WP:YOUTUBE.

You need to ensure that most of your citations (and all the citations you're relying on to establish notability meet all the criteria in WP:42. ColinFine (talk) 19:03, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I hate this

I edited the Mahan Air fleet so it could be easily understand for people. But why didn't Wikipedia accept it? Germanwings9525 (talk) 12:45, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Your edits were reverted (undone) because they were unsourced; the need for sources is explained at WP:Verifiability. You may also find WP:Referencing for beginners helpful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:49, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Help with new article

Hello, I’m a new user and I’m doing my best to write an article that follows Wikipedia’s guidelines. I’m hoping to find some friendly and patient guidance as I work through the process. Is there a particular user who might be able to help me with this?

Thank you so much for your time and support. User972364 (talk) 13:47, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@User972364 Welcome to Teahouse.... Please Leave Message on my Talkpage we shell work on something together. Cheer...🐍 Thilio🤖 14:12, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

You can ask for a mentor. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Chess book

I currently own a chess book (shown in the citation). Could it be used as a source for chess articles? Nighfidelity (talk) 15:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Almost certainly. But if you use it and someone has an issue with it, they should let you know. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:12, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

i, personally, cannot understand the second part of this reply. Is there a typo or missing word perhaps? Osa Akwamarynowa (talk) 17:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Apologies; I omitted the word "let"., which I have now inserted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:48, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

References

Testing Lua Modules + replacing <imagemap>

Where do i test Lua Modules. Also Your opinion about replacing <imagemap>

I am trying to create a new Lua module in the context of replacing <imagemap>, and generally learning lua scripting for wikipedia, but if i create a sub-page in my user page Starting as Module:, it doesn't get recognized as lua code. It only gets recognized under the Module mainspace as i can see, but that is for complete modules. In addition may i ask your opinion about making a new template that teplaces image map, in order to make it easier to interact with the feauture, allow stylizing (for ex. Centering the image of the image map in the infobox( ex. In the Animal article, the image is not centered) and make the options avaliable through the visual editor. Thank yoj in advance for your help and you opinion/feedback! Mant08 (talk) 16:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Mant08: Hello. To answer the first part of your question: you can create a sandbox module for yourself in the subpage(s) of the module called "Sandbox"—see Module:Sandbox. The common practice is to name the subpage after your username. For example, I have a module at Module:Sandbox/DVRTed that I can invoke from anywhere. I'll leave the second part of your question for someone more familiar with templates to answer. — DVRTed (Talk) 16:40, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@DVRTed Thanks for answering this part of the question. I am waiting, for the opinion of others for the other part. Mant08 (talk) 16:48, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I suggest you ask on WP:Village pump (technical). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:13, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing Thank you, i am going to ask them (The Village Pump), as soon as i have finished the concept of my idea. Mant08 (talk) 16:02, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Image resize

Is it possible to resize an image to be smaller? I recently added an image to the page Megan Woods (singer), but it appears unreasonably large and takes up half of the page. JavaJourney (talk | contribs) 18:18, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

User:Javajourney,  Done. Made it into 180 px, so it is smaller now. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 19:39, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

It was not even that large, anyways. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 19:39, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat: You should instead have used one of |image_upright= or |image_size=, as described in {{Infobox musical artist}}'s documentation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:11, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

@Javajourney: Yes. You can both resize and also crop images in Wikipedia, in different ways, but i will mention the most commonly used ones, and recomended.

[Resize] When an image isloaded in an article, using the format [File:example.png], you can set an "|80px" option/parameter which sets one of the image dimensions (i don't remember which) to that specific number and also the other based of the picture ratio. NOTE: This method doesn't crop images.

[Crop] You can crop an image in two ways. 1) Using the CropTool (Requires Setup) 2) Uploading a new cropped image to wikimedia commmons under the same options, while referencing the original one uploaded and affing an (cropped) at the file name end (not after the extension!), and use that in the article.

If you want/wish/prefer to you can use both, but usually only one is used at a time. Mant08 (talk) 18:52, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat, @Javajourney, @Mant08: Specifying absolute image sizes, such as "180px", is not recommended. See Help:Pictures § Thumbnail sizes.

Specifying thumb is usually enough; adding upright= can be used to adjust the size for (e.g.) portraits or maps. See MOS:IMAGESIZE. Bazza 7 (talk) 19:32, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Bazza 7 Thank you, about that, i didn't know about those guidelines! Mant08 (talk) 19:36, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Changing a name

Hi! I work for CBR (formerly Comic Book Resources) I am trying to change the wikipedia name. How do I do that.

Thank you! Valnetmp (talk) 18:34, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

• Hi Valnetmp, two things. First, look at WP:COI, and follow the guidelines on how to declare your conflict of interest--a box on your user page is the simplest way to do it. Second, place an edit request on Talk:Comic Book Resources, and if it's well-verified it should be an easy one for editors to handle. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 19:09, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
  • Valnetmp, I see that the name is already handled in the lead, and an entry is on CBR, the disambiguation page. A name change requires a move, and it would have to be to something like "CBR (comic books site)" or something unwieldy like that. Drmies (talk) 19:15, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

    Changing the article's name has been discussed a few times; two times it was suggested the move be to "CBR (website)". The last three move discussions resulted in "no consensus" so the status quo remains (2019, 2023, and 2024). Sariel Xilo (talk) 19:24, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello! First of all thank you for wanting to contribute to Wikipedia. The only way you can rename a wikipedia page, is if you move it. Though that requires appropiate permissions, and also in your case because you are affiliated with the company, it causes an Conflict of interest (C.O.I), which is then generally recommended to not act upon yourself and on general edits ask onether editor about your proposing modifications, or in your case make a page move request. See: Wikipedia:Requested moves, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Edit requests. Mant08 (talk) 19:10, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Valnetmp, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The first thing I will say is that if you work for CBR, and you intend to edit articles relating to CBR, Wikipedia regards you as a paid editor (even if you're not paid specifically to edit Wikipedia), and you must make a formal declaration of this, preferably on your user page User:Valnetmp (which is red because you haven't created it yet. There is no obligation to have one, but that's the best place to declare your status).

Then, you should not directly make edits to the article Comic Book Resources, but instead should make edit requests on its talk page.

In this case, what you are wanting is called a move - you cannot do this yourself yet anyway, because your account is too new. But again, you should not even if you technically could.

It will not be possible to move it to CBR, because that already exists as a disambiguation page. It should probably be somethihg like CBR (website).

If you think the move is uncontroversial, you can request it at Requested moves. But if you think anybody is likely to disagree, it would be best to propose it at Talk:Comic Book Resources and get agreement. ColinFine (talk) 19:13, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

There has been no consensus in favor of prior requested moves at the talk discussion, and I do not see that changing with another discussion from an involved party on the company's behalf. Per WP:NAMECHANGES, Wikipedia articles are never retitled just because the subject wants us to call it something else. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 19:36, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

A quick look at Talk:Comic Book Resources shows that the move you're talking about has been requested multiple times previously. Each time the requested move was not done due to lack of editor consensus. I very much doubt you'll have much success with getting the article moved without some sort of new significant justification. 161.11.160.60 (talk) 19:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

How to create a post

I need help with creating a post for a new technology that is out. What would i need and how do i do this without being flagged? 68.105.255.102 (talk) 21:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.

First, your use of "post" sounds as if, like many people, you are mistaking Wikipedia for a social media site, where people post things they want the world to know about. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which contains articles which summarise what reliable independent sources say about a subject.

This means that unless people wholly unconected with this technology have already published about it in reliable publications (not blogs or social media) then there is no chance of an article being accepted at present - the Wikipedia jargon for this is that the subject is not yet notable. ("New" or "Up and coming" things almost always have this problem - see WP:TOOSOON).

If there are several sources which meet all the criteria in WP:42, then an article is possible, and you may well meet another hurdle: what is your connection with the technology in question? If you have any connection with it, you have at least a conflict of interest, and possibly you are what Wikipedia counts as a paid editor. If either of these hold, then you are not forbidden from creating an article about it, but there are certain things you need to to (see the links above).

Whether or not you have a COI, if you are to write an article, you should summarise what those independent sources say, and very little else. Almost nothing that you know about the subject is relevant, unless it happens to be covered in one of those sources.

More generally My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. And that is even if you don't have a COI. ColinFine (talk) 22:17, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Self promotion question/advise?

Hello wiki community. I only have about 40 edits under my belt and have begun making pages specifically around outer space exploration. I created a page for an organization I read about that has sent two people to space. I found this incredibly noteworth so created a wikipage for it. A few days later it was speedydeleted for self promotion. I am not affiliated with the organization so was wondering if y'all had any tips for a newbie on how to make things as non-promotional as possible. I felt it was super neutral so am surprised it got deleted for self promotion. It almosts seems like any wikipedia article for a living person or organization could be interpreted as self promotion. Any insight welcome, I'll use your feedback to test with another page I'm working on in my sandbox. Cheers! Space.tracker.nerd (talk) 22:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

For example, things like "ground-breaking technology" or "high quality products" don't work. This is an encyclopedia, not essay work. See Wikipedia:Yes, it is promotion. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 22:38, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Sections like "Mission and Vision" are almost always promotional, since they consist of what the organization wants to say about itself, rather than what independent sources say about it. Also, crypto-focused news outlets such as CoinTelegraph are generally not considered reliable independent sources for crypto-related topics. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 23:18, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Surrounded by a morass of web pages about the "incredibly noteworthy", Space.tracker.nerd, Wikipedia dispassionately describes the credibly noteworthy. -- Hoary (talk) 23:25, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

The Shepherd of the Hills 1941

Substantially revising an article on The Shepherd of the Hills 1941

 Courtesy link: The Shepherd of the Hills (1941 film)

I have never edited a page before. I just watched the last portion of a 1941 movie named The Shepherd of the Hills, starring John Wayne and Harry Carey. After watching, I checked the Wikipedia article, which was totally wrong. It might have been describing the book but the article indicates it is about the 1941. Moreover, it has a section on how the movie differs from the book. I am hesitant to attempt to correct the text for three reasons: (1) I have never written on Wikipdia before; (2) the changes would be massive (what is written currently might be describing the book accurately; and (3) I did not see the first 5-10 minutes of the movie. LingPo1975 (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

You can fix it by adding reliable, secondary, and independent sources if they can be found. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 01:56, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi LingPo1975, for a plot summary specifically it's OK not to go based off of a secondary source. If you just saw the movie, you're currently en expert on what was in it -- if it was different from the explanation in the article, please do update the article! It looks like the summary at The Shepherd of the Hills (1941 film) is written pretty badly, so it would also be wonderful if you re-wrote it to be more concise and use paragraph breaks to structure things more readably. (Personally, I wouldn't be sad to see the whole thing deleted and replaced...) As for missing the beginning of the movie -- you can leave the beginning of the summary as-is, and pick up with what you know for sure. It'll still be on average more accurate than it was before. If you have any specific problems as you work, feel free to ask for more advice. Happy editing! ~ L 🌸 (talk) 05:57, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I agree with others that you should go ahead. While it does need a major rewrite, I suggest you make a number of smaller steps. Start by splitting the existing section into paragraphs, then rewrite each of those paragraphs, one at a time. Save the page after each.

That will make it easier for other people to see what you are doing, and you can review your work as you go. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:29, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Qualification of reference sources

I just got started as a Wikipedia editor and I'm having trouble distinguishing whether or not a reference is reliable and qualified. An article that I have been working on keeps getting declined because of this. I have looked up Wikipedia:Notability thoroughly, but the definitions are somewhat vague and some even conflict with several references in actual articles. So it would be really nice if anyone could give me a more detailed review of the article or just point out the exact reference that's unqualified in my article. That would help me a lot on improving my editing. Thanks!

The article that I'm working on: Draft:Unilumin. Yeehai9527 (talk) 09:45, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeehai9527, Draft:Unilumin has not been declined because of the unreliability of the supplied references. Instead, it has been declined because of the insufficiency of supplied references that are all four of (i) "in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)", (ii) "reliable", (iii) "secondary", and (iv) "strictly independent of the subject". There's a possibility that this means lack of reliability alone; but I immediately notice that Its product portfolio covers indoor and outdoor LED displays, transparent and creative form-factor screens, cinema LED systems, sports and event display solutions, and smart lighting such as multifunctional smart poles is referenced to prnewswire.com, which, it seems, will happily put out whatever it's paid to put out. (I'm also struck by the lack in this draft of any comment -- from reliable and independent sources, of course -- about the company.) -- Hoary (talk) 10:05, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for replying! Can you elaborate more on "comment" that you mentioned though? Is it a necessary part for a article on organizations and companies? What kind of content exactly is considered "comment"? It would be better if you can provide me with one or two example, because I have read through several existing simular articles but there doesn't seem to be anything that look like comment? Yeehai9527 (talk) 09:50, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Yeehai9527 Maybe "commentary" would be a better word. The point is that Wikipedia articles about companies don't just have to show the company exists but that it has attracted attention from reliable sources (newspapers, industry commentators, academics etc) independent of the company itself who have covered some aspect of it in depth. This is what we mean by saying that the article has to demonstrate that the company is notable. This is summarised by our golden rule about decent sources. When you have found three or so such sources, base your draft just on what they say: adding what the company itself would say on their own website is much less important. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:45, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Help with removing personal information

Hi, I’d added some personal info to my user page a few years ago, and people are using it to contact me on LinkedIn and other platforms.

Now, even after removing it the edits are visible in the edit history. Any way for me to purge this information, or do I simply need to delete my account (or will even that not work)? TIA. Kanishkawrites (talk) 11:32, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Kanishkawrites, and welcome to the Teahouse. What you want is called Oversight. Please see WP:OSFAQ ColinFine (talk) 11:38, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I've hidden the revisions from view prior to oversight. Oversight will remove it completely - revdel (which I have done) hides it from non-admins. Bilby (talk) 11:43, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much @Bilby, will give that a shot! Kanishkawrites (talk) 06:53, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

and thank you @ColinFine too! Kanishkawrites (talk) 06:55, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

disambiguation showed up significan conflation on term "GPGPU"

hi there is huge conflation on the word "GPGPU" - i just found a mistake on Nintendo switch where it is used to describe the wrong type of hardware (wrong technical term for an internal part of a GPU). this is a massive task, far too big for one person. how does one go about alerting editors with a view to collaboratively fixing this? (the computing task force is semi-retired/ended, otherwise i would go there) Lkcl (talk) 13:30, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

tia. Lkcl (talk) 13:30, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:General-purpose_computing_on_graphics_processing_units_(hardware)#c-Lkcl-20250814130400-Lkcl-20250814051200 Lkcl (talk) 13:32, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Obvious things

A user wrote to me they wanted me to review their draft. It did not follow the criteria, so it got declined. But it was about a character in The Legend of Korra and it shows what they do that is in the draft. Does it need any sources? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 14:17, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, everything in a Wikipedia article needs reliable sources. If there are no reliable sources on a topic, then that topic does not warrant a separate Wikipedia article, even if (one feels that) the information given is true. See verifiability and notability for more information on this. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:28, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

@Writ Keeper but things like Zaheer_(The_Legend_of_Korra) have very little sources because it shows it in The Legend of Korra. Can characters be like this? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 14:37, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

In this case, the primary source itself is the source of information. It's like a plot summary or synopsis of a book or movie. It's understood that the information comes from the primary source. Character summaries of newspaper comics and cartoon series are similar; the original work is the source. That doesn't mean the article doesn't need citations; at the least it would require assertions to cite episodes. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:56, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

How does one put a section of an article into a category?

I've seen people putting sections of articles into categories, such as an individual episode from an article of a list of episodes in a TV show. However, I can't find how to do this on the cat. FAQ and I don't see anything in source editing. How do I do this? Shocksingularity (talk) 16:13, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Shocksingularity, as far as I'm aware, there's no way to place anything less than a full page into a category. That said, you can categorize redirect pages, including episode redirects that lead to their show's main page. You can read more about this at WP:RCAT#Article categories. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:22, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Finding Source for articles

I'm trying to find sources for my articles so they don't get deleted. However, I can't seem to find any sources. What should I do? Breck0530 (talk) 18:24, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used.

However, lack of sources is often an indicator that a topic does not meet our requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:31, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Greetings, and welcome to the Teahouse. Sources do not need to be online, as long as they can be appropiately cited. But any article needs to be cited to reliable sources--without these, there is literally nothing upon which a proper encyclopedia article can be based, so if the sources cannot be found, then the subject may simply not be notable enough (in Wikipedia's particular sense of the term) to merit an article here at this time. Hope this helps. Feel free to ask further questions. Thanks, and happy editing! --Finngall ^talk 18:47, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

You're going about it WP:BACKWARD. You find your sources first, before you write a single word of your article. If you cannot find adequate sources, then don't start writing the article. It's that simple. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:52, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I don't have enough sources because I only found 1 or 2 sources about the article and also I've looked at books and none of them talk about the topics I'm writing about. Breck0530 (talk) 20:05, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Maybe you can return to this in the future? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:09, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

As I said, if you can't find sources, don't bother writing the article. If you write the article first and try to find sources later, you're wasting your time. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Breck0530, I took a quick look at your list of contributions and more or less randomly clicked on "1975 Small Club World Cup". This cites one source. I am ignorant of Venezuela (my excuse: it's very distant from where I happen to live), and I have no interest in watching people running around after balls, so it's not surprising that I have no immediate suggestions. But I imagine that the Argentine, East German, Portuguese, Spanish and Venezuelan (and Paraguayan?) press of the time would have said something. Now, if it's even possible to look through newspapers (whether digitized somehow, or on microfilm or microfiche, or on actual, crumbling paper), this is exhausting work; but presumably there were sports/soccer magazines in 1975 and it's likely that some reference library stocks these. You might ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. Your interest in Californian highways suggests to me that you may be in California; if you are, it's unlikely that you'd be able to visit a large library in Argentina, Germany, Portugal, Spain, Venezuela, or Paraguay. Wherever you are, and whatever the languages are that you can and can't read, be sure to word your question in a way that minimizes the risk that respondents would spend a lot of time typing kinds of advice that you couldn't possibly use. -- Hoary (talk) 22:22, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

&Asian as a source?

Hello,
Just wondering if &Asian may be used as a source on articles. Another editor raised the concern to me that they don't list their editorial staff on the site itself, though they do mention on their "About" page that they follow Independent Press Standards Organisation rules. They are also recognized by Muck Rack, which auto-generates pages for anything or anyone it identifies as "legit" journalism; while a lot of other online magazines like Metroscene.com (which other editors have said is okay to use as a source) aren't recognized by MR.
Their editorial staff can be found elsewhere, though (LinkedIn). They also have some interviews with legit people like Dolly de Leon and Karen Fukuhara: https://andasian.com/tag/interviews/
Their content has some pretty valuable info, so I'd love to be able to use it, but please let me know if it's not allowed as a source here. Use with discretion/it depends or not at all? Bloomagiliw (talk) 23:32, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

The best place to ask, Bloomagiliw, is WP:RSN -- but only after looking for the search term in that page's archives. Incidentally, I don't know what a "legit person" is; but interviews with people (whether law-abiding citizens or convicted felons) have only very limited uses in Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 01:58, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Page approval help

Hi there - I have adjusted my page to be less commercial in tone and added many references. Any other suggestions on how to get it approved? Draft:Numerator

NUWP2025 (talk) 23:42, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

@NUWP2025 Submitting it for review is one of the steps to take when you are satisfied that you have dealt with the three prior declines. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 23:52, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh, and, NUWP2025, get rid of the PR announcements and churnalism you are using for references. The add no value to any notability the topic may have. It is still an advert. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 23:54, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

NUWP2025, please answer 331dot's question. -- Hoary (talk) 01:52, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

NUWP2025, why are you keen to get your draft approved? It does not give a good impression of the company. The first paragraph says that it spies on consumers' purchase data. The second says that it has an app which people install on their mobiles. (The rest is about the company's acquisition history.) Most people reading it will be wary of installing that app. Maproom (talk) 06:53, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

ref tag in section heading

Norihiro Satsukawa has ref tag just below Managerial statistics section. in some articles its inside or end of section heading. e.g. ==head <ref>url</ref>== or ==head==<ref>url</ref>. is it allowed? -- jiki (talk) 06:00, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

It isn't desirable. I added some words before it. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:32, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

ArchNet CC

According to ArchNet's terms of use page:

Archnet is an Open Access resource, provided to the public to facilitate cultural understanding and excellence in both scholarship and practice. Content from Archnet.org may not be published, displayed, or appropriated for commercial use without the expressed written permission of the copyright holder.

Unless otherwise noted, Archnet material is available for instructional, nonprofit use, and personal use on the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license.

The content available on Archnet, including but not limited to information, text, graphics, logos, and multimedia related to the the Aga Khan Trust for Culture’s programmes, such as the Historic Cities Programme, the Aga Khan Award for Architecture and the Aga Khan Music Programme, may be protected by copyright, trademark, or other intellectual property rights and laws, whether owned by the Aga Khan Trust for Culture, its affiliates, or third parties. Unauthorized use, reproduction, distribution, modification, or display of this content is strictly prohibited without the express written permission of the respective copyright or trademark holder. Violation of this prohibition may result in legal penalties.

Would uploading some images from this article to Commons be appropriate, seeing that Wikimedia is a non-profit organization? Hsnkn (talk) 06:52, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hsnkn, you should ask about this at Commons' help desk. But I'm pretty sure the answer will be "No". Maproom (talk) 06:56, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Hsnkn In short no, "NC" is the dealbreaker, since stuff on WP is (mostly) allowed for commercial use. You can see the ok licenses at Commons:Licensing#Well-known_licenses. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:09, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Request for additional editor input on article talk page

Hello Teahouse, I want to disclose that I have a conflict of interest regarding the Alen Hadzic article,so I am not editing it myself. A discussion is underway about the article’s NPOV and compliance with Wikipedia’s BLP policy. While some editors have already contributed,it would be really helpful to have more editors review and provide input.

You can see one of the discussions here: MediaKyle’s talk page discussion, and on the article’s talk page: Talk:Alen Hadzic.

Any constructive contributions or feedback would be much appreciated to help ensure accuracy,neutrality and compliance with BLP guidelines.

Thank you!Goricah3 (talk) 10:43, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

This page is for asking questions about how to edit Wikipedia, not for recruiting people to ongoing discussions elsewhere. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:54, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

help for sandbox

User:Harold Foppele/sandbox Please see if this page is now correct to publish. If it is, can you please help me to publish it? Thank You ! Harold Foppele (talk) 11:10, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Your page is in Dutch; this is the English-language Wikipedia. Are you sure you wanted to publish it here? Lectonar (talk) 11:15, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

lack reliable secondary sources. 🐍 Thilio🤖 11:20, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

No, it is not suitable for EN-wiki. Try nl:Hoofdpagina. -- Softlavender (talk) 11:35, 15 August 2025 (UTC)