Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cullen328, 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:

Help request on behalf of a new user

Hi all, I wondered if someone could assist ADITYAKUSHWAHA999 (talk · contribs). I think they have a question about a caste but I don't have the knowledge to answer them. This is in relation to the Kushwaha (surname). I reverted an edit where they tried to add someone, but now I think they have a different question? Thank in advance to which one of you kind editors takes a look. Knitsey (talk) 18:46, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

What was the question? Henihhi28 (talk) 21:12, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

@Knitsey: From my understanding of Indian castes (I'm diaspora), ADITYAKUSHWAHA999 is saying that an unnamed editor described people who hold the Kushwaha surname as shudra (worker class in caste system), when Aditya says that Kushwahas are actually Kshatriya (warrior class; higher in rank in the caste system than shudra), and says that they have proof that Kushwahas are kshatriya instead of shudra. They go on to claim that the editor refuses to accept their edit request because they hate the Kushwahas for some reason. Perhaps a warning about casting aspersions would be in order? Grumpylawnchair (talk) 00:57, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

https://ncbc.nic.in/Writereaddata/635367176167888209_Advice%20No35.pdf

Please see the link above. Quite clearly, the Kushwahas belong to the OBC (Other Backward Castes) basis, at the very least. They do not belong to the Kshatriya category basis, both historically and societally. This is as per official government of India documentation. Hence, my suggestion would be not to be specific about the 'Shudra' category which is both psephologically, and societally, irrelevant, but instead denote the surname as OBC as has been observed by the National Commission for Backward Castes Rohanvyavaharkar (talk) 11:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Repeated removal of links, but clearly not vandalism (?)

An IP-only user (50.101.200.217) has been editing dozens of Wikipedia pages of various celebrities of the link removing links to districts, towns, and boroughs, instead just linking their larger area (e.g. removing London boroughs and replacing the link with London). This is not vandalism, obviously, but seems from most FA and GA I have seen to not be standard practice, and thus, it seems it should be reverted? Is the most efficient way to revert them one by one, or is it a minor enough thing to just leave be? The editor continues to make these edits and by the looks of their contributions history and talk page would not notice a message given. While I believe these changes to be in good faith, the user appears to have a history of vandalism. Insight appreciated. CollinDChase (talk) 02:39, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

I was thinking of WP:GEOLINK. This is not proper editing, but report seems over the top, manually changing a persisting editor seems futile, and a warn seems like it would not be seen. CollinDChase (talk) 02:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

The first step is always to try to engage them on their talk page with escalating messages -- either personalized or using templates. Engaging with user talk page communications is absolutely one of the table stakes expectations of being a wikipedia editor. Thus, if you or others have already repeatedly contacted them and they don't respond to messages at all, it's appropriate to escalate to WP:AN or WP:ANI. You can look through current and archived discussions on those boards to see how similar issues tend to be discussed and resolved. -- Avocado (talk) 16:26, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Can't access InternetArchiveBot

I've already been on Wikipedia for over 10 days now, but I still can’t access InternetArchiveBot. Just wondering—what could be the issue? — ArćRèv • talk 04:52, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Arc Rev, Apologies for late reply. If you have been on Wikipedia for over 10 days and still can't use InternetArchiveBot, the issue likely isn't the time since registration but rather user permissions. Why you might not have access yet may be Account age alone isn't enough InternetArchiveBot typically requires that you have autoconfirmed status and account must be 4 days old and have made at least 10 edits. InternetArchiveBot doesn't work like a user-run tool. You can't access it directly in most cases.You can request a bot run on a talk page or use the URL at IA Bot interface if you're in a project where it's available.You may not be editing a namespace where it functions automatically. InternetArchiveBot mainly works in article space, not user sandboxes or drafts (unless requested). Further, You can try using the bot via:https://ia.wikibots.org/ Or you can probably ask for a bot run at Wikipedia:InternetArchiveBot/Requests. I guess. Fade258 (talk) 17:57, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

@Fade258: A day later, I was able to run the bot. But I noticed that not all the references in the article I asked it to analyze were archived—only a few. Is that normal? — ArćRèv • talk 23:42, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Question

Hi, I am working on Draft:Aramean people, when it comes to the Aramean people, they were often called Syrians by Greeks and Romans, thus many sources speak of a Syrian people's history without mentioning "Arameans", is it possible to address this application of the Syrian name to the Arameans (there are many sources addressing this) in a specific section and in other sections such as Antiquity and Early Christianity, so that we can work with sources only mentioning Syrians, not Arameans and still write of them in the Aramean people draft, such as in the Byzantine period (this period, the Syrian name was in full swing)? Because, like earlier stated, Syrian came to mean Aramean, (also evident in the Bible translations, Hebrew --> Greek).

Basically apply information from sources X to source Y? Ex. source X states Arameans came to be called Syrians, and source Y speaks of Syrian history, can we therefore make the connection that source Y speaks of the Arameans (prior to name shift) and include it as a source about Aramean people (but writing "Syrian", not Aramean).

So can we apply information from one set of sources to another? For example, if one source explains that the Arameans came to be called Syrians, and another source speaks about the history of the Syrians, is it acceptable to connect the two and treat the second source as referring to the Arameans before the name shift? In other words, can we use sources that speak only of "Syrians" in the historical sense, as long as we clarify that "Syrian" was the name later applied to the Aramean people, and still include such sources in a draft about the Aramean people, while keeping the original wording "Syrian"?

hope you guys understand what i mean, i know it sounds confusing, even my text could be better explaining the dilemma but i do not know how else to put it.

Wlaak (talk) 12:49, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Wlaak, and welcome to the Teahouse

I don't think you can do this. The first line of WP:SYNTH is Do not combine material from multiple sources to state or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. Others may have a different interpretation. ColinFine (talk) 16:09, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi, Wlaak! This sounds like a massive headache, and I'm really sorry you have to deal with it. Just at a glance, what you're describing seems like synthesis, which isn't allowed under the "original research" policy. Although reliable scholarly sources say that the Greeks and Romans called the Arameans Syrians, where synthesis enters the picture is determining this on a per-source basis. If contemporary source X uses the term "Syrians" and later source Y says that source X meant "Arameans", then I see this as uncontroversial and non-original research (you would simply have to somehow keep source Y coupled with source X whenever source X is used). However, I don't think you can blanket this unless there's compelling evidence in multiple contemporary, scholarly sources that say that when Greeks and Romans said "Syrians", they always without exception meant "Arameans". TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

thank you @ColinFine @Fade258 @TheTechnician27 for the help, what i have done is written of "Syrians", as the sources state, I haven't changed to Arameans.

i've in order stated that Syrian came to mean Aramean in sections about Antiquity and Early Christianity etc. and now in the Byzantine section, i am only writing "Syrian" if the sources mention "Syrian".

am i allowed to write of Syrians in a article about Arameans? considering it would be WP:SYNTH to take info from one source and apply it to interpret what another source meant? basically the Syrian source not mentioning Aramaen makes it ineligible/unrelated/irrelevant for Aramean article? Wlaak (talk) 16:34, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

@Wlaak, given that the naming itself is contentious, you'll need to be especially careful here. Your example, Ex. source X states Arameans came to be called Syrians, and source Y speaks of Syrian history, can we therefore make the connection that source Y speaks of the Arameans (prior to name shift) and include it as a source about Aramean people (but writing "Syrian", not Aramean). only works if all Arameans came to be called Syrians, and no Syrians who were not previously known as Arameans exist at all. Do you see the problem? I'm basically restating what TheTechnician said, but it's important. If it doesn't work this way, and my understanding is that it does not, you're instead going to have to be careful about your implications. It would probably be fine to talk about Syrian history in an article on Aramean history where there is overlap, but all of that will be subject to challenge from editors who disagree that it's relevant, and you'll need to be as clear as you can be to contextualize the information so that readers aren't misled. -- asilvering (talk) 17:15, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

i understand, of course not every single Aramean came to be called Syrian, but the majority did and this is the academic understanding of the term Syrian.

could you give example of how i need to put it so that i can write of Syrians? for example, so far, i have already written of Aramean history in antiquity and Early Christianity, and it mentions how Arameans were referred to as Syrians (it also mentions the Bible translations, Greek authors such as Strabo, Eusebius, Posidnoius) etc. there will be a section specific to the name change as well.

if you have time, could you please check the section about Byzantine Periods? how i have written of it as, if that is okay, specially under Ottoman periods, all censuses wrote of "Suryaniler" (Syriacs), Keldaniler (Chaldeans), and Nasturlier (nestorians/assyrians), (last two irrelevant to the draft in terms of Syriac/Aramean history)

its really unfortunate how Aramean came to be Syrian in academics Wlaak (talk) 18:02, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

@Wlaak sorry, I'd better avoid getting too into any of this content since I've been dealing with this business at ANI as an admin. General advice I can do, but I'll have to bow out of specifics. But if any other teahouse hosts want to get involved, please do. -- asilvering (talk) 19:35, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

i understnad, i have one question tho, is there a guideline or a rule of how many sources you need per section/paragraph/sentence? or can i write a entire section based on one source? Wlaak (talk) 22:10, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

You can write a whole section based on one source, sure. Sometimes that's all you've got. If there's only one source holding down a section, that tends to suggest that it's not "due weight" - ie, that we shouldn't cover that section in so much detail. More sources tends to be better in general, up to a point. (eg WP:REFBOMB) -- asilvering (talk) 01:13, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

thank you, the source states that the Syriacs are the Arameans of antiquity and then goes on to write about these Syriacs (not writing Arameans), am I allowed to write Syriac-Arameans or does it stricitly have to be Syriacs only? Wlaak (talk) 09:23, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

If the source has something so direct as "the Syriacs are the Arameans of antiquity" I think you're justified in using "Arameans" the whole way through if that's appropriate to the article you're writing. Other editors might disagree, and you may need to come to some other kind of consensus - maybe I'd disagree if I had read that source! - but from your description of it, that's well within "editors are allowed to use their brains". -- asilvering (talk) 16:31, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

@Wlaak, I think Yes, with proper sourcing and context, you can use sources that refer to “Syrians” in an article on the Aramean people, as long as you clearly explain the historical naming overlap based on reliable academic sources. This is best of my knowledge and It may differ from person to person. Fade258 (talk) 16:13, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

What is the Wikipedia rule about not "point scoring" with your God?

I believe there is a rule or subsection about not writing things to win points with your God, NotQualified (talk) 16:05, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello @NotQualified. I'm not sure what you're talking about. Could you give us more details? Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 16:16, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

I was going through the rules a year ago and I recall one that explicitly called out religious people who try and secretly spread religious propaganda or suppress criticism of their faith. I remember seeing it in "Wikipedia is not censored" but I don't see it there now. NotQualified (talk) 16:25, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello @NotQualified, With the best of my knowledge and If I take your question rightly then, Wikipedia discourages writing with the intent to please a deity or promote religious views. All contributions should aim to summarize what reliable sources say, not express personal or spiritual motives. Mainly it focuses on neutral point of view. Fade258 (talk) 16:20, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

It was something along the lines of "Wikipedia is not censored and is allowed to offend people. Do not edit articles to try and score points with your deity by secretly spreading religious propaganda." NotQualified (talk) 16:24, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

@NotQualified, Wikipedia is governed by a Neutral Point of View (NPOV) policy, which means content must be present fairly, proportionately, and without bias including religious bias. Editors must not use Wikipedia as a platform for apologetics, or religious promotion. Fade258 (talk) 16:42, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Religion Not it but close. NotQualified (talk) 17:48, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

@NotQualified , the essay WP:NOTHERE, subsection "Trying to score brownie points outside of Wikipedia", includes "...Examples include edits to articles related to one's religion intended to score points with one's deity(ies),...". Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 17:18, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

That's it, thanks NotQualified (talk) 17:49, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

WP:RNPOV? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:24, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't think any god hands out brownie points, but you certainly accrue good karma but adhering to Wikipedia's rules. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:26, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Are you founding a new religion? NotQualified (talk) 19:07, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

helixism 2, babyyyyyy consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 19:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

There might already be an option for that. See Bluerasberry's recent item (video format) in The Signpost. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:21, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Bri and yes I am quite serious! This is a great religious option for Wikimedians! Bluerasberry (talk) 00:31, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Is there a viable alternative to deletion for Miss Serbia by year?

This article Miss Serbia by year has been unreferenced for over five years. I'm seeking advice on whether there is a viable alternative to deletion. I don't see another good article for a redirect, for example. Just leaving stuff like this unreferenced indefinitely doesn't seem like a good option. I would discuss with the article creator, but they were blocked as a sockpuppet, and I don't see any other major contributors. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:59, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

I added an introductory sentence and imported some references from Miss Serbia. I agree that it's in a very poor state though and I'm not planning on looking for more references. It's probably fine as a standalone list aside from being woefully out of date. If you want advice on what to do in similar situations... All I can advise is find similar articles and see if an acceptable level is achievable. -- Reconrabbit 19:50, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

I read the version of the article with the last edit made in "MAY/05/2025" at "19:48 UTC".

The article can be improven with references. In my point of view , this is a viable alternative to deletion. Anatole-berthe (talk) 09:56, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Public domain or creative commons license for blp

I am looking at adding a image of a blp in their infobox, but those are the hardest for me to understand the copyright, creative commons, and other restrictions. I have read the relevant policies, but I still am confused. I searched for "all creative commons" licenses with a bing search, and I think I found some, but could someone please help verify if what I am seeing can be correctly uploaded and used. The blp I am looking at is: Amy Peikoff Iljhgtn (talk) 21:08, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

https://www.google.dk/search?q=Amy+Peikoff&sca_esv=973c07562d464363&udm=2&tbs=sur:cl&source=lnt&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjsr9PIqY2NAxXlLRAIHXTSBNkQpwV6BAgCECA&biw=1280&bih=676&dpr=1

Nothing on Google so far Trade (talk) 21:59, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

My suggestion would be to ignore Bing and search Flickr or YouTube instead Trade (talk) 22:01, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Can you find anything on Flickr or YouTube? Iljhgtn (talk) 23:35, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

How it works is as follows: because the subject is alive, unless 1) the owner of the image's copyright has expressly placed it under a compatible license (listed here), or 2) the image is provably in the public domain (for specifics of the US public domain specifically, refer to the Hirtle chart), we can't use it. If no license is ever given, then (except for some old images discussed in the Hirtle chart) the image is by default all rights reserved for whoever took the image. It is therefore entirely possible that no compatible image of her currently exists. As Peikoff appears to be a highly public figure, it's likely possible to ask her yourself (we have a form for that around here somewhere), although as the US' far-right rabidly distrusts Wikipedia, it's questionable if she'd agree. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 03:12, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

So called "passive voice"

I have been reading up on grammar and some different things recently and I was curious about so called "passive voice" writing and the different forms of "voice", which is considered the correct "voice" and could someone point me to the best MOS on this that exactly supports the policy and subsection of what the best voice is to use for the entire encyclopedia please? Iljhgtn (talk) 21:29, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

The one I know of is at MOS:PASSIVE which is just a footnote. Generally, the passive voice is preferred here. While I don't agree with Steven Pinker on everything in this lecture, I think he does a good job here of describing why the passive is often so important. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 21:57, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

"Generally, the passive voice is preferred here." Oh? That's news to me. (I for one have no general preference.) ¶ The footnote to which TheTechnician27 points us is well-meant, but dubious. It starts: "The passive voice is inappropriate for some forms of writing". I can't think of a single form of writing for which it would be inappropriate. Whether it would be a good choice for a particular clause depends on what it is that you want to put across to the reader in that clause. ¶ Iljhgtn, one thing you have to remember when reading up on the passive is that some of the people who get worked up over use of the "passive" [note the scare quotes] don't even know what the word means in the context of grammar. The article "English passive voice" is well meant and has some good bits, but it's confusing. If you have twenty minutes spare, skip that article and instead go straight to Geoffrey K. Pullum's "The passive in English", which cuts through miscellaneous myths about the passive and gives you the straight dope. (Within it, "passice" is of course a typo for "passive".) ¶ If you don't want to devote the time needed to read and digest Pullum's article, then my advice is not to worry at all about whether or not to express something via what you (rightly or wrongly) believe is passive. -- Hoary (talk) 05:37, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Not quite sure what the confusion is here, but in terms of passive and active in Wikipedia articles, the two "voices" put their emphasis in different places. "Smith built an organ in the church of St Stephen" places the emphasis on Smith (it is the natural answer to the question: "what did Smith do?"). It's the natural choice for an article about Smith. "The organ was built by Smith" places the emphasis on the organ (it's the natural answer to the question "Who built the organ in St Stephen's church?"). It's the natural choice for an article about the organ or the church in which it stands. Elemimele (talk) 12:26, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Is there anyone here who can write Traditional Chinese (Taiwan)

On Commons there is an Taiwanese user whom one of the admins are trying to communicate with. Unfortunately said admin cannot write Chinese

If any Wikipedians here could translate his talk page message in a way that the Taiwanese user can read it would be appreciated Trade (talk) 21:52, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

I believe you may get better assistance over on the Chinese-language Wikipedia. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 23:59, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Local Embassy#Chinese ("Chinese" referring to the language, not the country) exists on this project, for that purpose. Try there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:39, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

@Trade and PhoenixCaelestis: Admittedly massively over-simplifying this, just to expand on what Andy wrote above, "Chinese" referring to the language, not the country, is written in two different forms, Traditional Chinese characters and Simplified Chinese characters. I seem to recall that there might have been a Wikipedia some sort of attached to the zh.wp Wikipedia that was in traditional characters, but I can't find it right now. Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 09:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I was under the impression the Chinese Wikipedia used both, its logo is in both and the English article on it says that it supports both writing types. Is that outdated information? PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 11:08, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Fixing Long-Term Vandalism on the Penis Page

This is a serious request, please do not scroll away. On the Penis talk page, User:Ludichris1 raised his concern that User:Autisticeditor 20 vandalized the page by removing thousands of bytes worth of information. There have been good faith contributions in between his edits and the present, so what action should be taken? Is there a special template that can be placed on the page or something? Easternsahara (talk) 00:37, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi, ES. I can't think of any templates that specifically apply here. Something I noticed that should not be reinstated until it can be cited with reliable sources is the subsection on 'Humans'. This violated WP:V which itself is disallowed, but it's especially important for medical reasons that everything we say about the human body is verifiable. Also, vandalism has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia, and it's not what Autisticeditor 20 did to this article; at worst, this would be disruptive editing. Checking the talk page archives, AE20 never discussed these changes at all, which makes me surprised they were never reverted. Looking at the article prior to AE20's edits, I think they threw the baby out with the bathwater and effectively destroyed it, and I'd be more than happy to help if you want any specific advice or work done. Maybe if I edit this and Douglas Spink in quick enough succession, I can have the most disastrous RfA in Wikipedia history if I ever apply in the future. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 02:45, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Help with my talk page and establishing a OneClickArchiver

Hi so. Some are my conservations are getting bloated and I want to clean some things up, but want to keep some of my achievements and recent conversations. I find setting up the a OneClickArchiver very confusing. I tried, but it did not work.

Can someone help me please and thank you? (: Historyguy1138 (talk) 02:40, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Historyguy1138, Have you tried by enabling Javascript for OneClickArchiever by using this code mw.loader.load('//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:SD0001/OneClickArchiver.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript');. Copy the above code and paste here Fade258 (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

I tried something like that before, and I just tried again, but I am not getting an archive option on my talk page. Historyguy1138 (talk) 03:09, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

I have left my message in your talk page. Please check it out. Fade258 (talk) 03:26, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Rhinotales Gamedev Studio

I'm looking for help improving my draft article, especially with formatting and choosing reliable references that demonstrate notability. I would also appreciate guidance on how to get the draft reviewed and eventually published in the main article space. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft%3ARhinotales_Gamedev_Studio&oldid=prev&diff=1288270389 Borishalikov (talk) 06:36, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Borishalikov, formatting is a relatively minor matter. You say "As of 2025, Rhinotales has a core team of approximately 30 professionals working full-time on Critical Shift." How do you know this? And though I've read the sentence "Rhinotales is actively involved in the development of Kazakhstan's gamedev ecosystem" I can't deduce any real meaning from it. (Just what does the active involvement comprise? What's a "gamedev ecosystem"?) -- Hoary (talk) 08:14, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Borishalikov, Thank You for your contribution. I have checked your draft and looks good but you need to add independent and reliable references and please remove social links from external links per social and also you need to reformat the writing style. Fade258 (talk) 08:17, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Borishalikov, and welcome to the Teahouse.

A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, and very little else. What you know about the subject is not relevant, unless the information is verified in reliable sources.

For this reason, writing a draft before finding suitable sources is mostly a waste of time and effort. It is like building a house without first building foundations or even surveying the plot: the house will probably fall down.

You do not have any useful sources: the two in English do not even mention Rhinotales, and the Russian ones just mention it in passing.

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. ColinFine (talk) 10:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Rhinotales Gamedev Studio needs better refs. David notMD (talk) 15:09, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Article Draft

Hello, Together with others, we wanted to draft an article for the History of Tourism. It is not supposed to be published yet, but something went wrong, and it was accidentally already submitted for publication. Is it possible to move it to the draft space? Thank you for your help. LouCharlotte (talk) 07:29, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

It does look like User:LouCharlotte/History of Tourism was accidentally submitted for review, but as it has been declined by the reviewer and is in your userspace, you can continue to work on it at your leisure, just don't press the big blue "Submit for review" button until it's ready. I'm not sure why you removed all of the draft content after it was reviewed – work-in-progress is explicitly allowed on user subpages. Some additional advice: @Timtrent said the draft looked like the outline of an essay or magazine article, so please read § Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought; and ensure that each contributor to this draft logs in as themselves before editing, so that everyone's contributions are properly attributed. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 07:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I also added a hint that this is a userspace draft. I deleted the previous contents, because they were the first attempts at writing and formatting in Wikipedia, but nothing 'final' to be published. The other users practice writing their contributions in their personal sandboxes and then later copy them into this sandbox. Thank you. LouCharlotte (talk) 08:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

LouCharlotte, why do you say that you plural wanted to do such-and-such? And whether you're singular or plural, why not work to develop what's currently the "History" section of the "Tourism" article? -- Hoary (talk) 08:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I wrote 'we' because this is a collaborative project of a university course on the History of Tourism. https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/University_of_Padua/Course_'History_of_Tourism'/home

As more than 20 people are writing contributions, I was told by an experienced Wikipedia editor that these additions would be too many to add to a section of the general article on tourism. On the German Wikipedia, there is an extra article on Geschichte des Reisens, that's why I thought, we could create an English-language main article on the History of Tourism, too. But if the course can add several subsections to the History section of the Tourism article, I would prefer that over creating a new article! Thank you. LouCharlotte (talk) 08:14, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geschichte_des_Reisens LouCharlotte (talk) 08:15, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

If more than twenty people are going to work on a history of tourism, then yes, the result is likely to be a lot more bulky than would be suitable for one section of the article "Tourism". First, move the draft out of your userspace, to Draft:History of tourism. Then the students (your students?) will be free to work on that. Good luck! -- Hoary (talk) 08:22, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi, thank you. I wanted to move the article out of my userspace into the draft space, but I didn't have the permission; that's why I opened this question. Do you perhaps know how I can move it to the draft space, or whom I have to ask for it specifically? Thank you for your support! (And yes, my students) LouCharlotte (talk) 08:27, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

I see that it has already been moved. Good. Another tip for you: "=Precursors to Tourism=", at the start of a line, is converted to HTML "<h1>Precursors to Tourism</h1>". But the software (Mediawiki) that Wikipedia uses converts the name of the article to h1, and there should be no more than one h1 header in any page. Also, headings use "sentence case" (capitalization that would also be suitable for regular body text). Therefore not "=Precursors to Tourism=" but instead "==Precursors to tourism==" (which Mediawiki would convert to "<h2>Precursors to tourism</h2>"). -- Hoary (talk) 10:36, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks! LouCharlotte (talk) 06:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Tourism is a B-class rated article with extensive content on history and various types of tourism. If anything, your group - with each student having their own account - can consider working on improving the existing article. Or, if committed to "History of Tourism", start by copying that section of the existing article with references into your draft. (Copying within Wikipedia is allowed as long as the Edit summary clearly states where the information was copied from.). After doing that, work on providing more information - referenced!! - on the historical aspects of tourism. As an example of an article linking to a sub-topic article, see Zinc and Zinc in biology. Also, learn how to properly use a reference more than one time. David notMD (talk) 15:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. I will copy the history section and mention it in the Edit summary. It is still a practice article, so the referencing of the students isn't perfect yet. But I'll make sure to go over the references before submitting the article for review. LouCharlotte (talk) 06:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Creation and design

Creation and design Moonwars3646 (talk) 09:38, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Moonwars3646 Hello. Do you have a question about using Wikipedia? 331dot (talk) 09:44, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia's role in drawing attention to community heroes

There are a lot of local heroes doing some real grassroots work that impacts hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people. However, due to the nature of the media, especially in India, they tend to get only a little bit of attention. I feel like Wikipedia can play a role in helping these people spread their mission and also bring more people to contribute financially and through volunteering efforts. Wikipedia will help in platforming their work (community-based, secular, grassroots volunteerism) but in light of the 'significant personality/notability' parameter on Wikipedia, how would one go about getting these local heroes the recognition they deserve, basis simply the impact they're having locally? Rohanvyavaharkar (talk) 10:08, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

@Rohanvyavaharkar Per design, this is not WP:s purpose, articles about people that fail WP:N would be seen on this website as promotion. The purpose of a WP-article should never be to help someone spread their mission. But the internet is vast, and there are other places to do that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia requires that people and other subjects meet the criteria at WP:N. We only write about people who get more than "a little bit of attention", by definition.

Your best course of action would be to try to get your regional or national press to write more about them; or to get your authorities to give them awards. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:29, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Rohanvyavaharkar See WP:NOBLE; Wikiepdia is not for telling the world about the good works people do- that's exactly what social media is for. 331dot (talk) 10:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

I understand all the responses. As a former journalists, we have a peculiar situation in India, where a lot of 'notable' people tend to come from a very specific social background with privileges and networks that allow for their 'notability' to be enhanced. This includes actors, politicians, 'entrepreneurs' with barely any substance to their name. I don't want to cast aspersions but WP is rife with examples from India where the real impact on ground has been minimal. I know we can't fix everything but a lot of transformative work, therefore, does not get recognised. E.g. There is a soft ban on coverage of a social activist working on environmental issues. The Freedom of Press aspects apart, the bar for such individuals to reach notability is much higher than someone who, for example, has played a bit part in a commercial film that barely registered a blip at the box office. I don't mean to demean people's achievements but it also seems like notability can be 'fixed' in a media controlled market like India? Rohanvyavaharkar (talk) 11:09, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Bit parts wouldn't meet WP:NACTOR. If you see articles where that's the only claim to notability, they should be proposed for deletion. 331dot (talk) 11:17, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

To speak to your larger point, yes, Wikipedia is skewed towards things that there are a lot of easy sources for and that get a lot of attention(like actors/musicians). However, verifiability is a key part of Wikipedia. We can't give topics with less coverage more attention or a pass on policies merely to elevate them. 331dot (talk) 11:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Your interest in bringing stories about India’s local heroes to light is commendable, @Rohanvyavaharkar. Where you might want to focus for a while instead of Wikipedia for now, however, is Western media. Human- interest articles and stories of breakthroughs in remote places anround the globe are often published there. Even world-class publications like The New York Times has run quite a few stories on local heroes, including Indians, over the past few years.

As word begins to spread in good solid sources about the work of some of these local heroes, then you can come back to Wikipedia and write articles about them that you can’t for now because of their lack of notability.

Whether you approach Indian or Western media, though, you may need help from others with some journalism or public relations background in “pitching” article proposals in such a way that editors easily see their value for their unique readership. If you’re feeling bold, perhaps you could even find a few allies in journalism schools. आपको कामयाबी मिले Augnablik (talk) 12:45, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

That's a fair point. I've given up on Indian media, but the global media suggestion is worth a shot for sure! Rohanvyavaharkar (talk) 12:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Rohanvyavaharkar. Wikipedia editors are well aware of the unique shortcomings of many Indian news organizations. Please read WP:NEWSORGINDIA for the details. Cullen328 (talk) 18:33, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Cullen328! Rohanvyavaharkar (talk) 12:21, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

How to create a new article page

Hello!

I tried to create an article which got rejected because it lacked notability for creation. However, I have another idea for an article which I would like to have a go at. I was going to do this through my sandbox, but my old article attempt is in my sandbox, and I'm not sure how to 'clear' the sandbox to make room for my new attempt at another subject.

If I could have some assistance with navigating a way to have a fresh start at a new article, that would be great. Thanks! Forester56 (talk) 15:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello. You can just edit your sandbox to remove the content that is there currently, or if you want to preserve it, create an additional sandbox, like User:Forester56/sandbox 2. You can even just click on that and begin editing.

A better way to create a draft is to use the Article Wizard. 331dot (talk) 16:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Help with a draft

Hi,

I'd like for someone to review my draft before I resubmit it for publication. I added more than 10 reliable sources and followed the guidelines. Appreciate your feedback or direct changes on the draft!

Draft:Miles Greenberg

Thank you! AnnaStaub (talk) 16:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

AnnaStaub Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You are essentially asking for a pre-review review, which duplicates effort- the best way to get a review and feedback is to submit your draft. 331dot (talk) 16:31, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Please also respond to the conflict of interest inquiry on your user talk page, thank you. 331dot (talk) 16:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

AnnaStaub, I'm not qualified to provide a review; but here's a pre-review. The reviewer who declined your draft last time was hoping that you'd provide better references, rather than more. It's the quality of the sources that matters, not the quantity. You need to cite reliable independent published sources with extensive discussion of the subject. I've checked the first five. The 1st and 3rd are about his work, not about him. The 2nd and 4th are about what he said, and so are not independent. None of those help to attest that he's wikinotable. The 5th however does help. Maproom (talk) 21:31, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

How many paragraphs can I copy paste quoting a book in talk page

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

---

How many paragraphs can I copy paste quoting a book in talk page SolderUnion (talk) 16:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

If it is copyrighted then none preferably. My apologies, I read your question incorrectly, on talk pages copyright doesn't apply unless you abhorrently violate it. Easternsahara (talk) 17:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

It's perfectly acceptable to quote material while discussing it on a talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:13, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Easternsahara, I am sorry but both of your answers are incorrect. Our restrictions on the use of copyright restricted material apply everywhere on Wikipedia, including article talk pages. The general principle is to quote the minimum amount of copyrighted material necessary to make an important point. The material must be attributed to the source and set off by quotation marks or by Template: Blockquote. Cullen328 (talk) 18:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. This is very vague. Can it be 2 pages if this is the minimum to conduct a summary? SolderUnion (talk) 21:22, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Regarding, "It's perfectly acceptable to quote material while discussing it on a talk page", that is mistaken. There is no distinction in copyright law about where you copy copyrighted material; if it is a violation to copy it into an article, then it is a violation to copy it into a Talk page (or any other page at Wikipedia). The tricky part, is figuring out whether it is covered under fair use. But just because it is a Talk page, does not make it all right. Mathglot (talk) 08:53, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

It is you who is mistaken. Not only that: you contradict yourself. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:58, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

There is no hard-and-fast rule. Try to include the least necessary. If you still overdo it, someone will point that out. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:14, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. SolderUnion (talk) 21:37, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

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

Does MOS: SANDWICH apply to the taxobox?

 Courtesy link: MOS:SANDWICH

I'm asking because the taxobox can be pretty long sometimes, making it difficult to fit images into relevant sections without sandwiching text between it and the taxobox. Bloopityboop (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Bloopityboop. The answer is "yes, but not rigidly". Looking at articles that use {{taxobox}} there seem to be ways of reducing the impact of such images. Palaeospondylus uses a small image on the left for an image in text affected by the infobox. Oxymonad uses a larger image centered beneath the text to avoid sandwiching the text.the text. That article also uses | image_upright = 0.4 in the taxobox code to narrow the image and thus narrowing the width of the infobox. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Starry. Hey @Peter coxhead would you like to chime in? I know we disagree on this. Bloopityboop (talk) 18:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Well, MOS:SANDWICH is very clear that it applies equally to infoboxes. If you have to reduce the size of the image to 40% in order to avoid significant sandwiching, I would say that is undesirable, writing as one of those who are elderly and have less acute sight. If it's really important that an image is placed at a specific point in the text, then one solution is to use a gallery with just that image, which centres the image with no surrounding text. Peter coxhead (talk) 06:25, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Infobox death indication

Following this discussion about the infobox at Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The situation is: in a conflict infobox, someone under "Commanders and leaders" is dead, and it's unclear how to label them. Their cause of death per the Russian government would be under natural causes ( #), but sources question the reliability of the Russian government's attribution. Other symbols I see (here) are also for specific causes of death. Is there a generic way to label dead people in the infobox when the cause of death is unclear? Placeholderer (talk) 18:34, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Looking at the discussion, † is not usable, as well as #. I would suppose something like a footnote, or just a simple (deceased) next to his name might work, as I could not find a template appropriate enough, because the cause of death is disputed. All that is needed is a reference. Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 12:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Guitarist article

Hi to all,

Does this meet notability under WP:MUSICBIO or need trimming/structure changes before going live: User:Ivhutt/Oz Noy Ivhutt (talk)?

Much appreciated, Ivhutt. Ivhutt (talk) 18:40, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Ivhutt. To me, your lead section comes across as name-dropping. A musician does not become notable simply by playing alongside more famous musicians. Please read WP:NAMEDROPPING. Cullen328 (talk) 18:59, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

I think @Cullen328 was suggesting you read WP:NAMEDROP. Bazza 7 (talk) 19:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Cullen328, for clarification. Ivhutt (talk) 20:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

And thank you, Bazza. I'm reading it. Ivhutt (talk) 20:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

The longer link was red, but I have now made it a redirect to the same target. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Andy Mabbett. When you have a moment, I’d appreciate your thoughts on whether listing multiple Iridium appearances to demonstrate the recurrence of performances is effective or comes across as clumsy. Thank you. Ivhutt (talk) 14:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

I have no opinion on the matter. I'm not clear why you singled me out to answer. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:27, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I was going back and forth on this, but was lead by John Scofield's and Nir Felder's articles. Should I keep fewer collaborations or drop them altogether? I do think too muchh is too much, but being involved repeatedly with the "best out there" also gives credence to your own proficiency. Thank you. Ivhutt (talk) 19:03, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Cullen328. Ivhutt (talk) 20:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, that article has decent sourcing and the guy is probably notable by our standards, but the namedropping throughout is a bit offputting. Drmies (talk) 19:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

The full name is Wikipedia:Meaningful examples in pop culture. Cullen328 (talk) 19:04, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Drmies. I'm on it. Ivhutt (talk) 19:05, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Sure thing, Ivhutt. And follow my lead in that copy edit I made. The hard part is that for a lot of sidemen (you know that's in large part what he is) there's not always a lot of biography to write cause you don't have the sources to write actual text, so do the best you can--if you can write a paragraph of uncontroversial biography based on a mediocre source, that's still better, because then you have a body in which you can incorporate the better sources that merely say "he plays a nice solo on this woman's album", you know? Looks more like writing, less like namedropping. Good luck. I love Mike Stern by the way. Drmies (talk) 19:08, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Wait you're affiliated with the guy? Ask him for the newspaper articles, not just the reviews. Drmies (talk) 19:09, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks again, Drmies. I am affiliated with him (and declared it) and I do have physical magazines, tons of them, mostly abviously guitar-related (Guitar Player, Premier Guitar, Guitar World, Guitar Technique, Vintage Guitar, Guitarist, etc, aside from Relix, Downbeat, AllAboutJazz,...). I tried to include the most notable sources (Boston Globe, NYT, LAT, New Yorker).

Your reasoning makes complete sense to me. I will do what you suggested. Ivhutt (talk) 19:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Ivhutt, I would like to offer some additional suggestions. First of all, a reference is not necessarily better just because the source is widely famous. In this particular case, a reference to in-depth coverage in Guitar World is vastly more useful than a brief passing mention in the New York Times. On to your mention of modeling your draft on two other articles, please note that John Scofield is a start-class article and Nir Felder is a stub-class article tagged as having significant problems. Using such articles as models is roughly analogous to copying the work of a C student and a flunking student. Instead, you should model articles on Good articles and Featured articles. Vince Gill is a Good article and Jimi Hendrix is a Featured article. Cullen328 (talk) 02:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Cullen328. This is very valuable because I was going back and forth between more extensive articles on the subject vs "the bigger the name". I also see that Bill Frisell has a problematic WIKI article. I also appreciate the humor in your analogy. I'll be observing the A-students in Hendrix and Gil. I'll retouch the Oz Noy article with this in mind. Ivhutt (talk) 14:44, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I revised the draft to minimize name-dropping and focused instead on a narrative approach. Reviews and press coverage are consolidated in the Reception section, with an emphasis on in-depth sources over passing mentions. I’ve been mindful of notability standards throughout—though I'm still unsure how to effectively collapse the recurring Iridium dates to demonstrate consistency. I used articles on Hendrix and Gil as structural models, and looked to Wayne Krantz’s page as a stylistic reference, since he's a closer contemporary (and his article avoids overstatement). I’d really appreciate your thoughts, if you have a moment. Thank you. Ivhutt (talk) 00:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey, Cullen328. I believe I fixed it. Would you mind checking if you find a moment? I'd really appreciate it. (I replied before but forgot to add your name to the response) Ivhutt (talk) 03:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Ivhutt, I think that you have significantly improved the draft. Nice work. Cullen328 (talk) 04:30, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

how to deal with arrogance and unwillingness to answer questions?

Someone inserted tags into 2 of my articles, i went to his discussion-site and asked friendly what he didn't find sufficient... he deleted my post and didn't answer. I asked again, why he is so unfriendly, he deleted my post again and didn't answer. I now deleted his tags because it is only his personal opinion - but i'm very frustrated. What is wrong with editors here, if they are unfriendly on purpose??? Why then do they at all "work" in my articles? I find this a very disturbing experience and wished one could do something about the behaviour of this editor. Naomi Hennig (talk) 23:22, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Naomi Hennig, that editor was fully entitled to delete your message without answering it -- but it does seem an odd thing to do. You asked politely enough; surely your question merited at least a laconic response. The editor also made minor improvements to the one article I looked at. (Both articles are easy to find from your list of contributions.) I think that yes, in some ways the article does resemble a résumé. This is not a condemnation of the article or even of some of its sections; I've made first suggestions in Talk:Regine Schumann#Like_a_résumé?. -- Hoary (talk) 00:45, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

The editor may have been "entitled", but he is treating me as if i was not even worth an anwer. I'm writing for wikipedia for more than ten years, and i deserve to be treated well and not as if i was a criminal. Noone ever complained about my lists of exhibitions - shouldn't that have been done when i posted the articles? I really don't like that way he treats me AT ALL. We do have a policy here to be friendly to each other and believe that the other person is good-willing, and i really don't understand at all, why a person whom i don't know and have never ever spoken to is out of no reason treating me as if i committed the most terrible crime. I'm absolutely not used to being treated like this - and i find it VERY unpleasant.

And this being said, i'm extremely thankful that you gave me hints to what seems to be wrong and what i could do differently and i will have a deeper look into it and try to make it better. But, also to tell the truth, i'm sitting here crying. I am a person just as this doubledoublex2 and i deserve to be treated in a friendly manner!!! I'm very, very, very upset by the way he behaves. I'm writing for wikipedia for more than ten years, i have written really good articles (like the one he now again put such a tag on) and i don't know, why i'm being a. the goal of this actions and b. why he treats me with so much condemnation - because it that what he does! Naomi Hennig (talk) 13:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

And again i just got an unfriendly answer by an administrator (not you!). Why is this being done to me. I'm a kind person, i'm polite, i do ask what did i do wrong, and just because i didn't write Wikipedia with a capital W -he admonishes me. Do admins in general not find it important to be friendly? I just don't get all this arrogance and aggression towards me. We have a conduct of behaviour, doesn't it apply to admins too??? Why this strange behaviour? I just wanted to learn how to do things better, but as nooone behalve you gives me a chance to do so, i'm very sad at the moment. I have not deserved to be treated like this! I'm a human being just as this admin. I just don't get this behaviour towards me. Not at all... and it's a very sad experience.

Naomi Hennig (talk) 13:20, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

From the Conduct of Behavior: "In all Wikimedia projects, spaces and events, behaviour will be founded in respect, civility, collegiality, solidarity and good citizenship." - respect, civility, collegiality, solidarity - i did not experience that from two contributors, only from Hoary. Naomi Hennig (talk) 21:20, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Biography of Cartoonist review

I submitted the following page for review User:Sloggatt/sandbox

Originally I Submitted this and they moved it to drafts and then deleted because of lack of citations. I have created this one to only include the cited information from the New York Times as well as readily available Veterans information and have included references. Can someone experienced take a look and move to the main page after review? Sloggatt (talk) 01:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Sloggatt, I was the editor that converted your page to a draft here. I did this, to quote the template I used, because it needs more sources to establish notability, you may have a possible conflict of interest (based on your username), and one of the sources is written by the subject's son. There are also some tips on what Wikipedia calls WP:Reliable sources left here on your user talk page. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 05:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I dont agree with this at all - its getting frustrating working within wikipedia - My Grandfather's cartoons appeared several times a week in the 2nd most widely circulated newspaper in the country in the late 50's and 60's - he was nominated for a Pulitzer prize - most people in America at that time had seen his cartoons. I have a personal archive of over 500 original cartoons that were published. I called the Library of Congress in NYC and they verified all the Daily Mirror papers are on record there with Art Sloggatt's cartoons. The Daily Mirror went out of business so the archives and references online are minimal but they do exist in the LOC. These are historical facts I have no conflict of interest and am not trying to misrepresent him in any way. Sloggatt (talk) 15:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I understand how frustrating this may be- Wikipedia has a lot of very specific rules. Writing an article is one of the hardest tasks a newcomer here can do. However, you do have a conflict of interest by Wikipedia's standards, because you're related to him, and must send your drafts through the Articles for Creation process. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 03:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

@Sloggatt, Sorry to confuse you. I was the editor who reviewed the current page. I don't know who deleted the old one. The page was not deleted, I am not sure what you mean. It was declined, mainly for not showing that Sloggatt met the criteria for biographies. Another requirement is significant coverage, the NYT article alone wouldn't satisfy this. The vet memorial is great but still not enough by itself. His late wife's obituary wouldn't help establish his wiki-notability. I hope that makes it clearer. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:42, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Sloggatt, no article, draft or other page written by you (as "Sloggatt") has ever been deleted. You seem to have abandoned your creation Draft:Arthur Hastings Sloggatt. -- Hoary (talk) 01:48, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

_{@Hoary, Thank you! Checking the page history it seems they meant it got moved to the draft space. Best, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:50, 7 May 2025 (UTC)}

At Draft:Arthur Hastings Sloggatt and needs more refs. David notMD (talk) 15:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

How do I request a scope change

I want to request a scope change for List of lakes to make it into List of lakes by country. This is because a Lists of lakes already exists, it is much more comprehensive than this list and this list doesn't really offer anything. Easternsahara (talk) 03:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

List of lakes states "This list of lakes includes those which are among the largest by area, depth, volume, or have cultural or environmental significance." Each country listed has a link to more detailed lists of lakes. The list of lakes is not in a very good state right now, but that can be improved. I imagine it is just in an awkward state because it would be strange to have no broad article called "list of lakes"... considering that list of rivers redirects to lists of rivers maybe it would be better to just redirect the list of lakes to lists of lakes. List of lakes by area, list of lakes by depth, list of lakes by salinity, and list of lakes by volume also exist. -- Reconrabbit 14:19, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I agree, I want to redirect List of lakes to Lists of lakes and create a different page which is List of lakes by country. I do not think that this move will be particularly controversial, but what is the process of requesting a page with content to become a redirect? Easternsahara (talk) 18:33, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Do you want to a) start fresh with List of lakes by country or b) reuse and edit the current content of List of lakes for it?

For option (a), you're probably looking for WP:BLAR for converting List of lakes to a redirect, and then you can just create a new page for the by country list. For option (b), you'll want to read WP:MOVE. After the move, you can change where the redirect points to, and will want to update incoming links, which you can find using the what links here tool for the article.

For either path, you have the option of being WP:BOLD if you think the move will be thoroughly uncontroversial, or discussing first on the talk page if you think objections are likely. -- Avocado (talk) 18:51, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Easternsahara (talk) 19:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

A Disruptive Editor

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

---

User @Reeshavp is appending honorifics to the names of several college and university chancellors, presidents, and other esteemed figures. Despite prior warnings and further advisories, they persist in this inappropriate practice. As evidenced by their recent edit made on May 7, 2025 and majority of their edits, their disregard for warnings must be addressed and rectified. VeritasVanguard: "Seeking truth in every edit" 03:58, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

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

BLP Notability for Noa Fay

Does Noa Fay pass a notability "sniff test"?

WP:Three are:

• How a Jewish student at Columbia became an icon of a movement
• Temple Sinai Stirred by Columbia Univ. Student Leader
• How an unstoppable Black Jewish woman from Brookline became a voice for Israel

Background/Views can be pulled from [1] [2][3]. BLP + I/P + an activist is always going to be contentious, so I wanted some extra input. FortunateSons (talk) 09:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

In my opinion, Noa Fay appears to meet a notability standard under the guidelines or policies like WP:BLP1E and WP:PUBLICFIGURE.I found that the sources are reliable and independent which provide significant coverage about her activism and role. I also noticed that coverage is not limited to routine or local reporting, but rather ties her to a larger national/international movement. Subject also framed as a representative figure or symbol in broader discourse, not merely an incidental participant.I also assume that, people may see this differently, but based on what’s available, I think she’s notable enough.Thank You! Fade258 (talk) 13:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

That sounds very good, thank you for the help! FortunateSons (talk) 14:21, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

FortunateSons: most of the sources you cite above are based on what the subject said, and so are not independent of the subject and do not help to establish wikinotability. So you're going to need to find at least one better source, with independent discussion of her. (Her status as an activist is irrelevant to the issue of notability.) Maproom (talk) 15:22, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I might be wrong here, but I think that by my interpretation of WP:INDEPENDENT, much of Forward and AJT, and decent parts of the JJ source are independent (except, obviously, the paraphrasing/quotes). Could you elaborate on why you believe they might not be? FortunateSons (talk) 15:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

In the Forward source, thirteen of the twenty paragraphs quote Fay's own words. The article is clearly based on an interview with her. So that source is not independent of Fay. Wikipedia wants to know what others have said about her, not what she has said. Maproom (talk) 15:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

What about content like this? For what it’s worth, I do believe the other 7 paragraphs constitute sigcov from an independent source, as an interview does not prevent the general independence of the article. FortunateSons (talk) 16:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

For article: 2025 India–Pakistan border skirmishes

Under section Military Events, subsection May 5th, I was wondering if I should go to the talk page and discuss first then wait for others to insert the NPOV tag or do it straight away? I’m a new editor but I want to learn first then do EmiliaPains24 (talk) 15:40, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi EmiliaPains24! That article currently has a level of protection that prevents you from editing it directly. Your best move is to comment at the talk page and describe the issue you're seeing. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:45, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

WikiMedia Public Domain Tag

I have uploaded a copy of a Sanborn Insurance Map available from the Library of Congress, Georgraph and Map Division, Sanborn Maps Collection. The LOC says "The content of the Library of Congress online Sanborn Maps Collection is in the public domain and is free to use and reuse." What is the appropriate tag/licensing to use? It is not PD-old, since the file happens to be from 1944. It is not PD-Gov, since the map was not made by the US government. What do I use? TwoScars (talk) 17:02, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

@TwoScars I'm not an expert on copyright for that sort of source but if you don't get an answer quickly here you should ask at Commons (c:Commons:Village_pump/Copyright) where the experts hang out. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

It would depend why it's in the public domain...did Sandborn release it (or transfer license ownership to LoC who released it), or was it somehow not protected? Commons has a huge collection of them,. I spot-checked the 1940s ones, and they are all in the latter situation, as {{PD-US-no notice}}. If you have a Sandborn map of interest, why not put it on commons so all he wiki sites can share? DMacks (talk) 03:21, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm presuming we're talking about c:File:BlenkoFactory1944InsMap.png that you had already uploaded to commons. That was confusing because your original comment seemed to be talking about something here on enwiki. But anyway, I see that you have now added the no-notice tag. I added the Sanborn cats. DMacks (talk) 04:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Requesting review of proposed edits to article Eduardo Levy Yeyati

Hi! I’m trying to request updates to the article Eduardo Levy Yeyati, but I have a conflict of interest, so I’m not editing it directly. About a month ago, I posted proposed edits on the article’s Talk page ([Talk:Eduardo Levy Yeyati#c-Lolamortola-20250421175100-Proposed updates to the article (COI disclosure)), but haven’t received any response yet.

The edits are factual, well-sourced, and aim to improve accuracy and neutrality. Could an uninvolved editor take a look and consider implementing the changes or giving feedback?

Thanks so much! Lolamortola (talk) 17:02, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Lolamortola At Talk:Eduardo Levy Yeyati you have proposed a complete revision of the article without providing any references to support the new information. To have any potential for success, in a series of requests, in each one, identify what needs to be changed and propose the new content with references. David notMD (talk) 17:34, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

An editor replaced the existing article with your proposed content. I reversed this because your proposed content had no references!!! Instead, it is now back to the earlier version with 20 references. David notMD (talk) 17:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

You'd likely have received a quicker response if you'd have used the {{Edit COI}} edit request template, as explained at WP:MAKINGEREQ, Lolamortola. Also, just to note that Tom.Reding won't have received a notification of your mention of them here because you didn't sign your comment (see WP:MENTION). Cordless Larry (talk) 18:11, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

How should I proceed with strong suspicion of group of people trying to promote nationalistic agenda

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

---

Hi,

I have a strong suspicion of a group of people that are editors for years and they truly contribute in Wikipedia but at the same time promote nationalistic narrative in a very sneaky way. How should I proceed SolderUnion (talk) 17:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

For context, are you referring to whatever's going on at Talk:Ancient Macedonians? GoldRomean (talk) 19:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Am I allowed to post talk pages that have independently see a pattern of promoting nationalistic narrative?I ask because I got caution when I post it on talk pages. At the moment three editors including me have the same observation.This cannot be coincidence. I have to stress that the editors in question participate in wikipedia for many years and truly contribute to the project. What they are doing is very subtle and complex. My understanding is repeated omission to act shows intent. For example there was a mistake. The reference provided didn't correspond to what the article was saying. I corrected it and one of them reversed the changes. No one objected even if the mistake was obvious. This clearly shows intent. SolderUnion (talk) 19:55, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) SolderUnion, First, read the behavioral guideline WP:Assume good faith. Talking about other editors behavior, especially in a negative way is a sensitive and tricky thing to do, and you are still brand new here, so it is best to avoid that for now. You should start out by locating specific content in one article that you feel promotes a nationalistic narrative, and start a discussion on the Talk page of the article about the *content* in the article, and not the editors. Identify the content you believe is WP:POV, and why you think it is. See how other editors respond to your concerns. Avoid mentioning other editors' names on the Talk page as much as possible, and address your concerns strictly about the article content. You can start a discussion at a second article that has similar problems, If, in time, more senior editors see a pattern of problems in the content of more than one article involving POV editing by the same group of editors, they may address this at user talk pages, or at a WP:WikiProject. An alternative, would be to use the template {{Help me}} on your own Talk page. Good luck, and happy editing! Mathglot (talk) 19:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. SolderUnion (talk) 19:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Note: this is being discussed at ANI: WP:ANI#SolderUnion. --ColinFine (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

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

Request for Draft Review

Hello, helpful editors. Could you take a moment to review my submission:

Draft:Diriba Eticha Tujuba Wieditor25 (talk) 00:54, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Things I may change;
From:
Tujuba earned a Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics with a specialization in leadership communication from Andhra University in India in 2019. He holds a Master of Arts in English from Adama University (2012) and a Bachelor of Arts in Foreign Language and Literature from Hawassa University (2005).
To:
Tujuba has graduated Andhra University in India in 2019 with receiving a Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics along with a specialization in leadership communication. He also holds a Master of Arts in English from Adama University (2012) and a Bachelor of Arts in Foreign Language and Literature from Hawassa University (2005).
From:
Under Tujuba’s leadership, Gambella University has established various international collaborations. In January 2024, the university signed a memorandum of understanding with the Armauer Hansen Research Institute (AHRI) to collaborate on research related to indigenous medicinal plants and communicable diseases.^[4]

Further partnerships were initiated with ICCS College of Engineering and Management in Kerala, India,^[5] and Hannam University in South Korea, aimed at faculty development and student exchange programs.
To:
During Tujuba’s leadership, Gambella University has established various international collaborations. In January 2024, the university signed a memorandum of understanding with the Armauer Hansen Research Institute (AHRI) to collaborate on research related to indigenous medicinal plants and communicable diseases.^[4]

Further partnerships were initiated with ICCS College of Engineering and Management in Kerala, India,^[5] and Hannam University in South Korea, aimed at faculty development and student exchange programs.
Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 01:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

It looks as though you have already submitted it to be looked at! Good things come with patience. (It looks good to me though.) MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 01:20, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much for checking it out! I appreciate your kind feedback and your time. Wieditor25 (talk) 01:25, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

@Wieditor25 I think that the current draft will struggle to show that Tujuba is notable as an academic. Your current citations 3 to 5 cover things the university did but do not provide significant coverage of him. I suspect that your main citation to a biography at a blockchain conference was written by him, so is not independent. That can be OK for uncontroversial information but does not help to show notability. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:52, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Grammar

I might just have bad grammar, but why is it, for example, usually The American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift instead of American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift? Is this a grammar or style issue? Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 02:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

I think it's a primarily a style issue, not a grammar issue. Grammatically, both phrases are correct. The choice depends on context and emphasis. Fade258 (talk) 02:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Good question, GoldRomean. "American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift" is an "anarthrous" noun phrase: "an occupational term [American singer-songwriter] is used with no determiner [but here, modified by American] as a bare role [noun phrase] premodifier of a proper name [Taylor Swift]". A comment on this: "It is true that noun phrases like fertilizer salesman Scott Peterson are found in newspaper articles (in fact John Cowan points out to me that it is a well-known feature of the style associated with Time magazine), but I have never yet found anyone but Dan Brown using this construction to open a work of fiction. The construction sounds to me like the opening of an obituary rather than an action sequence. It's not ungrammatical; it just has the wrong feel and style for a novel." Source for all of that: Geoffrey K. Pullum, "Renowned author Dan Brown staggered through his formulaic opening sentence", Language Log, 7 November 2004. It still sounds odd to me, but over the last twenty years it has undoubtedly become a lot more widely used. -- Hoary (talk) 12:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! It mostly makes sense now. GoldRomean (talk) 13:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

See also the article False title. I despise people who omit "the" in these. :) Deor (talk) 12:37, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

WP Search bar issues

Hey so not sure if this is the right place to post this, but there seems to be an issue/glitch with the Wikipedia search bar. After trying to type Terence Crawford's name into the search bar, his suggested page does not show up. The same could be said for Junto Nakatani. Both were coming up in the search bar fine yesterday so I’m thinking maybe there’s some sort of glitch? Any help would be appreciated, thanks. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 02:32, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

@GOAT Bones231012 Both are working fine for me now. Looking for Terence Crawford gives four options as suggestions, as well as the standard "Search for pages containing..." Is that what you see now? Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:40, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, both are coming up fine now for me too, thanks. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 12:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

How do I separate my userboxes, and how do I make it collapsible?

Currently working on finally tidying up my user page, may I ask how I can make the userbox tab collapsible, whether I can also split it into different sections(and also if I can make those sections collapsible). If you want, just be bold and tidy it up for me, as that would be greatly appreciated.

Thehistorianisaac (talk) 02:38, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

@Thehistorianisaac, To make it collapsible maybe try using Template:Userboxgroup. It already has it built in. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 11:30, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Ok thanks Thehistorianisaac (talk) 12:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm introducing myself as a new member

Since I forgot not only the password but also the username of the previous account, and even the e-mail was not connected to it, I had to create this new one. I'd like to correct the errors or typos mainly. You can see my talk page. Upset New Bird (talk) 03:54, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

@Upset New Bird Welcome. Creating a new account is fine if you have lost access to a previous one. Standard advice is to do a bit of detective work: try to think of some articles you previously edited, and when. Look in their edit histories and see if you recognise your edits. If you do, mention your old account name on your current user page, to explain the situation. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:34, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: I forgot even my old account name completely. Oh my! Upset New Bird (talk) 10:48, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Then your choice of a new User name is appropriate. Happy editing! David notMD (talk) 11:49, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Is this a known problem?

When I view any article on mobile, whether logged in or logged out, I see the languages button near the upper left. When I click on it, it has my suggested languages (English and Simple English) but it always says "Missing in English", which I believe is supposed to link to the Content Translation interface. Obviously, if I'm already on English Wikipedia, the article is not missing in English. Is anyone else seeing this error, and was it reported somewhere? TagUser (talk) 05:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Question

So i decided to asking that, i want to translate to Vietnamese in summary and in this File but it's said "This page is currently protected, and can be edited only by administrators" so could i edit them and im not an adminstrator too ? киска (Wanna Slay ?) 07:43, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello Namngocnghech ("киска"). If you are saying that you want to translate "English: Snooker player Zhao Xintong" (which already appears in c:File:Zhao Xintong_2025.jpg) into Vietnamese and to have the Vietnamese translation added to c:File:Zhao Xintong_2025.jpg, then I suggest that you create a section (perhaps titled "Summary in Vietnamese") in c:File talk:Zhao Xintong 2025.jpg and post your Vietnamese-language summary there. -- Hoary (talk) 09:00, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

@Namngocnghech The file is protected currently because the article about him is linked on the English mainpage. If you wait until Zhao Xintong is no longer in the "in the news" section you should find that the file goes back to standard protection and you should be able to add your translation for its caption then. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:25, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Adding 'filler' info to swimming events - unsure of policy to use - WP:MOS?

I read a lot of articles on swimming races on Wikipedia. When it comes to an Summer Olympic event, none of them in the past will start the lead by telling you how many laps of a 50m pool that the race will take. Maybe because it is not necessary and is just filler info. Most people know basic math that a 200m freestyle race will mean 4 laps of a 50m Olympic pool. Yet recently an editor added into articles - Swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Women's 100 metre freestyle and also, Swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Men's 100 metre freestyle that those races requires 2 laps in a 50m Olympic pool in the lede. I just think this is unnecessary filler info that isn't suited for a lede that's meant to summarize only the most notable facts. Also it dumbs the article down as if it's accommodated for kindergartners. I made a talk thread - [1] However I have to admit that despite I think it's filler info, I am not 100 percent sure what policy it violates. I do think it goes against Wp:Mos specifically - [2] and that we don't do this for any other Olympic swimming race articles ever but unsure of what policy exists to not allow unnecessary details that most sports readers of these articles don't need to be told about in lede. I already removed them by calling it as filler or unnecessary info. IP49XX (talk) 11:28, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Text doesn't necessarily have to be an explicit violation of policy to be removed. That it's not really helpful to an encyclopedic article about the event would be enough to argue for its removal. You went ahead and boldly removed the text (and I agree with you that it's kinda silly since we don't do that kind of basic aside in the lede for any other sporting event) and included your explanation why. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 14:41, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Are 200m freestyle races always 4 laps of a 50m pool, or are they sometimes 2×100m, or 8×25m? I don't know, and I doubt "most people" do. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:09, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

This is a Commons Wikimedia Question

I've found two images that are a Copyvio 1 2 and i don't know how to delete them off Commons. Can anyone help? 1timeuse75 (talk) 13:32, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

@1timeuse75 See c:Commons:Deletion_policy for the options and tags to use. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Another solution, if you ever see more, you could install a tool such as Twinkle for CSDing images as well, but if you are a beginner, using the Deletion Policy is quicker. Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 13:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for helping! 1timeuse75 (talk) 14:25, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

I was going to request an article for an album which has some notability, but found it was already a redirect to the band's page, what do I do?

The article is Return to the Kingdom of Fife which currently redirects to the band that made it, Gloryhammer. However, to keep it in line with the rest of the albums, I believe it should be it's own page. How should I go about requesting that? It has some media coverage, but I don't know how much it needs. Sanemero the Robot Prince (not really, it's a Gloryhammer reference) 14:23, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

You can create your article in your sandbox, then copy it over the contents of the redirect when you are ready.

Or you may prefer to create it in WP:DRAFT space and submit it for review using the WP:AFC process, and whoever publishes it will replace the redirect for you.

A third option is to expand the relevant section of the existing article on the band, then copy the material to the new article when ready. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Article series boxes missing articles

Hi there,

I’ve noticed several histories of English cities are missing from the English history article series box. Is there any way I can add the missing ones, particularly big places like Luton? Or is there a reason Luton is missing? It doesn’t look substantially worse than History of Nottingham or some of those which are included on the article series box. Me.Autem.Minui (talk) 14:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Should add - good at trawling old history books to add new info and just about worked out references but I’m a bit technically dim so sorry if this is very basic stuff Me.Autem.Minui (talk) 14:57, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

You're referring, I think, to Template:History of England; and yes, you are encouraged to be bold! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:07, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks enormously, that’s exactly the one. I also noticed the English Reformation missing which when I was at school was big news. We’ll see if the collective mind of Wikipedians agree. Thanks again. Me.Autem.Minui (talk) 15:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)