Wikipedia:Teahouse

Nick Moyes, 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.

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

Need help with hurricane ike part

So um in the Infobox for Hurricane Ike (2008) does not have the hurricane ike related part like for example: effects of Hurricane Ike in Texas or for short Texas (effects) and effects of Hurricane Ike in inland North America or Inland North America for Short (effects) and wikimedia commmons ike images. Hypercyclone 2 (talk) 14:06, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

it does have effects in Texas and inland north America but not in infobox area. Hypercyclone 2 (talk) 14:07, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Hypercyclone 2. I'm sorry that no one has responded to your question yet. Are there other articles that have those features in the infobox that you could point to to help me understand your query better? Cordless Larry (talk) 07:05, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Climate Farmers and Philippe Birker

Hey all,

big fan of Wikipedia and I would love to add my organization and potential myself on here, how do I go about that?

I have reliable sources such as Forbes, Euronews, or Vogue Business who interviewed me and I also appeared in a German documentary on SWR and on Portuguese TV on RTP2 in Biosfera.

I also spoke at many larger events such as COP 27 and Cop 29 or Change Now or the Global Fashion Summit and was selected as Obama Leader this year, would that be enough for an article?

Really appreciate any help or pointers here.

Thanks! Philippebirker (talk) 19:32, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

If you really feel you must, you need better sources to demonstrate that you or your organization are notable. Interviews don't count, no matter who publishes them. Appearances in media don't count. Speaking engagements don't count.

Read Wikipedia:Golden Rule. If you don't have multiple sources that meet all three criteria, then my advice is, don't even try.

This is why editors are strongly discouraged to write about themselves on Wikipedia, or to write about topics with which they have a conflict of interest.

If you're interested in building an encyclopedia, stay and help improve existing articles. If your purpose is publicity, then you're in the wrong venue. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:54, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Please use the active voice AppleFellow (talk) 17:48, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Um, what? I thought I was. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Philippebirker. I'm afraid I echo what Anachronist says.

In my experience, people who join Wikipedia, and immediately try to create an article, usually have a frustrating and disappointing experience. Sometimes, they eventually manage to create an article that gets accepted, usually after days and weeks of trying to understand the advice they have been given.

Often they don't succeed - and in many cases, they never had any hope of succeeding, because they aren't aware that Wikipedia has a minimum standard called notability which the subject of any article must meet; and, further, that "notability" in Wikipedia's sense is not about what they have done or produced, or said, or created, and not about whether they are popular, or famous, or influential, or benificent, but mostly about whether there is enough reliably published material wholly independent of them and their associates to base an article on. For most of us, even if we have done some pretty amazing things, that hurdle is simply not passed, and every minute trying to write an article about them is a minute wasted.

And all this is even when there is no conflict of interest. Writing about yourself or your own company is even less likely to be successful, because most of us find it more or less impossible to lay aside absolutely everything we know, or believe, or feel, about ourselves and our activities, and confine ourselves to summarising what somebody else has written about us/them - even if we know they are wrong.

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) 21:53, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

My draft keeps getting declined

I don’t understand why my draft keeps getting declined

 Courtesy link: Draft:Assawongrat Assarangchai

I have attempted to write a draft:assawongrat assarangchai and it gets declined every single time. It was also deleted once and idk how to fix it. I think all the sources are enough to pass since it includes national and international articles, even from the Royal embassy of new York. Idk what to do now, I guess I will give up now Assawongkvin (talk) 01:02, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

You should read these two pages: Wikipedia:autobiography and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. But to keep it short, creation of Autobiography is strongly prohibited on Wikipedia.

Cordially

Jo the fire dragon 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 02:00, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jothefiredragon: that is not (entirely) correct. Creating an autobiography is discouraged, sure, but there is no outright prohibition. @Assawongkvin:, please check your sources (and external links). Right now [1] has a SSL error and everything else 404's. That is not permitted. We need, at a minimum, the (working) sources nessesary to establish wiki-notability under WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC, plus enough sources to verify everything else in the draft. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:57, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for the clarification. Many celebrities and people in my country hire other people to do it, but I don’t want to spend money on that stuff because I think I am capable of doing it myself and I am trying to make it neutral as much as possible. Right now I am confused, because all my links are clickable, this morning that I checked it was still fine. I think someone must’ve changed all my links or deleted them, and in very new here and have 0 experience in editing, I will try to paste the links again but could you pls give me some advice, because I don’t want my links to be deleted again, is there any way to prevent that. Thankyou so much. I actually like editing, but I’m new abd don’t want to messs up, and I want to know every single step in editing, so u chose to edit myself first before trying to edit other people’s. I hope you understand and I hope I can be a small part in contributing to Wikipedia. Thankyouuuu Assawongkvin (talk) 08:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I’m not sure if this is the case but someone edited my thing and reverted some paragraphs, and cut out some words, idk I have no knowledge about this. Assawongkvin (talk) 08:45, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Assawongkvin That's fine. Almost all articles in Wikipedia can be edited by almost anyone at any time, and that includes drafts. That's how Wikipedia works. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:56, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyouuu I’m trying my best to edit. Btw, I can’t put my birthday in there, my birthday is (Redacted) Assawongkvin (talk) 09:11, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Assawongkvin, I would also like to tell you that writing articles about minors is especially risky and doesn't happen too often here. It isn't prohibited per se, but it's not common. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 13:18, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see the advice you were given at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1262#I can’t successfully create an article about an artist I like., where you were referred to WP:NMUSICIAN. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:52, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Additionally, when citing YouTube, please use the full www.youtube.com/watch?v=... URL, not the youtu.be shortcut. The shortcut is blacklisted, while the full URL's almost never are. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou, but now Wikipedia told me that they would not accept my request smt COI idk, because it’s an autobiography, should I delete this one and create a new account, or get someone experienced to help me? I am very grateful for all your advices Thankyou verymuch Assawongkvin (talk) 13:08, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I wouldn't do that if I were you. That could be Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry, so look into it. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 13:20, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok Thankyouuu so much, sorry to ask again, if I go in the talk page I could ask u questions directly right about some advices Assawongkvin (talk) 13:52, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I am not quite sure of what I should do now. I think the sources are above the standard but I’m not a native speaker and I don’t think I have the ability to make a Wikipedia page on my own, sad. Assawongkvin (talk) 13:55, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Is it possible if someone edited my thing my Wikipedia draft to make it prettier and maybe pass, that would be very helpful, because I have tried many times on my own and failed, but pls don’t remove the links guiding to the source. Thankyou sooo muchhhhh, or maybe give me some advice. Assawongkvin (talk) 13:56, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I assume your native language is Thai, so why not use the sources you already have to create an article in that language? Here on the English Wikipedia, we don't need drafts to be "pretty" but we do need them to pass our notability guidelines for musicians. Also, now that you have revealed you are having difficulties drafting your autobiography, beware that someone may attempt to WP:SCAM you by suggesting they can create a suitable article for money. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:27, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou so much for warning me, I will be aware Assawongkvin (talk) 14:59, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I have asked the good people at Wikipedia:WikiProject Thailand to take a look. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:14, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou so much, does that mean they would come and see my draft ??? Assawongkvin (talk) 15:24, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hopefully. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:32, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou soooo much, this is going to help me a lot, I am grateful for receiving so much kindness and help. Thankyou, hopefully one day if I’m better at editing I will do the same for other people in need too. Assawongkvin (talk) 15:40, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I looked at it, and declined it. It looks like you used an AI to generate the text. It would never be accepted that way. Due to the copyright license used by Wikipedia, all contributions must be attributable to an individual editor. It is impossible to comply with this license if an AI wrote it. You need to use your own words. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:43, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I first drafted the whole thing on my own, but because I’m not a native speaker, some of my grammar and those stuff are not completely right, so I asked Ai to help me correct the grammar and make it as neutral as possible, what should I do Assawongkvin (talk) 15:47, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

The tone and emphasis do not appear neutral. AI is biased toward emphasizing the positive; it does not know how to write neutrally even if individual words are "neutral". You were warned that getting an autobiography published isn't going to be easy.

English is a flexible language because you can convey a thought with bad grammar and others can still understand it, and it's easily corrected. It would have been fine for you to use an AI to correct each sentence without changing the content or rearranging anything. Poor grammar is easy to correct. It is much harder to correct tone and emphasis when the grammar is good.

Your own words are always preferable. Grammar can be cleaned up if the meaning is clear enough. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:16, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh I see, but with the sources I provide is it possible for anyone to help me out, I’m really out of ways (I’m very sorry to waste your time) Assawongkvin (talk) 16:34, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Is your original draft still in the history, or did you do that off Wikipedia? If you can go through it and substitute back your words, retaining the sources and citations, I can help with the grammar. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:17, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately no, I did that on Wikipedia and got deleted once, so I did it on cat got and let it change my grammar automatically. Sad Assawongkvin (talk) 16:30, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I hope u understand what I’m going trough Assawongkvin (talk) 16:30, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Assawongkvin, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm sorry, but what you are going through is exactly what hundreds and hundreds of people go through when they come to Wikipedia and immediately try to create an article - and even more so when that article is about themselves or something they do.

Why is it so important to you that this article get accepted? If it's that you want to be on Wikipedia in order to advance your career, then what you are here for is promotion - which is forbidden anywhere in Wikipedia.

Another thing to realise about an article about you is that you might not like it, but you will not have any control over it: see WP:PROUD.

My advice would be to leave this. If you want to be a Wikipedia editor, then choose some subjects that interest you, and see if you can improve existing articles about those subject. If you are not interested in being a Wikipedia editor, and you are only trying this to help your career, then leave it and go and do that on other outlets. ColinFine (talk) 18:08, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

The thing is, I think that draft has potential, the subject seems notable, it just needs work. I'm willing to clean up bad grammar but it's much more work to rewrite AI slop. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:02, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I’m struggling rn, I need help

Draft: Assawongrat Assarangchai

Hi, I’m struggling rn, although I got plenty of advice and help, my draft still didn’t make it through, I’m going to share to u every single detail and I hope u will understand me more. So I am very new to Wikipedia and very want to edit in here, but I don’t know how, so I started by writing about myself (to test) (but seems like I’m not capable of editing ) before editing other people. The first time I tried, it got declined saying that my writing is not professional and not ethical, so I had to do it all over again. The second time, someone removed my whole sandbox and said that autobiography is prohibited. So I had to start from zero again (note that I had to wait for weeks to be reviewed). Now I didn’t want the same mistake to happen again so I asked AI to correct my grammar mistakes and help me make it neutral, this time it passed into the draft session and later on got declined, saying that I can’t use Ai, and (there were plenty that were declined by numerous reasons but this is just an example). Now idk what to do now, I think I tried so hard and wanted to become a part of this community since many people had given me hope, advice telling me to do this to that, change the links, which really helped me, for now it almost passed the notability standard but I don’t think my English level skills are capable of writing an article that professionally, I just hope if someone could lend me a hand by helping me edit or helping me out of this situation that would be very helpful. I don’t even know what to do now. Again Thankyouuu all very much for ur support and this community means a lot to me. Assawongkvin (talk) 16:24, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

There is plenty on Wikipedia you can do to help or take part that doesn't involve writing an article from scratch - which is probably the hardest thing you could choose to do! If you want, you can take a look at our WP:TASKCENTER for a list of things you could help out with. If you want, there is also likely a Wikipedia for whichever language you are fluent in if you feel that would be something easier for you to get started on? CoconutOctopus talk 16:28, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou, I will have a look, do I have to start over again Assawongkvin (talk) 16:31, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I would suggest you completely avoid trying to write an article for now; especially one about yourself, as it is very unlikely you are notable by Wikipedia's standards. CoconutOctopus talk 16:33, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

U mean like stop writing articles in Wikipedia ? Assawongkvin (talk) 16:36, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

But I don’t know anyone in and outside Wikipedia who can directly help me tho, if I can’t write an article are you willing to help me write one, it would help a lot Assawongkvin (talk) 16:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello again, @Assawongkvin. Writing new article is not the only way to contribute to Wikipedia - and for relatively new users, it is certainly not the most effective way to do so.

We have thousands and thousands and thousands of articles that really need some work - expanding them, making the writing clearer, updating them with new information, and, especially, adding citations.

I suggest you either look at the Task center and see if there is anything there that you would like to help with; or else choose an area that interests you and look for articles that need improvement. (You might look through the WikiProjects, and choose one or two of those to work in).

If you do this, be prepared for some of your edits to get reverted, particularly at the start. This is normal, and is how Wikipedia is supposed to work, as each editor has their own view of what should be there, and the end-result we are looking for is a consensus. See WP:BRD for how to work with it. ColinFine (talk) 18:18, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou for your advice, how about my draft, do you want me to just leave it (but it took me so much time and effort to do it though, )or do you mean that someone is going to fix the bugs in my draft while I go and try to edit other people’s draft. Because it was supposed to pass already but now it’s only stuck with the Ai problem. I will try to go through the task center and wiki projects. Thankyou for your advice again. Assawongkvin (talk) 00:04, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Leaving the draft does no harm. If there are no improvements in six months, it will be deleted automatically, but easily restored again with a request at WP:REFUND. Don't worry about it. Take your time improving it. You might want to start by writing it in your own words, the original words you used that you claim were deleted (I couldn't find that deleted version), retaining the sources in the current draft. I'm happy to help with the grammar. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou for giving me a hand, may I please ask you that does my draft have enough potential to pass if I write the whole thing again with my own words…… Assawongkvin (talk) 00:33, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

If it does I will get to work and write it all again after I get back from skl td, thankyouuu Assawongkvin (talk) 00:41, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I think it does have potential, as I stated in the previous section. Besides using your own words, the main thing to remember about sources is WP:Golden Rule (read it, it is short). You need multiple sources (at least three) that are reliable, independent of you, and provide significant coverage of you. Winning notable awards helps, especially if the award already has its own Wikipedia article. Coverage in publications with nationwide readership also helps. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:44, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou so much for giving me hope, I will try my best for the last time and if it does not work I will proceed to the task center Assawongkvin (talk) 00:47, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

I have now read it Thankyouuu. Assawongkvin (talk) 01:03, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

It says that they are not interested in people writing about themselves, so do I have to get someone else to write it for me? Could it be my friends or does it have to be someone I don’t know very much (like you)? But where am I going to find a person to help me tho? Assawongkvin (talk) 01:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

No, "not interested in people writing about themselves" refers to the sources, not your draft. Wikipedia isn't interested in sources that consist of the subject talking about themselves. These would be interviews, recordings of performances, and so on. We want sources that are independent of you.

We understand that your draft is written by you. It would be better if someone who never met you would write it, but you may have to wait a very long time for that to happen. If it is accepted and published, you should not touch it after that, but you can make edit requests on the article talk page. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:29, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok Thankyouuu very much for helping me Assawongkvin (talk) 08:10, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@Assawongkvin: Have you considered writing in the Wikipedia for your native tongue? You'll have an easier time of it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:29, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou, but do I have to start ober Assawongkvin (talk) 16:32, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you should start over by editing other articles and learning how to do so well. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 18:21, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Assawongkvin Writing a new Wikipedia article as a new editor is like trying to perform in an orchestra when you don't know how to play a musical instrument. Do you see how it's generally a bad idea?

Instead, why don't you look at Wikipedia:Task Center which has lots of Wikipedia tasks you can get involved in, which aren't creating new articles. qcne (talk) 18:21, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I will take a look, Thankyouuu very much Assawongkvin (talk) 00:05, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@Assawongkvin also, is the articles subject you? HQIQ (talk) 09:23, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

This is already discussed above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:05, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I have a question, should I put a horizontal picture or a vertical picture in my info box, and how many pictures can we normally put in an article? Thankyou Assawongkvin (talk) 11:39, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I said on my talk page that I think your infobox picture should be cropped to the head and shoulders. It would likely be a portrait format then ("vertical") rather than landscape format ("horizontal") but it doesn't matter which kind of picture is in the infobox. There is no limit to the number of pictures, but a picture in the article should illustrate the nearby text if possible. With a biography, usually it's inappropriate to include more than just the infobox picture. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:26, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou so much, I will find more pictures Assawongkvin (talk) 00:35, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

You missed my point. You don't need more pictures. And the picture you uploaded is in danger of being deleted, because you don't own it, the television program or the photographer owns it. Only they can donate it to the Wikimedia Foundation, not you. You have not provided any evidence of this donation to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Either you must show a document of copyright transfer, or the actual copyright owner (not you) needs to write to Wikimedia to grant permission for re-use. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:05, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I see, but I own the picture, I went to the tc show that day and took it myself on my phone. I avoid taking pictures from the tvshows and try to use the ones I took myself only. Do you suggest me to change a picture again or Assawongkvin (talk) 08:21, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

If you are the photographer, then it's fine. If someone else took the picture, you don't own it. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:10, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia viewing

Hi folks. I'm an avid Wikipedia frequenter and editor (>1K edits) and often use my mobile device to surf the site and/or edit articles. However over the last couple of days I've had a bizarre thing happen to the Wikipedia website display on my phone. The mobile viewing is awful, all of a sudden. It looks like the screen is zoomed out and font sizes appear inconsistent. I have attempted switching between the "Desktop view" and "Mobile view" and there's no respite. The desktop mode is, unsurprisingly, a very zoomed-out, computer screen-esque view. However, so is the mobile view. It's different from the desktop view in a way I cannot explain or articulate adequately but it certainly looks very off and is NOT how the mobile view should look (or looked, before this problem).

Additionally, my display is set to dark mode on my account, so it should reflect the same after logging in, right? Turns out, after logging in, it switches to light mode. I've no idea how that is.

This is an extremely frustrating situation for someone like me who frequents the website almost certainly every day. I have screenshots but I'm unfortunately unable to upload them alongside my inquiry.

Is this a device issue or a Wikipedia issue? Or a mix of both? Is there a fix to this? Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Dissoxciate (talk) 20:09, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Dissoxciate. I think WP:VPT would be a better place to ask this kind of question. ColinFine (talk) 20:35, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I prefer dark mode too, but running the app in dark mode, any blue links are illegible. And I don't even log into the app. It's frustrating. So I use my laptop for Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:47, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Does the mobile view look as if you opened the mobile website on a computer? If so, you may have checked the "Desktop site" option somewhere in your browser settings. What browser do you use? --rchard2scout (talk) 23:22, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Is an image considered a freely licensed file if its used on other wikis?

^ no more information needed Wikiguyamir (talk) 10:03, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

More information is needed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:33, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

@Wikiguyamir: there are any number of wiki-based websites out there, most of which have nothing to do with us, so we clearly couldn't comment on their licensing policies.

Not even every image uploaded to Wikimedia's servers is 'freely licensed' (whatever that means, exactly), as some are used under the so-called fair use policies. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:37, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikiguyamir, yours is a question where no definitive answer is possible. If you mention a specific image and precisely where it is used, then we can give you an answer specific to that image. As a general rule, if you click on an image on a Wikimedia project, you will go to a file information page with information about its licensing. But errors are made on such pages all the time and a large volume of images end up getting deleted because they are improperly licensed. Cullen328 (talk) 15:53, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I have stopped being surprised at the number of images I encounter that claim to be "own work" but are clearly not. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

im asking about this one of kaeng chan, who doesn't have a page that i can take an image from.

(Link:https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fplayschool%2Fimages%2F8%2F83%2FKaeng-Chan-Profile-Pic1.jpg%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20210112123301&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=f0ff8e5c6a747705151f1ec71b39858e6280e5a760bc130fa71cc08169bb46c3) Its from the playschool fandom wiki Wikiguyamir (talk) 20:58, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Source is: https://playschool.fandom.com/wiki/Kaeng_Chan

There is nothing there to say where they got that image from. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:02, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

On that fandom.com link, the licensing information pop-up says "This file is copyrighted. It will be used in a way that qualifies as fair use under US copyright law." That means you cannot upload it to Commons, but you could upload it to Wikipedia for fair-use in an article about Kaeng Chan, which currently doesn't exist. However you may have problems because you don't know where the image actually originated. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:07, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

So, if im allowed to do that, how would I? Wikiguyamir (talk) 21:23, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikiguyamir, since Kaeng Chan is a living person, only freely licensed or public domain images of him are allowed on Wikipedia. Fair-use images of living people are not permitted. Cullen328 (talk) 08:35, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

How long does the edit takes

 Courtesy link: User:Godwinesewie/sandbox

We uploaded an article of a biography today and when can it be published Godwinesewie (talk) 18:36, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Who is this "we" you are referring to?

It cannot be published until a reviewer accepts it, and that won't happen until you fix the problems the reviewer identified. The details are all on your talk page. Read it. Follow the links and read those. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:03, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

When the reviewer said 'entire article in comment' they meant that you don't seem to have drafted the article correctly, you pasted the entire text into the Edit Summary field.

There also don't seem to be any sources for the article.

I suggest looking at some of the resources for helping new editors learn how to edit and getting used to the process before trying to create a new article. Good luck! MilesVorkosigan (talk) 19:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

The article was actually pasted inside an HTML comment that was already there in the default draft template. The draft content was all there in the source, just the closing end of the <!-- ... --> comment tag needed to be moved. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:12, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

If you are Godwin Eseiwi Ehigiamusoe, please see WP:COI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:32, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Godwinesewie, and welcome to the Teahouse.

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) 19:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

How can I get more people to join a WikiProject?

Recently I've been getting more involved with articles about skyscrapers, particularly tallest building lists, on Wikipedia. Most of these articles (especially in non-Western countries) are an absolute mess, and the associated WikiProject, WikiProject Skyscrapers, doesn't appear too active. Besides edits by myself on the project page and its talk page, I saw that both pages have received few edits or interactions. I changed the status from active to semi-active as a result.

While this is possibly a natural result of me having a niche interest that very few other people also share, having more editors involved would definitely make my work easier. All the "tallest building" pages have different standardizations (which is why I updated WP:SKYLIST recently) and any editors who do work on them seem disconnected from any other page, and are probably unaware of the wider WikiProject. I've tried posting to Reddit to boost participation with no result.

What's the best short or long-term way editors have found for reviving a WikiProject? LivinAWestLife (talk) 22:21, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Additionally, a couple of editors who do edit these pages somewhat frequently seem unwilling to communicate. One of them is an IP address editor! Their talk pages are full of other editors chiming in but they themselves have never left edit summaries. Editors like User talk:Camiloj747 never leave edit summaries. For some reason seeing editors not interact with the community irks me. LivinAWestLife (talk) 22:27, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

You could post on the talk pages of "parent" Wikiprojects; in this case Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Architecture.

You could look for featured, or new, articles on Skyscrapers, and post on their talk pages, or on the talk pages of the editors who worked on them. You could post on the talk pages of articles or Wikiprojects about cities with Skyscrapers, such as New York.

For the edit summary issue, you can use {{uw-editsummary}} (for new users) or {{uw-editsummary2}} (for experienced users), on their talk pages (WP:TWINKLE is a handy tool for deploying those, and others). Editors who repeatedly refuse to engage in discussion of disputed edits, to the point of disruption, can be reported at WP:ANI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:07, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Alright, I will try some of those, thanks! LivinAWestLife (talk) 11:29, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the context is that many or most wikiprojects are semiactive or inactive, so reversing the trend at WikiProject Skyscrapers may not be possible. Even Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture is only semi-active. As Pigsonthewing says, it is possible to communicate without using a wikiproject. TSventon (talk) 12:24, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Do you know if there's a reason why WikiProjects have become less active even if the overall number of edits to Wikipedia hasn't declined? LivinAWestLife (talk) 14:01, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

It depends: what do you think the purpose of a WikiProject is, in practical terms? Some WikiProjects have detailed guidelines on how to write articles in their subject area, others use their talk page as a sort of central discussion/help page for their topic, while others are more a list of names of people who are interested in a topic and who you could collaborate with. Interest in each of these types of things waxes and wanes over time. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 00:56, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm thinking of WP:WINE, which started out as a very active Wikiproject and is now a task force under Wikiproject food and drink. The project in its heyday had a lot of activity because wine is a huge topic area, there was a lack of wine-related articles on Wikipedia, and the existing articles were poor quality and needed a lot of development. As the amount of good-quality wine-related content grew, content creation gave way to maintenance. Eventually it languished because people moved on, especially since the main driver for the project left Wikipedia to pursue wine-related career goals. Basically the project served its purpose. I think other wikiprojects experience a similar life cycle. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:59, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Anachronist:, roughly when was the wine project most active? I have been editing Wikipedia for about seven years so I probably missed the golden age of wikiprojects. Annoyingly, Wikipedia:Size of Wikipedia has a gap in word count figures from 2011 to 2017. TSventon (talk) 11:28, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

I'd say the wine project was really active from its beginning around 2006, peaked out over the next couple years and started to taper off around 2009. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:10, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Copyright

So, I'm trying to find the copyright owners of a piece of music, which as I'm sure some of you know, is frustrating beyond belief. But it can be done. But my question is this. Is there a reason why it shouldn't be included in the side panel of the song. For example, Hash Pipe by Weezer. You can see the copyright holders here I believe.

https://api.publicrecords.copyright.gov/search_service_external/copyrights/pdf?copyright_number=SR0000792147

I'm asking because after watching false claims being filed against youtubers for years, who are using fair use provisions within the law, I wanted to know who owns the music. Because in a lot of cases over the past 20 or 30 years, (probably longer, but I'm not well versed in this) the artists have signed their rights to the labels. Not all though. And yes, as a musician, I've done a fair bit of research into this subject, as it directly affects me, and don't really want to get into the nuance of copyright, just want to find the copyright holders easily.

Is this something that can be done? Or is there some policy that says we can't? It doesn't make sense to me why this information shouldn't be included on these pages, as it is publicly available information. (see above link) Thx Mandlerex (talk) 00:43, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

One problem I foresee is that ownerships of anything from individual songs to entire catalogues can be, and are, sold and bought not infrequently, so it would be a considerable task to keep such information up to date on Wikipedia, probably one that far outstrips Wikipedia's (entirely volunteer) editorial resources.

Wikipedia is not meant to serve as a catalogue or directory, and there are commercial / public service organisations that keep track of this sort of information: In my view (FWIW) we should leave it to them. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.150.115 (talk) 02:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Andy Kuper updates

Hi all, I’m Melissa, this is my first time engaging on Wikipedia and I wanted to ask the community for some guidance. I recently submitted some suggested updates to the Andrew Kuper article (CEO at LeapFrog Investments) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Andrew_Kuper) to bring it up to date. As an employee of LeapFrog and therefore someone with a conflict of interest, I’m keen not to make these updates myself but would appreciate any help and guidance members can offer. Thank you! Fininc (talk) 08:10, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Fininc Thank you for making a disclosure and the edit request: since there are 257 edit requests waiting for review you'll have to be patient and wait for a volunteer editor to evaluate your request. qcne (talk) 08:50, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

AfC draft declined

 Courtesy link: Draft:Michael Mezz

Hi! I submitted an AfC draft which was just declined. Based on the feedback I understand why this was the case which is why I won't be resubmitting a draft, but one of the commenters mentioned that my subject would be banned from re-creation. I would really appreciate if someone would be able to explain why this is the case? Leed66 (talk) 14:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Leed66 I'm not sure where these comments you are referencing are. It seems that you just need to improve the article before resubmission from my end. Please do link this for me. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 14:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

hi @MallardTV, here's the link Here's the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Michael_Mezz Leed66 (talk) 14:44, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Leed66 I found the article on my own, I just don't see where it's "banned from recreation." MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 14:48, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@MallardTV sorry for the confusion! that comment was left on my user talk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Leed66 Leed66 (talk) 14:52, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Leed66 That doesn't say that the biography will be prevented from re-creation but that admins have the power to do this (see link) and may do so if you persist with submitting re-drafts which do not address the issues that have been pointed out, namely that there is no evidence this person is notable in the way that Wikipedia requires. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Leed66 It seems to just be that your subject is not notable at this time, and you have been somewhat persistent anyway. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 14:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Got it, I appreciate the feedback here! I made quite a large redraft based on the original feedback provided by admins, and given it's been declined again I won't be submitting any further redrafts. Leed66 (talk) 15:24, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

It's not unusual for someone's first (or second) article to go through three or four cycles.

You need to show that the subject meets the requirements outlined at WP:GOLDENRULE.

You also have multiple sections with no citation whatsoever—that it not allowed, for articles about living people especially. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:38, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing This is very helpful context, really appreciate you sharing it! Leed66 (talk) 21:18, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Where do I start?

Is there a link or resource where I can find pages that need editing? I want to contribute to Wikipedia but I don't want to try writing a full article at first. I know a lot about the topics of history and technology if that helps narrow my request.

-Keller KTSTW (talk) 15:10, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@KTSTW Any article could benefit from editing. As long as it’s encyclopedic and sourced! MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 15:13, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @KTSTW. I would strongly recommend having a look at Wikipedia:Task Center which outlines many common tasks, from beginner friendly ones to advanced ones, that a new editor can do! qcne (talk) 15:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@KTSTW You should also find some suggestions at Special:Homepage and that will track your "impact" and assign a mentor, should you need one. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello there! Do you frequently read on Wikipedia? In that case, you will eventually find mistakes or information that isn't up-to-date. I wouldn't worry too much about finding articles that need editing, but rather just discover them. Rockfighterz M (talk) 22:34, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

KTSTW, you could check WikiProjects that are related to topics you are interested in. For example, try WP:WikiProject History, or WP:WikiProject Technology. Mathglot (talk) 03:40, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

For articles about video games that release on PC, why does Wikipedia only list the compatible operating system?

Shouldn't the article also list digital storefronts the game is available for acquisition, like Steam, Epic Games or Itch.io? 2603:6080:C9F0:5C90:BDD1:222B:BF69:4A78 (talk) 16:26, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

That would make the articles spam magnets. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

It might be useful for you to read what Wikipedia is not. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:32, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Lecture video as source?

I'd like to expand Shading language with some history, but it's difficult to find WP:RS for this subject. I've just found a great lecture [2] by Pat Hanrahan that covers the subject in detail. I've read through WP:VIDEOLINK but it doesn't really answer my question: Would it be appropriate to use this as a source? I ask because I don't remember seeing a lecture used as a source here before. Apfelmaische (talk) 18:01, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

That seems to be a reputable subject expert in a video published independently by a reputable organisation, so should be OK. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:50, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Youtube reuploads of series

In the declined draft: Draft:Playhouse Disney (Australian TV Show), I used youtube re-uploads of the series as reference, is that not allowed, or did they simply not check what was inside the links? Wikiguyamir (talk) 21:51, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Wikiguyamir.

Two things:

First, it looks to me as if reference 1 (the only one I've looked at) has been uploaded to YouTube by some random guy. If so, then it is a copyright violation, and we never link to these. (If it were uploaded by the copyright holder on their official YouTube channel, that would be OK for copyright).

Secondly, a Wikipedia article should be a summary of what people unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject, and not much else.

As far as I can see, all but one of your sources are to shows in the series (not independent) and the one that is independent does not even mention Playhouse Disney, and so should not be cited anyway. Looking at why you did that, I see that it is supporting a paragraph of editorialising: that should be removed. No Wikipedia article should ever express judgments about whether anything is good, or bad, or important, or unimportant, in Wikipedia's voice. What should go in an "impact" section is a summary of what independent reliable sources have said about the impact of the subject, not what some Wikipedia editor thinks about it.

Almost all your sources should meet all the criteria in WP:42. Unless you have at least three separate sources which all meet all these criteria, you cannot possiblty write an acceptable article.

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) 22:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Connecting to an article in another language

So, I have written an article titled, "The National Park of Uzbekistan in the name of Alisher Navoi." This is an English language version of an existing Russian page, (which I don't know how to link except to type it out as I have done) ru:Национальный парк Узбекистана имени Алишера Навои. My page in English is much longer, with many reference citations (although I am not sure that some are acceptable.) I have the page saved on my computer as a word document, but I don't know how to make the title of the page, how to connect it to the Russian page for the same location or what to do now that it is written. Please advise. AkilinaL (talk) 22:27, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@AkilinaL: these pages are connected on Wikidata. In this case you can go to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q25527797#sitelinks-wikipedia and click "edit", put "en" in the wiki field and the English title in the box next to it, then click publish. This can only be done if the page exists! If the Wikidata entry did not exist, then you click on the "add links" under languages. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:43, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

AkilinaL, "The National Park of Uzbekistan in the name of Alisher Navoi" is a curiously cumbersome title. I don't know if "Alisher Navoi National Park" is the best option; but for now, let's suppose that it is. Then click on "Draft:Alisher Navoi National Park", create the draft there, "Publish" (i.e. save), keep improving and "publishing" it, and, when you're happy with it, submit it for consideration as an article. Linking between this article and one in Russian about the same subject is a very simple matter and not one that you need to worry about until the English-language article actually exists. I'm not aware of any software that converts a DOCX or ODT file to Mediawiki (i.e. Wikipedia "source") markup. -- Hoary (talk) 23:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

The English title, "The National Park of Uzbekistan in the name of Alisher Navoi" is a direct translation of the official name of the park and the Russian page. You are correct in thinking that the most common name one would find in English for this park is Alisher Navoi National Park. I put the text I created with all the references formatted manually in a word document since I didn't know where to keep it. I initially created it in my sandbox, but I am still not sure what to do next. AkilinaL (talk) 03:06, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@AkilinaL: The precedent, as far as I know, is to not translate имени directly and instead adhere to English norms, at least for many Slavic languages. So Батальон имени Павла Судоплатова is translated as Pavel Sudoplatov Battalion, Балтийский федеральный университет имени Иммануила Канта as Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, and Спорткомплекс имени Али Алиева as Ali Aliyev Sport Complex. Even the equivalents of имени in other Slavic languages are treated the same: Київський військовий ліцей імені Івана Богуна being translated from Ukrainian as Ivan Bohun Military High School and Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu (im. being short for imeni in Polish) as Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań. There's also a Wikipedia policy, WP:COMMONNAME, that mandates the use of the most common name of the subject, which is not necessarily the official name. For example, the article on the current Uzbek prime minister is titled Abdulla Aripov, not "Abdulla Nigʻmat o'g'li Oripov" or "Abdulla Nigmatovich Aripov". So I would highly recommend that you go with Hoary's suggested title of "Alisher Navoi National Park" for the article, for the reasons I have laid out above. Hope this helps. Sincerely, Grumpylawnchair (talk) 04:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. That is helpful. AkilinaL (talk) 06:24, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits to my draft. AkilinaL (talk) 23:15, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

No problem. Let me know if you need help with anything else. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 23:32, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

AkilinaL, copy your Word file as plain text. Click on User:AkilinaL/sandbox in order to edit it. Paste the plain text there. "Publish" (i.e. save). For each of your many (I imagine) numbered footnotes, remove the number that points to the footnote and the number of the footnote, move the footnote to a point immediately after what it verifies, and use REF tags to convert it into a reference. Like this: An assertion.<ref>Author(s), title, publication details</ref>. "Publish" (i.e. save). Turn off the computer before it turns your brain to mush. On a later date, turn it back on. Improve what you have. "Publish" (i.e. save). And so on. -- Hoary (talk) 04:36, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

My footnotes are already inserted in the proper location. At this point, the only thing I haven't done is to put the title into the document. How is the title formatted? AkilinaL (talk) 06:23, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I published it in my sandbox. Now what? AkilinaL (talk) 14:24, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

It now exists as a draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alisher_Navoi_National_Park AkilinaL (talk) 00:51, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

I have fixed your link, changing https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Национальный_парк_Узбекистана_имени_Алишера_Навои to [[:ru:Национальный парк Узбекистана имени Алишера Навои]] Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. AkilinaL (talk) 00:40, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

AkilinaL, here's one of your references:

<ref>[https://fergana.agency/photos/127500/]] "Возвращение «Комсомольского озера»", published 08-29-2022, retrieved 2025-08-20</ref>

It should be more like:

<ref>Andrei Kudryashov. "[https://fergana.agency/photos/127500/ Возвращение «Комсомольского озера»]" (The return of Komsomolskoye Lake). Fergana. August 29, 2002. In Russian. Retrieved 2025-08-20.</ref>

Anyway, the reference should name the author(s) (if, as on this web page, they are named), and also the website. If, as here, the title of the web page is in a language other than English, then a translation into English is welcome, but be careful not to format it in a way that suggests that the translation is the actual title.

(Even better is to use Template:Cite web or Template:Cite news, but let's keep things simple for now.)

When you think the draft is ready, add {{subst:submit}} to the top, and "publish" (save). -- Hoary (talk) 07:41, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok. I will look at all my references and see what I can find. Thanks for your assistance. AkilinaL (talk) 21:24, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Somewhat unrelated question. There is an article about a place in Tajikistan called Kal'ai Mug. I did some editing on this page a) because there was some incorrect information and b) because it was lacking in citations for verification. Someone has corrected the formatting of my citations, and I beleive that every fact now has a citation, but the block at the top still indicates that citations are needed. What is the process for removing that notation? AkilinaL (talk) 01:33, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

In short, there is none. If you think that the template (the "block") is no longer relevant, you can and should remove it. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 01:39, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Removing fancruft

Would it be acceptable for me to remove the wall of unsourced details on every Kenner toy from Littlest Pet Shop? I absolutely think it falls under WP:FANCRUFT but because it's such a massive wall of text I wanted to ask for a second opinion. Removing it wouldn't negatively impact the article in any way, since fans can find that detailed information elsewhere and there are no sources provided.

I'm trying to work on cleaning that article up because it's shockingly low on sourcing for something that's likely very easy to find sourcing on. Serilly (talk) 00:05, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Serilly Yes. In fact, per WP:BURDEN you can remove any unsourced content you feel like: it shouldn't be your job to look for sources if you don't want to. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 00:53, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Serilly (talk) 01:01, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

The exception might be synopses of shows. These don't need to cite sources (the show is the source) but they should be concise, not walls of text. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:47, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

List of schools in Bengaluru

List of schools in Bengaluru

As they instruction says - "Only add a school to this list if it already has its own article on the English Wikipedia". But, "VIBGYOR High School" in different cities have been added to the list with a redirect to VIBGYOR Group of Schools. None of the schools actually have a separate page for them. So....shouldn't they be removed from the list? BhikhariInformer (talk) 01:52, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Adding multiple styles of citation

Hi, planning to make some edits to an article that currently uses full citations. I'd like to add short citations to the article, as I'm pulling from a book and may cite from a number of pages. My reasoning is that citing each by specific page would be more helpful than one citation that says pp. 21, 54, 78, 123, etc. Is it acceptable to add differing styles of citation to an article? (I'm familiar with WP:WHENINROME, but am not planning to change the article's entire style, just add a different sourcing style for this one source. LivelyRatification (talk) 02:26, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Rather than "Rome", LivelyRatification, could you please specify the article for us? Then I'd understand what's meant by "full citations". -- Hoary (talk) 02:39, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary: The article is Peter Breen (Australian politician). LivelyRatification (talk) 02:40, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Got it. The article doesn't seem to cite anything that's obviously a book. If you want to cite page 21, then a little further into the article pages 46–48, and finally page 11 of the same one book (one that I shall choose at random), then your references could be:

• <ref name="Blum">{{Cite book | last=Blum | first=William | year=2014 | title=Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions since World War II | location=London | publisher=Zed | ISBN=978-1-7836-0177-6}}</ref>{{Rp|21}}
• <ref name="Blum" />{{Rp|46–48}}
• <ref name="Blum" />{{Rp|11}}

There are many possible complications (e.g. citing differently authored/titled contributions to the same edited volume); feel free to ask about any that might arise. -- Hoary (talk) 04:56, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

How can we create a beautifully designed WikiSound archive please?

Hello, I am an editor very interested in archiving sound, soudscapes, open access archives of podcasts that is beautifully presented and searchable, similar to Spotify but for files that are able to be shared/copyright free.

I know of Wikimedia Commons and have seen the Sound chapter and feel that some improvements are needed.

I appreciate that Wikipedia has evolved from text-based sources (encyclopedias) and would also love for Wikipedia to archive grassroot sound archives, interviews, podcasts, disappearing sounds, open access music etc.

I have become involved in Wikipedia farily recently, although joined up a few years ago and am impressed with Wikipedia's mission, reach, protocols, opportunities and generous community. Plus now these archives are particularly important community service providers as feed the ai chatbots and therefore provide reliable sources and a repose from the rampant misinformation that is available.

I am familiar with video2commons, musicbrainz, soulseek, internet library and a few other archives. It would be fabulous to centralise sound elements within Wikipedia ( to also be incorporated within the articles) and I believe this additional archive would hold great appeal, support the mission of cultural relevance and encourage more editors to get involved.

It was suggested that this project might suit as a Wikiproject, I don't know much about those and feel that this project should have its own ID and format.

I look forward to knowing your thoughts on this matter! I&I22 (talk) 03:11, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I&I22, as your plans concern Wikimedia Commons, you're likely to get a better answer at their help desk than here at en:Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 08:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Maproom thank you Maproom! I understood that Wikipedia is the top tier umbrella for all Wiki projects. I will check in with Wikimedia and to clarify I am suggesting a sibling Wiki project or chapter of Wikipedia with a slightly different interface. Best regards and thanks again I&I22 (talk) 12:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @I&I22. Please see meta:Proposals for new projects. Note that it says at the top that new proposals can be made and discussed, but will not be accepted until a general review is complete. ColinFine (talk) 13:42, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@ColinFine terrific! thank you and noted re: proposals and general reviews I&I22 (talk) 14:27, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

IABot issues

Hi there, I am trying to use the IABot via the "Fix dead links" link, but when trying to archive live links, it just crashes with a 502 Gateway Error. I was wondering if anyone else is having this issue? Could it be browser-related? Conyo14 (talk) 05:32, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Conyo14 yep, I agree. I think it’s browser related, i think you’ll have to ask an interface administrator for help. HQIQ talk 07:00, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Please don't post nonsense replies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

"502 bad gateway" is explained at 502 Bad Gateway and in more detial at [3] It is unlikely to be a browser issue, but could be an issue with your VPN, ISP or corporate network, or the target system. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

So, I have done this on two different systems

• ISP#1, w/ VPN (desktop)
• ISP#2, w/o VPN (desktop)

Would it be worth a try on a mobile device? Conyo14 (talk) 15:54, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Probably not; by a process of elimination, you have shown that it not the VPN, nor the ISP. Which leaves the target system. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Could you explain what target system refers to? Conyo14 (talk) 17:14, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

The server or servers at the other end of the request to you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:05, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Excellent. How can I fix the server at the other end (if there is anything I can do)? Conyo14 (talk) 19:54, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Try IABot's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:16, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Expanding the Mexican Federal and State Highways information

I found a map from the Mexican transportation that lines out each state and federal highway at http://rnc.imt.mx/tablero/. I wouldn't mind working on putting those here. I'd use a mix of google maps and that website. I'm not sure where to start or how to source it. Mostly talking about this article List of Mexican Federal Highways and making a similar one for the state highways AshDaWolfie1 (talk) 08:26, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@AshDaWolfie1 If you haven't already done so, you should read WP:MAPS. Most mapping in Wikipedia is done using OpenStreetMap rather than Google maps. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:18, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Article about a company

I tried to post an article about a company but it gets rejected

Hi everyone,

I am trying to post an article about a company called Dexatel, but it gets rejected. I gathered 4+ reliable sources, wrote an article that tries to stay informative, rather then promotional, however it still gets rejected for different reasons (for example, LLM usage, unreliable sources, promotional language).

I need help posting it to the platform. If you can help me write and submit article, or give any advice on what to do? Draft:Dexatel. Mikayel Khachatryan (talk) 10:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Most of your sources do not meet the criteria set out at WP:NCORP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:55, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

What I think you should do first, Mikayel Khachatryan, is to respond candidly and informatively to DoubleGrazing's post "Managing a conflict of interest". -- Hoary (talk) 11:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Mikayel Khachatryan. The first two sources I looked at are both Dexatel telling the world about themselves.

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

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 it is even more difficult if you have a conflict of interest ColinFine (talk) 13:45, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Mechanics of Wikipedia

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Semi-metro

Hello everyone, I've been happily editing Wikipedia for a while now, mostly in the field of architecture, cars and transit. Recently I have came some unpleasantness, which make me wonder: do I need some guidedance? I have searched through earlier entries here, and found the amusing Philosophy of Wikipedia, it's inspiring but I may need something else.

For a long time I was under the impression that one can add almost anything to Wikipedia, as long it is referenced in a reliable and independent source. But things aren't so simple anymore as, some say, that it can be undone because the addition contains a neologism. I disengaged because I took a Wikibreak, also keeping in mind that, per WP:NORUSH, Rome wasn't built in a day. However, recently the narrative "I see a neologism, it means delete" is popping up in multiple places recently.

I'm in need of some guidance of the mechanics of Wikipedia, especially on how to handle discrepancies between a policy and a guideline. I was under the impression that a policy is valued more than a guideline. Has there been any instances where this has happened before, and how was it solved? Or perhaps, even better, has there been an essay written on this topic? Currently I'm lost, and even a suggestion where I could go with my two questions would be really appreciated. KatVanHuis (talk) 10:51, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@KatVanHuis: Perhaps this is what you are looking for: Wikipedia:The difference between policies, guidelines and essays ? And we have of course our own text about neologisms. Lectonar (talk) 11:38, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello Lectonar, and thank you for your quick reply.

The latter link I have studied over and over again in the past months, but I feel it's not in line with the article on neologisms. Or at least, the article mentions "robot" as a neologism. I just can't image that the term "robot" can't be used in Wikipedia articles because it is a neologism. The first link is basically what I was looking for. It does mention that Policies have more value, but of course that exceptions exist... KatVanHuis (talk) 23:55, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@KatVanHuis:, you've made the point that Wikipedia articles are about subjects, not terms. But your article fails to explain what its subject, denoted by the neologism "Semi-metro", is. The closest you come is in the lead: One key difference from metro lines (rapid transit) is that a metro line has an entirely conflict-free track, often completely grade separated, whereas semi-metro has lines which only partially run in tunnels and on viaducts. That makes little sense to me. The Northern Line of the London "underground" runs partially in tunnels and on a viaduct. Maybe your intended subject is worthy of an article, but it's hard to tell without knowing what it is. Maproom (talk) 22:33, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello Maproom and thank you for your interesting comment. I wish someone had pointed this out earlier. I've rewritten the lede, I hope things are clearer now. I've rode the Northern Line, but not end-to-end, so I don't know if it's completely free from road traffic level-crossings. But it didn't appear to be using trams or light rail trains. But again, thank you for mentioning that the lede could have been more specific, this comment is very useful. KatVanHuis (talk) 00:04, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

There used to be a few level crossings on the London Underground system, but they were eliminated in the 1960s; there are certainly none on the Northern Line or elsewhere today, apart from two within depot areas inaccessible to the public, and one on tracks owned by London Underground but beyond the operations of its own trains. Nor are there any trams or light rail trains (as usually defined) on the system. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.150.115 (talk) 06:20, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Translated page

Hi, I have created an English translation of the Italian Wikipedia page on Filippo Monti. I’d appreciate a review before submitting via Articles for Creation. Here’s the link to my draft: User:Malp89/Filippo Monti Malp89 (talk) 12:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Malp89 I took the liberty of placing your draft at Draft:Filippo Monti over your comment there(which basically said what you say here). You may now submit it for a review; this is the best way to get feedback instead of asking for a pre-review review. 331dot (talk) 13:11, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Please disclose your connection to him, as it seems that you took a picture of him. See WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 13:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I can confirm that I have no professional or financial connection with him. I simply took the picture myself and uploaded it as a volunteer contributor. Malp89 (talk) 15:25, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I have declined your submission, but please continue to work on it. The subject is very likely notable, but the article lacks the required inline citations. Once that is fixed, resubmit it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Referencing Wikipedia

I am working on updating a page. I've seen that in another language, the page has more information. In this case, we are talking about the English page referencing that a person had 4 children, whereas his page in Portuguese also gave the name of the children. I liked for the reference in the Portuguese page to quote it in the English page, but coudn't find it. Can I update the names in the English page and reference the Portuguese page, or write something like "according to the Portugese page, he has 4 children: Osvaldo, Francis, etc...)? Francisdpas89 (talk) 14:34, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Please do not use articles from Wikipedia (whether English Wikipedia or Wikipedias in other languages) as sources, since Wikipedia is a user-generated source. The same goes for websites mirroring Wikipedia content or publications relying on material from Wikipedia as sources. Content from a Wikipedia article is not considered reliable unless it is backed up by citing reliable sources. Confirm that these sources support the content, then use them directly. If they don't, then they can't obviously be used. Lectonar (talk) 14:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Francisdpas89: Just because a person had children doesn't mean they need to be named. WP:BLPNAME, which I recommend you read, suggests that the names of non-notable minors from articles about their notable family members are not given. Bazza 7 (talk) 15:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Reliability :- Namu Wiki

hello, i want to ask about the reliability of Namuwiki

does it accepted as a source or not? Mr.WikiPageEditor (talk) 16:52, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

it's user generated, so no.

but if they list sources you may be able to check those for use. aquarium substrate^talk 17:10, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Namuwiki, being a wiki created by users, would not be considered a Reliable Source. See WP:UGC (or WP:NAMUWIKI) for a full explanation.

It does have a compatible license, meaning you may reuse text from their articles here, but since their English articles are just machine translations, that's unlikely to be useful. WelpThatWorked (talk) 17:14, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Also, @Mr.WikiPageEditor, the wiki states that content still may be biased. HQIQ talk 21:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you're saying that Namuwiki says somewhere that it's biased, @HQIQ, or pointing out that Wikipedia doesn't necessarily rule out a source because it's biased. See WP:BIASEDSOURCES. But unreliability does. ColinFine (talk) 00:04, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Requesting review of Draft:DramaBox

Hello, I would like to request a review of my draft article Draft:DramaBox

The draft was previously declined, but I have revised it into a neutral, encyclopedic style and added independent, reliable sources (36Kr Europe, Sensor Tower, Wired, Barchart News).

Could someone please review the draft and let me know if it now meets Wikipedia’s standards for notability, sourcing, and tone? I would greatly appreciate any feedback, as I hope the article can be published soon if it is ready.

Thank you very much! Siqicao47 (talk) 18:51, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

submitting it to review will give you feedback, please look over the notices on top of your draft for advice.

also of your 4 references, the only one about dramabox itself is a press release and thus not independent. see WP:42 for more clarity on what is needed. aquarium substrate^talk 19:09, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I’ve revised and resubmitted my draft on DramaBox.

This time I expanded the article with new sections (History, Features, Market, Industry Context, Awards), rewrote it in a neutral encyclopedic tone, and added multiple independent sources (SCMP, The Guardian, Business Insider, Sensor Tower, 36Kr Europe, Barchart News).

Could someone please take another look and let me know if the draft is now ready for acceptance? Thank you very much! Siqicao47 (talk) 19:21, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

You have submitted it and it is pending. Asking for a review to "jump the line" isn't likely to work. Please be patient. As stated on the draft,."This may take 5 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,786 pending submissions waiting for review." 331dot (talk) 19:23, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Siqicao47 It doesn't help that your first citation to the Guardian, a reliable source, doesn't mention DramaBox. Did you use a chatbot to write the text? These bots are well known for making up citations. This has already been noted by User:jlwoodwa, the previous Afc reviewer and makes for an immediate "fail". Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Keep getting blocked

Hi! I'm a marketing account manager and have been tasked with building a wikipedia page for a well respected university professor who is published in a lot of journals with tons of credibility. the issue im facing is that my account cannot be created, my ip is getting blocked any time I try this action. Can I please get some help with this issue?

Thank you. 2001:56A:7955:D600:1435:D166:BB51:B404 (talk) 21:29, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

the block now says i cannot do anything until July, 2027. This is super frustrating. 2001:56A:7955:D600:1435:D166:BB51:B404 (talk) 21:32, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello. What you may have been tasked with is between you and whoever has given you the task: it is likely to be extremely difficult unless you are an experienced Wikipedia editor, and may in fact be impossible. Have you read WP:BOSS? ColinFine (talk) 00:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Try here.

That said, it's very important that you understand Wikipedia's policies on conflict of interest, and your obligations in respect to that. Similarly, the professor needs to understand that he (or she) will not have control over the content of the article. DS (talk) 21:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Better reading when signed out than when signed in

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.

---

When signed in to wikipedia those quick blue links fail to show the brief summary. Therefore I prefer to be signed out and be able to read the pop-ups for the blue words. Why is a paying wikipedia reader put at such a disadvantage?

Or, why are non-members enjoying an a better reading experience?

Q: how to set the page so signed-in paying members can enjoy full services of pop-up summries? SrkhikerS (talk) 22:23, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello @SrkhikerS. As a signed in editor, I'm able to view those link popups when hovering over them. Perhaps you might've messed with a setting accidentally. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 22:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @SrkhikerS, and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds as if you've disabled Navigation popups in your preferences.

Note, by the way, that there is no such thing as a "paying member". Whether or not you choose to donate to the Wikimedia foundation is not known to anybody or anything in the Wikipedia project. Your Wikipedia account is not in any way connected with you as a donor. ColinFine (talk) 00:23, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@SrkhikerS I and others answered this at the help desk several hours before you asked again here at the Teahouse. Please don't ask in multiple places, as it only wastes volunteer time. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:47, 22 August 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.

Question on vulgarity policy for article/reversion

I removed some extremely offensive text in the page on Justin Roiland (link below) and replaced it with a description that maintains the meaning of the text while maintaining safety for all readers. My edit was removed by someone saying “We don’t censor.” with a link to the talk page. I reviewed the talk page, and I still disagree strongly with the revision because of the following reasons. The Wikipedia:Offensive Material article states, “Material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available.” The included text is universally offensive and does not make the article more useful or informative as is recommended by Wikipedia policy and guidelines. “Not censored" does not give special favor to offensive content.” What is the best course of action? I do not wish to start an argument or editing disagreement. Page: Justin Roiland Peachykiwimon (talk) 04:00, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@Peachykiwimon, you're totally in the clear here to remove this one. I think you were probably reflexively reverted because your edit summary is basically "think of the children!" and that line of argument is given approximately zero weight here. If you'd said "summarizing unencyclopedic quote" or something you'd probably be fine. -- asilvering (talk) 04:03, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! Peachykiwimon (talk) 04:26, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Peachykiwimon, I agree that the quote in question was gratuitous and unnecessary, and that summarizing was best. I also agree with Asilvering that an edit summary mentioning children is likely to provoke an anti-censorship reaction. There is some exceptionally ugly and disgusting content here, because it has encyclopedic value. Kids can see it if they look. That's life. Cullen328 (talk) 08:01, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

You might also want to read WP:NOTCENSORED. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:34, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Password reset

Hello. I am user transatracurium, and need to reset my password. I still have access to the associated email address but no matter what device I try to access the special reset password page it reports my IP is blocked. Can someone please help? Many thanks in advance. 2.103.160.198 (talk) 08:35, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Something odd in my talk page

Yesterday I got a notification from my talk where this anonymous editor asks me about Ardahan page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/149.140.53.235 Keeps asking me about removing cited climate table which has never been removed. Is it possible that this table could not appear in some devices, or is it just someone playing with me?PAper GOL (talk) 10:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@PAper GOL Welcome to Teahouse, The IP editor wants to know why you changed the averages in the table without a clear edit summary. Your edit summary was "Reverted an old change"this. Could you clarify which old change you are referring to? 🐍 Thilio🤖 11:41, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi and Thanks for helping. There were numbers regarding the mean number of days with precipitation (rain-snow etc.), which I reverted. The second reply is the reason I started the discussion, stating that All climate table was removed and not just part of it. I checked the page several times and the table still stands. And most figures are the official 1991-2020 averages as the IP editor stated. Only days with snow has a different source, and I cited that as well.PAper GOL (talk) 11:46, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Changing a profile picture

I am trying to change a 'profile picture' associated with my father - but struggling to do so as I find any edits I make seem to be reverted. Any assistance would be much appreciated. Vsavory5 (talk) 10:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

It looks like you did not know what to do, and inserted the file into the URL as a reference. It is a good idea to experiment on a sandbox to get the hang of what you want to do. Also since you have disclosed a WP:COI it would be good to state that on your user page. Say how you are connected to Michael Savory on User:Vsavory5. Then others who check you edit may determine a motivation. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:21, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Seems to have been done. Is there anything else you need help with? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:31, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Declined article

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.

---

Hello,

I recently submitted a draft article, which was declined due to concerns that it “is not adequately supported by reliable sources.” I would greatly appreciate guidance from experienced editors on how to improve the article so it meets Wikipedia’s standards.

In particular, I would be grateful for advice on: - Which parts of the article require additional reliable, independent sources. - Recommendations for trustworthy sources that would support the content. - Best practices for referencing, including how to cite web pages, reports, and press coverage in a way that aligns with Wikipedia guidelines.

Thank you very much for your time and help, any guidance or examples would be extremely valuable as I work to improve the article.

Regards, Ngochandao Ngochandao (talk) 11:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Please only use one forum at a time to seek assistance. 331dot (talk) 11:10, 22 August 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.

Trying to add a map to a page

I'm trying to add a map to this page: Draft:Southern Walnut Creek Trail

The map I would like to add is here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3457710#map=13/30.29295/-97.66129

The wikidata entry I made is here: d:Q132830932

Can someone help me understand why this is failing? Fastmole (talk) 15:38, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

We can't see why it's failing, because you haven't saved the relevant edit. Can you do so (then revert yourself), or otherwise describe what you're doing, in detail?

See also WP:Maps. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:50, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing The OP does have the template {{maplink|frame=yes|type=line|id=Q132830932}} in the draft's infobox. I don't know why it isn't working as the link in Wikidata does work. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Ah, I assumed this was a recent issue, not one from back in March.

The issue was with |id=Q132830932. The template expects the Wikidata ID of an item that is about the subject (not about an OSM map; now fixed); and expects the equivalent object in OSM to be tagged with the reciprocal Wikidata ID. (as I have now done).

That may fix it (we need to wait for caches to clear), but I'm not sure it works for relations. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:34, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Update: working now; draft reviewed and published. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:55, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Question regarding header requesting more citations

Good day, I was reading through Wikipedia as part of a daily scroll through it and the page I was on didn't have a lot of citations listed for many of things (for not knowing proper terms). While it has a fairly robust references and sources page, it doesn't seem to fall in line with Wikipedia's guidelines on verifiability but I do not know how to add a header to the page requesting more citations and I cannot find anything regarding it.

The article in question is Syndicalism. Johnthegreat6609 (talk) 16:41, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

You could add the {{refimprove}} tag to the top of the page, but it would probably be removed because, as you observed, the referencing is already quite robust. I would suggest tagging individual sentences with {{citation needed}}, {{failed verification}}, or other inline templates listed at Category:Inline citation and verifiability dispute templates. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:48, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, I'll see about doing that later today. Johnthegreat6609 (talk) 16:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@Johnthegreat6609 I see that there is a {{citation needed}} in the Lead. That's not needed, since the lead summarises the rest of the article and that's where the relevant citations should be. See WP:LEADCITE. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:14, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@Johnthegreat6609: I note that every paragraph in the body has a citation. The thing to do would be to check individual sentences that are not cited against those paragraph citations, when you have access to those citations. If they fail verification, then add {{citation needed}} or {{failed verification}}. I do not believe that the article needs {{refimprove}} or any section requires

{{refimprove section}}. Peaceray (talk) 17:25, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Artist biography

My name is James Matthew Udofia,I am a gospel music singer and songwriter. Please I want to add my biography to Wikipedia James Matthew Udofia (talk) 17:19, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@James Matthew Udofia: Have outlets with editorial oversight and no connexion to you written about you at length or otherwise reviewed your work? If no, then we can't even consider an article, and we'd urge you to reconsider seeking a Wikipedia article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:22, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @James Matthew Udofia, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory or social media.

Writing about yourself in Wikipedia successfully is so difficult that we strongly advise that you don't even try. See autobiography.

In order to succeed, you would need to find publications where people wholly unconnected with you had chosen to write about you, and base the article almost entirely on what they said about you: what you know or think about yourself is not relevant. Do you think you would find it possible to write in that way, even supposing you found suitable sources?

If you did succeed in having an article about you accepted, the article would not belong to you, would not be controlled by you, and would not necessarily say what you want it to say. It could be edited by almost anybody in the world except you and your associates - you would be able to request changes, but would not get to decide what changes were actually made.

In addition to all this, 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.

I suggest that you either decide you want to contribute to Wikipedia, but give up the idea or writing about yourself; or give up Wikipedia, and use other outlets to promote yourself. You can't successfully to both together. ColinFine (talk) 20:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

archiving talk messages on my user page

How do you archive the messages on your user talk page? Breck0530 (talk) 17:50, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Help:Archiving (plain and simple) should be helpfully instructive. Amstrad00 (talk) 18:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

What does Guard mean in AfD discussions?

I've seen it used a few times in discussions, such as here and here, but it's not immediately obvious what the editors are trying to convey, and there's no entry in the glossary. Thanks for your help! Epsilon.Prota ^talk 18:08, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Both of those are by the same person, so I've asked on their talk page. DS (talk) 18:21, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

It seems analogous to keep where it is used here. Could be a translation. -- Reconrabbit 19:14, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Which edit types can count as edit warring and which are exempt?

I know that the following reverts are exempt from edit warring/3RR:

• Reverting your own edits, including "accidental edits".
• Reverting edits in your own user space.
• Reverting obvious disruptive edits, such as vandalism.
• Revering edits performed to evade a block or ban.

However, I'm not sure if these types of reverts can count towards edit warring:

• Edit warring with a legitimate alternate account by having two computers side-by-side logged into different accounts and constantly reverting each other's edits (i.e. edit warring with yourself).
• Edit warring in someone else's user space (if the owner gives permission).
• Edit warring in the sandbox, or your own user sandbox.
• Canceling out the fourth revert by reverting the violating edit.

2001:56B:3FFA:3632:9961:B1C6:E784:2F12 (talk) 19:28, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

What possible reason could you have for any of these behaviours? ColinFine (talk) 20:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm just curious. I'm not actually going to do these behaviors. 2001:56B:3FFA:3632:9961:B1C6:E784:2F12 (talk) 20:43, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@ColinFine, would any of that activity inflate an editor's edit count? David10244 (talk) 04:36, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, David10244, this would inflate a user's edit count. This is one of several reasons why an edit count is not a very accurate tool for evaluating editor productivity. To the IP editor, edit warring with oneself or on a prearranged basis for amusement is disruptive behavior that can lead to a block. Cullen328 (talk) 06:51, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

looking to see if wikiproject exists

I was wondering if there's a wikiproject for volunteer artist and such to make (off site) (not on wikipedia or any sister sites) projects/art for the purpose of NON official marketing and also sorry if this is the wrong place to ask Skeletons are the axiom (talk) 19:35, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Skeletons are the axiom.

Please see WP:NOTWEBHOST.

There is nowhere on Wikipedia which is appropriate for discussions unrelated to Wikipedia and related projects, or to improving its articles. ColinFine (talk) 20:09, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Uninvolved Editor Review Request

Hi! I disclosed a COI on my user page. I drafted an article at User:Dm07891p/sandbox about J&Y Law based entirely on independent sources. Could an uninvolved editor review and, if it meets notability and sourcing, move it to mainspace? Hope I'm doing this right, I'm trying to learn. Any help would be much appreciated! Dm07891p (talk) 21:28, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Dm07891p. It looks like your sandbox draft duplicates a topic (Draft:J&Y Law) that was already declined multiple times and rejected, also authored by you. Relevant policies and guidelines are linked at the rejected draft for you to look at. Right now, the sources you used do not establish how the law firm is notable. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 21:51, 22 August 2025 (UTC)