User edit count
Please, what template, if any, do I use to output my edit count? Thanks. — Python Drink (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2022 (UTC) Python Drink (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello @Python Drink and welcome to the Teahouse! Are you talking about a userbox for your userpage? Helloheart (talk) 22:05, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Um no, @Helloheart, I'm not talking about a ubx. You know the
{{NUMBEROF}}
that can be used to output the number of user accounts, admins, etc on Wikipedia? Similarly I want a template that would output my edit count—the plain number itself— to my userpage? I hope I was able to make you understand. — Python Drink (talk) 22:14, 23 November 2022 (UTC)- Hi @Python Drink, and welcome to Wikipedia! Unfortunately, a template that automatically detects edit count does not exist, due to performance reasons. Cheers, 🥒 EpicPickle (he/him | talk) 22:40, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Adding on to my comment, {{adminstats}} does exists. When placed on a page, Cyberbot I automatically creates a page and updates various statistics for administrators, including edit count. I understand the justification for disallowing non-admins/account creators to use the template (the bot might be overloaded with the amount of users), but it'd be interesting if the bot code is tweaked to allow for a separate version for non-admins (without the deletion, protection, block, etc statistics). I'll post on the operator's talk page. Cheers, 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 00:39, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- @EpicPupper, thanks a lot for your answer. I assume the talk page you're talking you're talking about is Template talk:Adminstats (coz I'd like to be there to see the discussion if there'll be any). Thanks again. — Python Drink (talk) 19:22, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Python Drink, I posted on the bot operator's talk page (User talk:Cyberpower678)! Cheers, 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 05:58, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Python Drink, there are user scripts that will show your edit count (and those of other editors) on your main user page and user talk page, right under your username. But it doesn't display these counts in a box, the only editors who will see the counts (along with your permissions and length of time as an editor) are those who have the script installed. Maybe EpicPupper can track the right one down. I know I have the script installed along with a lot of others. But to update my edit count on my user page, I just go into my Contributions and click on the Edit Count link, see what number is displayed on that page and update the userbox on the page manually. Python Drink, your page looks like this. Liz Read! Talk! 20:34, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Python Drink: Hi. I recommend the same script user:Liz is referring to: User:PleaseStand/User info. Not sure what you want exactly, but this script shows the details/edit counts of other users (including yourself) to you. I have been using it since years, and I find it very useful. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Python Drink, there are user scripts that will show your edit count (and those of other editors) on your main user page and user talk page, right under your username. But it doesn't display these counts in a box, the only editors who will see the counts (along with your permissions and length of time as an editor) are those who have the script installed. Maybe EpicPupper can track the right one down. I know I have the script installed along with a lot of others. But to update my edit count on my user page, I just go into my Contributions and click on the Edit Count link, see what number is displayed on that page and update the userbox on the page manually. Python Drink, your page looks like this. Liz Read! Talk! 20:34, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Python Drink, I posted on the bot operator's talk page (User talk:Cyberpower678)! Cheers, 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 05:58, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- @EpicPupper, thanks a lot for your answer. I assume the talk page you're talking you're talking about is Template talk:Adminstats (coz I'd like to be there to see the discussion if there'll be any). Thanks again. — Python Drink (talk) 19:22, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Adding on to my comment, {{adminstats}} does exists. When placed on a page, Cyberbot I automatically creates a page and updates various statistics for administrators, including edit count. I understand the justification for disallowing non-admins/account creators to use the template (the bot might be overloaded with the amount of users), but it'd be interesting if the bot code is tweaked to allow for a separate version for non-admins (without the deletion, protection, block, etc statistics). I'll post on the operator's talk page. Cheers, 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 00:39, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Python Drink, and welcome to Wikipedia! Unfortunately, a template that automatically detects edit count does not exist, due to performance reasons. Cheers, 🥒 EpicPickle (he/him | talk) 22:40, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Um no, @Helloheart, I'm not talking about a ubx. You know the
Follow-up to Zoe Carides, actor : my birthplace according to Wikipedia
Hello all at Teahouse. I am Zoe Carides, an Australian actor. Unfortunately, somebody has once again made a change to the entry regarding my place of birth. My place of birth was London, UK. However, someone keeps changing it to 'Sydney, Australia'. A couple of very helpful users here at Teahouse found a citation to support the fact of my British birthplace, but another user went back in and changed it to 'Sydney' again. I'm very upset about this, as it's now been going on for quite a few years. Is there any way of stopping this user from continually changing the entry to false information? I had thought, since @theroadislong had kindly found a correct citation and applied it, that all would be well. But alas it is not so. Any advice welcome. Cheers, Zoe Zozment (talk) 02:11, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Zoe, I reverted it. The person below claims to have done it about 20 min ago, but it was not when I got the page.
- Bye!
- ~~ Missbellanash (talk) 03:20, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- It was done in this edit. You did not edit that article, as you'll see from the article history and from your contribution record. Perhaps you were looking at a cached version? - David Biddulph (talk) 03:28, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Who knows, browser manufactures' are a strange lot.
- ~~ Missbellanash (talk) 03:51, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- It was done in this edit. You did not edit that article, as you'll see from the article history and from your contribution record. Perhaps you were looking at a cached version? - David Biddulph (talk) 03:28, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Zozment Note that although we don't in general like the subject of an article doing any editing on it, there are exceptions including what has happened here with your place of birth. You are welcome to revert any edit that changes it again. See Wikipedia:FAQ/Article_subjects#The information in your article about me is wrong. How can I get it fixed? for the policy. For other changes, use the Talk Page of the article and make an {{edit request}}, with a reliable source for the new information. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:46, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- I've restored your birth info. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:23, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- The birth info is restored by UtherSRG here. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 03:24, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oh wow, thank you so much UtherSRG! And what an excellent citation you found! I really appreciate your help and work in this. Also thanks to the other Teahouse users who've helped with extra info. Much, much appreciated. Zoe x Zozment (talk) 08:44, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Please get the shit off my page.
I do not want all that stuff all over the page your autobots just posted.
Delete it now! #Angry
~~ Missbellanash (talk) 03:11, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Missbellanash: If you are referring to your user talk page, you could edit it yourself and remove it. Also, note that Wikipedia is not social media. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 03:12, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- It is sm if I want it to be, stop being instructive and ignore the things you can't do.
- Take that ridiculous fake code out and put a name in, it says "name" for a reason.
- ~~ Missbellanash (talk) 03:17, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- What name? I can't find any use of the word "name" in your user talk page. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 03:20, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Missbellanash Your talk page says "Please do not place signatures on the same line as comments". Editors making comments and replies aren't likely to follow that request, nor should they need to.
- You said "It [Wikipedia] is [social media] if I want it to be". Just so you know, you are wrong about that. David10244 (talk) 14:08, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- You can opt out of notifications. I don't think that will stop the messages from being written. You can delete the message though.Cwater1 (talk) 04:57, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- You have a robust turn of phrase, Missbellanash. This doesn't worry me personally, but do note that WP:Civility isn't a mere essay, it's a policy page. -- Hoary (talk) 09:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Policy Bashing i one of my pastimes, probably not a good idea to compliment me..it just gets worse. Heh
- @Hoary I hope you had a wonderful Thanksgiving and weekend! Take care, #best!
- ~~ Missbellanash (talk) 06:13, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Article Creation Request
Is it at all possible to get help creating an article from a semi notable band Infamous Sinphony? I tried in the past with no success only reason I ask for help. Thanks!
Here is their official website and a couple other sources: http://www.infamoussinphony.com/ https://www.n1m.com/infamoussinphony https://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Infamous_Sinphony/11263 Pjryb (talk) 06:47, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Pjryb Their own website is useless for notability (connexion to subject), we can't use n1m (streaming service), and the Encyclopaedia Metallum link is useless for notability (too sparse). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 08:14, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Pjryb, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer to your question is that is is not impossible to get some help, but there are some significant hurdles that you will need to overcome. Remember that Wikipedia is entirely edited by volunteers, who work on what they choose (for example, I mostly choose to help people here and at the Help Desk, and don't do a huge amount of work on articles). So in order to get help, you will need to get somebody's interest up enough that they choose to work with you. It is possible that you can do that by asking here, but not very likely. You might have more success asking at WT:WikiProject Metal, but there are no guarantees.
- In any case, one of the things that somebody who helps you will want to be sure of is that their work will not be wasted, and so they will want to be sure that Infamous Sinphony meets Wikipedia's requirements for notability, because if they don't then there is no point in anybody spending any time at all on an article. What you can usefully do is look for the independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the band which are an absolute requirement. If you can find them, then there is a chance of an article, either by you or if you can find a collaborator. (Follow the blue links to learn what those terms all mean in this context). If you can't find the sources, you'll know to give up. ColinFine (talk) 15:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello @Pjryb and welcome to the Teahouse! What you really need are sources that show that the article is notable, so I would ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment and see where that gets you. Happy editing! Helloheart (talk) 20:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
What to do after your article is speedy deleted
Hey guys,
My draft article Draft:PaykanArtCar has bene deleted due to Unambiguous advertising or promotion. As the topic worths a mention and I wanted to give it another try. Could you advise what's my next step should be? If I create a new article with the same topic and title but the content is improved, would it be still deleted?
Thank you!
KP070707 (talk) 11:43, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @KP070707 Yes, you can try starting a draft again. If it is deleted depends on how you write it. Citing sources, WP:RS, is essential, WP:TUTORIAL has info on that.
- Your first (not only) hurdle is WP:GNG, but I easily found [1][2][3], so that should be a fixable problem. Your task as a WP-editor is to summarize WP:RS, independent of the subject, in your own words. And not WP:FLOWERY ones. This is difficult for someone with a WP:COI, but you can try. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:58, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for this @Gråbergs Gråa Sång. As mentioned in the talk page, let me know if there's a good place for me to share you information that I have. KP070707 (talk) 16:50, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @KP070707: You should definitely NOT rely on [4], which says (even in the URL!) that it is sponsored content. [5] is also shaky - Bloomberg is usually a good source, but that is the "opinion" section of Bloomberg. ("Opinion" sections vary considerably between newspapers, running the whole range between "anyone who pays enough gets to write their own blog" to "single-journalist job, but from a competent staff journalist").
- Gråbergs Gråa Sång, I am surprised that you would offer the first of those sources; surely that was a mistake? TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 17:01, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Tigraan You are quite correct, I missed "sponsored", only saw ARTnews. I'll find some NYT and WaPo to replace it with. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:06, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- On the Bloomberg, IMO it's good enough for a GNG-point. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:31, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- KP070707, when Gråbergs Gråa Sång says that "you can try starting a draft again", take that to mean "you can try starting a draft (but not an article) again". You might ask Deb for comments on your draft. -- Hoary (talk) 12:05, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- There is also a quicker "fix". We can redirect PaykanArtCar to Alireza_Shojaian#PaykanArtCar_(2021). Is that ok with you? You can still work on a new draft. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:07, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- KP070707, I see that you had already asked Deb (but hadn't waited for a response) before asking here. -- Hoary (talk) 12:21, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
I put PaykanArtCar in mainspace. Feel free to improve. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Someone called Materialscientist stated my edit "did not appear constructive" and amended it, Why?
Why is Materialscientist allowed to edit my statement because it doesn't suit him/her and mentioned it "did not appear constructive", so because it does not "appear" to suit his/her idealogy they are allowed to negate my opinion? 175.38.119.96 (talk) 12:26, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- It looks like you edited an article but didn't cite any sources for your addition. Please read WP:CITE and WP:RS so when you add to articles you can reference where the fact comes from. Thanks. Glen (talk) 12:32, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- IP editor, you should not put "opinions" in Wikipedia. David10244 (talk) 14:33, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse. The other thing you need to read, beside what Glen pointed you at, is BRD, to see why Materialscientist's reversion was not personal, but absolutely central to the way Wikipedia works. ColinFine (talk) 16:01, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Remember: "anyone can edit" means "anyone can undo your edit if they don't think it's an improvement". DS (talk) 20:20, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @175.38.119.96: your only Wikipedia contribution (apart from asking this question) has been this one, so I assume that is what you are refering to. It makes quite a controversial claim without giving any source to support it. Your next step should be to go to the Talk page of that article and outline why that statement should be included, backed up by reliable sources. All concerned editors can then discuss it and agree what to do.--Gronk Oz (talk) 22:13, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Remember: "anyone can edit" means "anyone can undo your edit if they don't think it's an improvement". DS (talk) 20:20, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, it's me, Some random account on this website.
And yes, i have a question. Do i need to start to edit a wikipedia article? Some random account on this website (talk) 17:02, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Some random account, and welcome to the Teahouse.
Please see my reply to the previous question. - Sorry, I've just realised you weren't asking about creating a new article. I'm not sure what you were asking. You can edit most articles (a few are semi-protected so that new accounts can't edit them). But you should make sure you follow Wikipedia's policies on neutrality and verifiability. Please see Help:Intro. ColinFine (talk) 17:03, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- It's ok, some people can make mistakes. Some random account on this website (talk) 17:09, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- And thanks for the answer! Some random account on this website (talk) 17:10, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Some random account on this website I wonder if your question is, since you've set up an account, are you required to start editing something. As far as I know, the answer is no. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:34, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- ok Some random account on this website (talk) 20:10, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Some random account on this website I wonder if your question is, since you've set up an account, are you required to start editing something. As far as I know, the answer is no. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:34, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
How do I reference myself when adding my family information to my fathers wiki site, i.e. wives and children?
I am the 2nd daughter of two biological daughters of Charles "Charlie" Applewhite, and there is no family (wives, children) information listed. I added under "Notes", because I did not know how to list a ref. Could you please let me know how I should do this? Best, Lisa Applewhite Kimbell (redacted) Apple1954 (talk) 17:12, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Apple1954 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You cannot reference yourself, because Wikipedia summarizes what published reliable sources that can be verified state. There needs to be such a source for family information in order to include it in an article. 331dot (talk) 17:16, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Apple1954 Wikipedia has a core policy that everything written in articles must be able to be verified by its readers from the cited sources. Thus whatever you happen to know but has not been published in such a source cannot be in an article here. I will revert your addition in a moment and place some further information on your Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:18, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
How do you prove that you are the daughter of someone you are trying to write about, and/or is this a conflict of interest? Apple1954 Apple1954 (talk) 17:25, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Apple1954 We don't necessarily need you to prove you are who you say you are- but you do likely have a conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 17:29, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, it is almost certainly a conflict of interest; but apart from the question of conflict of interest, it is usually irrelevant whether you are the daughter. Wikipedia articles should be neutral summaries of what independent reliable published sources say about the subject. In principle the subject's daughter can do that as well as anybody else, but it may be difficult for her to confine herself to what the published sources say, especially when they appear to say something different from her memories. ColinFine (talk) 17:30, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Dear ColinFine,
- Thank you, for the information. BTW, you write beautifully!
- Best,
- Apple1954 Apple1954 (talk) 17:41, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Apple1954 It seems to me that you don't have to prove that you ARE the daughter; you only have to document the existence of the daughter. And actually, it's probably better done by someone who is not the daughter. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:19, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, Lisa. For notes, we often use the template {{efn}}, which is the approach used in Charlie's article. If you're new to Wikipedia, that is quite esoteric! I'm just mentioning it so that you may know how explanatory footnotes are created, though I realize it's not your primary concern. I hope you can find a source that mentions your name. An offline obituary maybe? Our article does say that he had two daughters, but I can't access the supporting sources to see whether names are mentioned. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 22:06, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Can you use your own IMDb site as ref?
I am an actress with an IMDb page and my father is listed on my page, with a paragraph of his career. He has a Wiki page and I wanted to know if I could use IMDb as a ref? Apple1954 Apple1954 (talk) 17:33, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Apple1954: IMDB is not considered a reliable source on Wikipedia, see WP:IMDB. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:40, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Dear victor,
- Thank you. Apple1954 (talk) 17:42, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Apple1954 I had driven home to me the reliability--at least for establishing notability (not!)--of IMDB when I discovered that I have a page on IMDB. I had a sort of secondary, but significant--and speaking, and appearing throughout--role in a small independent movie involving a fantasy world and fantasy races from a series of graphic novels. All the actors were body painted according to their particular fantasy race. I myself portrayed a member of one "House" that has chosen to return to nature and forego clothing; we, the actors portraying that particular group, wore ONLY body paint. That movie only ever appeared on Vimeo.com, and it stayed there for a couple of years until Vimeo recently deleted the account--presumably because too many of us were running around naked. I don't consider myself Wikipedia-notable for that. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:29, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Why is IMDB not considered reliable?
- @apple1954 I need help contacting a real person here please.Moderator Archer S Morrison (talk) 19:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Archer S Morrison, see the explanation at WP:IMDB. Can you explain what you mean by "a real person"? Wikipedia has administrators, not moderators; their toolset is used for curbing disruptive behavior. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:59, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Archer S Morrison IMDb is not considered a reliable source because whatever fact-checking processes they use - if any - are embarrassingly poor, and it's been known to use Wikipedia content itself. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 20:04, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
The stock exchange release is not a reliable source according to Wikipedia?
Why does Wikipedia not accept stock exchange releases as reliable sources? Unlike many newspapers, which are accepted as reliable sources, the text of stock exchange releases must be pure fact. If misleading information is given, the company may come under investigation and face serious problems in addition to reputational damage. I can well understand that a company's press release, which is often more like an advertisement, is not accepted as a reliable source, but a stock exchange release is one that is monitored by the market authorities.
The financial information of all companies listed on Wikipedia is taken from their stock exchange releases (financial statements). Similarly, news about companies is mainly based on the company's stock exchange releases. Science tends to refer to the original source rather than a source that refers to it, but Wikipedia considers the original source to be unreliable because the information comes from the company itself. In contrast, if a politically active journalist makes a newspaper story about it, which reports the story from the angle he wants in a major newspaper, suddenly that source becomes reliable?
I am referring to an article I did about a company founded in 2005, formerly focused on developing clean technology companies, which decided in 2021 to focus on one of its businesses, manufacturing energy-saving filters, and to sell its other holdings. The company changed its name to reflect this company this month. There are few reliable articles on the subject other than the company's stock exchange filings and for what the company does, the information is taken from their website. The article cannot be published on Wikipedia until some reliable sources have reported on it, because the official information from the company itself is considered as unreliable source? The article is here: Eagle Filters Group Senjasenkaappi (talk) 20:54, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Senjasenkaappi Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not interested in official information from a company, at least to establish notability(for a company). Wikipedia primarily summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company. A company is free to speak about itself on its own website and social media. 331dot (talk) 21:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Senjasenkaappi I don't think that the issue is about the reliability of the sources in this case, because as you say these are subject to overview by the relevant authorities. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia which limits its content based on notability, not just mere existence. I could write a draft about myself that was entirely accurate, and so could seven billion other people. The criteria for an article here requires WP:INDEPENDENT WP:SECONDARY reliable sources which is why most of us have to use social media with less stringent rules. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:09, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Senjasenkaappi. Material published by a regulated stock exchange may be reliable, but it is not independent because the purpose of the stock exchange is to buy and sell various stocks. What is required to establish notability is significant coverage that is both reliable and fully independent of the topic. Cullen328 (talk) 21:15, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- That's not entirely true. Stock exchange releases must provide investors with relevant information about the company if the situation has changed from before. This can have a positive, neutral or negative effect on the company's share price, but that is for the market to decide.Senjasenkaappi (talk) 10:22, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Senjasenkaappi. Material published by a regulated stock exchange may be reliable, but it is not independent because the purpose of the stock exchange is to buy and sell various stocks. What is required to establish notability is significant coverage that is both reliable and fully independent of the topic. Cullen328 (talk) 21:15, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- You may include a stock exchange release. But it won't help establish that the company is notable. Maproom (talk) 21:18, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- In this case, the company was set up in 2005. Its original idea was to own clean technology companies. The company the company decided to focus their business on has been developing filter materials since 1995. The company is listed on stock exchanges in two different countries. The fact that the company has been operating under its current name and in its current form since 14 November 2022 means that there have not yet been many articles about it, especially as it operates in Finland and publishes in English, which means that Finnish journalists, who are mainly interested in the subject, have to translate them into Finnish instead of copy-pasting them. It's apparently ok if I change the references in the article from English to the Finnish article behind the paywall instead of the orignal English release from the company? Especially as the editor seems to have translated using Google Translate? It is quite ridiculous that it is insisted that information from the company itself is always unreliable in Wikipedia, but when published in a reliable financial journal by a lazy journalist, the same thing becomes reliable, because the journal itself is a source known to be reliable and the journalist has assessed the reliability of the article. Senjasenkaappi (talk) 22:29, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Switching to rewritten press releases (that is, churnalism), won't help either. You need 3 or so sources that have been written independently. No one has said that
that information from the company itself is always unreliable in Wikipedia
- it just does not build the case for notability. We need some indication that people aside from the company itself and/or lazy journalists reposting press releases have decided this company is important enough to write about it. MrOllie (talk) 22:35, 25 November 2022 (UTC)- Such a limitation is an excellent barrier to publication, because there are two major sources of financial news in Finland (Kauppalehti and Arvopaperi), so there will not be at least three. Or, in some sexy area, other magazines are also writing about it, but when was the last time you needed energy-saving gas turbine filters for your home? Senjasenkaappi (talk) 23:00, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- You assume that those two publications have a duopoly on reporting on companies. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 00:07, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Well, of course not, but the fact that it hasn't been reported by other media. The two are also co-authoring each other's articles and publishing them at the same time. It's much easier to find articles about something on Twitter or Facebook from different media, even women's magazines. The mechanical autism that company stock market reports are not reliable sources is Wikipedia's bad fault. Have you read the article? Why is the information that the trading symbol and name will change on xx day so unreliable as self-reported by the company that some media should have reported it to be reliable?Senjasenkaappi (talk) 10:03, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- You have already been told that it's not that stock reports are unreliable, but that they cannot be used to establish notability as they are not independent sources- they are the company speaking about themselves. In terms of establishing notability, Wikipedia wants to know what others say about the company on their own, not based on materials from the company. If no independent sources speak about the company, it wouldn't merit a Wikipedia article. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Well, of course not, but the fact that it hasn't been reported by other media. The two are also co-authoring each other's articles and publishing them at the same time. It's much easier to find articles about something on Twitter or Facebook from different media, even women's magazines. The mechanical autism that company stock market reports are not reliable sources is Wikipedia's bad fault. Have you read the article? Why is the information that the trading symbol and name will change on xx day so unreliable as self-reported by the company that some media should have reported it to be reliable?Senjasenkaappi (talk) 10:03, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- You assume that those two publications have a duopoly on reporting on companies. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 00:07, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Such a limitation is an excellent barrier to publication, because there are two major sources of financial news in Finland (Kauppalehti and Arvopaperi), so there will not be at least three. Or, in some sexy area, other magazines are also writing about it, but when was the last time you needed energy-saving gas turbine filters for your home? Senjasenkaappi (talk) 23:00, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Switching to rewritten press releases (that is, churnalism), won't help either. You need 3 or so sources that have been written independently. No one has said that
- In this case, the company was set up in 2005. Its original idea was to own clean technology companies. The company the company decided to focus their business on has been developing filter materials since 1995. The company is listed on stock exchanges in two different countries. The fact that the company has been operating under its current name and in its current form since 14 November 2022 means that there have not yet been many articles about it, especially as it operates in Finland and publishes in English, which means that Finnish journalists, who are mainly interested in the subject, have to translate them into Finnish instead of copy-pasting them. It's apparently ok if I change the references in the article from English to the Finnish article behind the paywall instead of the orignal English release from the company? Especially as the editor seems to have translated using Google Translate? It is quite ridiculous that it is insisted that information from the company itself is always unreliable in Wikipedia, but when published in a reliable financial journal by a lazy journalist, the same thing becomes reliable, because the journal itself is a source known to be reliable and the journalist has assessed the reliability of the article. Senjasenkaappi (talk) 22:29, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Senjasenkaappi: Your English Wikipedia account is only a few days old and so far all of your edits have been related to trying to create an article or edit content about this particular company. Is that the only reason why you decided to create an English Wikipedia account? Are you connected to this company in some way? Were you asked or otherwise tasked by the company to create an English Wikipedia article about it? If you're connected to the company in some way, then that's OK; however, the more transparent you are about any such connection, the easier it will be for others to help you. Being connected to something doesn't mean you can't try and create a Wikipedia article about it, but there are certain policies and guidelines that you'll need to be aware of in order to avoid having problems when you try to do so. Is your draft a translation of fi:Eagle Filters Group? The formatting looks very similar. Translating articles from other language Wikipedias is allowed, but once again there are specific policies and guidelines that need to be complied with when doing so. Once again, the more transparent you are about these types of things, the easier it will be for someone to help you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:51, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- The reason I created the account was because I can't upload files without it (like the company logo). I usually edit Wikipedia anonymously because I like the idea that everyone can contribute and improve articles. I am not affiliated with the company in any way. I work in the energy sector, so I am familiar with gas turbines through that, and I know that the filter solution they have developed over a quarter of a century is one of the best in the world and reduces greenhouse emissions that way. Yes, the article is a direct translation I made from the Finnish article.Senjasenkaappi (talk) 12:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you Senjasenkaappi for clarifying that your draft is a translation of the Finnish Wikipedia article. Translating articles from other language Wikipedias into English for possible inclusion in English Wikipedia is allowed, but it needs to be done in accordance with WP:TRANSLATE. There are a number of things you need to be aware of when doing such a thing. The first is that Wikipedia's general licensing requires that any reuse of textual content be properly attributed in order for it to not be considered a copyright violation, and this includes content translated from a non-English Wikipedia to English Wikipedia or vice versa. The reason for this is because the copyright owners of textual content are, for the most part, the persons who create or edit such content and not the Wikimedia Foundation. Although everyone who edits any Wikipedia page on any language Wikipedia is agreeing to release their contributions under Wikipedia's general licensing each time they click the "Publish changes" button, they are still considered to retain the copyright over such content. If you translate their content into English, you're creating a WP:Derivative work perhaps, but you still need to properly attributed the original non-English article for it to not be considered a WP:COPYVIO.Assuming that your Finnish is good enough to translate the article into English (machine translations are considered unacceptable per WP:MACHINETRANSLATION), then the next thing you need to understand is that just because an article exists on Finnish Wikipedia is not a reason in and of itself for the same or a similar article to exist on English Wikipedia. Each language Wikipedia is a distinct project with its own community of editors as well as its own policies and guidelines. Since English Wikipedia is the largest of the various Wikipedia and it has the largest community of editors, many of its policies and guidelines have been adopted many by other language Wikipedias; so, there might be lots of overlapping in certain areas. There can, on the other hand, also be some important differences not only in the specific wording of a policy or guideline, but also in how rigorously it's being enforced. You're going to need to clearly establish that the company your draft is about meets WP:NCORP in order for the draft to be accepted as an article. In particular, you're going to need to show that reliable secondary sources have been giving it significant coverage per WP:CORPDEPTH for it to be considered notable for a stand-alone article to be written about it. This is a really big hurdle to WP:OVERCOME, but it's what you're going to be expected to do in order for your draft to be accepted.Each language Wikipedia also tends to have different style guidelines as well and English Wikipedia articles needs to be written in accordance with its WP:MOS. For example, the coloring used in the table in your draft might be OK for Finnish Wikipedia, but it seems a bit odd per MOS:COLOR. Another example is where references are added with respect to punctuation as explained in WP:REFPUNC: English Wikipedia wants them added after punctuation for the most part. English Wikipedia also doesn't really use commas in place of decimal points as explained in MOS:DECIMAL. So, there might be differences in style between English and Finnish Wikipedia that you'll need to cleanup if you're able to resolve the notability questions.You mentioned that you created an account because you want to upload the company's logo. Assuming this logo is thee same one you uploaded locally to Finnish Wikipedia as "non-free content", then I don't think it's complex enough to be eligible for copyright protection under US copyright law per c:COM:TOO United States as well as under Finnish copyright law per c:COM:TOO Finland. So, the file you uploaded could mostly likely be moved to Wikipedia Commons. You probably should check at c:COM:VPC just to make sure, but it should be OK for Commons. If it is, there will be no need for you to re-upload the logo to English Wikipedia since you can just use the Commons file instead.Finally, you mentioned that you
usually edit Wikipedia anonymously
which I'm assuming means you edit using an IP address. That's perfectly OK, but it's not as anonymous as you might think since an IP address can often be geolocated and is visible to anyone who wants to see it. So, you might've actually been providing others with more information about who you are than you would've been doing with a registered account. You also should be aware that English Wikipedia has a strict policy against using multiple accounts in an inappropriate way and some examples of this are given in WP:SOCK. I'm going to assume that 62.78.251.132 isn't you, but you also need to be very careful with WP:MEAT if you did post on some off-Wikipedia forum seeking assistance from others to try and help get your draft accepted. Such an approach is pretty much never viewed favorably by the English Wikipedia community. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:58, 26 November 2022 (UTC)- Thank you @Marchjuly for for your very thorough reply, which showed that you have read the article carefully!
- Should I somehow indicate in the article that it is a translation?
- This company has made a significant improvement in air intake filters, which provide an average 2% increase in efficiency for gas turbines. The problem with the company's industry is that it is mainly covered in energy trade magazines, as their customers are energy companies and they have virtually no consumer products other than FFP2/FF3 masks, which are also mainly aimed at professionals. You probably don't know which company made the seat belts and airbags for your car, but it's almost certainly Autoliv, which you've hardly ever heard of. A 2% improvement in gas turbine efficiency may not sound like much, but with the price of gas multiplying and one kWh of gas costing around €0.34 to produce, that's a significant amount of money. A 400 MW gas turbine can produce 8 MW/h more electricity with more air permeable filters. That's an extra €2720 per hour, €65 280 per day and €23.8 million per year.
- I corrected the comments on the colouring and commas. I removed all the colouring. It was done by somebody in the Finnish Wikipedia and it's not quite ok there either.
- I agree about the complexity of the logo. I'll upload it to Commons.
- I usually only make minor corrections and updates to articles, so that's why I haven't had time to "log in". Today I had to boot my router and apparently I have to make changes while logged in for now, because my new IP address is blocked in all Wikipedias.
- There has been some discussion online about the fact that the company's Wikipedia page has been updated. There had been calls for a rewrite, as the information was in line with the previous company structure and was no longer accurate. In the same context, there have been questions about when the English version will be available. For example, Google uses Wikipedia articles to introduce companies. They have not yet updated the information to reflect the new name, as it is likely to be added manually rather than automatically. For example, for Eagle Filters Group, the reading the page from Finland appears in Finnish and from Sweden in Swedish. In English, the start of the Wikipedia page is not displayed at all: [https://www.google.com/finance/quote/EAGLE:HEL]. Senjasenkaappi (talk) 19:45, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- You can provide attribution for your translation by using the template {{Translated page}} on the article's talk page as explained in WP:TFOLWP. That should be sufficient for Wikipedia's licensing purposes. The other stuff about the logo, coloring and decimal points are things that are not really related to the WP:NCORP of the company and shouldn't really impact whether the draft is ultimately accepted; they were good to cleanup, but they could've been cleaned up at any point in time. You should always try to log in to you account when you edit, particularly to avoid editing the same page with different accounts. I you want to use an IP for some things, then that's OK; however, it's a very bad idea to do so on the same page unless you're quite clear that the IP is you. Good luck with the draft. Even if it's declined for being WP:TOOSOON, perhaps things will change in the near future if the company continues to do good things. A company doesn't need to be written about on Wikipedia to be considered a good company; in fact, some companies might prefer not to be written about on Wikipedia because they have pretty much zero editorial control over what's written.-- Marchjuly (talk) 23:30, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you Senjasenkaappi for clarifying that your draft is a translation of the Finnish Wikipedia article. Translating articles from other language Wikipedias into English for possible inclusion in English Wikipedia is allowed, but it needs to be done in accordance with WP:TRANSLATE. There are a number of things you need to be aware of when doing such a thing. The first is that Wikipedia's general licensing requires that any reuse of textual content be properly attributed in order for it to not be considered a copyright violation, and this includes content translated from a non-English Wikipedia to English Wikipedia or vice versa. The reason for this is because the copyright owners of textual content are, for the most part, the persons who create or edit such content and not the Wikimedia Foundation. Although everyone who edits any Wikipedia page on any language Wikipedia is agreeing to release their contributions under Wikipedia's general licensing each time they click the "Publish changes" button, they are still considered to retain the copyright over such content. If you translate their content into English, you're creating a WP:Derivative work perhaps, but you still need to properly attributed the original non-English article for it to not be considered a WP:COPYVIO.Assuming that your Finnish is good enough to translate the article into English (machine translations are considered unacceptable per WP:MACHINETRANSLATION), then the next thing you need to understand is that just because an article exists on Finnish Wikipedia is not a reason in and of itself for the same or a similar article to exist on English Wikipedia. Each language Wikipedia is a distinct project with its own community of editors as well as its own policies and guidelines. Since English Wikipedia is the largest of the various Wikipedia and it has the largest community of editors, many of its policies and guidelines have been adopted many by other language Wikipedias; so, there might be lots of overlapping in certain areas. There can, on the other hand, also be some important differences not only in the specific wording of a policy or guideline, but also in how rigorously it's being enforced. You're going to need to clearly establish that the company your draft is about meets WP:NCORP in order for the draft to be accepted as an article. In particular, you're going to need to show that reliable secondary sources have been giving it significant coverage per WP:CORPDEPTH for it to be considered notable for a stand-alone article to be written about it. This is a really big hurdle to WP:OVERCOME, but it's what you're going to be expected to do in order for your draft to be accepted.Each language Wikipedia also tends to have different style guidelines as well and English Wikipedia articles needs to be written in accordance with its WP:MOS. For example, the coloring used in the table in your draft might be OK for Finnish Wikipedia, but it seems a bit odd per MOS:COLOR. Another example is where references are added with respect to punctuation as explained in WP:REFPUNC: English Wikipedia wants them added after punctuation for the most part. English Wikipedia also doesn't really use commas in place of decimal points as explained in MOS:DECIMAL. So, there might be differences in style between English and Finnish Wikipedia that you'll need to cleanup if you're able to resolve the notability questions.You mentioned that you created an account because you want to upload the company's logo. Assuming this logo is thee same one you uploaded locally to Finnish Wikipedia as "non-free content", then I don't think it's complex enough to be eligible for copyright protection under US copyright law per c:COM:TOO United States as well as under Finnish copyright law per c:COM:TOO Finland. So, the file you uploaded could mostly likely be moved to Wikipedia Commons. You probably should check at c:COM:VPC just to make sure, but it should be OK for Commons. If it is, there will be no need for you to re-upload the logo to English Wikipedia since you can just use the Commons file instead.Finally, you mentioned that you
- The reason I created the account was because I can't upload files without it (like the company logo). I usually edit Wikipedia anonymously because I like the idea that everyone can contribute and improve articles. I am not affiliated with the company in any way. I work in the energy sector, so I am familiar with gas turbines through that, and I know that the filter solution they have developed over a quarter of a century is one of the best in the world and reduces greenhouse emissions that way. Yes, the article is a direct translation I made from the Finnish article.Senjasenkaappi (talk) 12:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Another question regarding sourcing and adding references
Hello, I have another question relating to the same article as before : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shintaro_Ishihara#Books_written_by_Ishihara in this an editor has added an template asking for sourcing to be added to the bibliography of Shintaro Ishihara. Does Wikipedia require a list of books authored by a certain person to be sourced from secondary sources, because by what I can tell most western authors' books on here are either referenced by their ISBN code or have sources added only if their books won an award. I am pretty confused. What steps can I take to help add references for the books? Thank you again for your help. Wpakxl (talk) 00:58, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- My first reaction, Wpakxl, was "Of course that's not necessary"; but I took a look at the list and yes it does need referencing. Not "<ref>blah blah</ref>" referencing, but referencing all the same. For any book whose first edition has an ISBN, provide the ISBN. For any whose first edition does not, provide the NCID or a good OCLC or (better) both for that first edition. There's your referencing done. And of course it's not merely referencing: it helps readers locate the books. (Here's a model.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:58, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- PS, Wpakxl, strictly speaking, an ISBN is not a reference. The ISBN for a book doesn't even prove that a book matching the ISBN even exists. However, a typical ISBN can be used for finding bibliographical information for a real-world edition of a book. Somebody could reasonably question the accuracy, usefulness or validity of this or that particular ISBN, but I don't think that they could reasonably claim that a set of demonstrably valid ISBNs for a writer with print runs as large as Ishihara's was insufficient evidence for the existence of those editions. -- Hoary (talk) 12:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello and thanks for your reply. I will do as you say. I wanted to ask if there is a need for the bibliography to be in the form of a table like something over at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_King_bibliography or is the current format sufficient? Also, as I can clearly see you have sufficient experience in editing pages related to Japanese culture, would it be fine if I could come to your talk page to ask your for any doubts I might have? Again, thanks a lot for your advice. Wpakxl (talk) 02:38, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Wpakxl, I don't like the King bibliography: the complexity of its layout seems quite unnecessary, and the fact that it's tabular greatly increases the amount of scrolling that's needed. Other editors here may well have very different opinions. One thing that doesn't satisfy me about the Ishihara bibliography is that the status of many of the English titles isn't clear. When this is on a book published in Japan, is this an alternative, English-language title that actually appears in or on the book (as frequently happens for all-Japanese-language books), or is it a nonce translation by a Wikipedia editor? You're welcome to ask me questions; but if these are about a specific article it's better to ask them to nobody in particular on that article's talk page, and if you don't get helpful answers, then to ping me to get my attention. -- Hoary (talk) 11:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello and thanks for your reply. I will do as you say. I wanted to ask if there is a need for the bibliography to be in the form of a table like something over at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_King_bibliography or is the current format sufficient? Also, as I can clearly see you have sufficient experience in editing pages related to Japanese culture, would it be fine if I could come to your talk page to ask your for any doubts I might have? Again, thanks a lot for your advice. Wpakxl (talk) 02:38, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Article creation
Hello, I’m the Christian Cartoonist. I desire to be a Wikipedia article creator, but it’s difficult with all the procedures and what to put in there. What are some things I can do? The Christian Cartoonist (talk) 03:21, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- General advice is gain experience by improving existing articles before attempting to create an article - a difficult task for beginners. David notMD (talk) 08:03, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse! One thing you can do is to make sure you have the sources required at WP:GNG before trying to make an article. If you don't, write about something else. If you do, see WP:TUTORIAL on how to add references correctly and WP:YFA on how to start an article. See "Help out" at Wikipedia:Community portal, there's much to do besides making new articles. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Request for a site unban
My site was banned from wikipedia for creating a talk page or including it as a business. It was banned back in 2021 I came to know just a few weeks ago. How do I request for excluding my web address from banned list? Jabbar132 (talk) 06:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Flatly speaking, you don't. While you technically could appeal a blacklisting at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (assuming it was blacklisted on the English-language Wikipedia) in practice requests to remove one's own website from the blacklist are summarily rejected. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 07:16, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I presume you are talking about your website being added to either the local spam blacklist or the global blacklist. If so, either of these has a talkpage (local | global ) where delisting requests can be made, however, the chance that requests from site owners are granted are extremely low.
- If this is about gari.pk, for which you made a whitelist request in June this year, the reply you recived by Anachronist is still valid. gari.pk is on the global blacklist (added here) and as such a delisting request would need to be made here.
- If this is about something else, woould you please specify what? Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:18, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Yes I request about gari.pk but got no answers, As you mentioned let me check and continue if still problem occurs I'll ask here Jabbar132 (talk) 07:48, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- It is about gari.pk but I found no way of requesting unban of site or I'm missing something. Can you help me out Jabbar132 (talk) 10:40, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Personal websites are not allowed on Wikipedia. There is nothing you can do to unban it. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:35, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Create Article
How can I created article in wikipedia Hey Samsung (talk) 13:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, if you want to create an article you should read here for instructions: WP:MFA. Remember to keep your language encylopedic and to source any claims you make. FishandChipper 🐟🍟 13:34, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hey Samsung Be advised that writing a new article is the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia, and you may set yourself up for disappointment and frustration if you dive in too quickly- please spend some time editing existing articles first, and use the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 13:39, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
How to edit Wikipedia Article
Please any one can teach me how to edit wikipedia article in simple way. Hey Samsung (talk) 14:35, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- You can start at Help:Introduction. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:41, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oh dear. User now blocked as a WP:SOCKPUPPET. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:10, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Alt
I would like to get permission to use my alternate account, User:Villanykörte. I will mainly use this account for editing tests. Ricciardo Best (talk) 15:08, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- You're generally allowed to use alternative accounts for test edits. The best way to do it is to create a user page and make sure it says on your page what your alternate account is. Read the sockpuppetry page for more information on when you can and can't use alternate accounts. Usually you don't need a second account to do testing though unless you're working with scripting or something like that. Your sandbox is a good place to do test edits, and you can always create a second sandbox if you need to. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Gopal Tamang and Sabina Bajagain
Can any one create about Gopal Tamang and Sabina Bajagain article in Wikipedia for some information in people Hey Samsung (talk) 15:16, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hey Samsung I get the sense that English may not be your primary language; have you considered editing the version of Wikipedia that is in your primary language? 331dot (talk) 15:19, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Are you go to create Wikipedia Article about Gopal Tamang and Sabina Bajagain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hey Samsung (talk • contribs) 15:26, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- I personally am not going to; you may request it at Requested articles but there are many thousands of requests there, and it may be a long time. Could you answer my question please? 331dot (talk) 15:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Indef blocked as sock. David notMD (talk) 23:34, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello.
Hello there, I would like to know, how do I join this lovely place? Kind regards, H2Perkins. H2Perkins (talk) 16:29, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- It seems you already have. All you have to do now is make edits that improve the encyclopedia. Fix errors when you see them or add content based on reliable sources. What I suggest you don't do is ruin pages that you don't like, like you did on the talk page for Brazil. We're happy to have you here as long as your edits are helpful. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:14, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oops - editor now blocked for making unconstructive edits (per filter log). Nick Moyes (talk) 23:08, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Archiving URLs
I archived an article at archive.today but then thought it might be better to use Wayback Machine. Now I have archived versions from both and am wondering if I can somehow use both or if one is preferable to the other. Mcljlm (talk) 16:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- There are a number of archiving services available. The biggest advantage of Wayback is that it does a lot of pro-active archiving, and you often will have a large selection of existing archive versions to choose from. Also, Wayback generally will have linked pages archived as well, which can be critical to the usefulness of an archive link.
- I had been using archive.today in many cases when there were issues with Wayback. However, their on-screen advertisements have at times become excessively intrusive, and even though the archived page from archive.today may seem acceptable today, if they change how the ads display, that will affect previously-archived pages. As a result, I have started to look for alernatives. In particular, Wikiwix seems to be a popular alternative, though I have been using ghostarchive. Every archiving service will have its peculiarities. Unfortunately the interfaces are all different and not all web pages can be effectively archive on all the archiving services. I'm mostly concerned with having workable archive copies and not too concerned if Wikipedia readers have to put up with these slightly different interfaces. Fabrickator (talk) 19:58, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Help understanding copyright
Hi,
Dumb question maybe but I want to add an English translation to this page.
I got my edit reverted because I didn't cite my source. I realize that is bad practice so sorry :)
Someone on this website insists they own the copyright to the translation.
Clearly the translation there was verbatim copied from a comment 7 years earlier on a imperial Japan reenactment forum.
Are forum comments in the public domain?
Thanks,
Rishi RishiKakade (talk) 21:20, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- @RishiKakade: No, forum posts are not usally in the public domain. As far as Wikipedia is concerned, wether the translation was copied from lyrictranslate.com or tapatalk.com is a distinction without a difference since neither has any evidence on it that its freely licensed, and Wikipedia assumes things to be under standard "all rights reserved" copyright unless there is evidence to the contrary. (Courtesy Ping DanCherek as the revdelling admin) Additionally, translations are derivative works, so there are actually two copyrights to consider, the copyright of the original work (I am not an expert at Japanese Copyright, but if the song was released in 1885 its probbably PD now) and the copyright of the translation (which is still copyrighted). Victor Schmidt (talk) 21:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, RishiKakade, and thanks for your question. I'm afraid that forum contents are not in the public domain (unless there is a specific and clearly-stated agreement that those who post to it are releasing their words under a Creative Commons commercial license, just as we do here. That would be quite unusual, I suspect, and so the content would be the copyright of the person who posted those comments. But there is a bigger issue here - discussion forums are not seen as reliable sources because anyone can post anything to them without any editorial oversight. Therefore we do not permit them as sources, just as we don't accept personal blogs and personal websites, or self-published vanity books. I don't know enough about translations from Japanese to English to know whether there would be intellectual copyright on a high quality translation. The song you want to write about is clearly long past any copyright issue. I might have to leave that for others to comment on. But because it is a simple matter of copying the Japanese into Googler translate and coming up with a poor, but workable translation, I wonder whether it would be best not to include any translation in the article at all, and let readers do it for themselves until such time as a reliably-sourced, high-quality translation can be cited. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:06, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- A quick check online shows that human-made translations are copyrighted, regardless of quality. For translations on public domain text like in this, the copyright is usually held by the translator. – robertsky (talk) 02:43, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Just a comment, Nick Moyes, an appreciable number of forums state in their terms and conditions that the copyright of any text posted belongs to the forum, not to the person who posted it. This makes logical sense as the forum owner may wish to protect themselves from someone mirroring the entire forum, and if posting is anonymous, sorting out who owns the copyright would otherwise by quite tricky. A lot of forum users have absolutely no idea of this, and don't bother reading the small print. It's generally not a big problem, but I've seen it become an issue in a self-help forum where one particularly regular poster was considering using her accumulated posts as the foundation for writing a book, and was a bit shocked to realise she needed the forum owner's consent! Elemimele (talk) 12:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- A quick check online shows that human-made translations are copyrighted, regardless of quality. For translations on public domain text like in this, the copyright is usually held by the translator. – robertsky (talk) 02:43, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
youtuber wikipedia article
if your a youtuber what number of subscibers do you need in order to have a wikipedia article Joel clements is D E A D (talk) 02:18, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Courtesy link: Draft:Finn McCool (youtuber) echidnaLives - talk - edits 02:21, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- It's not based on number of subscribers, it's based on WP:CREATOR. ––FormalDude (talk) 02:22, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Can I post pictures I took of a singer during their concert to their Wikipedia page?
Hello. I follow a singer whose page's photos haven't been updated in awhile. If I have a great photo of him that I own the copyright to (because I took it during one his concerts) am I allowed to post it on his page, including replacing the current photo in his page's infobox? I know that I'd have to upload the image to the Wikimedia Commons first. I understand the technicalities pretty well; I need advice on the legalities. Thanks. Kirkdudley (talk) 03:27, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello @Kirkdudley, welcome to the teahouse! You can use these images, but generally they should be high-quality enough that the musician is recognisable. So, if you were close-ish to the stage and got a good quality picture, great! But if you were at the back and can barely make them out in the image, maybe not... But, there is no guideline/policies based on this, just a community norm.
- Thanks, echidnaLives - talk - edits 04:09, 27 November 2022 (UTC).
- Thanks! Kirkdudley (talk) 04:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Kirkdudley: Images should be posted on Wikimedia Commons, and into a Wikipedia article from there. You won't be able to post them directly into Wikipedia. Also, please be selective - each picture should highlight something from the article, not just "here are a hundred pictures I took".--Gronk Oz (talk) 05:36, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks! Kirkdudley (talk) 04:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
how to add musical artist information in wikipedia?
Recently I send a new craft about our musical group 'popeye(band)'. But it's declined because of "not adequately supported by reliable sources". How can I fix this problem? Agentsame (talk) 08:01, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Agentsame Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, please review conflict of interest for information on how to disclose your relationship with the band on your user page. Wikipedia is not a place for bands to tell the world about themselves, and were mere existence warrants a mention. This is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion, called notability- in particular, the definition of a notable band. An article about a band must not merely describe the band and the music it has produced. It must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the band, showing how it meets that special definition of notability. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Help to get to neutral tone
Greetings:
I would appreciate a second look at this page Draft:Norma Jean to help point out anything that needs editing to meet the Wikipedia standards. Angelagh (talk) 13:42, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Angelagh Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for declaring your paid connection to Norma Jean. Where did you get the information about her early life and career from? Most of that content is unavailable in the cited sources, so please delete them. We don't want to know what the subject says about themselves and their backgrounds - only what reliable sources have written about that person. There are far too many External Links; one official website and one social media account will suffice.
- In essence, collate only what others have already published about this person, and ensure you cite each of them properly. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:48, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes THANK YOU! I see your point! I missed where I was referencing that information. I have removed it now. I also removed several external links. I'm open to any other recommendations as well as if it is perhaps at the point to be accepted for publication. Angelagh (talk) 15:05, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oh - I found some of that content, but that raises another issue, now. Never do what you did here and copy paste from other websites (https://normajeanactress.wordpress.com/about/). That content is copyright of its authors (even if that person is you), and would need to be rewritten to have a more encyclopaedic tone of voice and not to closely paraphrase the original in any way. Not only that, the information comes from the subject's own website, and is not acceptable for Wikipedia. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:07, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes I just realized I didn't publish the latest changes where I removed a lot of the content. Hopefully the latest edits have removed the questionable material. thanks again! Angelagh (talk) 16:18, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
2011 Los Angeles Angels season correction
Hello. Please go to above article. Scroll down to pitchers section. I dont know how to seperate from hitters section, should be individual box by itself. Need help. Please fix. Thank you.Theairportman33531 (talk) 13:46, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- I believe I made the change you wanted, let me know 2011 Los Angeles Angels season Angelagh (talk) 14:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Yes, however, one more thing. Where it says Pitching statistics; move that all the way to the left, please. Thank you for your help.Theairportman33531 (talk) 16:07, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Theairportman33531 It is left aligned now :) Angelagh (talk) 16:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Editing Heading/title
Someone created a wiki page for me a while back (decades) with the title 'name (film maker)'. I am working much more in other areas (theatre) now. How can I delete/change the 'filmmaker'? (I'm new to this and decided to clean up/update the page.) Quebec Scot (talk) 14:27, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Quebec Scot I note that essentially the only article you have ever edited is Michael Mackenzie (filmmaker) so I assume this is what you mean by "a wiki page for me". If you read WP:OWN you will soon realise this doesn't belong to you and is in fact Wikipedia's article about you not your page because Wikipedia is not social media. By policy, you should not be editing that article at all since you have an obvious conflict of interest. Instead, if you think that there are changes that are well-sourced, you should make suggestions via an {{edit request}} on its Talk Page. One of these requests could be to move the article to a new title. However, the main purpose of the bracketed part of the title is to distinguish you from other Michael Mackenzies, not to give a full account of all the things you may have done in your career. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:07, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. I shall refrain from editing. Quebec Scot (talk) 15:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Pinging Theroadislong who has been working on the article and may not be aware of the COI. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Michael,
- In view of all this perhaps it's best simply to remove the 'Michael Mackenzie (filmmaker) wiki page. I'm not sure why the page was started, I'm pretty sure I don't make the 'notable' standard and updating seems complicated. I realise the process might be complicated. Have you any advice?
- Best
- Quebec Scot. Quebec Scot (talk) 16:23, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
How to find Reliable Sources On A Subject with not much Information
I am a new editor and tried to make a draft on “Simon Barrett” Sadly I could not find any reliable source as the decent ones were “LinkedIn” and “Find and update company info service” which are not moderated, Any Help?
Read My Draft Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Simon_Barratt Im Following The Username Policy (talk) 15:30, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that if you (who are the one who is interested in writing about Simon Barratt) cannot find any reliable independent sources, it is likely that he does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. (I'm extremely dubious that Four Door Lemon meets those criteria either. It was created in 2009, when we were less careful about standards).
- Note that writing a single word of an article before finding the reliable sources is usually a waste of time, because either the sources aren't there and the subject isn't notable, or if the sources are there, it's quite likely to need to be rewritten from scratch according to what the sources say. See WP:BACKWARD. ColinFine (talk) 16:14, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- OK, thank you, I'll make sure to take note. Im Following The Username Policy (talk) 16:39, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
No eps for Season 14 of Barney and Friends?
Can someone fix this? What user did this? 174.27.66.83 (talk) 15:51, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- For some reason it was removed over a year ago with this edit by @One-Winged Devil. ––FormalDude (talk) 16:01, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Question about a edit dispute on PragerU between admin
I did edits on prageru based on their own sources of PragerU, these edits were reverted by an admin who told me PragerU couldn’t be used as a source for who’s the CEO for PragerU, I tried disputing this using wp:ABOUTSELF and telling him it’s used as the source itself but he told me I have no idea what I’m talking about and to stop messaging him
the current version he reverted to still uses the source and falsely references the information, as well as other issues
My edits he reverted https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1124154266 my CEO edit he later reverted https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1124155209
the exact conversation was this
Me: “Your reverting edits based on false merits due to self published sources being allowed on information about themselves wp:ABOUTSELF, which itself is already used in the article”
Him: “You seem to have no idea what you're talking about. Kindly stop messaging me”
the other message I sent he ignored which was: “Use the talk page for your reverts on PragerU your keeping false information up and misplacing information in the wrong tab”
Am I wrong? What did I get wrong? If he’s wrong can I still do nothing about it since he’s an admin? Bobisland (talk) 17:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Your edit wasn't reverted because of WP:SPS, but because you added an external link to the body of the article, which generally should not be done. Help:Referencing for beginners explains how to add sources correctly. Also, FormalDude is not an administrator. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 17:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Bobisland. Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for wanting to improve Wikipedia. That is welcome, but you need to learn how to do it properly according to our procedures - and getting reverted is part of that learning. Please read WP:Bold, revert, discuss which explains that that is the way that Wikipedia is developed. As Medline says, FormalDude is not an admin (if you look at their user page User:FormalDude, they actually say so, explicitly). But they are an experienced editor who understands what is and what is not accepted in a Wikipedia article. ColinFine (talk) 17:36, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
How is he able to decide whether a article is approved or not? Is this a separate Wikipedia given role outside of administrators or is this something any user can do? Bobisland (talk) 17:27, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Anyone can undo anyone else's edits, though keep in mind the edit warring policy. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 17:30, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- There is no such thing as "approved" (except in specific senses - eg a draft can be reviewed and accepted into the main part of the encyclopaedia), and no article is ever finished. But individual changes can be reverted by other editors, either because they are contrary to policy, or because (in the opinion of the reverting editor) they are not an improvement to the article. See WP:BRD that I linked to above. ColinFine (talk) 17:38, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
I was referencing the quote on his profile “I frequently review articles for creation and patrol articles for deletion.”
And with external links it’s a blanket ban relating to biographies in the body including the infobox? And What do I do if someone ignores going to a talk page to dispute editorializing? Bobisland (talk) 18:38, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
And dispute other edits as the user is reverting edits based on false reasons and giving new ones when corrected, with an example calling the placement of who’s the CEO of a company wp:UNDUE in a lead, I told him to use the talk page to dispute these edits but he ignored me and I don’t know what to do about it, can he revert new edits while ignoring consensus disputes about his reverts? Bobisland (talk) 19:32, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Bobisland: The one who needs to establish consensus is the one that wants to add or restore material. Otherwise, it seems to me that your exact dispute with FormalDude is one day old, that you are both civil, and that you could find the talk page - you can wait for a bit to see if someone else intervenes, or else follow the standard steps of the dispute resolution process. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:43, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Unexplained deletion of a long standing bio post
Hello. I am hoping someone on this site can help me with a frustrating situation.
The long standing Wikipedia biography post of a well known, and widely published Zen Buddhism author was recently deleted for no apparent reason.
It's possible one of Roshi Joan Sutherland's fans was innocently trying to update her bio, as it had become somewhat dated, and some very rude editor intervened, and as a result completely deleted her bio!
I can't provide a link to her page as it is now gone. Thanks in advance for any help here.
Another fan of Roshi Joan Sutherland 66.129.198.33 (talk) 17:14, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- The article, Joan Iten Sutherland, was deleted after the discussion among editors at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joan Iten Sutherland. DanCherek (talk) 17:17, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. The basic criterion for having an article about a subject in Wikipedia is that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - this is not quite the same as the general meaning of the word, and doesnt mean any of "famous", "popular", "important" or "influential" (though it often follows from those). It mostly means that several people, wholly unconnected with the subject, have chosen to publish significant amounts about them in reliable publications: if this has not happened, Wikipedia will not accept an article about them. If you look at the deletion discussion, it was about Sutherland not meeting those criteria.
- The fact that the article had been around for a long time is, unfortunately irrelevant. Wikipedia has thousands and thousands of articles which were created before we were as careful about standards as we are now. Since it is entirely a volunteer organisation, it's not anybody's "job" to go through those and weed out the ones that shouldn't be there, so they remain until somebody for some reason decides to take action. Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. ColinFine (talk) 17:47, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- I respectfully disagree. If you do your research, you will see Roshi just released another book this year, "Forests of Every Color", after her last one in 2016.
- She has recently been featured in national magazines and on popular Buddhist websites. I don't understand how she gets deleted, when other less prolific authors keep their "privileged" status. Seems like you are discriminating, maybe not intentionally, but in fact you are hurting her reputation. So much for free distribution of important info, worldwide - I think you've lost your way if you are censoring good people, imho. 66.129.198.33 (talk) 15:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- It does not matter what YOU think about a subject, only what completely unrelated, reliable sources have to say. Also, if you don't mind me saying, if the lack of a Wikipedia Article is enough to damage her reputation, it probably wasn't stable in the first place. Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 20:43, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Black hat
Black hat (computer security) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamaal5 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 27 November 2022 (UTC) please look at the edit, it uses Wikipedia as a source multiple times, and Wikipedia is clearly not a reliable source in and of itself — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamaal5 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Jamaal5 - Though the vandalism warnings were indeed quite inappropriate (WP:BITE, anyone?), you did remove a lot more then just the Wikipedia citations. casualdejekyll 17:53, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Jamaal5, and welcome to the Teahouse. You're right that Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and cannot be used as a reference. However, deleting the reference while leaving the text in the article is not helpful. Either the information can be found in a reliable source, in which case cite that; or it can't, in which case the information should be removed from the article.
- In fact, the sentence you removed the reference from in your last edit, is copied from the article white hat (computer security), where it has proper references. A more helpful thing to do would be to copy the citations from that article. ColinFine (talk) 17:56, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Making the article longer
How to make the article longer ? Please help ! JiafeiInformated (talk) 19:01, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi JiafeiInformated, welcome to the Teahouse. Which article? In general, look for reliable sources and summarize them. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:35, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Courtesy link: Sia.
- JiafeiInformated, a way not to do it is by inserting into the lede text like:
- "In her,,About section on Spotify, it says that she was born from the bumhole of a unicorn named Steve." [sic],
- as you did at 13:48, 25 June 2022, as your sole Article-space contribution to Wikipedia to date. (Reverted by SunDawn 4 minutes later.) Please read WP:Vandalism. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.249.29.80 (talk) 21:57, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- I wrote something true there.. Please check Spotify. JiafeiInformated (talk) 07:34, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Healthcare Campaigns
I apologize if I am in the wrong place.
There is a need for a page indexing all Wikipedia-listed health campaigns, it would be useful for public officials, nonprofits, researchers, and providers.
For instance, there are these one-issue campaigns:
How many more are there?
At the same time, there are multi-issue, regional/state-wide/nation-wide/worldwide campaigns, which are so important, but many of which do not have a Wikipedia page:
2019 Arizona State Health Assessment https://directorsblog.health.azdhs.gov/public-healths-10-essential-services/
Virginia Well-Being https://virginiawellbeing.com/
Blueprint for Coachella Valley: https://coachellavalleyweekly.com/blueprint-for-the-coachella-valley/
I thought about trying to start this myself, but just simple Wikipedia edits take me over an hour... if someone wants to work with me, contact me. Thanks. BooksXYZ (talk) 19:04, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- BooksXYZ Hello. This sort of comment may be better suited to the Village Pump. That said, most of those articles are members of categories that seem to be similar to what you are suggesting(such as Category:Health charities in the United States). Are you proposing a new category? 331dot (talk) 19:07, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- @BooksXYZ: We also have Category:Health campaigns but based on your examples you may not have the normal meaning of health campaign in mind. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:28, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
How to do this?
In Free State of Jones (film), in the Premise section is a quotation that begins, "based on the books." The quotation names two books and places them in both single quotes and italics. The Wikipedia version omitted the single quotes, so I added them. But, when a single quote is next to the italics code consisting of two vertical lines, then we have three vertical lines on each side, which bold the words in between them instead of placing the words in single quotes and italics. Therefore, I inserted an extra space between the single quote and the italics code consisting of two vertical lines, but that isn't good. How do we handle this? Maurice Magnus (talk) 23:13, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Use nowiki tags. I already did so on the article, so you can see the code. Sungodtemple (talk) 23:23, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Maurice Magnus and Sungodtemple, according to the Manual of Style, book titles are designated by italics and not by punctuation. I have removed the excess markup. Cullen328 (talk) 23:42, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Cullen328, wait! It was a quotation! If this was an error then [sic] tags would be appropriate. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:45, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Sungodtemple, we never change the words in a direct quotation, but we bring the typographic formatting into compliance with the MOS. Cullen328 (talk) 23:48, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Cullen328 and Sungodtemple: Yes, we can't change the words in a quotation, and we can't change the punctuation either. Because the sentence we are quoting has the book titles in single quotes and italics, then we must do the same. A "[sic]" is unnecessary to indicate that a punctuation error was in the original, and readers would not know what the "[sic]" referred to.Maurice Magnus (talk) 11:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Maurice Magnus, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your opinion does not agree with the documented consensus on Wikipedia: see MOS:CONFORM. If you think that consensus should be changed, you will need to persuade enough other editors. The place to start woukd be either WT:MOS or one of the sections of WP:VP, but frankly I don't think you've much hope. ColinFine (talk) 14:02, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- ColinFine (talk) OK, I will drop the matter. I will point out an exception to what I wrote above. There is an occasion when it is necessary to change the punctuation in a quotation -- this is apart from Wikipedia rules. If we quote something that itself contains a quotation with double quotation marks, then, if we put double quotation marks around what we're quoting, then we must change the internal quotation marks to single. Maurice Magnus (talk) 17:31, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Maurice Magnus, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your opinion does not agree with the documented consensus on Wikipedia: see MOS:CONFORM. If you think that consensus should be changed, you will need to persuade enough other editors. The place to start woukd be either WT:MOS or one of the sections of WP:VP, but frankly I don't think you've much hope. ColinFine (talk) 14:02, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Cullen328, wait! It was a quotation! If this was an error then [sic] tags would be appropriate. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:45, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Maurice Magnus and Sungodtemple, according to the Manual of Style, book titles are designated by italics and not by punctuation. I have removed the excess markup. Cullen328 (talk) 23:42, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Two articles on the same topic
Hi. The 2022 annexation referendums in Russian-occupied Ukraine article was created under a different name (Kherson Oblast status referendum). It essentially covered the same topic. I only ask about merging the two histories so that the date of creation be 24 July not 11 August. I'm confused as to where I should ask about merging?--Sakiv (talk) 01:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Sakiv: On 24 July you created an article at Kherson Oblast status referendum. It was moved to 2022 Russian-occupied Ukraine referendums where the page history [6] still is. It was later redirected to 2022 annexation referendums in Russian-occupied Ukraine. There is no rule that the oldest article takes precedence when one article is redirected to another. The only rule is that if content is copied then the source must be attributed (see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia). Wikipedia:Requests for history merge is for cases where it wasn't done but it doesn't apply here. As far as I can tell, the content you wrote [7] was not used in the target article so no attribution or history merge is required. It appears the only one who broke attribution rules is you when you copied the other article to your article [8] without giving attribution. It was reverted. I understand it can be annoying that your earlier creation is no longer recognized but such things happen. It would even be allowed to delete the page history showing your creation if the content is not used anywhere. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @PrimeHunter: The article I created was linked and was not an orphan. This should not have happened at all and is unfair. I'm talking about something completely different, so why do you want to show everyone that I'm the one who made a mistake?--Sakiv (talk) 02:51, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Sakiv: The only way to show 24 July as creation is to make a history merge so I looked carefully for justification and that means missing attribution. I just said what I found but could have omitted it when it wasn't in your favour. Your content was 1535 bytes. I have written more in this discussion. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:16, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- The other article's creator gave his assent on the history merge, so there should be no problem here. Can we finish this once and for all?--Sakiv (talk) 03:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Sakiv: Where is the assent? I didn't find it at Special:Contributions/PLATEL. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- [9].--Sakiv (talk) 04:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Sakiv: Months ago on an archived page, and months after the article creations. No wonder I didn't find it. It would have been easier if you posted that from the start. I have made the history merge but it's not something we normally do in such a situation and it makes the switch [10] look odd. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:52, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- @PrimeHunter: I see, thank you anyway.--Sakiv (talk) 04:57, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Sakiv: Months ago on an archived page, and months after the article creations. No wonder I didn't find it. It would have been easier if you posted that from the start. I have made the history merge but it's not something we normally do in such a situation and it makes the switch [10] look odd. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:52, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- [9].--Sakiv (talk) 04:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Sakiv: Where is the assent? I didn't find it at Special:Contributions/PLATEL. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- The other article's creator gave his assent on the history merge, so there should be no problem here. Can we finish this once and for all?--Sakiv (talk) 03:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Sakiv: The only way to show 24 July as creation is to make a history merge so I looked carefully for justification and that means missing attribution. I just said what I found but could have omitted it when it wasn't in your favour. Your content was 1535 bytes. I have written more in this discussion. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:16, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @PrimeHunter: The article I created was linked and was not an orphan. This should not have happened at all and is unfair. I'm talking about something completely different, so why do you want to show everyone that I'm the one who made a mistake?--Sakiv (talk) 02:51, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Notability
Is the page Rekha Kamat notable enough to be included on Wikipedia? It is hard for me to tell for sure, but I have doubts. It mostly shows birth date, death date, family information about father, and a list of plays and films (most of which don’t have wikilink) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamaal5 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- It is not the article (not "page", please) that needs to be notable, but the subject. The job of the article is to demonstrate that notability.
- That said, I agree with you that the article does not, yet, demonstrate Rekha Kamat's notability. However, I would have expected that someone with such an extensive acting career, as evidenced by the list of her appearances, would be notable – i.e. that over the years sufficient material about her had been published in independent reliable sources. Someone needs to hunt down that material and add summaries of it to the article, with citations. Some of the sources already cited look as if they ought to contain a good deal of such material, but someone able to read Marathi (I cannot) would have to assess their contents and reliability.
- Since the article was only created 2 days ago (by Morekar), there is ample scope for its improvement. Still, it might have been better to have created it as a Draft and expanded it at leisure, rather than as an Article which is immediately scrutinized and held up to higher standards.
- Incidentally, the information about her father is, in my opinion, irrelevant and should be removed. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.249.29.80 (talk) 08:59, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
help
what do i do if my only source is fandom wiki? :( I know i cant use that. :'( 50.103.196.209 (talk) 02:09, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- If the topic has not received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, then it is not eligible for a Wikipedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 02:15, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- aw man rip. thanks anyway. 50.103.196.209 (talk) 02:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Infobox
Can I get some help adding an infobox to the thoropa taophora page? I figured it out for the Civil Rights Movement pages, but I'm having trouble finding an appropriate infobox flavor for this one. Jamaal5 (talk) 03:04, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- I believe the appropriate flavor is template:speciesbox, but I can't find the base code. Jamaal5 (talk) 03:08, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- There's some instructions here: Template:Speciesbox#Usage. - Sumanuil. (talk to me) 07:00, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- You might consider borrowing one from one of the other species of Thoropa, taking care to change all the information particular to the species. The other species should not be difficult to find since, just a few seconds ago, I added the article to the Category for Thoropa. I also changed the statement that it's a "subgroup" of the genus; it's a species. And it didn't need to say that it's a species of Thoropa, since that's inherent in the scientific name; much more informative to mention the family. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
how to remove IP details from edit history
I made a minor edit to a page today at 'Go Man Go (Radio Show)'. All my previous edits to this page were attributed to to my user name HonestArry. Today they were attributed to my IP address. How can I delete the IP address? HonestArry2 (talk) 05:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi HonestArry2. You can request the the IP address be hidden from public view using WP:OVERSIGHT as explained in WP:LOGGEDOUT. There's no way, however, to credit those edits to your "HonestArry2" or any other account as explained in WP:DELETEACCOUNT. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:10, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for that helpful information HonestArry2 (talk) 06:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
declined Articles
Hello, I know an entrepreneur in the country I live in. available in all media and newspapers. everyone knows him. I wanted to introduce it to the whole world, but it was rejected. can you please help with this? All references are available on their website. Yasirazeri (talk) 06:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, and welcome to the teahouse~ This is the English Wikipedia, so we can't take submissions that are written in other languages (like Turkish). You may be interested in submitting it at the Turkish Wikipedia which, as the name suggests, is written in Turkish, however I am unsure of the processes there (it might be the same, it might be different.) Some policies and guidelines may also be different. Good luck! echidnaLives - talk - edits 07:03, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Thanks for suggests . Have nice day Yasirazeri (talk) 07:13, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Who can I contact regarding add/modify laws of the war
To protect country sovereign, I have a proposal to the law of war. Do you know which organisation maintaining such this? Do you have an email address? Redcross can't help, UN no response :(. Who can help me? Tng888 (talk) 07:37, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Welcome to the "teahouse", where people ask questions about the use and editing of English-language Wikipedia. We can't give advice on other matters. -- Hoary (talk) 09:00, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, your colleague BilCat sent me here:(. She closed my question at "law of war" - Talk Tng888 (talk) 11:30, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- We have no way to modify the active laws of war, sorry Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 20:37, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- I mean to contact with lawyers who in charge add/modify the war laws Tng888 (talk) 21:01, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- I'm fairly sure the only people who can legally add/modify the laws of war are the people in charge of the United Nations. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:05, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Tng888, as recommended on your talk page, you should contact your parliamentary representative. It is the governments involved who make such rules, not anyone here on Wikipedia. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Wait so the UN isn't in charge of managing the laws of war? I'm being serious here, I didn't know. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:24, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- The UN is just a bunch of governments making agreements (sometimes, sort of) with each other. Whatever authority it has derives from them. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:31, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- The reason why I contact wiki: Redcross cant help, UN no response after 3 weeks and 2 push! :-(. So I am thinking those who update the site "https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_war" can/should be the lawyers who makes the international war laws.
- >>contact your parliamentary representative
- I am afraid they will say "we do know NOTHING" and sent me to UN.
- PLATO, please forgive me, I try my best for the last 3 weeks...I am quite disappoint by now, no one dare takes responsibility. Yes, c'est la vie, it's tough no you dont had the right connection.
- PLATO: “The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.” Tng888 (talk) 21:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Well then there's nothing you can do. No one here is a lawyer and no one here can alter international law. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- A few of us Wikipedians are probably employed in law work (a huge field of endeavor with many and varied practitioners), but it's certainly not a requirement in order to edit Law of war. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:52, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- ok, the last resort I will do is to contact "Geneva Conventions". Let hope this UN site https://www.ungeneva.org/en/contact-us is better than this one https://www.un.org/en/contact-us-0 (they are properly out for BLACK FRIDAY since 7/Nov :-) ) Tng888 (talk) 21:54, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Well then there's nothing you can do. No one here is a lawyer and no one here can alter international law. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Wait so the UN isn't in charge of managing the laws of war? I'm being serious here, I didn't know. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:24, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- I mean to contact with lawyers who in charge add/modify the war laws Tng888 (talk) 21:01, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- We have no way to modify the active laws of war, sorry Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 20:37, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, your colleague BilCat sent me here:(. She closed my question at "law of war" - Talk Tng888 (talk) 11:30, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
How to upload non-free files but use pay to upload?
but mostly non free files but using Advanced Wikimedia package upload to 4 files (Unadvanced User) upload to 8 files (Bronze User) upload to 16 files (Silver User) upload to 32 files (Gold User) upload to 64 or more (Platinum User) but free files outside Commons Can we upload at all. if Wikipedia users to me. 2001:44C8:41B2:5744:F8F8:7563:F7F6:750D (talk) 07:54, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi. Is this suggesting that you have been paid to upload files? 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 07:58, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- I think it's suggesting that users should be allowed to upload non-free files if they pay Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 08:05, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oh right. Commons is for free files. On English Wikipedia you upload non-free files..? Note that the "free" means "freedom to reuse/redistribute/re-edit". Not free as in not paid. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 08:07, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Alternatively the suggestion may be how can someone buy the copyright to some images and then donate them to Wikipedia under an open licence. If that's the case you can upload them on Wikimedia Commons and then email the permission information to us per the instructions at commons:Commons:Volunteer Response Team ϢereSpielChequers 08:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- I think it's suggesting that users should be allowed to upload non-free files if they pay Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 08:05, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Draft Rejection
this draft was submitted for review - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Madhubanti_Bagchi it has been rejected - but the reason is not clear there are references from leading indian dailies and she has been singing playback for a decade now and has worked with leading indian composers.
am looking for some specifics in order to enhance the page and avoid rejection prat (talk) 09:29, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Prat bose, it has not been rejected; it has been declined. It currently has a total of four references, citing four sources. Which among the four sources treat(s) Madhubanti Bagchi in depth? If none does, you'll have to find and cite sources that do treat her in depth. If no such sources can be found, no article about her is possible. -- Hoary (talk) 09:40, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- In-depth is a subjective thing I guess. There are external links provided as well. Let me try to share some more references. prat (talk) 10:32, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, prat bose, and welcome to the Teahouse. Notability requires that the sources be independent as well as reliable. Three of the four sources are interviews, with only a paragraph or two not directly quoted - and it is likely that the information in those introductory paragraphs came from Bagchi anyway. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only 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. The fourth reference is about somebody else, and only mentions her in passing - not even a full sentence about her. ColinFine (talk) 14:06, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response but let me clarify - apart from the early life section and the photograph nothing came from her. I am in no way connected or related to her - i have been contributing to wikipedia for a long time out of my own interest. So, I guess there is bit of assumption here which is not correct. The rest of the information is all available on the internet.
- I shall work on the citing the references a lot better so that things are more transparent and clear. prat (talk) 19:15, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, prat bose. I think you have misunderstood me. I'm not saying that you took the information in the draft from her: I'm saying that the sources that you cited (and from which you presumably took the information) are not independent of her, but are mostly interviews. Where are the sources that are wholly independent of her, and which talk about her in some depth? ColinFine (talk) 20:23, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, prat bose, and welcome to the Teahouse. Notability requires that the sources be independent as well as reliable. Three of the four sources are interviews, with only a paragraph or two not directly quoted - and it is likely that the information in those introductory paragraphs came from Bagchi anyway. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only 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. The fourth reference is about somebody else, and only mentions her in passing - not even a full sentence about her. ColinFine (talk) 14:06, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- In-depth is a subjective thing I guess. There are external links provided as well. Let me try to share some more references. prat (talk) 10:32, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Writing a page about a criminal
Several times I wrote drafts about criminals as an anonymous user, but they were all deleted for being "attack pages". How do I prevent this from happening? Ricciardo Best (talk) 10:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Ricciardo Best Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. While I don't know which drafts you are referring to- I gather that you made posts telling the world about people you feel are criminals. This is not permitted. If you want to write neutral articles about people who meet Wikipedia's definition of a notable person due to having been convicted by a court of law of having committed a crime, there is a process to go through. You should also review WP:BLPCRIME and WP:BLP1E. If the only thing that a person is known for is having been convicted of a single crime, it is doubtful that they would merit an article(unless it is someone like Lee Harvey Oswald or John Wilkes Booth). A career criminal may be different(see El Chapo) but you need extensive coverage in independent reliable sources. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 11:06, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, do make sure that the criminal really is notable first. Most are not, just like most estate-agents are not notable, even if they are good estate agents. To be notable for being a criminal, a criminal needs extended coverage in good secondary sources over a long period of time, not just the run-of-the-mill news reports at the time of the crime. Those involved in the great train robbery, for example, are notable because interest in their crime has been sustained and widespread. Second, make sure you summarise in a balanced way exactly what the sources say. Do not add even the faintest flavour of your own. Do not think for a moment that Wikipedia is here to castigate criminals or right wrongs. It isn't. It's here to give a simple historical record based on sources. We do not give any judgements ourselves. We can only report the moral statements that others have given, and even then we must be careful not to give undue weight to one individual's opinion, and we must give a balanced overview of what the sources genuinely say. Your best bet is to model your efforts on a good-quality article on another notable criminal, such as Ronnie Biggs, but remember, there are very few criminals who merit as much attention as that. And obviously, to be a criminal, the person must have been convicted. Elemimele (talk) 11:12, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Are people who are known to have committed a crime, but were never convicted still considered criminals? --Ricciardo Best (talk) 16:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Known by whom? A WP-article on any subject is supposed to cite and summarize WP:RS. See WP:BLPCRIME for some WP-context. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:49, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Ricciardo Best: there are very, very few circumstances in which someone who has not been convicted will nevertheless be described in Wikipedia as having committed the crime. The only one I can think of off-hand is where a suspect died before they could be tried, and a respectable number of neutral historians have since written that there is no doubt the suspect committed the crime. But even then, we might have to be a bit cagey and write that it is generally believed that they committed the crime (citing a couple of decent sources). As a rule of thumb, if you are feeling any form of emotion as you write about the person, or as you pose the question here, then you are probably not in a good position to write a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is a terribly amoral place: it doesn't care about right and wrong, it cares only about reflecting good sources in an unbiased way. If you think someone has escaped justice, make your case somewhere else, and if you manage to convince the world, Wikipedia will follow... we are usually last on the scene. Elemimele (talk) 18:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Elemimele, I disagree. Wikipedia cares a lot about getting things right, we have an entire policy that is concerned protecting the rights of living persons from edits that get things wrong. And the platform isn't amoral, it cares about editors treating each other with civility. This isn't a 4chan message board. I see the point you are trying to make but please be careful with generalizations that might misrepresent the encyclopedia to new editors. Liz Read! Talk! 19:27, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Civility and amorality are different things Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 20:35, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Liz:, I'm sorry, I should have used clearer language rather than playing with words: I didn't mean immoral, I meant amoral in the sense that we do not make moral stands or moral judgements about our subjects and their views. We never say that someone is good or bad, let alone criminal, in the voice of Wikipedia, no matter how much we think it, and no matter how much we loathe (or love) the ethics of how they live. In this sense, Wikipedia has no "ethics" in that it's not making any ethical or moral decisions of its own. The one thing that we stick to, with absolute rigidity, in article-space, is accurate reflection of reliable sources. Even our policy on living people doesn't promise to refrain from saying nasty things about them. It just says that we will be super-cautious and only say nasty things if we are absolutely sure we can back them up with really good sourcing, and even then only if the things are genuinely highly relevant to that person's notability. But if the sourcing is there, then we do say the nasty things even if it's going to hurt; and that is why we always warn people who want "their" article that having a Wikipedia article isn't necessarily a great idea. I suppose our determination to report with total honesty is a moral decision in itself, but that's about as far as it goes. Behind the scenes, yes, of course we expect civility; but even behind the scenes, Wikipedia is remarkably tolerant of the varied ethics and moralities of its editors. It is one of our best strengths. For example, I personally have quite strong views about fair distribution of wealth, and regard many right-wing politicians as deeply immoral, no better than pick-pockets, but there are right-wing editors here who would disagree with me entirely, and Wikipedia as a community remains firmly aloof, siding with neither of us: it has no moral opinion on the rightness or wrongness of sharing wealth, it only cares what philosophers, politicians and newspapers have said about the subject over the centuries. There is really only a small handful of moral viewpoints that are so abhorrent or intolerant of others that we cannot tolerate them in our community. The point I was trying to make is that Wikipedia is not the place for holding a campaign and righting wrongs, even though someone, somewhere else, ought to be righting them. But as I say, I'm sorry to have created confusion, which is why I've ended up typing a mini-essay - it's an important point and goes to the heart of what we do, and you're quite right: I needed to make myself clear in case readers are misled by my first attempt. Elemimele (talk) 21:01, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Civility and amorality are different things Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 20:35, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Elemimele, I disagree. Wikipedia cares a lot about getting things right, we have an entire policy that is concerned protecting the rights of living persons from edits that get things wrong. And the platform isn't amoral, it cares about editors treating each other with civility. This isn't a 4chan message board. I see the point you are trying to make but please be careful with generalizations that might misrepresent the encyclopedia to new editors. Liz Read! Talk! 19:27, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Ricciardo Best: there are very, very few circumstances in which someone who has not been convicted will nevertheless be described in Wikipedia as having committed the crime. The only one I can think of off-hand is where a suspect died before they could be tried, and a respectable number of neutral historians have since written that there is no doubt the suspect committed the crime. But even then, we might have to be a bit cagey and write that it is generally believed that they committed the crime (citing a couple of decent sources). As a rule of thumb, if you are feeling any form of emotion as you write about the person, or as you pose the question here, then you are probably not in a good position to write a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is a terribly amoral place: it doesn't care about right and wrong, it cares only about reflecting good sources in an unbiased way. If you think someone has escaped justice, make your case somewhere else, and if you manage to convince the world, Wikipedia will follow... we are usually last on the scene. Elemimele (talk) 18:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Somehow My Company Website Got Banned From Wikipedia
Hello,
When I understood how Wikipedia works I stopped editing pages and stopped mentioning our company website (scaler.com) on Wikipedia.
I am not sure how but our company website on wikipedia is banned. Is there any reason for this ban? can someone help me remove this ban?
I don't know what to do and I don't know how this all happened. Bikashdaga09 (talk) 11:19, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Bikashdaga09 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Do you mean that your company website is on the spam blacklist? There isn't much you can do about that, unfortunately. 331dot (talk) 11:31, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, it is in "Spam blacklist". But my question is, I haven't done any edits since very long on wikipedia and all of sudden this happened. I am totally broke now. I might have lost my Job too because of this. Is there no way to remove this ban? Bikashdaga09 (talk) 11:41, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- As the owner, you don't have to have edited anything. It could have been employees or even non employees. But, requests from a website owner(or their representatives) to remove their site from the list are not accepted. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#Proposed_removals. 331dot (talk) 11:48, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to hear about your circumstances, but those are outside of our area of concern. 331dot (talk) 11:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, it is in "Spam blacklist". But my question is, I haven't done any edits since very long on wikipedia and all of sudden this happened. I am totally broke now. I might have lost my Job too because of this. Is there no way to remove this ban? Bikashdaga09 (talk) 11:41, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
scaler.com
is globally blacklisted due to a "[m]assive cross-wiki campaign
". See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/scaler.com. —Wasell(T) 🌻🇺🇦 15:22, 28 November 2022 (UTC)- In other words, many accounts and IP addresses tried countless times to add links to scaler.com to many Wikimedia projects. That is spamming and it is not permitted. There is no good reason to have links to that promotional website anywhere on Wikimedia websites, and it is not going to happen. Cullen328 (talk) 18:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Why My page being rejected (article draft declined)
Hello,
I am a Fundraiser, I raise money for my medical treatment. Whydonate.nl help me to raise money thought their platform. WhyDonate is a crowdfunding and fundraising platform based in the Netherlands. When I am checking details about Whydonate, I found that other crowdfunding platforms are available on Wikipedia, but Whydonate's Wikipedia page is missing as I decided to create one page for WhyDonate.
Please help me what I am doing wrong?
Malvikashroff92 (talk) 13:29, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- One thing which you have done wrong is to resubmit for review without having addressed the result of the previous review. Alongside the "Resubmit" button it said: "Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be declined again." - David Biddulph (talk) 13:49, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Malvikashroff92 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not a mere database where existence warrants a mention. This is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion, which we call "notability"- such as the definition of a notable organization. Not every organization in a field merits a Wikipedia article, it depends on the coverage it receives in independent reliable sources. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 13:53, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Additionally, the article appears to be a mission statement more than an encyclopedia article, which are primarily written based off of what reliable, secondary sources have to say about the subject, rather than what the subject itself has to say. Furthermore, while it is not disallowed to have a close connection with the subject of the article you are writing, you should be careful to not write something that reads like an advertisement, as it will likely be identified as spam. Nobility does not equal notability, and the draft does not demonstrate enough independent coverage in reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's threshold of notability for companies and organizations. DecafPotato (talk) 02:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Vandalism of wiki profile.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fazal-ur-Rehman_(politician)&direction=prev&oldid=1078741398 this article is vandalized and currently portrays very negative image which is contrary to facts. Can it be rewind to its older version. Alitkk (talk) 17:08, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Courtesy links: Fazal-ur-Rehman (politician); Special:Diff/1078741398 – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 17:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Alitkk, welcome to the Teahouse. Vandalism has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia, which does not cover this case as you describe it. If you can point to specific non-neutral or unsupported statements in the article, it would be best to start a new discussion about them at the bottom of the talk page, which I see you've already found. Be specific there about the parts you object to and why the sources used (if any) are poor or misrepresented. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
If someone is blocked for vandalism of profile. Does his work gets revised???
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Toomanyyearskodakblack&action=view this person vandalized it and he has been blocked by checkusers but his editing hasn't been removed or revised. Alitkk (talk) 18:14, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fazal-ur-Rehman_(politician) this page has been vandalized.. Alitkk (talk) 18:15, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Subsectionized. – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 18:18, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Confusion of MOS:DATE in a cite source
I tried searching for this specifically but didn't quite find a question of a recent nature on the matter that spoke of the issue I'm finding.
When I use the Cite - Template option to place a news or web reference in a manual edit, it contains a field for the access date. If you simply click the calendar icon next the field (highlights as "Insert current date"), it places the date in day-month-year format.
I've already had a couple of my early contributions edited so that the access date is month-day-year by citing the MOS:DATE guidelines. By educating myself on how to be a better editor, I'm noticing a surprising number of MOS:DATE edits because of the access date field. But, and I admit I just may not be seeing it, there doesn't seem to be anything that requires such an effort to go full month-day-year in the references, though there is a carve-out that the date style should be similar throughout a page.
Is that really all there is to it then, that the date format throughout a reference should match?
The concern I have is to make sure I'm not making a mistake thus causing extra maintenance work here. It really is easy to click the icon and move on, especially for someone like me who isn't exactly swift of fingers on the keyboard.
Thoughts?
TheGREYHORSE (talk) 20:42, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @TheGREYHORSE: Yes, that's really all there is to it. Date format should be consistent within an article. Even though I'm American, I don't like our habit of using month-day-year because it messes up list sorting. I prefer YYYY-MM-DD or day-month-year like the rest of the world uses. However, whatever format seems to be established in the article should be used throughout. Some articles include a template at the top, such as {{use dmy dates}} or {{use mdy dates}}, to help establish what the article's preferred format is. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Anachronist: Thanks for that. I had no idea about the templates you listed or what they meant and now I'm better for it. Consider me learned and on board.
- All the best!
- TheGREYHORSE (talk) 02:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Issue Uploading New Photo to Musician Page
I am a manager for an artist who is requesting an updated photo to her page. We have press photos that we commissioned to use and replace the current picture with but each time we upload they are reverted back to the current image. I've added these photos to the wiki database so it's not that. Is there an issue with clearance/credit even if it's been properly credited by the photographer we commissioned? Pyangy (talk) 21:08, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Pyangy, welcome to the Teahouse. Crediting the photographer is not enough. The person who holds the copyright must release it under the appropriate license, in writing, and that permission must be sent by them to Wikimedia Commons (unless you are trying to upload the image locally per our WP:FAIRUSE policy). If you have a contract with the photographer that transferred the copyright to you, then you can do it; if not, they have the copyright to their images and they must do it. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:14, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Is this about Banks (singer)? Please read WP:PAID and disclose who your clients are, and who is paying you, so that can be properly noted where it is applicable. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:22, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Template Creation
What's the method for making a template accessible in the template search bar? I've planned and filled out the labels of the template in my sandbox.
TypistMonkey (talk) 21:48, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- TypistMonkey, you don't seem to have created a template in your sandbox. For the infobox you filled out in your sandbox, a transclusion of Template:Infobox, a Wikipedia article already exists for Farrer hypothesis. Please add to the existing content in that article. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:24, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @TypistMonkey: Your sandbox has a template call, not a template. The sandbox calls Template:Infobox which is a template. I guess "the template search bar" refers to a VisualEditor feature but it's for making template calls from scratch, e.g. a call of Template:Infobox, without having parameter values already. You cannot use that unless you want to start over. What you can do is to just copy the template call from the sandbox to the article but I don't think it's a good idea to call Template:Infobox at all. The template page says: "In general, it is not meant for use directly in an article, but can be used on a one-off basis if required". It's rarely done and it doesn't seem required to me. Not every article needs an infobox. I didn't know the subject in advance and frankly, the infobox made no sense to me before I had read the lead of Farrer hypothesis. An infobox is supposed to be readable by itself. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't know the right terms to phrase my question. How do I create a template, not just call it through Template:Infobox?
- The infobox would help those looking through information on the Synoptic Problem to be able to quickly identify key points of the hypothesis in question.
- TypistMonkey (talk) 00:58, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- @TypistMonkey: I don't think that's a good idea either considering how few articles there are, how much the reader must already know to make sense of data organized in such an infobox, and how little template experience you have. If you really want to try this then see Template:Infobox for how to create infobox templates, and Help:Template for how to create templates in general. There is a risk that other editors will disapprove of the result and not let it be used in articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:04, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- @TypistMonkey: Your sandbox has a template call, not a template. The sandbox calls Template:Infobox which is a template. I guess "the template search bar" refers to a VisualEditor feature but it's for making template calls from scratch, e.g. a call of Template:Infobox, without having parameter values already. You cannot use that unless you want to start over. What you can do is to just copy the template call from the sandbox to the article but I don't think it's a good idea to call Template:Infobox at all. The template page says: "In general, it is not meant for use directly in an article, but can be used on a one-off basis if required". It's rarely done and it doesn't seem required to me. Not every article needs an infobox. I didn't know the subject in advance and frankly, the infobox made no sense to me before I had read the lead of Farrer hypothesis. An infobox is supposed to be readable by itself. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Screenshot from Government Produced Video
I want to upload a screenshot from a video produced by the US government to Wikipedia. Is this alright? What is the copyright status on this gov't produced work? TheManInTheBlackHat (talk) 22:07, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- TheManInTheBlackHat this should be public domain according to WP:Public domain#Works ineligible for copyright protection. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:19, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Just going to clarify that it should be OK as long as the part of the video you sceencapture isn't someone else's copyright related work. Videos, even videos created by the US government, do sometimes incorporate content created by others, and this content may be protected by copyright and the government video may be using it under a claim of fair use or may have separately received permission to do so. Either case would not extend to any screenshot taken of the same content for the purpose of being uploaded to Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:31, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Unable to create new pages except as drafts
I'm trying to disambiguate a page and need to create 2 pages to make this all happen. When I try to make pages I end up a new user landing page and am stopped from making new pages. I can only make drafts. Haugtusser (talk) 01:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Courtesy link: Draft:Tusse (disambiguation) 💜 melecie talk - 02:00, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Haugtusser: That is because you aren't autoconfirmed yet. Your account needs have 10 edits in 4 days. You don't have 4 days yet. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Annoying, but fair.
- Would you recommend I leave the drafts or wait until my account is 4 days old? Haugtusser (talk) 02:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- It's not (yet?) obvious to me that such a disambiguation page would be helpful. The title "Draft:Tusse (Singer)" is malformed at best: there's no reason to capitalize "singer". But if the only likely confusion is with an alternative name for something that has an article with a quite different title, then the singer should be plain "Tusse" and perhaps a hatnote should be added to the singer's article. -- Hoary (talk) 02:28, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- I will try to change the Singer to singer. Thank you for that feedback. I think it is useful as if anyone looks up "Tusse" on Wikipedia they will only get the singer, while they may be looking for the singer or the mythical creature. I don't think the singer is more notable than the creature. Haugtusser (talk) 02:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Singer is now singer Haugtusser (talk) 02:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Well, thanks to your disambiguation draft, I see that the mythical creature you're referring to has an article, under the name Nisse. If your draft on the singer is accepted, you might think about putting a hatnote on that singer article, of the type that is already on the Nisse article. Uporządnicki (talk) 03:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oops! I see Hoary already made that suggestion. But in case you don't know what a hatnote is, now you can know to look at the Nisse article. Uporządnicki (talk) 03:14, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- That's right. A disambiguation page is not needed in this case because there are only two articles. Hatnotes pointing to the other article are sufficient. See WP:ONEOTHER. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Well shouldn't the article about the singer still be moved to Tusse_(singer) then. Happy to do that
- I'm also considering splitting Tusse off from Nisse as they are sometimes considered different creatures (sometimes the same though). Haugtusser (talk) 03:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- That's right. A disambiguation page is not needed in this case because there are only two articles. Hatnotes pointing to the other article are sufficient. See WP:ONEOTHER. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Singer is now singer Haugtusser (talk) 02:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- I will try to change the Singer to singer. Thank you for that feedback. I think it is useful as if anyone looks up "Tusse" on Wikipedia they will only get the singer, while they may be looking for the singer or the mythical creature. I don't think the singer is more notable than the creature. Haugtusser (talk) 02:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)