Wikipedia:Teahouse

Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Contents

(Please sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes like this: ~~~~.)

Possible plagiarism in an article with Portuguese references; I do not speak Portuguese.[edit]

I was doing some simple editing in the article

= Gustavo Franco = . I noticed that the language seemed very scholarly and then I came across a section that appeared to be cut off and did not make sense. There are a number of reasons for this excluding plagiarism and if the references were in English I would start there. What would you advise? I am very willing to believe that I am worrying about nothing except some sentences that got forgotten in an edit. Thank you bobdog54 (talk) 20:24, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello, bobdog54. The best place to express your concerns is on the Talk page of the article in question.--Quisqualis (talk) 20:55, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the speedy reply. I will do that. bobdog54 (talk) 21:06, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
I speak Portuguese if you need someone. deisenbe (talk) 10:48, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Why is citing so hard?[edit]

Hey! 😊

I find that for an encyclopedia that values citing sources so much, making citations is too tedious and complex. There are 23 templates for citing sources depending on their types, as evidenced by Wikipedia:CS1 § Templates. Then, there is {{Citation}}, which apparently does everything that the others do, but it is unloved and missing from the Wikipedia:CS1 § Templates list.

So, question 1: I was thinking, why don't I press the edit button and add it to that list?

Question 2: Why has nobody ever thought of deleting all the templates that start with "Cite" and use {{Citation}} only?

Side-question: It seems Wikipedia loves profilfration of templates. For instance, I use two templates in this message: "Tl" and "Section link". "Tl" has many siblings: Tlx, tlp, tlf, tnull and God knows what else. Why nobody has merged those? As for section link, why would even one need to have {{Section link}}? Why doesn't [[Wikipedia:CS1#Templates]] generate "Wikipedia:CS1 § Templates"?

flowing dreams (talk page) 12:28, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

flowing dreams As this is a volunteer project used by people from all over the world, many people have created templates for the same purposes. If you feel that some templates could be eliminated or merged, you are free to propose that at WP:TFD. Given that many people make use of them and many of them are entrenched in hundreds of thousands of articles, be prepared for a long and arduous process, though. 331dot (talk) 12:35, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
I know that, but I don't suppose any of them had anything to do with developing Wikipedia:RefToolbar/2.0, right? flowing dreams (talk page) 12:48, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Q1 – {{Citation}} is Help:Citation Style 2, so would not appear in a list of CS1 templates.
Q2 – It's been thought of, frequently! CS1 templates are an arcane black art which you will only fully understand after years of study, then they'll be changed. {{Citation}} lets the computer work out the details (what a lazy man like me prefers) and even adds the referencing for you without being told.
As regards a proliferation vs a monolith; this is an argument that turns up in all branches of computer science. Consider the UNIX philosophy of small programs that do one thing well versus the M$ monolith where one image does everything. Then do a bug count! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:43, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Martin of Sheffield. I hope you don't mind me adjusting your message's indentation, since I wanted to reply to 331dot too.
Q1: {{Citation}} supports CS1 too. It has |mode=cs1.
Q2: Are they? They seem to use the same infrastructure.
flowing dreams (talk page) 12:50, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Q1: In my experience this parameter is rarely used. I know that in the Lua CS2 uses CS1 code, but every case I can think of {{citation}} is used in its default CS2 form.
Q2: {{cite web}}, {{cite magazine}}, and {{cite journal}} (for example) may use the same infrastructure, but pick the wrong one and you'll be promptly put down by an editor or a bot.
All IMHO of course! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:09, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. 👍 flowing dreams (talk page) 13:28, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Just because all those templates exist, it doesn't mean you have to use them. Using the standard editor (not the visual one), I have a drop-down with four choices that appears on the toolbar above the edit window; I use "cite web" almost all of the time. I'm not sure if this is a standard feature or if you have to turn on a gadget. Filling out the resulting window (and using the auto-fill when it works) is about as simple as it gets, with some annoyances in date formats, etc. Filling out a template manually isn't really that hard either. It certainly is far less time-consuming than the actual researching of the cite. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 07:51, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Huh! Really? I truly and sincerly thought just because all those template exist, I must use them when appropriate! It was a logical conclusion: They were created, hence somebody saw a use in them! flowing dreams (talk page) 11:24, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Sometimes Citation guesses wrong about which kind of work you're citing; use "cite xxx" and "mode = CS2" in those cases. Jc3s5h (talk) 12:53, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
The unchanged rendering of [[Wikipedia:CS1#Templates]] as Wikipedia:CS1#Templates is determined by MediaWiki which is also used by thousands of other wikis. The '#' is part of URL#Syntax and has to be in the URL https://en.wikipedia.org/en/Wikipedia:CS1#Templates for browsers to go to that anchor. It's a well-known feature on the Internet so it's natural that MediaWiki displays it. I suppose there could have been a MediaWiki setting for a wiki to choose another display. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

New users' contributions[edit]

I used to use the link Special:Contributions/newbies to list new users' contributions. But today when I tried, it gave the error message "User account "Newbies" is not registered." Has the facility been removed, or is there some other way to get at it? --Gronk Oz (talk) 14:50, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello Gronk Oz. I wasn't aware of that as a way of once monitoring new editors' edits. However, the way to do it nowadays is to go to Special:Recentchanges. There, you'll find there are various filters you can select, including those by 'Newcomers' or 'Unregistered' users. I hope you find this of use. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:33, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for that, @Nick Moyes: it does allow me to find what I am after. To be picky though, it does not seem to allow me to store a shortcut that includes the parameters. I prefer to fine-tune the search, then store the link on my User page where I can easily use it again and again. For instance, to get new users I want to add the parameter "userExpLevel=newcomer" to give Special:RecentChanges?userExpLevel=newcomer. But adding that parameter breaks the link. Do you know of a way to do that? (If not, what you gave me already will do the job.) --Gronk Oz (talk) 04:40, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi Gronk Oz, you can definitely store the filter settings for later use. It's not hugely clear that you can do this, but see this help page. I find the easiest way is simply to save the URL from the browser bar and create an external link somewhere where I can access it. In my case I mostly use this setting: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?damaging=likelybad%3Bverylikelybad&goodfaith=maybebad%3Blikelybad%3Bverylikelybad&hidebots=1&hidepreviousrevisions=1&hidecategorization=1&hideWikibase=1&namespace=0&limit=500&days=7&damaging__likelybad_color=c3&damaging__verylikelybad_color=c4&goodfaith__maybebad_color=c3&goodfaith__likelybad_color=c4&goodfaith__verylikelybad_color=c5&lastRevision__hidelastrevision_color=c1&title=Special:RecentChanges&highlight=1&urlversion=2 I have this readily available as a link at the top of every page, via a userscript called bookmarknav.js
Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 07:44, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Perfect - thanks, Nick Moyes. Smile.gif --Gronk Oz (talk) 12:16, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
meta:Tech/News/2019/34 says: "Special:Contributions/newbies will no longer be working. This is because of performance reasons. It showed edits by new accounts. You can see this in the recent changes feed instead. [1]" PrimeHunter (talk) 13:25, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
I thought that had been turned off several years ago, in phab:T36659. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:38, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Special:Contributions/Newbies with uppercase "N" started showing the specific user there. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:33, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

What's the deal on how many times an editor, different each time, maybe every week, comes in to challenge content.[edit]

The specific case this is coming up with is Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act#Problems which is a section that I had added maybe a month ago. As far as I can tell, no one is adding content on this article at this point except for me. I have had no comments on the material from people who built the article. At a point, user:Newslinger came in, and had a lot of criticisms (many valid), and also seeming to want to yank all of the content, rather than have me adjust tone, etc. We went as far as RFC, and I think, in the RFC, that his position now is that this content ("problems" section only--what I put it was originally 3 sections plus a little--I'm dropping the intent to have the remaining in) can stay, but adjustments to matters he pointed out (judged easy to fix by me) will be done.

So, as far as I can tell, user:Newslinger and I are now in agreement on the content.

But, how do I know that next week, someone completely different, (likely a person who has not built the article, and also is non-expert in the subject matter) will not come in and challenge, and we have to start all over again. (For user:Newslinger and I both, it was quite a bit of work involved in the challenge and resolution. And I appreciate his work on the matter, by the way.)

And the week after.

And the week after that....

Note: I will be away the rest of the day, so it will be probably tomorrow that I can see your answers, and ask any follow up questions.NormSpier (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

@NormSpier: Hi there, welcome to the Teahouse. There two things you can do:
  • Gain thoughts before you significantly contribute to an article. Post on the talk page your proposed changes and ping any users who have significantly contributed to the article and gain their thoughts.
  • Stick to policy. People won't (usually) challenge your addition if it is backed up by reliable sources per WP:V, is written neutrally and you don't have a conflict of interest or are being paid by the subject.

I see you already have a good number of edits, so the best way to improve from here is probably discussion with others (which is what you are doing) and getting yourself deeply and thoroughly familiar with the policies. Best wishes, Willbb234Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 20:28, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

NormSpier (edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The short answer is, you don't know if someone will come along and edit or challenge the content you added. It is up to you to monitor the article for any changes and discuss the issues with other editors. 331dot (talk) 20:31, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Which means putting the articles you care about on your personal Watchlist, and checking that every time you access Wikipedia. I watch about 25, some people watch hundreds. David notMD (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
I currently have 16,020 pages on my watchlist, David notMD. The vast majority are completely inactive. NormSpier, the answer to your question is "as often as any editor acting in good faith chooses to challenge content". If details of health care policy gain greater attention in political discussions in the U.S., you can expect much more attention to the article. Perhaps daily. Perhaps hourly. This is how Wikipedia works. If you haven't had the chance yet, please read Wikipedia:Ownership of content, and take the good advice there to heart. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:21, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
User:Cullen328That you have 16,020 pages on your watchlist leads to a natural question about the informal structure of what goes on here, which is opaque and probably frustrating to newcomers. I am guessing you have about 500 editors each "patrolling" in some sense about as many pages as you are monitoring, so that every page is patrolled by someone. Thus, a patroller will show up one day (who may not have contributed or be expert in the topic of the patrolled page) and, due to the overworked nature of the patroller, may have to be a little broad-brush in actions. Note this is my conjecture only, so it would be fun to learn more from you. Also, it is not a complaint--I see Wikipedia has like 7 million pages, and it needs some way to keep things from going to heck. (Pinging user:Newslinger for the option to chime in.)NormSpier (talk) 09:46, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
NormSpier, the fact that you have reached consensus about content on the talk page with another editor means that you will be in a strong position to challenge any major changes to the consensus, but changes will be made in the future. They always are! That's one of the strong points of Wikipedia. If you want to publish your exact version, you will need to publish it elsewhere. Having said that, do keep the page on your watchlist, and challenge any changes that are not improvements, but use the talk page to reach consensus. See WP:BRD for the process. It seems to work. Dbfirs 20:53, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Dbfirs, I believe you have addressed your remarks to the wrong editor. Usedtobecool TALK  21:22, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Oops! Thank you for that correction. I've corrected the link above. Dbfirs 21:31, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Technical, getting things in the sandbox from the live article, and back again, when there are multiply-referenced footnotes.[edit]

This is, like a post just above, coming up in Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act. The resolution of the issue with Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act#Problems is that it will be modified, possibly in the sandbox. (If it is modified in the sandbox, the article will be reverted to before I got to it, and then eventually the sandboxed section will go back to the article.)

So I tried pulling the section to the sandbox, Talk:Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act/sandbox, by a transfer--source editor to source editor, but as you can see, many of the references didn't transfer.

I also tried the transfer by visual editor on the article to source editor in the sandbox, and that was even worse--no references transferred.

My guess is this problem is coming from repeated use of the same references in the article.

a)Do you know how to fix (loss of references forward transfer to sandbox)?

Note that I am concerned also with the back transfer to the article--the same reference appearing multiple times in the list of references.

b)Do you have a fix for that?

I've also noted the sandbox does not seem to support a visual editor, which seems like it will be some learning, and a real pain in the neck where I have multiply-used references. (The visual editor seems to handle that all automatically.)

c)Do you have a fix for that?

d)Do you know why the heck the visual editor option isn't available in the sandbox, like it is on the article itself?

Note: this question has also been posed to the team on the ACA article, here: Talk:Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act#"Problems"_Section_Copied_Into_Sandbox_to_Prepare_for_Rollback--_But_there_is_a_problem_with_many_of_the_references_transferring--please_advise

Note also, I will be away much of today. I will not probably be able to read your responses, and ask follow-up questions, until tommorrow.NormSpier (talk) 20:34, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

I don't know whether you have a good reason for editing in a sandbox, but, in general, it is better to make smaller edits to the live article, a section at a time. This allows other editors to check edits as they are made, rather than replacing the whole article at once. Dbfirs 20:46, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
NormSpier, about the refs, the error is to do with the reusability of citations. When a ref is used multiple times, it is named and defined once, and in all other instances, it's only called by name. The software compares the names and pulls definition at the time of rendering the page for the reader. When you take a chunk out from an article, you might take citations with definitions and break the name calls in the main article, or you might also take citations with name calls alone, in which case they will be working just fine in the main article but will appear broken in the sandbox. If any cites have broken in the main article, you need to move the citations with definitions to the main article and use name calls only in the sandbox. If you do that, it will continue to appear broken in the sandbox but when you move it all back to the main article, it will assimilate nicely since the name calls will have definitions already present in the article. This is, provided you don't change names of refs when in the sandbox. As an example, you have <ref name=":5" /> in the sandbox which is broken but will fix itself when you move it back to main article because the article already has <ref name=":5">{}</ref>. You could fix the sandbox by replacing all instances of the former type with the latter type, but that would introduce redundancies that would require fixing again when you move it back to the article. Hope this helps! Usedtobecool TALK  21:02, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
NormSpier, the Visual Editor works in sandboxes. I don't know why you were having trouble with yours. NormSpier and Usedtobecool, when you copy a piece of an article to your sandbox using Visual Editor it will bring the full reference along even if you aren't copying the piece that has the definition in the wikitext. The problems happen when you try to move it back. VE has no way of knowing that a reference named ":5" or "Smith" in your sandbox refers to the same references that are in the article. So it will rename the references to ":51" or "Smith1" and you will have duplicated references. This can't be fixed easily with VE - you have to remove the references and re-add them, or use the text editor. Our students in the WikiEd program have problems with this and there are requests in to fix it. Even for large changes to an article you should work on a small piece at a time. Use a placeholder for the reference in your sandbox, and wait to add the reference when you put it back in the article. Hope this helps. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:28, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
NormSpier, you are trying to use a sandbox in Talk space at Talk:Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/sandbox. That's not what Talk space is for. Create another sandbox in your user space and work on it there. But in small pieces. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:35, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Good luck. You are working to make Wikipedia better, but, as was said above, you might do it better by making smaller changes. Yours, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 22:45, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
StarryGrandma, the visual editor isn't enabled in the Talk: namespace, and I think that NormSpier is specifically looking at a talk page sandbox. A couple of WikiProjects use {{VEFriendly}} to get around that, but it is an officially unsupported workaround – might work, might not, no guarantees. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:44, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi, user:WhatamIdoing. I think we're OK. :StarryGrandma left me a more complete message here: User_talk:NormSpier#Your_sandbox_problem, telling me to move to a sandbox outside of talk. I will try creating that soon, and verify that the footnotes transfer, and everything else looks O.K. I will get back, of course, if something doesn't look right.NormSpier (talk) 19:32, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi user:WhatamIdoing pinging: user:Usedtobecool and user:StarryGrandma (if they are interested). I'm going with the account of user:StarryGrandma, as she indicated visual editor to visual editor (to and fro) is the best / easiest way to do it, and she sounds like she has most experience with the issue because of involvement with WikiEd. I have in fact followed her instructions for the forward transfer to sandbox, doing visual (ACA article) to visual (sandbox) for the section that I am trying to retain after rollback, modify, and reinsert to the ACA article, here, User:NormSpier/PPACAsandbox1 and voila: all of the references have transferred successfully. (It must be that the visual editor, besides being just easier to use than source, also manages references much more automatically.)
Now, as I understand it, when I transfer back from the sandbox to the article (which will be just the one section "Problems"), there will be duplicates of any reference also in the ACA article, which will have to be cleaned up manually. My thought is to clean them up in the visual editor right after I bring the section back to the ACA article. There should not be more than a handful of duplicate references, because my other two sections and other minor changes will be rolled back (permanently). That is, it's mostly in my other two sections that the duplicated references occur. Someone can tell me if I have any of this wrong. Thanks everyone for your help.NormSpier (talk) 20:12, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
You will notice that other editors have made improvements to the article. When you copy back from the sandbox, please do not undo or overwrite their edits. Dbfirs 20:40, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Why are there so many rude, condescending people on here?[edit]

Why is there so much rudeness? Aren't we all here for the sharing and gathering of knowledge? I expected more professional and polite attitudes from the most well-known encyclopedia on the internet. --Vigilante Girl (talk) 23:29, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Please sign your posts, like this one. People are expected to be civil, and rudeness has no place here. You can ignore those being rude, warn them later, and in severe instances, report them at WP:AIV. --LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 23:26, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
I apologize for not signing. I tend to forget. Thank you for the advice, I will do so. :) --Vigilante Girl (talk) 23:30, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Vigilante Girl. You freely chose a clearly controversial username, and you chose to write a mildly confrontational userpage, and you chose to involve yourself in highly controversial topic areas like the Kiev/Kyiv naming controversy, apparently without studying the extensive previous discussions about this issue. So, I am not sure who you are accusing of rudeness, but did you really expect to be greeted with flowers? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:33, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Vigilante Girl, I'm sorry to hear that you have encountered problems with some editors. Unfortunately, considering the number of people who volunteer on Wikipedia, I suppose it is inevitable that some would be unprofessional and/or impolite. On the other hand, I won't name names, but I think back to two editors whose encouragement kept me working on here when I all but gave up soon after I started. They patiently explained how to navigate difficulties that had frustrated me almost to the point of quitting. As a result, I am now in my fifth year of contributing in my small way to this work-in-progress encyclopedia. I have also found many useful comments in the Teahouse and Help pages that have aided my work. Please don't let some bad experiences turn you away from Wikipedia. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:38, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
The only rudeness I noticed on Talk:Kiev came from Vigilante Girl. I advise editing in good faith, sans emotion.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:05, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
@Vigilante Girl: Like you, I see no reason for rudeness when engaging with other editors here. Sometimes "tone of voice" is extremely hard to discern in another editor's post, and we all need to assume good faith, and not over-react. I fear that this diff of yours rather rather undermines your concerns and only serves to escalate issues. I'd have hoped you'd have seen that raising an issue that had been raised and dismissed many times before without showing any intent to read and understand those past discussions is almost inevitably going to elicit the firm but nevertheless polite response that you received. If you can meet what you perceive as rudeness with politeness of your own, you will be playing your part in keeping our editing environment 'safe and pleasant' for everyone. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:17, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
@Quisqualis:I do edit in good faith, and I was no ruder than the person being rude to me. --Vigilante Girl (talk) 09:49, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
@Cullen328:You are a perfect example of a horribly rude and condescending attitude. My username is not controversial and my userpage is not meant to be confrontational. I wanted to stop vandals like the guy who vandalized the Sea Otter page. Also, I'd rather not be greeted with rudeness. https://en.wikipedia.org/en/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers --Vigilante Girl (talk) 09:49, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
The word "vigilante" has the connotation of acting outside the law and may easily be seen as signifying a lack of respect for rules, regulations, and proper procedure. An impression that you seemed to confirm with the statement "why should I check edits from the past" when it was pointed out to you that this had already been discussed and decided against (many times, including one quite recent discussion). Your seeming unfamiliarity with move procedures ("And what do you mean by "non-formal requests"? Is my language somehow not formal enough for you?") also shows, at the very least, a lack of knowledge of the rules. --Khajidha (talk) 12:05, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
And it can also mean a server of justice who isn't law enforcement. Also, me not knowing stuff doesn't give anyone the right to be rude to me. https://en.wikipedia.org/en/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers --Vigilante Girl (talk) 15:34, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
And vigilantism is generally held to be illegal and vigilantes are looked upon as criminals. The term is not one that inspires confidence. And, as several others have mentioned, no one has been rude to you. Your user page injunction that "there's no need to explain to me what Wikipedia is. ", on the other hand, comes off as rather dismissive and shows an unwillingness to learn. An unwillingness that you continue to display here. Not to mention the fact that if you really know what you're doing, then you don't really fall under the category of newcomer and your constant quoting of "don't bite the newcomers" (with no evidence of any actual "biting") is inappropriate. You can't have it both ways.--Khajidha (talk) 15:46, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
So what? Vigilantes can also be heroes who help people. And yes they have been rude to me. And what I meant by that was no need to explain that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and all that. I'm not being anymore dismissive than you are. You and them are being rude to me and I will NOT stand for it. If Wikipedia really is filled with rude, condescending people, then I'll just quit. I will NOT accept your hypocritical hierarchy and I will NOT be bullied by people who always get off scot-free. I have enough crap to deal with in my life, I don't need more. --Vigilante Girl (talk) 18:18, 17 September 2019 (UTC)


I you have experienced "so many" rude people here, I am very sorry. I've been around since 2008, logged in, and as an IP even before that. I cannot fairly say thet I think there are "so many" rude people. But there are indeed some. Nobody is supposed to get away with it. The ones who do are well-connected with others of the same ilk who will defend them no matter what they do. Consensus rules with no regard to justice, i.e. if a majority of such people hate you for some reason, you're in big trouble. Some even swoop in from other language projects, just to argue some pet peeve of theirs, in groups akin to packs of wolves. Others who get away with being rude are such sarcastically skilfull and hard-to-handle bullies that hardly anyone has the energy or guts to stand up to them. There are very few rude people here, in my opinion. The ones there are should always be reported when evidence of rudeness is crystal clear. More of them should get blocked than traditionally are. We all deserve an inspiring working envoronment. Best wishes, --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:09, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, "so many" was a hyperbole. Thank you for your advice and info. --Vigilante Girl (talk) 15:36, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Vigilante Girl I don't know if this parable will help, but fwiw, here ya go:

A traveler came upon an old farmer hoeing in his field beside the road. Eager to rest his feet, the wanderer hailed the countryman, who seemed happy enough to straighten his back and talk for a moment.

“What sort of people live in the next town?” asked the stranger.

“What were the people like where you’ve come from?” replied the farmer, answering the question with another question.

“They were a bad lot. Troublemakers all, and lazy too. The most selfish people in the world, and not a one of them to be trusted. I’m happy to be leaving the scoundrels.”

“Is that so?” replied the old farmer. “Well, I’m afraid that you’ll find the same sort in the next town.

Disappointed, the traveler trudged on his way, and the farmer returned to his work.

Some time later another stranger, coming from the same direction, hailed the farmer, and they stopped to talk. “What sort of people live in the next town?” he asked.

“What were the people like where you’ve come from?” replied the farmer once again.

“They were the best people in the world. Hard working, honest, and friendly. I’m sorry to be leaving them.”

“Fear not,” said the farmer. “You’ll find the same sort in the next town.”

Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 17:41, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Though I certainly recognize good intentions in this story, I cannot support a thought that looks like an excuse for unacceptable behavior, the excuse being that well-behaved people also exist. Good people should be encouraged and thanked. Incorrigibly bad ("rude, condescending people") should be blocked. No exceptions. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:00, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Living kidnap victims named and illustrated[edit]

In the Ariel Castro kidnappings article the living victims are named and illustrated. I thought Wikipedia is not a tabloid or newspaper to spread information identifying living crime victims. Don't crime victims have a right to privacy?
NewageEd (talk) 03:51, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, NewageEd. There are a lot of factors to consider when considering whether or not to name criminal victims in an article. Among those factors is the degree of sustained media attention. In this case, the attention was intense, prolonged and worldwide. Another factor is whether the victims have spoken about the crime. In this case, one spoke at the kidnapper's sentencing hearing, all three released a joint video statement, and there have been various other statements from the victims in the time since their rescue. Though they do not seek to be public figures, I am unaware that they are trying to suppress their identities. Another factor is that law enforcement often asks the media to publicize names and details of kidnapping victims. Accordingly, I think that it is appropriate to mention the victims in this specific case, and in some other cases. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:17, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Wow Cullen328, that's a real eye opener; I wouldn't have thought any of those things you mentioned (or all of them as a whole) would be a factor in the decision to name living criminal victims in an encyclopedia; especially . . .
1. speaking at the kidnapper's sentencing hearing (WP doesn't interfere with Court proceedings by threatening exposure of those who appear)
2. your unawareness that they are trying to suppress their identities (you would have to be aware that they were NOT trying to suppress)
3. that law enforcement often asks the media to publicize names and details of kidnapping victims (They had no business asking for that after-the-fact in this case, besides WP is not "the media").
As for victims statements made after being rescued; victims are not in an emotional condition to make a legitimate precedent of publicizing their identities.
As for media attention being intense, prolonged, and worldwide; if they behaved badly by identifying the victims doesn't mean WP should also. However, Wikipedia could include how intense and prolonged coverage was in various parts of the world and mention which media were indiscreet.
If Wikipedia is a kind of a cross between an encyclopedia and news media, I'm unable to reconcile that with the Pillars, Policies, and Guidelines. I'm going to have a difficult time learning this stuff. Thank you Cullen328 for sharing that information. - NewageEd (talk) 08:17, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
@NewageEd: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. We write what others have written about. There is a presumption in favor of privacy (cf. WP:BLPNAME) but there is no censorship when the material is widely available. In this case, all three women made statements a significant time after being rescued, so there is no reason to assume they were not counseled wrt the effect of their statement. But the main reason is that all three women - to this day - are using what they lived through to help others: Knight publicly appeared on Dr. Phil in 2016 promoting her book about her capture, i.e. clearly wishing to be publicly known as one of the victims. Berry hosts local news about missing people, using her own story to get an audience. DeJesus uses her ordeal to publicly advocate for missing people. If these women wish everyone to know what they went through, why should we remove their information? Regards SoWhy 13:05, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you SoWhy for the clear explanation. Now I see that their information being permanently in the public domain means that the victims can't really change their minds at a later date; and keeping their information in Wikipedia will help the victims help other victims by expanding their audience. - NewageEd (talk) 17:37, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Changed place names[edit]

What is the policy for using names of places that have changed since the time of an activity described? The example that brought this to mind is this text: "visited Nur-Sultan in January 2017" in the Economy of Kazakhstan article. In all of 2017, the city of Nur-Sultan was called Astana. Kdammers (talk) 05:14, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

@Kdammers: Best thing to do is to say something like "visited Nur-Saltan, then known as Astana, in January 2017" or you could simply say "visited Astana in January 2017" this provided a wikilink to Nur-Saltan but displays Astana. I hope that helps, Willbb234Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 06:29, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
I'd advise using "visited Astana (now known as Nur-Sultan) in January 2017" --Khajidha (talk) 13:13, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Agree (with the second one). Use the correct name of the place at the time of the visit, with a courtesy parenthetical/note/link to current name on the first occurrence if you like. This extra verbage sees less necessary now that PagePreviews occurs for logged-out users, no? Or is there no equivalent for mobile? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:57, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Adding references[edit]

How do I add references in the text so that they appear at the end in a proper bibliography? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Judy1957 (talkcontribs) 17:33, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

You'll find it explained in WP:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:35, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Updating information on a Wikipedia page[edit]

I noticed that information for my municipality is not correct. How do I go about editing this information or is there a contact that I would be able to provide the information to for them to update? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.201.1.250 (talk) 17:59, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Assuming that you have not done any Wikipedia editing to speak of, and that you presumably don't want to get involved in the morass of Wikipedia editing protocols, my suggestion would be to create a new section on on the "talk" page for the article. If at all possible, please provide a reliable source for the information. Also, I'd advise you to establish a Wikipedia account, so that you aren't identified just by your IP address.
Now be aware, this will not necessarily cause anybody to modify the article itself. In my experience, it is quite likely that nothing will happen for years and years and years. But you've done your part ... if the Wikipedia organization can't figure out how to accept and evaluate this kind of input, that's on them, not on you. (Probably somebody will tell me I've got it all wrong, I'll just have to take such assaults to my reputation and try to survive. Fabrickator (talk) 18:18, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
@216.201.1.250: and @Fabrickator:, the OP can markedly increase the likelihood of some regular editor making the desired changes if, having waited a couple of days and coming to a concensus with anyone who wishes to debate the changes on that Talk page, they or any other participant place an appropriate 'request for edit' template in the section, as detailed in Wikipedia:Edit requests. 90.202.210.107 (talk) 19:44, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
What specific Wikipedia article are you talking about, and what information in that article do you believe is incorrect? Carl Henderson (talk) 20:50, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

All headers open on every wiki page[edit]

I've used Wikipedia for a long time, just reading articles on my phone, but for some reason recently on every article I read every sub-header has been open by default and won't let me close it like I used to be able to by pressing the arrow next to the heading title, making the pages quite difficult to read and navigate. Is this something I've done wrong or a strange new feature of the site? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.104.136.17 (talk) 18:11, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps at the foot of the page you have switched from "Mobile view" to "Desktop view"? --David Biddulph (talk) 18:43, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Hey, IP Editor. Here's what you need to do to fix this: In Mobile view, click the menu button on the top left of the page, and go to 'Settings'. I'm sure you'll find the 'Expand all sections' button has been enabled (blue when enabled). Simply slide it left to disable it, and you should now be fine. Perhaps you'd let us know if this resolves it? Nick Moyes (talk) 22:53, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Interactive map[edit]

This article gets an interactive map in the infobox: https://en.wikipedia.org/en/1st_Avenue_Mall

But this one does not, even though I just copied the infobox source https://en.wikipedia.org/en/User:Initramfs/sandbox

Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Initramfs (talkcontribs)

Hi Initramfs. Template:Infobox shopping mall#Mapframe maps says: "A Mapframe map is automatically included if: There are coordinates specified on the page's Wikidata item". The map would appear even if {{Infobox shopping mall}} was used without any parameters. Click "Wikidata item" in the left pane of the article to see 1st Avenue Mall (Q19804184) where the coordinates are stored. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:11, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

How do I delete my account?[edit]

There are too many rude people on this site. It's giving me excess stress and I want to leave. --Vigilante Girl (talk) 18:33, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Vigilante Girl: - per WP:FAQ, you cannot delete your account, but you're free to abandon it at any time. See WP:VANISH for more information. Thank you! -- a they/them | argue | contribs 18:39, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Or, Wikipedia:Retiring allows you to put a RETIRED banner across your User page. David notMD (talk) 22:09, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Unable to Publish Changes Within Sandbox User Page[edit]

Hello, I have been able to publish my bibliography in the article talk page and into my own talk page, but when I hit the button to "Publish Changes" in my user page in my sandbox, I keep getting an HTTP 404 error. Please help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mleggett8 (talkcontribs) 18:40, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

It sounds as if you have a faulty internet connection. I see that you have subsequently been able to make an edit. Let us know if you think the problem is not with your own internet. Dbfirs 07:54, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Wrong info in "Booth Lusteg Wikipedia" article on Google[edit]

There has been wrong statistics in my father's background and history info in the Wikipedia article. His name is Booth Lusteg How can I correct it? The site is called boothlustegtribute.com Thank you Lisa Lusteg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Courtlisa (talkcontribs) 19:56, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi there Courtlisa, welcome to the Teahouse. If you could mention which information is incorrect, we may be able to help out. I would thoroughly not recommend editing the article yourself as you have a strong conflict of interest. The website you have mentioned doesn't appear to be a reliable source, so I don't think we can use that website to verify the information you would like to change. Nonetheless, I still think I can help if you tell me where the information is incorrect, as mentioned. Best wishes, Willbb234Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 20:08, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi Courtlisa, I see that you have now made some edits to the page about your father. Any controversial edits should be suggested on the talk page because of your conflict of interest, but the minor ones you have already made are probably uncontroversial. The article urgently needs better references. Can you find some independent WP:Reliable sources? Dbfirs 20:38, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

What is needed to get something posted on Wikipedia?[edit]

What is needed to get something posted on Wikipedia? I would like Ball Road Anaheim, California namesake Hezekiah Wright Ball recognized if possible. How would I get this done and what is need with this content. Marvin Duane Ball Great Great grandson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballroad (talkcontribs) 20:46, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello Ballroad. Wikipedia is based on what has already been reported on a subject in reliable sources like books, newspapers, magazines and journals. We cannot go by family histories or reminiscences. It is up to you to find the wp:Reliable sources backing up the material you want to add to an article about your family.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:10, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello Ballroad. I'm terribly sorry - I was monitoring newly-created articles and had converted one to a draft on the grounds that it was inadequately cited (and also non-encyclopaedic) when I thought it sounded familiar, so came back here to check. I'm afraid I've just moved it to Draft:Ball Road Anaheim,California, where you're welcome to continue working on it and then submit it for review, when ready. Be advised that you must cite published material that anyone else can obtain and verify. Citing just the name of a local historian who 'knows stuff' is not sufficient. Only properly published and reliable material can be used. Might I suggest you look at a few similar articles here to gain a feel for how a Wikipedia article is laid out and constructed. See also Your First Article and The Wikipedia Adventure for an interactive tour of the basica of editing? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:41, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Is the idea an article about Ball Road, with a history section mentioning Hezekiah? Or is it an article about Hezekiah, mentioning that a road is named after him? Either way, need references in support of content. What you know to be true is not sufficient. David notMD (talk) 00:46, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

UPDATE: The editor immediately submitted this draft for review, without making any significant changes, or taking any of the advice offered here. Unsurprisingly, it was immediately rejected by reviewer, John from Idegon. Nick Moyes (talk) 06:46, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

How to response if someone left a message on my talk page?[edit]

Someone left a message on my talk page. I want to know how can I response to that message. Is it editing the source then Publish Changes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shyzii28 (talkcontribs) 01:07, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes, Shyzii28. You edit the source, indent your reply with a colon (:), and submit. --LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 01:14, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Also, at the end of your comment type four of ~. This 'signs' the comment with your User name. David notMD (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

How to Publish Pages[edit]

Hi, I am a new user/editor, I want to get some direction on how to publish an article or a page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Igweat (talkcontribs) 04:35, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Igweat. Please start by reading and studying Your first article. Feel free to return to the Teahouse if you have any follow-up questions. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:58, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Creating a Yoga School Page[edit]

Hey Wikipedians,

I had a question before I myself start editing on Wikipedia. I have to create a Yoga School page on Wikipedia. The yoga school is approved by yoga alliance. Do let me know if anything I have to take care before writing an article.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howravi (talkcontribs) 07:21, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Howravi. When you say that you "have to" create an article about this yoga school, that raises major red flags among experienced Wikipedia editors. The short answer is "No, you don't". If you have to do something, that usually indicates that it is your job to do so. If that is the case, then you must immediately comply with Wikipedia's mandatory Paid editing disclosure. Make compliance the goal of your very next edits. You must also comply with the guideline on editing with a conflict of interest. Next, read Your first article and Wikipedia's notability guideline for businesses and organizations. You should use the Articles for Creation process to write a draft which can be reviewed by experienced editors. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:45, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Howravi and welcome to the Teahouse. No-one "has to create" pages on Wikipedia. This is an encyclopaedia that has articles only on topics that have been written about elsewhere. If your yoga school has been written about in independent WP:Reliable sources, then you should collect those sources, summarise them in your own words, and use the sources as references according to WP:Referencing for beginners. You might like to read WP:Your first article first. If you cannot find such sources, then you will have a very difficult and frustrating time here if you try to write an article based on your own knowledge because that is not Wikipedia is designed for. Best wishes. Dbfirs 07:50, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
@Howravi: If you mean "school" as in a physical place in a retail environment that has yoga classes for fee-paying students, it is unlikely to be notable per the policies linked above, any more than the neighboring karate schools, nail salons, juice bars, etc. Or do you mean "school" in the sense of a style and methodology of yoga, like those listed at List of yoga schools (and which is not already listed there)? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 10:26, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

New page - gathering/adding information[edit]

I am sure this question gets asked a lot...

Will edits in progress, under a user's sandbox, get deleted after a limited period, or is it just the main article 'name' that is removed if the article cannot meet all requirements?

Nearing (talk) 11:59, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse, Nearing. You can keep content in your sandbox page or pages for as long as you wish, with just a few caveats. For example, copyrighted content, material that might seriously infringe our policy on biographies of living people or material not directly relevant to enhancing this encyclopaedia, such as an editor treating it as a free webhost to write about themselves, or anything unlawful. Draft articles will only get deleted after 6 months of inactivity, again with the same caveats described above. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:04, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you Nick Moyes. This helps a lot.

Nearing (talk) 12:08, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

help, i fix a bug[edit]

I want to create an account and to edit impose, but if you try to correct it with a new system that only gives me an error message as soon as they hit the save button reading, as you edit could not be processed due to the loss of data session. "Because of my name" Al175an "mean, but he is not eating prior to logging on to one, indeed, can not, what do I talk? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.235.3 (talk) 12:38, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Your question is not clear enough for me to understand. Please try again. And please do not post the same question in other parts of Wikipedia. Stick to just asking here, please. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:05, 18 September 2019 (UTC)


As is now trying to create, and the other called "Al175an 2". But this does not seem to assist the error is still time to try to make reviews! Please help fast, I do not know what to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.2.76 (talk) 12:48, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello again IP-hopping editor. As far as I can tell, User:172.56.2.76 and/or User:172.58.235.3 are the same person and in your confusion you have created User:Al175an and User:Al175an2 and User:Al175an 2. Please do not create any more accounts! Slow down, please, and try asking your question again. Just ask it here - not anywhere else. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:27, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

I will need help or can not create another important[edit]

− − good. let me ask again. I would like to use an archive to edit Wikipedia. once I logged into my Al175an account, I was careful to edit, but once I clicked save button, it gave me an error message about losing my session data. Then I created another article called Al175an 2, and that has the same results. I have not reproduced one, please help me fix the bug, thanks in advance.

− − By the way, I am from China, and is not limited to expect good quality — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.2.76 (talk) 17:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Al175an: We have no way to know without more info if you are losing session data from being in China, due to censorship, or because of issues with your browser cache. I can't help with the former, but I did find this info about Firefox. [[2]] There's also this Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_117#Loss_of_session_data You can also post your question at the Village Pump, where they are more technical. (Please sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes like this: ~~~~.) TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:42, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello again, IP editor/Al175an. I am very sorry I did not understand your first question. Thank you for persevering. I think Timtempleton has given good advice, especially to ask at our Village Pump. You say you are in China, but your two IP addresses geolocate to different parts of America. So, I assume you must be using a VPN or Proxy server? My guess is that this might be the cause of your loss of session data, but I do not have enough technical knowledge to be certain. Do please ask again at the Village Pump. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:20, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Need help creating a Wikipedia article for Jack Kehoe[edit]

I need help creating a Wikipedia article for Jack Kehoe, who was portrayed by Sean Connery in the film "The Molly Maguires" https://en.wikipedia.org/en/The_Molly_Maguires_(film). My wife and children are his direct descendants and we would like his story to be available on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcknecht123 (talkcontribs) 13:19, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Jcknecht123: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a place to merely tell about a subject(be it a person or something else). As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia has articles about subjects shown with significant coverage in published independent reliable sources that show how the subject meets the Wikipedia definition of notability. An editor's word, personal recollections, or documents in private hands are not acceptable for this purpose. It certainly seems like Mr. Kehoe might merit an article, but you will need to have the published sources available. You may wish to read Your First Article for more information. If you have the sources, you can create a draft using Articles for Creation that another editor can review and offer feedback. If you don't feel comfortable attempting to write such an article yourself, you can post at the appropriate area of Requested Articles, though I caution that the backlog there is such that it may be a long time before any article is written. 331dot (talk) 13:27, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Jcknecht123, another possibility (you still need reliable sources) is adding to the Molly Maguires article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:04, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
I've created what we call a redirect, Jack Kehoe (Molly Maguires). It's not an article, but it's something. Jack Kehoe was already taken. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:14, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Draft Josip Zovko[edit]

Hello, you had informed me that the source information (IMDd) is not accepted. Although I have spotted this as a source (even as the only source) for many artists. This was accepted as such. Although I have deposited many and also good sources, you tell me that you do not accept them. I should translate the sources in English. I did that. However, you refuse to review my post and activate it. This is a contribution by an artist who has worked in Croatia in film, TV and theater. Thus, he has contributed much to the culture and development. The artist died in April 2019. Their behavior discriminates against the described person. Especially as they accept other artists with the specified sources of ONLY IMDd. Please consider whether this is objectivity.Moj Galeb (talk) 15:58, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Moj Galeb: IMDB is user generated content - I could create a filmography for you there that is entirely fictional and try to create a Wikipedia article about you, but it would be blocked. If there are other poorly sourced articles that were written before the standards started being enforced, using just IMDB, that means they haven't been noticed and corrected yet, not that they are OK. Please see WP:OTHERSTUFF. You need to focus on finding reliable third party sources - see also WP:RS. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:34, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

I have told you that I have used reputable sources. As you can see in my given sources are none of IMDd. I understood and changed this approach. My sources are from reputable third parties. I have used renowned reports from HRT. This is the Croatian first television. In addition, renowned newspapers such as Slobodna Dalmacija, Vecernji List, 24 Sata. These are one of the most famous Croatian newspapers. I also translated these sources and added the author with date. Therefore, I have established an objectivity about the artist.In addition, I am the author of the article in German and Croatian language. This is not plagiarism. These are facts.Moj Galeb (talk) 19:26, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

As you can see, I uploaded licenses to the pictures. These can be viewed on Wikipedia Commons. Wikipedia Commons is the international platform for images and data. The pictures show the artist staging various world-famous acts. These images are vertified and confirm the genuineness of the artist. Several times I have convinced the authenticity and verification of the article and pictures. In addition, I wrote a German Wikipedia administrator who can verify my reports. He can also understand English and Croatian. It is up to you to contribute to credibility. I would like to honor with my contribution a killed man. With your passive and subjective opinions and behavior you do not make any positive contribution to objectivity. Wikipedia is actually a platform of participation, not segregation. I would therefore ask for your support and unlock the article. Moj Galeb (talk) 10:38, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Help me[edit]

Help to make my wikipedia visable on goohle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khetwadichaganraj (talkcontribs) 16:23, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Khetwadichaganraj Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Google does not index Wikipedia user sandboxes, which is where what you wrote is. If you want it to be an article, you can use Articles for Creation to submit your draft for review, but as it stands now it would not be accepted, as it is completely unsourced. I would suggest that you read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial before attempting to create an article, which is the hardest task on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 16:36, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

How to delete draft[edit]

I created one draft article but now want to delete — Preceding unsigned comment added by Achint2182 (talkcontribs) 16:29, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

The sole author of a page can request deletion by adding {} to the top of the page. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:33, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Deleted. Ruslik_Zero 18:17, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Ruslik and David Biddulph — Preceding unsigned comment added by Achint2182 (talkcontribs) 04:49, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Help me[edit]

My id is getting deleted help me please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khetwadichaganraj (talkcontribs) 16:35, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean; if you mean your account, accounts cannot be deleted, though they can be blocked. 331dot (talk) 16:37, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Your User page is supposed to be about you and your intentions as a Wikipedia editor. Hence the proposed Speedy deletion of what you have created. If you want to create an article, one place is your Sandbox. David notMD (talk) 16:41, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Plz help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khetwadichaganraj (talkcontribs)

Khetwadichaganraj Please put follow up comments in the same section instead of creating a new section. Click "edit" next to the section header. 331dot (talk) 16:42, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Khetwadichaganraj I think you have confused creating an article with creating an account. 331dot (talk) 16:42, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
It is your userpage has nominated to speedy deletion because it violates our policies (please read this). It does not affect your account. Regards.--PATH SLOPU 16:45, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Help me before my page get deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khetwadichaganraj (talkcontribs) 16:46, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Khetwadichaganraj, if you want the contents of your user page to be preserved, you can copy them to User:Khetwadichaganraj\sandbox.   Maproom (talk) 17:04, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
@Maproom: - I assume that you mean User:Khetwadichaganraj/sandbox (which is a subpage of User:Khetwadichaganraj), rather than User:Khetwadichaganraj\sandbox? --David Biddulph (talk) 17:07, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I've transferred the content to their sandbox. 331dot (talk) 17:18, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Citation bot requires OAuth every time[edit]

Why does Wikipedia citation bot (WP:UCB) require WP:OAuth every time I use it? I know there was a stir regarding the tool a while back but...?

@Waddie96: This bot related question is better posed to the bot maintainer - Martin Smith, on his talk page User talk:Smith609. (Please sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes like this: ~~~~.) TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:28, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

How to clear the flag issues[edit]

Hi, There are some flag issues shows such as errors for notability, citation and errors Although there are none.. Can you please help how to improve page and get submitted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Themediatalk (talkcontribs) 18:39, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Courtesy link for other editors - this appears to be about Draft:Haelyn Shastri, which may have been previously deleted. The tags are appropriate. (Please sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes like this: ~~~~.) TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 19:03, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict):Hi Themediatalk and welcome to the Teahouse. If this is about the draft and the article Haelyn Shastri then there are lots of issues. You might like to start by reading WP:Referencing for beginners. I expect an admin can delete the article, then you can work on the draft. The only correctly-formatted in-line reference seems to be about Hinal Bambhania. This needs explaining. Dbfirs 19:04, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Adding an image of a living person[edit]

I would like to add an image to the article Earring. It is a picture of my sister ca. 1958; she is still living. See Talk:Earring#History_1950s-60s for more details & a temporary upload of the image in question. The image will no longer be © by the original photographer, but I believe there are still issues. I know from past experience the copyright/permissions hurdles are very strict.

  • 1) Must the iamge be uploaded to Commons (not really appropriate for this one), or can it just be embbedded in the article?
  • 2) I would appreciate help in passing the standard copyright/permission requirements (point me at the appropriate help pages is fine)
  • 3) Since the person in the image is still living, do I need to obtain formal (written?) permission from her? Any other related issues? — Preceding unsigned comment added by D A Patriarche (talkcontribs) 19:33, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

P.S. I see some of the general issues were recently covered under Image Upload above. Don't bother dup'ing the Help topics pointers there (my question #2), I will follow them up, unless you see an issue with my image not covered in the above post. Please do help with my questions 1 & 3. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 19:46, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

The article Earring already has several pictures of earrings being worn. Why do you think it needs another, particularly one of questionable copyright status? If you have no evidence to the contrary, you must assume that the copyright belongs to the photographer. Maproom (talk) 19:57, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
There is an issue IMO re the 20th century history of ear piercing, covered in the Talk page section Talk:Earring#History_1950s-60s. However, reviewing my own post there, I realize the image would be at best a "primary source", at worst "OR"; what's needed to support my argument is the usual good secondary written source (so far I heven't found one). I think I uploaded the picture just to support my argument on the talk page in the absence of a good cite; I agree it would not add anything much to the article.
The section does need additional & better cites (the movie Grease is hardly a reliable source!), mostly already tagged, but that's a separate issue.
Question withdrawn! Thanks, --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 20:20, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

unoffical facebook page by wikipedia is confusing the public and driving me crazy[edit]

Hello,

I am an admin of Llanerch Country Club. https://en.wikipedia.org/en/Llanerch_Country_Club?fbclid=IwAR1-uxSCpgEvXoLr6R_O5l3KHmKd2DIkQU8mhHPD0rKxb0XSTpGw468-t4U There has been an unofficial facebook page UNOFFICIAL FACEBOOK PAGE made off of the above Wikipedia page. It is confusing people looking for information as some information is incorrect. additionally, people are accidentally tagging, reviewing and checking into the unofficial page instead of our official page OFFICIAL FACEBOOK PAGE. Any help on how to fix this would be appreciated.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbmargera (talkcontribs) 20:02, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Kbmargera Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has no control over people who use Wikipedia information to create their own Facebook pages; you will need to address that using whatever processes Facebook has(such as verifying your 'official' status) With regards to inaccurate information in the article about your club, you are welcome to go to the article talk page and make a formal edit request detailing any changes you feel are needed. You will first need to make the formal declarations required by the conflict of interest policy and the paid editing policy. 331dot (talk) 20:11, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
@Kbmargera: There's plenty of online advice available for you to deal with this problem, which has nothing to do with us. I suggest you Google "Facebooks unofficial organisation pages" and follow one of the 'how to' guide links you'll find there. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:51, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

article waiting for review[edit]

Good Evening,

I have a draft article awaiting review. It's been in this status since 8 July. I know this can take awhile, but we are fast approaching 3 months. Is this normal?

URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/en/Draft:Rita_M._Sambruna

Thanks! Sago — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagolightly (talkcontribs) 21:40, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Sagolightly: Hello. Please be patient. There are a lot of drafts awaiting review, and they are reviewed by volunteers. LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 21:56, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Sagolightly (ec) Unfortunately, there are literally thousands of drafts awaiting review, and a limited number of volunteers that perform the reviews(which are done in no particular order). This amount of time is not unusual. You will need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 21:57, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
@Sagolightly: Welcome to Wikipedia. You should continue to improve the draft while you are waiting. Read WP:YFA for guidance. In particular I notice that the references are bare URLs. See WP:REFB for how to do citations. You should also look for other sources to cite. RudolfRed (talk) 22:09, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
For this draft and your previously accepted Joseph Pesce, revise so that you are not repeating identical refs; instead, there is a method for showing repeat use of the same ref. I did two out of three for the Sambruna draft. David notMD (talk) 22:48, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Didda the Queen of kashmir[edit]

How does quoting from or of the sole book in the world that covers the life and times of Didda the warrior Queen of kashmir become promotion ? . More so when the book Didda the warrior Queen of kashmir is published by the largest publication company in India and clearly categorised as HISTORICAL/NONFICTION?. Furthermore, the book has been hailed as a bestseller and widely covered in Indian media. Let me also share the fact that my grand mother was a direct decedent of the Lohar dynasty, most specefixally the niece of the last king of Poonch the earstwhile capital of Lohar dynasty.

No author that you have quoted in Didda has any specefic authority on Diida and no one has been able to write more than a few pages on her that too are copied from Rajtarangni. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Authorashishkaul (talkcontribs) 22:00, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Assuming we're talking about this [3], do you not see promotion (WP:PROMO) in langauge like "The most comprehensive and the only true compilation" and "the bestseller book 'Didda The Warrior Queen of Kashmir' by prominent media ptofessional Ashish Kaul. Ashish kaul had spent 6 long years in research across undivided India and Iran."? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:27, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
I have left my own observations on this matter in response to the OP's statement on their own talk page. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:31, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
One must of course factor in that Ashish Kaul is a trailblazer and a maverick business leader across media and entertainment spectrum. He is also the representative of a brave new breed of multilingual writers. Ashish’s Hindi novel on Kashmir titled Refugee Camp has been extremely well-received. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:55, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Explicit Content Warning[edit]

I was reading the article about Wikipedia (linked from the Main Page) and read the section on Wikipedia's explicit content policy. I haven't visited any of the pages, but was wondering - are there any templates that place an explicit content warning at the top of the page?

Thanks, MrConorAE ( user | talk | contribs) 22:23, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello, MrConorAE. If there are, they shouldn't be used. See WP:NODISCLAIMERS. --ColinFine (talk) 22:50, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, ColinFine! I clearly haven't noticed the WP:NODISCLAIMERS. MrConorAE ( user | talk | contribs) 23:33, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Incorrect and malicious redirect on listing[edit]

Hello,

There is an inaccurate and potentially reputation-damaging listing in Wikipedia about a company named Kannalife. Someone not connected to the company has created a "redirect" listing Medical Marijuana Inc as the listing from Kannalife. This is inaccurate information. How do I fix this listing and remove the redirect to Medical Marijuana Inc? Here is the revision history https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=KannaLife&action=history --- none of the names listed are affiliated with Kannalife Inc.

Please assist ASAP as the current information and redirect is malicious and false.

Oddly enough this listing ONLY shows up on a mobile search and device but not a desktop.

Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgogos (talkcontribs) 01:35, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Rgogos, welcome to the Teahouse. Your post is a little unclear but I guess you refer to the suggested pages when KannaLife is written in the search box of the mobile site without pressing enter. KannaLife Sciences Inc. was a redirect to Medical Marijuana, Inc. This caused the latter article to be one of the suggested pages. I have changed the redirect target to KannaLife. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:34, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Batch additions to Watchlist[edit]

Hi friends. I wish to add all pages in a particular categories to my watchlist (specifically: Category:Ophthalmology_drugs, Category:Human_eye_anatomy, Category:Visual_system, Category:Eye. Is there a way to do it quickly and easily? Is there a way to subsequently Undo it if it becomes too much to handle?! lol

Thank you, Vitreology talk 03:01, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

This appears to be the only unanswered question in the Tea House at the moment.
So sad. So lonely. :(
(it's honestly not a super important question anyway, don't feel obligated to respond)

Vitreology talk 13:35, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Vitreology. I saw your question, but didn't know a good way to answer it. Perhaps others felt the same. You might have better luck find out about this type of thing at WP:VP/T since that a good place to ask technical questions about how the software runs. There's probably a way to do what you want to do, but I think most people just manually add pages to their watchlists. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:40, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
No dramas. I'll have a look. Thanks Marchjuly, Vitreology talk 13:41, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I want to create One Page and redirect it to another[edit]

Please tell me how can I do this. I want to create Fly Pro (Airline) and Fly Pro Moldova and Redirect it to https://en.wikipedia.org/en/Fly_Pro.

Thanks in advance for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Achint2182 (talkcontribs) 04:48, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Achint2182. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Redirect for some general information about redirecting pages. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:52, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Marchjuly — Preceding unsigned comment added by Achint2182 (talkcontribs) 05:21, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Achint2182. Please do not create "Fly Pro (airline)" as a redirect. Wikipedia only uses a term in brackets like that to distinguish different topics of the same name. I am also dubious about creating "Fly Pro Moldova" as a redirect: it seems very unlikely to me that anybody would search for "Fly Pro Moldova" and not "Fly Pro". I suspect that you are wanting these not to aid people in finding the article, but for SEO reasons: anything to do with SEO is necessarily promotional, and so fundamentally inconsistent with the purposes of Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 09:16, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine , thanks for the advice, my purpose is not for promotion, I will delete all other variants I created. Thanks for valuable advice. Achint2182 (talk) 09:37, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi, ColinFine I want to delete https://en.wikipedia.org/en/Fly_Pro_Airline please suggest process Achint2182 (talk) 13:27, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Achint2182. I'm not sure it's worth deleting a redirect that has already been created, but if you want to, the place to go is WP:RFD. --ColinFine (talk) 15:05, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

New Article Created Fly Pro[edit]

Dear Wiki Experts, please someone review this article and let me know if there is anything/content in this article which is not supposed to be in Wikipedia. This new is my first article and I am totally new.

https://en.wikipedia.org/en/Fly_Pro — Preceding unsigned comment added by Achint2182 (talkcontribs) 04:56, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

@Achint2182: the only big mistake you've made is to cite wikipedia as a source (currently ref #8). You can wikilink within the article, but never use it as a reliable source. The article has got through New Page Patrol and you've done a nice, succinct job there. Well done. Very minor niggles include occasional use of capital letters on nouns which are not proper names ( e.g. Cargo aircraft) and a couple of places where 'the' was ommitted. But these are nothing to worry about. The one inconsistency I noted was the formatting of the name. Is it FlyPro, Fly-Pro, Fly Pro, or something else? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:03, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Nick Moyes, I have removed citation of wikipedia page and changed name to Fly Pro everywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Achint2182 (talkcontribs) 08:19, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

@Achint2182: Thanks. One other little thing: (Please sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes like this: ~~~~.) Nick Moyes (talk) 10:19, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes Nick Moyes (talk), now I know how to sign off :) thanks Achint2182 (talk) 10:57, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Content experts - losing interest[edit]

Dear friends, could someone please explain

  1. Whether Wikipedia genuinely values contributions from content-experts?
  2. How Wikipedia encourages ongoing contributions from content-experts?

First: I have read and completely understand WP:EXPERT.

However, I am finding there is a certain futility to this project, and I am losing interest.
It seems that, for any unit of time that experts could be spending directly improving the WP:VERifiable content of articles within their realm of expertise, they have to spend at least double, if not triple the time trying to reach a consensus - which really means, content-experts teaching non-content-experts about the content. Conveying complex topics to passive users of the encyclopaedia is the easy part. The challenge, and most laborious/futile part, is fending off relentless attempts to revert your efforts, and trying to negotiate a compromise with people who gain more satisfaction by continually 'throwing a spanner in the works' than by trying to better their own understanding of the material. It's a pretty tiresome process and makes me wonder why I bother trying to improve the encyclopaedia, when the attitude seems to be "It would be great if you could clean up our articles. But we're not going to help you fend off every Tom Dick and Harry who wants to troll you and your efforts. Maybe I don't have the resilience for this nonsense. Maybe I should just walk away and let certain misleading shambolic articles be someone elses problem. I came here to improve the encyclopaedia for the general public, not to deal with hordes of trolls.

Would appreciate comments. Thank you Vitreology talk 05:03, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia welcomes input from experts, not primarily because of their knowledge of the subject, but because they are most likely to spot errors and to know where to find WP:Reliable sources to correct these errors. Please go ahead and improve any misleading articles. There are many editors here who will support you if you base your edits on the best sources. Where the best sources disagree, we report both views. Dbfirs 06:37, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Vitreology. You have been editing a long time, and I thank you for your contributions. 97% of your edits still stand and have not been reverted. And about 80% of your edits have been to article space. Those are very healthy statistics. Well done! If you could provide links to specific instances of relentless efforts to revert your edits and throw a spanner into the works, that would be helpful. Other experienced editors can then investigate and intervene if necessary. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:57, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Discussion is Talk:Pilocarpine#Refs2
Practice is variable with respect to treating ocular hypertension per the sources provided.
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:05, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Changing a title[edit]

hello How can I change the title of a page? In fact complete a title with two words more. Thank you 82.254.19.66 (talk) 06:11, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Changing the title of a page requires moving the page to a different title. IP users cannot do that by themselves, but you may go to Requested Moves to make a request. You may also want to discuss it with other editors that might be following the relevant page first. 331dot (talk) 06:38, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Changing page names can be contentious, when the change is made everything goes with the move except the score of how many readers have accessed the article in the past. To name change in the middle of a DYK is the height of rudeness; especially if it's a trivial change. However disambiguating a name from a similar other is sometimes necessary, unless it can be done with a re-direct? I actually wonder if there should be an optional forum for agreeing the names of article before their creation? Broichmore (talk) 11:30, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

why my article got declined[edit]

please help me. why my article got declined I'm not understanding. I'm new at wiki page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Girltalks (talkcontribs)

Girltalks Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It was declined due to not having inline citations. You have citations, but they are all at the bottom of the page and it is not clear what citation goes with what information. If you look at other articles, you will see small numbers next to many sentences or paragraphs, these are links to the citation for that information. To learn how to do this, you can read Citing Sources. I will caution you that it make take you some time to learn. 331dot (talk) 08:08, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

SeaScuirtsFaDinna.4[edit]

Hey, I’m SeaScuirt’s mate. I’m just wondering why and what exactly he got banned for

Noice Gary (talk) 09:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC) Noice Gary Noice Gary (talk) 09:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Noice Gary, 4 is not registered but 3 got banned blocked for vandalism. You seem to be headed down the same path, unfortunately. Usedtobecool TALK  09:26, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I haven’t made an edit on a page that isn’t mine in a while so what do mean by heading down the same path? Noice Gary (talk) 09:39, 19 September 2019 (UTC)Noice GaryNoice Gary (talk) 09:39, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi protected page editing[edit]

<how i can edit semi protected pages> Punjabier (talk) 09:08, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello Punjabier, you can use Edit Requests. Usedtobecool TALK  09:33, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Edit requests for semi protected pages[edit]

how i can make edit requests for semi protected pages kindle give the formats — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabier (talkcontribs) 09:42, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Did you read WP:Edit Requests and the links from there? What specifically did you not understand? --David Biddulph (talk) 09:53, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) :Use the {} template on the talk page of the article. Dbfirs 09:55, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Edit requests does not accepted by admin[edit]

several persons already made edit requests but admin or user registered is inactive any other alternative i had mafe 11 edits and account is confirmed still i am not able to edit in semi protected pages one day old account — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabier (talkcontribs) 10:03, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Please don't keep generating new sections. When discussing an existing topic, keep the edits in the same section. You can't edit semi-protected pages untilyour account is autoconfirmed. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:14, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Means 10 or more edits AND four days. David notMD (talk) 10:23, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
I should add that an edit that's not accepted by others is likely to be reverted even if you could make it yourself. The solution is to make your proposed edit policy-compliant. Please make your requests clear and concise, and supported by reliable sources.
I am guessing the query is about the edit requests at Talk:Saini. An editor experienced in this area should probably help clean up requests there, as Punjabeer has created multiple requests there, including blank ones. The issue itself seems to be a long-standing one, expert needed. Usedtobecool TALK  10:50, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Account autoconfirmed[edit]

after how many days my account will be autoconfirmed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabier (talkcontribs) 12:05, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

If you had either followed the link which you were provided to WP:autoconfirmed, or taken the trouble to read the answer which you were given above, you would have known the answer. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:12, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Edit article[edit]

request you air, can you edit one artical only one word in that artical that hurt us alot someone disgrace our images by publishing wrong information — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punjabier (talkcontribs) 12:17, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Courtesy: The dispute is about "(Mali)" in the sentence before the Lead in the Saini article "This article is about the Saini (Mali) community of Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Chandigarh and Delhi. For the Mali community who were not recorded as Saini prior to 1937 see Mali caste and Rajput Mali the Bhagrathi or Gola community of Western Uttar Pradesh Bhagirathi Mali." Punjabier has submitted an edit request on the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 12:31, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Question about link for "Find articles on Wikipedia which cite this ISBN"[edit]

Hello Tea friends,

The Wikipedia:Book Sources page mentions a way to "Find articles on Wikipedia which cite this ISBN". I found that the link that is included within the page heading: Wikipedia:Book Sources#Find_on_Wikipedia, leads to a magicnumber search. I am unsure where to include the ISBN or how to make this function.

My apologies for a likely silly question, but does this search still work, and if so, could you please let me know what I'm doing incorrectly? Thanks so much! SunnyBoi (talk) 09:40, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi SunnyBoi. You are not supposed to use Wikipedia:Book sources directly. The lead says:
  • If you arrived at this page by clicking an ISBN link in a Wikipedia page, you will find the full range of relevant search links for that specific book by scrolling to the find links below. To search for a different book, type that book's individual ISBN into this ISBN search box.
MAGICNUMBER automatically becomes the ISBN number when you do this. But all it does is make a standard search for the number. If you already have the ISBN then you can just enter it in the search box on any page. Special:Booksources only finds occurrences written without hyphens so it often fails. Making your own search including hyphens may find more. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:15, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

navigation template autocollapse question[edit]

On David Walker (abolitionist), there are two templates at the end. One is collapsed and the other not. They should both be collapsed? I can't figure out the problem. deisenbe (talk) 10:52, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Deisenbe, if you look at the source code, the expanded template has an additional parameter, "state": {} while the other one does not. So, someone made it so deliberately, you could ask at the article's talk page, or change it to what you think is best, and wait and see if someone else reverts. Usedtobecool TALK  11:12, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
I can't find the code you refer to. Sesrching the template for the word "expanded" produces nothing. deisenbe (talk) 11:25, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@Deisenbe: It is David Walker (abolitionist)#External links which says {}. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:40, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Need Help with Rejected Draft of Notable Person[edit]

Hello,

I am looking for more information about how I could have the following article accepted:

https://en.wikipedia.org/en/Draft:Antonios_Karatzis

I would like to ask:

1) Some sources in the said article are from materials produced by the creator (eg Reference number 2, which is the official site of the Karatzis Group of Companies, and referes to the company itself). Is this a red flag, and must be avoided at all costs? Or for cases, like the one I mentioned, it's ok to include said References?

2) In some Reference cases, like Reference number 20-25, the References are only in Online form, and from public sites (not owned by the creator though). Cases like these are included because there are no written sources available to ascertain these facts, aside from local newspapers and magazines which do not have online forms available to reference, since they refer to local events not covered in major media. Ar these references a red flag in the publishment of drafts? Shall I remove them altogether?

3) Could you give me some hints on which parts of my draft I should focus my attention on?

Any help will be greatly appreciated!

Thanks in advance, -George Antonakakis

Courtesy: The draft has been rejected six times. However, Antonakakis has only been editing after the fifth rejected. Question to Antonakakis: What is your connection to Karatzis? Asked because this is the only article you have edited, so need to know if your connection is paid or in some way a personal connection to Karatzis. David notMD (talk) 14:44, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

@David notMD: I think that you and the OP may have intended to say "declined", rather than "rejected"; the latter, if I understand it, is an action which has been introduced relatively recently and which has a degree of finality to it. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:52, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Yes, "Declined." I would still like a response from Antonakakis as to and WP:PAID or WP:COI related to becoming an editor on this draft. David notMD (talk) 15:33, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Change an article name.[edit]

I've just created a new article page, and I've realized that there's an error in its name. How can I correct it?-— Preceding unsigned comment added by Petrandreev13 (talkcontribs) 6:25 pm, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Is this Draft:Brent Hinkley? If so, then don't worry, it can be renamed when it is accepted. More important is that the draft does not have a single WP:Reliable source to establish WP:Notability. IMDB doesn't count. Anyone can put anything there. Dbfirs 14:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Two tables side by side[edit]

Hello! I added this information [4] to Campus sexual assault but the one thing I don't know how to do is get the two tables showing side by side. Could someone demonstrate how that's done? 6YearsTillRetirement (talk) 15:54, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 6YearsTillRetirement. You might find this section of Help:Tables of some use. Hope you find this helpful. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:46, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: Thank you, that's closer. Is there a way to rename the table headings so it doesn't just say "Table 1" and "Table 2"? 6YearsTillRetirement (talk) 16:56, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Had you tried changing the lines that say |+Table 1 and |+Table 2? --David Biddulph (talk) 17:01, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@David Biddulph: No I hadn't, I had assumed that would be a modifier like the style= modifier in the section @Nick Moyes:linked me to. Unfortunately getting them to lay out centered or evenly spaced I am still working with if someone has advice? 6YearsTillRetirement (talk) 17:07, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Sandbox[edit]

I developed my first article (page) in my UsedID:Sandbox. When I finished drafting and editing, and was ready for publishing on Wikipedia, I then moved it into the Wikipedia drafts area. Since then, the moderators have approved the article, and it is now “live”.

I have two questions:

1. All I have in my UserId:Sandbox is

  1. REDIRECT Anne Puckridge


  • From a page move: This is a redirect from a page that has been moved (renamed). This page was kept as a redirect to avoid breaking links, both internal and external, that may have been made to the old page name.

I now want to develop a new article (page). Do I delete the redirect statement, now the article is live?

2. Can I develop more than one page at a time in my UserId:Sandbox?

Thank you!

What a great encyclopedia..

The Retiree — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Retiree (talkcontribs) 17:02, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

1 Yes, you can remove the redirect from your sandbox, and/or replace it by anything else.
2 You can have as many user subpages as you like; you can create User:The Retiree/sandbox2, User:The Retiree/whatever new title you like, or whatever. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:11, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for such a quick response - very helpful — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Retiree (talkcontribs) 17:28, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Just for clarification, it isn't quite true that you moved your sandbox into the draft area and that the "moderators" have approved the article, and it is now "live". You moved the sandbox version yourself mistakenly to Wikipedia project space at Wikipedia:The Retiree/sandbox, and from there another editor (seeing that it didn't belong there) moved it to mainspace. In parallel you copied a separate version to draft space (at Draft:Anne Puckridge) and submitted it for AFC review. I assume that when a reviewer gets round to looking at it they will say that the mainspace article already exists, so they will decline the review of the draft. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:39, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Is BehindTheVoiceActors a legitimate source?[edit]

I'd like to add data for voice actors on media entries, and i'd like to use it as a source? Is it acceptable for me to use the site? They've a rigorous sourcing process which only allows in-work credits or sources from the production, rather than from IMDb or here directly. Starbeam2 (talk) 17:02, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Starbeam2. This website was discussed at Reliable sources noticeboard in 2013, and there was agreement at that time that the site is reliable when referencing a profile with a green check mark, which indicates that particular listing has been vetted. I am not familiar with the website myself. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:59, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

automatic acquiring certain information[edit]

Can you direct me to a place where Wikipedia would acquire some information automatically from another site? For example, the version and release-number of a program ....

Take a look Wikipedia:Wikidata RudolfRed (talk) 18:17, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Sandy Hook[edit]

Why is the perpetrator's motivation "inconclusive" when many articles cite that he was constantly threatened by his mother about hospitalization and feared that? Source — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.27.178.170 (talk) 18:48, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This page is a place for new users to ask questions about using Wikipedia. If you have a question or concern about a specific article, you should address it to that article's talk page. When you view the article, there should be a tab at the top that says "talk". Click that to access the talk page. 331dot (talk) 18:52, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Yes, the proper place to discuss this is Talk:Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:54, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
The issue of why a motive is not given is addressed in the "frequently asked questions" section of Talk:Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting. Fabrickator (talk) 19:07, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

WYZZ-TV[edit]

The box summary on the right side of the page incorrectly identifies channel 43.2 as GET-TV. The correct answer should show 43.2 as cool TV and channel 43.3 as GET-TV. Although 43.2 is actually not on the air because cool TV is bankrupt? I have tried to contact WYZZ for clarification, but have gotten no answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.18.138.62 (talk) 18:58, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello there! The actual channel has nothing to do with the wikipedia article which is maintained by volunteer editors like me, and you. We update the article based on what is published on reliable sources. Although I haven't checked the sources in this one, I changed it to 43.3 as you suggested because that's also what it says in the article body, and the infobox is supposed to be a summary of the article. Let's wait and see if the regular contributors to the article thank us or revert it back. Usedtobecool TALK  10:34, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Translating a page from Russian to English[edit]

Hello,I'm a librarian and received a question from a faculty member in the Russian language department. This faculty person is interested in creating a Wikipedia article about Maxim Amelin (sometimes spelled Maksim Amelin). She attempted to create an article in the past, but it was deleted because the topic was not considered notable enough. There are multiple wikipedia pages about Maxim Amelin in other languages, and so she said she would also be willing to translate an existing page into English. We have read through some of the translation information pages, but they are a little confusing. Is there someone who would be willing to put the next steps into layman's terms? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZoeannaMayhook (talkcontribs) 20:00, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

The first step is to address the question of notability. The fact that articles exist in other languages doesn't necessarily mean that the subject would satisfy the notability requirements in the English Wikipedia (as each language's Wikipedia is independent and self-governing), but it is obviously worth looking at the sources used in other languages to see whether they would be suitable for the English version. The basic advice is at WP:Translation. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:13, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
It would obviously be interesting to see any previous discussion about his notability here on enwiki, but on a quick search I can't see any evidence of such an article having existed and being deleted. Can you give us a link? --David Biddulph (talk) 20:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
I now see that a draft exists at Draft:Maxim Albertovich Amelin. It hasn't been deleted, but was declined at AFC review. It would obviously make sense to address the points raised during that review. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:25, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Live Wikipedia Page[edit]

This page went live today, https://en.wikipedia.org/en/Anne_Puckridge

but now it is showing this message:

This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (September 2019)

What has happened, and how can i fix it?

Thanks

Nigel — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Retiree (talkcontribs) 21:17, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

@The Retiree: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Nothing has "happened" other than the fact that no other articles link to the article you created. This makes the article an "orphan". If you add links to the article you made where they seem pertinent in other articles, the Orphan tag can be removed. 331dot (talk) 21:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@331dot: Would you mind looking at Draft:Anne Puckridge? I'm not sure why a draft for the article was created, particularly since the article already existed when the draft was created. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:37, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Please remove the draft - I moved my article from Sandbox to draft, thinking that was what I was supposed to doThe Retiree (talk) 23:21, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
The blue words in the notice are wikilinks to further information. In particular, you will find an explanation at WP:orphan. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:23, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Perfect - thank you so much - I have linked the article, and the message has gone away....isn't technology wonderful... — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Retiree (talkcontribs) 21:33, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@The Retiree: Perhaps you can clarify why you created a draft for this subject after you had already created the article about this subject? Usually, things are done the other way around. It's not going to break Wikipedia, but I don't think a "draft" is needed at this point. If you want to work on improvements to the article, you can use your user sandbox instead for practice or simply edit the article directly. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:37, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@The Retiree: The message hasn't "gone away". You deleted the orphan tag although the article is still an orphan. I have restored the tag. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:43, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Now I am getting really confused, because the page now has multiple issues:
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. (September 2019)
This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (September 2019) — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Retiree (talkcontribs) 21:49, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
I have linked the article frozen state pension with the page Anne Puckridge, and I am guessing this is where you want the The Retiree (talk) 22:03, 19 September 2019 (UTC)?
Hi again The Retiree. The article you created has lots of sources (though perhaps too many as explained in WP:BOMBARD; for example, you don't really need 16 sources to support the fact that she was interviewed by media outlets in the UK and Canada.), but all of them are related to the "pension" matter, and there are none for the biographical information in the previous section. If you're going to add content about her background, education, etc. then you need to provide sources for them as well per WP:BLPSOURCES; otherwise, the unsourced content can be removed at anytime. Even if you know the content is true, citations are still needed for verification purposes. Also, you might want to read WP:COISELF and WP:BLPCOI as well as Wikipedia:Ownership of content. While I'm sure your intentions were noble in creating this article, if you're connected to Puckridge in some kind of personal or professional way, then you would be considered to have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and need to understand that the article shouldn't be used to promote her or her cause(s). Neither she nor anyone else associated with her has any final editorial control over the article's content; so, anything not in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines has a good chance of being removed.
Finally, you should check the file you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons because it has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please read c:Commons:OTRS for more information on what you need to do to resolve that problem. For reference, Commons and Wikipedia are separate projects which means you will need to resolve the file issues over at Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:08, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@The Retiree: A possible way for you to WP:DE-ORPHAN the Puckridge article might be to add relevant sourced content about her and her challenge to Frozen pension#Challenges. Perhaps a short paragraph describing her case, the outcome, etc. would work as long as it's supported by citation to reliable sources. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:19, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
I see that The Retiree has created both Anne Puckridge and Draft:Anne Puckridge, and the presence of two versions is creating confusion, particularly for The Retiree themself. I have often seen inexperienced editors create two or more versions of the same article, and it usually creates confusion, for the person responsible, for reviewers, for editors who nominate one of the versions for deletion, and for editors who improve one of the versions. Maproom (talk) 22:10, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
I developed the page Anne Puckridge in my Sandbox, When I was happy with it, I moved it to Wikipedia Drafts, and from there I thought that the moderators then moved it to what I call "live" (is this called Mainspace?}. When I moved it, there was a Redirect placed in my Sandbox. Is this not the correct procedure?
The Retiree (talk) 22:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
The redirect was created automatically, just in case you forgot where you had moved the article to. You can safely delete it now. Just click on the "redirected from" link, then edit the sandbox to delete the contents so that you can start again. Dbfirs 06:33, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Whats WP:EEML ???[edit]

what is that I saw some one bring that Up? I don't under stand itJack90s15 (talk) 21:51, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

As you'll see if you put WP:EEML into the Wikipedia search box, WP:EEML is a redirect to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:55, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
(ec)add Welcome to the Teahouse, Jack90s15. That acronym refers to a ten year old controversy about coordinated editing related to Eastern Europe, which led to special restrictions called discretionary sanctions being imposed on that topic area. See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list for the whole mess. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:58, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Response to "Notability requirement" (16 September 2019)[edit]

I was able to find a number of sources for writer and minster, Albert Capwell Wyckoff. Perhaps the original poster, Gr8fultom, might find these of use in creating a basic article on the topic.

Online Sources

Morality in Literature—The Legacy of Columbia Author Albert Capwell Wyckoff, by Peder Johnson, Columbia Magazine, http://www.columbiamagazine.com/index.php?sid=10730

Albert Capwell Wyckoff, by Ed Waggener, Columbia Magazine, http://www.columbiamagazine.com/index.php?sid=10040

Capell Wyckoff's Mystery Hunters, by Frank W. Quillen, Newsboy, Volume 34, July-August 2001, Pages 13—20, The Horatio Alger Society, http://www.horatioalgersociety.net/newsboys/newsboys2000-2009/nb2001-07jul-aug.pdf [PDF]

Capwell Wyckoff (1903-1953), by Terence E. Hanley, Tellers of Weird Tales, 10 September 2011, https://tellersofweirdtales.blogspot.com/2011/09/capwell-wyckoff.html

Offline Sources

Obituary, The Lebanon Enterprise, 16 January 1953, (This obituary was reprinted at Find A Grave: https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/55733383/albert-capwell-wyckoff As Find A Grave is not a WP Reliable Source, someone with access to Newspapers.com archives would need to pull up the original to confirm.)

Libraries/University Libraries/Historical Assocations (according to WorldCat)

Wyckoff's Stories of Adventure, by Fred Woodworth, The Mystery and Adventure Series Review, Summer 1982

Reminiscences of Albert Capwell Wyckoff, by D. Cambell Wyckoff, The Wyckoff House and Association Bulletin, 5.29, 841-34

I hope this is of use to the person who wanted to create the article. Carl Henderson (talk) 22:29, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I've moved your message from the top of the page to the bottom where it belongs. It is always useful to provide a wikilink to a previous thread where relevant; in this case presumably WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1015#Notability requirement? --David Biddulph (talk) 22:38, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
I apologize for the misplacement of my post. I would swear that the text said "top" of page. I remember thinking at the time that that sounded kind of strange as the default is bottom of page for most stuff in WP. I guess I should not post when my AC is not working and it is Texas. Do you think it would also be appropriate to post this to the userpage of the person who asked the original question? Carl Henderson (talk) 04:21, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi Carl Henderson. New questions used to be posted at the top of the page, but this was changed not too long ago to bring the Teahouse more in step with the way other talk pages/noticeboards work.
As for your question, if the article they are intended to be used in already exists, then you can add them as citations yourself if you think they meet WP:RS and WP:RSCONTEXT; if not, then maybe they could be added as part of a WP:FURTHERREADING or WP:EL section. You can also add them to the article's talk page using Template:Refideas. If the article doesn't already exist but is a draft, then you can pretty much do the same but you might want to just let the draft's creator know first as a courtesy. If there's no article and no draft, then perhaps simply listing the sources on the other person's user talk page should be fine. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:03, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
It is an article that Gr8fultom wanted to see (I am not sure if he meant to create it). He was told there were no decent sources on Teahouse but my Google Fu is strong and I found some. Thank you. Carl Henderson (talk) 05:52, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

How do you create a user talk page?[edit]

I noticed that some edit summary’s show what’s called “talk” how do you make the title called “User talk: “persons username” without making the title called “talk”? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Japan Airlines Flight 123 (talkcontribs) 00:20, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

You already have a user talk page and instead of worrying about how to remove the word "talk" from it, you probably should be more concerned about whether your choice of username is appropriate per WP:IU. Japan Airlines Flight 123 was a horrible tragedy (which I'm assuming you know and which might be why you choose that as your username), and your choice to use it as your username might be seen by some as disruptive or offensive. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:22, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Just want to point out an error. (Can't figure out editing.)[edit]

Is this where I'm supposed to write?

I happened, in looking up an anatomical term, to peruse a Wiki article called "Anatomical Terms of Location". I noticed a minor error and wanted to correct it, but I am from the 1950s (b.'46) and only have a PhD, so I can't understand the editing instructions. Learning computerese continues to be gruelling (Canadian spelling) and I have other things to do, so I thought maybe I could just point out what I believe to be an error in the hope that some computer-/Wiki-literate person could correct it.

In the second illustration in this article a 4-legged animal is referred to as a "quadriped", and although I was certain it should have been "quadruped", I did my due diligence or whatever you call it and consulted numerous dictionaries of high repute: this endeavour supported my strong suspicion that there is no such word as "quadriped". Thass all, folks. Thanks for whatever you can do to correct this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zephyroob (talkcontribs) 03:19, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Zephyroob. You can be WP:BOLD and correct the error yourself. You can also be WP:CAUTIOUS and point out the error on the article's talk page and see what others think. You don't need to be an WP:EXPERT in order to edit the article, but you should at least make sure to leave an edit summary explaining why you made the change if you do decide to be BOLD. This will let others know why you're making the change. If, by chance, another editor disagrees with the change and WP:REVERTs it, just follow Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle and discuss things on the article talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:10, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi Zephyroob, and welcome to the Teahouse. The error is in the illustration, not in the text. Latin is a different language, but the only example I can find of the spelling to which you object is in an ancient document where it might be a misprint. Wikitionary does have an entry for wikt:quadripedal, perhaps because a few modern authors mis-use the word, but it seems to be a very marginal variant. We need to contact the uploader of the image, or change it ourselves. Thank you for pointing out the error. Dbfirs 07:18, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
... later note ... The illustration was from a text book by Tom (LT) who is a prolific expert editor here and who has kindly contributed the illustrations from his own book. Thus I was hesitant to make any changes, and I hope I haven't offended him by uploading a temporary modification of the image. I am quite happy if he deletes my version and updates to the modern standard spelling himself. Dbfirs 07:58, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

as i am new here[edit]

hi to the seniors over here, i have a question that i am new here so if i make an article directly from article wizard after getting autoconfirmed will it be deleted cuz i am new ?Ganeshayanamaha (talk) 06:12, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ganeshayanamaha and welcome to the Teahouse. Writing a new article from scratch is one of the most difficult tasks here, so it is not surprising that many new articles get deleted. If this happens, it is not because the editor is new but because they do not understand what is required for a Wikipedia article. We usually advise that new editors gain some practice at editing existing articles, as you have already started doing. Try adding a reference because this is one of the trickier tasks. You might like to try WP:The Wikipedia Adventure to get some practice, and make sure that you have understood WP:Your first article and WP:Referencing for beginners before starting on an article. Dbfirs 06:28, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello, Ganeshayanamaha, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you make an article using the Article Wizard, it will be a draft, which you can submit for review when it is ready. It will not be deleted or declined because you are new; but writing an acceptable article is one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia, and people who try it before they have some experience of editing other articles often find it a frustrating experience. Have you read your first article?
My personal take is that, for most new editors, they can contribute much much much much much more value to the encyclopaedia by improving some of our six million articles (many of which are in dire need of improvement) than plunging straight into the often frustrating project of creating a new article from scratch. --ColinFine (talk) 06:33, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination (Help me)[edit]

A tag has been placed on User:Chai Bisket, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia

Can someone help me why its rejected? i created page for my company — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chandumx (talkcontribs)

Hi Chandumx. The page was deleted by an administrator named Fastily per speedy deletion criterion U2. Apparently, you took the content you were working on at Draft:Sandbox and mistakenly added it to the user page of a non-existent account. That's not really the way to go about creating an article. You can either start a draft or a userspace draft and then work on creating an article.
Before you do that, however, please carefully read through Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, Wikipedia:Ownership of content, Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. There's a lot of information contained on those pages for sure, but it reading through might actually save you time in the end. Unless you're able to establish that your company is Wikipedia notable enough for an article to be written, you're unlikely going to ever have much luck getting such an article improved; moreover, even if you're successful in creating an article, you'll pretty much have no editorial control over it's content and won't be able to use it to promote your company in anyway. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:21, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Content currently at User:Chandumx/sandbox.

Banned From Editing[edit]

If you are banned from editing, can you edit your own Wikipedia User Page? I would really like to know. So, can you? Thank you. Tsarina Alexandra Hesse (talk) 10:20, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

You'll find the answer at WP:Banning policy. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:20, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Mr. David Biddulph. Tsarina Alexandra Hesse (talk) 10:38, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Banglan[edit]

I tried to create a page for art director and national film award winner Vinesh Banglan. But it is rejected and removed by wikipedia. Already a page in malayalam language is there. How I can create a page for Banglan in English language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Banglan (talkcontribs) 10:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Your user page was removed because that isn't the place for an article, see WP:user pages and WP:U5. The fact that there is an article in malayam doesn't necessarily mean that there should be an article in English, as each language's Wikipedia has its own rules. Please read about notability, and then read the advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:24, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia Accounts[edit]

Excuse me, but is there a way to change your Wikipedia account user name, please? I would really like to change mine. Thank you. Tsarina Alexandra Hesse (talk) 10:44, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

See WP:Changing username. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:51, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Mr. David Biddulph. Tsarina Alexandra Hesse (talk) 10:55, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Watchlists[edit]

Excuse me, but how do i access my Watchlist, please? I would like to access it. Thank you. Tsarina Alexandra Hesse (talk) 10:50, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

At the top of the page is a "Watchlist" link. If you are in mobile view rather than desktop view then you would probably need to use the top left-hand menu. For more information on your watchlist, see Help:Watchlist. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:55, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

wanted to know[edit]

hello, I wanted to know if a deserving article be recreated which was deleted because it was created earlier by a banned user? Thanks.Worldnpeace (talk) 11:12, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Which specific article do you mean? There is no response to this question that will cover all situations. --bonadea contributions talk 11:31, 20 September 2019 (UTC)