Wikipedia:Teahouse

Hoary, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

Review

On my watchlist I have an entry that says:

Page curation log 02:47 Discospinster talk contribs marked Kill James Bond as reviewed ‎ Tag: PageTriage)

When I go to Kill James Bond or its talk page I don't see anything indcating that it was review. what is this specific review process. TipsyElephant (talk) 14:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Most of the process is explained at Wikipedia:New pages patrol, TipsyElephant. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:58, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: would it be appropriate to open an AfD for the article after it got reviewed by new page patrol. I realized retrosepctively that I've actually litstened to the podcaster's youtube channel quite a bit and I would consider myself a fan, but I still don't see how it passes WP:GNG. Maybe I'll reach out to the new editor and look into merging the article instead, but in general is it ever appropriate to open an AfD when it's been reviewed by page patrol? TipsyElephant (talk) 19:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on AfD but I think that any article can be nominated. I do know that some reviewers accept articles that they believe have a 50% chance of surviving the AfD process. Make sure you follow all the correct procedures, TipsyElephant. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:16, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Possible Vandalism

On the article of Pope Leo I, I noticed an edit by user Brendanrettig123 that may be vandalism. An earlier edit by the same user on the same page was reverted.

Can I just restore the original content ? The content does not have a valid citation, so I cannot be sure what data is actually correct. -- Kwakeroni (talk) 08:29, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Kwakeroni, Vandalism is actually quite narrowly defined - only intentional damage to a page is actually vandalism. An unexplained edit such as this will have to be checked against the available source(s). Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:57, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

His earlier edit, a clear improvement to the article, was reverted without explanation. Maproom (talk) 09:55, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

I wouldn't call adding a spelling error an improvement (or were you being ironic ?) Anyway, I'll see if I can find any sources for this -- Kwakeroni (talk) 06:25, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Not ironic, just incompetent. My bad. Maproom (talk) 06:56, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

its my first article, can someone please review the article before i submit?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:LizKurian/sandbox LizKurian (talk) 08:58, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

LizKurian, it seems that his claim to fame is that he founded a non-notable company. I randomly checked three of the sources cited: two don't even mention him, and one merely listed his name, with no discussion. In your view, which of the sources you cited do most to establish that he is notable? Maproom (talk) 09:31, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Now at Draft:Tabassum Khan. I saw that you identify all of the images as your own work. Is is true that you took all of these photos, over a period of many years? David notMD (talk) 11:48, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

yes, these images are taken by us, over a period of years. Citations in Startgurus Consulting and Speaker and industry leader are all discussions with him. In philanthropy, the citation includes his initiatives that were done along with external links from media coverage. thanks for the help :) LizKurian (talk) 08:54, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

What do you mean by "us"? Accounts are for individuals. The pictures are from 2014 an 2021. Are you claiming that you as an individual took both of those photos, as you described then as "own work"? David notMD (talk) 18:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Article Review

Hello Teahouse, I have a question. If a newly article was created and it is on namespace but needs to be reviewed or patrolled to be indexed on search engines and a reviewer later saw it but it got a little problem and I fixed it, would any reviewer or patroller come back to check the article or do I have to notify a reviewer? Thanks in advance. Trendrives (talk) 23:32, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Once an article on main space is patrolled, it remains patrolled.

If someone perceives big problems with the article, it may be moved to draft space even if it was patrolled. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:48, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay I get that. Thanks!! Trendrives (talk) 03:38, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

I just created a draft article which I am sure is ready to be moved to Wikipedia namespace. Kindly review Draft:List of awards and nominations received by Olamide. Thanks! Trendrives (talk) 03:41, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

No. What you did was copy content verbatim from Olamide without stating where you got it from. AND, there is no reason a list of awards and nominations received by a person should exist other than it the article about the person. David notMD (talk) 11:16, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thanks and I get that. I have actually seen a lot of people having a different article about their list of award and nominations so I am just going to improve it. Trendrives (talk) 13:25, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

WP:Other stuff exists is not a justification. I added a Comment to the draft. I recommend with your next edit, you make a statement in the Edit summary that the table was copied from the Olamide article. Copying within Wikipedia is allowed, but attribution is required. David notMD (talk) 16:15, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Question

Can I update the Univision Noticias logo? ItsJustdancefan (talk) 00:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@ItsJustdancefan: Yes, you can. Near the bottom of the page File:Univision Noticias logo.jpg there appears a link to "Upload a new version of this file". Just be sure the new image has about the same approximate size as the current one. If it's too big, it will get deleted because we cannot use higher resolution images for non-free commercial fair use. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:44, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Anachronist Isn't this (size-fixing) generally done automagically by a bot these days? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:06, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Come to think of it, you're right. I forgot about the bot. So I guess you can upload it too big and the bot has some algorithm to determine what scaling to use. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:13, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Help me with Russian ROC flag and template hyperlink

Hi, can someone advice me on how to hyperlink the russian ioc flag for olympics for russian womens' handball team. I cloudn't get it to work. I also have some formatting issue as I can't remove the ROC word without removing the ROC flag. The page concerned is the handball section for France at the 2020 Summer Olympics(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_at_the_2020_Summer_Olympics). Thank you!! Atom105 (talk) 06:12, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Done. I used {{FlagIOC|ROC|2020 Summer}} - X201 (talk) 11:57, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Unclear rejection for lack of notability

My question is about the following article, that I submitted a few months ago and was recently rejected due to lack of notability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nsynth_Super

So I checked the comment from the rejector and the notability guidelines here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability

I really struggle to understand the reason behind the rejection, as the article cites mostly independent sources, music authors and peer-reviewed papers which have nothing to do with the manufacturer of the instrument. It has been significantly covered by some of the main music online magazines and general press, it seems that it ticks all the points of the notability checklist to me, but if it doesn't, I really struggle to understand what is wikipedia-worthy or not, as I've been trying really hard to meet the guidelines and I think this is a very notable instrument that should be here, please help.

Thanks! Rustycandle (talk) 08:50, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Rustycandle: I think that the problem is that most if not all of your sources are based on interviews with Google staff, which counts as WP:primary sources, which don't establish notability. We need WP:secondary sources with significant coverage of the topic. I took a quick look via Bing and Google News and was quite surprised that I couldn't find such sources. Note that the reviewer didn't say the topic was definitely not notable, only that your draft didn't (yet) demonstrate this. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:42, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

How to find vandalism?

How to find signs of vandalism on a page? IndoUniverse88 (talk) 12:14, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse IndoUniverse88. There are some suggestions at WP:SPOTVAN. Thanks for wanting to help.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:37, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

new topic

hello! i accidently worte a topic as an english one but i want it to be on another language. how can i change it wothout override the link and etc? TomerYakirStein (talk) 12:58, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Here's a list of all the different Wikipedia's, choose the correct one and copy and paste your text from here to there, but remember to check the linking etc in your article. - X201 (talk) 13:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

TomerYakirStein Welcome to the Teahouse of the English Wikipedia. Please go to the Wikipedia home page and select your language from the dropdown list.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, TomerYakirStein, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is as far as I know, no way to move material from one Wikipedia to another edition. I think you will need to "Edit/Edit source" the English article (to get at the source), copy the source, and then paste it into an article Hebrw Wikipedia. Remember that, to comply with the licence, you must say (probably in your edit summary) where you copied it from: see WP:copying within Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 13:32, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Unsourced statements about living people: non-biographies

Should unsourced, and seemingly negative statements about named people, be treated as described in the WP:BLP policies, even if the material occurs in non-biographical articles? My feeling is that they would be, but I would like confirmation, if possible, please. Thanks. 49.177.69.7 (talk) 13:03, 2 August 2021 (UTC) 49.177.69.7 (talk) 13:03, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Ah, yes, in my rushed reading I managed to miss this: This policy applies to any living person mentioned in a BLP, whether or not that person is the subject of the article, and to material about living persons in other articles and on other pages, including talk pages., right at the top! Sheesh: sorry, answered own question. 49.177.69.7 (talk) 13:08, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Help with first article

Hi, I've just finished my first draft for my first article and I just wanted some feedback; I don't think it's very good and I think I need better sources, so I'm open to any constructive criticism. Also how do you find good sources? cause I have so many tabs open and I can't find anything useful.

Here's the draft Draft:Ted Ferguson (actor) Huey117 (talk) 13:24, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Huey117. There is little prospect of your draft being accepted because its main source is WP:IMDB. As that link will show, this is not considered reliable enough to establish notability for an actor. You need to find independent reviews of his acting career in reliable sources with significant coverage of him. If you have tried to find such sources and failed, then I'm afraid there can't be an article in Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:31, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Yep it just got refused, I'm going to keep looking for independent sources, but I doubt I'll find anything. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huey117 (talk • contribs) 13:52, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Huey117: I did a quick search and can't find anything else other than what you included. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:32, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

people from stockton-on-tees

I miss some names on this list, Francis Roddam (Quadrophenia), David Ross Stoddart and Rick Hewson (RAH). How can I insert them? 14:34, 2 August 2021 (UTC)John the miller (talk) John the miller (talk) 14:34, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi John the miller. Where exactly did you want to put them? Franc Roddam and Richard Anthony Hewson are already included in the list at Stockton-on-Tees#Notable_people. Simply insert * [[David Stoddart (geographer)|]], at the appropriate place in that list.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:02, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Images and infoboxes

On the Vineland, Ontario page there is an img. It is currently left aligned, which disturbs the heading structure. However, if I make it right aligned, it goes below the infobox on the right. If I leave it left aligned and add a clear template below the section there is a large section of whitespace between the sections so it can clear the infobox.

Is leaving the img left aligned the best solution in this case? A Thimblerigs (talk) 15:44, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

If it's the peach pickers image, it's better at the left of the page. Mjroots (talk) 16:02, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Turning a draft page into a published one

I’d appreciate some guidance on how to publish this page as I think it’s ready (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1036575344) Leyton2021 (talk) 15:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: At Draft:Tony Sims. David notMD (talk) 16:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Leyton2021, to establish that Sims is notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article, you'll need to find and cite several reliable independent publish sources with significant discussion of him. The draft cites no such sources. The sources it does cite are not independent, being based on what Sims himself has said. Maproom (talk) 17:11, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for letting me know, it’s much appreciated. Will take a further look in that case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leyton2021 (talk • contribs)

Thanks again for your help. I’ve added to independent sources so would appreciate your input again if possible.

Changing a page title

Hello again. This organisation no longer goes by the same name. I’ve already highlighted this on the talk page but I haven’t had a response so would appreciate any guidance on how I can potentially make the adjustment myself (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Association_of_Graduate_Recruiters) Leyton2021 (talk) 15:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Leyton2021: - I've moved the article to Institute of Student Employers for you. You can now make the necessary amendement to the text of the article. Mjroots (talk) 16:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Brilliant, thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leyton2021 (talk • contribs)

How to request an edit to something already written?

So, I read something on here that was wrong, kind of. I tried to add some clarity to the subject, but it looks like the post was locked due to vandalism. How does someone like me send the author a message to fix that specific posting? It's clearly wrong and if this were Youtube, it would have been censored already for misinformation.

Hello, HistoryTryItSomeTime. Discuss the matter on the article's talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:16, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Your record of contributions show no edits other than this query. Did you edit when not logged in? Or did you mean that you could not edit because you are new, and the article is protected? What was the name of the article? Per what Collen328 replied, initiate a discussion on the Talk page of the article. If content is wrong, your discussion should include a reference(s) confirming your position. David notMD (talk) 17:41, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

maybe a silly question

Sir, i know i am really NEW for this, but out of curiosity, i want to the procedure and eligibility for being a administrator on wikipedia. By the way, i joined wikipedia as editor today only but i have edited around 20+ things, this shows my dedication and my ability to become a administrator in future. please guide me, about procedure and eligibility so that when the right time came to become administrator, i had already done my best to become one. PLEASE ANSWER IN DETAILS (if possible). Indianman1 (talk) 17:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC) Indianman1 (talk) 17:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. You can see some of the things at WP:RfA. In short, it requires a lot of Wikipedia experience, demonstration that you understand Wikipedia policies, and demonstration that you need to admin toolset to perform the tasks you want to perform. You should view adminship and being a janitor, and beware of WP:Hat collecting 99% of things on Wikipedia do not require being an admin. RudolfRed (talk) 17:43, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Indianman1 You can start here Wikipedia:Administrators#Becoming_an_administrator and continue with pages linked from there. At Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#About_RfA, in the candidates column, you have links to recent "admin-runs" and there you can get a sense of what is expected. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

thanks i will save your words on my talk page, for future asistance as they will be deleted from here after sometime Indianman1 (talk) 17:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Note that discussions on the Teahouse (and other talk pages) are archived rather than deleted, Indianman1. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:02, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse, specifically, Indianman1. I definitely do not want to discourage you as the encyclopedia needs great admins and we have some out there but, to echo some above, the highest position anyone can hold on the project is "editor". --ARoseWolf 19:07, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

ok Indianman1 (talk) 04:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Photos of individuals for Wikipedia pages

I know that copyright rules are tricky, but can we post a photo of an individual on their Wikipedia page from one of their social media accounts if they have given us permission to do so? Does that need to be documented, and if so, how would we do that? BoredNoodleWrecker (talk) 18:27, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@BoredNoodleWrecker: Welcome to the Teahouse. The copyright holder (who isn't necessarily the subject in the photo) has to be the one to release the copyright. On social media it tends to be the subject themselves, but generally it's whoever took the photo. In any case, the copyright holder has to declare a release of the materials as a donation (a form can be found at the link). Just be aware that by them releasing the file to Wikipedia, they are allowing it to be used for any purpose, even if it's commercial. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

This is a lot more complicated than I thought! Thank you for the answer though. BoredNoodleWrecker (talk) 19:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@BoredNoodleWrecker: The process is actually quite fast. It's the legal language that throws people off. It's to protect Wikipedia from copyright infringement charges. The copyright holder can fill out the text and email the file as an attachment in less than two minutes. And BTW, here's a good way to not wreck your pasta [[1]] Cacio e pepe. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:24, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@BoredNoodleWrecker: I didn't realize that the simpler text page wasn't easy to find. Go to this one Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:26, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

I remember seeing that page a while back but forgot about it. I might start pointing users there instead. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

That seems a bit easier! If it was some sort of long, drawn out process I would have a great deal of difficulty convincing people to go through this process. Thank you. BoredNoodleWrecker (talk) 20:01, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Need help editing a Wikipedia Biography Article Draft

Can someone help me edit this draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Assaf_Biderman

I need to make the tone more neutral and include significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources VidishaAgarwalla (talk) 19:44, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@VidishaAgarwalla: Welcome to the Teahouse. Before going any further, please address other users' concerns about paid editing. If you do have a paid relationship (as Wikipedia defines it), please disclose that on your user page at User:VidishaAgarwalla (you can click on the red link to create the page). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:56, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@tenryuu how do I do that

adding a fact

I have just registered with Wikipedia. I simply want to add one fact to the Rudy Giuliani article, one more Honorary Degree that he has received in the past. I am having trouble seeing how such a simple task can be accomplished. Barnabywombat (talk) 21:06, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Barnabywombat: Welcome to the Teahouse. Might I suggest you try the interactive tutorial first? It covers the basics of editing and using Wikipedia, one of which is adding citations of reliable sources, which would be needed at the very least to be even considered for addition. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:18, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Barnabywombat, you probably won't be able to edit the article on Giuliani till you have made edits elsewhere. (This is a rudimentary protection against would-be vandals, trolls and other time-wasters, in an article of particularly wide interest.) In the meantime, you're welcome to make a "Semi-protected edit request" at the foot of Talk:Rudy Giuliani. Please say there precisely what it is that you want or suggest, and be sure provide a reliable, independent reference for its veracity. A suggestion: Before you do this, have a quick look at some earlier edit requests on that talk page, so that you understand what's required. -- Hoary (talk) 22:43, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Establishing consensus before repeated edits

I noticed that many articles in Category:Master's degrees don't use a sortkey, meaning that the "M" section is full of degrees that don't start with that letter (e.g. Master of Architecture in "M" instead of "A"). I already edited a few articles in Category:Bachelor's degrees that were missing a sortkey, but fixing the Master's degrees category could require a bunch of edits (ideally with a tool like HotCat).

My questions:

1. Since most articles in this category already follow the convention I want to use, is it reasonable to perform all the edits required, or should I always get consensus in cases where repetitive edits are going to be made?
2. In general, what is the best way to get consensus for changes to multiple pages? I imagine that not many editors have actual category pages on their watchlists since the page content is updated automatically.

Thanks, Inverted Hourglass (talk) 23:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Good question. The current situation is clearly unsatisfactory. But while sorting Master of Architecture on "Architecture" (at least for this purpose) seems an obvious and uncontroversial fix, what about Master of Science in Development Administration: on "Development Administration", or on "Science in Development Administration"? (Additionally, I wondered why such an article would be necessary at all: if the reader knows what the academic subject named Development Administration is, and knows what an MSc is, then what is there that still needs explaining? And after skim-reading the article, I am none the wiser.) I suggest that you bring up the first question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories. -- Hoary (talk) 01:17, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

You're right that some of the article titles are ambiguous—that's something I didn't think of that I could bring up on WikiProject Categories. (I also agree with you that many of those articles might not need to exist in the first place, but that's a much larger problem to solve.) Thanks for the help! Inverted Hourglass (talk) 21:04, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Panathinaikos B

Where would I make a plea that a page be nominated for deletion? I tried to research it to save it but there is nothing...Panathinaikos B is the current iteration - CaliBuds (talk) 01:53, 3 August 2021 (UTC) CaliBuds (talk) 01:53, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi CaliBuds. You can found out more about this in WP:DELETION, but bascially there are three types of deletion process on Wikipedia: tagged for speedy deletion, proposed for deletion and nomimated for deletion. Before you start a deletion process, however, you might want to ask about the article first at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football to see what some others might think. The article was created about a month ago and it doesn't look like it ever received a proper review or assessment from any members of that WikiProject. It's possible the a member or some members of WikiProject Football might feel there's a viable alternative to deleting the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Marchjuly not sure it's worth the work but I appreciate the info! CaliBuds (talk) 13:44, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Switch On and Sources and Notability

I will try to address a question that I was asked on my talk page here, both in case other experienced editors can add to my thoughts, and for the possible information of other submitters. User:Lilylovesreading19 asked me to explain why I and other reviewers have declined her draft:

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Switch_On

I am wondering why the draft Switch On keeps getting rejected. I have updated the citation of it from a legitimate source that was listed on Article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Korea/Reliable_sources) and the Korean Herald is also included in the citation which is pretty much like the NYTimes is the US. I have added the track listing along with the composers and lyricist. Since the album only came out yesterday in South Korea, there are no official charting yet so that has not been added. I did ask for advice and they said that it's because of the source which Naver is not reliable and I have changed it since then. Is there any other reasons why this keeps getting rejected since I have constantly updated the citation to make it more legitimate and have reviewed the notability music article and have tried following the article.

There is a myth among submitters in Wikipedia that the key to having any draft article accepted is finding the right sources. This is a myth because verifiability is a necessary but not sufficient condition for notability. An article must have reliable sources, but not every subject that is mentioned by reliable sources is notable. In some areas, such as sports and music, Wikipedia has special notability guidelines. Your draft was declined by three reviewers including me because it was (at the time) an unreleased album, and unreleased albums are almost always considered too soon. Sometimes they are not released. Then you resubmitted the draft on the day that the album was released. As you said, it had no official charting and no reviews. What you should have done was to wait for the charting and the reviews, and what you should do now is to wait for the charting and the reviews. References, which establish verifiability, are a necessary but not sufficient condition, and some submitters make the mistake of focusing entirely on the sources. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:01, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

When it comes to creative works like musical albums, films, stage plays, poems, novels, paintings, sculptures and the like, the most common way that notability is established is through published commentary by professional critics. Some blockbuster films will have so much significant coverage in independent, reliable sources that the films are notable after principal filming begins but before the film is released and reviewed. The sources are the most important part of an article or draft, but a handful of mediocre sources are not enough. The quality of the sources used to establish notability is the most important factor. The sources must be reliable, they must be fully independent, and they must devote significant coverage to the topic. In this case, unless the upcoming music album received a truly unusual amount of unusually detailed coverage in independent reliable sources before release, then it would be best to wait for professional reviews by critics, and chart positions, before accepting an article. The promotionalism factor is also important. Draft articles or new articles about the latest start-up and the latest rapper and the latest musical album are going to be subject to higher scrutiny than an article about a rare butterfly species or a Kentucky state legislator who served in the 1830s. Countless people see Wikipedia as a marketing opportunity, and people get rich off of new pop music but not so much from writing about toad habitats. Wikipedia is not a venue for promoting new commercial ventures, so people who try to use it that way are going get pushback. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:40, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I have reformatted your message, I hope for the better. ¶ Wikipedia:Notability (music) is appallingly complex and confusing. Sample: criterion 7, Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability. The subject, or the claims made for the subject? Should one infer that verifiability is unimportant for the other 11 criteria (none of which mention it)? Et cetera. I sympathize with anyone who can't be bothered to plod through it, and suspect that a great deal of it could just be deleted. Not much needs to be added to WP:GNG. -- Hoary (talk) 02:56, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

A few questions about ip's

Hello there! I wanted to ask a couple questions related to ip addresses, as my ip had originally been banned from making an account. Can someone help explain to me how the process of banning ips work? I don't really know much about this stuff, but do I know that i had never tried to change an article in any major way, or ever comment on message boards (i didn't even know message boards for Wikipedia existed!). I live in an apartment complex, and with other people (although none of them had edited articles either), so could that have something to do with it?

A very confused Wikipedia surfer, (im adding for tildes after this, but I don't know if I'm supposed to??

KittyLover1232 (talk) 02:43, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

If an IP number is used in a deleterious way (degrading articles, trolling, etc), an administrator can "block" (not "ban") it from editing, either for a set period or indefinitely. It's clear that you can now edit as "KittyLover1232", so I suggest that you do so: no need to worry further about the IP number(s). Thank you for hitting "~" four times in a row. -- Hoary (talk) 03:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Some more information expanding on Hoary's reply: IP addresses can change hands very quickly, so over the course of a month, 5 to 10 people may have had that IP address. Your "IP" will probably change in a month or so, depending on your ISP and area, so being IP-blocked when you haven't done anything wrong isn't abnormal! WhoAteMyButter (📨_talk│📝^contribs) 03:50, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Help to move an article from my sandbox

I would like to move an article from my sandbox to Articles for Publication. How do I do this?

Thanks! Vedlagt (talk) 04:40, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Before you submit your draft for AFC review you ought to expand the bare URLs to full citations. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

What is the procedure? Thanks for any help. Vedlagt (talk) 12:59, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Laurence Myers

Another editor has moved the draft from your sandbox to draft space. You can submit it from there when you are ready, Vedlagt Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:49, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Subpage

How to create a subpage of my userpage? Peter Ormond 💬 04:50, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Peter Ormond: Welcome to the Teahouse. The quickest way to do so would be to go to your browser's address bar, add a / after User:Peter Ormond, and type in the subpage's title before pressing ↵ Enter. For example, you could do https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Peter Ormond/Subpage. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! I didn't know it was that easy and quick! Peter Ormond 💬 04:57, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Alternatively, you could type User:Peter Ormond/subpage in the Wikipedia search box, Peter Ormond. --ColinFine (talk) 15:18, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Or drop a link on your user page [[User:Peter Ormond/subpage2]] - X201 (talk) 15:24, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Can I remove the template?

I added translation from this article to Dyspessa ulula, can I now remove {{Expand German}} from the article? Also, I forgot to add 'Content in this edit... see its history for attribution' statement in my edit summary. Will this cause me any trouble? I did add {{Translated}} in its talk page. Excellenc1📞 05:03, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: Good work! If you feel like there's no more information from the German page that can be used to build the article, then go ahead and remove the template. For {{Translated}}, I would fill out version and insertversion just to be extra clear. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 05:59, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Bogus Review?

Hello, I've been working on a Wikipedia page for two months now. I've had several insightful editors send notes when rejecting my submission. Tonight, however, I was told I needed to get an English-speaking writer to work on the project. I'm from the U.S. and a journalist to boot. So this type of rejection left me pondering... How do I resubmit with this kind of feedback. Thanks for your help.

P.S. The photo I uploaded of my subject has also disappeared. It was viewable for a while. Not sure what happened. Any clues appreciated. Bekwright (talk) 05:35, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Samuel A. Culbert

@Bekwright: I don't exactly agree with TheBirdsShedTears that the English syntax is the biggest problem here. Yes, there's some bits and pieces to clean up, but the biggest problem here is sourcing. You need to first demonstrate that the subject is notable for a Wikipedia article yet. You need to find independent sources, which are written by people completely unaffiliated with Culbert (including Culbert himself), and then you base article content on those independent sources. Wikipedia does not care about what the subject has to say about themself, and so far, the draft reads too much like a resume, instead of from a neutral point of view.

By the way, the image you uploaded to Commons at commons:File:Sam full size (1).jpg is a copyright violation and is likely to be deleted; we can only accept free images here. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 05:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Bekwright: Welcome to the Teahouse. In addition to what Ganbaruby has said, make sure you're not using words or phrases that promote or laud an individual. Phrases like

Culbert's writings encourage the individual’s emancipation from organization and work-culture imposed constraints to effectiveness, promotes the ever-present pursuit of self-awareness, authenticity, and other-sensitive interactions in life and work

and

Culbert believes most managers are well-intentioned but sees them immersed in a disorienting, work-culture-imposed force field. To that end, he’s published eight books exposing hidden features of leadership, management, and professional participation in contemporary organizations

sound more at home at a press release, and are inappropriate for an encyclopedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:00, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Bekwright, this draft reads like a CV which makes it nearly difficult for a reader to under the topic efficiently. It should be presented with a good lead section as well. The current revision seems non-encyclopedic. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 06:07, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

As it stands now, 16 of the 26 refs are to stuff Culbert wrote. Establishing notability requires refs to what people have written ABOUT Culbert. And to your original question, a lot of the content was jargon. David notMD (talk) 12:46, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

The citations in this article are improper

4 of 5 citations in Alfredo Sadel direct to pages which have nothing to do with the text for which it is used. This also questions its notablilty. (This might probably be because the citation expired or something, I don't know) Excellenc1📞 06:18, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Excellenc1. Notability doesn't really expire and neither does the reliability of a citation per se, but citations may sometimes become dead links over time for various reasons; for example, a link to a citation may be overwritten or archived by the source in question as part of its efforts to keep its website as up-to-date as possible. When this happens, the link originally added for the citation may no longer work as before and might instead redirect to another website or another page. What you can try to do is to check whether there is an archived version of the original url that can be found using something like the Wayback Machine or some other archive service and then update the citation using the parameters |archive-url=, |archive-date=, and |url-status= so that those reading the article can see that the original url is no longer accessible, but an archived version for it exists. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:44, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I ran Fix Dead Links on it (at the top of the page's edit history, the furthest right external tool), but I didn't go back and make them pretty. :) —valereee (talk) 12:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Request help re first article

I wrote my first article a few days ago, Draft:Ultimate_Heliport which was declined because of the following reasons:

"This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."

It was also flagged as a COI. Since then I have corresponded with the original user who declined the article, who is now happy there is no COI. He also suggested removing one of the sections, which I did. I tried to find as many secondary sources, which are independent of the subject. Can anyone else give input/advice in terms of what to change? Perhaps it's written in too subjective a tone? I think this is a valuable entry and interesting, especially within the South African Aviation context.

Any help would be appreciated! Hassanbeem (talk) 07:33, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Hassanbeem, that first article can be difficult for a new editor. You can take a look at WP:Your first article, and you might also go to the talk pages of WP:WikiProject Aviation and WP:WikiProject South Africa to see if anyone might take a look.

The immediate issue is finding significant coverage in unaffiliated sources. The most recent reviewer said Whether as a commercial operation or piece of transport infrastructure, the subject needs to demonstrate notability by WP:GNG, which requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources. Of the ones cited, the BusinessTech article provides sigcov but may not be entirely independent, while the Times one is probably reliable and independent but only covers the subject as a secondary subject. So that's one that covers it heavily enough but is possibly affiliated and one that is unaffiliated but doesn't cover it heavily enough, so unfortunately neither provides help in proving notability.

You need three unaffiliated reliable sources which give focus primarily on this heliport; at least two of them should be outside the local area. You might check for coverage in industry magazines, but it's also possible the heliport simply isn't being covered enough yet and will eventually be. As long as you keep working on the draft at least every few months, you can just keep looking for those sources. —valereee (talk) 12:27, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi —valereee. Thank you, that makes a lot of sense. I will just park it for now and check back in a month or so to see if anything has changed, in terms of more coverage. Thanks for taking the time to comment! Hassanbeem (talk) 15:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)hassanbeem

Source list

I remember a page that have a giant list where it lists sources as "verifiable", "questioned", or "blacklisted". But I forgot what page it is, could someone care to link the page in question? Thanks 180.251.155.166 (talk) 08:00, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds like you could be referring to the perennial reliable sources list. 331dot (talk) 08:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Just what I was looking for. Thank you! 180.251.155.166 (talk)

Draft: Jalaledin Moayerian

Previous discussion : WP:TEA#Jalaledin Moayerian

Hi there, Regarding my draft as Jalaledin Moayerian I had been advised to ask Robert McClenon. Below please find his reply and his request from you to advice. Could you please help me to find a way out of this loop.

FYI

 – Indenting and boxing to show quoted content. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:31, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Aria Moayerian (talk) 09:28, 3 August 2021 (UTC) Aria Moayerian (talk) 09:28, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Jalaledin Moayerian. A different draft, created by a different editor, but with near-identical content, is at Draft:Jalal Moayerian. Your draft has been Declined five times by five different reviewers, and then Rejected (the other draft Declined twice). As Jalaledin is your uncle, you should have declared that at the beginning as an obvious conflict-of-interest. This omission did not prevent you from creating a draft, but it did prejudice McClenon from offering help. Please accept the decision that your uncle does not rise to Wikipedia's definition of notability, and either tag the draft for deletion or abandon it. If the latter, you will be reminded in 5-6 months that the draft will be deleted, as no work has been done on it anymore. David notMD (talk) 11:20, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@User talk:David notMD - Thanks for your attention and here is some clarifications; 1- I don't have any objection about the taken decision and I just need your help to know what would be the best way to publish this article in Wikipedia. As you know the reason of rejection was submitting multiple drafts and not the article by itself as per Robert McClenon. 2- Since it was my first article so, I didn't know anything about the rules, procedures, tools... of Wikipedia and I asked many people i.e. friends, other family members and colleagues to help me out. I even asked Robert to help me on April 23 at 15:59 (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Robert_McClenon&diff=prev&oldid=1019483422) but no reply at that time. Maybe the other editor, user:No Judgment, is one of the people whom I had asked for help. Is it acceptable if I leave a comment on the talk page of user:No Judgment to keep going and I provide the feed for this article and or ask this user to stop working on this article? (I am just asking you for the advice and don't want to make it worse) 3- Since it was my first draft so, I didn't have any experience and didn't know I should have declared the subject is my uncle. If I wanted to hide this matter I would not submit the draft under my real name. In fact, I submitted it under my real name for the purpose of transparency and to show my honesty because I didn't see any reason to hide my identity and was thinking I would be considered as a simple user. Having said that it was unintentional if I didn't mention the subject is my uncle and it was just because of lack of experience and knowledge. 4-Referring https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jalaledin_Moayerian , per provided comment by the reviewer, Robert McClenon 07:14, 31 July 2021 (UTC),the reviewer has not decided that the topic is not notable and I had been advised to blow up and start over my draft. In addition, Referring 16:55:28, 31 July 2021 review of submission by Aria Moayerian , I have been advised by User:Timtrent to start over (here is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk#16%3A55%3A28%2C_31_July_2021_review_of_submission_by_Aria_Moayerian). As the final question, I am just wondering if I still have the chance to start over. Thanks a lot for your patience ad your anticipated consideration is highly appreciated.Aria Moayerian (talk) 17:09, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Anveshi Jain

Hi Team ,

I have been struggling to understand how an article needs to be published here in Wikipedia . I wanted to create an Article related to a person that i am closely associated.

The topic i have given is " Anveshi Jain " . It seems like some one have created an article about this person and deleted later on . Now i am unable to ge this approved as i am new in this platform or i am unaware hot to get it approved.

Anyone would be able to asssit ?

Thanks in advance Anveshijain (talk) 09:56, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

It is simple. Do not try to write an article about someone you are connected to. Edits should be neutral.--Bduke (talk) 10:10, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome!

The article was deleted after discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anveshi Jain and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anveshi Jain (2nd nomination) - the consensus being that the person in question isn't notable enough to warrant an article. The reason you can't create the article is because it's creation protected due to constant recreation.

If you feel that this person is notable enough to warrant an article, and you can cite reliable secondary sources to prove it, you could consider asking for the protection to be removed at WP:RPP.

As a side note, your username may be problematic (it's the name of the person you're trying to write about) - check WP:REALNAME for information on this - and if you are the person you're trying to write about, check WP:COI for why this is a bad idea. Zudo ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:14, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Per Bduke's terse reply, Wikipedia advises against autobiography (WP:AUTO), paid editing and conflict of interest (for example, being closely associated), but does not forbid those practices. Last advice - creating an article as a new-to-Wikipedia account is very hard. Trying that for a topic that has been through Articles for Deletion twice is near-impossible. See Anveshi Jain for the troubled history of this topic. David notMD (talk) 11:33, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Searching

I tried searching incategory:"Wikipedia redirects" but it didn't work, and neither did deepcat:"Wikipedia redirects". ―Qwerfjkltalk 10:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: incategory is working as expected - Category:Wikipedia redirects is a holding category that only contains other categories. There are no pages in article space that are sorted into that category so it is correctly returning no results, repeat the search in template space (which contains the single page sorted into this category) you will correctly get one result. Deepcat is probably erroring because you've gone over its search limit - it can only search up to 5 levels of categories of 256 total categories, but one of the subcategories of Category:Wikipedia redirects is Category:Wikipedia soft redirected categories, which currently contains a bit over 100,000 subcategories. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 12:34, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

requesting to know about sources.

hi this is the page i submitted and the draft got declined saying it need some reliable sources. I want to know if there is any other problem with the article? or is it that I should enclose details published in any other source like newspaper, magazines... What if there are only few magazine mentions which i have already mentioned in the page below. is it not sufficient?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Canadian_Chamber_of_Commerce,_Middle_East Mivida2021 (talk) 11:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Mivida2021, you need at minimum three articles in well-regarded unaffiliated newspapers or magazine which all cover the subject in-depth and which aren't all local to the area where the subject is located. There is information at WP:RELIABLE SOURCE and WP:SIGCOV and WP:NORG. That is how we determine whether an organization is notable enough for an article. There are other problems with your draft that you would need to fix, but proving notability is the crucial first step.

Are you an employee of this organization? If you are, you will need to disclose that relationship, as undisclosed paid editing is not allowed. There are instructions at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. —valereee (talk) 11:43, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

To be pedantic, having three reliable sources is strongly recommended, but by no means is it an actual policy or guideline. It does make reviewers much more receptive to drafts, though. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:35, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Images:

Hi, just wondering how images work on Wikipedia; for instance if I wanted to create an article about a person, what images of them would I be able to use? and how can they be found? I'm just asking because it seems like most Wikipedia articles have pictures of their subjects, but it also seems that Wikipedia has strict rules about what images are allowed. Huey117 (talk) 11:38, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Huey117, the answer unfortunately isn't straightforward. It depends on whether the person is still alive, how old the photo is, and a few other things. —valereee (talk) 11:54, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

The full story is at WP:IUP Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:04, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons is our depository of "free" images. If you're lucky, there might be one there. If you're able to take a pic of the person yourself with your own camera, you can upload it there, and then use it on WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

A little suggestion to teahouse

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § A little suggestion to teahouse

 – ―Qwerfjkltalk 11:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Are wiki guidelines subjective?

I've followed WP guidelines to the letter and continue to get denied on the following article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alison_Morrow

Morrow has 2 Emmy awards and a Sigma Delta Chi award in journalism. And her work has been referenced in federal and state law reviews. I have 13 references in my article that are independent sources including the Emmy web sites and the SDC web sites and other major news outlets other than her own.

This biography checks more boxes than the guidelines indicate are required. This subject is far more notable than many of the biographies on WP. So what else has to happen to get this article published? Stocatta (talk) 13:42, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Stocatta: Welcome to the Teahouse. Have you read the comments (prefaced with  ) below the templated responses? There's also concern that you may be in an undisclosed paid relationship with Morrow or someone related, which is something you should clear up first; if you do have such a connection, please disclose it on your user page. When a reviewer has concerns over that, it usually also means that the draft isn't neutral in tone, and that it serves to promote the subject, which Wikipedia isn't interested in doing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:41, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I have no relationship to Alison Morrow. She came up as a guest on a podcast I listen to and I was very impressed with her story. She is well respected in her field. I've been editing occasional articles on WP for a little while and wanted to take a stab at writing an article. But I'm shocked at the difficulty in getting published since I based my wording and approach on dozens of other biographies that are far more esoteric than Morrow. So are you recommending that I indicate in my user page that I have no association with each article subject that I take on? Stocatta (talk) 06:05, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I need more help determining where I'm supposed to state that I'm not affiliated with her or being paid by her. Isn't the first tenant of WP: "Assume good faith?" Why do I have a red box indicating I may be paid and violated terms of service. I've contributed to other articles. How did I get tagged as a paid writer? Stocatta (talk) 06:45, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Stocatta, I've tried to find evidence that Morrow is notable, by checking the sources cited in the article. Nos. 1 and 11 are not independent, being based on interviews with her, and 9 and 10 don't mention her (2-8 give me "Access Denied" messages so I haven't been able to check them). I haven't tried to check the rest, but what I've seen, 0 of 4 sources providing evidence of notability, is not encouraging. Maproom (talk) 16:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Reference 1 is from an environmental organization that selected her to join it. That isn't independent? References 2 through 7 are her work, not independent, but they verify that the work was done (just following every other biography I could find). Reference 8 through 10 are not her work, they are independent verification of the law that changed because of her. Reference 8 is a television report about the lawsuit that was triggered by her investigation. References 9 and 10 are links to the Center for Biological Diversity that brought the lawsuit and credited Morrow's work. They are independent and notable since they have their own WP page, right? Reference 8 has the CBD mentioning Morrow. References 9 and 10 are supporting the text and existence of the lawsuit. I thought I needed to prove everything in the article so I have subject matter references even if they aren't all referencing Morrow.

I don't know how you can get accessed denied on any of these links. I've confirmed them all.

I appreciate your assistance, but I still don't get it. Reference 11 is about Morrow, not by Morrow. Reference 12, 13, and 14 are the governing bodies reporting the award winners for the Emmy's and the SDC award. These awards were then repeated by every major news outlet, but we wouldn't want repetitive references, right? Reference 15 was about her running the Marine marathon while pregnant. (cool if not notable) References 17 through 21 are subject matter evidence for the controversy section. One was her report, and two were not her report but about her.

I thought we had to cite EVERY claim in addition to the biographical subject. So I have 22 references and 13 are not by or with her, but independent. I don't have any references that were not used elsewhere in other WP articles.

Should I remove references? Stocatta (talk) 06:30, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@Stocatta, it doesn't look like the sources prove this person is notable yet. The awards are all sourced to the awarding organizations -- if those were notable enough awards, they could be sourced to unaffiliated media. The controversy over demonetization doesn't seem to have been widely discussed anywhere, and it looks like all the pieces that are actually about her (rather than about endangered species) are redlinks.

Notability is the most important first question that needs to be answered about a candidate for an article. If you can't find at least three instances of significant coverage of the article subject in unaffiliated reliable sources (two of them outside her local area), you're wasting your time. —valereee (talk) 16:21, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Stocatta, please disclose your relationship, if any, with the subject of your draft. You wrote Morrow left the grind of city living and corporate news to seek the great outdoors with her family. I checked the reference for that statement and it does not mention or allude to "grind" or "city living" or "corporate news" or "great outdoors". It says she lives in an Airstream trailer with her husband. That single sentence violates Wikipedia's three core content policies of verifiability, the neutral point of view and no original research. Your draft should be completely rewritten to come into compliance with Wikipedia's policies. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:25, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm new to this but your comments don't seem altogether helpful. Morrow did in fact leave the city and corporate news with her family to the outdoors. You are suggesting that "grind" is not an adequate impartial and frequently used adjective about bit city living and corporate work patterns? And the reference to "great" is a description of expanse. Somebody else removed the entire sentence but I think this is where the words add meaning and have not editorialized anything. And how can you say her leaving the news or leaving the city is not verifiable. You saw it yourself in the article. It is indeed a neutral point of view because I'm not implying that one is superior to the other. And I didn't provide any original research nor did Morrow other than stating the facts and referencing the facts as reported by others. Stocatta (talk) 06:43, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

So the references to the SDC and the Emmy organization are not desirable? If we are looking for facts wouldn't references to the governing bodies be more reliable than a secondary news report about the same? Stocatta (talk) 06:32, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Stocatta, will you please address the specific question I asked you, and the specific point I made about a specific sentence in your draft? Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Isn't it moot since the sentence is gone? Stocatta (talk) 06:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I have no relationship to Morrow. I've stated that above. I simply wanted to try writing a Wikipedia article and chose a personality that I saw online that has significant stature in her industry and didn't have a WP article yet. I thought this was the whole point of Wikipedia. And the first tenant on every talk page is "assume good faith". Why are you assuming nefarious intentions? Did I do something to deserve the accusation? I understand how the system works. I've been editing articles for a little while and simply wanted to take a shot at starting an article. You're doing a good job at pushing a volunteer away if that is your intent. Stocatta (talk) 06:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Addition of actor's name to the article about films removed by Rdp060707

Addition of actor's name to the article about films removed by Rdp060707

The addition of the actor's name was removed by Rdp060707 stating that I have not provided the source. But I would like to bring it to your notice that I myself am the actor about whom the mention was missing from the movies articles. Hence I made a login and tried to make myslef eligible to Wikipedia and also mark my presence in the projects I have been part of. But I am not sure how to go about it since my suggestions were removed. Kindly help me, as there are quite a few projects that have missed my mention in them as an Artist. I again request you to help me get my valid Wikipedia existence by the work and contribution I have given to the Film industry. regards Atmaja Pandey https://www.imdb.com/name/nm6592801

References

/ Atmajapandey (talk) 14:48, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Atmajapandey: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia only takes stock of notable (as Wikipedia defines it) subjects; it is possible that you may not meet the criteria to be considered as such, which is why your edits are being reverted. As you are the actor in question, this is something you are strongly discouraged from doing, as writing about yourself usually ends with your additions being removed. If you're able to find reliable sources that significantly cover you, you can submit an edit request on article talk pages, using those sources as references. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Atmajapandey:, this is not to discourage you but I would think first. A lot of people don't understand that having an article on Wikipedia or even adding information about yourself on Wikipedia means anyone can edit that information or add new information based on what reliable sources say. You do not own that information or any article on Wikipedia including an article about yourself should one be created (See WP:OWN and WP:BLP). You can follow @Tenryuu's instructions above should you decide you want to try and get the information included. --ARoseWolf 17:05, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Article declined

Hi Everybody, The submission of the article Draft:Sphere_(company) has been declined for the following reason "the draft does not establish corporate notability." As the article is a translation from the French article, I was wondering : does it mean that French sources (Le Monde, Les Echos, La Tribune, Le Parisien, etc.) are not considered as "independent reliable sources"? Should I put more English speaking sources?

Thank you in advance for your help Inceptio (talk) 14:49, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Inceptio Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Sources do not need to be in English, but I think the more relevant aspect here is that what is acceptable on one version of Wikipedia is not necessarily acceptable on another, as every version is its own project with their own editors and policies. 331dot (talk) 14:53, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Inceptio, thanks for coming to the Teahouse. While what 331dot says above is true, this should not be used as a means to discriminate or preclude non-English subjects from the English version of the Encyclopedia just because the sources are not in English. Le Monde, La Tribune and Le Parisien are independent reliable sources with a strong editorial process. A reliable source is a reliable source no matter where it is in the world, English or not. In regards to the draft, the comment that should be focused on is "This draft is written from the viewpoint of the company, focusing on what the company says about itself." It is not that the article doesn't reference independent reliable sources but that the reviewer felt the article was written from the perspective of what the company says about itself rather than what the sources say about the company. --ARoseWolf 15:57, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

331dot ; ARoseWolf Hello, thank so much for your answers. It helps a lot! Of course, I saw the comment of the reviewer. But I find hard to make as both perspectives are quite getting mixed up... I will work again on the draft to improve it. Inceptio (talk) 12:46, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

My Edits on Page: Tim Southee

Hi there, it has been 2 days since I have been posting the same question, although recieving no reply. I have made changes to Article Tim Southee a couple of days ago. Pls someone check then and let me know if anything needs to be done. And why didn't I get any replies? Does my question show up? Is my Question visible? Thanks in Advance! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 15:47, 3 August 2021 (UTC) Jocelin Andrea (talk) 15:47, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Tim Southee.   Maproom (talk) 16:05, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Jocelin Andrea if your question was left on the Tim Southee Talk page I don't see it. Where was your question posted? All Wikipedia editors are volunteers, so it may be that those who are interested in the Tim Southee article are not able to respond to you immediately. I looked over your addition to the article but, since I know nothing about cricket, I can't say if anything else needs to be done. If your reference is a reliable source, and you didn't copy and paste the exact words from your source (it's important to rewrite the information in your own words), your addition should be fine. Best wishes on your Wikipedia work. Karenthewriter (talk) 16:19, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Your previous questions here are at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1118. The reason why you haven't received a reply is that, as Karenthewriter said above, all Wikipedia editors are volunteers. If anyone had been sufficiently interested and believed that anything needed to be said, they would have said it. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:21, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Dover Corporation factual page edits denied

Hello, I work at a marketing agency on behalf of Dover Corporation, and Dover requested that we submit factual changes related to the introductory paragraph of the company's page. Specifically, Lisa Moloney submitted these changes on June 4, but they were denied because they were labeled as "obvious PR" - a distinction we believe is incorrect due to the fact that our only changes were factual in nature and were backed up by mostly external sources.

Because Dover is publicly traded, we wanted to provided factual, up-to-date information to keep the page accurate. Let me know if there is any way to have another review of our suggested changes. SODH1988 (talk) 16:11, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

See Talk:Dover Corporation Request made 4 June, denied 30 June. Lisa Moloney identified herself as a company employee and proposed specific changes, such as update X ref with Y ref. Not at all clear why the reviewer declined the requests (although the refs should be in ref format, not just URLs). David notMD (talk) 16:24, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply - is there anything we need to do aside from updating the format to help push the changes along? SODH1988 (talk) 18:03, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

SODH1988 I suggest properly formating references (see Help:Referencing for beginners) and resubmitting as a new request on the Talk page, but be clear that this is a resubmittal. You may get a different reviewer, I have concerns that (pinging) Quetstar's Contributions show other rejections of Talk page edit requests for editors who have declared a COI. David notMD (talk) 19:03, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

SODH1988I have added "Dover was ranked 429th in the 2020 Fortune 500' with the source for you, it was incorrect on the talk pagehowever. Theroadislong (talk) 19:15, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD I denied the request mainly because the way it was written seemed like PR, and its poor quality and formatting. I will also add that i review COI requests based on quality and relevance to the subject matter. I i see a request that meets these criteria, I will (usually) wait for another more experienced editor to make the relevant edits. If its doesn't, i will deny it. Quetstar (talk) 19:17, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

There was a time gap between the request (6 June) and your dismissal of it (30 June), but calling it "obvious PR" when it appeared to be mostly about updating facts and references, was not useful. David notMD (talk) 19:25, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I acknowledge that my initial reasoning as "obvious PR" was not useful at all. Quetstar (talk) 19:35, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Plain Rudeness

In an article (don't want to specify which), unneeded information is there that is completely insulting and degrading to a religious text is there. Am I allowed to remove it? IFvoltronwasadragon... (talk) 17:44, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, it's not possible to say really without knowing exactly where and what it says, but please be aware that Wikipedia is not censored. Theroadislong (talk) 17:48, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Creating an article about a company.

Hello, I wanted to know if an article written about a company is notable. Thank you. Three or two (talk) 17:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Three or two:, As you have added a question, it's a bit confusing. What I understand from this is that I can give you a suggestion. You can check out WP: COMPANY. It might be helpful for you. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)}

Hello, Three or two, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's not articles that are notable or not: the question is whether the subject of an article meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and secondly whether the article about the company establishes that notability. If a subject is not notable, then No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability, and any draft will be rejected, or an article deleted. If the subject is notable but an article does not cite the sources required to establish this, an article is likely to be tagged or draftified, and a draft to be declined. --ColinFine (talk) 20:39, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Edits

 WinnipegMA (talk) 18:00, 3 August 2021 (UTC) Where can I find easy articles to edit? And where can I practice editing articles?

@WinnipegMA: Try the task center and the sandbox. NW1223_{(Howl at me|My hunts)} 18:11, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

If you have an area of expertise or interest, short articles rated Stub or Start on the Talk pages of those articles likely need improvement. David notMD (talk) 19:09, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

List of legislation named for a person

Hello, my name is Lavinia B. Masters and I am an advocate and the namesake of HB 8: THE LAVINIA MASTERS ACT in the State of Texas. It is a piece of legislation that was passed in 2019 and we nt into effect Sept 1, 2019. I am also the first surviving black woman to have a law named after me. My question is how do you get my name entered on this article : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_legislation_named_for_a_person . I am not internet or tech savvy but I would love for someone to volunteer and update the page with our information from here in Texas. I have attached 3 links below with more information about my law.Bold text'

https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86R/billtext/html/HB00008H.htm

https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/governor-signs-hb-8-into-law-to-end-backlog-of-rape-test-kits-in-sex-assault-cases

https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/2019/06/20/she-was-raped-at-13-her-case-sat-untouched-for-21-years-now-shes-changed-the-law/

God bless you and thank you !

laviniamasters.com 47.187.147.117 (talk) 18:17, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

NM lol —valereee (talk) 19:08, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

How to create private sandbox or draft to start off

Hello, as someone new to Wikipedia I was expecting My sandbox to be private but have discovered it is not. Despite searching widely on Wikipedia and the Internet I have not found how to configure My sandbox or a draft to be private for the initial practice and preparation. How can I do this? My apologies if I have failed to find instructions already published and available online, if so I would appreciate a link to the instructions. Otherwise, any helpful answers will be appreciated. Thanks in advance. Zackroo (talk) 18:43, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Zackroo, on Wikipedia nothing is private. You should never write anything private anywhere on Wikipedia anyway. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:52, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Zackroo: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! There is no way to make a private page on wikipedia, all pages are publicly viewable and editable by others. Don't worry about making a mess of your sandbox experimenting, that's the entire reason they exist! As long as what you write there complies with our core content policies (e.g. no copyright violations, no promotional/advert pages etc) editors are given a lot of leeway as to what they can use their sandbox for. If you would like to write an article in private you will need to do it in a separate text editor, but of course you won't be able to format it as a wikipage until it's copied into wikipedia. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 18:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both for your answers. They confirm the conclusions I have been arriving at. I have also wondered about using an offline editor with visual capabilities to preview the page and have not found such a solution yet. I have found extensions to various editors on different platforms but they only provide syntax highlighting, that is useful, but they do not include visual preview. Any suggestions or links will be appreciated. P.S. I have already made a newbie mistake here, when first trying to add this reply I did not check the box "This is a minor edit" and my reply has not appeared so I am doing it again. Zackroo (talk) 19:48, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Zackroo: Have a look at Wikipedia:Tools/Editing tools which lists a load of converters from various file formats to mediawiki markup, and an offline editor. By far the best way to learn is to just muck about in a sandbox though, no-one will care if you make a mess of your sandbox, honest! 192.76.8.91 (talk) 02:54, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft deletion process

Hi, there are a few drafts that I've created but won't be working on anymore. As a paid editor, we've either refunded the amount to the clients or the subjects are simply not notable enough to merit any additional work. How do you propose I delete these drafts? Thank you! BettytheBeth (talk) 19:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@BettytheBeth: Just add {{db-g7}} to the top of the page and an administrator will delete it as an author request. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 19:18, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Moving Page from Draft Into Main Namespace

Hi! I recently became an autoconfirmed user and wanted to move a draft to the namespace, but had submitted it for review before moving the page. If I'm autoconfirmed, does a reviewer still have to review the article before it goes to the main namespace? Ntk202 (talk) 20:18, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Ntk202, I see you have now moved Erika Green Swafford to mainspace yourself. I see that two of the sources it cites are based on interviews with her and one is self-written; but I guess that others just about do enough to establish her as WP:notable.   Maproom (talk) 20:37, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Maproom, I'd like to actually remove those sources as well, but not sure how to remove the template. Once that is done, is the article considered accurate and ready? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ntk202 (talk • contribs)

Same day, Timtrent moved it to Draft:Erika Green Swafford. Awards section needs references. David notMD (talk) 07:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Article miscategorisation

An article I created Theatre of the World has been miscategorised as an English language opera which it isn't. I can't edit the English Language Operas category page to remove it. Is there something I can delete somewhere? I just added a piece to the article about the language to clarify for the reader, so it may change the categorisation eventually. Thanks. Thelisteninghand (talk) 20:20, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Thelisteninghand: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! Categories are added to the article, rather than the category page. If you edit the wikitext of the page and scroll to the very bottom you'll see a link that looks like [[Category:English-language operas]]. Adding or removing these links sorts the articles into categories. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 20:29, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thelisteninghand, I've done it for you. It was categorised as an English-language opera because the article itself contained the line

 [[Category:English-language operas]]

All I had to do was delete that. Maproom (talk) 20:31, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thelisteninghand It's your lucky day! I've seen this; I've recategorised literally thousands of articles here (there's a 4000 article category I hope to get into, soon--most need to be moved to subcategories). Anyway, someone beat me to removing the article in question from English language operas. I took the next step and added to German--which I gather it (mostly) is. Uporządnicki (talk) 20:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you and thank you!! All I have to do is drink tea it seems. I've edited the short description also to German. BUT the opera is deliberately polyglot for artistic reasons. So can we create that? (maybe not - but should really)Thelisteninghand (talk) 20:42, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

My draft post for Ceres Power keeps getting rejected, please help!

 Courtesy link: Draft:Ceres Power

My references for a Ceres Power listing, are being rejected but they're coming from legitimate and well recognised third-party authorties.

Are there any other reasons for why it is being rejected? Kelvmorgan2020 (talk) 20:43, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kelvmorgan2020, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. On a quick look, it seems to me that every one of the sources cited is based on interviews or press releases from Ceres. Wikipedia isn't interested in those. --ColinFine (talk) 21:37, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Help for edit of controversial page

Thank you generous teahouse hosts! I am interested in improving the content and value of the page "Deep Adaptation." As a climate change-related topic, it is subject to extra requirements, and has a talk page. I have a personal POV, so will not be able to reliably produce NPOV contributions. How may I find a "buddy on the other side" (you had a great name for this person, I can't find it now) or given my good faith efforts, a generous impartial editor guide who will keep me on the straight and narrow?

FYI there are two issues I see with the current page (among many stylistic ones):

1. It is biased against the title topic, a) giving undue weight to a critical response that states that Deep Adaptation assumes too dire an expectation of climate change and b) implying that the purpose of Deep Adaptation is to promote such a view. In fact, a) The consensus has been shifting and b) the purpose of Deep Adaptation is acknowledgement of the challenge to accepting such a view even if evidence supports it and then, if one assumes such a view, to respond constructively.

2. It is not purely a science topic, as it seems to be treated in the article. The self-published article which coined the term, and the term itself, refer to constructive policy and personal responses to the dire situation the author believes likely. This is hardly covered.

I am doing background work gathering citations and quotations that I think will be helpful. I could take all this directly to the talk page but I would rather develop some credibility there by not doing stupid things. Please advise how I might humbly and helpfully proceed. Artemisia-californica (talk) 21:40, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Artemisia-californica: If you have a conflict of interest, you may always request changes on Talk:Deep Adaptation. Preface your proposal with the tag {{request edit}}, which lists your request in a category page monitored by some users. Formulate your request in the form "Change X to Y" or "Delete X" or "Insert Y after Z", and provide reliable sources to support your proposed change.

Be aware that there is a large backlog of requests, so be patient. Everyone here is a volunteer, so there are no deadlines on Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:39, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Habib Rahman moved to draftspace

I recently made a page, but it got removed, and i got this message: An article you recently created, Habib Rahman, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:35, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

How can I find my page Ethesham1 (talk) 23:57, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Ethesham1: Welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft has been deleted for inactivity, and you'd have to ask for a refund. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:02, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: That message was only left yesterday, I would hope it would take more than 24 hours for a draft to be deleted! What seems to have happened here is that Ethesham1 created their draft by overwriting an existing redirect. The article was moved to draft space, but was then moved back to article space for some reason to re-make the redirect? Why I have no idea. The draft is in the page history of Habib Rahman, it either needs moving back to draft space so Ethesham1 can continue to work on it or a history split. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 00:20, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

This is a confounding situation. I don't think there should be a problem by having the revision with the draft content being moved back to Draft:Habib Rahman. I'll leave the best way to do so to someone who's more learned in page moving. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:29, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@Ethesham1: I have restored Draft:Habib Rahman for you to improve. There were multiple unrelated deleted drafts there. After I got confused myself after I restored and merged them (including the one in main space), I restored the one that you were working on. Please don't move it to main space until it passes review. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:31, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

JP Karliak: An Openly Gay Actor and Voice Actor

American actor, voice actor and comedian JP Karliak is an openly gay American who had recently married his boyfriend on July 2021. A couple days ago after I moved his page to the main article, I proved that a lot of citations can help improve his Wikipedia page. It is said that on his Instagram post, JP Karliak and his boyfriend are recently married after being engaged. So how does anyone know if Karliak is gay throughout his entire life? MetaWiz4331 (talk) 03:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia can only report what is found in reliable sources. The article must stay silent on points that don't have coverage. If you can find no information about how long he has known he is gay, then the article cannot say anything about it. Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons requires that any statement we make about a living person must be backed up by reliable source. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:43, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Help with article

Hi, I've been trying to get my draft about a musician published, and it was just recently denied for referencing sale websites such as Apple Music and Spotify; however I've seen many other articles about musicians cite these websites as sources. I'm just wondering why this is; plus any feedback on the article and how to improve it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Here's the draft: Draft:Matt Maltese Huey117 (talk) 05:46, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@Huey117: Wikipedia has millions of articles, and just because you see other articles having poor-quality content is not a reason to include such content in a new article. Apple Music and Spotify do absolutely nothing in the way of significant coverage for the purpose of establishing notability, and needlessly bloats the reference list with pointless items. These are not required. You basically made the article into a web directory of his music, in violation of the WP:NOTDIR policy.

What you need are sources that provide actual coverage of the subject. See Wikipedia:Golden rule to get an overview of what is expected. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:51, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Is there any beginner's guidance for AfC (reviewer or something)?

I want to approve Articles for Creations, but I am not even sure about my own articles. I am scared I will mess up all the submissions, so is there any demo or guidance I can get which I can follow? Excellenc1📞 06:25, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Have you read WP:AFCR? --David Biddulph (talk) 06:54, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Can I somehow watch another user submit an article and learn that way? (Or probably I'll leave the thought because I am not yet stable about reliablilty and independence in sources) Excellenc1📞 07:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, yes of course you can watch what happens to other people's creations. (However, if you are unwilling to read and digest WP:AFCR, you shouldn't work as an AfC reviewer.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:24, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Delete it.

Hello everyone! I am VNHRISHIKESH. I viewed an orphan draft article named 'Draft:Magic Grabber'. There is only one edit on it for 4 months(from creating that draft). The creator also does not make edits recently. The content in that draft is very short. The reference list is not large. The draft have no reliable sources. So I proposes deletion for the draft article, 'Draft:Magic Grabber'. Regards, VNHRISHIKESH VNHRISHIKESH (talk) 07:16, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Magic Grabber is an unsubmitted draft created by an IP in April, and not edited since. The easiest path is to ignore it - drafts with no activity are deleted at six months. David notMD (talk) 07:54, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Commons

Please revert the recent revision of File:Rajiv Gandhi (1987).jpg, as it is a violation of Commons:Colorization. Peter Ormond 💬 09:03, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Peter Ormond. If you want something done on Commons, you need to ask on Commons. Try Commons:Commons:Village pump. --ColinFine (talk) 09:49, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I've reverted it over on Commons. It was forced colourization on 29 different wikis. - X201 (talk) 09:57, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Forgot to ping @Peter Ormond: - X201 (talk) 10:14, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine, he can't. He's indefinitely blocked there. (See commons:User talk:Peter Ormond, passim.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:20, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Please help

i am being targeted by an user

Hi , i am a new editor here in wikipedia by account but i have been editing from a long time with my ip address. recently i wanted some changes to be made on the topic bhumihar which is semi-locked and when i suggested my edits a user named <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';" said that Wikipedia works on quality content and i needed to give my reference which when i gave beside of reading and then replying me he suggested that i should be blocked but the other editors did not agree with him. i am currently working working on narayan dynesty and i came across many pages of them with minor information so for the same and i took the paragraphs from the page narayan dynesty which i had edited and took me hours and used it there . this gave the user another chance for taking my work down he put the page on draft without even discussing with me . is it right yo remove work without even discussing and this user is targeting me please take some actions and help Gaurav 3894 (talk) 10:45, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Gaurav 3894,

1. You are not a new user - you have been around long enough, also as an unregistered editor, to be aware that this project has its rules, policies and its own Manual of Style.
2. Your POV-pushing is tedious, you don't seem to understand that Wikipedia strives to present all the significant points of view as presented in reputable published sources. Several editors tried to reason with you at Talk:Bhumihar, to no avail.
3. Regretfully, you have been quite disruptive with your tedious edit requests containing similar statements and placed one after another under every possible heading at Talk:Bhumihar: [2][3][4] and likely many of the previous IP edit requests with similar content.
4. You have copied text without attribution; Diannaa explained to you on your Talk that this cannot be done, and she draftified one of "your" articles; I did the same with another article consisting purely of text you copied from another article. Still you don't seem to understand.
5. I'm sorry but your English is at times below the level required for the mainspace. I told you twice to use proper punctuation and capitalisation, and you are still obviously unable to understand it, as seen in the above paragraph.

I do recommend you to acquaint yourself with the rules of this encyclopaedia. I am placing a chart with links for you to study. In the meantime, I recommend you take a break from pushing your point of view on the Bhumihar and the Narayan dynasty. — kashmīrī ^TALK 11:43, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Article Review

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Arman_Li%C4%8Dina Wikivampir (talk) 11:06, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikivampir The draft you are talking about is deleted for it being used for promotion on Wikipedia, and for keeping Wikipedia non-profit from all sides such advertisements and promotions (even indirect) are not allowed. For more information visit WP:PROMO and WP:NPOV. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 11:52, 4 August 2021 (UTC)