Wikipedia:Teahouse

Nick Moyes, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Bookmarking oft-visited WP sites possible?

I now have a lot of sites I want to visit on occasion, such as my mentor's Talk page, some of the policy and guidance information like conflict of interest, and how to add images. Does Wikipedia have a Bookmark feature, as do Chrome, Safari, and other browsers? Augnablik (talk) 19:23, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@Augnablik To a point, yes, you can add them to your watchlist.

As for stuff that's unlikely to be updated but that you want to keep track of, I, as an Opera GX user, tend to simply have the tabs open in one of my workspaces so I don't have to go rummaging through my regular browser bookmarks. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 19:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Augnablik. Another possibility is to add a list of links to your favourite pages on your user page (or a user subpage). ColinFine (talk) 19:34, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@CommissarDoggo and @ColinFine, thank you both for your ideas. I think Colin’s suggestion comes a little closer to what I was thinking of, but I should mention that after I posted this question here in the Teahouse, I thought to ask my mentor if perhaps there was a way to make a request of the tekkies to create a feature.

In his reply, he mentioned the Wishlist. I’ll probably try that, though I know there’s no guarantee of a Wiki Bookmark feature ever being created — and of course that will take awhile. So I’ll try out all 3 of your suggestions, starting by trying to set up a User sub-page first. Augnablik (talk) 17:45, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@Augnablik: Hi. In case your watchlist gets very large, User:MusikAnimal/customWatchlists is a good option. I use it, as well as as subpage method. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Maybe this is what I'll try first. Thanks! Augnablik (talk) 10:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Reverting on mobile

How do I revert an article to a previous edit on mobile, as well as undo an edit? I am on an iPhone. AlexTheWikipedian (talk) 22:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi AlexTheWikipedian. I believe if you scroll all the way down to the bottom of a Wikipedia page while using the mobile Wikipedia site, I'm pretty sure you're given the option to view the page in "Desktop mode". If you click this, you should see the page as you would see it using the regular Wikipedia set up, and be able to edit just like you would edit any Wikipedia. Be aware, though, that your mobie service provider might be using an IP proxy that is blocked from making edits per Wikipedia:Open proxies; you can view pages fine, but you just can't edit them. So, if you go to desktop mode and still can't edit because the IP address your account is using has been blocked, there might not be much you can do except try Wikipedia:IP block exemption. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@AlexTheWikipedian: I've never used iphone, but given their reputation, I think first you would need to upgrade, or buy some accessory. I'll post a serious answer in a few hours. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:02, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Automatic search for red links

Hello ! Anybody can say me if there are a way for an automatic search for red links ?

When I see an article with red links. If there are articles about the topic available in another language than English.
I create an interlanguage link.

I'm unable to translate into English because I'm not a native speaker of this language and my translations could be too literal.
I can translate from English into French but not the reverse.

Therefore , create an interlanguage link is a good beginning but I don't know if we can search these links with internal search engine of Wikipedia. Anatole-berthe (talk) 23:59, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

You might ask any MediaWiki dev about your idea. Ahri Boy (talk) 00:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer !

I don't know where to find a developper.

I don't ever known where can I look to find one of them.

Can you help me ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 00:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

See mw:Project:Support desk. Ahri Boy (talk) 00:45, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks you ! Anatole-berthe (talk) 02:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@Anatole-berthe: You could try this in your common JavaScript to search Wikidata for the page name you are on, also if it's a red link:

mw.loader.using(['mediawiki.util'], function () {
  mw.util.addPortletLink(
    'p-tb',
    '//www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=' + encodeURIComponent( mw.config.get('wgPageName') ),
    'Wikidata search',
    't-wikidatasearch',
    'Search the page name in Wikidata',
    null,
    '#t-wikibase'
  );
});

It may not find other spellings and scripts. On Igor Artemov it gives Wikidata search which finds Igor Artemov (Q4070423). On Alexander Saliy it gives Wikidata search which doesn't find Aleksandr Salij (Q16335510). PrimeHunter (talk) 02:24, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

If I understood rightly. I create a page in my user's subpage "Anatole-berthe/common.js".

Then , I can create a subpage inside "Anatole-berthe/common.js"" and for example I name it "Finders".

In "Anatole-berthe/common.js/Finders" I can create a subpage named "redlinkfinder.js".

When I'll go to "Anatole-berthe/common.js/ScriptsJS/redlinkfinder.js". I'll be able to use the script if I copy and paste the code there.

I'm not certain to understand if the script can be in the subpage of a subpage.

I prefer to organise my "Anatole-berthe/common.js". with subpages for a better organisation.

I say you thanks because even if this script have the limits you exposed. It's better than nothing. Anatole-berthe (talk) 02:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@Anatole-berthe: I have made it a user script with installation instructions: User:PrimeHunter/Wikidata search.js. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks you ! I think I understood the basis.

About the part :

importScript('User:PrimeHunter/Wikidata search.js'); // Linkback: [[User:PrimeHunter/Wikidata search.js]]

I understood than I need only to put this part in my "Common.js" that will be connected to your userpage.

Am I right ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 04:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Sourcing question

In the article for Walmart, I wrote a sentence in the History section about them ending their DEI program and delisting gender affirming products for minors. I originally cited an ABC News article, but I found an article from the Associated Press, which I believe is a more reliable source when it comes to current events. As of my edit, both sources are there to back up my sentence but I kind of want to get rid of the ABC citation since AP is a better source. Should I get rid of it and leave the AP citation, or leave it alone with two citations? Additionally, to avoid any confusion in the future, does Wikipedia have some sort of tierlist or something for sources that ranks how accurate and reliable they are? I know we have one for bias, but I am not sure about accuracy. ApteryxRainWing | Roar at me | My contributions 14:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi! If this is a problem, both sources, should be clear, as said by the reliability chart. I have placed some screenshots below to show you.

I would suggest to keep both, but it all comes down to the reference. For the full list of common references, click here Thanks, Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 14:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. For future reference, is it a good idea to have multiple citations on a claim, especially one about a recent and/or controversial development? On the surface it sounds like it adds credibility to my statement but having too many sources might impact readability because of all the blue superscript numbers. ApteryxRainWing | Roar at me | My contributions 14:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@User:ApteryxRainWing I fixed your ABC News citation. One consideration is whether readers can access one source better than another source when there are two equivalent ones you could use. That isn't relevant here, as both are live weblinks. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Would website stability contribute to that factor? AP has a lot of ads that slow the site down but ABC runs smoothly even on my terrible chromebook ApteryxRainWing | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 17:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

You can bundle multiple references into a single super-scripted number with Template:Multiref2. Alegh (talk) 19:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Made an edit there to bundle both references to a single number. This leaves both sources in case one is more accessible to a reader. You can re-order them if it makes a difference. Just change the 2 to a 1, and the 1 to a 2 for quick change. I think if you're missing #1, the template does not produce the desired result. Alegh (talk) 19:24, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

wikipedias user

whats Wikipedias user TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 16:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello @TheSmartWikiOne, and welcome to Wikipedia. It's unclear what exactly you're asking; can you please rephrase? CoconutOctopus talk 16:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

TheSmartWikiOne, you have used up a lot of the time of other editors but haven't made any improvement to Wikipedia. Please consider abandoning Wikipedia and taking up some alternative pursuit. -- Hoary (talk) 22:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

xtools counter. I recommend to be mindful of WP:NOTHERE. In the past, I've seen over-enthusiastic editors getting blocked for similar editing. You should spend more time on help building Wikipedia, and less time on user/user talk pages, or doing some other irrelevant activity. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:16, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

But its time consuming am busy looking at houses TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 18:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

no TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 18:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

About and other templates

In aliasing (factorial experiments), I want to modify the headnote to read: This article is about aliasing in statistics, in particular fractional factorial designs. For other uses, see Aliasing (disambiguation).

If I try to do this using the "About" template, I get: This article is about aliasing in statistics, in particular fractional factorial designs. For other uses, see Aliasing (factorial experiments) (disambiguation). There is no such disambiguation page. I don't see a way to use extra arguments to do what I want.

The templates "Other uses" and "For" are not helpful here, either, and I'm assuming that I would need to write a unique headnote for this purpose.

I'd appreciate some assistance in this. Johsebb (talk) 16:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@Johsebb What you need is {{About|aliasing in statistics, in particular fractional factorial designs|other uses, see|Aliasing (disambiguation)}}. Copy/paste this directly from the rendered text, as you don't need the nowiki etc. you see in the source code. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Is it reasonable that a reader would wind up at a page titled "aliasing (factorial experiments)" if they wanted some other meaning of the term "aliasing"? If not, then WP:HATNOTERULES #3 advises not to have a hatnote at all. DMacks (talk) 22:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Actually, it is reasonable, so I think a hatnote is appropriate. I've used the one suggested by Mike Turnbull. Johsebb (talk) 02:29, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Mike! Johsebb (talk) 02:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

I found a somewhat suspicious user. It seems as though they're editing things to advertise a business.

I do know that the user is actually contributing, or at least... it looks like it. I'm not really experienced enough to what to do from here. Can someone help me out? AmrAlWatan(🗣️|📝) 16:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@AmrAlWatan Could you link what you're referencing for us? CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Rock-climbing_equipment&diff=1259679042&oldid=1247466299

As I said, I don't know exactly what I'm supposed to be looking at... I'll get there someday :D AmrAlWatan(🗣️|📝) 19:02, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@AmrAlWatan With cases of inserting inappropriate external links or advertising, you should either alert someone to the issue as you've done here, or, if you feel comfortable, revert the edit and apply a notice to the user's talk page, as I've done here.

You can do this far easier with things like Twinkle, which you should have access to. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 19:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much! AmrAlWatan(🗣️|📝) 01:14, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Why does wiki sometimes show "Edit" and other times show "Edit Source"?

Its annoying for my 2 braincells, since I'm horrible at source editing, but it always shows up, unless for suggested edits. Is there a way to toggle this? BlazeFlames (talk) 18:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@BlazeFlames, are you having this problem on article pages or only elsewhere? There is no Visual Editor support for talk pages, for example, so it's only edit source available there. -- asilvering (talk) 18:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

article pages BlazeFlames (talk) 18:59, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Ok, go to Preferences --> Editing --> Editor --> Editing mode. Make sure this is set to "always give me the Visual Editor if possible". -- asilvering (talk) 19:52, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

thank you! BlazeFlames (talk) 21:40, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Is enough info for an article/stub?

Hey Teahouse! I have some question regarding an article I'm debating on creating.

The article I am debating is on the effects of Millennium Force, particularly in the station and queue. Throughout the main article on Millennium Force, there are some references and notes regarding station effects and history, a lot of which was added by me. However, that only scratches the surface of what there actually is and has been. I'm just unsure as to whether it fits in the main article, and I believe I could create a sub-article of sorts explaining the information in a much, much better way than there is now.

For example, under the "station" heading, a note is mentioned about 3 sets of dispatch audio. It had citations to the audio and the fact that there may be more, but that's it. In reality, those audio sets have a deeper history, such as the decade old promos that they came in.

This is prevalent again with the in-station projectors. I mentioned that they had been brought back in a new but limited fashion, but didn't get to touch on the history of them, or why they weren't even working on the time. (I even emailed Cedar Point's spokesperson regarding this and got a good answer with info!)

There is just so much interesting and deep history regarding the queue, station, and cable lift effects that don't get mentioned at all in the main article. I have and can get more citations for all of the info, but I just don't know if it would qualify for Wikipedia. Like would I have to take some existing information regarding the effects from the main page? Or could there be some brief info on the main page with all of the in-depth info on a "sub-page"?

I would love some feedback on this! Therguy10 (talk) 18:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@Therguy10, it sounds to me like this is the kind of thing you can add to the main article, rather than something that ought to be added as a WP:SPINOUT. In general, the way this kind of thing is approached is by working directly in the "parent" article and only spinning out if it gets too long or overdetailed. Regarding emailing CP's spokesperson, did they send you to some resource online, or did they just answer your questions directly? Unfortunately, since personal communication isn't externally verifiable (see WP:V), we can't use it on Wikipedia. But if you can find that information in reliable sources (WP:RS), you're good to go. -- asilvering (talk) 19:14, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering The email I received confirmed what I had suspected with already reputable sources, but I wanted to be 100% sure before adding anything to Wikipedia because no official announcement was made about it. Tony Clark (the spokesperson) just gave me additional details; things that I had already gathered but was happy to hear confirmed. (You can actually email him yourself if you need more verification)

And as far as adding the information I have goes, if I typed up an article draft of every single bit of info, (with all of the reputable sources and citations, of course) and then added it to your talk page, maybe you could you review it and decide whether or not it should go into the main article or spin-off? Or is there anyone else I could find help with? I'm comfortable with either option in adding to the main article or to a spin-off, but I'd hate to gather up all of my sources and citations just for it to be undone.

(If that's something you can't do that is totally fine! I don't expect help lol) I appreciate your help already! Therguy10 (talk) 19:28, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

It's really hard to review drafts on a talk page, so please don't paste it there (also, my talk page is kinda long so that will be extra annoying). My advice would be to work directly in the article, but not to make all of your changes in one go. Add a paragraph or maybe only a couple of sentences at a time, and see how that goes. That's easier for other editors to review, and will be less disappointing to you if someone objects to your additions. -- asilvering (talk) 19:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering Got it! I'll try to start on that at some point in the near future. I really appreciate this feedback so thank you very very much! Therguy10 (talk) 19:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I should warn you that, because that is a Featured Article, you may receive some pushback for changing it, simply because you're changing it. If that happens, just know that it's not about you. Come back here for more advice and we can help you untangle whatever happens. -- asilvering (talk) 19:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks; I didn't even think about that. If something arises I'll try to come back to the Teahouse. Therguy10 (talk) 19:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

According to View history, the article has 95 'Watchers' who purportedly check on their Watchlist every time they log in (albeit many are likely no longer active editors or Watchers). The Talk page of the article is a better place for discussion if reverted. On a more general note, pot3ential content can be true and reference-verifiable but not seen as improving the article. See the essay Wikipedia:Fancruft for thoughts on this. David notMD (talk) 22:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Help finding template

I need the template for an unsourced information tag FLIPPINGOUT (talk) 19:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@FLIPPINGOUT Template:Citation needed? CommissarDoggo^Talk? 19:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes! Thank you FLIPPINGOUT (talk) 19:24, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Wait nevermind @CommissarDoggo

I need the warning template, sorry FLIPPINGOUT (talk) 19:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@FLIPPINGOUT Oh, the actual warning template for adding unsourced information? That's at WP:WARNINGS > multi-level templates > "Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material" CommissarDoggo^Talk? 19:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you again for the help FLIPPINGOUT (talk) 19:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@FLIPPINGOUT, if you enable WP:TWINKLE in your user preferences, you can automate leaving user warnings. -- asilvering (talk) 19:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Using a book reference

Hi there. I have a question about using a book as a reference in my draft. The book is named "Valiant: Many Hands, One Vision" published by Walkerville Publishing in 2009. We have an ISBN - I can provide if necessary. However, the book is not available to the public, and you can't purchase it online. If you search for the book you can only see the cover, but it is not being sold anywhere. Can I use this source if other editors can't verify the information in the book?

We have the PDF of the book. Would it work if we published this PDF on our website, then include the URL in the book citation? AliceMaiAnh (talk) 21:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

AliceMaiAnh, why do you say "we"? -- Hoary (talk) 22:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@AliceMaiAnh, I assume you are working for the company and they are willing to put it on their website. It depends on if the company owns the copyright to this privately published book. It would be easier just to have some company history on the website to use as a source for facts. The bigger issue is finding sources that are completely independent of the company in order to show that it is notable enough, that is well-enough-known, to have a Wikipedia article. Currently all your references appear to be based on press releases. StarryGrandma (talk) 22:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

AliceMaiAnh, Walkerville Publishing is a self publishing company. It is highly unlikely that this is a reliable source for use on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 03:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Another thing: This page of Walkerville's lists "Valiant: Many Hands, One Vision, with Marty Solcz". Draft:Valiant TMS tells us "Founder[:] Michael G. Solcz". And so as well as probably having little or none of the checks imposed by a traditional publisher, it appears to be co-written (or perhaps even written) by somebody with a COI. All in all, publication of the PDF on the company website (or anywhere else) wouldn't help. -- Hoary (talk) 11:23, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

My edit got reverted despite it being accurate

Hello, my edit got reverted despite it being accurate. The edit being "To Pimp A Butterfly was met with universal acclaim" on Kendrick Lamar's "To Pimp A Butterfly" due to it being the highest rated album on "RateYourMusic" and it indicating universal acclaim on "Metacritic", so now i'm just wondering on why it got reverted since i think it's completely accurate? Elijahjb306 (talk) 00:32, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Elijahjb306, the article already said "universal acclaim" when you made the changes. -- asilvering (talk) 00:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

AI Aided Suggested Edits (adding links between articles)

Yesterday on my suggested edits I had on these AI suggested ones (e.g. http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Quartz_crystal_microbalance_with_dissipation_monitoring&diff=prev&oldid=1259648652) for adding links between articles and now they're gone. (See https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Growth/Tools/Newcomer_Tasks#s-link) Sushidude21! (talk) 05:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Sushidude21!, I'll ping you into a discussion where someone should be able to answer that question. -- asilvering (talk) 06:31, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Need advice on improving this draft.

Hello, I’m seeking guidance on how to improve this draft. It has been rejected multiple times for reading like an advertisement. I’ve made several attempts to rewrite it with a more neutral tone, but I’m struggling to get it approved. To me, it seems neutral, but I may be missing something. Could anyone point out specific sentences or sections that come across as promotional? I would really appreciate your feedback so I can make the necessary edits. Here’s the draft: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Quintessential_(company) Commercialindustrial (talk) 07:14, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

You need to stop. The article you made is too WP:PROMOTIONAL. Please read WP:NOTABILITY. Ahri Boy (talk) 09:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

To be fair to Commercialindustrial, Ahri Boy, the reviewer who rejected the draft invited Commercialindustrial to come here and ask for advice. Commercialindustrial has asked, politely, for specifics; and has done so according to the invitation. Perhaps you'd care to tell them how the draft is too promotional. -- Hoary (talk) 11:28, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

The great majority of the content and references document financial activities of the business real estate company. While true and referenced, these are about the company's actions but not the company. If you really intend to try again, I agree with the Comments suggestion that all existing content be set aside and start over in the existing draft. David notMD (talk) 11:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I will add that many of the references are press-release-like interviews with company executives. The Property portfolio needs to be deleted. Same for descriptions of the Master funds. Content on the three divisions is not referenced. The ESG section requires a ref other than Q. The awards list can stay, but minor awards do not contribute to establishing notability. David notMD (talk) 11:52, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

General References

Hello, how do I format general references into an article? My draft already has some in-line citations, but I would like to make my general references display properly. How do I insert them without getting the little bracketed number (the ones that look like this [1] but smaller) in-line citations do? AkiyamaKana (talk) 12:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@AkiyamaKana As far as I recall, general references aren't really needed (see WP:GENREF), so I think it's better to change them to appropriate inline citations. Myrealnamm's Alternate Account (talk) 14:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Sandbox seems to be not working

Hello, I want to write a wikipedia article. I can't seem to get the sandbox to work. I want to write the article in the sandbox and then submit it for approval. Could anyone provide the exact URL or a link that is sure to help me write the article in the right place? Article_wizard seems to make a draft, but the draft is not in the Sandbox, is that correct? I want to write 2 articles. Can I have 2 or more articles in the Sandbox? Thank you for your help. SpecialistWikiEditor (talk) 14:33, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I believe you may be conflating the general Sandbox, which is for everyone, with your personal sandbox, which is not. You can make as many concurrent items in your personal sandbox as you like, but items in the general Sandbox will likely be overwritten within minutes. Does that answer your question? DS (talk) 14:48, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@SpecialistWikiEditor I stongly recommend you use the article wizard to create a draft article, rather than your sandbox, but you should see a link to your personal sandbox at the top of any Wikipedia page. You can create as many drafts as you wish. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

It appears you now have a draft at Draft:Julien Samuel Roux. David notMD (talk) 23:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Image gallery centering at Saint Peter's Church (Mendota, Minnesota)

Hello, does anyone know why the second gallery in Saint Peter's Church (Mendota, Minnesota) is aligning slightly to the right rather than having the three images being centered? Is it trying to match the gallery above it for alignment? Thanks. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 15:15, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Nevermind - it's aligning normally now. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 15:39, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Darth Stabro: This is just my personal opinion. A better question ask might be to ask why is there even an image gallery needed in that article. Image galleries can, for sure, improve the quality of an article as explained in WP:GALLERY, but too many images can also overwhelm the text of an article, particularly a shorter article. Multiple images showing the church as it looked in during roughly same time period probably don't provide the reader with twice or thrice as much encyclopedic value as seeing one image of the church, and other images could probably be incorporated into sections of relevant article content to better establish context. There can be a tendency with respect to image galleries to keep adding more and more images because it tends to be easy edit to make, and many see it as a case of more always being better. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Article Improvement

Hi, Teahouse. I have been working on the article Quinte Health. Would a list of the board of the directors be too much? Also, how does the article get reviewed on the Wikipedia:Content assessment scale? Thanks CF-501 Falcon (talk) 15:21, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

How many are the board of directors? You would want to be careful to avoid WP:Wikipedia is not Tesleemah (talk) 15:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Tesleemah, There are 16, that is probably too many names. Should I instead mention the 2 vice-presidents and just the chair of the board, for conciseness? CF-501 Falcon (talk) 15:41, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

That will be better, I guess. Tesleemah (talk) 15:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Tesleemah, I found a list of all the vice-presidents, I assume that is too many;

• Stacey Daub, President & Chief Executive Officer
• Matthew Campbell, Vice President & Chief Transformation Officer
• Gina Johar, Vice President & Chief Digital Officer
• Dr. Colin MacPherson, Chief of Staff
• Lina Rinaldi, Vice President & Chief Nursing Executive
• Susan Rowe, Vice President, People & Communications
• Bill Tottle, Vice President & Chief Financial Officer

CF-501 Falcon (talk) 15:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@CF-501 Falcon That's the sort of detail that appears on an organisation's own website, which is already linked in the infobox of the article. If any of these is notable enough to have an article in Wikipedia then that might be justification for mentioning them somewhere in the text but otherwise I think it is non-encyclopaedic. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:07, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@CF-501 FalconI agree totally with @Michael D. Turnbull Tesleemah (talk) 16:23, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull and @Tesleemah, Thank you so much. I will leave it out then. Have a great day! CF-501 Falcon (talk) 18:09, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

What if someone with a COI doesn't reveal so?

What if someone with a Conflict of Interest to a subject writes about it but fails to or deliberately doesn't mention about it in their user page? Randomdude121 (talk) 15:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Randomdude121 There is detailed advice about this at WP:COICOIN and the links given there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:01, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

How would someone know if the editor has an undisclosed COI? Randomdude121 (talk) 16:03, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Randomdude121 From the evidence. I assume you were asking because you thought you had such evidence. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:08, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Typically, if someone's not willing to disclose that they have a COI, there are other issues with the quality of their edits as well. DS (talk) 04:45, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@Randomdude121: You can't force someone to disclose they have a COI; moreover, WP:COI is a guideline that users with a COI are encouraged to follow, but they're not required to do so. Undisclosed paid editing is a violation of Wikipedia's Terms of Use, and such editing can lead to an account being blocked because disclosure is required by Wikipedia policy. So, if you suspect an editor of having an WP:APPARENTCOI, you can follow the guidance given in WP:COI#How to handle conflicts of interest and encourage the editor to be as transparent as possible about any connection they might have with the subject because doing so will make it not only easier for others to help them, but more than likely make others want to try to help them. You don't want to come down like a ton of bricks on the other editor, at least not right at the beginning of your interaction with them, but instead make them aware of Wikipedia's concerns about COI editing and ask them to try to follow the COI guidelines. If they don't and their edits are otherwise no problem per relevant policies and guidelines, there's no really need to push the matter COI any further. It's only when someone with a COI starts making inappropriate edits that their COI tends to become a problem; in such cases, their problematic edits can be dealt with in the same way as problem edits made by any other editor. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull I was just curious.

Thanks to the both of you! Randomdude121 (talk) 16:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Is there a "third opinion" for conduct disputes?

Say there's a conduct issue that I tried (possibly badly) discussing with the user and didn't manage to convince them that it's an issue, the issue also didn't improve but it also seems too minor-ish for ANI... is there an alternative step that isn't the drama board? Is there a way I can ask a third, neutral, opinion? – 2804:F1...02:ACA0 (::/32) (talk) 15:46, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, see WP:THIRDOPINION. You could also try dispute resolution. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:48, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Can I make graphs on Excel

I’ve been reading WP:Graphs and Charts and WP:How to create charts for Wikipedia articles and it’s all quite confusing and I’m now wondering can I create graphs on excel following the guidelines listed on “How to create charts for Wikipedia” and then upload those to commons or is that classed as copyright infringement. I really don’t know if that’s okay or not and I’d prefer to find out before trying it. Thanks N1TH Music (talk) 16:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

You are welcome to create graphs from scratch in Excel or other programs and upload them to commons. Because you are the creator, you can declare whatever license you like (though only files with open licenses would be allowed). Be sure you cite the source of your data. Unlike creative graphical works or writings, pure data cannot be copyrighted, so your graph would not be infringing on the publication that contains the data you used (assuming you are not literally recreating the same graphs that publication has). DMacks (talk) 17:38, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@DMacks What exactly do you mean by "cite my data"? N1TH Music (talk) 18:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

What is the origin of the data you are graphing? Did you get it from a newspaper, a journal article, generate it by a math equation, make it up yourself, etc. DMacks (talk) 20:29, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi N1TH Music. Copyright issues aside, your graphs shouldn't be a way for you to incoporate your own personal research into an article. So, if you're going to create a graph based on your own personally accumulated data, then others are most likely not going to want that in the article unless you're a really well-established content expert who is recognized as such by reliable sources. At the same time, if you're going to use data from a third-party source, you should make sure that source is considered reliable for Wikipedia's purposes and clearly say where the data comes from. You might be able to upload your graph to Commons because Commons is mainly considered with the copyright status of the content it hosts and not so much how such content ends up being used; Wikipedia, on the other hand, is equally concerned about both, and there's no guarantee it will end up being used in Wikipedia if others feel it adds no or just very little encyclopedic value to an article. In other words, you may have seek a consensus on the article's talk page to add the graph if someone feels it's not really an improvement. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Hii, I have doubt on blocks and unblocks

at this [2] a user got blocked for being WP:NOTHERE but I am of view that merely because the person expressed unpopular opinion there, he should not get blocked from editing as per WP:NOTHERENORMS - Expressing unpopular opinions in a non-disruptive manner -

• How or where do I see discussion on the block and
• Is it possible that admins review it because I (unrelated person) raise doubt over a block (want to know irrespective of this block)? `~ᴀɴᴋʀᴀᴊ ɢɪʀɪ🎇✨( C • Talk ) 17:46, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Ankraj giri, I hear you about WP:NOTHERE blocks. I really don't like them, myself. You can always go ask the blocking admin about this kind of thing, but I'm not sure I'd suggest that a new editor do that. In this case, though, I can understand this block pretty well, so I'll explain it: this person was never at any point engaged in what we're all trying to do here, which is "building an encyclopedia". Look at their contribution history - all they ever did was talk about this one issue. Wikipedia isn't a forum for discussion. Established editors say things like "no IPs should be allowed to edit wikipedia" all the time and don't get blocked for it; saying that isn't a problem. Wasting everyone's time is. -- asilvering (talk) 18:17, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I wanted to argue if as long as the person is not harming Wikipedia, vandal edits or edit battles then should they not be allowed to stay on the site. I myself have limited time, I got free just yesterday and thought I would roam around wiki only to find a burning forest here. I wish best for editors and wiki, good luck! I just hope that the day when I get blocked its not without me being heard :-) Thanks for response as always TeaHouse is best place to come! `~ᴀɴᴋʀᴀᴊ ɢɪʀɪ🎇✨( C • Talk ) 18:26, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

If you get blocked, you can appeal through various means, principally on your talk page. An independent administrator will review the decision. The process is mentioned on that blocked user's talk page, and they get more details when or if they try to edit again. The 'community' doesn't really entertain unblock appeals from third parties, since we always need to discuss things with the original blocked user. However, you as a third party are allowed to question the blocking administrator and ask them to review their decision, by visiting their talk page. There's also nothing stopping you in principle from urging the blocked user to appeal, on their talk page. I'm not recommending either here, in fact I'd probably recommend against both; I'm just explaining the process. The short answer if that if a user wants to appeal they have plenty of opportunity to do that. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:39, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Ohh I read block period as indefinite so I thought the user can never appeal or write anything on wiki again, Learning, Thanks :) `~ᴀɴᴋʀᴀᴊ ɢɪʀɪ🎇✨( C • Talk ) 18:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

"Indefinite" means there's no fixed end time, but that also means that a block can be very short - it's basically "forever, or until you successfully appeal". In some ways it's less harsh than a block for a month or so, since you're not terribly likely to be let out of a time-limited block early, but you can be let out of an indef as soon as you've satisfied an admin at unblock appeals that you don't need to be blocked anymore. -- asilvering (talk) 18:56, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I am an adminstrator who has issued quite a few WP:NOTHERE blocks. For me, a typical example is an editor who has registered a profane, trolling sexualized username and then sets out on a campaign of profane, trolling sexualized vandalism. Either policy violation deserves an indefinite block but how do I choose between one or the other? I will block for NOTHERE and note the two (or more) reasons in the block log. Often, violations of the WP:BLP policy are involved as well. In my personal practice, I want to see two or more policy violations to use NOTHERE. Without delving too deeply into the specifics of this case, evaluating which pattern of editing is disruptive and blockable is the job of an adminstrator using their discretion and good judgment, and if another adminstrator decides that unrelenting axe-grinding is enough for a NOTHERE block, then I will not object to the label applied to that block. Quibbling about the specific block reason of a justified block is not a good use of volunteer time. Any editor who sincerely believes that they have been blocked unfairly, or that they have repented, is free to file an appeal which will be reviewed by another administrator. If I believe that my concerns have been adequately addressed, I never object to the unblock. But feeding trolls is a bad idea. Cullen328 (talk) 09:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm not interested in editing.

I'm not interested in editing. So I don't want all these pages that have to do with editing. I just want to do searches. And I couldn't find anyplace where to do it. I created an account as I thought that was the only way to do searches only to find that the magnifying glass icon is for searches and it was there all along. But in the meantime I have all these pages having to do with editing, is there a way to get rid of them? Terry W Ryder (talk) 20:33, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Terry W Ryder: Just sign out and abandon the account. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:51, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi! Even if you don't intend to edit, an account may help you use Wikipedia without having to see fundraising banners. I can't be certain what pages having to do with editing you refer to, but I'm guessing one of them is the newcomer homepage. You can disable the newcomer homepage and related features in your preferences > user profile at the very bottom. Perception312 (talk) 22:29, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Technical question: is there a reason why at Special:UserLogin there is no "Show password" button?

Hello. When logging in, I noticed that there is no "Show password" button when doing so. I do realize that this may be due to several reasons, namely: 1) it would be unwise to have someone peer over your shoulder in a vulnerable café table as you enter your password, and 2) perhaps MediaWiki hasn't accomodated for this feature yet. Could someone let me know why this so, and would it be wise to implement this in the near future? Thanks. — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 02:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Highly unadvisable. Recommended to use a password manager instead. Ahri Boy (talk) 05:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Also see phab:T164189 (2017). -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 05:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks zzuzzz. Ahri Boy (talk) 05:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@Zzuuzz, @Ahri Boy – Thank you both. For one, yes, I do realize that using a password manager is simply more convenient in this case. The other thing is that when typing my password (I have it memorized) I was thinking exactly about RexxS' (hoping for his return) use case in that Phabricator ticket (obviously, I would never type it out in a café with the hypothetical password shown in thin air). I suppose I'll make do with what I have, though, as this is a relatively minor issue (at least for me). — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 15:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Adding articles to Wikiprojects

If I identify an article that is relevant to a WikiProject though it not listed there, how can I include it in the Wikiproject? LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk) 07:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Put a WikiProject template to the article's talk page. Ahri Boy (talk) 09:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Taco wikilove

Will they ever update and add some new wikilove? Especially would be interested in a wikilove burrito and a wikilove taco. Iljhgtn (talk) 08:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

The WikiLove is mainly controlled be the community, so technically anyone can update it anytime. You can just create a "WikiLove Burrito or Taco" template and add it to the list if you like. Cheers. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 08:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Altering incorrect information on a page

I am something of a Dinosaur when to come to IT Tech !! There is a page relating to a feature in my/our village with some total inaccurate information -- Caton Oak a link maybe ? How do I alter it to make the info correct ? Don't want to mess it up !!! 1, It says the tree is routed in the River Lune - its not its close to 1 mile from the Lune -- it is situated in a Mill Race man made stream take from Artlebeck a tributary of the Lune. 2. It states the blacksmith used to set up his forge there - He did not the Forge /Blacksmiths shop was in Farriers Yard some 150yards away and backed onto the Croft drying grounds -- closer to the tree. By the Way I am now 80y lived in Caton all my life so did Dad and Grandad, I remember the forge, blacksmith, the carpenter next door, etc etc Hope someone can point me in the right direction Thanks John Redhunter350 (talk) 11:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

What you know to be true is not evidence enough. It is not clear what reference verifies that the oak tree in question was "rooted in the River Lune", and so, perhaps, you could change that text to the mill race. As for your second point, reference #5 states that a blacksmith would set up near the tree, so you would need a better reference for where he did set up in order to justify removing mention of the blacksmith. Or else change the first and leave the second. David notMD (talk) 12:10, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Cyprus military ranks

I need help with the NCO ranks, i already made the png files how the ranks look but i dont know how to modify the code so i make it look like the greek one, cypriot army have 2 nco ranks for every rank, one for permanent NCOs that completed military academy and the other for SYP-EPY (in Greece EPOP-EMTh) for contracted NCOs that cannot become Warrant Officers, example bellow.

NCO and other ranks

NCO ranks (excl. OR-9 and conscript ranks) have undergone some changes through the years, the latest being in 2004.

NATO code	OR-9						OR-8		OR-7		OR-6						OR-5						OR-4				OR-3		OR-2						OR-1
Hellenic Army																																			Arm/corps insignia only
	Ανθυπασπιστής Anthypaspistis						Αρχιλοχίας Archilochias		Επιλοχίας Epilochias		Λοχίας Lochias												Δεκανέας Dekaneas				Υποδεκανέας Ypodekaneas								Στρατιώτης Stratiotis
Greece (Conscripts)							No equivalent																												No insignia
	Δόκιμος Έφεδρος Αξιωματικός Dokimos Efedros Axiomatikos										Λοχίας Lochias												Δεκανέας Dekaneas				Υποδεκανέας Ypodekaneas		Υποψήφιος Έφεδρος Βαθμοφόρος Ypopsifios Efedros Bathmoforos						Στρατιώτης Stratiotis

Other ranks

The rank insignia of non-commissioned officers and enlisted personnel.

Rank group	Senior NCOs																						Junior NCOs						Enlisted
Cypriot Ground Forces																																			Arm/corps insignia only
	Ανθυπασπιστής Anthypaspistís						Αρχιλοχίας Archilochías		Επιλοχίας Epilochías		Λοχίας Lochías				Έφεδρος Λοχίας Éfedros Lochías								Δεκανέας Dekanéas				Υποδεκανέας Ypodekanéas								Στρατιώτης Stratiótis
Cyprus Navy																																			Arm/corps insignia only
	Ανθυπασπιστής Anthypaspistís						Αρχικελευστής Archikelefstís		Επικελευστής Epikelefstís		Κελευστής Kelefstís				Έφεδρος Κελευστής Éfedros Kelefstís								Δίοπος Díopos				Υποδίοπος Ypodíopos								Ναύτης Náftis
Cyprus Air Forces																																			Arm/corps insignia only
	Ανθυπασπιστής Anthypaspistís						Αρχισμηνίας Archisminías		Επισμηνίας Episminías		Σμηνίας Sminías				Έφεδρος Σμηνίας Éfedros Sminías								Υποσμηνίας Yposminías				Ανθυποσμηνίας Anthyposminías								Σμηνίτης Sminítis
Rank group	Senior NCOs																						Junior NCOs						Enlisted

any help it will be good to make it right (sergeant in cyprus have 3 variants. Asd3131 (talk) 13:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Teahouse is a place to ask general help questions, not as topic specific as Greek and Cyprus military rank emblems. David notMD (talk) 14:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@Asd3131 Are you aware of the military history project? Editors there are pretty active and if you post a link to this discussion on one of their Talk pages, they may be able to help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Dear, Michael

thank you for answering my comment, i will post the same message as the above and i hope they help me make the visual correct, have a good day sir.

Love,

Paraskevas Asd3131 (talk) 17:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Help with new article

Hello,

I am trying to successfully post an article drafted here: Draft:Captain's Compass

I've worked that draft up since the initial rejection and any suggestions would be appreciated for helping me get it to the point of re-submission.

It was deleted from the List of Cocktails for having no page, so this seems like a key step.

Thank you,

Joe Josephbwalton (talk) 15:07, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello. The draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means it may be resubmitted. Please see the advice left by the reviewer. Wikipedia is not a cookbook; Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. I'm not really seeing a claim to notability in the draft- that a database includes this beverage does not confer notability unless you have independent sources that detail the significance of this. It's true that there must be an article to include it in the list article, but it must be notable. 331dot (talk) 15:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@Josephbwalton You appear to be providing information which is essentially your own opinion and research in the "Notes" section; that's unacceptable here. You cite sources for the ingredients but no source for the suggestion that these ingredients actually have been commented upon in reliable, secondary sources as being part of this specific cocktail. Please read the linked pages carefully. My view is that you will not be able to show this cocktail is notable in the way that Wikipedia requires. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

After cutting what obviously does not belong in a cocktail article, there is not enough left to establish Wikipedia notability. Look at other cocktail articles to get ideas of what to incorporate - if references can be found (if not, abandon the effort). David notMD (talk) 16:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT: You claimed that the image is your own work, but it is copied from the copyright protected Kindred Cocktails website. David notMD (talk) 16:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Alternative to range block calculator

I didn't realize that Fastily had maintained the IP range block calculator, an invaluable tool. Their departure from the project means that tool is not functional. Is anyone aware of 1.) suitable interim alternatives and 2.) discussions on the reintroduction of the tool? Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@Pbritti – I was able to access Fastily's password-strength tool on the Wayback Machine. After checking for a couple seconds, I found out that web-crawlers successfully archived a version of that the rangeblock tool as well from 17 September 2024 (with all functionalities preserved surprisingly after testing it) here. I doubt that Fastily changed their tools substantially in two months, so I think that should be a feasible interim solution. With regards to the reintroduction of the tool, I actually have no idea, and it would either A) be dependent on Fastily's return, or B) have someone else basically fork Fastily's software to another tool in toolforge.org. Thanks. — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 15:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Pbritti: Hi. I'm not sure if Teahouse regulars would be able to answer that question satisfactorily. The best venue seems to be WP:VPT. —usernamekiran (talk) 15:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both! @3PPYB6: That does have some incredible functionality for an archived version! ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

New tool: https://galaxybots.toolforge.org/iprangecalculator – DreamRimmer (talk) 05:57, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Help with uploading Tour Poster

Hi! I just made a page for a tour and I need help uploading a tour poster for it. The page is Lana Del Rey UK and Ireland Tour 2025 and I’m really struggling with how to do it. If someone could help me that would be greatly appreciated!! TIA :) Olivergrandeee (talk) 15:55, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Don't bother unless is survives the AfD. David notMD (talk) 18:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, there's a part of an article that is inaccurate and I'd like to remove it. What's the best way to proceed please?

There is just a sentence at the end of an article that is not sourced nor accurate and I would like to fix it. Gaëlle Ibrahim (talk) 15:55, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@Gaëlle Ibrahim – Could you provide me with the link to this article? In most cases, the simplest solution is to fix it yourself (the sentence is not going to fix itself anyway). If the article is one you cannot edit, most of the time you can request an edit on the article's respective talk page. Just make sure if you are fixing it yourself that you make sure that the statement is indeed verifiable with a reliable source (for reference: a peer-reviewed research paper is reliable, a reputable news source is reliable, but a disinformation outlet or "I said it myself" is not reliable). — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 16:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

What are the important project pages to get started with?

I never received a welcome message on my talk page, so what are the tips on using Wikipedia? NicePrettyFlower (talk) 17:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

One place to start is Help:Getting started. Fabrickator (talk) 17:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I watchlisted it so whenever I am doing an act, I will read the article and it's linked ones so I can know what to do first. NicePrettyFlower (talk) 17:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Rosemary Jacobs

I'm currently making an article on her (victim of colloidal silver) and have asked her for permission to use her image on it. However, if she allows it, what should I do next? Tavantius (talk) 17:49, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Note that the subject of a photo isn't necessarily the copyright holder- typically it's the photographer. Not that its wrong to ask the subject, just that the photographer needs to grant permission, unless they reassigned the copyright. 331dot (talk) 18:05, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@Tavantius: You could show her WP:A picture of you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Query

I have 2 things to ask. First about the tags on talk page which is used to give the class to any article eg:stub class or start class. Can these classes be given only by user with any specific user right? If not, then how do we know and how do we use it or give it ourselves to any article. I saw many such articles which were expanded from stub class to start class or c class but they are haven't been updated there. So, I am really curious and it would be immensely helpful if I would have the knowledge myself of how and when to use those.

Secondly, there is a YouTuber named Nitish Rajput. He is very prominent in India. A year ago, a article was made about him but was deleted using PROD. May be at that time he wasn't notable. But then also in the deletion discussion then, some editors said that he might be notable after some time. Although, the article was then deleted. I want to ask and request the AfC reviewers out there, to check now if he's notable or not and would it be justified to create a draft on him and submit it for AfC. It takes a quiet long time to create any draft and article and so, it would be very helpful for me to know that it would be good to create a draft or not. AstuteFlicker (talk) 18:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@AstuteFlicker, Hi. Have you read Wikipedia:Notability (people) and the general Wikipedia:Notability? Those might help. Cheers, CF-501 Falcon (talk) 18:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Regarding your first question, anyone can change the class from stub to something else if the article is no longer a stub. Perception312 (talk) 19:38, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Question about citing a blog post as a quote from an expert

Is it okay to cite a blog post made by a notable expert (Tyler Cowen) if it's explicitly mentioned that it's a quote? For example, I wrote the following text that was reverted because the source was considered unreliable:

In his blog Marginal Revolution, economist Tyler Cowen included the developer of 15.ai as one of the "most underrated talents in AI and machine learning."

My question is: is the above valid? My understanding was that per WP:V, quoting that an expert said something about the subject is valid, but something like:

The developer of 15.ai is one of the "most underrated talents in AI and machine learning."

would be invalid. Thank you for the help!

As extra context, there is a previous noticeboard on the source: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_223#Marginal_Revolution_(blog). GregariousMadness (talk) 18:53, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Although I would typically say "yes, that's okay", I'm not confident I like the way you've interpreted what Cowen actually said. DS (talk) 19:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the response – do you have any suggestions on how I should reword it? I tried to be as neutral as possible by quoting Cowen directly, but I wasn't entirely sure on my wording, either. GregariousMadness (talk) 19:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Would the following be better?

In his blog Marginal Revolution, economist Tyler Cowen referenced the developer of 15.ai when asking readers to identify underrated talents in AI and machine learning, specifically highlighting technical builders.

It feels a little bit wordy but I think it keeps it more accurate. GregariousMadness (talk) 19:57, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Partial translation of an English article already existing in French

I would like to extract information from English articles to put them in existing French articles.

I am thinking for example of the article about the language "Talysh" on the French Wikipedia which is not as complete as the equivalent in the English language version.

How to translate without copying and pasting. The beta version of the tool to translate articles with the English text on the left and the French text on the right is not suitable. I tried. Anatole-berthe (talk) 18:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Anatole-berthe. Does WP:Translate us help? ColinFine (talk) 22:05, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

I'll read what you share with me later. Thanks ! Anatole-berthe (talk) 22:45, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

bracketed ellipses

I don't know whether this is the best place to bring this up, but I notice that some editors place brackets around ellipses. Their point presumably is to show that the ellipses were not in the original language being quoted. But that doesn’t make sense, because, if bracketed ellipses were the convention, then bracketed ellipses could have been in the original language being quoted, if that language were quoting something. I believe that readers should assume that ellipses without brackets were not in the original, unless the person quoting inserts "[ellipses in the original]." Brackets should not be placed around ellipses. Maurice Magnus (talk) 20:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Maurice Magnus, if this prescription is beneficial, then it belongs in WP:Manual_of_Style#Punctuation. If you want to suggest its inclusion there, then WT:Manual_of_Style is where to suggest it. -- Hoary (talk) 21:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Hoary (talk). Thank you for the cite. It indicates that my suggestion is already Wikipedia's rule: "When an ellipsis (...) is used to indicate that material is removed from a direct quotation, it should not normally be bracketed. (See § Ellipses for an exceptional case.)." Therefore, I will feel free to remove brackets around ellipses (except in the exceptional case), and, if anyone complains, to cite the rule. The exceptional case referred to is, "Square brackets may be placed around an ellipsis that indicates omitted text to distinguish it from an ellipsis that is part of the quoted text: She retorted: "How do I feel? How do you think I ... This is too much! [...] Take me home!". In this example, the first ellipsis is part of the quoted text and the second ellipsis (in square brackets) indicates omitted text." Maurice Magnus (talk) 22:10, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Suggested Discography Template

Thought I'd ask, as I have noticed there's a few discography templates. Which are best to use? Echowanderer43 (talk) 21:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Please see Help:Introduction to tables with Wiki Markup/1. Ahri Boy (talk) 01:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Echowanderer43. I'm not sure what the above answer has to do with your question, but you might want to try asking about this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies because certain templates might work better in certain articles. You could also look at articles where each template is used by going to the template's page and clicking on "What links here" in the left-side bar. Seeing how each template is being used by others might help you better understand their differences. Lastly, you can practice using them in your WP:USERSANDBOX where you can display them side-by-side or above one another for a visual comparison. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Referencing

Do templates in the {{more sources}} family like {{one source section}} and require a new section on the talk page? Somebody removed templates that I added and their edit summary said "drive by tagging", but I thought "drive by tagging" was about things like {{POV}} where the changes required are more debatable or less obvious? Is there a clear list somewhere of which tags need discussion? Industrial Metal Brain (talk) 22:34, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

{{one source section}} has a "there may be discussion on the talk page" link, but if there's a section and every reference is the same number, what needs to be explained? Industrial Metal Brain (talk) 22:34, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with using a single source in a section, as long the source is reliable and comprehensive and verifies the content. In my view, if you believe that the section needs additionsl sources, the best practice is to explain why on the article talk page. Cullen328 (talk) 00:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Username change policy questions

Hello. Going over WP:UNC, it mentions that one would be better off starting fresh on a new account if the current one has “few or no edits.” What is the cutoff there? 78 is really small in the grand scheme of things, but it’s not literally a few—it’s several dozens. Further, if starting anew is the route I take (I’m not actually sure what, or if, I’d want to rename to yet,) is there anything I should do with this account to be sure I’m not mistaken as a sockpuppeteer? Thanks in advance! Velvetune (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

If you are attached to your edits, then I would keep the account and just rename. If you want to go down the alternate account route, as long as you are not using multiple accounts to do bad things and you are open about it, you should be fine to have multiple accounts. ✶Quxyz✶ 02:48, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

@Velvetune: Hi. Do you want to keep the two accounts connected, or do you want a WP:CLEANSTART? You will be considered sock puppeteer only if you use these two accounts at the same time for bad purposes, without disclosing the connection. If you create a new account, then post on older userpage: "I stopped using this account, now I use 'new account'". On new userpage, you should mention "Velvetune was my old account". I think 300 edits would be enough for renaming the account. —usernamekiran (talk) 07:01, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Usernamekiran! Having the two accounts connected would be fine, I have no reason to seek an entirely clean start. It just comes down to this username no longer feeling like me—Wikipedia is the only place where it remains my username (barring Cohost, which is read-only now.) Not a feeling I can put into better words than that, to be honest. I did entirely forget about that policy though, so thank you. Velvetune (talk) 08:40, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Pygame - tutorials in external links?

•  Courtesy link: Pygame

Hi!

I am looking at the article about Pygame and wonder if maybe we should put the tutorials in external links, maybe in tutorials subsection? Wouldn't it be more readable and easy to access that way?

I might be wrong, though... :) this is why I am writing in here :)

Best wishes Kaworu1992 (talk) 01:56, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Is your draft in progress? Just cite as many as possible. Ahri Boy (talk) 02:34, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Kaworu1992. FWIW, I don't think the "just cite as many as possible" suggestion given above is a very good one and don't suggest you do that. You should only add links that are clearly in accordance with Wikipedia's guideline for external links. There's some general guidance about this given in Wikipedia:External links, but you can also ask about specific links at Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard. Whether links to tutorials are generally considered OK for Wikipedia articles about software or video games might also be something worth asking about at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Software. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:56, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Films - (Music too?) - Response - Critical Response - [Should have historical format]

I come here to Wikipedia for information of all sorts! lol In movies is see under "Response"(sometimes reception) and then "Critical Response." I'm seeing a decent amount of 'unformatted' content here where there should be all formatted content in "(Film)". First off we have to go through a bit of history and the cinematic publishing history; IE: VHS, DVD, Blu Ray, Streaming Services. If memory serves me then about 1982 (Video Disks?) was when VHS started to take off with local 'mom & pop video rental stores.' And Blockbuster (1987?). DVD's in the late 1990; Blu Ray and Streaming services last. Now with that out of the way lets look at "The Exorcist" (1973). Sure if you've seen it you've heard the controversies but I lived through them! lol I like that format, given what the movie IS! I also like "After release" subtitle(?). So that's a decent 'historically accurate' account. Now if you look at "Forrest Gump" (1994) you'll see "Critical reception" start the first paragraph with "Rotten Tomatoes" which by the way wasn't even active until 4 years later. Then it goes into: "Ebert" of the Sun Times, but doesn't mention "Siskel & Ebert"... Too many times I see: "On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes" and that makes it look like 'Wikipedia' is upselling Rotten Tomatoes. Least I get into "They weren't even around." At least I'm glad I don't see IMdB here especially because of the "Rings of Power Fiasco!" What I'm getting at is that this 'reception' should be historically accurate as well as in historical order. Cadamier (talk) 06:23, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

You are free to be WP:BOLD and amend such articles to your preferred arrangements (and reference-cited contents). If someone disagrees with any of your edits they will Revert them, and the two (or more) of you can civilly Discuss them on the article's Talk page and form a consensus. This, the WP:BRD cycle, is a normal way of improving Wikipedia.

Note that you will make mistakes and likely have them corrected. This is inevitable with such a complex, evolved project as Wikipedia: erring and being corrected is one of the ways that everyone learns how to edit here, so don't take it personally. Before you start, you might want to study Wikipedia's Manual of Style. Happy editing! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.211.243 (talk) 07:47, 29 November 2024 (UTC)