This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.
Request for Feedback and Assistance in Revising Draft
Dear Expert Team
I hope you're doing well. I am reaching out to request your help in improving my draft article, Draft:Sarbjit_Singh_Jhinjher, in light of the recent feedback provided.
The reviewer pointed out that the submission does not adhere to the formal tone expected for an encyclopedia article, and I would greatly appreciate your advice on how to rewrite it in a more neutral and encyclopedic format. Additionally, I have been advised to refer to a broader range of independent, reliable, and published sources to strengthen the article.
Could you please assist me by reviewing the draft, particularly focusing on:
Ensuring the tone is formal and neutral
Avoiding any "peacock" terms or language that promotes the subject
Suggesting improvements to improve the overall quality and adherence to Wikipedia's standards
Your input would be incredibly valuable in helping me align the draft with Wikipedia's guidelines.
Thank you in advance for your time and assistance. I look forward to your feedback.
A sample (the section "Village Leadership"): From 2013 to 2018, Jhinjer served as [Why "served as" rather than plain "was"?] the Sarpanch [There is no reason for this to be boldface.] (village head) of Jhinjran, where he contributed [What did he contribute?] to the development of infrastructure [Water, electricity, sewerage, phone, wireless LAN, ...?] and improvements [What kind(s) of improvements?] in the village’s quality of life. And what is the (reliable and disinterested) source for all of this? -- Hoary (talk) 22:17, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
A different view: served as is correct and normal and commonplace English usage. In American English (at least), it is the standard way to refer to a person holding a political office, a judgeship, or a military rank. Cullen328 (talk) 22:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Unsure as to whether article is actually been submitted for review.
Conflict of Interest, New Editor, Already made edits - eek!
I am an associate member of the Society of Graphic Fine Art, and was asked by the committee to update the Wikipedia page. I have made significant changes to the article, which contained inaccurate and inadequate information. Naturally, I believe that I maintained a neutral position, but I am aware that it is not my place to judge this. I need help with this, please!
I know that I need to declare this conflict of interest. I located the UserCOI template and I understand that this goes on my user page - but where and how?
What do I do about the edited page? I think I need to put a COI declaration on Society of Graphic Fine Art - again, I'm not sure where or how. Does another, impartial editor review my changes? Or do the changes need to be rescinded?
I now know that I should not make any more edits on the Society's page (apart from very minor ones).
I have no idea why somebody thought it was a good idea to list roughly 150 artists who participated in the organization's 1921 exhibition, referenced to the organization's own 1921 catalogue. Wikipedia articles about an organization should summarize what reliable sources entirely independent of the organization say about it, with very limited exceptions. Cullen328 (talk) 23:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
My first thought is the fact that so many of the artists who participated in the first exhibition (1921) are subjects of Wikipedia articles reflects on the importance of the organization at its origin, BUT it is possible, nay likely, that these people became Wikipedia-notable for careers that extended long past 1921. So delete the list! David notMD (talk) 23:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Sadly, there is very little available material that doesn't trace back to the Society, one way or another. It's a little bit ... niche, should we say. I take it that mission statements etc are one of your exceptions?
Hello, @Smnczz, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read the links in the decline notice. In summary: your citations are not properly formatted (bare URL's) which makes them hard to evaluate (see WP:REFB). But "Gazzetta Officiale" is almost certainly a primary source, and does not contribute to establishing notability. You need most of your citations to meet the triple criteria in WP:42. ColinFine (talk) 11:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Review
Greetings,
Any professional editor able to review and provide suggestions to get my article published?
@Anniebeau I have removed all the external links from the body text, as these are not normally allowed. I also fixed a couple of archive errors and did a bit of tidying up. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
I am unsure what is considered "unreferenced" as I ensured each bit of information was noted with a reference. That is why I have about 18 news articles documented.
@Anniebeau, you have quite a lot of sentences in the Career section that appear to be unreferenced. If they are in fact all referenced by the next given citation, you may want to think about combing them into paragraphs and/or using named references so it's clear where the information comes from. Generally, if there's no citation on the end of a sentence, and it's not a part of a longer piece of information, that sentence is likely to be considered unreferenced. StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
In the current version, here is some of the unreferenced text:
A 1967 graduate of Wayne State University, Yessian taught speech and English for four years at Detroit's Redford High School. He left education to pursue a music career.
In 1971, Yessian Music opened in a 300-square-foot office, once an old bait shop in Farmington. He called local car dealers hoping to interest them in purchasing a custom jingle to promote their business.
Yessian wrote theme songs for sports organizations including Detroit Pistons, Detroit Red Wings, Detroit Tigers and Los Angeles Dodgers.
In the 1980s, Yessian met songwriter David Barrett (Composer "One Shining Moment") with whom he composed numerous songs including a collaboration on "I See Wings" a song written for Yessian's documentary and symphonic work "An Armenian Trilogy".
Reliable sources for a topic in software development
It's extremely hard if not impossible to find any source other than primary sources or a topic in software development.
So I added a few sources that are not "reliable" just to satisfy secondary sources rule.
What exactly counts as a reliable source and is it possible to make a secondary source rule exception for topics are related to software development since an unbiased view is less of concern due to rational nature of software development compared to things like politics and past events.
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia isn't a place to just tell about something- it's a place to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about something, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. If a topic isn't written about by independent reliable sources, it can't be on Wikipedia. There are other websites with less stringent requirements where people can just tell about something.
You can certainly work to obtain consensus for a carve-out in policy for software development, but it would be a long, difficult process- and I don't think it would work, as it would lead to every topic seeking a carve-out, rendering policies meaningless. 331dot (talk) 14:27, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
But this policy has been created to reduce amount of bias right?
While I do agree, I think software development should get a exception due to sometimes only source being the project itself.
if anyone’s watch the 900 days without Annabelle documentary, I feel like Rafael who was the first president of his country also tried very hard to help this case and I think that deserved to be realized in his page! I just don’t know how to write it good..Rafael Escuredo66.129.196.190 (talk) 20:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello, IP user. If you have an improvement to suggest to an article, the article's talk page is the best place to make the suggestion. Your suggestion is more likely to be taken seriously if you cite a reliable published source for any information you wish to add. (I have no idea who Rafael is, or what that documentary is about, but if you want to cite it you need to establish that it was published/aired by somebody with a reputation for editorial control and fact checking). ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
States in India do not have flags or banners, they have their emblems or seals, most containing the Emblem of India. In the Page of Government of Punjab, India, Due to no evidence, I deleted the image claiming to be the banner of the State Government. I 've never seen it in use in any of the Offices, Website, Notifications, Events, Buildings of the Government (I've been to many). The user is the uploader of the said file, he was the one who first added it, and he did the same again. What should be done? VeritasVanguard"Seeking truth in every edit"14:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Recently i added a Government banner in the infobox of the Government of Punjab, India, but now an user keep deleting it citing that Indian states don't use banners but in reality Indian state governments use banners to represent the state government. We have a whole article on Wikipedia on this topic (List of Indian state flags), I don't want to start an editing war, what i can do now? Shubhdeep Sandhu (talk) 08:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
@Shubhdeep Sandhu: I've moved a related discussion down and put your question under it. The above advice applies to you, too: [start] a discussion with the user on the article's talk page to ... provide a reliable source that explicitly supports the claim that the image in question is the state's banner. Rotideypoc41352 (talk·contribs) 10:41, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
@Rotideypoc41352 I have said , and will state again 'That states in India do not have flags', they have seals/emblems that they use. This is misleading to upload a file namely 'Banner of Punjab' when there is no use by the said government. The user in its Commons File deletion gives 'Indiamart' a selling platform, vexilla-mundi.com & other unknown, Facebook (unreliable) sources. VeritasVanguard: "Seeking truth in every edit"14:59, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
does a COI still exist if you haven't had contact with someone for 25 years?
I'm thinking about improving the article of someone for whom I worked 25 years ago. Is that still a COI, or is the COI no longer significant, since it was decades ago? Thanks, FactOrOpinion (talk) 20:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
I haven't had contact with my dead grandfather for longer than that, and I'd still have a COI.
You're right, I worded the question in my heading poorly, as some kinds of COIs clearly continue to exist no matter how much time has passed. I'm not going to memorialize him, just try to improve his article a bit, as it's currently a stub. I believe that I can be neutral, but am trying to figure out whether I need to declare a COI and only post edit requests. FactOrOpinion (talk) 21:30, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
FactOrOpinion, as I see it, the question of a conflict of interest is not a yes-or-no, black-or-white question in most cases of writing new articles or major expansions of existing articles. Instead, it is a continuum. If an editor is motivated to do the work of finding and evaluating and summarizing the reliable sources about a topic that interests them, then it can be said that they have at least a weak or mild conflict of interest about that topic. I was born and raised in Michigan and have lived in California for over 50 years, and have worked on many articles related to those two states. Back in June, my wife and I had a wonderful ten day visit to Alaska and I have since written and expanded several articles about Alaska. My favorite article that I have written about Alaska is Wooden halibut hook, a topic that I had never heard of six months ago but which fascinated me when I saw them in two museums in Alaska. I think that my conflict of interest is mild even though I took two of the photos in that article. When I was a young man, I was a California mountaineer. As a new editor, I wrote a biography of Jules Eichorn, a climber that I took a two week trip with, along with about 15 other climbers in the late 1970s, and I took the photo in the article of him as an older man, 40 years older than me. And now I am older than he was then. I never heard from him again. I suppose I have a conflict of interest but I think that it is minor, because the article includes none of my personal experiences, and instead summarizes the reliable sources that I cited.
A major problem occurs when the conflict goes beyond minor or mild, and interferes with the editor's ability to comply with Wikipedia's core content policies. The relevant language in the WP:COI policy is While editing Wikipedia, an editor's primary role is to further the interests of the encyclopedia. When an external role or relationship could reasonably be said to undermine that primary role, the editor has a conflict of interest similar to how a judge's primary role as an impartial adjudicator would be undermined if they were married to one of the parties. Any external relationship—personal, religious, political, academic, legal, or financial (including holding a cryptocurrency)—can trigger a COI. How close the relationship needs to be before it becomes a concern on Wikipedia is governed by common sense. So, we need to use common sense and recognize that "can trigger a COI" is not equivalent to "always triggers a COI". If an editor can and does write content that is verifiable, that avoids original research, and that complies with the neutral point of view, then common sense tells us that the conflict of interest is mild and manageable. Cullen328 (talk) 07:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Cullen328, thank you for that elaboration. I always try to abide by WP's PAGs and seek guidance when I need it. I appreciate how much time you and other experienced editors invest in helping people out. FactOrOpinion (talk) 15:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
How is an articles importance in a Wikiproject debated?
How do I rate their importance then? I doubt that many are interested in any of the subjects besides Colossal Biosciences due to them constantly making headlines, being endorsed by various governments, educational institutions, and celebrities. Judean date palm is also a plant, which doesn't gain much attention as a de-extinct animal as bucardo or soon to be de-extinct such as the woolly mammoth or thylacine. Edelgardvonhresvelg (talk) 02:48, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Some wikiprojects have specific criteria for rating importance, such as WP:DOGS on their Assessment page, but no such criteria seem to be established for WikiProject Extinction, other than major extinction events are "top" importance. I would rate the importance of the mentioned articles based on how much literature on the subject appears to exist at a glance, or as Just Step Sideways stated above, however important you believe them to be. If it ends up being controversial, then the resulting discussion can start to establish what each level of importance should be applied to. Reconrabbit00:05, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
I will add that most readers or editors do not bother looking at the importance. So it is not worthwhile to get too stressed about the rating. For top or high importance, it may reault in the article being selected in a subset publication for some purpose. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:01, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Unfortunately the table is of little help. What are the criteria for "must-have", "minor", etc? Importance could be defined in terms of number of accesses -- via which, of course, Taylor Swift would be of vastly more importance than, say, Universe. -- Hoary (talk) 01:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Can Chatgpt/similar GPT be fused with Wikipedia? Will help in solving instant doubts
I am an active user of Wikipedia and this question recently struck my mind. I wanted to convey this idea to Wikipedia community to bring up a creative update.
If the community was interested in having ChatGPT write Wikipedia, then the community would have likely already made bots that do so. We are interested in the sum of human knowledge, not the sum of what knowledge LLMs predict humans to possess. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 12:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
I didn't understand your question exactly, but ChatGPT has entire Wikipedia (only mainspace) in its datasets. It also may have other sections/namespaces in its datasets. Gemini accesses Wikipedia in real-time. —usernamekiran (talk)16:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Editor change?
I was trying to work on an article the other day when I noticed a difference in how I edited. Previously, I had the visual editor, but instead I now was editing the source of the page itself. I'm pretty limited in my ability with the source code, and is there anyways to revert back to the visual editor? Did I accidentally change something in my settings? Therguy10 (talk) 16:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
@Therguy10 When you're in the source editor, there's a little pen button on the right, if you click on that, you can select the visual editor. You can also change the URL directly by changing "&action=edit" to "&veaction=edit". I hope this helps! Myrealnamm's Alternate Account (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi. If you are on a talk page, VisualEditor does not work. If you are editing an article, just go to the dropdown menu as listed here
When will the newly created page be searchable on Google?
On Wednesday, I created a page for academic painter Stano Bubán on the English Wikipedia Stano Bubán. I want to ask when this page will be searchable via Google? It can be searched on Wikipedia, but it is not searchable via Google yet. Thank you for your answer. Jozef Heriban (talk) 08:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
The article Stano Bubán looks like it is in good condition, but there are two problems. 1. there are no links to it from anywhere else on the website, and 2. it does not seem clear that you own the copyright to the photos of him, particularly his first photo that looks like it was professionally done and the painting he did at the end of the page. Reconrabbit16:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
@Jozef Heriban: Hi. Google, and Wikipedia are two different websites. An article becomes eligible for being indexed by Google (or any other search engines) after it is "reviewed" here. The time taken to be indexed after the review, is totally up to that particular search engine. —usernamekiran (talk)17:03, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
What are user talk pages really for?
I know what article talk pages are for, but what about user talk pages? So far, mine only has trout notifications and some notifications from a bot who harasses me every time one of my Teahouse threads gets archived. I had one person stop by and leave a message about an article I was working on at the time as well. Are user talk pages specifically for Wikipedia-related things or can I use mine for more general conversations and small talk with anyone who stops by? I ask because I saw someone else's talk page and they were talking with someone about their favorite character from a book series like it was a normal forum thread. ApteryxRainWing | Roar at me | My contributions15:28, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
@ApteryxRainWing: user talk pages are for communication between editors regarding Wikipedia. The communication should generally take place on article's talk page, or concerned/relevant wikiproject, or venue where it can be seen by a larger group of people who might be interested in that discussion/situation. User talk pages are mostly used for notifications, and one-on-one communication. Also, I'm not sure if you know the exact meaning of "harassment". If you want to stop the bot, there are clear instructions in the message itself. —usernamekiran (talk)16:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
There's a fantastic little game called Smile For Me, developed by LimboLane. I bet you're wondering "Hey, if you want this to have a page so badly, why not do it yourself!?" I gladly would, but I am severely inexperienced. As you may not know, I have only been on Wikipedia as an editor for less than a week. I just wanted to bring this fantastic little game to light and hope some people agree with me. Thanks, Wikipedians! Shovel Shenanigans (talk) 19:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
I had a similar situation with the game Redout 2. If there aren't any major publications like IGN or Kotaku running multiple articles on it, then any article made about your game will get nuked when it's checked for notability. ApteryxRainWing | Roar at me | My contributions19:14, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
I have no experience with using this tool myself, but you can check out WP:AfC and see if they have any resources to help you develop this article. Don't be afraid to contribute, people are very willing to help! /home/gracen/ (yell at me here) 20:59, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
@GracenC, I'm not sure what you mean by "tool"? AfC isn't a tool, it's a process that editors who cannot create articles in mainspace can use to create articles. Experienced editors review the articles and accept or decline them based on whether they meet some basic standards, like WP:N. I wouldn't suggest that anyone use AfC if they don't have to - if you create an unsuitable article in mainspace, the patrollers from WP:NPP will notice it and give you suggestions or move it to draft space. -- asilvering (talk) 03:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Apologies, that was poor word choice on my part. Also, thanks for the information; I was under the impression it was recommended for all new editors to go through AfC rather than just publishing to mainspace. /home/gracen/ (yell at me here) 03:30, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Personally, as an AfC reviewer I wouldn't recommend it. If you submit to AfC, you have to wait until a reviewer sees and accepts your article for it to get to mainspace. Sometimes that can be a long wait. Meanwhile, if you create directly in mainspace and your article wouldn't pass AfC, NPP will draftify it (so, you'll end up in the AfC queue in the end anyway), and if it would pass, they'll mark it as patrolled, maybe with some maintenance tags, and you won't have had to wait in the AfC queue. -- asilvering (talk) 03:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
I have to disagree with asilvering. I also review AFC articles. And even though I am an experienced editor, I have submitted an article or two to AFC just to get a reviewer's eyes on it to gain suggestions for improvement. NPP is overwhelmed, they do not catch every problem, and a lot of junk that should never have been in main space ends up staying there.
There are no deadlines on Wikipedia for stuff like this. If I have to wait 3 months for a draft to be reviewed, so be it, I don't care, I am in no hurry to get my articles published.
Yes, it is recommended for new editors to go through AFC. Bypassing AFC potentially creates needless work for others to clean up after you, if what you created in main space isn't actually ready for publication there. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:14, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
I wasn't referring to my own articles in the context of NPP. Looking at what I wrote, I can see how it would come across that way. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:19, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
If the above exchange confuses any new Wikipedians: I think it shows an acceptable difference in opinion. If anyone wants yet another, I would've suggested going to the Video games WikiProject, showing them three sources, and asking if the subject seems to satisfy criteria for a standalone article (what Wikipedia calls "notability"). Especially with the changing landscape of gaming journalism (the and video game industry in general), what sources are reliable or not may not be obvious. If the answer is "not notable", then it saves you the effort of writing a draft (per Anachronist) or an article (per asilvering). Rotideypoc41352 (talk·contribs) 14:03, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
I need to get a bio of my pastor on Wikipedia, but I don't really have a way to footnote anything. He has books with bios on the back cover and he has an outdated bio on his own website. I made a simple bio on Wikimedia Commons site for Dr. Larry Ollison, and that's about all I really need on Wikipedia. I need it because on the streaming site for LarryOllisonRadio.com, when you click on Larry's name, the software searches for that name on Wikipedia. Right now it finds Barry White who has a son, with the name Ollison. Can anyone here help me create this bio on the main site?
A "buy it here" page? No. An article about a person needs to cite sources that provide in-depth coverage about that person. See Wikipedia:Golden Rule for the kinds of sources required. That one you cited doesn't meet the criteria, because none of the information there is independent of the author or the book, and none of it constitutes "coverage". Even if all you could find were book reviews, that suggests that the book may be notable, but not the author.
Also, what you're asking is basically to use Wikipedia as a publicity platform (or a way to fix technical problems you are having with publicity that isn't a problem for Wikipedia), and that sort of purpose is prohibited. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
If the image is free, then it can exist on commons and does not need to be on enwiki also. If it is non-free, it is forbidden to be on commons and also does not seem to satisfy the limited cases where non-free content is allowed on enwiki. The licensing and origin really needs to be clarified, and usually only the photographer (or someone else specified by a contract the photographer has) can make a valid license release. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information about how to figure out who owns the license and how they can release it for use. DMacks (talk) 01:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Atlantic306, usually no. We require the sources to be published, and MA dissertations are rarely published. Doctorate dissertations are sometimes published, but should be used with care. More info at WP:DISSERTATION. qcne(talk)21:00, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
I found an image that is crucial for illustrating early COVID-19 cases in Wuhan, which is directly relevant to an article on Wikipedia about the origins of the pandemic.
What is the rationale that it's legal to upload this image under a fair use claim? The image is copyrighted, but I believe it falls under fair use for educational purposes. Does this justify uploading it? How can I ensure that I meet the requirements for fair use on Wikipedia, and are there any additional considerations or guidelines I should be aware of?
If you're asking about this map, then I think you're going to have are time justifying it's non-free use per WP:FREER and WP:NFC#CS. The map of China itself is almost certainly not eligible for copyright protection per c:COM:CB#Maps and satellite imagery because outlines of countries and place names are elements typically considered eligible for copyright protection; so, someone could essentially create their own map if they want. It's the way the data the map's based on is expressed visually that might be eligible for copyright protection, but the same information doesn't necessarily need to be expressed using this particular map or any map at all for Wikipedia's purposes; it could be expressed as plain text, in a Wikipedia:Table or in some other form. If this map itself, however, was the subject of sourced critical commentary in reliable sources (either because others thought it to be accurate or perhaps thought it to be inaccurate), then that might be a way to justify its non-free use, but just wanting to show it as a map because it's a map is probably not going to be enough. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
U.S. govt sources not credible for bio of U.S. diplomat?
Hi folks, I’ve been working on a bio page for a prominent international official, draft here.
The sources myself and other drafters have cited to document her career history are mostly from the U.S. government (the White House, the Congress, the Department of State) or from auxiliary roles she held in international bodies as a diplomat.
Existing wiki bio pages for U.S. officials who have held the same position(s) or even more junior ones use the same types of sources. I’ve linked to examples of those bio pages in the draft’s talk page.
However, I’m stuck. Several editors have rejected the draft bio because the sources aren’t sufficiently independent or credible, and they’ve suggested newspapers as alternative sources. Unfortunately news coverage of most diplomats’ careers doesn’t exist, so beyond what’s included in the media section of her page, I haven’t found sources such as the type they have recommended.
How do I reconcile the reality of the sourcing (which has seemed legitimate enough to substantiate other bio pages) with the recommendations from editors?
I’d appreciate advice re: what makes the existing sources in the draft not credible, and overall, what kinds of additional sources are needed to verify a living person’s bio when the majority of their career is documented by government and government-adjacent sources.
Thanks in advance for the guidance. 🙏🙏 This is my first attempt at major drafting and it seems this is a bigger project than I had intended. Lfdigests (talk) 23:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Lfdigests, I'm going to leave a message for one of the reviewers on the Talk page for your draft. I'm not going to have a lot of time during the next week, but will try to check back. I would think that she should be presumed notable by virtue of her high position in the OECD, though I could be wrong about that (and I'll ask about that on the Talk page). I don't have time to dig in on the references, etc., but I suggest that you look through the "Publications, remarks, and media" section (which you'll need to trim) and see if some of those confirm her notability (per WP's definition of notability), in which case you can use them as references. For example, I would think that the 4 minute NPR interview with her about the US's global COVID response is that sort of reference (the interview isn't about her, but she's seen as an expert, and NPR is an independent reliable source). Edited to add: As I think about this more, I'm less certain that that helps establish her notability, since it's not significant coverage of her, only significant coverage of the US international COVID response; I've asked SafariScribe about that on the Draft Talk page. FactOrOpinion (talk) 02:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
I noticed he is in digital romantic comedy series on YouTube and he has a small role maybe a guest role. I want to add this on his filmography but the only source i can find is the full episode on YouTube. What can I do if he officially appeared but there are no other sources regarding this. What can I do? 122.55.235.127 (talk) 03:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
If the actual owner of the show published it on their own YouTube channel, then you could consider it an 'official' primary source and cite it. If it's just a video that some random youtuber uploaded, then you can't cite it. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
You more than doubled the length of the English article without adding any references. I do not see why the article should not be nominated for deletion. Are there no refs in the Swedish version that would help verify the English version? David notMD (talk) 18:45, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Yes, there are no references in the Swedish version that would help verify the English version. The Swedish page only has a reference for a different statement I did not translate. The Neco-Arc (talk) 05:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
@The Neco-Arc: Thanks for trying to improve the article, but I think it needs sources more than anything else. Wikipedia articles need to be based on reliable sources that are independent of the article's subject. You suggestedhttps://monoskop.org/Interactive_Institute, but that is a user-generated wiki (i.e. unreliable), and the links there are all associated with the Interactive Institute (i.e. not independent). If there are no independent reliable sources that cover the Interactive Institute, the article will be deleted, so expanding it is like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. Also, while this is a moot point if the article is deleted, this paragraph you added has a very promotional tone:
The institute creates results by combining art, design and technology. By exploring and integrating these three areas, the institute strives to achieve innovative results that not only develop and question interaction and communication between people and their environment, but also challenge traditional perspectives and ways of thinking.
Each Wikipedia language has its own standards for neutral-point-of-view content and references, so even if what you added was a translation from the Swedish Wikipedia, the wording (and lack of independent references) cannot exist in English. David notMD (talk) 20:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
True, it has a promotional tone. I did not know that that website is a user-generated wiki, and I cannot find any information about it other than that page, other than its website (through wayback machine, as the original website has been merged into another) and a page about a project by the institute, with little information on the institute other than some pictures of its project. As I cannot find any reliable sources on this institute itself, but it is part of RISE, I will redirect it to Research Institutes of Sweden. Thanks, The Neco-Arc (talk) 05:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of Malik Jamroz Khan for deletion
Good Morning
I created this page regarding a know figure of our small area, who also happens to be my great grand father. The article contained only his bio and achievements made during his life time. It was created more than a decade ago. There was nothing controversial since it only had the bio of a known person with zero material objectionable to anybody. I know now been informed that the article has been ' nominated for deletion'. One wonders how can that be?? How can a non-controversial person, passed away in 1964, with few words written on his bio can be nominated for deletion???? Mujeebkanju1 (talk) 04:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Being controversial isn't why articles are nominated for deletion nor is being harmless a reason to keep an article. Articles are nominated for deletion when they don't meet our standards for notability. Many older articles fell through the cracks and nobody got around to nominating them for deletion; there are nearly seven million articles here. The editors who discussed it all concluded that it was complete missing reliable, independent sources about Khan and that no improvements had been made to remedy the situation for 15 years. Can you provide three good sources that are primarily about Khan and that are both reliable and independent? If so, you can always try and write a new, compliant article and submit it to Articles for Creation. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Draft:Senran Kagura Burst Re:Newal a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Senran Kagura Burst Re:Newal. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you.
Hello! I created the Draft page but then realized a page for it already existed that all it did was redirect. So i thought the best course of action would to move the draft data to the existing article. But it recommended tranferring which I can't do because the page already exists. So i was hoping to add the draft data to the existing article. KaabiiRamen (talk) 03:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying KaabiiRamen. Given that the draft you want to move has already been declined once by an AfC reviewer, it's probably not a good idea for you to try to do so yourself even though it might be technically possible for you to do. Moving the page yourself at this point could lead to it being nominated for deletion if another user shares the AfC reviewer's concerns about the draft. If you're not sure what those concerns are or how to address them, you could ask the AfC reviewer who declined the draft for clarification, or you could ask for help at WP:AFCHELP. For what it's worth, there's no limit on the number of times a draft can be submitted for AfC review as long as the same declined version doesn't keep being resubmitted over and over again. Moreover, if an AfC reviewer approves the draft, they will take care of all the cleanup associated with moving the page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi again KaabiiRamen. Given the comment just added to the draft's page by Anachronist, I definitely don't recommend you try to move the draft to the mainspace, but instead try to look for better sources to help establish the subject's Wikipedia notability per WP:NSOFTWARE. Moving the draft to the mainspace yourself almost will certainly, at the very least, lead to it being draftified but could also lead to the article being nominated for deletion. If you're having a hard time finding appropriate sources yourself, you could try asking for help at WT:VG. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:26, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Academic Notability
Before I (User:RomanVilgut) post my question, I would like to be transparent about my background. I am a communications officer at the University of Graz, the second largest university in Austria with over 400 years of academic history (~28,000 students, ~3,200 academic staff including teaching). My role is not primarily editorial, it is not my main job to edit Wikipedia. However, now that I have a user, I have been asked several times to help with Wikipedia. I have therefore marked myself as a 'paid editor' in order to demonstrate my commitment to maintaining the highest standards of transparency within the Wiki community.
One of our professors in the field of nano-robotics and nano-chemistry has requested my assistance in translating his Wikipedia page on the German Wikipedia (de:Leonhard Grill) to the English Wikipedia. He is a full professor with an impressive publication record in top-tier scientific journals, including Nature and Science. He has also received numerous accolades, particularly the ERC Advanced Grant, the most prestigious grant in the European Union.
Upon reviewing the notability criteria for the English Wikipedia (Wikipedia:Notability (academics)), I came to the conclusion that Criteria 1 a, d, e and Criteria 5 a, b, c appeared to be met. I therefore proceeded to create the page on the English Wikipedia Leonhard Grill.
Some days later, a user added a maintenance template to the page, offering constructive feedback on the notability and citations. I added some important citations and initiated a dialogue with the user on the talk page, Talk:Leonhard Grill. The user set the bar quite high in terms of notability and told me about his extensive experience in reviewing academic pages.
I then asked which criteria he felt had not been met, and the response I received made me a little cautious. I then checked the user page, where I discovered that he had revealed his true identity (which I also did). I believe he is a researcher in nano-robotics, emeritus. It would seem that he is engaged in the same scientific field as Leonhard Grill. I am also somewhat sceptical because when I look at the pages of faculty members at his university, I notice that those very high standards he is using are not always met.
I feel he may be applying different standards. However, I felt that users who are not familiar with me might perceive a potential conflict of interest on my part (which I personally do not see), and so I decided to step away from the discussion.
I would therefore be grateful if the wider Wikipedia community could take a look at the page and the talk. I would be grateful for any support from experienced wiki users who might conclude that the notability is high enough. I would also appreciate any tips and tricks they could share, as well as guidance on which sources should be added. We already have plenty of sources, but I would prefer not to overwhelm the reference page.
But if experienced wiki users conclude that the notability is not high enough, I will respect their decision and not challenge the deletion of the page.
What is lacking are references to what people have published about him. In English Wikipedia, describing his research, with references to his sci poblications, adds nothing to establishing Wikipedia-notability. OK to list minor awards, but again, not estabilshing notability. Delete the Weblinks section for same reason. David notMD (talk) 11:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Thank you very much. So to conclude for me. It makes no sence to cite all his papers, that proof in what groups he worked? Cited should be works, that cite his work?
What still puzzles me: How can a habilitation paper on the FU Berlin be no proof for habilitation (plus the fact, that he is a faculty member - I found the official journal of his appointment and cited it)? What other proof would be acceptable, a scan of the document? RomanVilgut (talk) 12:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
2nd Question. For undergrad and Phd there is a "citation needed". Both Papers are avaiable as hard copy in the library of the university of Graz. Is the link to the entry in the library-catalogue accepted as citation? RomanVilgut (talk) 12:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
@RomanVilgut Regarding notability, we only require one of the listed criteria to be met. In my opinion, his award of the Feynman Prize in Nanotechnology is sufficient to pass criterion #2. The article can cite self-published sources (e.g. your website) for non-controversial material: see the guidance at WP:ABOUTSELF and of course can give a limited account of Grill's research. However, the biography should mainly cover his background, education and personal life. The article should not aim to be a cv but can mention highly cited papers, for example. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:58, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Per comment from Mike Turnbull, common to have a section titled Selected works, to include perhaps 5-7 publications. For academics, the university they work at often has a biographical sketch for faculty members, with information such as education; that would serve as a citation. David notMD (talk) 17:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
An administrator named Queen of Hearts fixed the template's syntax; however, there's a difference between proposing an article for deletion (what you did) and nominating an article for deletion. Anyone may WP:DEPROD the article (i.e. remove the proposed deletion template you added) for any reason or no reason at all; if that happens, don't re-add the template because an article can only be proposed for deletion once. If, at that point, you still feel the article should be deleted, you will need to start a regular AfD discussion and explain why. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Validity of an Wikipedia:Notability § Stand-alone lists article
I would like to consult your views regarding a discussion on Turkish Wikipedia about an article deletion request. I am advocating for it to keep, while the other editor argues for its deletion. Although Wikipedia in one language does not directly bind another language, I need to ask this because the editor in favor deletion has referenced a rule from English Wikipedia. To eliminate any confusion, I am crossing out the irrelevant parts. My question is related to the status of the article on English Wikipedia.
or the listed schools should be removed, as they believe the list can only include entries with blue links. (Thinks that blue links indicates notability. However, WP:CSC explicitly contradicts.)
I will explain the position I am advocating for based your views. For now, I would like to know in your opinion schools in NYC article complies with the rules in terms of its list feature and the schools it includes. TarantaBabu (talk) 10:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
@TarantaBabu: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1242. We can't provide feedback on the policies of other language Wikipedias, even if users decide to cite something from here. The most I can tell you to do is to be familiar with the Turkish Wikipedia's policies and base any argument you have on those. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 10:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Just to clarify, are you asking whether we think the list is notable, because the Turkish version of is undergoinging a deletion discussion? If so, we can't help you with that - every wiki has their own policies and notability guidelines. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs)10:47, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Can anyone support another editor with Arturo Muñoz (intelligence)? The subject of the article, Arturo Guillermo Munoz (talk·contribs), is not happy about the hyperbole in the article. There is also a lot of unsourced information. I started stripping it down but realised there wouldn't be a lot left, and his career is not something I'd have the expertise to find new references about. The user suggests that maybe there shouldn't be an article on him at all; I'm not able to judge notability in this topic area. Many thanks, Tacyarg (talk) 07:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
I’ve been trying to add new information on the Wikipedia article regarding Illinois’s Protect Illinois Communities Act, though I don’t know how to edit via the simple and direct way (without the brackets and other characters used for Wikipedia functions). If someone could help me out with adding this information or do it for me, that would be great. LordOfWalruses (talk) 01:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello, LordOfWalruses. If you want to contribute to Wikipedia, then you need to learn how to create references to reliable sources. It is not that difficult. Please read and study Referencing for beginners, and if you have any specific questions, ask then here at the Teahouse. Cullen328 (talk) 03:37, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Sure thing; I apologize for any inconvenience or confusion I caused amongst other users. If you could send that link to my talk page so that I can always know how to access it (even when this conversation is removed), that would be great. LordOfWalruses (talk) 05:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
@LordOfWalruses, if it helps, you can put links to any handy Wikipedia things you want to be able to find easily on your user page. You can access your user page by clicking on your name either at the end of comments or on the top right of your screen. Your user page link is currently red, which means the page doesn't exist yet, so you'll start off by simply creating the page and adding whatever you like. Mine is full of links I find useful; you're welcome to investigate and use 'edit source' to see the Wikipedia coding I used. That should help you understand how all the linking shenanigans work! Feel free to post on my talk page if you have any questions about how I set it up. Welcome and happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 21:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Dear StratGrammarTime, I would like to ask you for help. I use the icon in the upper left corner of the page to link information and quotes from external websites. For example, I am currently trying to create a page about the academic painter Stano Bubán
Editors keep pointing out to me that I am using the wrong way of linking. I have asked several times in various discussion places to send me a link to generate the correct templates. So far, no one has sent me such a link. My question is: Is there a template generator to link to external websites? I assume that there certainly is one. Please, could you send me a link to generate the correct templates? Thank you. Have a nice day. Jozef Heriban (talk) 00:17, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
@BadEditor93 The easiest template to use is {{cite web}}. See that link for the parameters it takes. The URL for the .pdf goes into the |url= parameter and you fill out others like the title, date and authors from the content of the .pdf itself. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1242. If this is about the Malaysian Touch 'n Go card, we cannot help you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 10:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
I think the OP meant to say 'my' as the letters 'T' and 'Y' are next to each other and its not in uppercase. In that case, if you provided an email and have access to it, you should reset your password. Otherwise, you have no choice but to create a new account and (if you remember the username) remember to state somewhere that you were formerly edited under another username and to explain the situation, WP:COMPSOCK. JuniperChill (talk) 17:17, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
How would you mark an article for good?
I know that some articles are marked as "good" across the website. (about 0.53%?) How would I go about trying to nominate an article for being good? And if it's rejected, would I be given feedback on how to improve said article?
Well into the future, if I was to try to make a different article good status, how would that work? I really don't have any article in mind but for future reference that could be helpful. Therguy10 (talk) 17:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
It is an independent part of the LMU in Munich. I'm not sure which notability criteria would apply to a semi independent part of a university, with its own staff etc. There are external sources about it, but not much as it often happens with academic institutions themself.
Hello, @Kristbaum, and welcome to the Teahouse. The four sources above contribute absolutely nothing to notability for the Centre, as the first three are not independent, and the last is a mere listing (and probably not independent either). You need three or more sources each of which meets all three of the criteria in WP:42. ColinFine (talk) 17:52, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Searching for a good place for article creation ideas
Hello TeaHouse!,
I am new to editing and writing on wikipedia but there are some topics that I believe should have articles but don't. I am afraid to write an article on some of the topics as I am by no means an expert. However, I was wondering if there was a forum, talk page, or any kind of location that I could post some of these ideas in hopes that someone may want to write an article but is looking for an article to write. What is the most appropriate place to post suggestions like that? Middle Mac CJM (talk) 15:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
@Middle Mac CJM While in theory that should work, the reality is that there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of proposed article topics and very, very rarely are any taken up. If you believe a topic deserves an article then WP:YFA is the path. That said, there is a strong recommendation to gain experience improving existing articles before essaying to create. David notMD (talk) 18:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Why do some categories on some pages seem unremovable?
