From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Why is social media very unreliable and non-credible media?[edit]

If social media, blogs, forums, wikis, and self-published websites are forbidden to cite on Wikipedia, would you give me a reason why is this unreliable? How much content are in social media altogether? Can you utilize it? (talk) 03:54, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TL;DR: people can just say unverifiable things on social media. LilianaUwU (talk / contribs) 03:56, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Social media allows anyone to post anything they want. For example, I can say that the Earth is flat on Twitter. However, that does not mean that is true. Reliable sources need to be correct almost all of the times. Carpimaps talk to me! 11:33, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikipedia gives preference to institutional reporting over individual reporting.
Institutions are easier to rule on and to hold accountable to truthful reporting.
Sources that align with liberal democratic values and do centrist reporting are preferred over sources with a different ideology. Bart Terpstra (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is it possible for a topic to be notable in one language version but not notable in another?[edit]

I ask because there’s a music group that fulfils WP:NMUSIC, is very popular, has reliable sources that report on it and has an article on the Japanese Wikipedia, but I’m afraid it might be rejected for being non-notable if I create an English version because of heuristics and editors not being able to verify Japanese. Zipgyros (talk) 14:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some Wikipedia languages may have much more lax notability than English Wikipedia. However, sources being in different languages is not an issue. Editors who speak Japanese would come to help. Carpimaps talk to me! 14:21, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The group has been on the national music chart for Japan multiple times, which fulfils WP:NMUSIC in English. Zipgyros (talk) 14:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Zipgyros If you begin by translating the Japanese article, please note the guidelines at WP:TRANSLATE and WP:HOWTRANS. We prefer citations to English-language sources if there are alternatives available but that's not mandatory. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:33, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alright, thank you! Zipgyros (talk) 17:44, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Completely and utterly lost[edit]

Hi Wiki people,

For a newbie, this is definitely the most confusing and complex process I have ever come across. I have no idea if I've done everything correctly to ensure my article is in for review. (No idea why they're called articles when the entire planet calls them pages?).

So I've landed on a page that has a big yellow box at the top that says:

Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 4,744 pending submissions waiting for review. If the submission is accepted, then this page will be moved into the article space. If the submission is declined, then the reason will be posted here. In the meantime, you can continue to improve this submission by editing normally.

Well that's a wonderful surprise, only 4 months!

Anyway, at the bottom of the big header it says:

Warning: This page should probably be moved to the Draft namespace.

What on earth does that mean? One minute the page says review waiting - so I assume I've done something right. But then it says I should move it.

Please can someone help me ensure I haven't stuffed things up somehow - my blood pressure won't cope! 😁

Thanks so much, Jimmy. Santoman (talk) 14:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: User:Santoman/sandbox Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 14:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Santoman Hello and welcome. The "entire world" doesn't draw much of a distinction between a web page for Walmart and one for Wikipedia, but there is a difference. A "page" has a much broader meaning than an "article". Anyone can do anything on a "page" pretty much, that isn't the case with an article. An article summarizes what independent reliable sources say about the topic, and isn't for the benefit of the topic.
You have submitted your draft correctly. It can take four months or even more, but it could take less. This is because reviews are conducted by a limited number of volunteers in no particular order(there isn't a queue, a list that reviewers pick from based on their own criteria or even none at all).
Draft space is a designated area in which drafts can be created. This can be done in your sandbox too, but draft space is more compatible with the review process for various reasons. 331dot (talk) 14:30, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your welcome. That's the best explanation I've ever heard and makes complete sense. Coming from a copywriting background I get what you mean. Thanks for that. Great news on the draft - big relief. However, you didn't quite answer that last newbie question, do I need to move my article over to the Draft namespace as it's asking me to do, or just leave it? Santoman (talk) 14:41, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Santoman it has already been moved to Draft:South Pacific WWII Museum and tweaked a bit. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:44, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks again for your help. i really do appreciate it. Santoman (talk) 14:46, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Santoman You would be wise to remove what we call WP:PEACOCK language from the draft, as that is a red flag for reviewers that the article is being used to promote the museum, something forbidden on Wikipedia, not describe it in a neutral encyclopaedic tone. Please read these linked pages (and they are pages, since that's what we call everything that is not an article). Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:56, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Michael D. Turnbull thanks so much for the tips. I'll definitely fix anything that reads that way. I just have to figure out how you go back in to edit an article and then ensure it stays in the queue for review. Santoman (talk) 15:10, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Editing the draft while it awaits review is encouraged, and can be done by anyone intending to improve it to make it more likely to pass muster. As previously mentioned, articles awaiting review are in a heap, not a queue. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Santoman And now (29 May) it has been declined, reasons given. Yours to improve and resubmit (do not do the latter without the former). Usually, a resubmitted draft gets taken up by a different reviewer, so that person may have new reasons to decline. Again, not a queue, so could be hours, days, weeks, or sadly, months before next review. David notMD (talk) 18:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the advice. Based on what everyone has said, I will be rewriting before resubmitting. (talk) 22:38, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry @David notMD I wasn't logged in, so my signature was just my IP address. Santoman (talk) 22:41, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Amending incorrect information[edit]

I tried to delete material regarding the creation of the 16 Club. At the moment it says the 16 Club was created in the 19th century. In fact it was created in 1971 by myself and three other students. I don't understand why I can't correct this, please enlighten me. (talk) 20:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You removed sourced information from an article without explanation. It's not enough to say it's "false". If the sources given are in error, please provide an explanation as to why and any sources you have to support your claims. Are you sure you aren't talking about a different club from yours? 331dot (talk) 20:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good day IP editor,
Please note that there was a citation that trumps most things about what you say. We cannot prove who you are on top of that. If you can find another source that says it was founded in 1971, then you might be able to change it. ✶Mitch199811 20:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Courtesy - article is The 16' Club. David notMD (talk) 18:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


How does one introduce a simple fact ex. Annamarie Tendler is featured on Laur Wheeler's spoken word album Birthday Card, in which she reads the poem, "Well and Good", when the only source is New York Post, and the actual album itself: Amazon Music, Spotify Album, YouTube track listing, Boomplay, KKBox, Tik Tok, etc? Thanks. (The question is not regarding notability for inclusion but whether the content statement is considered null and void solely based on NY Post not being a reliable source.) I'm coat-tailing on this discussion here: [1] about People Magazine. Can't a simple "better source needed" template suffice when it is not contentious, analytical, opinion-based, libelous content? Maineartists (talk) 20:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Maineartists, it doesn't seem that the link to the New York Post is working, at least for me, so I can't see it. But if it follows the guidelines in WP:Reliable sources fits with the source and it has significant coverage then you can add the fact with the citation in the appropriate article if it's notable. ‍ ‍ Helloheart ‍ 20:57, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello‍ Helloheart & Maineartists! Here's a fixed version of that New York Post link as the one above left the "|access-date" attached. Hope this is of help! LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 21:07, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck! ‍ Helloheart, it's not content that requires multiple sources. It's merely a stated fact. The track is multi-listed and the story was covered (albeit in the NY Post). The question I have is: should the content be stricken simply because the New York Post is considered a "non-reliable" source? What more sourcing does one need to back such a simple claim? I'm questioning overkill for such a straightforward statement. Maineartists (talk) 22:41, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maineartists, if the "album" (CD?) Birthday Card has liner notes (or something analogous) that say that Annamarie Tendler reads the poem "Well and Good", then those are (that is) what I'd cite. (If there's reason to doubt the veracity of the liner notes, it's a different story.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:31, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, Great, Hoary! I never even thought about liner notes! Thank you! Maineartists (talk) 13:42, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to remove an abandoned Draft?[edit]

For Draft:Flavia Vento, the top banners shows "This is a draft Articles for creation (AfC) submission. It is not currently pending review." Then "...abandoned drafts may be deleted after six months." So my question is: how to delete? Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 23:53, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JoeNMLC: If it has been 6 months since the last edit, you may request deletion using {{Db-g13}}, see the instructions there. RudolfRed (talk) 00:00, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
JoeNMLC, there are bots that automatically tag for deletion drafts that have not been edited in six months. It is not necessary for human editors to do this work. Cullen328 (talk) 00:07, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Cullen328, looks like the 6-months will be June 2, so I can wait just a bit longer. Thanks, JoeNMLC (talk) 00:56, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh dear, one might use the sorry history of this article to illustrate how a lot of well-intentioned people devoted increments of time that must have added up to quite a lot -- to the eventual accomplishment of nothing. (But this unusually prolix version might show that machine translation has advanced during the last decade.) Somebody a lot more interested in un personaggio televisivo, showgirl ed ex modella italiana than I am might examine the Italian article: it doesn't look bad. -- Hoary (talk) 09:21, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First Article Help[edit]


I have tried to submit my first article on Wikipedia, however it has been rejected for being bias. I have rewritten it, please could someone help me with what to take out/ add to make the article acceptable before I resubmit. Any advise welcome.

Thanks, Issie

Extended content

Tusker Cars · Type of business: Private · Founded: 2000 · Headquarters: Watford, United Kingdom · Area Served: UK · CEO: Paul Gilshan · Industry: Automotive · URL: [1] · Current Status: Active

Tusker is a salary sacrifice and car leasing provider working in the public and private sectors in the UK focusing on getting employees into Electric Vehicles (EV’s) and Ultra-Low Emission Vehicles (ULEV) [2].

Bought by Lloyds Banking Group in February 2023, the acquisition will support the group’s ambitions to achieve net zero targets by 2050 [3].

Tusker are sole providers of CPC Drive which offers salary sacrifice and car benefit schemes to the NHS and other public sector organisations [4]. Tusker are also founders of EV100, and have pledged to have a fully electric fleet by 2030 [3].


Tusker was founded in 2000 with the aim of developing the corporate fleet leasing industry by taking it online. Supplying contract hire and lease cars through an online platform with lead investor Smedvig Capital, a London-based venture capital firm [5].

In 2008, the business started offering salary sacrifice car schemes to organisations, the first of which was launched with multinational law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer [5].

Following becoming a carbon neutral company in 2010, Tusker introduced a Carbon Offsetting Project where they would offset any tailpipe emissions of all the cars they put on the road and even the charge needed for the electric cars on the road against verified carbon offsetting projects [6].

In 2010, Tusker was awarded as sole provider of CPC Drive which offers salary sacrifice and car benefit schemes to the NHS and other public sector organisations. Tusker also developed and now manage an online salary sacrifice and lease car management web portal for CPC Drive [4].

In 2012, Tusker introduced a StopGap car scheme, designed to keep its drivers mobile while they await delivery of their new car [7].

In 2015, following the exit of Smedvig Capital, the company formed a new partnership with ECI Partners [8].

In 2018 Paul Gilshan was appointed as CEO of the company. Previous CEO David-Hosking moved into the role of Deputy Chairman [9]. In August 2018, Kit Wisdom joined Tusker as Operations Director [10]. In October 2018, Steve Barker was appointed as Commercial Director for the company [11].

Recent Years

In 2019, Tusker won a place on the Salary Sacrifice Cars and Associated Services Framework, making their salary sacrifice scheme available to more than 70 councils and 40 NHS trusts [12].

In 2020, Tusker partnered with Reward Gateway, the leading global employee engagement company, to offer salary sacrifice car schemes to their clients’ employees [13].

Continuing with their environmental work, on World EV Day in 2021 Tusker announced that they are a net positive contributor to the environment. This comes after 11 consecutive years of Tusker running its business as carbon neutral. Tusker is on track to achieve net zero by 2023 and has surpassed a milestone in offsetting more than 250,000 tonnes of carbon emissions via Verified Carbon Standard programmes in the process [14].

In 2022, Tusker lobbied with the BVRLA on their #SeeTheBenefit campaign working to keep company car tax low on electric vehicles [15].

In February 2023, Tusker was brought by Lloyds Banking Group joining their transport division with the likes of Lex Autolease and Black Horse [3].

Awards · Best Car Benefit Scheme 2021 – WSB Awards [16] · EV Finance & Insurance Award 2021 – Electric Vehicle Awards [17] · Green Apple Award for Environmental Best Practice 2018, 2019, 2021 [18] · Best for Turnkey Car Benefit Solutions 2020 – Business Excellence Awards [19] · Car Benefit Scheme Provider of the Year, 2019 – Corporate Vision Magazine [20] · Best Workplace Car Scheme 2019- UK- AI Business Excellence Awards [21] · Car Benefit Specialist of the Year, AI Business In Excellence 2018 [22] · Innovation in Customer Service, Fleet World Honours 2017 [23]

External Sources 1. Tusker's LinkedIn Profile 2. Tusker's Facebook Page 3. Tusker's YouTube Page 4. Tusker's Instagram Page 5. Tusker's Trust Pilot Page

1. ^ "Tusker — Drive a better car through Salary Sacrifice". Tusker. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 2. Lloyds Banking Group. Retrieved May 30, 2023. 3. ^ "Lloyds Banking Group acquires low emission vehicle leasing company Tusker". Lloyds Banking Group. Lloyds Banking Group. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 4. ^ "CPC Drive - Vehicle Leasing and Salary Sacrifice Scheme (NOE.0524)". NOE CPC. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 5. ^ "Investment Portfolio". Smedvig Capital. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 6. ^ "Tusker introduces new green initiatives". Fleet News. September 1, 2014. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 7. ^ "Success for Tusker StopGap cars scheme". Fleet News. November 30, 2012. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 8. ^ "Tusker". ECI Partners. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 9. . Fleet News. October 9, 2015. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 10. ^ "Tusker extends Fleet Assist contract for three more years". Fleet News. August 5, 2020. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 11. ^ "Tusker to assist EV switch with Diode partnership". Fleet News. February 10, 2021. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 12. ^ "Tusker joins nationwide procurement framework as sole supplier". Fleet News. February 12, 2019. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 13. ^ "Reward Gateway Announces Salary Sacrifice Partnership with Tusker". Employee Benefits. November 26, 2020. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 14. ^ "Tusker now net positive contributor to environment after 11 years of carbon neutrality". EV Fleet World. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 15. ^ "BVRLA helps MPs #SeeTheBenefit". BRVLA. July 21, 2022. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 16. ^ "WSBA Awards 2022". WSBA Awards. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 17. ^ "Results 2021". e-mobility awards. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 18. ^ "CRSA Awards" (PDF). CRSA Awards. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 19. ^ "Tusker". Acquisition International. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 20. ^ "Tusker". Acquisition International. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 21. ^ "Tusker". Acquisition International. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 22. ^ "AI 2018 Business Excellence Awards". Acquisition International. Retrieved April 6, 2023. 23. ^ "Fleet World Honours 2017". Fleet World. Retrieved April 6, 2023. (talk) 09:58, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse. Where was your old draft article that was rejected? And where is your new draft article? Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 10:21, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This appears to be User:Tusker Cars evading their block. Their draft was deleted as promotional. ColinFine (talk) 10:36, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Enabling IP information tool[edit]

how to enable this feature? Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 13:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@hypersonic man 11: preferences > beta > ip information lettherebedarklight晚安 13:27, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thx Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 12:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd like to start a discussion about collecting and world records. Where would be the best place to do this?[edit]

I'd like to start a discussion about collecting and worlds records. I had some articles deleted in regards to these, and I think a larger discussion needs to be had. I'd like to know where this discussion should take place.

Thanks KatoKungLee (talk) 14:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@KatoKungLee There is a category page Category:Records (superlatives). I suggest you look at some of the articles in there and then at the Talk Page(s) of any that seem relevant to you. Those Talk Pages should list the WP:PROJECTS interested. Using a relevant project talk page might be a good place for your discussion. You could leave a message on other Project talk pages to say where you are centralising the discussion. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:14, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Uncertainty about the validity of creating a new Wikipedia article[edit]


I wish to create a new Wikipedia article which is a collection of facts about an existing UK-based amateur barbershop music group.

I seem to recall I tried creating such a Wikipedia resource a few years ago but perhaps it was taken down by moderators. This would have only been because it was either not notable and/or lacked third-party validation/citation (sorry, cannot remember the details any more).

I now want to have another attempt at creating the article but, this time, I want to make sure I prepare better, listen to the experts, and be ready for issues before they happen so that I don't waste time on an article which gets rejected.

As such, I felt it would be a good idea to base my own article on others which DO seem to have stood the test of time in that they still exist - so presumably conform to Wikipedia rules. For instance:

Hallmark of Harmony

Alexandria Harmonizers

What I would like to do is to pretty much follow the same content and style of these to introduce another barbershop group on the basis that, if these other articles are acceptable, then mine will be too.

So my question to Teahouse is simply this: what is it specifically about these other two articles which means that they conform to the accepted standards for articles in terms of notability, validity, citation, and so on ? Or, to turn it on its head, what do they NOT say which would otherwise cause moderators to ask for changes ?

Thank you for any replies. Gazroobari (talk) 15:09, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@gazroobari: those articles are bad. don't base your article off of those. it's unfortunately quite common that old and poor quality articles like these are swept under the radar.
as for our standards on articles, this page contains everything you need to know about creating an article. lettherebedarklight晚安 15:13, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@gazroobari: The easiest way to tell if anything is notable or not is by doing various google searches, Google Books searches and searches. If the group you want to write about has a lot of articles on them by major mainstream media sources, it's probably worth writing about. If your topic of interest just has sources that were made on personal websites or databases, it's probably not suitable under current rules.KatoKungLee (talk) 15:17, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Gazroobari There is a useful essay at this link about how to approach drafting your article. There is a rather harsh assessment at WP:GARAGE that is nevertheless worth reading too. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:21, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


hello there -

i'm wondering if anyone knows about the maps on Wikipedia - specifically, the tech behind them. when i've enlarged the maps (across several devices), the indicator dot disappears on the enlarged map. the enlarged maps to which i'm referring are of the area including the dot indicator on the initial, unenlarged map.

somehow i found my way here, and that map issue has long been on my radar. so i'm here to map out my study on behind the scenes Wikipedia with that.

any direction is appreciated - either to an entity here to fix this or to training that might address this.

thank you, Beth. Hirbey (talk) 15:32, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hirbey, welcome! If you get no better reply here, WP:MAPS may have some of what you want. You can also try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:36, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why no original research on Wikipedia?[edit]

Although Wikipedia is an encyclopedia about adding new information and adding content with sources cited, I know that it is an tertiary source. However, would you please explain why Wikipedia is not a place to add unreviewed research and original research to these articles? Why is that rule added in 2003? What are the only cases you can add original research in these articles? Thank you again. /EnjoyBrowser557 (userpage) (talk) (contributions) 17:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

would you please explain why Wikipedia is not a place to add unreviewed research and original research to these articles?
because this was how wikipedia was decided to be.
What are the only cases you can add original research in these articles?
never. lettherebedarklight晚安 17:06, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
should probably add my 2 cents that only might derail this whole conversation before it inevitably gets closed
wikipedia's main role is to mention things that happen, how reliable sauces say they happen
if it did allow opinions and original research, there wouldn't be much incentive for saucing things, and this could very well devolve into a clone of tv tropes with slightly different formatting
could mention how this is related to trying to avoid coi editing, but that's going off-track cogsan(give me attention)(see my deeds) 18:03, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
...sourcing, not saucing
i can't believe i made this mistake again cogsan(give me attention)(see my deeds) 18:04, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
well, the op is blocked indef... lettherebedarklight晚安 18:05, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
not an outcome i can say i expected from this situation cogsan(give me attention)(see my deeds) 18:07, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Because the editors decided amongst themselves Wikipedia should describe what exists in the world outside Wikipedia and not what is in the heads of the editors and not include arguments made by editors.
Wikipedia aims to be apolitical/centrist through enforcement of WP:NPOV, allowing users to make novel arguments and conclussions would undermine this, as basic as they might seem.
it also helps argue against people editing their own pages or inserting facts without citation.Bart Terpstra (talk) 18:51, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The key to Wikipedia is that anyone can edit (except, apparently, now, not the person who started this discussion), but statements of fact must be verified by reliable source references. “You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.” ― Daniel Patrick Moynihan David notMD (talk) 19:04, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What is a fact, reliable or notable are things that are created by social consensus of editors/by those with power.
They generally attempt to do this following the beliefs codified in the guidelines.
"There are no facts, only interpretations."
-Friedrich Nietzsche Bart Terpstra (talk) 19:16, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Having looked up the quote, it's funny you credit the person who popularized it, rather than the person who said it first or whom the credited person gives credit to for the phrase.
hitting home the point about subjectivity of facts XD Bart Terpstra (talk) 19:41, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

how do you add a page[edit]

wanting to add a page for dextromethamphetamine which does not yet exist, and if you click the link to it, it'll link to the racemic meth page.

there's two isomers in meth, levo and dextro, which both together in equal amounts make racemic methamphetamine. dextrometh is known to be the more active isomer, responsible for most of the euphoric clean recreational effects. yet, even though structurally dextrometh is a different drug from racemic, there's no page for it, and the 'page' for it just links back to the normal meth page which is kinda annoying. how do you add a page? Doxylamine (talk) 17:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Doxylamine Hello! If you are sure that this topic is notable, I would suggest creating a draft article for "Dextromethamphetamine" and when it is ready for the main namespace you can make a technical move request. Or alternatively, you can make a draft in your personal sandbox and then copy and paste it over the current redirect. Apmh 17:13, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Doxylamine I see that you have already started a discussion of this on the article's Talk Page. As Methamphetamine is classified as a good article, the issue of whether a fork is needed to the specific dextro compound has been discussed before and some are now archived. You need to seek consensus before working on a new draft, or you may be wasting your time. See chiral drugs for some of the chemical background. The dextro isomer would clearly be notable but that's not the issue in my opinion. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:38, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How do I start a wiki project?[edit]

I noticed wikiprojects seem surprisingly informal so I was thinking of starting a niche wikiproject dedicated to developing years in jazz articles or more broadly years in music if thats too specific. Is this a good idea for a wikiproject and if so how do I start one. It would be related to WP:Jazz and WP:YEARS Carolina Heart (talk) 19:21, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Instead of starting a new project why not work within the existing projects? 331dot (talk) 19:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Was thinking I could direct an increased activity to those pages with other editors Carolina Heart (talk) 19:41, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Carolina Heart I think @331dot is right. It's too niche, and could be done within WP:JAZZ. You could raise the idea there and link to it at WP:YEARS. Unless you have a few other editors with a genuine and seriously-expressed interest in working with you in that very topic area, it would be unwise to attempt to create a new WikiProject as it would soon die a death if there was not enough enthusiasm to sustain it. If you can't find those editors, then just continue working as you have been doing to improve those 'year' articles. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:41, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, ok Carolina Heart (talk) 19:42, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Carolina Heart and welcome to the Teahouse, I agree with @Nick Moyes and @331dot I wouldn't want you to spend so hard on something just for it to die. Jack345110 (talk) 20:51, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Narrow focus is a commonplace error. Someone once started a Wikiproject about Higher Education in New York. I figured since there was not much happening in possible parental Wikiprojects such as Higher Education or New York, it was doomed. It indeed came to nothing. So, the place to ask is in the parental Wikiprojects where you would ask whether discussion about your topic is getting out of hand, growing so large that it interferes with other matters. Usually the answer is no. Cast your net large, and you might catch something good; a narrow net will net little if anything. Jim.henderson (talk) 22:57, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What hatnote would be the most appropriate to place here?[edit]

Forgive me for my inexperience with hatnotes, but I'm unsure which one to add to Joose.

I want to add a hatnote informing people that there's a band that Jack Stauber is in that has the same name.

It currently has the following hatnote:

Would this be appropriate?:

--QuickQuokka [⁠talkcontribs] 20:51, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Helo, QuickQuokka. In my opinion, that is not an appropriate use of a hatnote; but I confess I cannot find the case discussed in WP:HATNOTE. ColinFine (talk) 20:56, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@QuickQuokka: Welcome to the Teahouse. It doesn't seem the band he was in has an article of its own, so there's no point in linking to Jack Stauber, where Joose is mentioned only once in the lede. I'd keep it as is. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:04, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How do I make a page in Wikipedia[edit]

I don't know how to make a page in Wikipedia, can you tell me how? TheReaperScythe1 (talk) 23:13, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hi @TheReaperScythe1 and welcome to the Teahouse! what do you want to create an article about? before starting one, I recommend you read Notability (on what can get an article), Reliable sources (on what can be used to source the claims in your article), and Your first article (on writing the article itself). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:07, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please click and read this - the same applies to you.-1Firang (talk) 00:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Creating a link in the edit summary[edit]

In this edit, I was unable to create a link to what I wanted people to go and read, if they chose to (a particular section of the, "Talk page"), so please let me know how to create a link correctly in the edit summary.-1Firang (talk) 00:06, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hi @1Firang and welcome to the Teahouse! the link you have created, Talk:Coerced religious conversion in Pakistan/Lower Protection to EC., links to a subpage of Talk:Coerced religious conversion in Pakistan that doesn't exist. the right way to link to subsections of a page is by using hashes: Talk:Coerced religious conversion in Pakistan#Lower Protection to EC. links to the relevant talk page discussion. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:12, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you!-1Firang (talk) 00:16, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So what if I want to link to a subsection? Will Talk:Coerced religious conversion in Pakistan#Lower Protection to EC.#Achieving consensus work?-1Firang (talk) 00:40, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@1Firang: No, but Talk:Coerced_religious_conversion_in_Pakistan#Achieving_consensus should work. RudolfRed (talk) 00:43, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks a lot (it does)!-1Firang (talk) 00:46, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Plagiarism found in this article[edit]

Link: Ellesmere Park High School

I have found a specific section in this article which literally copies word for word from this website. The following passage from the article can be seen here:

"Local Education Authorities were required to submit proposals to the new Department of Education for reorganising secondary schooling in their areas.

Most LEAs aimed to establish the three main 'streams' or categories of school - grammar, secondary modern and technical - which had been recommended in a Report by Sir William Spens in 1938.

Children would be allocated on the basis of an examination at the age of 11, known as the Eleven-Plus. This was intended to provide equal opportunities for children of all backgrounds, though in reality this did not happen. LEAs were not co-ordinating and so percentage rates of passes were deemed inconsistent; and some would have leanings towards more passes for boys than girls despite girls proving the more intelligent at these younger ages, whilst the boys tended to overtake them later. The overall apportionment of places was deemed to be unfair.

Also, the school leaving age was raised to 15, though the stated intention that it should be 16 was not effected until 1972."

Most of the text shown here is plagiarized, and would it be wise to delete it on sight? Thanks, TrademarkedTarantula (talk) 05:02, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi TrademarkedTarantula. It would probably better for you to follow the guidance in Wikipedia:Text copyright violations 101 since deleting the content from the current version of the article is unlikely to be all that needs to be done. An administrator may need to go through the article's history and hide any versions which include the same content. Finally, it's also probably not a good idea to repost everything again on other pages because you're just making more things to clean up if it's truly plagiarism. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:28, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


What is the Difference between Austria and the Austrian Soviet Socialist Republic— Preceding unsigned comment added by Santaclaus1993 (talkcontribs)

Santaclaus1993 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. We have an article on Austria, but no article on a "Austrian Soviet Socialist Republic", probably because Austria was never part of the Soviet Union. I'm not clear on what your question is. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I wrote the above in response to your original posting. You're asking what the difference is- one existed, the other didn't. This page is for asking questions about using Wikipedia, general questions should be asked at the Reference Desk. 331dot (talk) 08:38, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Where could I create the arcticle of Austrian Soviet Socialist Republic ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santaclaus1993 (talkcontribs) 08:46, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

it doesn't exist. don't. lettherebedarklight晚安 08:49, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Santaclaus1993 (ec) New accounts cannot directly create articles. Creating new articles is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia, and as such we usually recommend that new users first gain experience and knowledge by using the new user tutorial and then editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. However, if you still want to attempt to create a new article, you may use the article wizard.
Very curious as to what you will be writing about since as far as I know there has never been an entity called the "Austrian Soviet Socialist Republic". What sources do you have? 331dot (talk) 08:51, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
lettherebedarklight Things don't have to exist to have an article about them- but there must be coverage in reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 08:54, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have source about there was an Allied-occupied Austria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santaclaus1993 (talkcontribs) 08:56, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Santaclause1993 But that is not a "Austrian Soviet Socialist Republic". Austria was never part of the Soviet Union. 331dot (talk) 08:58, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Beside the Austrian Soviet Socialist Republic, I would also like to create arcticles about the East German Soviet Socialist Republic and the Norwegian Soviet Socialist Republic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santaclaus1993 (talkcontribs)

Santaclaus1993 None of those things have ever existed or even attempted to exist, I think. We have an article on East Germany as well as Soviet occupation zone of Germany; it was never incorporated into the Soviet Union. You are a long ways from creating articles effectively and I suggest that you not attempt it until you are more familiar with our guidelines. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Editor now indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 13:22, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello, so far I have never cited any of my published articles. Some of them are published in peer-reviewed academic journals. I was wondering, if I were to cite them, would I be required to disclose my identity on the article talk page or elsewhere? Per WP:SELFCITE, You will be permanently identified in the page history as the person who added the citation to your own work. Does this mean that I should disclose a WP:COI? Thank you for letting me know, Gitz (talk) (contribs) 09:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gitz6666 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, if you intend to make edits citing your own work, you should disclose a conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 09:14, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for the prompt reply. This clarifies the issue: I've never cited my work in the past and will never do so in the future. However, I'd suggest we write this explicitly in the relevant guideline. E.g., WP:SELFCITE could be Using material you have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if the conflict of interest has been disclosed and the material is relevant, conforms to the content policies, including WP:SELFPUB, and is not excessive. Shall I go for a bold edit or am I wrong? Gitz (talk) (contribs) 09:22, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would suggest that you propose your edit at Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest, the talk page for that policy. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note that disclosure of unpaid COI is a "should", not a "must". So your proposed wording requires more than the policies require. Nevertheless, I agree with your change in principle. ColinFine (talk) 09:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you again for your suggestions. The thread is here. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 09:35, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Publication of books[edit]

There are three books that/ which ought to be published: What is the criterion for the same. (talk) 09:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. By "ought to be published" I assume you are speaking about creating articles for them. The crieria for books to meet in order to merit an article may be found at WP:NBOOK. You will need to gather at least three independent reliable sources to summarize in any article about a book. Writing a new article is very difficult, please see Your First Article. If you create an account, you may use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia and what we are looking for. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(e/c) This is a page for help with using and editing Wikipedia. We do not publish books. You would need to find yourself a publisher or publish them yourself. Shantavira|feed me 09:25, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
no. lettherebedarklight晚安 09:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Why is China trying to take over the world[edit]

why are there so many Chinese? Santaclaus1993 (talk) 09:30, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Teahouse is not for this type of question. 331dot (talk) 09:44, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


How to make a basic picture to become a Wikipedia pic? Santaclaus1993 (talk) 09:57, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Santaclaus1993: what is a "Wikipedia pic"? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:01, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia picture for sharing to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santaclaus1993 (talkcontribs) 10:02, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Santaclaus1993 Pictures you have taken with your own camera or images you personally have created should be uploaded to our sister Project, Wikimedia Commons, and licensed there for anyone to use, including within Wikipedia articles. Please click on this link for the full instructions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:28, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

information Note: OP has been blocked. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notices are the top of an article about to be edited[edit]

I notice that some articles have "page notices" that appear at the top when editing the page (e.g. like on List of climbers and mountaineers). Am I, an ordinary editor, able to create such notices, or is that for an administrator? thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 11:17, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Aszx5000 That notice comes from a template {{Editnotices/Page/List of climbers and mountaineers}} which happens to have been created by an admin. Template creation is a bit of a specialist art but I don' t think there is any requirement that such templates be made only by admins. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:23, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Aszx5000, Michael D. Turnbull I am afraid that this is incorrect. All editnotices, that is, pages under Template:Editnotice/, are automatically protected by the title blacklist. See Wikipedia:Editnotice for more info. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 12:38, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Victor Schmidt mobil Apologies, I was confused since some such templates are made by non-admins like pagemovers and template editors. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:45, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for that. Much appreciated. 17:51, 31 May 2023 (UTC) Aszx5000 (talk) 17:51, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help; IDK how to make a article[edit]

Hi i know what you're thinking, but i do not understand how to use the article wizard or any help article. You, Wikipedians could make 400 children happy by helping me make this article. I am entirely greatful if you could help me make: Birch Hill Primary School. I can give details and facts. Thank you.

IGotHacked12 (talk) 11:42, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello @IGotHacked12! What about the article wizard do you not understand? (You can find it at Help:Your first article if this is your question) Apmh 12:32, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
After you read WP:YFA as suggested by Apmh, I would suggest also WP:BACKWARD. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@IGotHacked12 I assume that you are planning to write about the school that you attend in Bracknell. It is relatively unlikely that your school is notable in the way that Wikipedia requires. Please read that linked article or you may be wasting your time trying to draft something. You cannot base a draft on information you happen to know about the school, only on what has been published elsewhere in reliable sources meeting these golden rules. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
hi thank you, but i do plan to write this like for example brackenhale school has itself an article and yes it is unlikely to be notable however the school has (even i did not know) a very rich history. even the teachers are keen when i first told the plan to my class. (Dont worry i did not tell for sure). so im kinda between a rock and a hard place + i am known as the buissness guy in class so they are expecting something IGotHacked12 (talk) 20:00, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, IGotHacked12, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry if you're in a hard place, but if you cannot find sufficient reliable independent sources about your school, then an article on it is simply not possible, and every moment of time you spend on trying it will be time wasted. Please read WP:AMOUNT. Perhaps you can find another outlet to write the school's history. (see WP:OUT).
On another subject, if you haven't already read Guidance for younger editors, I strongly advise you to do so, for your own safety. ColinFine (talk) 20:20, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello hosts! I got a reply a while back on the Teahouse for guides. I knew all of the stuff in there. By any chance do you know a few advanced Wikipedia guides? (That are up to date)

Thanks in advance! Wikihelper59 (talk) 13:34, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Wikihelper59, welcome to the Teahouse. Advanced guides here on Wikipedia tend to be specific rather than general (Help:How to move a page, Help:How to write the perfect "Did you know" hook, etc.). Is there a specific area you're interested in? (talk) 14:26, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Wikihelper59 Hello, if you are looking for things to learn, there is a huge list of pages at Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines. You don't need to read them all, though (unless you want to become a real Wikipedian (just kidding)) Apmh 15:32, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Firsteval thanks for the invitation guys! I wrote an article and I was working for hours but it was unfortunately deleted. Currently, I am writing another article about a another person. I do not want the deletion order to be repeated with me. Is there anyone here who can help me in checking and improving the article? Normally I can write good enough because I am a developer :/, but it seems that writing on Wikipedia requires special skills. MarkScoopit (talk) 13:51, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @MarkScoopit, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you mean the draft at User:MarkScoopit/sandbox? (talk) 14:22, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thank you for your reply
yes I mean the person in my sandbox. MarkScoopit (talk) 19:21, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MarkScoopit: You would do well to read these essays on article creation: WP:YFA, WP:BACKWARD, WP:42. Failing to heed the advice in them will likely result in your attempts being deleted again. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oke I will read them. MarkScoopit (talk) 19:22, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is it possible to have an article/page about me deleted[edit]

Is it possible to have an article/page about me deleted Prince.james2000 (talk) 16:23, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Prince.james2000, welcome to the Teahouse. It may or may not be possible - it depends on the article. If it is well-referenced and the subject is obviously notable, it will stay. If it is poorly referenced, or if notability is in doubt, then it could be taken through one of Wikipedia's deletion processes. If the article you're concerned about is Shanita Namuyimbwa, I do not think it would be eligible for deletion, but I haven't checked the sources closely. (talk) 16:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Prince james. I agree with 199. I would like to add that if you are indeed Shanita Namuyimbwa, then you have a conflict of interest, and should not edit the article directly at all but instead should make edit requests on the article's talk page, ColinFine (talk) 16:42, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@ColinFine: I think a case can be made to delete it based on WP:1E; she played a major role in an otherwise minor event. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:28, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is one of those dilemmas: firstly we can never be sure whether a person claiming to be the subject of an article is really who they claim to be, and secondly when the subject of an article asks for removal of material reflecting negatively on them, the Wikipedia community is often uncooperative (for the very good reason that WP is here to reflect everything that's said about a person, not just the good stuff). Therefore, Prince.james2000, there is probably very little you can do about this article. If there are facts in the article that are wrong, and that you can demonstrate are wrong, based on reliable sources, you can ask for those facts to be corrected by posting an edit request on the talk page.
However, I do think the article looks like trivial gossip from the gossip-sphere of the society pages of the tabloid press, so I've nominated it at AfD (Articles for deletion) where its fate can be discussed. Prince.james2000, do remember that even if it is deleted, deletion is not necessarily final. If the article is deleted, and you, or anyone else, re-creates it, it is likely all the negative stuff will reappear. I'm not proposing to delete it to sanitise things ready for a re-branding.
Anyone else reading this, if you choose to get involved in the deletion debate, please treat it as a debate on the article, based on the merits of the article and its sourcing. Elemimele (talk) 20:59, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How would I combine a connecting subject into in article?[edit]

How could I combine a connecting subject into in article if they are both on the same subject; like a category? Reese82R (talk) 17:45, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Reese82R. Can you be more specific with your question? Providing an example would be helpful. Cullen328 (talk) 17:47, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The article I am asking in this case is my draft. Draft:Ro-Aviation It has 2 subjects that make up the entirety of the group in a whole. Reese82R (talk) 17:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Reese82R your question is very vague, you need to be much more specific. Please mention the article and the subjects you wish to link. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:49, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This Draft:Ro-Aviation Reese82R (talk) 17:56, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And the two groups that make it. Airlines & Tech Companies. Reese82R (talk) 17:57, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Reese. I'm afraid that I still don't get what you are asking. Are you asking about which categories the article belongs in? If that's what you mean, that's like worrying about painting the windows before you've built the house - or even surveyed the site.
Your draft has no chance of being accepted in its present form because you have written it backwards - as most people do who try to write an article when they haven't much experience of editing Wikipedia. It looks as if you have written down what you know about your subject. I'm sorry, but Wikipedia isn't interested in what you know about a subject. (It isn't interested in what I know or Cullen knows or Roger knows either). Wikipedia is only interested in what reliable published sources have said about a subject, and all the material in an article should come from such sources. ColinFine (talk) 18:15, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question about citing in an article[edit]

How would one go about citing information in a bio article when the origin of the written information is unknown, or the information came from verbal comments of the subject? David (talk) 19:22, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You don't. Wikipedia articles are based on Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Shantavira|feed me 19:25, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, MR2David. In this circumstance, the information cannot be added to Wikipedia. That would violate the core content policies of Verifiability and No original research. Cullen328 (talk) 19:27, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MR2David The one exception might be an interview with the subject published in the form of something where you could use {{cite AV media}}. Still needs to be a reliable source and the qualifications at WP:ABOUTSELF apply. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:34, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Changing the appearance of my signature[edit]

My account is MR2David, and has been that way since I created it. Originally, my signature would reflect that, but now my signature simply says David. I've done nothing to make this change. This is not such a problem for me, but it is confusing for others. Is there a way to change my signature to reflect MR2David? David (talk) 19:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, there is a way. WP:FANCYSIG explains how. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 19:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MR2David To get the simplest possible signature, simply go to Special:Preferences and remove anything in the signature box. (Don't forget to "save" the page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:38, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! I didn't realize that was there nor do I remember doing that. Let's see if it works. MR2David (talk) 20:51, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Misspelling or incorrect name?[edit]

I made redirects Dream Sweet in C Major, Dream Sweet in C-Major, and DSICM, which are all incorrect versions of Dream Sweet in Sea Major.

Should this be an {{R from misspelling}} or {{R from incorrect name}}? --QuickQuokka [⁠talkcontribs] 20:10, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd suggest {{R from misspelling}} as you have now is perfectly fine - it isn't a big deal either way. The category Category:Redirects from misspellings is a subcategory of Category:Redirects from incorrect names anyway, so the two have almost identical functions. Tollens (talk) 21:42, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Was there a recent redesign?[edit]

I know there was a redesign a few months ago, but it suddenly looks slightly different. Was there a redesign a few hours ago or am I just going insane? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 20:21, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Immanuelle, there has been A/B testing of a new design for logged-in users - see here, for example. You might be one of the lucky recipients. (talk) 20:33, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Immanuelle: I don't think you're wrong. I noticed right away because it breaks how Wikipedia looks for me. QuickQuokka [⁠talkcontribs] 20:44, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Any way to opt out of A/B testing on Wikipedia?[edit]

Dropdown menus not working as intended

I saw that recently, there has been a new experiment to once again change up the skin from Vector 2022 to something new called Zebra. This kind of messes up dropdown menus among other things. I have two questions:

  1. Where should I report this bug properly? I know phabricator exists, but I have never used it before and have no idea how it works at all. Already reported it on the village pump to the wonderful Mr. Szymon Grabarczuk of the Wikimedia Foundation.
  2. How do I opt out of future A/B testing (if possible)?

-- QuickQuokka [⁠talkcontribs] 20:54, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@QuickQuokka, no one here is likely to know more than the VPT folks. I'd recommend asking your other questions there. (talk) 20:59, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Returning Wikipedia member[edit]

I was after on Wikipedia about 20 years ago until I was attacked by another member on Wikipedia. I withdrew, and have a new account, making very minor edits. It was never my idea to get involved in something bigger. However, (the laid plans of mice and men) I have found an article that is very inaccurate in that it has turned a former mail stop along the old Pennsylvania Railroad tracks in Ohio into an "unincorporated community," which it never was. (No streets, no buildings other than an exterior platform and at most a mail distribution point - before Rural Free Delivery started in 1905. This place had no school, no churches, no grange or hall of any sort. Its simply a grade crossing created by a railroad. Portraying this as "community" is causing problems on other sites that insist that place was more than it was and as an unincorporated community that there were members of said "unincorporated community," when there were none. I just want the correct information to stand and remove this fictitious portrayal of what was a mail stop and perhaps a small post office that only functioned from 1895-1905 as an "unincorporated community" The factual information is already assembled, what remains is what to do with the "box" used for places. I just want this to be accurate, without deepening involvement. Is it possible to make this happen? ClevelandExPat (talk) ClevelandExPat (talk) 22:00, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just looking at the sources in the article - the USGS still lists this as a location: [2] I will note that unincorporated communities can be completely uninhabited, so having a school, church, etc. as you describe is not a prerequisite for its existence. Is there some reason that the article should refer to the location as 'defunct' when it remains labelled by the government of the US as a named location? Tollens (talk) 22:12, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Many years ago, a lot of places got into Wikipedia that now don't qualify. These locations turn up regularly at Articles for Deletion, AfD, where there is a fairly active group of editors who regularly debate whether a railway siding in Ohio is a genuine inhabited place. The most recent such debate is at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Burdickville,_Rhode_Island. You could either contact someone who's active in US locations via their talk-page, asking if they'd be interested in having a look at your location (I included the link to Burdickville so you can find some of the regulars). Or you could nominate your location for deletion (see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion) which means its status will get debated. But if you had a bad experience at Wikipedia before, do remember that there may be a fairly robust debate. You don't have to get more involved than you want to. Elemimele (talk) 10:08, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copying references[edit]

I'm working on the history of a city. A book that I am citing has its own 'Notes' section in which references are given, and some reference multiple sources. For example, in citing the existence of a nickname, the author indicates: "For a sample of the designation, see x and y. For the city being commonly known by the appellation, see z."

My question is in two parts: first, if I wanted to include this level of detail in my citation, is copying the note a copyvio? Second, even if it isn't, is it preferable / more efficient in the majority of cases just to cite the book? Thanks in advance. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 22:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's perfectly acceptable to cite a source that itself cites other works. No attribution is required for the sources in the book - the book itself provides that attribution. You can cite the sources the book provides instead, but in that case you do need to make sure that the sources do actually support your statement, not just rely on the author of the book you are using to have correctly cited their sources. I would recommend paraphrasing the note to avoid any issues with copyright. Tollens (talk) 22:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's pretty much what I assumed, and what makes sense. Thanks for your help. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 22:26, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Contribution review help request[edit]

Requesting attention @ Special:Contributions/AlbaniaeDominus. Though account seems new most edits seem to cite relevant policies, same time some strange article moves and edits seem to be testing waters of WP policies. Range of doubtful edits is wide enough, I don't think capable of reviewing and taking up with user or different different talk pages alone and also confused which other forum would have been right. I am intimating the user of this discussion so they can benefit from inputs of other experienced users in this discussion. Bookku (talk) 02:26, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Hi, I am struggling to move this article from my Sandbox into the mainspace. The following message appears and I can't work out how to do either option: This sandbox is in the article namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the {{User sandbox}} template.

Sorry, appreciate this sounds like a stupid question. This is my second article, the first was part of the WP:SAGESBS course in March. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks Occupational Therapy History Matters (talk) 07:49, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@occupational therapy history matters: as the message says, remove "{{user sandbox}}". lettherebedarklight晚安 07:52, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, Occupational Therapy History Matters and welcome to the Teahouse. I've removed "{{user sandbox}}" and also white space from the top of the article. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 07:56, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Perfect, thank-you so much. Occupational Therapy History Matters (talk) 08:53, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Occupational Therapy History Matters I note that you used a Wikipedia page as a citation for her MBE. That's not a good source. The London Gazette has a website where you'll find the official announcement in their web archive. I don't have time at the moment to track this down myself. Mike Turnbull (talk) 08:58, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. I will track down Macdonald on the London Gazette. Occupational Therapy History Matters (talk) 09:15, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Changing the colour of my username[edit]

Please how do I change the colour in which my username is displayed to pink. JoS Josedimaria237 (talk) 12:15, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Josedimaria237 you can modify your signature at Special:Preferences. For instructions go to WP:CUSTOMSIG. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 13:56, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sungodtemple: No, I am not talking of the signature. I mean the colour in which my username appears on the signature. Josedimaria237 (talk)

@Josedimaria237: Welcome to the Teahouse. What Sungodtemple told you is correct. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:40, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Josedimaria237 to change the color in which your username appears on your signature you have to modify your signature. <span style="color: pink;">my_username</span> -> my_username. Copy paste this into the box for the custom signature to change the color. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 14:43, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sungodtemple: Ok, got it. Thank you. Josedimaria237 (talk) 14:52, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Concern over biased editing of new article by activists[edit]

Hi Teahouse Hosts,

I am planning to write a new article on Wikipedia and would like to know how you handle biased activists. I have already written some articles on the German Wikipedia, so I am familiar with the basics. However, the topic of this new article is about animal research, which is a controversial subject in the public eye and may attract activists. I am concerned that the article might be vandalized with biased edits, and, most importantly, that I won't be able to undo such edits. Don't misunderstand me, I welcome constructive criticism in this article or in real life, as a matter of fact – I am a vegetarian for ethical reasons. However, as a researcher working with animals, I have experienced that a small but vocal group of people are not concerned with facts but rather intend to promote their own agenda. I have read the Wikipedia help section on dealing with activists. However, I would really like to know firsthand experience of how the English Wikipedia community handles such activist editing. I greatly appreciate your insights. Thank you for your support! S.Y.M.B.I.O.N.T. (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well...on a case by case basis; here, we don't even know yet what you will write about. If vandalism occurs, it will be dealt with with the usual instruments: escalating warnings which may results in blocks, and page protection, amongst others (on the Wikipedia:Activist page, when you scroll down to the end, you can see a whole list of linked arbitration cases: that's what it may come to in rare cases, but it's the exception, not the rule) . As you mentioned having edited in DE-Wikipedia: be so kind and have a good read-up of our policies, as things are done somewhat differently hereabouts. Lectonar (talk) 13:57, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Might want to see WP:PREEMPTIVE. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 14:44, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, Lectonar! Also for recommending to pay attention to the different policies to the German Wikipedia. Indeed, I did not realize that they are different and will keep that in mind. Sorry for omitting the topic of my intended article. It will be about the International Society for Transgenic Technologies (ISTT), an organization advancing knowledge exchange and education regarding genetically engineered animals. They have already been mentioned in other WP articles and, of course, research articles, but no WP page exists yet. Thanks, Sungodtemple for the link to WP:PREEMPTIVE as well. Appreciated! S.Y.M.B.I.O.N.T. (talk) 15:31, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
English Wikipedia makes a distnction between vandalism and good faith edits - what you might consider a biased point of view would fall under the latter - best taken up by having a discussion on the Talk page of the article. Good advice offered above if problems persist. David notMD (talk) 17:45, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The guidelines to permanently suspend a draft.[edit]

What are the guidelines to permanently suspend a draft? Please reply. Thanks. 2A02:C7C:5058:3900:B47D:D4CF:90CB:1C90 (talk) 13:10, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that I don't know what you mean. We don't have a concept of "suspending a draft" as far as I'm aware. ColinFine (talk) 14:03, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Are you asking about a draft you have created - perhaps as a logged in account? Or someone else's draft? "Suspend" or delete? David notMD (talk) 17:53, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you don’t want to work on a draft anymore then just leave it be and someone else may fix it. If you made the draft then do a g7 speedy deletion if you want to get rid of it. If it severely violates rules such as blp then tag it for speedy deletion or miscellany for deletion based on that. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 18:12, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I forgot my password[edit]

Help 2600:1008:B1A3:DF9B:5CDD:90FF:FEA7:A730 (talk) 13:58, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See Help:Logging in#What if I forget the password? Lectonar (talk) 14:04, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you attached an email address to your account, and you still have access to that email address, then you can ask for a password reset via that email. Otherwise I'm afraid there is no way to recover your account, and you'll need to create a new one. ColinFine (talk) 14:04, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reference formatting[edit]

Is there an easier way to format references so that it carries the information Wikipedians like to see in references ie author name, citeweb title, access date, date of article, etc. Does Wikipedia have a method to make the desired formatting easier or even automated? I do a lot of mobile editing and it is complicated to try and add those items. Thank you! PaulRKil (talk) 14:19, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PaulRKil you can use WP:ReFill? WP:RefToolbar should also be auto-installed. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 14:45, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New article[edit]

Hi. I've been trying to create an article about a film called My Friend Vince. The film, made in 1974, is distributed by the Canadian Film Makers Distribution Center. It was reviewed by a now-defunct magazine called Cinema Canada and mentioned in an academic paper and a reviewer in Tennessee. All of the above is noted in a draft page that I wrote and was taken down because I did not edit the page within the six month limit.

I did not edit the page because there was another article written about the film in another now-defunct magazine, of which I have a scanned copy, but which is not dated.I was hoping to retrieve the issue from the national archives in order to get the date, but after more than six months trying, have learned that the particular issue is one of several issues that have been lost. Do I have enough information to have the article posted? Attributed2 (talk) 14:50, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I doubt it, but please read Wikipedia:Notability (films) and decide for yourself. Shantavira|feed me 15:28, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Attributed2 If you haven't checked already, some of the hits here [3] may be of use. Per WP:GNG you need better than passing mentions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:05, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
[4][5] should help your case a bit. You can try asking about your source at WP:RX. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:17, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Best practices to edit Infobox[edit]

Hi everyone, I'd like to know if there's an ideal/preferred way to make edits to infoboxes if needed? It would be great if there's a view similar to the visual view to make these edits.

I came across this, but im wondering if there are other links I can review/including a video from Youtube where possible?

Thanks in advance. Shehandd (talk) 15:20, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Shehandd, and welcome to the Teahouse. Try Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes for some more advice. ContributeToTheWiki (talkcontribs) 16:51, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Second sandbox[edit]

How do I make a second sandbox? ✠ Robertus Pius ✠ (TalkContribs) 19:04, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Orson12345: Welcome to the Teahouse. The simplest way to do so is to change the subpage name in your browser's address bar. For example, if your sandbox is at, you can make a second by turning sandbox to sandbox2 or whatever you want to name your new subpage. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:08, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Robertus Pius and welcome to the Teahouse. Just go to your user page and in the address bar of your browser add something like /sandbox2 onto the URL, so you have ... User:Whoever/sandbox2. Go to that page and when told it doesn't exist, create it. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 19:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Esowteric: @Tenryuu: That worked perfectly, thanks for the help! ✠ Robertus Pius ✠ (TalkContribs) 19:19, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article title italics and parentheses[edit]

The standard method of italicizing a title for an article about a work of art is to use the italic title code. There are a few examples of works of art whose full titles include parentheses, including "Untitled" (Perfect Lovers). The italic title tool automatically de-italicizes the words in parentheses, I assume because this is often where articles with generic names would indicate who made the piece or what the medium is. Is there a way to make the entire article title italicized? Wondering if anyone else has run into this issue/what should be done in cases like this. --19h00s (talk) 20:17, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, 19h00s and welcome to the Teahouse. Not an answer, but is Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles of works#Italicizing Wikipedia article titles any help? Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 20:24, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That is exactly what I was looking for! Thank you, didn't see that when I was searching the MOS earlier :) 19h00s (talk) 20:28, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]