Misplaced Pages

:Teahouse: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:07, 30 May 2022 view sourceSingleton4321 (talk | contribs)93 edits →vandalism: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:28, 23 January 2025 view source Ss0jse (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users731 edits →These quotes could be added to a "figure of speech" Misplaced Pages page in the future: ReplyTag: Reply 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{pp-move}}{{Short description|Help forum for new users}} {{Short description|Community Q&A hub for new editors}}{{pp-sock|small=yes}}
{{skip to top and bottom}} {{skip to top and bottom}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} |archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
|maxarchivesize = 400K |maxarchivesize = 400K
|counter = 1153 |counter = 1247
|minthreadsleft = 10 |minthreadsleft = 15
|minthreadstoarchive = 2 |minthreadstoarchive = 25
|algo = old(48h) |algo = old(48h)
|archive = Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Questions/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Questions/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
{{clear}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Questions/Archive Indexed
|mask=Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Questions/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=1
|indexhere=yes
}}
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
{{Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Header}} {{Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Header}}
<!-- Questions go here. Post new questions at the BOTTOM of the page. -->

== Need advice re: fixing issues in a rejected article ==

Hi everyone! ] got rejected, and I need some help to understand what exactly I can do to improve it. I did my best to follow the NPOV guidelines, did a thorough research, and tried to provide sources and references for everything (both reputable news and academic articles). Also, I included criticism so as to cover the topic as objectively as possible. In the meantime, I wrote another article on an entirely different topic, and it got approved without any objections (despite way fewer sources being available). It kind of confuses me, so I'd really appreciate any pointers you guys could throw my way. Big thanks in advance! ] (]) 20:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

:Hello @], and welcome to the Teahouse. It's not unusual for an editor to have one article accepted, then another one rejected. The key hurdle the article need to get over is ] - the notability criteria for businesses. At the same time, it mustn't read like an advert for that company, listing every single product (which yours does). Phrases like {{tq|"Even though the DIY kit lacked official backing, it stirred much attention. "}} are not neutral (nor even supported with a citation). Despite that, there are an awful lot of citations you ''have'' included, so could you tell us which ''three'' (and only three) citations show detailed, in-depth and independent coverage of this company? I would prefer you tell us what they are, rather than expect us to wade through to find them for ourselves. Maybe that could be a start, though others may wish to make different suggestions for you ] (]) 20:24, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
::Declined (what happened) is less severe than Rejected. ] (]) 00:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
:::Ha, I didn't even realize that there was a difference! Lots of details to process here... ] (]) 16:02, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
::Thank you, this really is helpful and I think it'll get me back on track! ] (]) 16:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
:@] The draft says {{tq|as well as recording action potentials of living neurons in invertebrates and plants}}. Do plants have neurons? ] (]) 06:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

== Forum for community review of draftifications ==

Hi everyone. If a page mover moves an article to draftspace, what is the forum to challenge the page move? Would ] be an appropriate forum? I would of course first try to persuade the page mover to move it back to article space. Cheers, ] (] <nowiki>&#124;</nowiki> ]) 02:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
:{{Ping|Clayoquot}} to challenge the draftification all you need to do is move it back into the main space. At that point anyone who feels it meets one of the criteria for deletion may nominate it as such. ] <sup>(])</sup>/<sub>(])</sub> 02:59, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
::OK thanks :) Do you know the name of the policy that says it's OK to do this? Do I need to discuss it with the page mover first? ] (] <nowiki>&#124;</nowiki> ]) 03:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
::: {{re|Clayoquot}} See ]. You do not need to discuss it first. ] (]) 03:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
::::Perfect, thanks! ] (] <nowiki>&#124;</nowiki> ]) 03:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::{{ping|Clayoquot}} {{ping|RudolfRed}} That is not a Misplaced Pages policy, that is an essay, basically one editor's point of view. A better practice would be to initiate a discussion on the talk page of the user who draftified it. Usually when I draftify something, it is for a good reason (usually the author had no clue about what makes a Misplaced Pages article acceptable) and I move it to draft space as a courtesy rather than delete it. Because I have seen newbies start move-warring, I also often leave a create-protection behind so that only a reviewer with the extended-confirmed right can move it back to article space. This is a way to encourage more eyes on the article, rather than rely solely on the judgment of the newbie who wrote it. ~] <small>(])</small> 05:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: This is about ], which was draftified, then reverted by Clayoquot. ] (]) 09:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
:For good reason - that looks more like a PowerPoint slide than a Misplaced Pages article. ] 12:46, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
::However, it's worth noting that participating in the AfC process is entirely voluntary in most cases, including this one ] 12:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

::::{{ping|Anachronist}} I agree it's good to encourage more eyes on an article if an experienced editor feels it's not ready for mainspace. The usual place to do this is AfD. If a newbie moves an article that has been draftified to mainspace, which I think is what you meant by "start move-warring", would it not be appropriate to nominate it for deletion if you still feel it's inappropriate? W.r.t ], good point that it's not a policy. On the other hand, it represents the collaboration of since 2013 and is actively watched by so I think it's fair to say it has a solid level of acceptance in the community. ] (] <nowiki>&#124;</nowiki> ]) 13:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::{{reply|Clayoquot}} I routinely make small edits to essays, but that doesn't mean I agree with them. Only a handful of editors contributed the majority of that content. I disagree with the assertion that "it's fair to say it has a solid level of acceptance in the community." It's an essay, the essay expresses a valid viewpoint, but that viewpoint does not have community consensus.
:::::As to your question about AFD being inappropriate, the answer is yes in many cases it's inappropriate. The purpose of AFD is to judge whether to keep an article on a topic based on its notability. AFD isn't a place to canvass other editors for improvements. You propose an article for AFD when you have policy-grounded reasons to believe that the topic isn't suitable. If an article topic may be notable but is written in an incomprehensible or non-encyclopedic way, or without sufficient evidence of notability, or in dire need of cleanup, it is appropriate to move it to draft space. If someone other than the author reverts the move to draft, that's fine. I draw the line, however, at the article author doing this.
:::::In my experience, every time an author of an article attempts to revert a move to draft space, that author has a COI or a promotional intention. Some of them end up being blocked, and I've seen some become good editors after my mentoring. Bottom line: COI editors have no business deciding what content should be in main space. ''That'' has community consensus. They can write drafts, and the drafts can be approved by someone else, but they do not get to decide when an article on their pet topic is ready for publication. That is why I often create-protect articles I draftify, with a protection level that allows experienced editors to un-draftify. I have no objection if an editor other than the author reverts a draftification. ~] <small>(])</small> 22:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::I really appreciate the work of volunteers (like {{u|Anachronist|yourself}}) who are on the front lines of COI and promotional editors. A lot of our usual processes are understood to be different if one of the editors involved has a COI. I think it's fair to assume that the processes described in ] shouldn't be used by COI editors.
::::::What about the case when I'm the author of an article that's been draftified and I don't have a COI or promotional intent, and I want to object to the draftification? I could follow your recommendation to ask the page mover to move it back to mainspace, but what if the page mover refuses? That would bring me back to my original question - where would I go to start a community discussion if the page mover and I disagree? ] (] <nowiki>&#124;</nowiki> ]) 05:20, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::::{{reply|Clayoquot}} See ] (] is useful if it's just two editors disagreeing), or, if that's undesirable, you could state your case here and ask for another review. Better still, you could address the concerns expressed by the person who disagrees with you and revise the draft accordingly. I'm a pretty experienced editor, I've been editing Misplaced Pages for 16 years, and while I am capable of writing a good article directly in article space, I will still occasionally submit a draft for review if I suspect my investment of my time in the topic has colored my viewpoint. I have one such declined review at ]. And I will not move it to article space myself if another experienced editor disagreed that it should be there. But I haven't gotten around to recasting it in the context of the only notable thing in it. ] on Misplaced Pages, after all. ~] <small>(])</small> 17:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Missing TOCs! (with 2022 skin) ==

Am I doing something wrong?

After some mild mannered and kindly "robot" suggested that I switch to some new "skin" -- (I do not even really understand what a "skin" is, ... in this context!) -- eventually I started noticing that, on all "Talk:" pages, the TOC ("Table of contents") was missing.

Then (today iirc) I started noticing that, ... the same thing was happening in "article" space. NO Tables of contents!

Just on a wild GUESS, I tried going back to my "]", and changing my "SKIN", from "Vector (2022)" ... << (back) >> ... to "'''Vector legacy (2010)'''".

<big><big><big><big>All of a sudden,</big></big></big></big> my TOCs '''resumed working''' as they usually do! ... and as they '''have''' been working -- just fine! -- for '''years.'''

<big><big>Any advice?</big></big>
(Are there any questions that I perhaps SHOULD be asking, at this time, but that I do not even know to ask?)

Thank you, ] (]) 15:49, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

:"Perhaps" one that I should *** "avoid" *** asking, -- '''(right?)''' -- is: ... whether or not this new "skin" is causing similar issues for THOUSANDS of other Misplaced Pages readers (and editors). I would expect that if ''something like *that*'' '''were''' taking place, that ... then ... in that case ... some Misplaced Pages experts ... way more clued-in than the average bear ... would have already either '''''' fixed things, or ... (at least) '''''' issued some kind of "notice", to rescue me from having to submit a new "TOPIC" like this, on a page like this. --] (]) 15:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
::@]: Welcome to the Teahouse. The new skin moves the table of contents onto the left side of the screen. You can follow discussions about it at ]. <br><small>Please don't go crazy on formatting like using the big tag multiple times; it's somewhat irritating.</small> —]&nbsp;(&nbsp;]&nbsp;•&nbsp;]&nbsp;) 16:04, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Tenryuu}} Thanks for that kind reply.
:::I have done *** some *** (but apparently not ''enough'') reading, at places that I found, starting with the help that you provided.<br/><br/>
:::My '''question''' << Am I doing something wrong? >> still stands.<br/><br/>
:::When I use the "OLD" interface ("") I can find the TOC (positioned kinda sorta within the body of text on the page) ... and I do not mind navigating "from" -- and even back '''"to"''' that "OLD" TOC ... which can sometimes be done using the << back >> feature of my web browser.<br/><br/>
:::When I use the "New" interface ("Vector 2022" or whatever it is) ... I cannot see the TOC. I do not know "what to do" (to cause it to become visible), or ... '''where it is,''' if it is already there (maybe right in front of my nose?)<br/><br/>
:::Please forgive me if I am not specifying very expertly, what it is that I need to know (I need to find out). I suspect that, if I knew that, I would '''then''' be able to ... not only
:::* '''''' do a better job of asking my question here,<br/> but also
:::* '''''' ''answer'' the question myself, instead of having to "ask" it.<br/><br/>
:::<code>Thank you.</code> -- ] (]) 17:48, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
::::@]: It should be there on the left. . —]&nbsp;(&nbsp;]&nbsp;•&nbsp;]&nbsp;) 17:51, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::Thank you.<br/><br/>
:::::I am not seeing that TOC that you are seeing (and sending).<br/><br/>
:::::I mean, I do see it in the attachment ... I just do not see it in the screen snapshot that I probably should create, and post here. (and maybe I am about to do so ... it might take a few minutes).<br/><br/>
:::::Seeing that (screen shot) might not enable you to figure out the full answer to ... :<br/><br/>
:::::My question << Am I doing something wrong? >> still stands.<br/><br/>
:::::But it might be a step in the right direction ... and it might cause me to not seem crazy ... as I perhaps did when I first asked ... :<br/><br/>
:::::<< Am I doing something wrong? >><br/><br/>
:::::Thank you. -- ] (]) 18:06, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::{{ping|Tenryuu}} (and anyone else who is interested.)<br/>
::::::I regret the delay.<br/><br/>
::::::I have 3 files. TWO of them are ".PDF" files, which show relatively small Misplaced Pages articles, both of which allow their TOCs to be visible '''to me''' when I use the (OLD) "Vector 2010' skin.<br/><br/>
::::::I am not sure how to (figure out how to) attach those 3 files to this message. I am tired, now, so ... I am just going to include a link to the place "on the cloud" ... (on "Google Drive"), where the 3 files are resting now. Here is the LINK:
::::::https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Gn8iAwQHqQ5r3E7ONLODe1yWWXNGMK5D?usp=sharing<br/><br/>
::::::NOTE that, even though ... one of the two "smaller" files (they are *.PDF files) does appear to "IMPLY" that there was a TOC shown on my computer screen, before I took the "snapshot" (using "Ctrl-P" meaning "Print", and then using "Save as .PDF" instead of the name of an actual ink-on-paper printer) ... it is lying ("pants on fire").<br/><br/>
::::::That is the purpose of the THIRD file ... which is a *.JPG file ... namely, to *show* that the info that was '''actually''' being displayed on my computer screen -- when using the "Vector 2022" skin -- '''did not''' include a TOC at the top of the article. (nor '''on the side''' ... I looked all over).<br/><br/>
::::::Actually, I just added a 4th file ... once I saw that I could download a .PDF of an article '''"directly",''' without using Ctrl-P and "Save as PDF". That (4th) file is in a sub-folder.<br/><br/>
::::::<big>Thanks for listening.</big> Any advice appreciated. -- ] (]) 22:44, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::::<sub>The text in this section is very weird. I like it.</sub> ] (]) 06:37, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::::I do not like it. Wakes it SIGNIFICANTLY harder to follow. (eospecially after the user was asked to refrain from crazy formatting) Happy Editing--''']]''' 11:22, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::::::I don't like it either... ] (]) 06:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

== Reference problem ==
]
I do not know how to repair this. No link at all? This is via the WP Library
] (]) 17:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
: {{re|deisenbe}} There is a link next to the message that says "how to repair". Click "show" for help on this issue. ] (]) 18:00, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

I have tried to follow those instructions. Either I'm not following them right, or they didn't solve the problem. They led me to cfeate this:

|url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?AN=41341328

but it doesn't link to anything. This is the second reference as I had an AN number at hand for it, but not for the first. ] (]) 19:34, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
:{{ping|Deisenbe}} Here's the correct URLs to use for those two refs:
:* https://pubs.lib.uiowa.edu/annals-of-iowa/article/id/12188/
:* https://pubs.lib.uiowa.edu/annals-of-iowa/article/id/12227/
: You should also consider adding and populating the doi parameter as well.
: Here's ready-to-use examples for both refs:
:* <code><nowiki>|url=https://pubs.lib.uiowa.edu/annals-of-iowa/article/id/12188/|doi=10.17077/0003-4827.11512|doi-access=free</nowiki></code>
:* <code><nowiki>|url=https://pubs.lib.uiowa.edu/annals-of-iowa/article/id/12227/|doi=10.17077/0003-4827.11521|doi-access=free</nowiki></code>
: Hope this helps! ] (]) 23:25, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

:: Thank you, but I have no idea how to create a doi parameter, nor where to find instructions. ] (]) 13:33, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::: Hi {{u|Deisenbe}}. Citing (scholarly) journals is vital for many articles. The ] is an international standard which we use normally within a {{tl|cite journal}} template. If you look at the website pubs.lib.uiowa.edu, you'll see that each article's webpage has a "how to cite" part that gives its doi. The good news is that Misplaced Pages has lots of tools to help editors create citations. See ]. The one I use can take a simple doi within the cite journal template:
:::<nowiki>{{cite journal |doi=10.17077/0003-4827.11512 }}</nowiki>
:::and turn it into a full citation ready to be placed inline as a reference.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.17077/0003-4827.11512 |title=John Brown Among the Pedee Quakers. Chapter I |year=1866 |last1=Lloyd |first1=Frederick |journal=The Annals of Iowa |volume=1866 |issue=2 |pages=665–670 |url=https://ir.uiowa.edu/annals-of-iowa/vol1866/iss2/9 }}</ref>
{{talkref}}
::: Hence for most citations I never fill out the parameters in the template myself but rely on the tool to do this for me after I supply the doi (or the ISBN, as the tool also works with books). However I do check that the tool has got everything correct and I add |doi-access=free if appropriate. ] (]) 14:36, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Citations ==

I'm a new editor (Just started May 27th), and I don't understand how to do the citation links at the end. Please help. ] (]) 01:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:Correction: May 26th ] (]) 01:12, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::hi @] and welcome to the Teahouse! please see ''']'''. you can use various templates such as {{template|cite web}} and {{template|cite news}} for this situation, and have them inside the <code><nowiki><ref> </ref></nowiki></code> tags. additionally, I'd advise you to read ''']''' to see which can count as a reliable source for your citations. happy editing! &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 01:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:::After using a template inside the <code><nowiki><ref> </ref></nowiki></code> tags, you only need to put "{{template|reflist}}" in the References section at the end and the references autopopulate. ] (]) 02:35, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::Thanks! ] (]) 12:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Help reviewing status and class of article ==

Hi there everyone, I'm new to editing on Misplaced Pages and have made a number of edits on the ] article. I would love to get some feedback and help reviewing the class status of the article which was formerly tagged as a stub. Thanks! ] (]) 02:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Good question, i would like to know the answer to this as well. I have seen good articles with a low rank, or no rating at all. ] (]) 02:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

::It's certainly more than a stub now! I'm no expert in quality ratings, but I suspect someone here will be able to give you their assessment. For classes of B or below, you can make the assessment yourself against the ]. Also, if you would like feedback on the article, ] might be a good place to look which tells you both how to ask for a peer review, and how to improve the article before asking for one. ] (]) 02:33, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::Thankyou! I'll check it out ] (]) 07:37, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::B and below, how articles are rated primarily depends on when the last review occurred. If you think the rating should be different, feel free to change it. ] (]) 08:35, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::That's great to hear, thankyou. ] (]) 04:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

:Grading is unimportant. ''Improvement'' is important, and it's needed for this article. Sample: {{Olive|In Europe, some early field stations (which are still in operation today) included Concarneau Marine Biological Station (Station de biologie marine de Concarneau) which was founded in 1859 in Concarneau, France. Concarneau Marine Biological Station is a marine biology station which was founded for the purposes of conducting research into coastal fishing by the request of Napoleon III. In Asia, }} First try: {{DarkRed|In Europe, one early field station still in operation today is Concarneau Marine Biological Station (Station de biologie marine de Concarneau), founded in 1859 at the request of Napoleon III by Victor Coste in Brittany for research into coastal fishing. In Asia, }} (Though I'd probably cut the bit about Napoleon III.) Tip: Try reading an article out loud. -- ] (]) 04:44, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::That's a good point thankyou, I'll be sure to have a look over some of the wording. ] (]) 07:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Redirect Depp and Heard to ] ==
We all know about the ongoing defamation trial between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. Search up Depp and everything that comes up is Depp v Heard. Same thing when searching up Heard. I just think for the time of the trial (until sentencing date and as long as the word "Depp" is associated most with Depp v Heard and the word "Heard" is also associated most with Depp v Heard) both Depp and Heard should redirect to Depp v Heard, as most searchers will be looking for the trial and scandal and not Johnny Depp's life and film career or the super basic word ''heard'' that everybody knows the definition of usually. --] (]) 03:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:hi @] and welcome to the teahouse! this will probably be {{not done}}, for the former as ] still remains as the ]. anyone who knows of him through the case may still want to research who Depp is, and given that he's the most notable person with the surname Depp, it redirects there. for the latter, ] is a very basic word where outside of Depp vs Heard and to most people unaware of or just don't care about it, it will relate to hearing. there's also ''lots'' of notable people with the ] including ], so it makes less sense to redirect either Heard or Heard (surname) to Depp v Heard, a case which is not even the main topic since both people are notable and have their own articles, since relevance isn't really a reason to change the redirect target. happy editing! &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 04:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::...oh, and a relevant essay you might want to read: ]. &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 04:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::It would just be a temporary redirect. Is that allowed on Misplaced Pages? Also while I totally agree about Johnny Depp becoming best known as an actor and not an abuse victim, but do really think Amber Heard if found guilty will ever be best known as a good actress? ] (]) 04:34, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::I'd still believe that if you're searching for Depp, you're looking for ] himself and not the case ] (or maybe the bits of Depp's article that provides background behind events in Depp v. Heard). same thing for Heard, which is a ] by the way, plus she already has her own article that details her acting career, this defamation case won't be her entire life covered by the news (which is often the case for person articles redirecting to event articles, like ] -> ], see ] for more on this). regardless, the proper place for this to be brought up would be ] as Hoary pointed out below, or the relevant talk pages ] or ]. &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 04:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::But please, ], don't post it to more than one talk page, don't present your opinions on this case, don't speculate about the future, don't ask others for their opinions, and don't ask others to speculate about the future. Best of all just drop the whole matter. -- ] (]) 05:19, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:Well then, ], the best place for you to suggest this would probably be ]. This page certainly isn't the place. -- ] (]) 04:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:@] You said {{tq|most searchers will be looking for the trial and scandal and not Johnny Depp's life and film career}}. Really? How do you know this? You must have access to Misplaced Pages's internal user and search statistics, right? ] (]) 05:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Each biography gets several times more page views than the trial, and that's during the trial. There are many redirects with both their names. It doesn't make sense to redirect one of their names to the trial. ] (]) 06:39, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::Thanks for that, @]. Nice chart and tables. ] (]) 05:10, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

== Sandbox ==

Excuse my not-perfect language. I'm a foreigner. How to make a sandbox under my user name when I don't want to have a discriminating "own" user page? ] (]) 08:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:Just click on "Sandbox" at the top of any Misplaced Pages page and then edit it and publish it to create it. Whether you have a user page is irrelevant. ]|] 08:37, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::: Just checked: There is no word for "Sandbox" (Hiekkalaatikko in Finnish) in Finnish Misplaced Pages at the top of article page or at the top of the article's history page or at the top user's start page or at the top of the user's talk page. ] (]) 08:53, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::: Simply click on ], edit it, and save it, ]. Though I've no idea why you're asking about the matter here rather than in fi:WP. -- ] (]) 09:58, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::Hello Jan. On English Misplaced Pages, you can have as many user sandboxes as you like, having any names you like, such as ] or ]. ''Also'' for convenience there is an automatic link to the one called ] (if it exists) at the top of every screen. I would guess it would be similar on su-wiki, but I don't know. ] (]) 10:04, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::::: It worked! Thank you very much. Why am I asking here? Because I have asked 2 times in the Finnish Misplaced Pages without getting an answer yet. ] (]) 10:09, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Indice ==

Buongiorno, sono nuovo a Misplaced Pages e sto scrivendo un articolo. Vorrei inserire l'indice ma non so come fare.

Mi potreste aiutare? Grazie ancora.

] (]) 09:07, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

::: This was the first non-English post on this page and apparently the answer to my question about the sandbox. Thanks, good joke though, if you can’t come up with a better answer. ] (]) 09:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

::::It's not about you, ]. -- ] (]) 10:01, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:], if you're asking about the table of contents that normally appears near the top of a complex article, don't worry. It will be generated automatically. -- ] (]) 10:01, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::grazie ] (]) 16:52, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Ox, Oxen and disambiguation page ==

The article entitled "Ox" does not list a species. This is a significant oversight.

Also, the "Ox" disambiguation page does not refer to the animal.

I am not an expert in bovines. While I do have skill in editing, I have no knowledge of the Misplaced Pages system. Thus, I am reporting this here with the hope that someone who has both skills can make the necessary updates to these articles. ] (]) 09:21, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:The article ] conspicuously points to the article ], which explains. The "Ox" disambiguation page has a conspicuous link to ]. So your opinion and mine differ: in mine, no such change is needed. You're free to ask on ] for this or that alteration; perhaps somebody there will agree with you that it's needed. -- ] (]) 09:50, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:If ] is a male ], it can't list a species, can it? An ox can be a '']'' or a '']'', etc. ] (]) 09:51, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Ping ==

how to ping anybody ] (]) 09:39, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Simply link to their name, ], and sign your message (as I'm doing here). -- ] (]) 09:52, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:If you use the link, there's a little-guy-with-a-plus button you can use. ] (]) 09:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Is this website reliable? ==

. I found many Misplaced Pages articles cited this site and the site is very much popular and minimum 10 years old. Actually, I want to use this site for refference that's why I am asking that is this site reliable or not? Thanks ] (]) 09:58, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:I don't know, ]. My guess is that most people here won't know either. The place to ask is ]. -- ] (]) 10:05, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::I agree with what Hoary says. Searching the archives of that noticeboard, nobody seems to have asked about it before. The question is, is it a site with an editorial policy of checking facts, or does it just reproduce anything that comes its way? ] (]) 10:10, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::@],@]. Thanks for the answers. I asked this question there in ]. ] (]) 10:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Hmmm ==

how do you replace the images in a table? ] (]) 10:10, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:Hello, Edward, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you'll need to be more explicit if you want a useful answer, because with what you have said so far, my answer is "the same way as you replace images anywhere else" - see ]. Note that unless the images you want to use are already in ], you'll need to upload them, and that gets you into the thorny area of copyright. ] (]) 10:13, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::@] ] ] (]) 10:16, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:@], Welcome! Can you give us an example? And do you want to replace the images with images correctly uploaded on , or random pics you found online, which is probably a no-no? ] (]) 10:14, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

==Help Needed & Welcomed to get a page Approved ==

]

This page about a fighter in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising was deleted (now in Draft for 6 month reprieve) the main issues being:<br><br>
1. Yitzhak is not important enough to be included in Misplaced Pages<br>
2. Insufficient references<br>
3. Too much on the events surrounding Yitzhak's actions compared to the Yitzhak himself.<br>
4. Style<br>

Point 1. I attempted to deal with this point here but got no response. ] <br>

Point 2. I have used every source available,namely 5 books where his actions are described and I have edited the reference section etc.<br>

Point 3. Re-edited and slashed to a minimum ( I think)<br>

Point 4. Tried as much as possible but found the instructions and guides baffling.<br>

I have received no response about the changes I have made since the original article.<br>
I am unsure of what else to do to get it approved. Any and all guidance welcome.<br>] (]) 10:19, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:@], consider asking for input at ] and ], it can't hurt. ] (]) 10:31, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::Thanks for that suggestion. I will try. ] (]) 06:47, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

== Linked data project ==

Hi I am in my first MSc year in GIS. I am in a project linking data from OSM and Misplaced Pages. I have to link osm residential construction sites to their Misplaced Pages page. To do so I have used a tool to transform OSM data into RDF so that I can link to wikidata and eventually wikipedia. I uploaded a very simple and basic article about Kruisvaartkade ]. Is it possible to generate a wikidata page from this when it is still draft? ] (]) 10:40, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:I can't see why you'd need a novel wikidata page when many already exist, also there's little chance of that draft ever becoming an article. Do you have a question about editing Misplaced Pages? ] (]) 10:51, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== "Self-advertising" in user page ==

Hey, I recently created my own user page ] in which I briefly mention my twitter page (because contacting me via twitter will probably give a faster response then my talk page). Is this allowed? ] (]) 12:45, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hi {{U|Rhinocesus}} and welcome to the Teahouse. First of all, I will remind you that Misplaced Pages is not a place for self-advertising. I think you are new in Misplaced Pages where you are not aware of such Misplaced Pages policies. If your eidts were promotional then you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Please be patient or don't get panic, I will send some useful links in your talk pages. That guides you on how Misplaced Pages works. Thank you! ] (]) 13:02, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:: Welcome, {{u|Rhinocesus}}. The guidance regarding what may be placed on userpages is at ]. This specifically says that links to a personal website are OK provided they are not used in a promotional way. However, the guidance also cautions that such personal information, once published, is very difficult to remove, so you should be cautious about your privacy. ] (]) 13:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Unified Standard of Article Creation ==

I am confused by the double standard in creating new articles on Misplaced Pages.

I created ] based on hundreds of articles on Misplaced Pages for similar journals with the same set of references, but it was moved to draft. I raised the concern to the person who rejected it to restore it.

I re-submitted ] (I had no contribution to it) which already had several reliable and independent references (mostly from universities and academics), and it was rejected twice. I can give you tons of examples of similar articles on Misplaced Pages with much fewer independent references.

I understand that each reviewer/administrator interprets the requirements differently, but it is not justified to reject something when there are similar articles on Misplaced Pages. It is like the ] in the justice system.

What is the strategy of Misplaced Pages for having a uniform encyclopedia?

I wanted to create the articles for missing journals, but I know I will encounter the same problem.] (]) 12:49, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:{{tq|it is not justified to reject something when there are similar articles on Misplaced Pages}}. Please see ]. Unfortunately, few editors are motivated to plough through the thousaneds and thousands and thousands of seriously substandard articles improving or deleting them. (I include myself here). ] (]) 13:59, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::], thanks for the link that indeed supported my point. An encyclopedia should be comprehensive at the level it is designed.] (]) 19:13, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:Our policy is not for articles to be "uniform", particularly if that means uniformly bad. We have standards we enforce, and those standards have been rising. Certainly, there are articles created years ago which would not be accepted if they were created today. If you come across such an article, you can work to improve it so that it meets current standards. Or, if you believe that would not be possible, you can propose it for deletion. (I'm surprised you got '']'' accepted. It seems to me to offer no evidence that its subject is ].) &nbsp; 13:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC) ] (])
::], you surprised me by questioning the notability of ] (which is now proposed for deletion). If ] is not notable enough for Misplaced Pages, there are at least hundreds of journals on Misplaced Pages which should be deleted (I can name tens of them on the top of my head). Out of curiosity, what is your standard for the notability of a research journal? ] has received over 320,000 citations so far. What is the purpose of a scholarly journal? What impact a journal should have on the progress of research to be notable? ] (]) 19:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::''Nano Energy'' may, for all I know, be notable. (I'm inclined to suspect not, because it's published by Elsevier and has a title comprising unrelated subjects, like the notorious ''Chaos, Solitons & Fractals''; but I've made no attempt to check.) The article does not establish ] through ]: it does not cite sources showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Such sources may exist, but you haven't cited any. If there's a standard for notability based on ], I'm unaware of it. If you are aware of such a standard, you should mention it at ]. &nbsp; ] (]) 19:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::], Whether it is a written rule or not, people who are familiar with scholarly journals will judge an article about a journal based on its reputation (which is somehow represented by its impact factor). This is exactly my point. Someone who is familiar with scholarly journals should judge such articles. You may argue that there is a one single rule for the secondary sources of all Misplaced Pages articles. Then, there are at least hundreds of articles about journals which do not meet those criteria. In my practice, Misplaced Pages editors are excessively aggressive towards new articles without having the expertise. ] (]) 22:03, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::I'm sure that there are indeed hundreds of articles about journals which do not meet those criteria. I believe there are tens of thousands of articles about subject (of many different kinds) which do not meet those criteria. Ideally, editors would go through those articles deleting them; but that doesn't happen very often - mostly because it can take considerable work to determine whether their subjects do in fact meet the criteria.
:::::<s>You are arguing for a change in the notability criteria for academic journals, rather like the criteria for ]: that makes some sense, but you need to achieve consensus that they should be changed, rather than simply assert it here. I suggest opening a discussion at ]. ] (]) 11:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)</s> <small>I see that this was discussed in a later item, and there is such a set of criteria --] (]) 11:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)</small>

== Question regarding information boxes ==

Hey there, I was wondering if anybody could help me learn how to insert the boxes one traditionally sees at the very top right of an article, the one with all the info and whatnot on the article in question. I'm writing up ], and think it requires one of those.

Thank you all so very much, ] (]) 14:29, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:@]: Welcome to the Teahouse. You are thinking about ], and they are not required for articles. They help consolidate information about the subject, but by no means are they required. I would focus on making sure the draft is good enough to be accepted before even thinking about that. —]&nbsp;(&nbsp;]&nbsp;•&nbsp;]&nbsp;) 14:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
: (edit conflict) Hello {{u|AdmiralAckbar1977}} and welcome to Misplaced Pages. Help pages about many of the items you'll need as an editor can be found by typing "WP:" followed by the name of what you are looking for into the "Search Misplaced Pages" box. So ] will get you to the right place. That said, I think it is a bit ] for your draft to be accepted as it refers to something only supposed to happen in 2023 and not yet widely discussed in ] ]. ] (]) 14:49, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Regarding a draft page/article ==

Hi,
Could you please kindly let me know the process how a draft page gets published as a Wikipage permanently? And how long does it take? What does the submitter need to do? Thank you. ] (]) 16:52, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:Relevant courtesy link: ]. ] (]) 17:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse! Before being moved to the mainspace (becoming an article), a draft should be submitted and reviewed through the ] (AfC) process. An AfC reviewer will then decide whether or not to Accept the draft article, decline the draft article for later improvement and resubmission, or reject the draft completely. This process can take some time due to the high backlog of about 3,000 articles, although it is unlikely it will take any more than 4 months between each submission. Happy editing! ] (]) 18:42, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:In addition to what {{np|HenryTemplo}} said, articles aren't necessarily permanent once they enter mainspace. They can be nominated for deletion if they don't meet certain guidelines or by editor consensus at ]. —]&nbsp;(&nbsp;]&nbsp;•&nbsp;]&nbsp;) 19:58, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Editing question: Company rebrands ==

Hello!

General editing question. A company has rebranded, and the Misplaced Pages document still references the previous brand name - whilst the document references the new, and in the infobox references the old brand name as "formerly". My assumption is that this document title (and reference URL) won't change, unless there is substantial need/cause for further disambiguation amongst other namesakes. Am I correct in this assumption? This is the article in question: ] - I saw the question raised in the contrib notes and this got me thinking as I can't see any direct guidance on this. ] (]) 17:22, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hello, {{u|Taylordanrw}}. I verified the current name and ] the article to ]. ] (]) 18:51, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== Article and category that do not stick to subject ==

The article Dichotomy is supposedly about dichotomy in logic, yet contains a slew of example from outside logic. I'd like to remove the lot of them, and if someone wishes to reuse those in a different article, then that's great. However, if the article is to be limited to logic, then perhaps it could be retitled something like Dichotomy in logic, or Dichotomy (Logic)?
Also, one of the Categories to which it has been assigned is Greek words and phrases, but Dichotomy is not a Greek word, it is a word with Greek etymology. In fact, the entire Category suffers from this confusion, as it is a hodgepodge of Greek words, words that are same in both languages, English words with Greek roots, and English translations of Greek phrases. I'd like to delete at least all the English words, unless 'close enuf' is what to aim for. ] (]) 18:46, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:I agree with your first paragraph. ] starts off well, by saying what it's about. It sticks to that subject for a while, and then wanders off into other uses of the word. I consider that inappropriate. An article should be about a topic, not a word and its various uses. &nbsp; ]. ] (]) 21:24, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== How do I use the talk section of Misplaced Pages? ==

How do ask a question, or reply to somebody?

] (]) 19:10, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hello, {{u|Requity}}. If you want to ask a specific editor a question, you can do so on that editor's talk page. If you have a question about how to improve an article, you can ask on the article talk page. If you have a question about a policy, you can ask on the talk page for that policy. And so on. ] (]) 19:15, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hi, @]<nowiki>! You can ask a question by clicking the new section button on the top of the page. You can reply by clicking the reply button next to a comment. Always remember to sign your posts with the ~~~~!</nowiki> ]&#124;🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦&#124;]&#124;] 19:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::@] you can read more at ] ]&#124;🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦&#124;]&#124;] 19:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::@] Thank you!
:::] (]) 19:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== List of songs about animals ==

I don't see a list of songs about animals, though I see several other lists about categories having numerous members, such as ]. Am I missing something? If not, then what should be done to start one?] (]) 19:15, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hello, IP editor. It seems that nobody has gotten around to it. Register an account and start editing. After four days have gone by and you have made at least ten edits, you will be eligible to create the list article. Read ] for guidance. ] (]) 19:23, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::Grr...I wrote so much you beat me to making a reply{{jokes}}. ]&#124;🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦&#124;]&#124;] 19:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hey, and Welcome! There is the page ] but no, there is not a page about songs about animals <small>so as a turtle I am very sad {{jokes}}</small>. If you are willing to put in the time and energy, ] and make one! However, I would '''strongly''' recommend ] and spending more time on Misplaced Pages and learning more skills before your right an article. (I have 1000+ edits and when I started ''I'' wanted to make an article. You can see how far I got in ].) Once you have decided to and you are ready, read ] and ]. In the mean time, create an account and try working at the ]! ]&#124;🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦&#124;]&#124;] 19:25, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== How do I make my signature not look ugly. ==

I've seen people on Misplaced Pages with stunning signatures, whilst my signature looks like this: ] (]) 19:20, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hello, {{u|Requity}}. Please read ]SIGNATURE. ] (]) 19:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

== The importance of the expertise of Misplaced Pages editors ==

I understand Misplaced Pages runs based on consensus, but I see some editors make irreversible changes without relevant expertise. For instance,

I created ], which is proposed for deletion (]). By any standard, ] is among the top 5% (if not 1%) scholarly journals. For example, the Danish Bibliometric Research Indicator level listed it as a distinguished journal (see Wikidata).

I re-submitted ] in which the contributors (I was not one of them) provided examples of high profile authors who used the scientometric analysis of their publications in their CVs. The editor, who rejected it, compared it with someone who goes to a music concert. Anyone with academic experience knows how much academics are sensitive in including reliable resources in their CVs.

I believe each category has its own standard (there are more secondary references for Instagram model comparing with scientists). All articles in a category should be judged by the same standard by people who know the field. Being an experienced Misplaced Pages editor does not qualify someone to judge all topics. ] (]) 19:49, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hi, {{u|MojoDiJi}}, we have inclusion criteria to assess against and we do so in a neutral way; you don't have to be a subject matter expert and sometimes that can be a hindrance because we look at notability in a broad sense not under a narrow light. I suggest you express your concerns at the article's ] as we have no control over the process here. Kind regards, ] (]) 20:25, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::Thanks for your thoughts, ], but I beg to disagree. You should be an expert to judge the significance of references. For instance, there are lots of media coverage for a junior politician, which can be used as secondary sources; but there are rarely articles about successful scientists. You cannot judge the availability of secondary sources equally. ] (]) 21:30, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::@] That's why we have different definitions of notability for different subjects. A scientist would have to pass the criteria at ], while politicians have to pass the criteia at ]. If they don't meet either of those specialised criteria they may also qualify for an article if the pass the general ] criteria for a biography, or any of the "this person is automatically notable" criteria at ]. ] (]) 21:36, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::That's exactly my point. There should be separate notability criteria for scholar journals. If not, people who are not familiar with scholarly journals should not take the action/make the judgement. ] (]) 22:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::@] There is, see ] and the specific criteria at ]. If you include a reliable source that shows that the journal passes one of the three criteria laid out there it is essentially guaranteed to be kept if nominated for deletion. ] (]) 22:21, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::Oh, thanks for that. I was looking for this page. Clearly, ] meets the requirement. Therefore, the editor who proposed for deletion was at fault. Taking an action without reviewing the rules in place. This is the concern I am trying to address. Unnecessary actions waste other people's time. ] (]) 22:25, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::::@] Yes, the nomination was clearly incorrect, three established users have commented there and there is currently unanimous support for keeping it. Notability on[REDACTED] is an extremely complex and unintuitive concept with the rules being different for essentially every subject, so it's not surprising that mistakes get made occasionally. It's a real shame that you seem to have been ] quite badly by having your first article nominated for deletion, I hope it hasn't put you off completely. Have you considered joining a wikiproject? ] is full of people interested in writing about scientific topics, they can be a great resource to get subject specific help. ] (]) 22:35, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::::I should add though that the subject specific do see a lot more activity than the general one, e.g. ] ] (]) 22:37, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::::Thank you very much. You were very supportive. I might have overreacted. ] (]) 23:19, 28 May 2022 (UTC)


<!-- Questions go here. Please post new questions at the BOTTOM of the page. -->
:Actually, there're ''far'' less useful sources for Instagram models - or really anyone whose fame comes from social media, web videos, or eSports - than you realise. And ] exists because of the issues surrounding sourcing for academics, especially when ] is also a factor.
:As to Exaly, ], and our audience hardly understands what the hell a scientometric analysis or an ] is. We're written for the layperson, and the article should reflect that by just summarising what the journal is. ], while not a guideline or policy, explains what reviewers are looking for when it comes to these sorts of publications.
:This looks more to me like a gripe that would have been easily dealt with if you had bothered to do research on Misplaced Pages before jumping headfirst into the literal ''hardest'' thing to do here. —] ] <sup><small>]</small></sup> 20:19, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::There are many news outlets such as ] (s credible secondary source) which publish an article whenever an Instagram model post a racy photo. The link did not mention anything about notability by osmosis. My point is that maybe you need to start accepting it for cases like this. You make the same mistake as the editor I mentioned. Here the authors are not the users. By linking they, as reliable and independent professionals, testify that the analysis of their publications is correct. Anyhow, I did not devise this type of referencing. ] (]) 21:39, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::@] The sun (and many such similar publications, like the daily mail) is considered a depreciated source, see ]. This means that editors have deleted essentially all references to the sun except those used in a small number of situations (like ], see this search for the last 20 ), it is highly discouraged as a reference and coverage in the sun does not count towards notability. ] (]) 21:48, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::That was just an example that celebrities get more media coverage than scientists. However, it was good to know. Thanks :) ] (]) 22:16, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::] source, not ]. See also ]. &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">] {] · ] · ] · ]}</span> 14:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:@] We don't give experts special rights to decide on notability, partly this is because we have no way of verifying who anyone is (see, for example, the ]) and partly because everyone can find it difficult to acknowledge their own biases - if you use a piece of software every day you might think it is notable enough for an article, but from an outside observer's perspective it might be that the coverage to support an article simply doesn't exist.
:The journal article deletion nomination appears to be frivolous and I fully expect it to be kept, so the deletion nomination process is working as intended. Likewise the draft on the search engine appears to be full of not great sources and the decline appears to be correct. Compare the sourcing in that draft to things like ], ] or ]. The sources in ] are almost entirely people using or mentioning the search engine, as opposed to coverage of said search engine. The reception section should cite some kind of third party coverage of the reception of Exaly, you might use a news article on the search engine or a bit of coverage from a book, for example, rather than finding individual examples of mentions and combining them together (this falls afoul of ]), citations 7-14 do not show significant coverage of the topic and, in my opinion, should probably be removed. Citation no 6 appears to be to a research paper, but it is actually a citation to a user submitted comment on that paper - this is not usable as a source as it is ]. In citation no 5 the only mention Exaly is a one word link in the "other resources" section - there is no coverage of this search engine at all there. Citation 4 is a WordPress blog, while the author here is an expert in the field and this can probably be used for information it doesn't really show notability. Citation 3 is the website's own about page, and is not independent coverage. Citation no 2 appears at first glance to be a university writing about the search software, but a further search shows that it's just a copy paste of https://exaly.com/about-us.html. Citation 1 appears to be a good length piece of coverage by an independent party and is exactly the kind of source that is needed, one or two more sources like that are what is needed in this article.
:If you are an academic having a go at writing[REDACTED] articles you might want to have a read of ] and ], both of which were written by academics to give advice on making the transition from academic writing to[REDACTED] writing. ] (]) 21:23, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::I highly appreciate your review. If you rejected the article, I would say it was an expert review. But comparing high profile authors with attending a music concert is not acceptable. I am mostly interested in creating articles for journals than Exaly, and find it ridiculous to see high impact journals nominated for deletion. However, since you mentioned; I need to add two points. First, if you look at the pages you lined such as Scopus, Google Scholar, etc., they have not much references when their articles were created. The references were added over 10-15 years. Second, you did not scrutinize the references thoroughly. For instance, Citation 6 is not a user comment. It is stated by the original author of the paper. I agree with you that Citations 7-14 should be removed but comparing them with going to a music concert is unacceptable. ] (]) 21:52, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::Just pointing out that the OP's statement that "some editors make irreversible changes" is incorrect. The actions here are anything but irreversible. ] was draftified as not being ready for article space. It was then moved back to article space and improved. Another editor has now nominated it for deletion, and that's being discussed at ], where several editors have already expressed opinions that it should not be deleted.
::::And ] was not "rejected". It was "declined" three times. There's a big difference. "Rejected" means it is not believed that the topic will qualify for an article. "Declined" means the article is not ready for article space, and the reviewer (in this case reviewers) leave suggestions on what needs to be fixed. ] (]) 21:50, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::], I still believe the changes are irreversible. The original author of ] gave up. I re-submitted it though I had no significant contribution. I give up now and draft will be deleted. I give up creating new articles for missing journals when I see the articles I created are unfairly suggested for deletion. ] (]) 21:56, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::If ] is abandoned it will not be deleted until it has been untouched for six months, And even if that happens it can be restored at any time by any editor simply by asking for it to be restored. How is that irreversible? I already told you that your article ] is under discussion and so far several editors have supported keeping. Why don't you work to improve the article, and contribute to the AFD instead of simply throwing your hands up in the air and giving up? ] (]) 22:03, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::::], as you see I did comment (though in the wrong place :D). We all are volunteers with no personal gain. It is frustrating to see that you spend time to help the community and instead your contribution is treated unfairly. I follow the rules to enhance Misplaced Pages. I am not here to fight to prove the value of my contribution. If I had created a controversial article, I would expected to see the result of consensus. But when I created something that was strangely missing in Misplaced Pages, it is disappoint to see it is considered for deletion because someone without the required knowledge or reason felt this way. ] (]) 22:09, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::::"unfairly" How is the AFD "unfair"? Did anyone prevent you or anyone else from participating? See ], or perhaps even more relevantly, ]. AFD is a process, and the only threshold for triggering that process is that someone ] thinks the article it not notable. And on earth, there are about 8 billion someones (and incidentally, there are many many AFDs on Misplaced Pages). It's as fair of a process as there is. &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">] {] · ] · ] · ]}</span> 14:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:::@] One of the things you have to bear in mind is that the minimum standards that articles need to survive has increased drastically over the last 20 years. "what[REDACTED] is not", which removed some of the worst of the early content from the project wasn't written down until nearly 6 months after the project started . The concept that "information needs sources" wasn't actually written until mid 2003, two and a half years after the project started The concept that things should demonstrate significant coverage in third party sources wasn't written down until late 2006 nearly 5 years after the project started. Even when written down a lot of these policies weren't really enforced properly until the late 2000's, when the fallout from things like the ] forced editors to start enforcing content policies more thoroughly. There are a lot (as in millions) of articles from the early days of[REDACTED] which do not meet modern quality standards, but cleaning them all up is a monumental task, there is currently a "sweep" wikiproject in the works though that aims to clean up the worst of them.
:::Although the comment in citation 6 is by the original author of the paper it has not been through the same peer review and editorial process as the main paper and as such cannot be considered to be equal, especially in terms of things like reliability. Mentioning something in a discussion about a paper you wrote is also very different from mentioning it in the paper submitted for peer review from a notability standpoint. ] (]) 22:16, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::::I agree with most of your views. ] (]) 22:20, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::"But comparing high profile authors with attending a music concert is not acceptable."
::: I made that comparison as a way to explain our notability criteria and what independent reliable sources are by analogy with a topic that's more easily accessible. It's a perfectly acceptable comparison. &#32;<span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">] {] · ] · ] · ]}</span> 14:16, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


== Indefinitely protect Teahouse ==
== I need help with the article to be worked on for approval ==
{{Moved discussion to|Misplaced Pages talk:Teahouse#Indefinitely protect Teahouse}}


== Article for submission ==
I have a strong belief that all my articles are best on people that require the[REDACTED] kind of recognition


Hi! Few days back, I created a draft in Afc, ], I havent received any reply. Is there any way to...just have a reviewer to review it? Forgive me if I sounded impatient, Im new here, I dont know all the rules and regulations here, So, a reply would be enough. ---- ] (]) 08:07, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
However the rules of notability do not seem that clear for me maybe to understand


:Hello there. You have to remain patient because drafts will be reviewed by AFC reviewers in a random order so, just like how the draft says it right now, it may take 2 months or more to be reviewed. ] (]|]) 08:11, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Aanywell wisher will be grately appreciated


:While you're waiting, ], there's more work that you can do by yourself. The ISBN is wrong; what's the correct ISBN? Consider this: "they often receive less attention compared to more prominent meteor showers". It strikes me as pretty much a truism. I mean, I know squat about dog breeds, but I'll hazard a guess that lesser-known dog breeds often receive less attention compared to more prominent dog breeds. And the first sentence: What's singular and what's plural? -- ] (]) 08:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
thank you ] (]) 19:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::@] All right, All right, I will correct those mistakes. But the isbn is correct, you can search that isbn in Google and you will get a result. I don't know what's the problem here. ] (]) 08:40, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{u|Andrew Kayiza}} Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume this refers to ]. Misplaced Pages is not a place to merely tell about someone, and is not meant as a form of recognition for someone(there are, in fact, ] about one's self). A Misplaced Pages article about a person must summarize what independent ] with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the personm, showing how they meet the special Misplaced Pages definition of ]. Being a prince may very well be notable, but only if independent sources write about him, without his involvement or that of associates. Your draft has virtually no sources. Misplaced Pages is interested in what other people unaffiliated with the Prince say about him. Please read ]. ] (]) 19:59, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::], the closest I find at WorldCat is {{OCLC|958134990}}; but this has different editors and no ISBN (correct or incorrect) is specified for it. You're right about getting a result from googling: in fact you understate what Google returns. ( in particular ''should'' be authoritative.) Well then, ] is for you! As for the identities of the editors, here's a wild guess: Are Jenniskens et al perhaps the authors of a particular piece you're citing within the ''Proceedings''? -- ] (]) 08:56, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::What I meant was this . You are right, It has different authors. I will correct it. But as you can see, the isbn is same. So, How do you use the above template. ] (]) 09:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
{{od}} Normally, ], I'd say "Just skip any mention of the dud ISBN." But it appears frequently and conspicuously; so if you skipped it somebody might later add it, with the same ill-effect. And therefore I've . (I'm tempted to add "So now you owe me a beer." But of course soliciting for payment, whether of bucks or booze, is a no-no.) NB the place where a conference is held is not necessarily the place ("location" in Misplaced Pages-speak) of publication of a volume of the "proceedings" of the conference. Now I see another note, specifying something on pages 355–356 of ''Meteoroids 2013: Proceedings of the Astronomical Conference.'' What's the title of the particular piece you're citing, and who wrote it? Please try to add this info yourself; if you get stuck, ask here. -- ] (]) 00:27, 21 January 2025 (UTC)


:@] Thanks a lot for rewriting the reference!👍 Now lemme try to find what you mentioned. If I got any problem, I'll just leave a message on your talk page. ----] (]) 05:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
== Follow-up to ] ==


== Double-checking process for submitting first article? ==
Please review latest changes.


I have my first article written and ready to go ––&nbsp;I just want to check a few things?
Hello, I made changes to the page I am writing called Joanna Langfield. The last comments I received on it was that the way it was written currently was that it was not compliant with how you would like, so I made the changes.


* There's a little notification that says, "Important, do not remove this line before article has been created." Should I remove it before hitting "publish" (since I've written the article now), or does it mean to wait until the article has been approved by an editor?
If you can please review so it can (hopefully!) be published now that would be greatly appreciated.&nbsp;] (]) 20:12, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
* I wrote the article in the Misplaced Pages wizard. My understanding is that if I hit "publish," it will go to another volunteer editor for review? It won't automatically appear on Misplaced Pages's home page? The code at the top is subst: AfC submission/draftnew.
:{{courtesy link|Draft:Joanna Langfield}}. &nbsp; ] (]) 21:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::The enormous list in section "Notable Works and Mentions" is mostly trivial and adds virtually nothing to the draft except an air of desperation. ] (]) 22:13, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::Hello, {{u|GregWikiMake}}. According to ], she should be referred to by her surname following the first mention of her. Remove all those extra "Joannas". The "Interviews" section is unreferenced and it therefore comes off as shameless namedropping. Unreferenced sections are a red flag for reviewers. This would only merit inclusion if discussed by an ''independent'' reliable source. I agree with Theroadislong's comment about the "Notable Works and Mentions". It is a disjointed and jarring list of factoids. You need to develop the skill of writing in an encyclopedic fashion. ] (]) 01:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::Thanks for reviewing and I can remove the Joanna's.
::::I do want to make clear however that I know for a fact that, because she is my mother and I spoke to her about this (and that I have already disclosed), she did interview all those celebrities.
::::When Joanna first started on the radio 40 years ago nothing was digital or online. I have called many MANY people about this to try and get references, to no avail.
::::With all that being said, how do you believe I should write the Natoble Works and Mentions section? ] (]) 03:19, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::If the facts you know aren't independently verifiable in reliable published sources, then they should not be included. I have had similar problems with wine-related articles, in which I can talk to a notable winemaker in person and learn something that isn't published, but I cannot use it. ~] <small>(])</small> 06:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


] (]) 16:12, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
== trying to anchor a reference and it won't anchor ==


:Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse. You need to hit "publish" in order to save your draft at all - the name was changed to "publish" some while ago to emphasise that even drafts are public, in that anybody can see them if they go looking. It doesn't mean "Publish to the main encyclopaedia".
<del>Reference 19 is supposed to go to its anchor and it won't. What am I doing wrong? ] and ]. If it reverts back on you by the time you get my question, .</del> --] (]) 20:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:Once you have published (i.e. saved) your draft, have a careful look at whether your sources meet ] and the draft establishes that the subject is ] in Misplaced Pages's sense. If so, there will be a button that you can pick that says "Submit this draft for review" (or some such language).
:{{ping|Epiphyllumlover}} Since you've stricken through your post, it's probably fair to assume that you figured things out yourself. If that's the case, then great. For future reference, you can probably just remove your question in such a case if you want as long as nobody has replied to it and it wasn't posted too long ago. You can also strike through you post, but probably should follow the instructions in ] if that's what you want to do. Just leave the section heading as is and strike through everything up to your signature. A subsequest post stating you've sorted things out would also probably be a good thing. The way you tried to strike your post created a formating problem that made it seem as if your post was part of a completely unrelated question asked by someone else. -- ] (]) 22:25, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::Thank you, yes, I figured it out. I am sorry for creating a formatting problem.--] (]) 19:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC) :{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}} ] (]) 16:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you! I followed your directions and hit published, made a few more edits (added more sources to further establish independence), and then submitted for review, fingers crossed I guess! I appreciate your assistance! ] (]) 17:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::For the curious, ]. And for A&G, the review system is not a queue, so could be days, weeks, or (sadly) months. ] (]) 20:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


== What to do about a user mass-removing content sourced from a certain site ==
== How to resolve "Category:Rejected AfC submissions" ==


Hello. I've come across a user whose contributions removing content from articles that source material from a site called "Brenton Film", and from edit summaries the user appears to have some sort of conflict of interest. I am unsure of what to do, what the Misplaced Pages guidelines are for this, and if my concern is even valid. Any advice/help would be appreciated. Thanks - ]] 19:05, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi, I need help resolving this issue with a[REDACTED] page that was rejected. What should I do? ] (]) 00:04, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:{{u|MaryamZahedi}} Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It would help to know which draft you are talking about, as your account has no edits(other than here), but generally a rejection means that nothing further can be done. If the draft was "declined", then something can possibly be done. ] (]) 00:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::Thank you for getting back, the original submission was sent with a different account and I'm here to help figure out how we could publish a new page on Misplaced Pages. It does meet all the guidelines and I don't know what needs to change in order to have it go through the next time. Really appreciate your input. ] (]) 00:34, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::{{u|MaryamZahedi}} Again, it is difficult to help you without knowing what the draft is. Who is "we"? Do you represent an organization? Misplaced Pages does not have "pages", it has articles. ] (]) 00:42, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::I'm new to Misplaced Pages and its terminologies and trying to help a friend who is also new to this, and has created and submitted an article that was published on everybodywiki.com instead of[REDACTED] and I'm trying to understand what needs to be done next time to help so that it goes through. Trying to figure out what caused the rejection so that it doesn't happen again. The article ended up being published under the name "Bioenergy Economy" in the everybodywiki website but this chat is not letting me link the URL here since it's an external site. ] (]) 00:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::Hello, {{u|MaryamZahedi}}. The draft in question is ]. It still exists. It has not been rejected. It is not in any such category. Instead, it has been declined, which is different. The draft has lots of problems and several reviewers have offered good advice about how to improve it. Read all that advice and heed it. Study ] and follow that advice as well. If you have a ], be sure to declare it. ] (]) 01:11, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::The original author is ]. ] (]) 01:15, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::::Thank you, that is super helpful to know. Thank you for referring me to that page, I will take a closer look and read through it all. Thanks! ] (]) 04:30, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::regarding everybodywiki, it seems that bioenergy economy's draft has been forked there. it's not officially related to[REDACTED] or any of its sister wikis, and has been recognized as a ] of[REDACTED] that scrapes pages using a bot (which is the case with your draft). happy editing! &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 01:20, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::Didn't know that could happen, thanks for informing on that! ] (]) 04:31, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


:Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse. The IP's grounds for objecting to the site don't seem relevant (sources can be biased ''and'' reliable), but I doubt whether Brenton Film counts as a ] in the first place. It looks to me like a Blog, or at any rate an ]. I suggest asking at ]. ] (]) 19:39, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
== Kevin Millar (baseball player) ==


== Subpages (User), remove redirect ==
Go to the article, go to: Replacement player section. Reference needs to be cleaned up. Thank you for your time. ] (]) 02:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:Fixed. The 1st reference was missing a close tag. Thanks.] (]) 02:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


Hi, how do you remove redirects from (1) subpages to pages and (2) from subpage to subpage? I have difficulty with this logic as it is now.  
== editing ==
Is there an administrator who can delete a previous edit summary I made that has a spelling mistake or fix the spelling mistake in the edit summary? I am unsure how to complete this request with a dummy edit, if possible. ] (]) 03:33, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


Case 1: Page ] points to the lemma ] and keeps showing as a "subpage", how to remove/unlink this?
:Edit summaries cannot be changed once the edit is saved. They can be deleted, but this will not be done just because the edit summaries contain typos or spelling mistakes. ] (]) 04:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::Minor errors in edit summaries are not worth worrying about. If you make a significant error in an edit summary, like misspelling the word "tuck", then you can use the technique described at ] to clarify what you really meant. ] (]) 04:40, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::I am having trouble with the format for a dummy edit. I believe the spelling error is significant. Here is the page, , or you can view the spelling error on this page: . Thank you! ] (]) 14:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


Case 2: Page ] points to ], but why when the second page has a dedicated name?
== Seven Sisters ==


What I intend is to simply create subpages as notes; if one of them has "article qualities", it can be moved to the main page, but will the redirect still be set? How can I undo it? Thanks!
All 7 dots on the Seven Sisters Colleges map are in the wrong places. I have no idea how to fix it. ] (]) 04:26, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


] (]) 19:50, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:Welcome to the Teahouse! It appears you would fix the map on ] by fixing the coordinate location in the Wikidata entry for each college, such as ] for ]. Hope this helps, and happy editing! ] (]) 04:37, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::The locations on Wikidata were correct, @]; there was something else funky going on, possibly with the map template itself. I sidestepped the issue by converting it to the more modern {{t|Maplink}} format. Cheers, <span style="color:#AAA"><small>&#123;{u&#124;</small><span style="border-radius:9em;padding:0 5px;background:#088">]</span><small>}&#125;</small></span> <sup>]</sup> 05:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::@] @] The issue might be this recent change to the coordinates in the data template for the cropped northeastern US map? ] (]) 06:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::{{Re|Shrikesong}} Is there a chance your edit caused something? <span style="color:#AAA"><small>&#123;{u&#124;</small><span style="border-radius:9em;padding:0 5px;background:#088">]</span><small>}&#125;</small></span> <sup>]</sup> 06:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::Yes, somewhat. My edit attempts were trying to correct the map locations as well. Whenever it was changed to NE Cropped map the locations were very off. A comment was made that it wasn't correct and I looked into it to see what I could adjust. It turned out more complicated and I was able to get some places closer, but I really think it has to do with the settings based on that cropped map. I had been testing and was going to reach out to others, but then got sidetracked and left it as best I could at the time. Was going to come back eventually. I think the non-cropped version probably worked better if anyone wanted to go back to it. I kind of like the maplink format better anyway. ] (]) 06:16, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::@] @] Having looked into it a bit further I think I know what the issue is. ] currently has the data set up for an ], however the map it's been cropped from, ] is a ]. The different projections mean the maps need to handle distortion differently, if you look at the bottom boundary of Delaware the difference is obvious, in an equirectangular projection it's a horizontal straight line, in a conic projection it's a curve. To fix this the map needs to be set up to use a modified form of the x and y formulas used in ] to account for the distortion. ] (]) 06:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::::The formulas needed are in the article ] ] (]) 06:31, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::::::Thank you. I will work on that this week if no one else gets to it first. ] (]) 02:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


:{{u|17387349L8764}}: you have created two subpages of your own user page, both redirects. (I cannot think of any purpose that would be achieved by doing this, which rather hampers me in giving advice.) One of them was to another redirect, and was automatically rerouted by a robot to avoid the double redirect. If you don't want these redirects to exist, you can just blank them - they're your own subpages, and no-one will mind, or even notice. I don't know what you mean by "will the redirect still be set?". If you blank the content of a redirect, it ceases to be a redirect. ] (]) 23:48, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
== Library books as a reliable source ==
::Hi, there was no particular reason. I think the auto-redirect caused the confusion. Because I moved the article once some time ago, I left it and lost to see the "mechanics" behind it. It all works now, i.e. removing the #redirect and using u1 to remove "used" subpages. ] (]) 11:35, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{to|17387349L8764}} A page is made into a ] simply by putting the text {{code|#redirect ]|wikitext}} at the top (as the very first text contained in the page, nothing before it). This redirects it to whatever page name is inside the {{code| ]|wikitext}}—] here. That's it! Magic! To make it not-a-redirect anymore, you just edit the page to remove the {{code| #redirect|wikitext}} thing. Important: this means '''editing the redirected page itself, ''not''''' the page it is "pointing at" (redirected to). To edit your user sandbox: {{-r|User:17387349L8764/sandbox|follow this link}}. Remove that {{code| #redirect|wikitext}} part and ''voila''.
:Your "]" is considered "yours" and you can do whatever with it (as long as it's "productive" Misplaced Pages Stuff). If you want any pages in it deleted such as {{-r| User:17387349L8764/List of requirements engineering tools}} just add the text <code>{{tl|u1}}</code> at the top of the page and an ] will come along and take care of it. I suggest trying out ] if you haven't as it makes easier this and many other Misplaced Pages tasks.
:For a list of every page in your "userspace" have a look at: ]. And to look up info about editing WP and how to do various things try ]. You're also of course welcome to ask for assistance here or the ], or ], and ] can direct you to other venues to find assistance as well. I hope you have a good day and if you have more questions ask away! --] (]) 04:31, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you for this absolutely clear description. This helps me a lot. The German Misplaced Pages does some things differently, so I have to remember in both spheres. Twinkle is activated and I may use the subpages more often when I see potential to prepare an article. I will bookmark the question/answer. Have a nice day. ] (]) 11:39, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Ah, in that case note also plenty of "project space" pages have ] as articles do, to go between "equivalent" pages on different language editions. So if you're more fluent in another language you might find it helpful to start from "help" pages in that, and go to the en version. (Note interlang links are kept centralized on ] if you're not aware.) --] (]) 21:26, 21 January 2025 (UTC)


== About My Draft (]) ==
Are library books a reliable source even though I read them? Should I use the text from the book I read to edit on articles? It is called research. This will be a good idea to help improve Misplaced Pages and contribute on building an encyclopedia. Books and literature tend to have more information than the Misplaced Pages itself. Respond when you are ready. -- ] (]) 04:38, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hello, IP editor. Books can be excellent sources but you must develop the ability to evaluate the reliability of any given book. Does the publisher have a good reputation? Does the author have a good reputation? If you have determined that a specific book is reliable, then it does not matter where you read it. Libraries books are fine. Books from new or used bookstores are fine. Books that you can read online are fine. Books you borrowed from a friend are fine. If you pull a book out of a garbage can, then that book is fine, as long as the author and the publisher are reliable. ] (]) 05:13, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::@] This IP is an editor avoiding a block. They were blocked for a year as {{IP user|2601:205:C002:D1E0:0:0:0:0/64}} for long term trolling, disruptive editing and vandalism, they are currently avoiding their block as {{IP User|76.20.110.116}} and various IP addresses in the {{Ip user|204.129.0.0/16}} range. I opened an SPI about this a week or so ago but they're a bit backlogged there at the moment, see ]. If you look at the edits of those two IP ranges you can see the obvious overlap in topics and pages and the good hand bad hand editing, e.g. they vandalise the page ] as 204.129 and leave some trolling on it's talk page before showing up again as 76.20 to do some good hand editing . ] (]) 05:20, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::Please file a report at ]. I am not willing to investigate on my own at this time, because I am not a particularly skilled sockpuppet investigator, plus I am busy with other things. ] (]) 05:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::Fair enough, as I said I filed an SPI a week and a half ago but there's a perpetual backlog there, especially for cases that can't rely on checkuser. {{Ping|bbb23}} You've been cleaning up a lot of the mess coming out of the 204.129 /16 range, would you be willing to have a look at 76.20? ] (]) 05:35, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


Shall I consider the comment left by ]? When I fix up articles, I only really look at the reason that was provided in the decline box. In this case, it was "This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission." If I fixed up this issue and this issue only, would the page have a higher chance of being accepted? Also, I'm not really sure how to interpret this statement. Are my explanations insufficient? Are they considered hard to properly interpret to the average reader? I also may need some help with the 'Analysis' section because the scholarly analyses I've found on ] that revolve around the film and its cultural impact are paid. ] (]) 22:50, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
== How to get a printable version of Encyclopedia. ==


:{{ping|LeGoldenBoots}} Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, your draft would have a higher chance of being accepted if you fixed that problem. It's not a guarantee though—different reviewers have different opinions. As to how you fix the problem, the best thing to do is to imagine that you've never seen ''The Shining''. I, for instance, have never seen it, and I am a bit confused by the draft. For example, I have no idea why "Here's Johnny!" was said, what scene it was in, why it's repeated so many times, etc. There are some comments you might want to look at on the draft. If you need to access certain paywalled sources, you should be eligible for the ], which might grant you access to those sources, or you could ask at ]. Happy editing! <span style="border-radius:3em;padding:5px;background:#483D8B;">‍''']''']</span> 00:16, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Since Misplaced Pages Book Creator has been closed, do you have any reason why it is closed? If so, how will I get my own personal book with selected articles and have it printed on PediaPress? Any strategy? How can I find the way to create my own Misplaced Pages book? Thank you! ] (]) 04:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::@] Alright, I had made some edits here and there to the page; particularly in the "Imagery and phrases" section. I also changed some of the vocabulary I used in sections of the article, courtesy of the comment left by ]. Would the page be in a good spot to be properly submitted now considering I fixed the issues described in the decline box, thanks to your explanation of what that really meant. (Thanks!), or should that be left for me to decide? ] (]) 01:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello. In brief, that project did not prove to be viable. still seems to be in business, but they are no longer in a partnership with the Wikimedia Foundation. Also, there are countless self-publishing platforms available that will print a book to order for you. I used a service like that recently, that claimed to collect the best photos that I have posted on Facebook in recent years. Their algorithmic bot did a great job of selecting photos, although about 3% of them were incongruous. The algorithm clearly favors photos of flowers and babies. That was fine with me. ] (]) 05:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::{{ping|LeGoldenBoots}} It's still a bit confusing. My suggestion is to have a "Plot" or "Background" section in the beginning, right after the lead, where you briefly describe the plot and the characters of the film. This section doesn't need to be cited, but it could help clear up some of the confusion as to what character does what. <span style="border-radius:3em;padding:5px;background:#483D8B;">‍''']''']</span> 01:38, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::@] The book creator is still around and you can still use it to make books, the only bit that was removed was the "community maintained" book namespace which was mostly full of rubbish. To use the book creator you need to create an account (as you can only save books in your own user space now), then you can go to ] to start the process of collecting pages. The in-wiki pdf creation functionality has been broken for about 10 years, and the free pdf rendering PressPedia was supposed to offer was withdrawn about 5 or so years ago, so the only options for actually being able to read your book are to pay PressPedia to print it or to use the community maintained mediawiki2latex. If you have a short book there's a version of the software running on wmflabs, https://mediawiki2latex.wmflabs.org/, if it's too long for online rendering you'll need to set up a linux machine to use it. It sort of works, but the rendering of certain templates can be a bit dodgy. It's not a great experience for readers overall, hence all the warnings about everything being half functional. ] (]) 05:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::Will do. Thank you. ] (]) 05:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Yeah, that is all far too complicated for me, and I have been a Misplaced Pages editor for 13 years. If I wanted to print a physical book consisting of various Misplaced Pages articles, I would use an "on demand" book printing service, copy pasting the articles, and attributing them on the fly. ] (]) 05:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
{{od}} {{U|LeGoldenBoots}}, I thought I'd clean up a single, very short paragraph, as a demonstration of one kind of the work needed. But I was stumped by "Another similarity is the axe-murdering Salamanca twins, in contrast to the axe-murdered Grady twins." Maybe there's a similarity, maybe there's a contrast, maybe there's even both. But if there are both, then say so directly; don't make the sentence look as if you started it with one idea but reversed yourself less than a dozen words later. Elsewhere in the same section, the draft says that the film ''Ready Player One'' "features a plentiful of references" to the film ''The Shining''. I suppose "features" means "has" or "shows", but your use here of "plentiful" is alien to me. (For me, and ], it's an adjective, not a noun.) Perhaps it's just the result of a sleepy and incomplete rewording; but whatever the reason for it, I recommend that you slowly read the draft aloud; and where it sounds strange, rewrite. Best of luck! -- ] (]) 02:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::::What about any other website? Do they sell physical Misplaced Pages books? ] (]) 15:30, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::Googling "" seems to support 192.76.8.78's recommendation. ] (]) 19:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


:Alright, thank you for the clarification! ] (]) 05:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
== Alvin Ailey Page ==


==Empty string==
I look up celebrities on Misplaced Pages all the time. In the “early years” section, the celebrity’s parents are always listed. I just now looked up Alvin Ailey after watching a PBS documentary on his life, and was surprised to see that his mother’s name was not included in his early years description. Her presence was mentioned, but her name was omitted. She was a very important figure throughout his life and the absence of her actual name seems terribly disrespectful. I honestly can’t think of why, when among all the many celebrity entries I’ve read on Misplaced Pages the parents are named, this oversight of Alvin Ailey’s mother’s name has happened.
Please copy the following question over for me:


Having a strange interaction at ] with an editor who seems not to be able to read or understand guidelines; I don’t really know how to talk to a person who thinks is mandated by the MOS. Advice (or, even better, weighing in gently somewhere) requested. (Is this bad use of punctuation ''explicitly'' ruled out somewhere in MOS? Anything that requires interpretation or reading comprehension seems like it would be hard to convey to them.) ] (]) 13:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Can someone please look into it and correct the exclusion? They both deserve better.
:So try, straightforwardly and of course with no hint of sarcasm, on ]. -- ] (]) 00:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)


== Alt accounts ==
Thank you. ] (]) 06:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:I've added the names of his parents to the ] article. ] (]) 07:30, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


So I know that some users on Misplaced Pages have alternative accounts. Is there a criteria that someone has to meet in order to legitimately have an alt account? ] (]) 00:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
== New page ==
Hi fellow teahouse host, Can anyone tell me that how to create new page in wikipedia? ] (]) 06:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:{{reply|ADP Dahal}} See ]. If you're new, it's best that you create a draft page first and get it reviewed. ~] <small>(])</small> 06:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:@] Start with making sure that you have the sources to meet the demands of ]. If you don't, pick another subject. ] (]) 09:07, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:@] - Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Misplaced Pages, especially if you do not have a lot of experience editing Misplaced Pages. To learn how to edit, you could view ] and ]. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple ] ] that have provided ] of the subject, and determine whether it meets Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, called "]". If so, you could follow the instructions at ], and be prepared for a process that may include months of waiting, rejections, and rewrites, before an article is created. Hope this helps, and happy editing! ] (]) 15:16, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::I'm sure you meant "months of waiting, declines, and rewrites". ] (]) 07:10, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks all for your time to address my problem. ] (]) 07:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


:{{ping|RedactedHumanoid}} see ]. There's no specific criteria, but sock accounts not meeting any of those bullets are at best frowned upon. —] ] <sup><small>] ]</small></sup> 00:03, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
== Unreleased music on artists' discographies ==
::Alright, thanks. ] (]) 00:13, 21 January 2025 (UTC)


== A general question ==
Hello Wikipedians! Good to see you again! Lately, a lot of artists play unreleased music which has not even been announced officially at performances e.g. ] at ], ] at one concert ofthem some days ago at Malta etc. Do we add those songs with TBA or we don't write them at all until the official announcement? I'm asking because it is already played music live but is not on music platforms. - ] (]) 06:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


:Hello, Fisforfenia, and welcome to the Teahouse. The place to look for this sort of guidance is ], which suggests not. (see section "What should not be included"). ] (]) 11:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC) Hi! I was just wondering, Why are there a lot of articles with no references, Aren't there 'new page reviewers'? Why did they accept articles without references? ] (]) 05:52, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @]. ] users can post articles without having them reviewed. The ] backlog is also 11,000+ and growing, so it might take a while for articles to be reviewed. ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 06:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:@] A lot of artists play other artists' music during concerts -- Heart and Pink, among others, often play a Led Zeppelin song during a concert. But I presume this isn't what you are asking about, right? ] (]) 07:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::{{u|Warriorglance}}, ] is available for your use to draw attention to such articles. Even better, you can add references to reliable sources yourself. ] (]) 06:25, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::No, what I'm asking is when an artist eg. ], go to a concert and perform a song of them but unreleased officially yet, see , , and , do we add it or not? I'm asking because this one is not released on any platforms but it has been announced on a performance. ] (]) 13:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:::@] Ok, I know that, but why is 'Afc' there? Can you please explain the differences? ] (]) 06:29, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Warriorglance}} ] is an option that editors may use when creating articles, and it's often recommended that those (particularly new or newish editors) without sufficient experience in article creation take advantage of it because it can help them avoid having their efforts being quickly deleted if they try to add a new article directly to the encyclopedia themselves. The AfC process allows users to receive feedback on drafts for potential articles and perhaps in the process learn some more about Misplaced Pages editing. It's not a perfect system but it can be helpful to some; in addition, it's also a way to try to minimize the number of bad articles (e.g. excessively promotional articles) being added to the encyclopedia. As for ], Misplaced Pages has more than six million articles and all Wikipedians are volunteers working in areas that interest them; those involved with NPP probably do whate they can whenever they can, but their efforts will almost always never be enough because there's simply more pages being created than there are NPP people to look them over. All Misplaced Pages articles are in a sense "new" pages since articles can change (sometimes drastically) from one minute to the next; moreover, all Wikipedians are in a sense "new page patrollers" because they all have the ability to either improve/clean up existing articles or tag/propose/nominate them for deletion. An unreferenced article could be an article that was bad from the start and needs to be deleted; it could be an article that started out OK but morphed into something worse over the years that just needs to be returned to its better state; or, it could be an article that has lots of potential that just needs some one to come along and devote some time to. Figuring out what is what is one of the things that Misplaced Pages will always have to deal with because from the very beginning it was sent up to not be a peer-reviewed publication with some sort of central editorial or approval board. -- ] (]) 06:58, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::To be clear, {{u|Warriorglance}}, use of the Articles for Creation process is ''entirely optional'' for a large majority of active editors and is mandatory only for paid editors and those with an overt conflict of interest, and for new editors who are not yet autoconfirmed. I have written over 100 new articles and never once used the AfC process. ] (]) 07:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::There's also the fact that ], so there are a lot of articles that were created under much, much more permissive conditions than we're used to today. —] ] <sup><small>] ]</small></sup> 19:05, 21 January 2025 (UTC)


== chatgpt article ==
== Want to edit semi protected pages ==


] definitely has many issues that i stumbled upon: first off his title "Maharaja" was added in a move by a certain user ] who claimed the original title was "misspelled". I moved it back.
How to edit? ] (]) 07:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


Now my question is, this same user has added a large amount of information in "Legacy" section which is so obviously chatgpt that i'd rather draftify than leave it sitting in article space. "fostered", "enhanced", "unity", etc etc... and its last point is the nail in the coffin which confirms it being an llm, not to mention it is completely unsourced.
:You need to register an account, then make at least 10 edits and wait four days. After that you should be able to edit semi protected pages. ] (]) 07:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::You should request an edit using the ] process on the article talk page. ] (]) 08:11, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


Do i go ahead and ] remove the content in question, or should i draftify because the article truly doesn't look like it belongs in article space. ] (]) 16:00, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
== Contributions disappeared ==


:@] The article has been around since 2007, so you can't ] it. You can remove unsourced material, add {{t|cn}} tags or send it to ] and you should definitely expand your concerns on its Talk Page. ] (]) 16:10, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Why did my contributions disappear They're gone from the pages I added them to ] (]) 11:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::After going through the edit history on the article, I would restore the version before Rohan began editing, as their edits also removed some sourced content. ]&nbsp;] 16:12, 21 January 2025 (UTC)


== help wanted! ==
:Hello KingBiscuitBlues, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you look at the history of the articles you edited (such as ]) it is clear that {{U|Ojorojo}} has removed the paragraph you added to each of them with the comment "rv unverified, spam". That is to say, the information you added was not supported by a reliable published source, ''and'' contained an apparently promotional link (I know it wasn't an active link, but it was still spam). I think Ojorojo should have notified you that they were reverting you, but they didn't. ] (]) 11:54, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
{{Courtesy link|Talk:Alison Weir (activist)#Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 January 2025}}


Greetings,
== ] ==


I have an outstanding extended-confirmed-protect edit request that is one of several needed for a page that has been subjected to a rigorous crtique by the organization of the subject of the page. However, there is no editor with extended-confirmed status paying attention to my efforts. I need a volunteer with that editorial status to work with me to more expediently approve or critique my editorial efforts on that page. Any editor with an interest in and understanding of media bias is especially invited to help, as it is the leitmotif of the subject of this page and the controversy surrounding her.
Can someone who is really good at English have a look at the article and tell me, why you need to have the season link in italics. I just don't understand why it needs to be emphasised. () From what I understand, it shouldn't be done and it really looks like a strange formatting pattern to do that. Not to mention there seems to be somewhat of an edit-war over it. It really is driving me nuts! ] (]) 12:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:Well, it's not in italics in the first three similar articles I checked (for Arsenal, AC Milan and Aston Villa), and I can't see why there would be any ''need'' for it to be. On the other hand, it seems to me to be an utterly trivial point, which no-one would even notice if attention hadn't been drawn to it, so I'm not going to involve myself further in what seems to me to be an utter waste of time for everyone involved.
:You might like to pursue the matter on the Talk page of ]. I notice that in the proposed model example at ] this link is not italicised. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 13:10, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


Thanks in advance to anyone willing to help!
== Merging "Abyssinian Guinea Pig" with "List of guinea pig breeds" ==


] (]) 18:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
So, yeah. It isnt really that good of an idea to have a page for the Abyssinian Guinea pig itself, since Guinea pig breeds are quite similar to each other. The reasons to why are below.


:] in case anyone is interested. ] (]) 18:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
The only main difference is really just the Guinea pig’s coat type. Each breed is the same size and body shape, all of them have a large variation of coat colors, and lastly, each one has the same personality, and really only varies by the individual Guinea Pig that you own.
::...which is under ]. —] ] <sup><small>] ]</small></sup> 18:21, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:::yes, that is why it requires an extended-confirmed editor to authorize edits...I'm only about half way to the 500-edit mark so I need an editor who's "made the grade" to respond to my edit requests ] (]) 20:50, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
::::there is no "talk" on her talk page....my edit request just sits there with the crickets ] (]) 20:56, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::To be fair, ] '''did''' respond to your edit request. You just didn't like their response, and said so in no uncertain terms. I can't blame them for stepping back, and I'm certainly not interested in working on it after seeing your response. Only 7 editors who have that talk page on their watchlist have visited it in the last month. Maybe one of the other 6 will respond. ] (]) 05:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::Ultraodan did not want to do the homework, and said so. A ten-page critique of this webpage has been issued by Alison Weir's organization which started the thread. Anyone who takes the time to read it will be in a position to judge whether what is being represented as Alison Weir's views are truly her views or a tendentious distortion of her views, very poorly sourced, I should add. ] (]) 06:29, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Please don't assume what I am or am not willing to do. I explained my problems on the talk page and left when it became clear it wasn't worth my free time to deal with it. @] gave some good advice about that below this. ] (]) 07:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::I also saw the request and the response. And decided it was not worth my time to help someone who who reacted like that. ] (]) 16:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::I don't edit in contentious topics full stop if I can help it. —] ] <sup><small>] ]</small></sup> 06:24, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::then don"t! ] (]) 06:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::We're all volunteers. If you want to find someone to volunteer their time and effort to help you then perhaps you should have explained what your edit request was about '''before''' taking the first person to respond to task for not reading your mind. Starting your response off with {{tq|I cannot tell you how disappointed I am in your response to my edit request. You seem to be totally unaware of the purpose behind the edit request}} is not a good start and is not likely to convince anyone to help. ] (]) 07:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::ultraodan had made a previous edit to the page in response to my request, during which my rationale was cited, so he wasn't a complete stranger to it....that said, I believe the ten-page critique of this[REDACTED] entry by Weir's organization is necessary reading for anyone working on revising this page in response to it, and that's not every editor's cup of tea ] (]) 17:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


:{{u|Kenfree}}, I had a look at your request and the following discussion. I found it confusing. You want some text moved, but it's not clear what text: the text you want moved is not indented or otherwise distinguished from the request above it. Later, it says "END OF QUOTE", but there's no corresponding start of quote. I expect I could puzzle it out with enough effort; but like everyone else here I'm a volunteer, and I have better uses for my time.
In addition, the Abyssinian Guinea pig isn’t really a special breed itself, given that each breed of Guinea pig is diverse towards the type of coat they have. The only distinguishing feature they really have is spiky and frizzy hair that looks kind of messy.
:tl;dr: If you want someone to help you, make it clear what it is you want. ] (]) 09:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
::Ok, it looks like you were reading pretty far past the actual edit request, so I have reformatted to distinguish the edit request per se from the responsive commentary. Please let me know if this suffices. ] (]) 17:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
: Responded at ] (and added courtesy link above). P.S., to set off the part you want to quote, see {{tl|blockquote}}. ] (]) 21:57, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


== Cover art ==
That’s all I really have to say for why there shouldn’t be a page for Abyssinian Guinea pig. ] (]) 13:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


Hello! I was wondering if I can add a screenshot from a music video to the infobox for a music single page that doesn't have an artwork, for example "]" and "]". If I could, I'd also use the ] page to upload the screenshot right? ] (]) 19:03, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:hi @] and welcome to the teahouse! there doesn't seem to be an article named ]. what article are you referring to? it's best for you to discuss changes and ideas regarding an article to that article's talk page, which can be accessed over at the top of any[REDACTED] page. happy editing! &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 13:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::I meant ], @].
] (]) 13:33, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


:Correct. It'll be ], so make sure you fill out a proper ]. ] (]) 20:02, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:<s><small>oh i dumb.</small></s> anyways, you'd want to start a merge request over at ], plus read the ] while you're at it, which details when to do, how to do, and how to discuss merges. happy editing! &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 13:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::Okayy thank you so much!. ] (]) 04:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


==How to promote an article to c-class==
== Ègoiste (magazine) ==
How do I promote an article (]) to c-class.&nbsp;] (]) 03:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


:Article class assessments are done by specific ] based upon their own sets of criteria. You'd need to go to the relevant WikiProject(s) and raise the issue with them. —] ] <sup><small>] ]</small></sup> 04:00, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello everyone,
::{{U|Jéské Couriano}}, this doesn't seem to be true any more. These days the AfC reviewer is invited both to add project templates to a fresh article's talk page, and to specify a (single) quality class (whether "stub" or near or far above this) for the article, a class that thereupon propagates to all the project templates. Certainly the promotion-to-article process doesn't point out to the reviewer that standards may differ among projects, let alone encourage the reviewer to read up on the respective standards and act according to what's written. (Actually I've pretty much stopped specifying classes myself. Most recent example: ].) -- ] (]) 04:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:::@] and anyone interested in article assessment: for those who are particularly interested in getting a third-party opinion on what an article should be assessed as, there is a requests page: ] ]] 14:48, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:Answering {{yo|Sushidude21!}}'s question: edit the ] page. Near the top change "class=Start" to "class=C". I believe the change is justified. A formal evaluation is not required. ] (]) 09:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


== Is this article based on a podcast acceptable as a source for a BLP draft ==
I had a AfC draft for ] what was rejected and the reason given was the tone of voice (seems to be my achilles' heel), I was wondering if someone could help me identify what needs to be changed and how -- I'd tried my best to remove unnecessary adjectives this time. Please let me know if there's something glaring that I am missing. Thank you. ] (]) 16:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


Hi, I have been working on a draft article and wanted to know if and how this synopsis of a podcast episode can be added.
:PS -- the article also exists on French Misplaced Pages, here: https://fr.wikipedia.org/Égoïste_(magazine) ] (]) 16:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse! I think I was the pesky editor who ''declined'' the draft (please note that there is a crucial difference between ''declining'' a draft, which allows the draft to be improved and resubmitted, and ''rejecting'' a draft, where the draft is found to be completely unsuitable for Misplaced Pages). If you want to address the issues relating to the writing tone, I'll give you a couple of problem phrases that you can address if you want:
::- "in fact", this phrase doesn't really fit in with the formal tone expected from an encyclopaedia
::-"It deals with" could be reworded to something more formal like "It focuses on"
::There are a few other prose problems, but if you could address them and resubmit the draft, as long as the subject of the article is notable (which I think it is), I reckon the draft article will be all ready to be accepted into the mainspace. Happy editing! ] (]) 19:11, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::Ahh, thank you for the clarifications @], it's very helpful. I will give it another go and resubmit. ] (]) 20:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::Your welcome! Have a great day! ] (]) 20:26, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


https://www.stewardshipcommons.com/article/rajeev-peshawaria/2024/08/29/ep-5-bhargav-sri-prakash-on-digital-vaccines-and-the-future-of-healthcare
:::I see nothing whatever wrong with either "in fact" or "deal with". (By contrast, rendering "Égoïste" as "Ègoïste" is some kind of crime.) -- ] (]) 23:35, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::<small>A pretty grave crime, I would say. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 09:58, 30 May 2022 (UTC)</small>


I would also welcome any feedback about the draft
:@] Should the English WP have an article for foreign-language magazines? Maybe so, since ''some'' of the refs are in English. If all of the refs were non-English, I would argue against a magazine being notable to an English-speaking audience, if that makes sense. ] (]) 07:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::I respectfully disagree. As a collector of primarily English-language books and magazines, I am interested in foreign magazines and publishers that originated stories or books later translated into English (think of ] or ]), and sometimes where/by whom a story/book translated ''from'' English has been published. I even have some (dozens of) magazines and books in non-English languages amongst my collection.
::Moreover, some non-English magazines become internationally newsworthy for non-literary reasons: consider '']'' or '']'' (though such will often have some English-language citations). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ] (]) 09:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::I don't think the language of a particular publication is by any means relevant if they are otherwise noteworthy, which in this case it very clearly is. ] (]) 10:32, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


Thank you,
== Draft Submit ==
] (]) 05:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:This looks to be a user contributed content platform, and so would not count as a reliable source. However in general, a podcast from a trustworthy organisation (eg a journal) or from a recognised and proven expert in the topic could be considered as a source. Peer-reviewed material, reviews, or carfully edited material would be superior. ] (]) 09:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


== Possibility to see number of edits for each space ==
] How do I submit this for review? ] (]) 17:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:], the text currently has a total of two sentences. If this is all that can be written about a person, then as a reviewer I would infer that he's not notable (as understood in Misplaced Pages) and would decline the submission. Incidentally, for the great majority of assertions, all you need to cite is ''one'' reliable source. -- ] (]) 22:29, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


I'd like to know if there are a mean to see the number of edits for each space. <br />
== Bennedict Mathurin & Acknowledging Sexual Assault Allegations ==
When I'm talking about space. I'm talking for example about the '''"Mainspace"''' and '''"Talk-Pages"'''. ] (]) 07:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


:Hi @]: presumably you mean ''your'' edits (in different namespaces)? In which case, you can see that info (for en.wiki) here: https://xtools.wmcloud.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org/Anatole-berthe -- ] (]) 07:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
On March 21, 2022, after a decisive victory, (then) college basketball player, Bennedict Mathurin, was accused of groping a cheerleader from the opposing team. This was captured in a viral video and widely reported by a variety of news outlets including the Associated Press and ESPN (https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/33579541/arizona-wildcats-bennedict-mathurin-says-reached-tcu-video-shows-possible-contact-horned-frogs-dancer).


== Orphan ==
I have been trying to work some kind of reference to these allegations into Mathurin’s page, but I have faced a great deal of resistance. I am not stuck on the actual words I used. I just feel like this information should be reported upon in some fashion. I feel like the administrator is misusing procedural recommendations to bury any reference to this incident.


Hello. I have translated and published an article from Misplaced Pages in Japanese about ], a cafe staffed by actors. I think the quality and quantity of this article is plenty good, and the subject is humorous, notable and worth introducing. However, at the moment it is an orphan. (This is the same situation with the original Japanese article, which has almost no links to the original article.)
I would love to have someone else edit my original write-up to meet Misplaced Pages standards or to write and submit something fresh. It just feels like it is wrong to bury something of this magnitude altogether. ] (]) 18:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


Is there any good source of links to the article anywhere, or if you have any good ideas, please let me know. Thank you very much. ] (]) 09:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:Misplaced Pages works by ]. If another editor reverts your edit, then it is up to you to build consensus by opening a discussion with that editor (and any others who may be interested) on the article's talk page, not by ]. There may be other editors who agree with you that the incident should be mentioned, but wadign in and accusing other editors of "wanting to suppress discussion" is not the way to achieve that.
:It may also be relevant to read ] and ]. ] (]) 18:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC) :Perhaps it could be linked from articles on the actors, or from the location it is in. Or maybe an article like ] if it is now a museum.] (]) 09:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you very much for your advice. ] (]) 10:33, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{u|Truth Possum}}, according to the article you cite, he's not aware of having touched her, and she showed no reaction at the time. "Famous baseball player may or may not have touched woman's breast, neither of them noticed at the time." I really don't think that's worth mentioning in the article. ] (]) 19:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
: ], another route is via categories. You have added it to ], which has several other entries. You could add your article to the ] section of each of those articles, creating the section in those cases where it does not yet exist. I'm not sure if ] would be helpful, and you can always create a new category, if a valid one exists conceptually, and add articles to it, such as ], where your article would be a good fit. But if there aren't any other articles that would go there, then don't create the category. Hope this helps! ] (]) 20:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:@] You should read ], which it is a requirement to follow if you are going to edit articles about living people, in this case especially the sections on ], ] and ]. The policy on[REDACTED] is that people are presumed innocent until convicted in a court of law (]), that articles on people must not overly focus on recent events (]) and articles must present praise and criticism fairly and in balance (]). The main issues with those edits are related to whether the amount of content added is giving ] weight to the event. In my opinion, no, this is not a fair and balanced representation of the event within the context of the article or Bennedict Mathurin's life or career. A "personal life" section should provide a balanced overview of the subjects personal life, not 2 sentences about his family followed by 4 paragraphs of content about how he might have brushed past a woman's breast and how this might have been groping according to people on social media. Following the video going viral there does not appear to have been any follow up coverage at all, it does not seem that anyone has pressed charges and it does not appear to have had any lasting impact on his life or career. If this is going to be covered at all in the article it really should not exceed one short sentence, but given the complete lack of any lasting impact, the extremely low quality of some of the sources used (e.g. the New York Post) and the complete lack of any kind of coverage more than a day or so after the video went viral I would lean on the side of not including it at all on the basis it is a complete non-event of no lasting significance. ] (]) 19:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::Any further discussion of this matter should take place at ] where I have made my points. ] (]) 19:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


== changes from germany during ww2 to nazi germany specifically ==
== Misplaced Pages ==


Hi there! Going through recent changes, I've been seeing a lot of edits tagged as possible vandalism that change links to germany to nazi germany, or similar. Examples include and . I've been a bit of a lurker here on[REDACTED] for a while, but I don't edit a lot and I'm unfamiliar with our guidelines for this. Should ] be linked, perhaps specifically to ], or should ] itself be linked? Thanks, ] (]) 12:11, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello how to upload images at english wikipedia. ] (]) 18:04, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


:I think it’s inappropriate in these cases. It would be due and relevant the political climate is discussed/relevant, for example they served in the army, or experienced food shortage as a result of being in Nazi Germany. ~ 🦝 ]&nbsp;(he/him&nbsp;•&nbsp;]) 12:28, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @], The best thing to do is to use the ] which will guide you through the process. Before starting make sure that you understand what the copyright status of the image is - the file will either have to be under a free content licence that is compatible with wikipedia, or you will need to provide a claim that the image can be used under fair use. ] (]) 18:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


== Changing name of draft ==
:For the great majority of images that would be helpful for English Misplaced Pages (let alone the Wikipedias of other languages), ], the best thing would be to upload them ''not'' to English Misplaced Pages but instead to Wikimedia Commons. (Images for "fair use" are exceptions.). -- ] (]) 22:16, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::@] The file upload wizard automatically directs people to commons if the licencing information is compatible. ] (]) 22:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::Thank you, IP Number. I hadn't known that. What I had observed were very many files -- of paintings by people who died twenty years ago, photos by persons unknown but clearly dating from before WW2, etc -- ''both'' (i) moved by some robot (I think it was) from en:WP (where originally uploaded) to Commons ''and'' (ii) falsely described as the uploader's "own work". I inferred that something about this procedure removed obstacles to the misdescription of what was uploaded. Is this just my imagination, running away with me? (And is there any advantage to uploading stuff to en:Misplaced Pages?) -- ] (]) 23:29, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
::::@] The transfer process is done semi-manually with human review (not by a bot), mostly using scripts to assist. The "own work" claims are most likely people who don't know where the file came from filling in the inputs with bogus information just to get through the wizard and get it uploaded, or from a misunderstanding - a significant number of people seem to think that if you buy/digitise an old image the copyright is theirs. Theoretically images should be getting reviewed and files with obviously incorrect licences shouldn't be getting transferred to commons, but mistakes do happen.
::::There are 2 main advantages to local uploads - we can host stuff that is fair use rather than free use, and the fate of the image isn't tied to content policies on another project. I know of a few people who upload stuff locally and use {{tl|keep local}} to make sure a local copy is kept. ] (]) 23:47, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:::::Mistakes do indeed happen -- by the thousand. As for fair use, this can of course only be claimed if a set of conditions are met. Some of these images are very useful, but my impression is that the great majority of those uploaded by new users (and meeting the conditions) are of what I'd say are of little encyclopedic value: album covers, company logos and the like. -- ] (]) 01:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


Hello! I'm new to creating Wiki articles. Is there a way to change the name of this draft from Caitlin McCarthy (activist) to Caitlin McCarthy (writer)? Thank you! Link: ] ] (]) 12:54, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
==Reusing Articles==
:This is done via a ]; I have moved it to ]. ] (]) 12:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
I want to use a number of[REDACTED] articles in a book I am writing. I know your material is free, but does that apply to publication usage or would I require your written permission to use? ] (]) 20:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:I would note that the specific title of a draft is not particularly relevant; it will be placed at the proper title when accepted. ] (]) 13:00, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, you can reuse[REDACTED] content in a book as long as you provide proper attribution and follow the conditions required under the creative commons licence, see ] for details. ] (]) 20:54, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hello, @]. You will need to remove all the ] from the text. If a link is to a ] which verifies a specific piece of information about McCarthy, then convert it into a ]. If it is to a general topic that Misplaced Pages has an article about (such as ]) then convert it into a Wikilink. Otherwise, get rid of it. ] (]) 17:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
::Also be careful when re-using images, as some of them are used under a claim of fair use rather than a free use licence. ] (]) 20:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:If you substantially duplicate content in your book, you must also license your book under the same license that it is here, which is the CC BY-SA 3.0 or the GNU Free Documentation License. This is because both are 'copyleft' licenses. (Disclaimer: {{abbr|IANAL|I am not a lawyer}}) ] (] | ]) 23:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


== Page rejected ==
== How to find the NYC edithons or Meetups? ==


As it seems like advertisement.
How to find the NYC edithons or Meetups? ] (]) 23:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


:] will have a calendar with meetups and edithons in the future. ] (]) 02:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC) My username is: Saurabh zadoo ] (]) 14:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


:Hi @], you just came onto the #wikipedia-en-help live chat channel. As we stated, your draft is absolutely promotional and will be correctly deleted. Carefully read our criteria for inclusion at ] and then read guidance on writing an autobiography at ]. We highly discourage autobiographical writing. <span style="background-color: RoyalBlue; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">''']''' <small>]</small></span> 15:03, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
== is there any way to change to the old[REDACTED] look ==
::More explanation on your Talk page. ] (]) 20:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


== Draft Improvement ==
i want to edit a page but the new look just make the editing page like a visual edit, i love the old one more. is there any way to change to the old[REDACTED] look? ] (]) 23:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


Hi everyone, please I would like to know where in this article ] should be improved.
:If you want to switch from visual to source editing, just press "Visual editing" at the top right and select "Source editing" from the menu that pops up. ] (] | ]) 23:44, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
] 17:28, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
::if you meant the style of how you ''read'' pages, you can switch to the pre-2022 look at ] > Appearance > {{radio button}} ]. alternatively you could instead pick {{radio button}} ], which gives you the pre-2010 look. happy editing! &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 00:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


:Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse.
== TV Films ==
:That draft looks not bad for a first attempt - I haven't checked the sources, but assuming they are all ], they may well be enough to establish that he is ] by Misplaced Pages's criteria. (It depends on whether they are wholly ] of him, and how much they say about him, as well).
:What you need to do is to put some more content in that shows the reader why he is notable: which independent writers have noticed him, and what have they said about him?
:But in general, you won't necessarily get this sort of feedback at the Teahouse: the purpose of submitting it for review is to get the feedback. ] (]) 21:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
::Now at ]. I agree that this was not ready for mainspace. Despite having references, the draft has very little to say about him. Content from the refs can be paraphrased. Also, refs 4-7 are reviews confirming existance of his books. Those confirm the books but do not contribute to establishing his notability because they are not about him, or if they are, that information is not used in the draft. ] (]) 22:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:::If I was attempting to find direct detailing about an author, I might look for reviews of their works in reliable sources and apply them to the individual works listed. Often, reviews provide specific third-party detail about the author. ] (]) 02:50, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
::Hi, ], ] and ]. Thank you very much for your guidance. I've added more content to this very ] with sources. I will abandon it for now.
::] 14:12, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Allowing a draft to mellow while you to gather sources and "gumption" is often a good choice. I'd suggest not abandoning the draft entirely. A single useful edit would extend any draft's G13 expiration another 6 months... ] (]) 14:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
::::], noted. I will keep improving it on my free time.
::::thanks for your guidance. ] 15:58, 23 January 2025 (UTC)


== Automatic Custom Signoff ==
Should I put them in the:
*'''Film''' categories,
*'''Television show''' categories, or
*Both '''Film''' and '''Television show''' categories? ] (]) 01:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


Hey! I'm not sure if this is something that someone is able to do, but I have seen stuff that leads me to believe that people are able to set it so their custom made sign-off automatically appears rather than the normal one. It's a pain having to copy-paste my sign-off every time just to look cool... hah... ] <sub>] ]</sub> 18:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:@] The subcategories of ] seem like they would be the best place. ] (]) 01:16, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hi @], see ] for instructions. ]&nbsp;] 18:48, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
::I'm specifically talking about when it comes to things like:
::@], thank you!!!!! ] <sub>] ]</sub> 18:48, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
::*'''Category: Films shot in England'''
::*'''Category:Television shows filmed in England'''
::*'''Category:Films set in England'''
::*'''Category:Television shows set in England''' ] (]) 01:24, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


== Deleted pages ==
== Circumvention and Internet freedoms impeached in Australia ==


Is there a way to view a deleted page and its history? I have found how to view a deleted page talk discussion history, but not the page itself once deleted. ] (]) 02:42, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Does anyone know why Australia is now allowing censorship and circumvention of the internet. No1 believes me and it’s ruining my life. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 02:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Any user in good standing may request to look at a deleted page. Often the request may be made at ], but I could assist now. Which page are you interested in? ] (]) 02:46, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
::I was mostly asking first just as I work around. So it has to be done in a request to undelete a page? I'd rather look at the deleted content first, and not need to request to undelete the page. ] (]) 02:48, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:::The first paragraph of the page covers the circumstance you've described, following {{tq|In the second use case...}}. ] (]) 02:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Unless you'd like to run for admin yourself... In that circumstance, you would be trusted to look at the material without having to undelete it or userfy it. ] (]) 02:55, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::That seems like a weak case for being an admin. Interesting that only admin are allowed to even look. I can understand why they can take action, but to merely look? ] (]) 03:04, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::If anyone can look at the content, then it's not deleted. ] (]) 03:59, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::That is an interesting point. Though I suppose by that logic ever "deleted edit" which is in the edit history is "not deleted" as well? ] (]) 04:00, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::FWIW, I've been thinking for a while that there could be a new perm to allow trusted non-admin users to view deleted content (excluding suppressed, obvs, or anything otherwise flagged as too sensitive). This would be helpful in sock-hunting, evaluating G4-able recreations, etc. Slight downside risk is that it would provide a backdoor to undeletion by copypasting, but like any perm this could be removed from anyone abusing it. -- ] (]) 08:04, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::I think that would be a useful perm. Like you said, "this could be removed from anyone abusing it", and you would need to request it first and "earn" it. I wonder what it would be called, "Deleted viewer" I suppose is the most straightforward and obvious. It would only allow viewing after all, not action on the undeletion or anything. How could we bring this to be a reality? I like the idea! ] (]) 14:01, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::]? ] (]) 14:20, 23 January 2025 (UTC)


== Finding deletion discussion ==
:Welcome to the Teahouse! This is a place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Misplaced Pages, not about the policies or laws of Australia. ] (]) 04:11, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


How do I find the deletion discussion for ]? ] (]) 03:37, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
== Soul Jain ==


My article on sales blunder got rejected. I didn't know what went wrong. Can you help me with my article and allow me to revise my article? reply ] (]) 03:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC) :@] I see that you have used ], which works differently from ] (AFD). A proposed deletion does not involve a discussion. ] (]) 03:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:@] Your Prod has been removed. If you think that the article should be deleted, you need to go through the full ] process. ] (]) 12:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC)


== Draft:Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman ==
:In your strangely titled ], which {{U|Jimfbleak}} very rightly deleted, you plagiarized from , a how-to guide. In ], which I have just now deleted, you did the same. Misplaced Pages is not a place for people to paste web pages (even their own) from elsewhere. It is also not a place for how-to guides. -- ] (]) 04:44, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::Right, LinkedIn claims a copyright in the material on that page which you copied. ] (]) 07:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


Why has the latest submission received a response that indicates it is identical with an earlier submission when it has been rewritten in an encyclopaedic format and completely revised?? ] (]) 05:21, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
== about logo of srtm university nanded ==
:@]: {{welcometea}} According to the latest reviewer, the tone is still not suitable for an encyclopedia. At some points it feels like the draft lionises her, like {{tq|Matilda Wallace is commemorated as a pioneer settler in Australian history}}. —]&nbsp;(&nbsp;]&nbsp;•&nbsp;]&nbsp;) 06:20, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello @]! The reviewer has not said that it is exactly identical, but it is another draft with the same name as the previous one you created, that is ]. Although that is not the reason for the decline, the actual reason is what Tenryuu mentioned above. Please do not resubmit drafts before doing the changes mentioned by the reviewer, I noticed you only removed a bullet point and resubmitted ''']''' (]) 06:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)


Status: There are two drafts ] and a subsequent, longer ]. The latter has been declined several times for not being in encyclopedia format. In addition, you have article-related content on your User page and your Talk page. Delete all that. ] (]) 12:45, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
i have updated logo of srtm university nanded.
but removed by wiki...


== Strange user and edits to page ] ==
] ] (]) 06:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


I need help, I found an edit on Recent CHanges that seemed promotional to me. I reverted the edit but it seems this article has been edited by multiple accounts all trying to fix it. and I don't know if they are the same person or organization. ] (]) 06:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:hi @] and welcome to the teahouse! it seems that you have uploaded two school logos, one of which has been deleted at ] and another of which is undergoing a ]. instead of claiming that these images are your own work, what you should do is upload it to Misplaced Pages instead of Commons over at ] (since Commons only accepts ] and also review the policies on ]. happy editing! &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 06:56, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:] was, and is, about a now closed museum. {{u|NationalCommunicationMuseum}} tried to hijack the article, replacing it its content by unreferenced and promotional material about a different museum. Their changes have been reverted, and their account indefinitely blocked. ] (]) 09:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)


== How to add content online == == Just how do we add a new category or subcategory? ==


I created an article regarding a new South Korean football club, ]. I'd like to include it in more categories, but some categories are missing.
I want to add my business content and also about me... please provide me guidance that how can i add my content on[REDACTED] ? ] (]) 07:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


Under the ], there is a subcategory for ], but only one city is listed, Seoul. I'd like to add ] the city of Busan's subcategory. However, but there is no such subcategory?
:hi @] and welcome to Misplaced Pages! to save you a long time of explaining, unfortunately you don't. unless what you have done in life is already particularly ] in ], you can't get an article, and so won't your business. and even if it was, it still won't be a place for you to tell the world about or advertise yourself or your business, it would just cover what those reliable sources that are ] will, the good and the bad sides. happy editing! &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 07:12, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse! First of all, I think you fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of Misplaced Pages. Misplaced Pages is not a platform where anyone can write an ''page'' about themselves or their company, Misplaced Pages is a free online encyclopaedia where anyone can start and contribute to ''articles'' about ] subjects. Also, It is strongly discouraged to edit articles where you have what's known as a ]. If you or your company is actually notable, chances are another random editor will start an article about you or your company. Regardless, have a great day! ] (]) 07:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


How do I add the club, or create a new subcategory? ] (]) 07:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
== Created page for : ] ==


:@] There are instructions at ], but it seems unlikely that article would meet the ] criteria at this point. ] (]) 09:06, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
== Redirect request: ]{{afc-c|a}}
:And if there is only prospects for one entry in a category, it is not worth having. ] (]) 10:07, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:I would recommend using ] ] (]) 11:33, 23 January 2025 (UTC)


== These quotes could be added to a "figure of speech" Misplaced Pages page in the future ==
*Target of redirect: ]


Define the figure of speech that the following quotes are examples of:
*Reason: <nowiki>{{r from lang|mh|en}}</nowiki> (Marshallese in Marshallese)


1. "(Galaxia) But that's impossible! (Beerus) Now you're catching on. I AM the impossible!" (Source: Death Battle)
*Source (if applicable):


2. "(One of the female Samurai Rangers, talking about robots) They're not WEARING armor. They ARE armor!" (Source: Power Rangers: Clash of the Red Rangers)
<references />


3. "(Optimus Primal) Obsidian, this is treason! Megatron wants to destroy Cybertron! (Obsidian) Megatron IS Cybertron." (Source: Beast Machines: Transformers)
] (]) 23:16, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


4. "(Luke Skywalker) You killed my father! (Darth Vader) No, Luke, I AM your father." (Source: something Star Wars)
*] '''Redirect created.'''Ali Sabri Musician''' &rarr; Marshallese language. Thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages! Happy Editing--''']]''' 23:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


5. "(Rafael, talking about Unicron) He's not IN the Earth's core, Jack. He IS the Earth's core." (Source: Transformers: Prime S1 E25)
*] '''Redirect created.''' Ali Sabri Musician &rarr; Marshallese language. Ali Sabri Musician &rarr; Marshallese language. Thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages! Happy Editing--''']]''' 23:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


6. "(Galactus) So quick to beg for oblivion's embrace. (Unicron) I AM oblivion!" (Source: Death Battle)
{{afc-c|b}}] (]) 13:03, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


7. "(Lex Luthor, in his own body) Still hiding behind this hideous mask, tin man? Let's show your true face in the light of day! (Doctor Doom, now in Lex's body) Don't you see? That mask IS my true face." (Source: Death Battle)
have a strong belief that all my articles are best on people that require the[REDACTED] kind of recognition


8. "There used to be a POINT to the war. Now, war WAS the point." (Source: Death Battle - Frieza vs Megatron)
However the rules of notability do not seem that clear for me maybe to understand


9. "(Ratchet) Have you taken control of the Deception vessel? (Nemesis) I AM the vessel." (Source: Transformers: Prime S2 E11)
Aanywell wisher will be grately appreciated <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 13:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


10. "I don't THINK I'm a god. I AM a god!" (Source: Mega Man ZX Advent)
:hi @] and welcome to the teahouse! you'd want to read the ] in this case.
:* first, you would need ]: sources from stuff such as news outlets or trusted sites in the music industry that have a reputation for editorial oversight and fact-checking (''not blogs, not wikis, not social media'').
:* if you do have them, check whether these sources prove that he fits in one of these criteria.
:* if you do not have reliable sources or they don't fit the notability criteria, then stop: an article won't be created.. perhaps it may be ] to create the article, you should wait until they get notability and outlet coverage first.
:happy editing! &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 14:03, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


11. "(Trunks) Do you really believe your own hype that much?! (Vegeta, at the top of his lungs) I **AM*** THE HYPE!!!" (Source: Dragon Ball Z Abridged Episode 44)
== Draft Declined: Sanctuary of Refuge ==


12. "(Perfect Cell) I thought you were just somebody's hype man. (Hercule Satan) I AM the hype!" (Source: Dragon Ball Z Abridged Episode 57) ] (]) 14:17, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi, can you all please help? This is my first wiki article and I've followed the tutorials as much as possible. I am trying to have the following article reviewed, resubmitted and approved (Sanctuary of Refuge). Feedback states the sources used were not secondary and the format was not encyclopedia based. There is a similar organization with a similar wiki page (Restored Hope Network) in which I used there wiki page as a guide. Any help you can provide would be appreciated. Thank you ] (]) 13:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:See ], Misplaced Pages is not an appropriate venue for you to promote deeply offensive ]s. ] (]) 13:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


:Hello @]! Can you please explain what this is supposed to be? ''']''' (]) 14:38, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
== HEART ==
::Well, I don't know what the term is for the pattern that these quotes follow. I *will* say that a--corollary? example? subcategory?--of this pattern is what TV Tropes calls "I Am the Noun." ] (]) 14:41, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi, I'm a hot glass artist and just recently had tow stents placed in my heart. I want to make a piece or art meaning heart in Japanese for a gidt for the surgeon. How shall I shape it for most meaning to him? ] (]) 13:22, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:::@] This page is for questions about editing or using Misplaced Pages. It is not the place for suggestions to improvements to articles. Those belong on the relevant article talk page, but there would be ]. ]|] 15:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hi, I.P, welcome to the Teahouse. I would suspect that perhaps the most meaningful representation for a heart surgeon would be based on the anatomy of the heart. You can find more about symbolism ]. The Teahouse is however for asking questions about editing Misplaced Pages, do you have a question in that regard? Thanks, ] (]) 13:36, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::::<s>Where, then, may I ask this question? ] (]) 15:17, 23 January 2025 (UTC)</s>
::...if you'd like to ask questions about non-wikipedia topics, the best place to ask would be the ]. happy reading! &#128156; <span style="border:solid 1px; border-radius:7px;background:#226;border-color:#338">]</span> ] - 13:56, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::::I understand, @], but I don't know what the "relevant article" is. ] (]) 15:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::Hello, @]. If you're asking for a term to describe these examples, ] would be a better place. But we don't add indiscriminate examples to articles. ] (]) 15:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::Okay. Thanks, @]. (By the way, I also don't know if the term's article even exists.) ] (]) 15:47, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::The article ] already exists and has enough examples. ]] 17:01, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::@], but which figure of speech is this? ] (]) 17:28, 23 January 2025 (UTC)


== WP:PUFF ==
== Teahouse archival message ==


Hello, '''"Distinguished"''' comes under ] or not? I'm little confused as it is not mentioned there. A reply will help, Thanks. ] (]) 14:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi, recently, I got a message from muninnbot that my teahouse message has been archived. This incident is really normal. But this time, I can see that I have received the message only, but nothing visible is being displayed. I saw that a certain code has been inserted at the bottom of my talk page, but that code did not get executed. Is the bot malfunctioning? ]<sup>]</sup> 14:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:Hi, {{u|Itcouldbepossible}}, you accidently removed the closing tag of a comment by Sinebot when you made . If it's not closed like <nowiki><!-- --></nowiki> it'll hide everything that follows. I've now fixed it. Kind regards, ] (]) 14:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::Thanks {{u|Zindor}}, that thing totally missed my eye. ]<sup>]</sup> 14:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::@] But can you fix something. Why is a part of the comment being removed every time I move a section? Only that section is to be removed. Where is it going wrong? ]<sup>]</sup> 14:37, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


:Puffery/Peacock terms are words that don't follow ] e.g "X was one of the most legendary people of the 80s" ] (]) 14:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
== vandalism ==
::@] There are several examples where the "distinguished" is part of someone's title, for example "", so we have over 6,000 examples of that. As always, context matters. ] (]) 14:42, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
:I would only use the word "distinguished" if it is in a direct quotation discussing the subject, or if it is a title conferred to a person. Example: ] describes him as "a Slovenian theatre director, art historian, professor, and restorer", and later states "he was named a distinguished professor". ]] 14:41, 23 January 2025 (UTC)


== efn falling off screen ==
How do i stop others from reediting my pages by removing legitimate information? ] (]) 14:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:{{u|Singleton4321}} Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The word "vandalism" has a specific meaning- an attempt to deface an article- merely removing edits is not vandalism. In the case of your edit to ] you replaced sourced information with unsourced information. This is not acceptable in an article about a living person, see ]. If you have sources for your edits, please discuss them on the article talk page. ] (]) 14:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:@] First, ] If it's a long time problem on a specific page, you can ] If it is one user that you have ] enough times (4 times or a ]) you can request for them to be blocked at ]. If you want to DEFEND[REDACTED] more, you can enroll in the ]. ]&#124;]&#124;]&#124;] 14:39, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::However @], as @] pointed out, make sure the edits really are vandalism. For more information, see ]. ]&#124;]&#124;]&#124;] 14:40, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::: You say "my pages". Firstly, Misplaced Pages does not have "pages". It has has articles. Secondly, articles do not belong to any person; they are not "mine" or "yours". The nearest WP has to "my page" is a user's own page (and related pages). In your case these would be, for instance, ], ], etc. ] (]) 14:53, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::::You have misunderstood my use of the word 'my'. I mean the page about me, not my possession. I would have thought that was obvious, obviously not, from your comment. Do you have any advice on how to protect the articles about me from leaving out a great deal and only including reference to my most vocal critic? ] (]) 15:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
::thx for this info. Unfortunately, its a variety of opponents of my ideas who seem to quickly put back their edits. They remove my qualifications and reduce the page to an advertisment for the my main critic's comments, one Stuart Ritchie. I am not sure how to protect myself from these constant changes to the pages. ] (]) 15:05, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:::@] if this really involves you personally, you may have a ]. I would advise you to distance yourself from pages that offend you. ]&#124;]&#124;]&#124;] 15:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


The article ] has an efn tag at the top of the section "Games", immediately followed by a wide table. As a result, clicking the footnote while viewing this page in Chrome on Android causes the pop-up citation to appear off-screen, i.e., far to the lower-right near the terminus of the table rather than proximate to the actual viewed area. I assume this is a "bug" of the site itself, but I wonder if there's anything to be done in this case to fix the issue and/or where the issue should be reported. ] (]) 14:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
I am the author of the books cited, the evidence for my sales is not in the public domain. how can i verify in a way that constitutes a legitimate wikisource? several of my books had periods in Amazon's top 5, how can i prove that?


:@] Clicking on the efn tag works fine for me on a PC with ]. If you want to take this further, the correct venue is ]. ] (]) 14:47, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
I am not sure how i prove that i produced or presented television programmes that were broadcast 20-30 years ago - only one of them is available on youtube, some of them are available on my website. please advise? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 14:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Latest revision as of 17:28, 23 January 2025

Community Q&A hub for new editors Skip to top Skip to bottom

[REDACTED]
Shortcuts

Nick Moyes, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Misplaced Pages. Ask a question Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host New to Misplaced Pages? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2–3 days.

Most recent archives
1228, 1229, 1230, 1231, 1232, 1233, 1234, 1235, 1236, 1237, 1238, 1239, 1240, 1241, 1242, 1243, 1244, 1245, 1246, 1247


Indefinitely protect Teahouse

Moved to Misplaced Pages talk:Teahouse § Indefinitely protect Teahouse

Article for submission

Hi! Few days back, I created a draft in Afc, Draft:Kappa Ursae Majorids, I havent received any reply. Is there any way to...just have a reviewer to review it? Forgive me if I sounded impatient, Im new here, I dont know all the rules and regulations here, So, a reply would be enough. ---- Warriorglance (talk) 08:07, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello there. You have to remain patient because drafts will be reviewed by AFC reviewers in a random order so, just like how the draft says it right now, it may take 2 months or more to be reviewed. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 08:11, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
While you're waiting, Warriorglance, there's more work that you can do by yourself. The ISBN is wrong; what's the correct ISBN? Consider this: "they often receive less attention compared to more prominent meteor showers". It strikes me as pretty much a truism. I mean, I know squat about dog breeds, but I'll hazard a guess that lesser-known dog breeds often receive less attention compared to more prominent dog breeds. And the first sentence: What's singular and what's plural? -- Hoary (talk) 08:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Hoary All right, All right, I will correct those mistakes. But the isbn is correct, you can search that isbn in Google and you will get a result. I don't know what's the problem here. Warriorglance (talk) 08:40, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Warriorglance, the closest I find at WorldCat is OCLC 958134990; but this has different editors and no ISBN (correct or incorrect) is specified for it. You're right about getting a result from googling: in fact you understate what Google returns. (This in particular should be authoritative.) Well then, Template:Listed Invalid ISBN is for you! As for the identities of the editors, here's a wild guess: Are Jenniskens et al perhaps the authors of a particular piece you're citing within the Proceedings? -- Hoary (talk) 08:56, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
What I meant was this site. You are right, It has different authors. I will correct it. But as you can see, the isbn is same. So, How do you use the above template. Warriorglance (talk) 09:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Normally, Warriorglance, I'd say "Just skip any mention of the dud ISBN." But it appears frequently and conspicuously; so if you skipped it somebody might later add it, with the same ill-effect. And therefore I've fixed the matter for you, and also specified all the authors and the title of the paper you cited. (I'm tempted to add "So now you owe me a beer." But of course soliciting for payment, whether of bucks or booze, is a no-no.) NB the place where a conference is held is not necessarily the place ("location" in Misplaced Pages-speak) of publication of a volume of the "proceedings" of the conference. Now I see another note, specifying something on pages 355–356 of Meteoroids 2013: Proceedings of the Astronomical Conference. What's the title of the particular piece you're citing, and who wrote it? Please try to add this info yourself; if you get stuck, ask here. -- Hoary (talk) 00:27, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary Thanks a lot for rewriting the reference!👍 Now lemme try to find what you mentioned. If I got any problem, I'll just leave a message on your talk page. ----Warriorglance (talk) 05:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Double-checking process for submitting first article?

I have my first article written and ready to go –– I just want to check a few things?

  • There's a little notification that says, "Important, do not remove this line before article has been created." Should I remove it before hitting "publish" (since I've written the article now), or does it mean to wait until the article has been approved by an editor?
  • I wrote the article in the Misplaced Pages wizard. My understanding is that if I hit "publish," it will go to another volunteer editor for review? It won't automatically appear on Misplaced Pages's home page? The code at the top is subst: AfC submission/draftnew.

Altras&gingerale (talk) 16:12, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Altras&gingerale, and welcome to the Teahouse. You need to hit "publish" in order to save your draft at all - the name was changed to "publish" some while ago to emphasise that even drafts are public, in that anybody can see them if they go looking. It doesn't mean "Publish to the main encyclopaedia".
Once you have published (i.e. saved) your draft, have a careful look at whether your sources meet WP:42 and the draft establishes that the subject is notable in Misplaced Pages's sense. If so, there will be a button that you can pick that says "Submit this draft for review" (or some such language).
My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Misplaced Pages works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 16:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you! I followed your directions and hit published, made a few more edits (added more sources to further establish independence), and then submitted for review, fingers crossed I guess! I appreciate your assistance! Altras&gingerale (talk) 17:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
For the curious, Draft:Tara Dower. And for A&G, the review system is not a queue, so could be days, weeks, or (sadly) months. David notMD (talk) 20:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

What to do about a user mass-removing content sourced from a certain site

Hello. I've come across a user whose contributions all involve removing content from articles that source material from a site called "Brenton Film", and from edit summaries the user appears to have some sort of conflict of interest. I am unsure of what to do, what the Misplaced Pages guidelines are for this, and if my concern is even valid. Any advice/help would be appreciated. Thanks - Imconfused3456 19:05, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Imconfused3456, and welcome to the Teahouse. The IP's grounds for objecting to the site don't seem relevant (sources can be biased and reliable), but I doubt whether Brenton Film counts as a WP:Reliable source in the first place. It looks to me like a Blog, or at any rate an WP:SPS. I suggest asking at WP:RSN. ColinFine (talk) 19:39, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Subpages (User), remove redirect

Hi, how do you remove redirects from (1) subpages to pages and (2) from subpage to subpage? I have difficulty with this logic as it is now.  

Case 1: Page User:17387349L8764/List of requirements engineering tools points to the lemma List of requirements engineering tools and keeps showing as a "subpage", how to remove/unlink this?

Case 2: Page User:17387349L8764/sandbox points to User:17387349L8764/Lost series, but why when the second page has a dedicated name?

What I intend is to simply create subpages as notes; if one of them has "article qualities", it can be moved to the main page, but will the redirect still be set? How can I undo it? Thanks!

17387349L8764 (talk) 19:50, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

17387349L8764: you have created two subpages of your own user page, both redirects. (I cannot think of any purpose that would be achieved by doing this, which rather hampers me in giving advice.) One of them was to another redirect, and was automatically rerouted by a robot to avoid the double redirect. If you don't want these redirects to exist, you can just blank them - they're your own subpages, and no-one will mind, or even notice. I don't know what you mean by "will the redirect still be set?". If you blank the content of a redirect, it ceases to be a redirect. Maproom (talk) 23:48, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi, there was no particular reason. I think the auto-redirect caused the confusion. Because I moved the article once some time ago, I left it and lost to see the "mechanics" behind it. It all works now, i.e. removing the #redirect and using u1 to remove "used" subpages. 17387349L8764 (talk) 11:35, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
To editor 17387349L8764: A page is made into a redirect simply by putting the text #redirect ] at the top (as the very first text contained in the page, nothing before it). This redirects it to whatever page name is inside the ]—WP:Example here. That's it! Magic! To make it not-a-redirect anymore, you just edit the page to remove the #redirect thing. Important: this means editing the redirected page itself, not the page it is "pointing at" (redirected to). To edit your user sandbox: follow this link. Remove that #redirect part and voila.
Your "userspace" is considered "yours" and you can do whatever with it (as long as it's "productive" Misplaced Pages Stuff). If you want any pages in it deleted such as User:17387349L8764/List of requirements engineering tools just add the text {{u1}} at the top of the page and an admin will come along and take care of it. I suggest trying out Twinkle if you haven't as it makes easier this and many other Misplaced Pages tasks.
For a list of every page in your "userspace" have a look at: Special:PrefixIndex/User:17387349L8764. And to look up info about editing WP and how to do various things try Help:Contents. You're also of course welcome to ask for assistance here or the Help desk, or my talk page, and Help:Contents can direct you to other venues to find assistance as well. I hope you have a good day and if you have more questions ask away! --Slowking Man (talk) 04:31, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for this absolutely clear description. This helps me a lot. The German Misplaced Pages does some things differently, so I have to remember in both spheres. Twinkle is activated and I may use the subpages more often when I see potential to prepare an article. I will bookmark the question/answer. Have a nice day. 17387349L8764 (talk) 11:39, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Ah, in that case note also plenty of "project space" pages have interlanguage links as articles do, to go between "equivalent" pages on different language editions. So if you're more fluent in another language you might find it helpful to start from "help" pages in that, and go to the en version. (Note interlang links are kept centralized on Wikidata if you're not aware.) --Slowking Man (talk) 21:26, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

About My Draft (Draft:Cultural impact of The Shining)

Shall I consider the comment left by User:SafariScribe? When I fix up articles, I only really look at the reason that was provided in the decline box. In this case, it was "This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission." If I fixed up this issue and this issue only, would the page have a higher chance of being accepted? Also, I'm not really sure how to interpret this statement. Are my explanations insufficient? Are they considered hard to properly interpret to the average reader? I also may need some help with the 'Analysis' section because the scholarly analyses I've found on Google Scholar that revolve around the film and its cultural impact are paid. LeGoldenBoots (talk) 22:50, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

@LeGoldenBoots: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, your draft would have a higher chance of being accepted if you fixed that problem. It's not a guarantee though—different reviewers have different opinions. As to how you fix the problem, the best thing to do is to imagine that you've never seen The Shining. I, for instance, have never seen it, and I am a bit confused by the draft. For example, I have no idea why "Here's Johnny!" was said, what scene it was in, why it's repeated so many times, etc. There are some comments you might want to look at on the draft. If you need to access certain paywalled sources, you should be eligible for the Misplaced Pages Library, which might grant you access to those sources, or you could ask at WP:TREX. Happy editing! ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:16, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
@Relativity Alright, I had made some edits here and there to the page; particularly in the "Imagery and phrases" section. I also changed some of the vocabulary I used in sections of the article, courtesy of the comment left by User:Hoary. Would the page be in a good spot to be properly submitted now considering I fixed the issues described in the decline box, thanks to your explanation of what that really meant. (Thanks!), or should that be left for me to decide? LeGoldenBoots (talk) 01:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
@LeGoldenBoots: It's still a bit confusing. My suggestion is to have a "Plot" or "Background" section in the beginning, right after the lead, where you briefly describe the plot and the characters of the film. This section doesn't need to be cited, but it could help clear up some of the confusion as to what character does what. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:38, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Will do. Thank you. LeGoldenBoots (talk) 05:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

LeGoldenBoots, I thought I'd clean up a single, very short paragraph, as a demonstration of one kind of the work needed. But I was stumped by "Another similarity is the axe-murdering Salamanca twins, in contrast to the axe-murdered Grady twins." Maybe there's a similarity, maybe there's a contrast, maybe there's even both. But if there are both, then say so directly; don't make the sentence look as if you started it with one idea but reversed yourself less than a dozen words later. Elsewhere in the same section, the draft says that the film Ready Player One "features a plentiful of references" to the film The Shining. I suppose "features" means "has" or "shows", but your use here of "plentiful" is alien to me. (For me, and for Wiktionary, it's an adjective, not a noun.) Perhaps it's just the result of a sleepy and incomplete rewording; but whatever the reason for it, I recommend that you slowly read the draft aloud; and where it sounds strange, rewrite. Best of luck! -- Hoary (talk) 02:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Alright, thank you for the clarification! LeGoldenBoots (talk) 05:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Empty string

Please copy the following question over for me:

Having a strange interaction at Empty string with an editor who seems not to be able to read or understand guidelines; I don’t really know how to talk to a person who thinks this is mandated by the MOS. Advice (or, even better, weighing in gently somewhere) requested. (Is this bad use of punctuation explicitly ruled out somewhere in MOS? Anything that requires interpretation or reading comprehension seems like it would be hard to convey to them.) 100.36.106.199 (talk) 13:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

So try, straightforwardly and of course with no hint of sarcasm, on Talk:Empty string. -- Hoary (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Alt accounts

So I know that some users on Misplaced Pages have alternative accounts. Is there a criteria that someone has to meet in order to legitimately have an alt account? RedactedHumanoid (talk) 00:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

@RedactedHumanoid: see WP:SOCKLEGIT. There's no specific criteria, but sock accounts not meeting any of those bullets are at best frowned upon. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v 00:03, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 00:13, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

A general question

Hi! I was just wondering, Why are there a lot of articles with no references, Aren't there 'new page reviewers'? Why did they accept articles without references? Warriorglance (talk) 05:52, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Warriorglance. WP:AUTOCONFIRMED users can post articles without having them reviewed. The WP:NPP backlog is also 11,000+ and growing, so it might take a while for articles to be reviewed. Tarlby 06:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Warriorglance, Template:Unreferenced is available for your use to draw attention to such articles. Even better, you can add references to reliable sources yourself. Cullen328 (talk) 06:25, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
@Cullen328 Ok, I know that, but why is 'Afc' there? Can you please explain the differences? Warriorglance (talk) 06:29, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
@Warriorglance: WP:AFC is an option that editors may use when creating articles, and it's often recommended that those (particularly new or newish editors) without sufficient experience in article creation take advantage of it because it can help them avoid having their efforts being quickly deleted if they try to add a new article directly to the encyclopedia themselves. The AfC process allows users to receive feedback on drafts for potential articles and perhaps in the process learn some more about Misplaced Pages editing. It's not a perfect system but it can be helpful to some; in addition, it's also a way to try to minimize the number of bad articles (e.g. excessively promotional articles) being added to the encyclopedia. As for WP:NPP, Misplaced Pages has more than six million articles and all Wikipedians are volunteers working in areas that interest them; those involved with NPP probably do whate they can whenever they can, but their efforts will almost always never be enough because there's simply more pages being created than there are NPP people to look them over. All Misplaced Pages articles are in a sense "new" pages since articles can change (sometimes drastically) from one minute to the next; moreover, all Wikipedians are in a sense "new page patrollers" because they all have the ability to either improve/clean up existing articles or tag/propose/nominate them for deletion. An unreferenced article could be an article that was bad from the start and needs to be deleted; it could be an article that started out OK but morphed into something worse over the years that just needs to be returned to its better state; or, it could be an article that has lots of potential that just needs some one to come along and devote some time to. Figuring out what is what is one of the things that Misplaced Pages will always have to deal with because from the very beginning it was sent up to not be a peer-reviewed publication with some sort of central editorial or approval board. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:58, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
To be clear, Warriorglance, use of the Articles for Creation process is entirely optional for a large majority of active editors and is mandatory only for paid editors and those with an overt conflict of interest, and for new editors who are not yet autoconfirmed. I have written over 100 new articles and never once used the AfC process. Cullen328 (talk) 07:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
There's also the fact that the drafting process only came into existence in 2011 and ACPERM didn't happen until 2018, so there are a lot of articles that were created under much, much more permissive conditions than we're used to today. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v 19:05, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

chatgpt article

Bir Bikram Kishore Manikya Bahadur definitely has many issues that i stumbled upon: first off his title "Maharaja" was added in a move by a certain user Rohan TheWikipedian who claimed the original title was "misspelled". I moved it back.

Now my question is, this same user has added a large amount of information in "Legacy" section which is so obviously chatgpt that i'd rather draftify than leave it sitting in article space. "fostered", "enhanced", "unity", etc etc... and its last point is the nail in the coffin which confirms it being an llm, not to mention it is completely unsourced.

Do i go ahead and boldly remove the content in question, or should i draftify because the article truly doesn't look like it belongs in article space. ☢️SCR@TCH!NGH3@D (talk) 16:00, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

@Scratchinghead The article has been around since 2007, so you can't WP:DRAFTIFY it. You can remove unsourced material, add {{cn}} tags or send it to WP:AfD and you should definitely expand your concerns on its Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:10, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
After going through the edit history on the article, I would restore the version before Rohan began editing, as their edits also removed some sourced content. Schazjmd (talk) 16:12, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

help wanted!

 Courtesy link: Talk:Alison Weir (activist) § Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 January 2025

Greetings,

I have an outstanding extended-confirmed-protect edit request that is one of several needed for a page that has been subjected to a rigorous crtique by the organization of the subject of the page. However, there is no editor with extended-confirmed status paying attention to my efforts. I need a volunteer with that editorial status to work with me to more expediently approve or critique my editorial efforts on that page. Any editor with an interest in and understanding of media bias is especially invited to help, as it is the leitmotif of the subject of this page and the controversy surrounding her.

Thanks in advance to anyone willing to help!

Kenfree (talk) 18:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Alison_Weir_(activist)#Extended-confirmed-protected_edit_request_on_11_January_2025 in case anyone is interested. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
...which is under PIA sanctions. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v 18:21, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
yes, that is why it requires an extended-confirmed editor to authorize edits...I'm only about half way to the 500-edit mark so I need an editor who's "made the grade" to respond to my edit requests Kenfree (talk) 20:50, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
there is no "talk" on her talk page....my edit request just sits there with the crickets Kenfree (talk) 20:56, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
To be fair, user: Ultraodan did respond to your edit request. You just didn't like their response, and said so in no uncertain terms. I can't blame them for stepping back, and I'm certainly not interested in working on it after seeing your response. Only 7 editors who have that talk page on their watchlist have visited it in the last month. Maybe one of the other 6 will respond. Meters (talk) 05:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Ultraodan did not want to do the homework, and said so. A ten-page critique of this webpage has been issued by Alison Weir's organization which started the thread. Anyone who takes the time to read it will be in a position to judge whether what is being represented as Alison Weir's views are truly her views or a tendentious distortion of her views, very poorly sourced, I should add. Kenfree (talk) 06:29, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Please don't assume what I am or am not willing to do. I explained my problems on the talk page and left when it became clear it wasn't worth my free time to deal with it. @Meters gave some good advice about that below this. Ultraodan (talk) 07:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
I also saw the request and the response. And decided it was not worth my time to help someone who who reacted like that. LizardJr8 (talk) 16:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
I don't edit in contentious topics full stop if I can help it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v 06:24, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
then don"t! Kenfree (talk) 06:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
We're all volunteers. If you want to find someone to volunteer their time and effort to help you then perhaps you should have explained what your edit request was about before taking the first person to respond to task for not reading your mind. Starting your response off with I cannot tell you how disappointed I am in your response to my edit request. You seem to be totally unaware of the purpose behind the edit request is not a good start and is not likely to convince anyone to help. Meters (talk) 07:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
ultraodan had made a previous edit to the page in response to my request, during which my rationale was cited, so he wasn't a complete stranger to it....that said, I believe the ten-page critique of this[REDACTED] entry by Weir's organization is necessary reading for anyone working on revising this page in response to it, and that's not every editor's cup of tea Kenfree (talk) 17:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Kenfree, I had a look at your request and the following discussion. I found it confusing. You want some text moved, but it's not clear what text: the text you want moved is not indented or otherwise distinguished from the request above it. Later, it says "END OF QUOTE", but there's no corresponding start of quote. I expect I could puzzle it out with enough effort; but like everyone else here I'm a volunteer, and I have better uses for my time.
tl;dr: If you want someone to help you, make it clear what it is you want. Maproom (talk) 09:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Ok, it looks like you were reading pretty far past the actual edit request, so I have reformatted to distinguish the edit request per se from the responsive commentary. Please let me know if this suffices. Kenfree (talk) 17:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Responded at the Talk page (and added courtesy link above). P.S., to set off the part you want to quote, see {{blockquote}}. Mathglot (talk) 21:57, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Cover art

Hello! I was wondering if I can add a screenshot from a music video to the infobox for a music single page that doesn't have an artwork, for example "V.A.N (song)" and "Suffocate (Knocked Loose song)". If I could, I'd also use the Special:Upload page to upload the screenshot right? Gabriella Grande (talk) 19:03, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Correct. It'll be non-free content, so make sure you fill out a proper fair use rationale. DS (talk) 20:02, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Okayy thank you so much!. Gabriella Grande (talk) 04:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

How to promote an article to c-class

How do I promote an article (Michael Porter Jr.) to c-class. Sushidude21! (talk) 03:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Article class assessments are done by specific WikiProjects based upon their own sets of criteria. You'd need to go to the relevant WikiProject(s) and raise the issue with them. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v 04:00, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Jéské Couriano, this doesn't seem to be true any more. These days the AfC reviewer is invited both to add project templates to a fresh article's talk page, and to specify a (single) quality class (whether "stub" or near or far above this) for the article, a class that thereupon propagates to all the project templates. Certainly the promotion-to-article process doesn't point out to the reviewer that standards may differ among projects, let alone encourage the reviewer to read up on the respective standards and act according to what's written. (Actually I've pretty much stopped specifying classes myself. Most recent example: Talk:Tara Dower.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
@Sushidude21! and anyone interested in article assessment: for those who are particularly interested in getting a third-party opinion on what an article should be assessed as, there is a requests page: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Wikipedia/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment Reconrabbit 14:48, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Answering @Sushidude21!:'s question: edit the Talk:Michael Porter Jr. page. Near the top change "class=Start" to "class=C". I believe the change is justified. A formal evaluation is not required. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Is this article based on a podcast acceptable as a source for a BLP draft

Hi, I have been working on a draft article and wanted to know if and how this synopsis of a podcast episode can be added.

https://www.stewardshipcommons.com/article/rajeev-peshawaria/2024/08/29/ep-5-bhargav-sri-prakash-on-digital-vaccines-and-the-future-of-healthcare

I would also welcome any feedback about the draft

Thank you, KrisJohanssen (talk) 05:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

This looks to be a user contributed content platform, and so would not count as a reliable source. However in general, a podcast from a trustworthy organisation (eg a journal) or from a recognised and proven expert in the topic could be considered as a source. Peer-reviewed material, reviews, or carfully edited material would be superior. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Possibility to see number of edits for each space

I'd like to know if there are a mean to see the number of edits for each space.
When I'm talking about space. I'm talking for example about the "Mainspace" and "Talk-Pages". Anatole-berthe (talk) 07:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Anatole-berthe: presumably you mean your edits (in different namespaces)? In which case, you can see that info (for en.wiki) here: https://xtools.wmcloud.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org/Anatole-berthe -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Orphan

Hello. I have translated and published an article from Misplaced Pages in Japanese about Tomodachiga Yatteru Cafe, a cafe staffed by actors. I think the quality and quantity of this article is plenty good, and the subject is humorous, notable and worth introducing. However, at the moment it is an orphan. (This is the same situation with the original Japanese article, which has almost no links to the original article.)

Is there any good source of links to the article anywhere, or if you have any good ideas, please let me know. Thank you very much. 狄の用務員 (talk) 09:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps it could be linked from articles on the actors, or from the location it is in. Or maybe an article like List of museums in Tokyo if it is now a museum.Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your advice. 狄の用務員 (talk) 10:33, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
狄の用務員, another route is via categories. You have added it to Category:Coffeehouses and cafés in Japan, which has several other entries. You could add your article to the See also section of each of those articles, creating the section in those cases where it does not yet exist. I'm not sure if Category:Japanese performance artists would be helpful, and you can always create a new category, if a valid one exists conceptually, and add articles to it, such as Category:Performance art in Japan, where your article would be a good fit. But if there aren't any other articles that would go there, then don't create the category. Hope this helps! Mathglot (talk) 20:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

changes from germany during ww2 to nazi germany specifically

Hi there! Going through recent changes, I've been seeing a lot of edits tagged as possible vandalism that change links to germany to nazi germany, or similar. Examples include this edit and this one. I've been a bit of a lurker here on[REDACTED] for a while, but I don't edit a lot and I'm unfamiliar with our guidelines for this. Should Germany be linked, perhaps specifically to Germany#Weimar Republic and Nazi Germany, or should Nazi Germany itself be linked? Thanks, Sashanatane (talk) 12:11, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

I think it’s inappropriate in these cases. It would be due and relevant the political climate is discussed/relevant, for example they served in the army, or experienced food shortage as a result of being in Nazi Germany. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:28, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Changing name of draft

Hello! I'm new to creating Wiki articles. Is there a way to change the name of this draft from Caitlin McCarthy (activist) to Caitlin McCarthy (writer)? Thank you! Link: Draft:Caitlin McCarthy (activist) WistahHoney508 (talk) 12:54, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

This is done via a move; I have moved it to Draft:Caitlin McCarthy (writer). Lectonar (talk) 12:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
I would note that the specific title of a draft is not particularly relevant; it will be placed at the proper title when accepted. 331dot (talk) 13:00, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @WistahHoney508. You will need to remove all the external links from the text. If a link is to a reliable source which verifies a specific piece of information about McCarthy, then convert it into a reference. If it is to a general topic that Misplaced Pages has an article about (such as Métis) then convert it into a Wikilink. Otherwise, get rid of it. ColinFine (talk) 17:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Page rejected

As it seems like advertisement.

My username is: Saurabh zadoo Saurabh Zadoo (talk) 14:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Saurabh Zadoo, you just came onto the #wikipedia-en-help live chat channel. As we stated, your draft is absolutely promotional and will be correctly deleted. Carefully read our criteria for inclusion at WP:NMUSICIAN and then read guidance on writing an autobiography at WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. We highly discourage autobiographical writing. qcne (talk) 15:03, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
More explanation on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 20:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Draft Improvement

Hi everyone, please I would like to know where in this article (NU) should be improved. Ok1616 17:28, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Okwanite, and welcome to the Teahouse.
That draft looks not bad for a first attempt - I haven't checked the sources, but assuming they are all reliable sources, they may well be enough to establish that he is notable by Misplaced Pages's criteria. (It depends on whether they are wholly independent of him, and how much they say about him, as well).
What you need to do is to put some more content in that shows the reader why he is notable: which independent writers have noticed him, and what have they said about him?
But in general, you won't necessarily get this sort of feedback at the Teahouse: the purpose of submitting it for review is to get the feedback. ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Now at Draft:Ndifreke Ukpong. I agree that this was not ready for mainspace. Despite having references, the draft has very little to say about him. Content from the refs can be paraphrased. Also, refs 4-7 are reviews confirming existance of his books. Those confirm the books but do not contribute to establishing his notability because they are not about him, or if they are, that information is not used in the draft. David notMD (talk) 22:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
If I was attempting to find direct detailing about an author, I might look for reviews of their works in reliable sources and apply them to the individual works listed. Often, reviews provide specific third-party detail about the author. BusterD (talk) 02:50, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi, BusterD, ColinFine and David notMD. Thank you very much for your guidance. I've added more content to this very draft with sources. I will abandon it for now.
Ok1616 14:12, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Allowing a draft to mellow while you to gather sources and "gumption" is often a good choice. I'd suggest not abandoning the draft entirely. A single useful edit would extend any draft's G13 expiration another 6 months... BusterD (talk) 14:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
BusterD, noted. I will keep improving it on my free time.
thanks for your guidance. Ok1616 15:58, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Automatic Custom Signoff

Hey! I'm not sure if this is something that someone is able to do, but I have seen stuff that leads me to believe that people are able to set it so their custom made sign-off automatically appears rather than the normal one. It's a pain having to copy-paste my sign-off every time just to look cool... hah... Ali Beary (talk2me!) (stalk me?!) 18:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Ali Beary, see WP:CUSTOMSIG for instructions. Schazjmd (talk) 18:48, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
@Schazjmd, thank you!!!!! Ali Beary (talk2me!) (stalk me?!) 18:48, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Deleted pages

Is there a way to view a deleted page and its history? I have found how to view a deleted page talk discussion history, but not the page itself once deleted. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:42, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Any user in good standing may request to look at a deleted page. Often the request may be made at WP:Requests for undeletion, but I could assist now. Which page are you interested in? BusterD (talk) 02:46, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
I was mostly asking first just as I work around. So it has to be done in a request to undelete a page? I'd rather look at the deleted content first, and not need to request to undelete the page. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:48, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
The first paragraph of the page covers the circumstance you've described, following In the second use case.... BusterD (talk) 02:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Unless you'd like to run for admin yourself... In that circumstance, you would be trusted to look at the material without having to undelete it or userfy it. BusterD (talk) 02:55, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
That seems like a weak case for being an admin. Interesting that only admin are allowed to even look. I can understand why they can take action, but to merely look? Iljhgtn (talk) 03:04, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
If anyone can look at the content, then it's not deleted. DS (talk) 03:59, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
That is an interesting point. Though I suppose by that logic ever "deleted edit" which is in the edit history is "not deleted" as well? Iljhgtn (talk) 04:00, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
FWIW, I've been thinking for a while that there could be a new perm to allow trusted non-admin users to view deleted content (excluding suppressed, obvs, or anything otherwise flagged as too sensitive). This would be helpful in sock-hunting, evaluating G4-able recreations, etc. Slight downside risk is that it would provide a backdoor to undeletion by copypasting, but like any perm this could be removed from anyone abusing it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:04, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
I think that would be a useful perm. Like you said, "this could be removed from anyone abusing it", and you would need to request it first and "earn" it. I wonder what it would be called, "Deleted viewer" I suppose is the most straightforward and obvious. It would only allow viewing after all, not action on the undeletion or anything. How could we bring this to be a reality? I like the idea! Iljhgtn (talk) 14:01, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
WP:Village pump (policy)? BusterD (talk) 14:20, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Finding deletion discussion

How do I find the deletion discussion for Society of Knights of the Round Table? Sushidude21! (talk) 03:37, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

@Sushidude21! I see that you have used Proposed deletion, which works differently from Articles for deletion (AFD). A proposed deletion does not involve a discussion. Jolly1253 (talk) 03:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
@Sushidude21! Your Prod has been removed. If you think that the article should be deleted, you need to go through the full WP:AfD process. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman

Why has the latest submission received a response that indicates it is identical with an earlier submission when it has been rewritten in an encyclopaedic format and completely revised?? Xyzbio (talk) 05:21, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

@Xyzbio: Welcome to the Teahouse. According to the latest reviewer, the tone is still not suitable for an encyclopedia. At some points it feels like the draft lionises her, like Matilda Wallace is commemorated as a pioneer settler in Australian history. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:20, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello @Xyzbio! The reviewer has not said that it is exactly identical, but it is another draft with the same name as the previous one you created, that is Draft:Matilda Wallace. Although that is not the reason for the decline, the actual reason is what Tenryuu mentioned above. Please do not resubmit drafts before doing the changes mentioned by the reviewer, I noticed you only removed a bullet point and resubmitted TNM101 (chat) 06:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Status: There are two drafts Draft:Matilda Wallace and a subsequent, longer Draft:Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman. The latter has been declined several times for not being in encyclopedia format. In addition, you have article-related content on your User page and your Talk page. Delete all that. David notMD (talk) 12:45, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Strange user and edits to page Victorian Telecommunications Museum

I need help, I found an edit on Recent CHanges that seemed promotional to me. I reverted the edit but it seems this article has been edited by multiple accounts all trying to fix it. and I don't know if they are the same person or organization. MessageApp (talk) 06:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Victorian Telecommunications Museum was, and is, about a now closed museum. NationalCommunicationMuseum tried to hijack the article, replacing it its content by unreferenced and promotional material about a different museum. Their changes have been reverted, and their account indefinitely blocked. Maproom (talk) 09:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Just how do we add a new category or subcategory?

I created an article regarding a new South Korean football club, Gijang Citizen FC. I'd like to include it in more categories, but some categories are missing.

Under the category:Football in South Korea, there is a subcategory for Category:Football in South Korea by city, but only one city is listed, Seoul. I'd like to add Gijang the city of Busan's subcategory. However, but there is no such subcategory?

How do I add the club, or create a new subcategory? OttoSilver (talk) 07:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

@OttoSilver There are instructions at Misplaced Pages:Categorization#Creating_category_pages, but it seems unlikely that article would meet the WP:N criteria at this point. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:06, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
And if there is only prospects for one entry in a category, it is not worth having. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:07, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
I would recommend using HotCat Sushidude21! (talk) 11:33, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

These quotes could be added to a "figure of speech" Misplaced Pages page in the future

Define the figure of speech that the following quotes are examples of:

1. "(Galaxia) But that's impossible! (Beerus) Now you're catching on. I AM the impossible!" (Source: Death Battle)

2. "(One of the female Samurai Rangers, talking about robots) They're not WEARING armor. They ARE armor!" (Source: Power Rangers: Clash of the Red Rangers)

3. "(Optimus Primal) Obsidian, this is treason! Megatron wants to destroy Cybertron! (Obsidian) Megatron IS Cybertron." (Source: Beast Machines: Transformers)

4. "(Luke Skywalker) You killed my father! (Darth Vader) No, Luke, I AM your father." (Source: something Star Wars)

5. "(Rafael, talking about Unicron) He's not IN the Earth's core, Jack. He IS the Earth's core." (Source: Transformers: Prime S1 E25)

6. "(Galactus) So quick to beg for oblivion's embrace. (Unicron) I AM oblivion!" (Source: Death Battle)

7. "(Lex Luthor, in his own body) Still hiding behind this hideous mask, tin man? Let's show your true face in the light of day! (Doctor Doom, now in Lex's body) Don't you see? That mask IS my true face." (Source: Death Battle)

8. "There used to be a POINT to the war. Now, war WAS the point." (Source: Death Battle - Frieza vs Megatron)

9. "(Ratchet) Have you taken control of the Deception vessel? (Nemesis) I AM the vessel." (Source: Transformers: Prime S2 E11)

10. "I don't THINK I'm a god. I AM a god!" (Source: Mega Man ZX Advent)

11. "(Trunks) Do you really believe your own hype that much?! (Vegeta, at the top of his lungs) I **AM*** THE HYPE!!!" (Source: Dragon Ball Z Abridged Episode 44)

12. "(Perfect Cell) I thought you were just somebody's hype man. (Hercule Satan) I AM the hype!" (Source: Dragon Ball Z Abridged Episode 57) Ss0jse (talk) 14:17, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Ss0jse! Can you please explain what this is supposed to be? TNM101 (chat) 14:38, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Well, I don't know what the term is for the pattern that these quotes follow. I *will* say that a--corollary? example? subcategory?--of this pattern is what TV Tropes calls "I Am the Noun." Ss0jse (talk) 14:41, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
@Ss0jse This page is for questions about editing or using Misplaced Pages. It is not the place for suggestions to improvements to articles. Those belong on the relevant article talk page, but there would be no place in Misplaced Pages for an indiscriminate collection of quotations. Shantavira| 15:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Where, then, may I ask this question? Ss0jse (talk) 15:17, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
I understand, @Shantavira, but I don't know what the "relevant article" is. Ss0jse (talk) 15:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Ss0jse. If you're asking for a term to describe these examples, WP:RDL would be a better place. But we don't add indiscriminate examples to articles. ColinFine (talk) 15:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Okay. Thanks, @ColinFine. (By the way, I also don't know if the term's article even exists.) Ss0jse (talk) 15:47, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
The article figure of speech already exists and has enough examples. Reconrabbit 17:01, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
@Reconrabbit, but which figure of speech is this? Ss0jse (talk) 17:28, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

WP:PUFF

Hello, "Distinguished" comes under WP:PUFF or not? I'm little confused as it is not mentioned there. A reply will help, Thanks. Taabii (talk) 14:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Puffery/Peacock terms are words that don't follow Neutral point of view e.g "X was one of the most legendary people of the 80s" JustSomeoneNo (talk) 14:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
@Taabii There are several examples where the "distinguished" is part of someone's title, for example "distinguished professor", so we have over 6,000 examples of that. As always, context matters. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:42, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
I would only use the word "distinguished" if it is in a direct quotation discussing the subject, or if it is a title conferred to a person. Example: Marko Marin (professor) describes him as "a Slovenian theatre director, art historian, professor, and restorer", and later states "he was named a distinguished professor". Reconrabbit 14:41, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

efn falling off screen

The article List of Atari Jaguar games has an efn tag at the top of the section "Games", immediately followed by a wide table. As a result, clicking the footnote while viewing this page in Chrome on Android causes the pop-up citation to appear off-screen, i.e., far to the lower-right near the terminus of the table rather than proximate to the actual viewed area. I assume this is a "bug" of the site itself, but I wonder if there's anything to be done in this case to fix the issue and/or where the issue should be reported. Al Begamut (talk) 14:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

@Al Begamut Clicking on the efn tag works fine for me on a PC with Microsoft Edge. If you want to take this further, the correct venue is WP:VPT. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:47, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Categories:
Misplaced Pages:Teahouse: Difference between revisions Add topic