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 19:23, 25 June 2014 view sourceDamarisgomez (talk | contribs)21 edits Deletion of a page: new section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 10:33, 22 January 2025 view source 狄の用務員 (talk | contribs)440 edits Orphan: ReplyTag: Reply 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Community Q&A hub for new editors}}{{pp-sock|small=yes}}
{{skip to top and bottom}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} |archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
|maxarchivesize = 70K |maxarchivesize = 400K
|counter = 223 |counter = 1247
|minthreadsleft = 12 |minthreadsleft = 15
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |minthreadstoarchive = 25
|algo = old(3d) |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 Index {{Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Header}}
|mask=Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Questions/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=no
}}
{{TH question page}}
<!-- ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
***PLEASE NOTE***


<!-- Questions go here. Please post new questions at the BOTTOM of the page. -->
You may want to enter your question using the "Ask a Question" button on the question page. If you would like to ask your question manually, please type it directly underneath the dotted line below. Thanks! - Teahouse Hosts
¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦-->


== how do I start a new article? ==


how do I start a new article? ] (]) 18:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
==Deletion of a page ==
Hello, I recently had helped to contribute to update a surgeon's profile and as a result it was deleted. The surgeon just recently won this award: http://prod.www.steelers.clubs.nfl.com/news/article-1/Steelers-team-doctor-wins-NFL-honor/3561a16d-0d6a-4a49-aa00-22f371d9737a


:Start with reading ] and ] carefully. ] (]) 18:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
So my goal was just to updated by adding this acheivement but instead of leaving the article prior to my addition, they decided to delete it. So if someone acheives something good and there's evidence, why is it not allowed? and furthermore why is it punished? ] (]) 19:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::Creating an account is not a requirement but is recommended, as that allows better communication between editors. Also, a strong recommendation to put in time (months?) learning how to improve existing articles before attempting to create an article. ] (]) 18:35, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
==mark historical information as outdated==
:Most importantly see ]. Maybe see why ] or why ]. ] (]) 00:35, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
On the page https://en.wikipedia.org/Marshall_Army_Airfield there are two runways listed, however, there is only one runway currently existing. The other was removed during some previous renovation. How do i mark the removed runway as removed in the table? My first thought was to simply delete it, but then i considered that the information was useful for historical/research purposes, and should be left in but marked.] (]) 16:18, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


== First AfC Draft declined ==
:Hi, {{U|Dunerat}}. First you need to find a reliable published reference which says that there is only one runway: if you cannot find such a reference, you should not put the information in the article, as it will not be verifiable. Ideally, you will find a source which says that the second runway has been closed, or is being closed, in which case that source will support both the former two runways (a piece of information presently unreferenced) and the current one.
:As for how to show the information: I can suggest two approaches, either of which will work. One is to leave the table as it is, but put a note on whichever runway has closed - you might create a further column headed "Notes", or perhaps a column with "Dates". The other possibility is to remove the closed one from the table, but make sure that the History section describes it appropriately. --] (]) 17:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


I submitted a very basic draft about an author, but it was declined. I used online sources for all of the facts I mentioned, but I got this feedback: "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Misplaced Pages article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
==Is it possible to have auto numbering for an article? ==
I was hoping I could apply auto numbering to an article. I was able to go to preferences under my account and create auto numbering for myself. Is it possible to create auto numbering for an article so that anyone who views the article will see it] (]) 15:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:No, I don't think so. --]<sup> ] ]</sup> 15:55, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


Can someone help me with examples so I can do this right?
::Provided I understand what you mean by autonumbering; the text
::<nowiki># First point</nowiki>
::<nowiki># Second point</nowiki>
::<nowiki># Third point</nowiki>


The subject is Robert Christiansen, who is an author of multiple books, owner of several businesses, and was a VP of Strategy at Hewlett Packard. I strongly feel his accomplishments and his mission are important enough to warrant an article. Anyone can google him and read tons of things about him. ] (]) 19:51, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
::will produce:-
:Hello @]. I suggest you read ], ], ], and ]. Understanding the notability required on Misplaced Pages can be complicated, especially as a new editor. My advice is to focus on other elements on Misplaced Pages first before attempting to write an article. ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 20:23, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
:# First point
::] has several problems. In addition to the references not meeting the criteria mentioned in the above comment, the refs are URLs. See ] on how to format refs. Per the refs, first is a blog, second his website, third confirms he wrote a book, fourth a webinar, fifth about a presentation he gave, but not about him. None of these qualify for notability. ] (]) 20:41, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
:# Second point
:Hello, @]. I echo what the other replies have said. Please understand that {{HD/WINI}} ] (]) 22:52, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
:# Third point
:Hello @]! Please read ],And read ]. Making a Article can be hard, So please read these resources. ] ] ] 22:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
::If you mean something else - please explain further - ] (]) 16:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::@] ] applies to articles about books. It is not relevant here. Perhaps you meant ]. ]|] 09:56, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Thank you @]. I meant that ] ] ] 00:50, 18 January 2025 (UTC)


== Interpretation of NOLEGALTHREAT policy ==
:No, that's what I meant. I didn't think it was possible, but wanted to check.


While editing the article on ] I saw it had the off-wiki legal threats reported at . {{tq|On 14 October 2024, a Delhi High Court Bench comprising acting chief justice Manmohan and Gedela criticised Misplaced Pages for hosting a page titled Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation related to an ongoing defamation lawsuit filed by Asian News International (ANI) against the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF). The page claimed that the court had threatened to block Misplaced Pages in India if certain editor identities were not disclosed, which the court found objectionable}}. Since this is a clear ongoing legal threat by a foreign Court against Misplaced Pages editors and Misplaced Pages itself, should the quoted text be reproduced on Misplaced Pages ?] (]) 09:09, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks.] (]) 16:04, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


:Hello, @]. Certainly. If a legal threat against Misplaced Pages has been reported in reliable sources, it is appropriate to say so in a relevant article.
==DON'T UNDERSTAND ERROR MESSAGE==
:The point of the policy you refer to is that ''an editor'' who has made legal threats towards Misplaced Pages may not edit Misplaced Pages while those threats have not been withdrawn. It says nothing about what may be reported from reliable sources. ] (]) 13:43, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi,
::Actually, I discern this policy as a legal policy to be strictly implemented to protect the Misplaced Pages itself from actions of its users. {{tq|Do not post legal threats on Misplaced Pages. A legal threat, in this context, is a threat to engage in an off-wiki ("real life") legal or other governmental process that would target other editors or Misplaced Pages itself. It does not refer to any dispute-resolution process within Misplaced Pages.}}. By my interpretation the foreign court has threatened to ban Misplaced Pages in India for discussing on-wiki the case which is ] before it. They have gone as far as telling Misplaced Pages that (paraphrased) ''because you Misplaced Pages are the party in the litigation you especially should not publish anything about this matter since it is an interference in the judge's functioning, and if you do so again we will block you and hold you in contempt''. This is unambiguously an ongoing legal threat against the Misplaced Pages and its editors if anything about the ongoing case is published on-wiki. So as per my reading of the NOLEGALTHREAT policy (with legal implications) this threat ought not to be uploaded to Misplaced Pages, irrespective of whether it is reliably sourced or factual or neutral etc. It must also be considered that this is an actual real world ongoing legal threat and not one that can be brushed off as an idle threat which are a dime a dozen for creating chilling effect. ] (]) 19:52, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Hello, @]. I think your interpretation is perverse and nonsensical. Nobody can stop people (and courts) making threats. If a court is doing so, it is clearly in the interest of Misplaced Pages and its editors that that fact be reported - not necessarily in an article, but certainly in talk and discussion pages. Reporting that somebody has raised a legal threat is not the same os posting a legal threat. ] (]) 15:12, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::::@] Ignoring (for the moment) your personal remarks, I find it difficult to take your advice seriously. We both apparently agree that the statements of a court which has the power to direct that Misplaced Pages be blocked in India is a legal threat. That court had previously directed Wikimedia not to publicly discuss or publish anything related to the case on Wikimedia platforms while the case was sub-judice, and Wikimedia intervened in a rare office action to delete the discussions. Now you advise that Wikipedians can persist in uploading these clear and direct legal threats on this Wikimedia project by disregarding that ] is an over-riding policy with legal implications mandated by Wikimedia who have themselves kowtowed to that court. You also overlook that these legal threats has been published (you describe it as ''reporting'') in article space on the judges who issued that threat to block Misplaced Pages, and not in talk space. I also fail to see the distinction you do between ''reporting'' (Misplaced Pages is not ] for ], ]) qua ''posting'' a legal threat. I think this needs a 3rd opinion. ] (]) 04:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::It is not our job to determine whether the court is making a binding/mandatory "request" or not. All we have to worry about is to edit. The WMF exists to defend itself in court, and if they get a court order they feel they must comply with, ''they'' will make any changes/adjustments to articles needed, up to temporarily or permanently removing content.
:::::NLT is about '''a Misplaced Pages user''' making a threat of legal action against another user, or against the WMF. It has no bearing whatsoever on our articles' content. The case is being reported by multiple reliable sources that I've seen over the past couple months, and that ]. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez &#124; ] &#124; ] 04:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::@] Thanks for your assistance. I see that WP:DUE resolves to WP:NPOV. It is precisely because Misplaced Pages is a PARTY in the case that the court in question ''directed'' (ie. not ''requested'') WMF to remove the earlier discussions (which WMF kowtowed to) and to ensure no future publication as long as matter is sub-judice (which it is). Since the English Misplaced Pages community is before the court, with 2 or 3 editors also being targeted, through WMF I am unable to see how any '''NEUTRAL''' content can be posted on a WMF project when both Misplaced Pages as well as WMF are parties before the court. Also, I am unable to see anywhere that NLT says that it is '''limited to''' ''users'' making threats against other users or WMF, while certainly that is one of the use cases. The clear meaning is {{tq|A legal threat is a statement by a party that it intends to take legal action on another party, generally accompanied by a demand that the other party take an action demanded by the first party or refrain from taking or continuing actions objected to by the demanding party.}} and here the court is the demanding party and Misplaced Pages+WMF are the other party. The demand being "don't publish ''anything'' about a pending case in which you are a party" which is very different from ]. BTW, it seems you believe so I'll await opinions of uninvolved editors thank you. ] (]) 05:28, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::We are not the WMF. Editors do not make decisions based on legal grounds - except those which are enshrined in our policies (such as copyright, BLP, etc). Let me rephrase it this way - NLT does not apply here because we are not posting a threat of legal action against anyone. We are merely posting information about an ongoing legal case. If the WMF feels that they must remove or prohibit such information to comply with a court order, '''they will step in, trust me'''. Until they do, there is no policy based reason that said information about the case cannot be posted. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez &#124; ] &#124; ] 05:34, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::@] Yes I knew the distinction between WMF and Misplaced Pages. At the most basic level my question is this - "''Whereas in the USA the ] no publication rule is not usually enforced, putting users from Commonwealth nations at risk of prosecution and contempt, so, would the situation you describe be different if the USA also had a sub judice no publication rule ?''" ] (]) 17:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Each user would need to consider their own personal risk, sure. But you can’t stop others from including information on an article. If you think you are legally at risk from you editing an article, simply don’t edit that article. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez &#124; ] &#124; ] 20:55, 19 January 2025 (UTC)


== Need to remove issues symbol ==
I'm having problems on a page I've been contributing to:


Hi, i have contributed to Misplaced Pages through a page creation. but it is showing multiple warnings. i could not understand. i have replied the messages came from Misplaced Pages representatives. but still the error symbol is persist. help me to come out of this. The page link is ] ] (]) 17:58, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/My_Wife%27s_Family_(1941_film)


:Welcome to the Teahouse, {{u|M3mediachennai}}. I've moved the article to draft space because it appears promotional. Could you please clarify whether you have a connection with the subject of the article? You've uploaded two photos of the subject, marking them as your own work, so I presume you have a business or personal relationship with her. ] (]) 18:09, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
..Basically, I don't understand the message in red, even after reading the "help" page, and wonder if someone could assist, please? It's like technical gobbledegook/car mechanics to me...I also had problems cleaning up the references using User:Dispenser/Reflinks - they just wouldn't "take", for some reason.
::Yes, She is my well known friend. We worked together Miss. Cordless Larry ] (]) 18:14, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Hello, @]. In that case, you have a ] - which doesn't prevent you from working on an article about her, but you need to be aware of the advice in that link.
:::Your user name suggests that you are part of a media agency - presumable M3 Digital Media. There are several problems with this:
:::# User names which suggest that you are editing on behalf of an organisation are forbidden. So are usernames which suggest that this is not a personal account but might be shared. You must ] - or abandon this account and create a new, personal, account - immediately. See ].
:::# The fact that you appear to be associated with a media agency creates a very strong impression that you are a ]. If this is the case, then you '''must''' make a formal declaration of this fact before you do any more editing - see that link for how to do so. If you are not, please clarify what is your relationship to that agency.
:::Turning to your draft, ]: like most new editors who attempt the challenging task of creating a new article before spending time learning much about Misplaced Pages, you have created something which is at present entirely unsuitable for Wikiepdia. {{HD/WINI}}
:::{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}} ] (]) 18:29, 17 January 2025 (UTC)


Now at ]. See ] on how to insert properly formatted refs into text. For a living person, all content needs to be ref'd (education, career, etc.). Listing her films does not contribute to establishing notability. What is required are references about her. ] (]) 23:03, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanking you, ] (]) 15:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
* Hello {{U|Beryl reid fan}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. I've cleaned that article up for you and removed the red error. What that error meant was that someone had a named reference on the page that didn't have anything in it. Thank you for reporting the issue. Happy editing! — <span class="nowrap">&#123;&#123;U&#124;]&#125;&#125; <sup>(] • ] • ])</sup></span> 15:45, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


== Pinging a wikiproject ==
Thank you so much, ]! ] (]) 15:50, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


Hello! I am currently writing a GAR for the ] which is listed as a good article currently. A recommended action in the ] is pinging the wikiprojects relevant to the article. in this case it would be WP:socialism and WP:China. i have looked through two pages in the archive looking for an answer on how to ping a wikiproject since i couldnt really find an explaination on the GAR page, (they same line it recommeneds doing this has a template but as far as i understand this is for GAR navigation rather than WP communication). i appreciate any and all help with this ] (]) 21:55, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello. Specifically this referred to the code which said <code><nowiki><ref name="allmovie1"/></nowiki></code>. References can be given "names" so that the same reference can be referred to twice in the text. The code as written is asking the software to look for a reference which has been named "allmovie1", however no such reference exists. I guess that you want this reference to point to http://www.allmovie.com/movie/my-wifes-family-v103442 , a reference used later in the text. So what you need to do it "name" this reference ''allmovie1''. To do this, amend the code that reads <code><nowiki><ref>http://www.allmovie.com/movie/my-wifes-family-v103442</ref></nowiki></code> so that it says <code><nowiki><ref name="allmovie1">http://www.allmovie.com/movie/my-wifes-family-v103442</ref></nowiki></code>. This will "name" the reference, eliminating the error.
:Note: I now done this in the article. --]<sup> ] ]</sup> 15:52, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:* I cleaned it up with reflinks/citbot and they cleared out your change Luke because there was no need to have the same reference on two sequential pieces of information without a different source in between. Either way, it is looking good on that front now. The only remaining issue with the article is that it currently seems to lack reliable sources indicating its importance and ]. I suggest someone, possibly {{U|Beryl reid fan}}, and some more reliable sources to the article. Happy editing! — <span class="nowrap">&#123;&#123;U&#124;]&#125;&#125; <sup>(] • ] • ])</sup></span> 16:14, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


Thanks, ] and ] - I will get on the case later re. notability and reliable source issues. ] (]) 17:25, 25 June 2014 (UTC) :Hello, @]. I've never heard of ] a WikiProject, and I don't think the notification system can do this. I guess that the word is being loosely, and I would interpret it as meaning "put a notice of the matter on the Talk page of the WikiProject". ] (]) 22:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
::thanks for the quick response @]! perhaps i did misinterpret the sentence. I'll post the GAR and if another editor adds that there is such a feature, then ill make a quick response to it making the notification. i'll manually notify each of the two major Wikiprojects of the GAR tommorow, as im fairly tired atm. if they dont also explain that there was better way to notify them of this then ill take it as caseclosed that theres no such pinging feature for wikiprojects. thanks again ] (]) 02:36, 18 January 2025 (UTC)


== Appendix Documents ==
==Problem with display on my talk page==
I can see recent comments in my talk page history, but not when I view my talk page. Can anyone suggest what is happening please? ] (]) 14:28, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:Hi ]. Another editor removed a ">" from tag markup causing the tag to never "end". I fixed that but can you fix the signatures? --] <sup>]</sup> 14:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::Many thanks! ] (]) 14:46, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


I’ve been sourcing a lot of history on a region named Mizoram. I have several books on the topic and their appendixes have government documents and letters written by individuals. The books publish these documents in the appendix. Some of these documents are too long to be quoted reasonably in article but I want to know the copyright status of government documentation. As for the letters if they’re published in books (no mention of permissions, plus writer died long ago) does that make it copyable? I want to preserve the documentation and letters on wiki source or would wiki quote be more appropriate? I just wanted some advice, I normally type out the documents and keep them as personal research tools but wanted to know the possibility of publifying it. ] (]) 03:19, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
== How to move user page to article? ==


:Before going into the other questions you raise, ], it seems to me that you want to cite primary sources. This surprises me, as I'd have thought that suitable primary sources would have been identified and summarized (and in places quoted) within secondary sources (books, academic papers, etc). Copyright issues aside, are you sure that your proposed use of primary sources would be in accordance with "]"? -- ] (]) 06:37, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
I am new to Misplaced Pages and I am really confused. In confusion I requested one admin that my page is not biography but a user page, thinking it will still remain as article. But rather it is a user page now, not an article. How can I move my user page to article ? Thanks. ] (]) 14:11, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::The books are secondary sources but they include an appendix of primary sources and I wanted to know the feasibility of publicising them as they are obscure and can provide insight into the political nature at the time. That was my intention. The books using these sources provide their own recounts and perspectives which I’ve cited myself. ] (]) 08:42, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello. What you can do is read the instructions at ] and move the page to ]. Then place the code <code><nowiki>{{AFC submission|T}}</nowiki></code> at the top of the page to mark the article as a draft you are working on. Please note you do not have exclusive control over this draft, and other editors are as entitled to edit this draft as you are.
::: ], I'll interpret "publicising" as "publicly reproducing". ] has already commented (below) on the legal aspect of publicly reproducing them in some bulk: which is that he doesn't know. (And I don't know either.) I can't imagine that there'd be any copyright barrier to quoting small samples from within them; after all, this is commonplace in Misplaced Pages even when what's quoted is indisputably copyrighted. But talk of " the documentation and letters on wiki source" is another matter. You'd better ask at Wikisource (of which you have more experience than I). If you're asking about, say, a patchily decipherable letter written in 1896 and laboriously deciphered and edited by a much later scholar for her book published in 2003, I wouldn't assume that the letter in its (2003) published form would be in the public domain (even if stripped of editorial annotations): I really don't know. But why not simply cite/quote the book appearance of the letter? What's cite/quoted doesn't have to be available on the web. -- ] (]) 22:21, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:Now, this draft is a autobiography. Such drafts are strongly discouraged (but not explicitly forbidden) on Misplaced Pages for various reasons you can find at ]. Personally I would recommend that you stop attempting to create content on Misplaced Pages about yourself. If your music career is successful, and we wish you every success, it won't be long before a fan creates a Misplaced Pages page about you.
: {{Ping|Mmis325}} {{Tq|1="the copyright status of government documentation."}} This will depend on which country they govern, and possibly then when they were published, and - if known - who wrote them. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 21:39, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:If really do wish to pursue this, please read the guidance at ] carefully. Writing an article about yourself is extremely difficult, as it requires you to adopt an external perspective and limit what you write about yourself to what others have written about you. --]<sup> ] ]</sup> 14:43, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


== Linking to other language wikipedias? ==
::Actually AFC templates should be substituted, so the correct code is: <nowiki>{{Subst:Submit}}</nowiki> --] (]) 19:12, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::As a Misplaced Pages editor you are entitled to write a short profile of yourself at your user page (i.e. at ]). However this should not be used as a promotional page for your music, and nor should it ] as a full article. You can find guidance on user pages at ]. --]<sup> ] ]</sup> 14:46, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


:Thank you so so much for your help mate. Seriously I was so confused but you have made my confusion as clear as the water of Lake Tahoe. Thanks for recommending me, to not to create an autobiography. I will for sure change content then and limit to just one or two paragraphs having bit profile info only at user page. And thanks a lot for such a nice words about my career. Cheers. :)
:But as you mentioned if some fan can create page possibly in future, what if I give present content to some other person and request him/her to create article of me having same content. I think that is not a bad idea. What is your suggestion about it ? <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:16, 25 June 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::{{ping|AliImtiazHere}} That ''is'' a bad idea. Gaming the system will not get you very far. Please read our ]. If you meet our ] someone independent of you will probably write an article about you. --] <sup>]</sup> 16:30, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::{{ping|NeilN}} Thanks for the reply. Yeah have read it just now, sure.

== I am musician from Lahore, Pakistan ==

I think there have been a slight confusion. I am not Imtiaz Ali, director from India. But I am Ali Imtiaz, musician from Pakistan. We both are different persons. My user page does not already exist. My recent track "Yaad Aata Hai" went to #3 on reverbnation charts of pop in Pakistan. I am currently ranked #3 as well in Pop artists category at reverbnation. Furthermore, I have added bit more independent references for the confirmation. Hope it works out this time. Cheers. :) ] (]) 13:00, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

:Hello, {{U|AliImtiazHere|Ali}}, and welcome to the teahouse. There is no confusion in Misplaced Pages. Misplaced Pages does not at present have an article about you, so if somebody searches for "Ali Imtiaz", the search engine does the best it can and points to the four articles we have about people called ]. If you meet the criteria of ], then Misplaced Pages could have an article about you - but you are strongly advised not to try and create this article yourself: see ] for why not. If you believe you do meet the criteria, then you could request that somebody write an article by asking at ]; or you might find somebody at ] who is interested to do so. Note that your user page ] is not an appropriate place for writing an article about you. You may share some personal information on that page about you ''as a Misplaced Pages editor'', which could certainly mention your career in passing; but attempting to write an article there will not be successful. --] (]) 17:44, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:I've just seen that you were answered in a further question above. But my answer still stands. --] (]) 17:46, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

==how can i insert photo in my edition? ==

] (]) 08:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

:Hello {{U|Ovijatrik}}. I'm guessing you mean the article ]? I'm afraid that that article has been nominated for deletion, because Misplaced Pages does not publish essays or original research: it only publishes articles which summarise what reliable published sources have already said. So adding a photo to it would be a waste of your time. If the material is indeed available in independent reliable published sources, then you should add references to these sources to the article; if you have added such sources (several of them, that argue the points made in the article, not just incidental references to things mentioned in the article), then you may delete the {{tl|prod}} from the top of the article, to stop it being deleted.
:Having said all that, to add a photo to an article, you need to determine that the copyright status of the photo allows this use, and then upload it to Misplaced Pages (or preferably to Wikimedia commons); then you can use it in an article. See ] for more information. --] (]) 17:34, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

==First Article deleted, any advice on how to revise it so it will get passed as a page?==
Hi, Hi,


I was reading an article and saw a blue link, clicked it and was redirected to an article on Swedish Misplaced Pages. This has never happened to me before, so is this normal/ok or should I remove that link? ] (]) 10:39, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
I've just written my first article about an organization called Stop Organ Trafficking Now. It was rejected and this was the reason: "A tag has been placed on Stop Organ Trafficking Now requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable."<br />


:What article was this on? Inter langauge links should normally be well labeled. -- ]-'']'' -- 10:53, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
There isn't really much about this organization other than it's official website and some links and resources from that website, so how can I improve it to get it passed. I really want this article about this organization to get passed, so I want to make sure that I'm taking the necessary steps to do so. Here is the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:Sandbox
::It was in the Sweden section of Punch (drink) : Punch (drink) - Misplaced Pages (I hope this makes a link, I don't have much experience with this) ] (]) 10:55, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Ok, it didn't make a link :I, anyway it's the word "bål" ] (]) 10:57, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::::@] The syntax that has been used there is <code><nowiki>]</nowiki></code> instead of the more standard interlanguage link using {{t|ill}}. These sorts of links are better, in my opinion, on Talk Pages than in articles, as they will look like conventional Wikilinks to most readers. There is a large list of such links that ''can'' be used: see ]. ] (]) 11:47, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Hello, @]. I have replaced the link with {{tlx|ill|bål|sv|Bål (dryck)}}, which shows as {{ill|bål|sv|Bål (dryck)}}. That link was inserted in December 2017 and though the "Ill" template had been around for a while, I suspect it wasn't widely known then. ] (]) 14:43, 18 January 2025 (UTC)


== John James (businessman and philanthropist) ==


Can I now remove the COI message at the top of the page? The issue has been addressed, back in November, and can be viewed on my talk page. ] (]) 11:16, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks!
] (]) 04:50, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:Welcome to the Teahouse, {{U|Reema98}}. We only have articles here on Misplaced Pages that are ] as Misplaced Pages defines it. In order to establish notability, the topic must have received ] in ]. The group's website is not independent. So, you will have to find independent reliable sources covering the group in order to have an article accepted. ] ] 05:03, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:*I was going to move (really, copy and paste) from the draft space, but I see you already have it up at ], which is the best place to work on something. Good luck, ] (]) 05:09, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


:Hello @]! You are not supposed to remove the template, since any person who views your edits on the ] article will come to your user page and then know that you had a close connection to the subject, which is the reason for the tag on the article ''']''' (]) 11:22, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:Oh, I understand now. I was a bit confused with the way Misplaced Pages explained it. I'll try to find some independent sources, but I doubt there are any reliable ones, as I have searched before. Thank you so much ], I will keep your response in mind when writing future articles!
::Oh, okay, thanks. Just wondered how it works. ] (]) 11:28, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:::No problem! Feel free to ask if you have any more questions ''']''' (]) 11:33, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Have added a link on the "John James may refer to" page but it's come up in purple, not blue. Have I done something wrong? ] (]) 12:54, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::What you are referring to is Misplaced Pages's way of letting you know that you have visited that page before. Nothing to be worried about ''']''' (]) 13:10, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::Thanks. ] (]) 13:11, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::Um - where did you get that idea, @]? There is no suggestion of that as any part of the function of the template at ], and in fact it says {{tq|This tag may be removed by editors who do not have a conflict of interest after the problem is resolved, if the problem is not explained on the article's talk page, and/or if no current attempts to resolve the problem can be found}}. ] (]) 14:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I just realized what I did. For some reason, I thought Jjarchivist was referring to his own user page, and not the article. Whatever I said was in relation to the user page. @], apologies, and if you have resolved the problem, you are free to remove the tag. Thanks @] for pointing it out! <small>(I really need to get ] for that)</small> ''']''' (]) 14:52, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Don't feel all that bad. Mistakes is how we learn on Misplaced Pages and in real life. ] (]) 21:16, 18 January 2025 (UTC)


== I somewhat swore ==
] (]) 05:09, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


In a new section in ], I typed the F-word admitting my own wrongdoings but I replaced the u with an asterisk. I know that if I didn't censor it, I would get a "one last warning before I get blocked" notification. What happens now? I promise I'll never do this again. ] (]) 15:41, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
==How to cite the author of a foreword? ==
Hi! I'm trying to find out how to properly cite the foreword author. The main author will not be cited for this article, if that matters. I've puzzled through a few pages about citations and don't see the answer. Thought it might be easiest just to ask the experts here.
Foreword author: Bessel A van der Kolk, MD


:You're allowed to say fuck and shit if you want to. ] and ] aren't about not saying specific words (although I'd refrain from any slurs). So long as you are being civil towards your fellow editors and keeping a collegiate atmosphere, nothing should happen and you can go about your business. -- ]-'']'' -- 15:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
<ref name= "Ogden">{{cite book |last1= Ogden |first1= Pat |last2= Minton |first2= Kekuni |last3= Pain |first3= Clare |year= 2006|title= Trauma and the Body: A Sensorimotor Approach to Psychotherapy |publisher= ] |page= xxiii |isbn=0393704572}}</ref>
::Okay, but I'm never doing it again as my religion says that profanity is comparable to malice and slander, should never be repeated, and contradicts blessing. ] (]) 15:51, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:There's nothing wrong with using either f*ck or even fuck, depending on the context. It's inappropriate when it's used as an ''attack'' on someone. It can also be inappropriate if done in an obviously disruptive fashion, like making every other word in a long discussion a swear word. You merely used it to put an exclamation point on your own frustration. ] (]) 15:52, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:We can say whatever the fuck we want, mate! Run fucking wild!
:] ] (]) 19:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)


== Indefinitely protect Teahouse ==
Thanks!] (]) 04:34, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
{{Moved discussion to|Misplaced Pages talk:Teahouse#Indefinitely protect Teahouse}}


== Made an article in place of an redirect ==
{{reflist-talk}}


Hello everyone, I just created an article (]), which turns out was created in place of an older redirect. Is there a way to fresh start the article? '''''Best.''''' ] (]) 19:13, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:<small>Removed extraneous <nowiki></ref></nowiki>, and added {{tl|reflist-talk}} so that the reference will show.</small>
:Hello, {{U|Karinpower}}, and welcome to the teahouse. I suggest using the "chapter" parameter and use the "editor" parameters for the book authors. So
:<nowiki>{{cite book |last=van der Kolk|first=Bessel A|chapter=Foreword|editor1-last= Ogden |editor1-first= Pat |editor2-last= Minton |editor2-first= Kekuni |editor3-last= Pain |editor3-first= Clare |year= 2006|title= Trauma and the Body: A Sensorimotor Approach to Psychotherapy |publisher= ] |page= xxiii |isbn=0393704572}}</nowiki>


:Hello, @]. I'm not quite clear what you are trying to do. Is this an article about a different Tuebingen School, or intended to replace the existing article?
:displays as:
:If it is a different school, the articles will need to be disambiguated - and unless there is a ], they'll both need to have a qualifier in the name - in that case, you can create the article with the disambiguator, and afterwards move the existing article to its new name. (I am assuming that you have a track record successfully creating articles - if not, I strongly recommend that you go through ])
:{{cite book |last=van der Kolk|first=Bessel A|chapter=Foreword|editor1-last= Ogden |editor1-first= Pat |editor2-last= Minton |editor2-first= Kekuni |editor3-last= Pain |editor3-first= Clare |year= 2006|title= Trauma and the Body: A Sensorimotor Approach to Psychotherapy |publisher= ] |page= xxiii |isbn=0393704572}}
:If you are wanting to replace the existing article, it is recommended practice to edit it in place, incrementally; but if you are convinced that that is not practical, you can create the article in your sandbox, or in draft space, and then ] over the existing article - you'll probably want to get agreement on the talk page of the existing article before doing that, though.
:--] (]) 07:30, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:In either case, the redirect is not really relevant, as the article(s) should have capital S on "School" - if you end up moving the article, the redirect should be repointed.
::Thanks, {{U|ColinFine}}! I figured the answer would be simple and elegant, and it is! Perfect. My only question is... the other authors are not really editors, they are co-authors of the entire rest of the book. Any alternative way to list them? Thank you!--] (]) 18:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:Does that answer your question, or have I misunderstood? ] (]) 19:45, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:: @] Yes, It does. It was concerning the latter case. Before creating the page, the article was an empty redirect, so if it's edited in place, it doesn't indicate where the edit history really begins. So I'm still not sure what the best practice here is. Thanks. ] (]) 19:55, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Oh, I see. ] existed, but was a redirect (to various places) until you created an article there a couple of hours ago. I thought you were talking about the redirect ].
:::Apart from the fact that you have no inline citations, and so it is not an acceptable article in English Misplaced Pages, I don't see the problem. The previous edit history is short and not really significant. ] (]) 21:06, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::::@] I wonder why the community is so hesitant about this, I made a ] but my request was deleted without a response (I can't seem to find the history on the page or any description of why my request was discarded), I also asked @] who subsequently moved and edited the page. Perhaps I shouldn't have created the page in the first place. ] (]) 08:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::: The move request was declined . You requested that ] be moved to the existing article ], so ] replied that a merge can be done instead. The new draft is nearly identical to the original article though, so I'm not sure why this new version was created, can you please explain? ] (]) 08:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::@] Thanks for locating the diff. This is what @] suggested above ("create the article in your sandbox, or in draft space, and then ] over the existing article"). I created the page, by translating the page from the German WP, but that doesn't seem to satisfy page creator attribution requirements here? ] (]) 18:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::The {{History|Tübingen School|edit history}} of ] shows that first there was a redirect to ], and then you expanded that redirect into an article. I and others, such as User:Reconrabbit, User:Utopes, also made some minor improvements to the article. You then copied and pasted the contents of that article, ], to ]. Are you saying you want that ''copy'' you made of the article to replace ]? So there are no traces of the edits made by other editors? ] (]) 18:55, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::@] No actually those edits are helpful, I just think it's only fair that the page be attributed to whoever created it. Is there another way to do that? ] (]) 19:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::All the required attribution is there in the edit history of ], as far as I can see. ] (]) 19:04, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::@] But the page doesn't appear on my ] . ] (]) 19:06, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::I can recreate the page based on my initial edit, and then User:Reconrabbit, User:Utopes And you are welcome to add your edits. ] (]) 19:09, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::@] If not I will return the article into its original redirect condition. ] (]) 19:15, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Per our licenses, every significant edit to the page must be preserved, not just the person that started the article. The created pages list is not the only way for users to see what content you have worked on; many users proudly list out what pages they have created, created from a redirect like you have done here, or simply rewritten and taken to our content review processes. Not being the page creator does not negate that you created this article on the English Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 01:47, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::@], Yes it does, it's also not displayed on the . ] (]) 06:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::@]: I have no issue seeing that you are the page creator under §Edit history. —]&nbsp;(&nbsp;]&nbsp;•&nbsp;]&nbsp;) 14:19, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


== Some svg files cannot be displayed ==
==I wish to delete my article, remove my Commons file and delete my profile==
{{tracked|T384128}}
This is more trouble than it's worth. How do I delete my Wiki profile, short article and associated image that I've spent the last 5 days working on? It's 10 times easier to publish it privately.
]
]
This seems to not be a universal problem, but I've found that some svg files are not showing up in articles or when I visit commons.


I've tried looking at it on Firefox and Safari, using a Windows laptop, on an Android phone, and on an iPhone. I also tried clearing my cashe and restarting my computer. My account is using the default Vector (2022) skin responsive mode is enabled and so it limited width mode. I think those are all the defaults, I cannot recall that I changed anything and certainly not in the last few weeks.
Thanks,
] (]) 01:54, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:Hello, {{U|A much better place}}. Your draft article was declined because we already have an article about your topic, ]. You are welcome to help expand and improve that existing article. But it is against policy to have two articles on the exact same topic.


The error message when I clicked on the file https://commons.wikimedia.org/File:NuclearReaction.svg from the page ] at reaching https://en.wikipedia.org/Lise_Meitner#/media/File:NuclearReaction.svg
:You blanked your draft and an administrator who saw your note here deleted it in accordance with your request. If by "profile", you mean a user page, you do not now have a user page. If you ever had one, it no longer exists. You can blank your user talk page if you wish. You can't delete your account. If you no longer want to edit, just stop editing. We have millions of inactive accounts. As for an image you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, you will have to ask an administrator there. In theory, release of an image under a Creative Commons license is irrevocable, but if there was some misunderstanding, perhaps someone there will assist you. ] ] 03:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


"Sorry, the file cannot be displayed There seems to be a technical issue. You can retry if it persists. Error: could not load image from https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/NuclearReaction.svg/1024px-NuclearReaction.svg.png".
:Hi Cullen. Thanks you for your consideration & reply. As noted in my brief article, the RCAF (Canadian)and RAF (British) both had a No. 168 Squadron (as did the USAF (American)and probably other nations. They are all unrelated except they share the same arbitrary number. That should be clear from reading the articles.
I see I actually uploaded the same image twice in Commons - my mistake. It took me some time to even find it and I still don't know how to delete or clarify the copyright parameters there.


As with the IUCN svg other svg files on the same page are fine. https://en.wikipedia.org/Lise_Meitner#/media/File:Lise_Meitner_signature.svg
I guess I'm just not prepared to spend the time to learn the Wiki codes, HTML, copyright details and definitions so I'll move on.
] (]) 14:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


I initially asked at ] because I initially thought it was just the one file. One other editor said they were having a similar problem. Asking here because I'm not quite sure where I should ask a question about this and if this is something that might already being worked on or not. ] (]) 21:08, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
==Expanding width of my Infobox==
I am using the OS info box. In my sandbox I created 2 (by copy, paste and edit): one just to show the logo and the other shows the screenshot & the list of information. The problem is the top box is 3/4 the width. I'd like them to align. Suggestions? Thanks] (]) 01:39, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


:Top one is broken for me too, appears to be an issue with Commons generating the preview images. Not sure if it's a known issue or not, but the best place to ask is probably ] if nobody else here knows. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez &#124; ] &#124; ] 22:17, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{ping|Robpater}} Welcome to the Teahouse! The OS Infobox actually lets you put both the logo and the screenshot into one infobox. I've jumped in and made the edit to your sandbox , so you can see how it's done. I also removed excessive file formatting things; for infoboxes, you typically only need to put the file name and then include the size as another parameter (as I've done). '''~'']'']''' <small>] ]</small> 01:44, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::I've reported it to the Commons Technical Village Pump for you, there was another user who had commented about a .jpg image doing the same thing. Server gremlins appear to be afoot! -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez &#124; ] &#124; ] 03:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:P.S. I just noticed that the images you want to include are ]. Misplaced Pages tries to limit its usage of non-free images, so as a result, we cannot use them on our userpages. I've commented out the images ; if you ever move the contents to an article, you can then restore the images. Thanks, '''~'']'']''' <small>] ]</small> 01:48, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:::Works fine for me, seems to be a device or browser-specific problem ''']''' (]) 04:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::From what I can read, it's an issue with only one data center having some corruption (codfw, located in the Dallas Fort Worth area) so it may only be happening for some people depending on what datacenter your computer or internet is pulling from. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez &#124; ] &#124; ] 04:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::Ah ha! That seems to fit with where I live and that it is broken across a wide range of devices. Thanks for cross posting the information here. ] (]) 22:20, 19 January 2025 (UTC)


== Is this NPOV? ==
:: Thanks. Much appreciated. Rob] (]) 04:44, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


.... but is there a way to size infobox width? It appears to me the box has a maximum and minimum limit but cannot be set for a specific width independent of text content. ] (]) 12:17, 25 June 2014 (UTC) So im currently working on ], and I just finished the lead. Looking for feedback here - does the tone feel too negative? ] (]) 22:13, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:It feels negative because the sources you've cited say negative things about the game. That's how it should be. (It's odd that you've started with the lead. The lead is meant to summarise the rest of the article. Normal practise is to write the body of the article first, basing it on what's said in the sources it cites; and then to write the lead as a summary, generally without references becasue they're there in the body. If you start with the lead, you're likely to need to rewrite it once the rest of the article exists.) ] (]) 23:19, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::To clarify, should I rewrite it to be more balanced? Or leave it? ] (]) 23:47, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:One thing I'll suggest is that "which reviewers have deemed excessive" should probably be supported by a source explicitly saying that this is the general opinion of reviewers or that this is the reaction it always gets. If it's a specific reviewer saying this, then the article should clarify that it's that one reviewer's opinion. ] (]) 07:04, 19 January 2025 (UTC)


== Collapsible userbox template ==
==How do I request a Draft review to be based on verifiability and WP:CALC?==
I keep getting reviewers that are arbitrarily rejecting my draft because they do not understand verifiability and ]


Hi, so I’ve finally sorted out how do I sort my templates into 1 template. So I found the template ], and can someone provide how do I make it collapsible in wikitext? ] (]) 22:29, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Is it possible to request a reviewer that understands verifiability and ]?


:Try to see ]. Hope it is helpful. ] (]) 03:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
The draft is here: ]


== on tfa dates ==
] (]) 01:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:Welcome to the Teahouse, {{U|Matthewhburch}}. In my opinion, your article in its current form does not convincingly establish that the specific discrete topic is ]. I see no issues pertaining to routine calculations, although the issue of ] and synthesis may be a problem for reviewers. When you delete the assessments of previous reviewers from your draft, it makes it difficult for new reviewers to understand the history. And when you state you will do the same in the future, that makes it far less likely that someone will volunteer to review your submission. I have not heard complaints that our AfC reviewers do not understand verifiability. This is a collaborative project, and a collaborative attitude goes a long way here. ] ] 03:57, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


admittedly a question i likely won't be able to make use of before 2028, and even then said use won't be particularly important or consequential, but curiosity exists to be sated, so...
::{{Ping|Cullen328}} Thank you for your response, Cullen328, but unless you can provide a Wiki rule indicating that I must allow clutter to build on my article page, do not restore the comments and notices I have removed. That having been said, Everything in that article is verifiable, and the routine calculations prove it's inherent notability. If you have a specific example of something that is not verifiable, or question any part of the math which defines the article as notable due to the efficiency potential, then please address what you question in an actionable, specific manner. ] (]) 04:20, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:::Notability in Misplaced Pages terms is established by ] of the specific topic in ]. It is ''not'' established in any way, shape or form by calculations. So, my actionable request is to point to the specific reliable sources that discuss the specific topic of your draft article in detail, {{U|Matthewhburch}}. I won't restore anything to your draft, but what you call "clutter", many experienced editors would call "useful information about the review history of a draft article". ] ] 04:48, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::::{{Ping|Cullen328}}Please note in ]: "Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity" Verifiable data and routine calculations demonstrating a clear advantage of one method over another is notable. The specific reliable sources that discuss the specific topic are already there, because a method is a combination of technologies. The rest is math. Math is believed (by most people anyway) to be verifiable as well. ] (]) 05:02, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:::::{{U|Matthewhburch}}, I have said ''nothing'' about "fame, importance, or popularity" since many obscure topics are notable because of the coverage they have received. After reading the talk page of your draft, I see that other experienced editors have described your draft article as ]. I agree. Misplaced Pages does not publish original research, and that is policy and therefore non-negotiable. I suggest that you submit your article to a publication that does publish original research. Their number is legion. ] ] 05:12, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::::::{{Ping|Cullen328}}You indicate that obscurity is no barrier to notability. You understand that this is an obscure topic, yet simple to describe via easily verifiable data and routine math. I have provided three examples. It's obscure enough that nobody has bothered to create a name for the class of methods, like was done for ], but that doesn't mean the concept doesn't exist. That doesn't mean that it isn't notable. And it certainly doesn't mean that it's ] ] (]) 05:29, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


assuming ] nominations can have any say on the date an article is shown, provided it's nominated ahead of time, is there anything against suggesting dates that would be funny given its topic (i.e. ] on november 1, ] on a monday, ] in july 8 or august 7, and so on)? <small>yes, i know those aren't featured articles at the time of writing this, it's purely hypothetical</small> '''] <sub>] ]</sub>''' 03:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::Hello, ]. When Wikipedians use the word "notable", they mean that a subject has been written about extensively in publications with editorial oversight, such as books, magazines, scientific journals, etc. The focus of your article appears to be in delivering a payload in space efficiently by using the remote fueling process described in the section "A Practical Remote Fuel Method", about which you appear to have written a book. For this method to be "notable" in the Misplaced Pages sense, a number of scientists and/or professional science writers would need to have written about it. The references you provided describe technological items that could be used as part of a payload delivery system, but do not discuss remote fueling of a payload in transit. Action: Find some references that do discuss this. Also, in several places you have included your own opinions and conclusions; a Misplaced Pages editor must be neutral and only summarize what others have written, so that the result is an encyclopedia article and not an essay. Action: change such affirmative statements (for example, "we cannot build a Bussard ramjet", "this is not a feasible method", "it is irrefutable"), to sentences referring to published sources which verify that experts in this area agree with these statements (for example, Professor X of Y University, in his book ZZZ, confirms that....", or "As reported in XXX journal, experiments conducted at the ABC space research lab have demonstrated that ..."). &mdash;] (]) 05:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:::Thank you, {{U|Anne Delong}}, for explaining clearly, and better than I did, the type of coverage of a topic that establishes notability. {{U|Matthewhburch}}, it seems to me that not only have you failed so far to furnish that kind of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, but you have so far declined to address the core issue. Yes, relative obscurity is no barrier to notability, IF and only if the topic has received the coverage needed. You have been told many times now what our standards are. ] ] 06:19, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


:Generally speaking, Today's Featured Article isn't the place for ''most'' humor. There are some topics that may merit specific days of the year, such as ] being run on November 5 (the date traveled back to in the first movie), for example. But it is not generally (or primarily) for humor, but instead because it's a relevant date to the topic at hand. I don't think there's an explicit ''prohibition'' on recommending purely humorous/joke dates.. but there should at least be some connection between the date selected/requested and the topic at hand other than the joke, imo. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez &#124; ] &#124; ] 03:41, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::{{Ping|Anne Delong}} Thank you Anne, for offering constructive and useful feedback. I have addressed the addressable parts of what you have mentioned already as I worked with another editor. However, it is not possible to reference any other document on the specific method that demonstrates a practical method, except the one I have written, because that specific subset of ] has never been published. However, since it is a method of using existing technologies, defining the existing technologies that can be used to implement the method clearly define the method itself. The very clear and simple math describes the massive efficiency gains possible, which makes it notable. Obscurity, as you say, should not prevent article creation when it is very clearly obvious that an article is valid, verifiable, notable, and supported by simple calculations. ] (]) 07:10, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::meaning that, in the case of those <small>thankfully</small> hypothetical scenarios, it's a "probably not" for christmas and 9, and a "maybe" for garfield, which might be worrisome
::either way, thanks '''] <sub>] ]</sub>''' 16:05, 19 January 2025 (UTC)


== PediaPress/Book Creator not working ==
==Sandbox vs. Sub page - which is better & why?==
Hello,


Hello. I've ordered four books from PediaPress within the past 5 years, with two of them being in 2023. Even though Misplaced Pages says that the Book Creator "has been withdrawn," it has worked normally for years. Though I haven't ordered many of these Misplaced Pages Books, I still like making outlines for them. I suppose it's kind of weird but it's just how my brain works.
I'm trying another article (this time for an association), but decided to start the article as I had done before, which was in my sandbox - is it ok to do this instead of creating a subpage? I marked {{userspace draft}} in my sandbox and when it is time to submit the article for review, I will remove this userspace draft tag - Please advise if this is correct.


Today, I went to see how many pages ] I made a few months ago would have. I went to the section that said "Order a printed copy from: PediaPress" and clicked the link. I received an error message I've never seen before that said "There was an error while attempting to render your book." This is the first time I've ever received this error and it confused me because the link worked as recently as December 17th 2024.
It seemed easier to create the content in the sandbox and then submit for review - does it not? what is the subpage's purpose anyway? I created a test/subpage but I still don't get it so it just sits there on my userspace, - is it ok to go to the sandbox (it is also a subpage of the user space) - I can then ask editors to take a look before i submit my article?


I am very confused here. Is the feature glitched? Is it intentionally gone? The PediaPress website is still active but I think the URL is slightly different. Meanwhile the ] on Misplaced Pages makes no mention of any new updates. What's happening here? ] (]) 04:01, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Also - I tried to find my old message about creating the sub page but it is gone (nine days ago) - is there a time limit to answer questions in the teahouse?
Thanks in advance] (]) 01:15, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:Hello, {{U|AdBCWi14}}. A sandbox page is just an easy to remember name for a type of user subpage. You can use your sandbox page for any type of experimentation or article development you wish, as long as the ultimate goal is improving the encyclopedia. Active editors often have many user subpages, because they are working on several projects simultaneously. To start a new user subpage, just type a slash (/) after your user page URL in the box at the top, add a nickname for the page after the slash, and hit enter. You will be asked if you want to start a new page with that name, and when you do so, an edit window appears. Just start editing. But if you only need one page, just use your sandbox.


:@] welcome to Teahouse! It’s a 3rd party service. I did look at their website homepage which state that it’s updating its servers so temporary disruption is expected. ~ 🦝 ]&nbsp;(he/him&nbsp;•&nbsp;]) 17:55, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:Old Teahouse questions get archived. You can search the archives using the search function available on this page. ] ] 04:10, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::Ah! I must've missed that when I went to the site. Thanks! ] (]) 21:11, 19 January 2025 (UTC)


== How to do good referencing? ==
==I need a reflist template to complete my references but I don't know what that is!==
The message I received was:


I'm new to[REDACTED] and I wanted to make a article about my favorite band. I talked and got some interviews articles and articles by somewhat popular sites from the band I wanted to make the article for. I spent some time adding references and then after some waiting I see my submission got declined and I'm a little unaware what is wrong. I would think the sources I put are good or the placement of the citations are badly put on. The message left with the decline said "submission is about a musician or musical work not yet shown to meet notability guidelines" and I see what help I can get. ] ] (]) 04:11, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <nowiki><ref></nowiki> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a <nowiki>{{reflist}}</nowiki> template (see the help page).


:{{ping|GranolaWad}} The important thing is ] (or, in this case, ]). Either can be met. The important thing is that references must be to '''reliable sources''' that provide '''significant coverage''' of the subject and are '''independent of the subject'''.
Could anyone tell me how to correct this error? I have been to the help page but am none the wiser and I am sure I followed the WP video on the topic of referencing.
:* The first - reliable sources - means that the source must have a reputation for reliability. User generated content such as blogs, random webpages, and the like are not permitted. Reputable magazines or news organizations would qualify as reliable sources. Reliable sources should have clear editorial policies, a clear editorial "hierarchy" (i.e. an editor in chief or other person responsible for the material), and should provide a clear mechanism for error reporting and correction - that they actually act on.
:* The second - significant coverage - means that it must not just be a sentence or two in a longer article that discusses the subject. There is no hard and fast rule over how much coverage a subject must get in any given article for it to be significant - but it should ideally be at ''least'' multiple paragraphs that cover the topic in depth (rather than a passing mention).
:* The third - independent of the subject - means that we don't care what the subject has to say about themselves or who they convince to interview them or publish a press release from them. While interviews and talking-about-self works (like their website) may be able to be used to cite specific facts about themselves (ex: if they said in an interview that they're 30 years old, you could use that interview to cite that fact alone)... they do nothing to contribute to notability. Notability is all about what ''others'' say about someone.
:Ultimately, all but the first of the sources in the draft right now fail the third point - independence. The second and third sources are both interviews - not independent. I am not sure on the first one - it ''looks'' like it may be a lesser known/smaller music magazine of some kind - but does not list an editorial board, or any error reporting mechanism. It only lists a PR contact and an advertising contact. That doesn't rise to the level of a reliable source, in my mind. Ultimately, you'd need to show that the band meets one of the criteria at ] or you'd need to find multiple (i.e. 3 or more) sources that meet the three criteria above. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez &#124; ] &#124; ] 04:38, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::Well guess it will take a while for the article to get published then. They are still somewhat popular but not enough to get mainstream or bigger publications to talk about them. I did see some but they seem to be shady kinda AI generated responses I seen some people people mention. Thanks for the advice and hope it can get published one day! ] (]) 05:35, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Hellom, @], and welcome to the Teahouse and to Misplaced Pages. Unfortunately, this is what tends to happen when new users rush into creating articles before they have understood how Misplaced Pages does things. {{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}}
:::(And yes, I see you've had your account for most of a year, but you hardly edited before creating this draft). ] (]) 21:36, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Yea sorry about that. I really wanted to do something and I thought I had some good stuff, which I believe was good for the first source but I ended up not thinking about the second and third one too. Mostly because I thought the interviews were a fine source. I tried to look for other articles but the band is slowly getting more eyes on them (Plus they are a small band so I thought it would be fine for an article). But I thank you and the person above for giving and keeping the info in mind. I'll definitely be making sure to put more effort in and seeing stuff carefully. Not to mention because of the draft I see writing articles fun so I hope to make or help add to some articles. ] (]) 03:51, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


== Comment? ==
Thanks,


Is this proper to comment about something on here? Anyways, it is confusing that there are two ]s. I saw it on the '''Did You Know'''. ] (]) 04:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:I added nowiki tags to clean things up at the Teahouse.
:{{ping|Cwater1}} that's kind of why it's a DYK; it's interesting that we have two people sharing the same uncommon name of sufficient notability to merit an article here. In any case, the Allen links in the DYK section on the main page are properly disambiguated. ]<span style="color: #3558b7;"><sup>]</sup>]</span> 04:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
] ] 00:40, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::I know. Thanks! We learn something new each day. ] (]) 15:34, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::You need to add a references section at the end of your article, and then start a new line. Add <nowiki>{{reflist}}</nowiki>, which is the wikicode to display your list of references. ] ] 00:45, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


==Rename== == Complied ==
Hellow fellow Wikipedians! I just recently got a rename, as of ], so my name is now MrWoohoo, not BrandonWu! Can someone take a look at ] and ] at the notices? Also, I have a new signature that I give credit to ]! Thanks Christine! ] • ] 22:47, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:Welcome back to the Teahouse <del>BrandonWu</del>, oh sorry, I mean {{U|MrWooHoo}}. ] ] 04:26, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::Haha ], nice joke? (That was a joke, right.....?) ] • ] 14:24, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


I think all are complied to publish now.
==Am I ready to submit a draft?==
Farzana ] (]) 05:46, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Would an editor be able to tell me if my article looks ready for submission and if so, how do I go about doing it properly.


:Hello @]! Welcome to the Teahouse. If you are talking about ], well it's probably not ready at all for inclusion in Misplaced Pages. Firstly, you have used Misplaced Pages as the only reference in the whole article. Misplaced Pages is not a ], according to ]. You'll need sources that are ] and provide ] in order to demonstrate that this topic ] an article. You'll also need to fix the formatting of the article, as presently it has no headings or sections. When you have fixed all of this, then you can consider resubmitting the article ''']''' (]) 08:10, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you,
::Hi,
Jet 19:55, 24 June 2014 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::Some external link with sources are quoted other than Misplaced Pages. I thought Misplaced Pages will trust more on wilki sources. Will add other sources in citation in next edit.
::Farzana ] (]) 21:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse. Like most new editors who have not spent time learning how Misplaced Pages works before trying to write an article, you have written your draft ] - that is, you have written what you know about the subject and then looked for references. But Misplaced Pages isn't interested in what you know (or what I know, or what any random person on the internet knows). Misplaced Pages is ''only'' interested in information which has been published in reliable sources.
:{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}} ] (]) 21:43, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::You know, prior to 30 minutes from now I didn't know where should I reply. We all are on learning curve.
::Farzana ] (]) 22:13, 19 January 2025 (UTC)


== Needed reliable sources for an article ==
:You can submit it and wikipedians will check it] (]) 20:16, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


this is for an article called ] and i don't know where to find some reliable sources according to ]. it's also hard to find when youtube, know your meme and imdb are not reliable sources and since i mostly use youtube as reliable source. im just so new to make an article. ] (]) 06:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::That's true, {{U|SillyPotatoe}}, but you haven't told {{U|Jet1950}} how to do that! Jet1950, just insert {{tls|submit}} at the top of the article. And while you're about it, add a lede - an introductory paragraph, before the first section heading, summarising who he was and what he did. You don't need any references in this, provided the information in it is all referenced in the main part of the article. --] (]) 21:12, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


:Hello @]! If you need a list of reliable sources, you can find them at ]. And as for reliable sources in general, we need ] and ] that are not related to the subject of the article. Your current sources are user generated, and all those youtube videos are made by Daxflame himself. If you are not able to find at least three reliable sources, then the topic is probably not ] enough for inclusion on Misplaced Pages ''']''' (]) 08:00, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:Colin,
:@] You have missed a couple of possible BBC sources and one in ]. There is a special Google-based search engine you can used for Wiki-reliable sources. . ] (]) 14:03, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for your help. I'll give it a try.


== Universally agreed facts ==
Jet 22:19, 24 June 2014 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


:Hypothetical: If all 8 billion humans on the planet universally agreed on something, could an opinion that is voiced by all 8 billion on a human matter be presented as objective fact?
==Fixing and Verifying the Page: Charles Koppelman==
Hello,
I would like to fix this page, but am having trouble because of "Conflict of Interest". Could someone please edit the page of any promotional tone as well as try and fix the page so there are no more warnings at the top. I am also trying to add a picture to the top of the page but someone requested to delete it due to the fact that it wasn't properly described as Copyright, etc.
Thanks,
Charles Koppelman's Office
] (]) 18:35, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


Hypothetically, if all 8 billion humans on the planet just woke up one day and said, ''for example "Genocide is wrong"'', could a wikipedian then write "Genocide is wrong" on an article and not have it deleted as violating NPOV? ] (]) 06:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:For the picture you need to say where you got it from.] (]) 20:17, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:{{u|SimpleSubCubicGraph}}, there is no value in discussing highly implausible hypotheticals. We do not say in Misplaced Pages's voice that ''anything'' is "wrong". Take a look at ], an act almost universally considered by humans as "wrong". But the Misplaced Pages article does not overtly call it "wrong". Instead, the article neutrally describes the social and legal norms about murder, and the various definitions of murder and its intersection with ] and the broader concept of ]. The same is true of ]. ] (]) 06:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::You need more than to say where you got it from. The copyright holder must explicitly release it under a suitable license, either publicly, or emailing Misplaced Pages via the OTRS system. Please see ].
: {{Ping|SimpleSubCubicGraph}} See ]. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 15:34, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::As for the article, on a quick look, it seems to be well-referenced now, but the language is still a bit problematic. "Broke into the music business" is the language of hype, not of encyclopaedias. And "was championed as the savior of the brand" would be acceptable only if the source had pretty much those words. --] (]) 21:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


== Paid editors ==
==Categorizing and perfecting a new page==
Hi guys,


Where can I see a list of all undisclosed paid editors and people who did not disclose other COI's
I'm very very new to wikipedia, and I've just had my first article accepted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/RESIST_(non-profit)
It is classified as start class, and I believe it needs to be categorized and beefed up a bit. I'm working now on trying to connect it to other pages so it is no longer an orphan, but I could use some help on categorizing it, or bettering it in general.
any suggestions or helpful efforts would be very greatly appreciated.
Thank you!
maggie
] (]) 15:16, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:It appears someone has already taken care of categorizations. Congratulations on your first article! ] <sup>]</sup> 17:31, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


Is it possible to do so? Can I have some of the most famous examples of this? ] (]) 06:36, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
==Licence==
:{{u|SimpleSubCubicGraph}}, since Wikipedians are not infallible detectives, it seems almost certain that some undisclosed paid editors have never been detected. Even more so for conflicts of interest, which almost every editor has to a greater or lesser extent. It is only when a severe conflict of interest prevents neutral editing that a COI becomes a problem. We have several mechanisms to allow positive contributions from COI editors. Among these are the ] process and the formal ] process. ] (]) 07:06, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
I know Misplaced Pages has strict policy about copy right. I have seen 114 years old picture of Kohat railway station on the net. Can I add it to article about Kohat? or is it still copy right violation? neither owner nor source is traceable.
:@] ] may be a start. It lists the articles which currently have a UPE template included. "Famous" is in the eye of the beholder but there have been ] articles about some cases, for example ]. ] (]) 13:57, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
<span style=" color:#060; text-shadow:#F2F 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; class=texhtml">] <sup> (])</sup></span> 15:03, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:Note also that it has not always been mandatory for paid editors to disclose. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 15:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:Welcome to the Teahouse, {{U|Aftabbanoori}}. In the United States, where Misplaced Pages's servers are located, a photo published before 1923 is no longer covered by copyright. Most other countries have similar rules. I think that you are safe in uploading a photo that old to Wikimedia Commons. ] ] 15:17, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks dear Cullen
<span style=" color:#060; text-shadow:#F2F 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; class=texhtml">] <sup> (])</sup></span> 17:12, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:You are welcome. ] ] 17:45, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


== Is the material ] and ] compliant? ==
==Post requires more notable sources==
Hi there! I'm writing a page about Cooper's Hawk Winery and Restaurants, a restaurant chain in the Midwest. Before writing, I followed formats that other restaurant chains used for their Misplaced Pages pages. While I referenced Cooper's Hawk's website a few times, I also included more outside sources from reputable websites and newspapers. In fact, the number of third-party sources I used was more than what I found for other restaurant chains.


I have proposed some changes to the contested material here: ] But I want to be sure that it is policy compliant/ that it doesn't get removed in bad faith. The contested text:
In the end, the page was rejected, and the reasoning was because I did not include enough third party sources, and it sounded like an advertisement. I've since revised the content and taken out phrases that may seem bias, but I'm not sure what to do about the number of sources. If I add more third party sources (I have six right now), it will make the page longer, and increase the risk of it sounding like an advertisement.


Subhash Velingkar, a former member of the ] organisation of ], has demanded ] of Francis Xavier's relics (corpse) for veracity, they are also attempting to cancel Francis Xavier's patronage of ], where his relics are exposed periodically, to replace him with '']'', a ] of ].
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! ] (]) 13:42, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


The sources are here: ]
:Try to put newspaper reports and latest article on a particular non-adv. article of a newspaper.Use neutral point of view. Focus more on its establishments and history than quality of food available there.Bishal Baishya 14:30, 24 June 2014 (UTC)Bishal Baishya]Bishal Baishya 14:30, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


What do you reckon/ suggest? ] (]) 13:03, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::From your user-name, and the promotional nature of your draft, it appears you have a conflict of interest in editing ]. Please read, understand and follow our guidance on ]. Furthermore, it also appears that your username contravenes ], so you should change that as well. - ] (]) 14:47, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


:I think a better one would be: ], a politician formerly linked to the ] (RSS), has demanded DNA tests of Francis Xavier's relics (corpse) for veracity. The organization is also attempting to cancel Francis Xavier's patronage of ], where his relics are exposed periodically, to replace him with '']'', a sage of ].
:::Hello, {{U|CoopersHawk}}. Your wording "formats that other restaurant chains used for their Misplaced Pages pages" betrays a misunderstanding of how Misplaced Pages works. Those articles about restaurants should not have been written by people connected with those restaurants, just as an article about Cooper's Hawk should not be written by somebody connected with it. (My "should not" is a little bit exaggerated: writing with a conflict of interest is not forbidden, but it is strongly discouraged).
:I will say that you must carefully source these statements; I have done my best here to make it as neutral as possible. I removed the Hindu extremist and Hindu nationalist part since a reader can open the respective articles of the politician and the organization where they can find out what views they hold ''']''' (]) 13:15, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Some pointers about the language: "feature a modern, casual dining experience" is marketing speak. The English for "dining experience" is "meal". If a reliable source ''independent of the restaurant'' has described the place as "modern" or "casual", then those words can go in the article, suitably referenced; otherwise they are unsubstantiated puff, and don't belong there. And that's just the first sentence. :-) Do you see what I mean? --] (]) 18:58, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
::] Thanks for the suggestion ] (]) 13:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC)


== Draft:Emanuele Naboni ==
==Account Verificaction==
Hello,
I created my Misplaced Pages page about a month ago and I was told by someone that I have to edit random pages for a week in order to get verified by Misplaced Pages. I've been editing pages for three weeks now and yet nothing has happened. I think I was told the wrong thing to do. so how do I get my page to be verified by Misplaced Pages?] (]) 13:05, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:Welcome to the Teahouse. When you say verified, do you mean the autoconfirmed status that allows you to edit semi protected pages? --] (]) 13:12, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:Thank you,
By verified, I mean that when people try to search for me, lets say Google, my Misplaced Pages information/page should pop up as a search result.] (]) 13:23, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
::I found you quite easily. --] (]) 13:28, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
::If you would like to submit ] for review as an article in the encyclopedia then place <code><nowiki>{{subst:submit}}</nowiki></code> at the bottom of the page. New users can do that right away. ] (]) 13:32, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:thank you so much. Although, Someone just put up my page for speedy deletion. Who and Why?!] (]) 13:45, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:* Hello and welcome to the Teahouse {{U|Ndidi Okonkwo Nwuneli}}! It quite frankly doesn't matter ''who'' put it up for deletion, although if you really care you can find that information in the page's ]. I've removed the CSD tag as the page does not qualify for deletion under that criterion. Your request for review, which was a '''good''' move to avoid ] and ] issues, has been declined with a note in the decline message explaining why. Based on that decline by {{U|Timtrent}}, I suggest you read up on our ] guideline. If you need any further assistance, please do let us know and I'm sure someone would be happy to help you. — <span class="nowrap">&#123;&#123;U&#124;]&#125;&#125; <sup>(] • ] • ])</sup></span> 13:59, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:: <s>Hi {{u|Ndidi Okonkwo Nwuneli}}. It's good that you're interested in Misplaced Pages and want to contribute; however, it does seem like you might be misunderstanding what Misplaced Pages is all about. It also looks like you're not quite getting what a ] is for and what kind of information is permitted to be posted on it. So, I suggest you take a look at the following articles: "]", "]", "]" and "]". All of these should help you better understand what you can and cannot do on Misplaced Pages.</s> - ] (]) 14:15, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
::* {{U|Marchjuly}}. I think you are confused, or you edit conflicted with me and haven't read what I've written above. The draft is not tagged for deletion, it has been moved to Draft: space, and userspace drafts are most certainly okay to start in your userspace (even on your usepage if you are so inclined). This draft doesn't fall under ], ], ] or ] at all. {{U|Ndidi Okonkwo Nwuneli}}, your draft isn't going to be deleted any time in the near future unless it is determined to be a ] or you stop working on it (in which case it will likely be deleted in about six months as a stale draft). I know there are some users that enjoy taking drafts like these that appear to meet the ] and clean up the COI/POV issues so that the article may be accepted into mainspace. {{U|FireflySixtySeven}} is one of these users, and I'm wondering if {{GENDER:FireflySixtySeven|he|she|he or she}} might be interested in this draft... I'll {{Tl|Tb}} them as well as the ping from here. — <span class="nowrap">&#123;&#123;U&#124;]&#125;&#125; <sup>(] • ] • ])</sup></span> 14:35, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:::: Hi {{u|Technical 13}}. I am usually confused, but in this case I was editing my post when made your's. If you check, you'll see that I self-reverted the part about the page being tagged for speedy deletion and being deleted after I discovered the tag was removed . Maybe you were still editing your reply to me when I made my self revert. Anyway, I guess I left the other information because I thought it might be still helpful to the OP, but in hindsight I should have removed those links as well because they only confused things and were off-topic. Sorry about that {{u|Ndidi Okonkwo Nwuneli}} and good luck with your article. {{p|smile}} - ] (]) 21:25, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


]
:Thanks. The comments here helped a lot.] (]) 14:42, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi everyone,
I recently submitted a draft article about Emanuele Naboni, but it was declined with the reason that the subject does not meet the academic notability criteria.
I have included several references to peer-reviewed publications, books, and independent sources from academic journals and conferences. However, the draft was still considered not notable enough.
I would greatly appreciate any guidance on:
What specific improvements are needed to meet Misplaced Pages’s academic notability guidelines?
Are there additional types of sources or formatting that could strengthen the draft?
Would restructuring the content help in emphasizing the subject’s impact better?
Thank you for your time and suggestions! ] (]) 13:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)


:Hi @]: the decline notice contains within it an explanation of the two notability guidelines relevant to this, namely ] and ]. Please follow each of the links in the notice, and study the guidance carefully; it is there for exactly that reason. The additional comments provided by the reviewer are also useful to note. -- ] (]) 14:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
==Requesting a re-write of a section==
::So, in your opinion, is the person on the Misplaced Pages page not well known enough to have one? Google identifies them as a public figure, and I don't understand what doesn't comply with the mentioned guidelines. Could you be more specific? I've read the guidelines, but I'd appreciate some clarity. Thanks for your help. ] (]) 17:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
To whom this might concern,
:::] lists eight criteria that may qualify a person with an academic position as article-worthy. Naboni does qualify for any. ] may apply. ] (]) 17:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Hi, thanks for your feedback. However, according to Misplaced Pages's guidelines on academic notability (WP:NACADEMIC), a person does not need to meet all eight criteria; satisfying just one is sufficient to establish notability.
::::In this case, the subject has authored several books, which can be found in the references provided. This meets the criterion related to significant published works, contributing to their notability in the academic field. ] (]) 18:52, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::@]: I make no comment on this person's notability, since I haven't reviewed the draft. I'm just saying that the decline reasons are given in the decline notice (and the accompanying comments, if any). Often authors overlook those, thinking that they are just some meaningless boilerplate, whereas they actually give the decline reasons in a succinct manner. I could regurgitate them for you, but chances are I would only be making things less clear. -- ] (]) 18:50, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Thank you for your clarification. I appreciate the reminder about carefully reviewing the decline notice and accompanying comments.
::::Regarding the notability criteria outlined in WP:NACADEMIC, it is important to highlight that it is not necessary to meet all eight criteria—meeting just one is sufficient to establish notability. In this case, the subject has authored several books, which are listed in the provided references, thus fulfilling the criterion related to significant published works.
::::Additionally, it is possible that the reviewer may not fully grasp the importance of the subject in the field of sustainable engineering and architecture, which is gaining increasing relevance on an international level.
::::I have carefully reviewed the decline reasons, but I still do not fully understand why the draft was rejected. It would be helpful to receive further details to improve the content in accordance with Misplaced Pages's guidelines. ] (]) 19:04, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::], you're correct that a professor only needs to satisfy 1 of the 8 criteria (though some people satisfy several). Based on what you've said above, it sounds like you think he meets Criterion 1. Is that correct? If not, please specify which criterion you think he does meet. Assuming that I was correct, first note that it says "The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, ''as demonstrated by independent reliable sources''" (emphasis added). These links will tell you what Misplaced Pages means by "]" and "]." Second, look at the ], specifically at how Criterion 1 is assessed. For example, it's not enough that Naboni has written several books; you'd need to show that these books are widely cited in his field. Does this help? ] (]) 21:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::@FactOrOpinion Thank you for the clarification. We both agree that it is necessary to meet one or more criteria, but not all eight. However, I believe that Emanuele Naboni meets multiple criteria of WP:NACADEMIC, specifically criteria 1, 2, 4, and 8.
::::::Regenerative Design in Digital Practice - TU/e Research https://research.tue.nl/en/publications/regenerative-design-in-digital-practice-a-handbook-for-the-built-
::::::KGL Akademi – Regenerative Design & Digital Practice https://kglakademi.dk/da/regenerative-design-digital-practice
::::::YouBuild - Ripartiamo dalle città https://www.youbuildweb.it/ripartiamo-dalle-citta/ ] (]) 10:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::If you think that he meets multiple criteria, then for each one, you need to look at the Specific criteria notes (the section I directed you to), paying attention to ''what kind of evidence you need to provide'' for it. For example, as I said, it's not enough to provide evidence that Naboni has written several books; you'd need to show that these books ''are widely cited by others in his field''. None of your three links above shows that Regenerative Design in Digital Practice is widely cited by others in his field. ] (]) 13:24, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::@FactOrOpinion Thank you for your clarification. I understand that demonstrating the impact of Naboni's work requires showing that his publications are widely cited within his field.
::::::::I would like to point out that Regenerative Design in Digital Practice has been mentioned on the official website of the Royal Danish Academy, which is a recognized academic institution, and it has been cited 52 times on platforms such as ResearchGate https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336121907_Regenerative_Design_In_Digital_Practice_A_Handbook_for_the_Built_Environment, which is widely used by the academic community to share and cite research work.
::::::::I find it challenging to understand why citations from well-known and reputable academic databases might not be considered sufficient, especially when I have observed citations from less reliable sources being accepted in other profiles. Could you please clarify what specific types of citations would be considered valid in this case?
::::::::I appreciate your guidance on this matter. ] (]) 14:35, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Yes, the Royal Danish Academy is a well-established academic institution, but in this context, that webpage is not itself a citation or a review; rather, it's more of a brief overview of the book + access to the book. In many fields, being cited 52 times means that the work has been cited in a ''typical'' way rather than being ''widely'' cited. (And I have no experience with Naboni's field, so I cannot say whether it's different in his field for some reason.) It is often difficult to show that a work is widely cited; this is discussed a bit ]. Many professors do interesting work, work at well-known institutions, and get cited in their fields, but don't meet the standard for being "notable" in Misplaced Pages's sense. And an argument based on what you see in other articles isn't effective, as ]. ] (]) 15:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


I see that you have changed the image in the Infobox, but this one also identified as your own work, meaning you personally took this photograph. That is being reviewed at Commons, and may end up being removed at Commons. If you were not the photographer I suggest you remove the image from the now resubmitted draft. Images or lack of are not part of the AfC review consideration. ] (]) 08:54, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
There is a page I've been consulting on Yugoslavian history "namely "The Balkans") which is poorly written in parts (the English used simply does not make sense in places and the sentences themselves - where they do make sense - are overly long and somewhat confusing). For example:


:Thank you for your feedback. Regarding the first image, I had obtained permission to use it as it was also published elsewhere. However, I later uploaded my own photographs taken during various congresses around the world. Additionally, I have sent an email to Misplaced Pages declaring that the photo is my property and have also obtained permission from the professor to use it.
"Bulgaria insisted on its status quo territorial integrity, divided and shared by the Great Powers next to the Russo-Turkish War (1877–78) in other boundaries and on the pre-war Bulgarian-Serbian agreement. Provoked by the backstage deals between its former allies Serbia and Greece on allocation the spoils at the end of the First Balkan War, while it fights at the main Thracian Front, Bulgaria marks the beginning of Second Balkan War when attacked them. The Serbs and the Greeks repulse single attacks, but when the Greek army invaded Bulgaria together with an unprovoked Romanian intervention in the back, regardless of the single won battles, Bulgaria collapsed."
:I didn't think that dealing with photo usage could be this complicated, but I understand the need to comply with the platform's policies. ] (]) 09:33, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::Wikimedia is EXTREMELY sensitive about copyright infringement. What was needed is confirmation that you took the photograph; the subject's permission is not required. ] (]) 11:07, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


== Misplaced Pages archiving bot ==
here:


In the past, I've seen Wiki articles with very neatly archived sources. All references get archived and archival links are put into the references. There is some publicly accessible bot that does that. I've been searching for it for a while now, without finding it. Where do I find that bot?&nbsp;] (]) 17:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/Balkans#20th_century


: ] (]) 17:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
How does one request a language 'tidy up' from a knowledgeable subject matter expert (SME)? I have a good command of the English language but, given I am not an SME, I feel it would be unwise for me to embark upon such an edit in case I inadvertently change the author's intended meaning.


== help with potential BLP violations in an AfD discussion ==
Thank you for your time...
{{collapse top|conversation is now at the BLPN}}
In response to a BLPN section started by another editor, I ] there yesterday re: acting on potential BLP violations in ]. It's been over a day, and no one has responded at the BLPN. As I noted there, I am hesitant to delete people's comments myself, due to my extensive participation in that AfD discussion, and also because I'm not that experienced an editor (though I'm not a newbie) and have never deleted discussion comments. I did post a ] of that AfD discussion yesterday, expressing my concerns and suggesting that people review their own comments and remove inappropriate content, but no one has done so. (No one has edited that page at all since my comment, and I don't know whether anyone has seen my comment.) I recognize that BLPN is the most appropriate place for my question; I'm asking here since I didn't get a response there. I'd appreciate some input. Thanks, ] (]) 19:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)


:You now have got feedback at ]. (And when you still hadn't, the best thing to do would have been just to wait.) -- ] (]) 02:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
] (]) 09:54, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
::], no, there is no response to me there. And my concern about waiting is that the BLP policy is pretty explicit that "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced ... must be '''removed immediately and without waiting for discussion'''." Several degrading statements about the BLP subject haven't been removed. Other statements are sourced to blogs, which are not acceptable sources for BLP claims, even outside of article space. ] (]) 02:23, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Oolong and Bilby have responded there. If their responses don't satisfy you, then that message thread, not this one, is where you should ask for other responses. -- ] (]) 02:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::You misread the exchange there. The first comment was posted by Bilby, not me. Oolong responded to Bilby, and Bilby then responded to Oolong. I only entered after Bilby's second comment, and then I waited for a day to see if anyone would respond, which no one did. It wasn't a matter of their responses not satisfying me, as no one ''had'' responded to me. But Bilby has just responded to me there, a minute after you posted your second response here, so I won't respond further here. ] (]) 02:45, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::], you're right, I'm wrong, I'm sorry. (Perhaps my brain is frazzled by a slightly earlier, unrelated set of edits.) -- ] (]) 02:51, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


:{{ping|FactOrOpinion}} My advice would be to ignore it. Not because you are right or wrong, but because the conversation is already pretty complicated, and about a very sensitive issue, and the more you get bogged down in meta-conversations the more energy will be wasted. I know thats probably not what you want to hear, but on Misplaced Pages picking your battles is an incredibly important skill (one at which I suck) and often shrugging and ignoring certain aspects of a situation is a great strategy which helps you achieve your goals. Hope that helps, if not then please ignore me. ] (]) 04:52, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:Hullo ], welcome to the TeaHouse. A good copy-editor teases out the meaning in their own head before writing out what the original author really meant to say. If the meaning is totally opaque, the copy-editor will seek further clarification. Many of Misplaced Pages's good copy-editors have knowledge of military and political history, although one does not really need to be a subject matter ''expert'' to edit this type of subject. Given the controversial subject matter (and I assume a lengthy article), wise copy-editors will probably avoid it until and unless they can do it justice. So, put <nowiki>{{copyedit}}</nowiki> at the top of it (or perhaps <nowiki>{{Copy edit-section}}</nowiki> at the top of a section) and trust to the collected and individual wisdom of ]. It might take a very long time though. A somewhat shorter time (but still perhaps a month or two) by requesting it on the Requests page at ]. --] (]) 20:15, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:By the way ] has an interesting documentary about facilitated communication called ]. Not an easy watch! ] (]) 04:57, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::This isn't about facilitated communication, though. That's part of the problem. Apparantly Ido's mother tried it and found that she did not have any confidence that it actually worked. Anyway, the primary concern is that without knowing if he can commuicate or not, statements that it is all faked and he can't possibily communicate have considerable potential to be degrading. - ] (]) 05:18, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Bilby}} I still recommend the documentary because I am a big fan of Louis Theroux. Debating if those statements on that talkpage are degrading does not lead to improvements to the encyclopedia. ] (]) 05:22, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Debating if the statements are BLP violations does lead to some sort of improvement, though, at least in the sense of protecting subjects. I find Theroux a mixed bag, but certainly enjoyed some of his work. That one my not really relevant to the disussion, but may well be relevant as a matter of interest. - ] (]) 05:51, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::{{tq|protecting subjects}} It won't. Further discussion is far more likely to cause a ]. ] (]) 06:08, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::I'll have to disagree with you. Determining that something is a BLP violation and removing it seems better than leaving it there and hoping no one notices. - ] (]) 06:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::{{ping|Bilby}} Publicly talking about it draws attention to it, so if your goal is to protect that BLP subject (who is unlikely to read that AfD) then its best to move on. If you start editing someone elses comment that will draw loads of attention, someone will revert, and then an administrator will have to jump in and it is unlikely that that administrator will agree that those are BLP violations, see ]. But even if they do, which probably won't happen, then all you've done is draw far far more attention to BLP violations than they would've gotten if you ignored them. This is not something you can agree or disagree with, because it is not an opinion but a statement of fact. ] (]) 06:24, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::I am aware of the difficulties. But I will never be happy working in any environment where degrading comments about another person are simply left in place because we do not want to draw attention to them. If you are happy with such a scenario, then so be it. I am not. - 06:59, 20 January 2025 (UTC) ] (]) 06:59, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::I thought that the goal was protecting the BLP subject, not making you happy. ] (]) 07:30, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::] is very clear: {{tq|In the event of rudeness or incivility on the part of another editor, it may be appropriate to discuss the offending words with that editor, and to request that editor to change that specific wording. Some care is necessary, however, so as not to further inflame the situation. It is not normally appropriate to edit or remove another editor's comment. Exceptions include to remove obvious ] or ], or if the comment is on your own user talk page. Derogatory comments about another contributor may be removed by any editor.}} ] (]) 06:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::]: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced and not related to making content choices should be removed, deleted, or oversighted, as appropriate". - ] (]) 07:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Since you won't be able to delete those comments you consider degrading, or at least not for long, your options are to keep drawing attention to them, or to not do that. ] (]) 07:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::No, I have options. The main one is to ask the community for consensus about how to handle them. Which I have done. - ] (]) 07:54, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::Because you are trying to protect a BLP subject or because you are unhappy? Bit confusing tbh. Asking the community about something surely won't draw attention to it. ] (]) 07:55, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::{{tq|or because you are unhappy?}}: See ], ] ({{tq|Without clear evidence that the action of another editor is actually in bad faith or harassment, repeatedly alleging bad faith motives could be construed as a personal attack}}). ] (] &#124; ] &#124; ]) 08:02, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Is this "''The first person who falsely accuses someone else loses the debate''"? Should I insert some links to irrelevant behavioural policies and guidelines here? ] (]) 08:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::Ok. Let's keep any discussion about this to BLPN. The Teahouse is not the place for it. - ] (]) 08:08, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::Agreed. I pointed out that Hydrangeans made a mistake on that other page, but that is no reason to worsen the mood here. ] (]) 08:09, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::There's no need to say false things about another user either. I described user behavior at the AfD (someone saying that Kedar can't independently communicate, contrary to what reliable and BLP-appropriate sources have said), and then I provided a diff to an example of that behavior. I don't see what the mistake could be. ] (] &#124; ] &#124; ]) 08:14, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::{{tq|There's no need to say false things about another user}} then please stop doing that. And please stop trying to export drama to the Teahouse, a place intended for friendly collaboration. I can explain it over at that other page if you don't understand the mistake you made. Thank you! ] (]) 08:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::'Because users break the rules, we shouldn't bother with the rules' is a pretty uncompeling argument for ignoring the BLP rules. ] (] &#124; ] &#124; ]) 07:56, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::See ]. ] (]) 08:00, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}


== How to unsubmit a page for review? ==
==Conflict of Interest?==
Greetings, Teahousers. I have another basic question that I hope you can help with. I have been a member of a local astronomy club (the Astronomical Society of New South Wales) for some years. I notice that it does not have a[REDACTED] page, and I would like to create one.


Can I unsubmit a page that I recently submitted for review? If so, how? If not, can I delete the page? ] (]) 03:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Provided I can support notability, etc, is there any conflict of interest being a club member? I have never been a club official, never been paid - just a regular member. Reading the guideline at ] it does not seem to fall within the strict definition, but I want to make sure I get it right. If not a direct COI, should I declare my membership somewhere for transparency? ] (]) 05:49, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:Hello {{ping|LilyXChloe}}, welcome to Misplaced Pages! I think you are referring to ]. I have unsubmitted the page for you. I visited the ] page and then I used the ] functionality to undo the submission. You can't delete that page, ] can, but if no one is working on it it will automatically be deleted after some time has passed, see ]. ] (]) 04:32, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:Welcome, {{u|Gronk Oz}}, and thanks for the question. Quoting a section of the COI policy, ''Any external relationship – personal, religious, political, academic, financial, and legal – can trigger a conflict of interest. How close the relationship needs to be before it becomes a concern on Misplaced Pages is governed by common sense. An article about a band should not be written by the band's manager, and a biography should not be written by the subject's spouse. But subject-matter experts are welcome to contribute to articles in their areas of expertise, while being careful to make sure that their external relationships in that field do not interfere with their primary role on Misplaced Pages.'' I think this addresses two parts of your question. First, yes you technically do have a mild COI as there is a relationship there outside of Misplaced Pages. Since you obviously are not here for the sole purpose of promoting the club, it comes down to the second part of the quote - does common sense tell you that you will be able to neutrally write about the topic? One challenge can be making sure that everything you write about the subject is verifiable - it can be difficult to "forget what you know" and rely on reliable sources.
::Answered on editor's Talk page on how to ask for deletion. ] (]) 11:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:If you do choose to write the article, you could consider adding ] to the talk page to encourage a little extra scrutiny. If you wanted to write a draft, feel free to ping me and I can review it for you before it is moved to mainspace. ] (]) 07:48, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
::Great, thanks! I will do that; it will take a while to get the draft ready for review, but then I will take you up on your kind offer to review it. --] (]) 08:20, 24 June 2014 (UTC) :::Thank you! ] (]) 13:55, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I would like to add a little bit of personal experience here, {{U|Gronk Oz}}. I have been a member of the ] for 38 years, but have never been an officer or an employee. I disclose that mild conflict of interest on my talk page. I have written many biographies of notable Sierra Club leaders and also one about a wilderness property owned by the club. I do my best to write from the ], and have never had any significant criticism of any of those articles. ] ] 04:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::::{{Done}}Thanks for the suggestion, ]. I copied your disclosure and adapted it on my own user page; it looks like a good way to provide that desired transparency.--] (]) 09:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


== Should I be linking this word? ==
==DC Talk Album Chart==
I was trying to do an album chart on the DC Talk page, but it didn't work. Can you help me?
] (]) 21:23, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
:Hi ], and welcome to the Teahouse. The first big issue is that the <nowiki><timeline></nowiki> tag was misspelled as <nowiki><timeli</nowiki>''m''<nowiki>e></nowiki>. Once that is fixed, the timeline returns a couple syntax errors that need to be fixed. I'm not familiar with using ], so I can't really help you beyond that, but hopefully someone else can help you out if you can't get it. Good luck! '''~'']'']''' <small>] ]</small> 21:35, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


Editing the page I'm currently working on, ], I'm confused on whether or not I should be linking the word "]" on the page. In music, tempo is the speed of piece of music, measured in beats per minute. On the page ]—a featured article—it's only linked once in the page very deep in the body despite being mentioned in the lead and other parts of the body but are unlinked. Per ], {{tq|technical terms, jargon or slang expressions or phrases}} should be linked to their corresponding articles. The question is does tempo qualify as a ''technical term'' in this context? Will ] reasonably understand what tempo without requiring linking? ] (] • ]) 06:22, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
==Why was my draft declined?==
:As a layperson I understand "tempo". Of course I can't speak for everyone, so you can just do what you prefer, of flip a coin if you have no preference. ] (]) 06:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
I made my draft of South East Asian International Airlines (Seair-i) but it was declined. It is a new airline separate from Tigerair Philippines. Why was it declined. Maybe you could perfect it because it doesn't look right and I couldn't fix it.


== How To Create Page For This Site IAC News ==
From ggghhj123 ] (]) 19:39, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
{{atop
:Welcome to the Teahouse, {{U|Ggghhj123}}. The reviewer explained that the main problem with your draft is a lack of references to ''independent'' sources required to show notability. The airline's own website is not independent. Find independent coverage and add that to the draft. ] ] 19:45, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
| status = duplicate section below


| result = See later section about the same question. ] (]) 16:47, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::But if it is a new airline, it is possible that it has not yet been written about in enough places to meet Misplaced Pages's criteria for notability; if that is the case, {{U|Ggghhj123}}, then Misplaced Pages cannot have an article about it yet. --] (]) 20:34, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
}}


I want to create a page for IAC News. Url: iacnews.com. Will you help me? ] (]) 08:03, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
==First article - how do improve it? how do I know if it will be accepted?==
:Hi Gaziismail and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Unfortunately I can't seem to find ] in ] sources, which ''could'' mean that iacnews.com is not (yet) ]. For more information see ]. If I am wrong, please list some independent reliable sources that have discussed iacnews.com here. Thank you! ] (]) 08:13, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
I've edited a few things on Misplaced Pages before, but never drafted an article from scratch for inclusion like I have done for "Edward M Fram" - how do I know if it is "good enough" and how can I improve it? I'm trying to upload a picture for it but am unsure how to do this. Any other suggestions to make it better would be warmly received!
:Agreed with ], ]. And even if you succeed in demonstrating that IAC News is notable (]), it will be ''your'' job to try your best to create a worthwhile ]. In order to have a significant chance of succeeding, you should first get a lot of practice in improving existing articles. If your ] is already promising, and shows effort, when you ask for help with it, you're likely to get help, but you're unlikely to get much help before then. -- ] (]) 08:22, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
-Ed. ] (]) 18:58, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
::I have some evidence like some profiles and live websites, here I have given the link. ]: ]:
:Hello again {{U|EdFram}}. Please read ] for instructions on proper formatting of references. Your user name indicates a possible ]. If so, please declare it. ] ] 19:08, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
::]: Will this be possible ? Dear ] ] (]) 08:41, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Profiles and their own website do not establish notability. You need independent ] that on their own chose to write about IAC news and describe what they see as important/significant/influential about it.
:::Are you associated with IAC News? ] (]) 08:44, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
{{abot}}


== Article for submission ==
==uploading photos==
Hello, really silly question I'm sure ... but how do I go about uploading an image (in simplest way possible please as I'm a newbie!) Thanks in advance, Ed. ] (]) 18:52, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
:Welcome to the Teahouse, {{U|Edfram}}. There are some things that can't really be simplified, but I will do my best. If ''you'' took the photo yourself, and the photo is of something not subject to copyright, and you are willing to release the photo under an acceptable ], then it is pretty simple. Go to our sister project ], and follow the simple instructions there to upload the photo. After you upload, you will be provided with the proper wikicode that you can copy and paste into a Misplaced Pages article, to display the photo there.


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, if someone else took the photo, things get much more complicated. We need to know the subject, the date, who took it and where you found it. It is likely you can't use a copyrighted photo. Limited exceptions are described at ]. I tried to keep it as simple as possible. ] ] 19:01, 23 June 2014 (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. ] (]|]) 08:11, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:Thanks for the reply - most helpful :)
I wanted to include a photo for my first article "Edward M Fram" ... the picture dates from c.1952 and it is of the person who the article is written about. It is from my family's old photo collection - can I use the "simple" upload for this in your view?
Thanks ] (]) 19:06, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
::If you are an heir or executor authorized to freely license the photo, then proceed. ] ] 19:11, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


: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)
==guidance for academic researchers==
::@] 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)
Is it acceptable to create articles about your own research to help communicate its findings to the public (otherwise it remains locked behind paywalls?). (Ii) What makes research notable? (iii) what are the criteria that make an academic notable? Publication? A national Award? Is there any guidance?
:::], 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)
I can see that , but as yet I cannot identify specific guidance on academic editing issues.
Are there any?
] (]) 17:43, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


== Author notability guidelines ==
:If your research has not only been officially published, but has also been the subject of '''substantial''' coverage in '''independent''', '''reliable''', sources, it may be suitable for an article. However, you would have a ] in presenting this - for example, you would find it difficult to present a ] if some of that coverage was critical of your research, or presented alternative scenarios. We would not, therefore, recommend that you wrote about your own research.<br />With regard to the notability of academics, please see ] - ] (]) 18:00, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


My draft article was decline as a result of non notable author. But author clearly passes ], here is the ].
::Bearing in mind the conflict of interest issues raised above, it would be acceptable if you went to an article's talk page and mentioned that a new piece of academic research on the topic is available, providing relevant information. This would allow interested editors to read your work and, if warranted, integrate it into existing pages. Additionally, if you're an academic with expertise in a field, I would strongly encourage you to work on improving articles relevant to your area of interest (steering clear of citing yourself). ] <sup>]
</sup> 19:40, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


] 13:57, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks very much both. I have found this about citing your own work:


:@] Your first and second references are reviews of one of Afenfia's books but says nothing about him. Hence they don't contribute to his notability, except indirectly. The other two sources are an interview, so are not ], as required by our notability guidelines. That's why the draft has been declined. If you find further material with sourcing meeting ] you may be able to develop the draft and re-submit it. ] (]) 14:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
'Using material you have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant, conforms to the content policies, includingWP:SELFPUB, and is not excessive. Citations should be in the third person and should not place undue emphasison your work. When in doubt, defer to the community's opinion'


== Author Guidelines ==
which is helpful. ] (]) 03:08, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


Please I'm here to learn, I don't want to contribute to any article here without knowing the guidelines.
==Are decisions on changes made to articles decided by majority or seniority of editors?==
Could someone please explain how the process is supposed to work?


My area of interest is creating article for notable authors.
(Article in question - https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Gun_shows_in_the_United_States#Controversies_section_heading) Thank you. ] (]) 17:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


Please assist me check the if any of these authors meet WP:GNG or WP: Author. Thanks.
:{{ping|Darknipples}} In a way, neither, actually! ] is the primary way of making decisions on Misplaced Pages. Essentially, all decisions should be made based on the input of all participating editors, with an effort to meet all legitimate concerns and make compromises if need be. In cases where things get tough, there are other venues to get third-party opinions from other experienced editors (such as ], ], and ]). Essentially this means that while the majority usually matches up the consensus, it is not just a majority vote that determines decisions, nor are minority viewpoints necessarily left out. See ] for details. '''~'']'']''' <small>] ]</small> 17:35, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
:: Thanks for the input ]. Should I reach out and talk to each editor/watcher listed for this page, or just wait for a certain period of time for all of them to comment? If a compromise cannot be reached, we will use one of the options you mentioned to resolve the issue. Thank you! ] (]) 17:58, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
:::No problem! Eh, I haven't read the discussion, but it seems to be rolling along and getting more than sufficient input. There doesn't look like a need to call for input from other editors at the moment. It's been less than a day, after all.
:::As a side note, as far as I'm aware, you can't tell what users have a page watchlisted. '''~'']'']''' <small>] ]</small> 18:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


#'''Bisi Adjapon'''
==I have written my first article, but am unsure if I've done it correctly.==
#'''Ndifreke Ukpong'''
Could someone please take a look at the article I've written about the painter "Richard Earl Thompson". It's my first article and I'm not sure if I'm missing anything I need to include or if I'm formatting correctly. I would like to have an info box in top right, but I'm not sure how to do it.
#'''Chukwuebuka Ibeh'''
#'''Nestor Udoh'''
] 15:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


:Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to present your evidence for them meeting the criteria, we'll look at it. But it is unlikely anybody is going to do the research that you want done. ] (]) 15:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank You,
::Hi, ] the evidence could be what?, Please explain it in a way I can understand ] 15:30, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Jet 16:26, 23 June 2014 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::Check this two Bisi Adjapon and Ndifreke Ukpong ] 15:32, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Would you start learning to play tennis, and immediately enter a tournament? Or start learning the violin and immediately book a public recital?
::::{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}} ] (]) 16:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Show us how they meet the criteria: what is the evidence? What are the sources that you claim are of adequate quality (check out ]}? ] (]) 15:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:@] (])? ... have you discovered and gone through ] yet? That's where you can get a good introduction to the guidelines, which you rightly understand you need to know before contributing to articles. The senior editors who staff the Teahouse expect us to know something about those guidelines when we ask questions, not make them "do our homework." ] (]) 16:12, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::Second the recommendations that you gain experience working to improve existing articles before trying to create an article, and that Teahouse Hosts are here to advise, not to do your 'homework' of researching potential notability for these authors. ] (]) 16:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Your ] has been declined for lack of valid references. I advise you work on only one draft (MA or another) rather than starting four more. ] (]) 16:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Thank you very much. ] 18:54, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


== How To Publish This Page IAC News ==
:From a quick look, it seems to be like quite a promising draft. One suggestion relates to the tone of the article. It's very nicely written, but on Misplaced Pages we aim for very factual, dispassionate language. So in the introductory paragraph, for instance, you might want to trim down the more visual or emotive language, or details that are not immediately relevant. I would eliminate the interjection about World War I, the stock market collapse, shifts in general attitudes in society, etc. Also, things like "his works are meditations on nature's harmonious perfection, which he visualized in his mind's eye and refined on canvas" is not really appropriate to put in Misplaced Pages's voice. If a reviewer has said these things, you could quote the reviewer, but the encyclopedic voice must be more detached.
:I also noticed that you have many references that repeat. You can solve this problem by naming a reference, rather than spelling the whole thing out each time. See ] for details. Good luck! ] <sup>]</sup> 17:03, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


Sir, I have drafted it here with some information. Is there any problem in updating it later? ] ] (]) 15:44, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:Thank you for your help Keihatsu. I will try to change the tone as you suggest. Much of the language was from the articles written about him that I have referenced. I referenced his biography many times because I thought it was necessary when using information from the book. How often do I need to reference the book?
:I commented on the draft that it was just advertising. I was weirdly called racist for doing so. ] (]) 16:00, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
I really appreciate your help.
::Thank you so much ] ] (]) 16:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Jet 18:02, 23 June 2014 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:@] The whole idea of having drafts is so that editors can work on them until they are ready for submission: see ] for details. Your draft is not yet suitable for mainspace, since it only cites ] (unreliable) and ], which is a deprecated source (see the link I supplied about it). ] (]) 16:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::Can I remove these links now? ] (]) 16:09, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Yes, certainly. What your draft needs is sources/text to show how IAC news is ]. Also, please remove the categories, as we don't categorise drafts. ] (]) 16:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Hello, @].
:::{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}} ] (]) 16:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::Sir, I have removed the bad words, if there are any more bad words, please tell me. ] @] ] (]) 16:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::As advided above, articles are based on what independent, reliable sources have reported, you have none? ] (]) 16:20, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Gaziismail, you will need to disclose your conflict of interest on your user page, which is at ]. Instructions are at ].
:::The article currently has no sources. It is impossible to accept an article that has no sources. We generally need three that represent significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the article subject. You can find more information at ]. ] (]) 16:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


== <sup>1]</sup> ==
::Hello, {{U|Jet1950|Jet}}. Ideally, every piece of information about the topic should be referenced to a source; so any paragraph without a reference is suspect (except in the lede to the article, which usually summarises material from elsewhere in the article); and in some passages every sentence should have a reference. As {{U|Keihatsu}} said, you can use named references to do this (and I've replaced Keihatsu's URL above by a wikilink to the section). You probably want to reference different pages within the same source, and you can use the template {{tl|rp}} to do this. --] (]) 19:37, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


I found this construction in ]:
==VxWorks editing question==
I have been updating VxWorks and now I get a message that the article has many disambiguous links but when I check it says there are none??] (]) 13:32, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


Teagarden was born in ], United States.<ref name="Larkin3">{{cite book |title=] |date=1997 |publisher=] |isbn=1-85227-745-9 |editor=Colin Larkin |editor-link=Colin Larkin (writer) |edition=Concise |page=1165}}</ref><sup>1]</sup>
:Hi Robpater. That link is added with the <nowiki>{{dablinks|date=June 2014}}</nowiki> text at the top of the article. If it no longer applies, you can remove it :) ] (]) 13:36, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


It seems to add an extraneous superscript after a reference. I am tempted to remove it, but I'm not sure what it is. There are several throughout the article. Thanks for your advice
:Thanks! <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 13:41, 23 June 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
{{talkref}}
] (]) 16:05, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:Someone used <nowiki><sup></nowiki> to insert those numbers, no idea why. I removed them. ]&nbsp;] 16:09, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:@] Someone has used the source code <code><nowiki><sup>1]</sup></nowiki></code>. I'm not sure what they were trying to achieve but perhaps page numbers, although that seems unlikely in the example you gave. There is a template {{t|rp}} if that's what they wanted. ] (]) 16:10, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


== Double-checking process for submitting first article? ==
==How do I delete an upload in progress? ==
The page appears but I have not saved it. I accidentally selected a version of my article without a photo. Can I add the photo later, or can I delete the current unsaved version and upload a pdf with the photo? ] (]) 12:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


I have my first article written and ready to go ––&nbsp;I just want to check a few things?
Hi Kmillett, and welcome to the tea house. I'm afraid I'm not quite catching the meaning of your question. Did you try to create a new page, but forgot to upload a photo? If so, don't worry—everything here can be done iteratively. You can save the page, then click edit again to add a photo or any other additional information you'd like. If ever you create a file or a page but then change your mind and want it to be deleted, just add <tt><nowiki>{{db-g7}}</nowiki></tt> to the top and an administrator will delete it for you.] <sup>]</sup> 14:04, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


* 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?
==Help with Jesse Rose page==
* 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.
Hi,


] (]) 16:12, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
I am writing on behalf of the management of Jesse Rose and the article that was written for Jesse Rose was declined. Can somebody please help me and give me some feedback why this was declined? We want to get the page up as soon as possible. Jesse Rose is a DJ/producer and he has been around for a while so there are enough sources and references.
https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:Jesse_Rose


: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".
] (]) 09:20, 23 June 2014 (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).
:Hi {{u|Sean.holbrook}} and welcome (back?) to the Teahouse. Your article was declined because it does not reach the required threshold for inclusion in Misplaced Pages. To establish that the topic is ], you need to show significant coverage in ] ] sources. At the moment you have two references, one of which is a blog post and doesn't count towards notability. You need to find more people who have written that Jesse Rose deserves attention. You also appear to have a conflict of interest if you are representing Jesse Rose's management - please also read this ]. Good luck!]<sup>♦]</sup> 09:50, 23 June 2014 (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)


== References Help ==
Hi [[User:Philg88| Thank you for the reply. I am not actually working for the management. It is more like a learning project. I tried to write it as neutral as possible. The two sources I used, I took it from another[REDACTED] page. https://en.wikipedia.org/Electro_house#cite_note-guardian-29 So you recommend to add more sources?


Hello, I have been trying to publish a page on American Film producer and writer Austin Hoyt. I have done everything I can to find sources and cite everything in my draft, but it is still being rejected. Are you able to give me more in-detail reasoning as to why this draft is getting rejected? What about the sources I provided is not correct? My draft is ] ] (]) 16:58, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
] (]) 09:58, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


:Hello. Note that it has only been declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means it may be resubmitted.
:{{tping|Sean.holbrook}}. Yes, you need to find more sources according to the criteria I described above. ]<sup>♦]</sup> 12:01, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
:You have not summarized independent ] that show how he is ]; you've pretty much just listed his work. ] (]) 17:07, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


== What to do about a user mass-removing content sourced from a certain site ==
:Hello, {{U|Sean.holbrook|Sean}}. I'm afraid it does not make any difference whether you are working for them at present or not: you have told us enough to show that you have a conflict of interest. That doesn't meant that you may not work on the article, but you need to be very very cautious, and make sure you follow the suggested practice for editors with a ]. One more point: you may want to get the article up as soon as possible: Misplaced Pages does not. Misplaced Pages wants to get as good an article as possible (which includes the possibility of no article at all, if sufficient independent sources do not exist) and doesn't care how long that takes: see ]. To me (and I suspect many other editors) when I see somebody saying they want to get an article up as soon as possible, especially if they are connected with the subject, I immediately suspect that they are here for the purpose of ], which is explicitly forbidden on Misplaced Pages. My suggestion would be that you collect independent reliable sources for Jesse Rose, and if you think there are enough to ground an article, submit a request via ], and leave it for somebody else to write when they choose. Then if you would like to help us improve Misplaced Pages, there are many other articles you can work on where you haven't got a conflict of interest. --] (]) 15:11, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


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)
==Deletion of article==
Would like the know the procedure for requesting deletion of ] as the article has been written about a train that had not been introduced when the article was written and has significant shortcomings.
] (]) 05:41, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
:Hello {{U|Superfast1111}}. You say that the train "had not been introduced when the article was written", which implies that the train is running now. Do you know? The first solution to an article with outdated information is to improve and update the article. If you have the knowledge and the interest, I encourage you to do so. If you are convinced that the topic is not notable, then please follow the instructions at ]. ] ] 05:54, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
::This from the railway company said that service was to begin in early April, 2014. ] ] 05:59, 23 June 2014 (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)
True but was it fair to create an article in February 2013 for a service that is introduced in April 2014 & expecting some other editor to clean up / suitably edit the article to a decent standard. Why should credit of an article creation go to a fake article?
] (]) 07:45, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
:{{ping|Superfast1111}} ] outlines our policy on articles about things that have yet to come. Essentially, articles on future things are acceptable as long as they are ] and are almost certain to take place. Just because something hasn't taken place yet doesn't necessarily mean it's not worthy of an article, nor does it make it "fake" or anything of that sort. The way I like to look at it is if the future event were to be cancelled, it would still have received enough coverage to be notable enough for Misplaced Pages.
:As for the "credit of an article creation", I'm not sure what the issue is there. Misplaced Pages is a collaborative encyclopedia, and nothing is stopping anyone from improving the article now that it needs updating. '''~'']'']''' <small>] ]</small> 07:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
::{{ping|Superfast1111}} I've added two references to the article. Whereever possible, it's always best to try to find references rather than consider deletion an option. ]<sup>♦]</sup> 07:58, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


== Subpages (User), remove redirect ==
==want to add two header rows to a two-column format==
Hi,


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.  
I'm trying to set up a double column to show the name of an office-holder in one column, and the years of service in the second column. I've found out how to do that.


Case 1: Page ] points to the lemma ] and keeps showing as a "subpage", how to remove/unlink this?
However, I would also like to have two header rows that span both columns, to have the name of the office in the top row, and some detail about the office in the second row.


Case 2: Page ] points to ], but why when the second page has a dedicated name?
Is this possible to do (without much knowledge of formatting)?


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!
Here's what I would like it to look like: ]. I looked at the code for those columns, though, and there seems to be a lot of data built into them, so I can't just use them as a template.


] (]) 19:50, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks!


:{{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)
] (]) 19:10, 22 June 2014 (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. ] (]) 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 (]) ==
:Hi Mr Serjeant Buzfuz. It sounds like you want the below which uses colspan="2". See more at ]. ] (]) 20:43, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! colspan="2" | A
|-
| colspan="2" | B
|-
| C1 || C2
|-
| D1 || D2
|-
| E1 || E2
|}


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)
::HI, PrimeHunter. Thanks for the response. However, I'm not sure a table will work, because I want to list several officer-holders, like the example of the US Supreme Court justices. That article displays 3 or 4 columns side-by-side. Is it possible to have 3 or 4 tables side-by-side? ] (]) 02:35, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


:{{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)
:::{{ping|Mr Serjeant Buzfuz}}You can put tables side by side by essentially putting those tables within another table. A simpler way to do this, though, is to use the ], as the Supreme Court Justices example does. See the ] for an idea of how it works. '''~'']'']''' <small>] ]</small> 08:20, 23 June 2014 (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)
:::{{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)
::::Will do. Thank you. ] (]) 05:11, 21 January 2025 (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)


:Alright, thank you for the clarification! ] (]) 05:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
:::: Yes, that's why I initially asked about using columns. But, I still don't know how to have a single cell at the top of a two-column display, the same as the Supreme Court justices example does. ] (]) 20:28, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


==Empty string==
:::::Look at the code I used above. If this is not the table layout you want then please explain the difference. ] (]) 10:06, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
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)
==How do I site a source?==
:So try, straightforwardly and of course with no hint of sarcasm, on ]. -- ] (]) 00:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm having a lot of trouble siting my sources. I have still done the ref thing. Can someone help me?


== Alt accounts ==
] (]) 18:34, 22 June 2014 (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)
:Hello ], and welcome to the Teahouse! To cite a source, just add this next to the passage you're citing:


:{{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)
<pre>
::Alright, thanks. ] (]) 00:13, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
<ref>Your citation here</ref>
</pre>


== A general question ==
:Next, go to the bottom of the page, add a section called "References", and then add {{t|Reflist}} there. Very simple!


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)
:If you have any further questions, you can check out the ], or just ask again here. --''']''' (] &#124; ]) 18:41, 22 June 2014 (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)
::Another useful resource, {{U|Spacedude3000}}, is ]. ] ] 23:37, 22 June 2014 (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)
:::@] 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 ==
==Creating my first page on Misplaced Pages==
Hi, I work in the tourism business in Ireland. I see several instances where I could add pages to Misplaced Pages. I tried to create my first page some time back to learn the process. I found the experience frustrating. I will have another go and see how it goes. I felt there should be a simple template for novices to add basic pages. Possible more experienced editors could then add to the pages..... just my experience. ] (]) 18:04, 22 June 2014 (UTC)


] 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.
:Hi Poshpaddy! Welcome to the teahouse. Thank you for letting us know about your experience. --] (]) 18:11, 22 June 2014 (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.
::Hello ]. I think the page ] might help you in creating new pages. Of course, ] scares a lot of newcomers, so that's what the Teahouse is here for! And you're more than welcome to fool around with the code at the ]. Once you get used to the markup language, you'd be amazed at how much we can do with it. Happy editing! --''']''' (] &#124; ]) 18:34, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
:::Welcome to the Teahouse, {{U|Poshpaddy}}. Another good resource for people learning how to write articles here is ]. ] ] 20:14, 22 June 2014 (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)
==Requesting assessment==
Is there any place where you can request quality assessments for particular articles? Obviously, GA and FA articles have specific reviews but I'd like to know whether articles - particularly articles I've created - are Start-class or C-class or B-class etc.


:@] 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)
I suppose if there's a particular article I have in mind, it would be ] (presumably start/stub) or ]. But very few of articles created by me have been rated, and I'd imagine there's some rule against rating articles you've created or worked substantially on. ] <sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 17:23, 22 June 2014 (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! ==
:I normally rate an article I've worked on as C-class if I think it's appropriate. I wouldn't rate an article I've worked on as B-class or higher; it wouldn't really be appropriate (though I don't think there are specific rules about it).


Greetings,
:The best way, perhaps, is to add the article to appropriate WikiProjects, and if it hasn't been rated there yet, it will be eventually, by the members of that WikiProject. If it already has a rating at that WikiProject, you could ask at the WikiProject for it to be re-rated? Some have particular processes for this. --] (]) 18:14, 22 June 2014 (UTC)


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.
==What to do with an IP's userpage==
I noticed a completely ] article being created on an IP's userpage - ]. The page was created by ] and not the IP.


Thanks in advance to anyone willing to help!
If this article was located in the main namespace, I'd know what to do - tag with {{t|db-a7}}. But the template only applies for articles in the main namespace, and ] reminded me by not showing me the option to tag the page as such.


] (]) 18:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
What would I do in this situation? The article wasn't even made by the IP - what deletion template should I use?


:] in case anyone is interested. ] (]) 18:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks in advance. --''']''' (] &#124; ]) 16:22, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
::...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 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)


:{{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 distinguihed 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.
:I just tagged it csd U5...not a webhost violation. That should do it, but an admin might have a different idea. ] (]) 16:33, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
:tl;dr: If you want someone to help you, make it clear what it is you want. ] (]) 09:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


==Just curious.== == Cover art ==
Sometimes when I just roam the Misplaced Pages on a Sunday morning walk I come across a small text on some pages saying "Mark this page as patrolled". What is that? Is it an indication that I should do something. - ] (]) 12:52, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
:Please see ] - you don't have to do anything, in which case the same box will appear to the next patrolling editor who views the page.<br />However, if the page looks "appropriate for Misplaced Pages, even if it requires significant work" you can mark it as patrolled, or you can propose it for deletion, or, if it needs certain work, you can tag it with the appropriate tag(s). - ] (]) 16:22, 22 June 2014 (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)
==Changing user name' capitalization==
How do I change the capitalization of my user name? When I originally signed up as a member, I did not capitalize my user name. Misplaced Pages automatically capitalized it. How do I un-capitalize it?


:Correct. It'll be ], so make sure you fill out a proper ]. ] (]) 20:02, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
] (]) 21:31, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
::Okayy thank you so much!. ] (]) 04:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


==How to promote an article to c-class==
:Hi data, welcome to the Teahouse. The first character of user names is automatically capitalized. I see you have found how to customize your signature. You can place {{tl|lowercase title}} on ] and ] to display the page heading in lower case, but that is all you can do. Logs like user contributions and page histories will always show it in upper case. You can type the name in lower case when you log in but others will not see what you typed. ] (]) 22:27, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
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)
:: Thank you ]. I suppose I cannot change the capitalization of any non-initial characters either? ] (]) 23:05, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
::{{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)
: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 ==
:::Only the first character is automatically capitalized. The others are as they were entered at account creation. Changes can be requested at ]. ] (]) 23:14, 21 June 2014 (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.
:::: Thank you! ] (]) 23:49, 21 June 2014 (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 recieved an error while trying to replace a citation==
I am having trouble understanding how to properly replace an old citation with a more relevant one. Specifically, "The named reference".


I would also welcome any feedback about the draft
Link to the page with the error - https://en.wikipedia.org/Gun_shows_in_the_United_States#Notes_and_references


Thank you,
] (]) 04:42, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
] (]) 05:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:Welcome to the Teahouse, {{U|Darknipples}}. We have a way of defining a reference once, and then using it multiple times in an article, by using "ref name=" in the wikicode. In this case, a master reference was defined as "Clinton pushes Congress to pass new gun control legislation". Probably what happened was that a reference was created with that name, and used several times in the article. During the course of editing over time, the master reference was deleted, but not the secondary use of the reference. So, there are two solutions: restore the master reference from the article history if it is a solid reference, or delete the secondary use of the reference. Because articles related in any way to gun control legislation are highly controversial and subject to ArbCom restrictions, I recommend caution, and that you raise the matter on the article's talk page first. ] ] 05:07, 21 June 2014 (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)

"restore the master reference from the article history if it is a solid reference, or delete the secondary use of the reference."

I am unaware as to how to do either of these, as I am a novice. Any suggestions on where to obtain step by step instructions for accomplishing either of these two options?

"Because articles related in any way to gun control legislation are highly controversial and subject to ArbCom restrictions, I recommend caution, and that you raise the matter on the article's talk page first."

How do I access the article's talk page? Thank you for your help. Your advice is very appreciated. I love[REDACTED] and wish to learn how to contribute properly. Thank you! ] (]) 06:02, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
:::Hello again, {{U|Darknipples}}. Please read ] for the basics of how references are formatted.


== Possibility to see number of edits for each space ==
:::When you are reading any Misplaced Pages article, there will be a menu bar at the top of the page. One of the choices will be called "Talk". Clicking on "Talk" will take you to another, behind the scenes, page. That is where editors interested in that page discuss possible changes to improve the article. Because you are a novice, I am willing to make the correction for you. Or you can try it yourself. Just let us know. The main thing I want you to understand is that you are welcome to make positive changes to any article here. Your input is appreciated, and we want you to edit. But I also want you to know that editing in highly controversial areas can be tough at times. Kind of like stepping into a boxing ring for the first time, although the punches are verbal rather than physical. I want you to be prepared, and I hope that you will continue editing here. Please feel free to return to the Teahouse with questions at any time, or ask on my talk page. Five years ago, I was in your shoes as a complete beginner, and I was grateful to get a friendly welcome. I wish you well. ] ] 06:36, 21 June 2014 (UTC)


I'd like to know if there are a mean to see the number of edits for each space. <br />
::::To find the reference in the history, you click on "History" or "View history" at the top of the page and pick some arbitrary date and see if the reference had all the needed information on that date. If it doesn't, you would want to search earlier if the reference was already deleted or later if it hadn't been included at all yet.— ]&nbsp;• ]&nbsp;• ]&nbsp;• <br /> 21:42, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
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)
==Tool to order citations numerically==
Hi! I was wondering if there was a tool to order the citations at the end of a sentence from: "I like pancakes." to "I like pancakes. Thanks! ] (]) 13:40, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


== Orphan ==
:Welcome back to the Teahouse, Bananasoldier! I don't believe there is a tool for that, but we have some very talented coders around here on Misplaced Pages who I'm sure would be willing to make one and help improve the editing experience. Happy editing! <font face="webdings"><font color="#007FFF">ö</font></font><font face="segoe script">] ] ]</font> 19:37, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
:{{ping|Bananasoldier}} Hi. It seems that I'm a bit late, but there's a very simple way to do this. If we have <nowiki><ref name = "ref32"/><ref name = "ref15"/><ref name = "ref9"/>, then we can change this to <ref name = "ref9"/><ref name = "ref15"/><ref name = "ref32"/> to produce your desired output.</nowiki> --'''] (]) ''' 13:31, 22 June 2014 (UTC)


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.)
==How do I find a volunteer to have a wiki page edited, updated, and written better? Thanks==
How does one go about having a wiki page improved i.e. adding a photo, improve the writing and information as well as update? It's a bout a race car driver.
Thanks!] (]) 21:49, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
:Welcome (back?) to the Teahouse ]! You can't necessarily get someone to "volunteer" to have a wiki page edited, but you can get someone from the ] to improve your articles' writing, like you said. Maybe some more experienced Wikipedians know if there are "volunteers" on Misplaced Pages. Cheers! ] • ] 00:13, 20 June 2014 (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)
::Also, you can do it yourself if you have the time, suitable reference material, and the inclination. One of the strengths of Misplaced Pages is that all sorts of people can contribute to it. Click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page you want to change, then "Show preview" once you're done to be sure it worked like you intended before Saving your changes. Registering as a user is optional, but recommended. Need help? Click on the "Help" link at left, or of course you can ask here... --] (]) 07:05, 20 June 2014 (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)
:::{{replyto|190.238.199.210}} Post on the ]. An experienced Wikipedian might offer to help you. <font face="copperplate gothic light">] (])</font> 10:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
::Thank you very much for your advice. ] (]) 10:33, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 10:33, 22 January 2025

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

[REDACTED]
Shortcuts

Tigraan, 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


how do I start a new article?

how do I start a new article? 2A00:23C5:6114:5401:9EC8:E9FF:FE6E:C6C2 (talk) 18:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Start with reading WP:BACKWARD and WP:YFA carefully. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Creating an account is not a requirement but is recommended, as that allows better communication between editors. Also, a strong recommendation to put in time (months?) learning how to improve existing articles before attempting to create an article. David notMD (talk) 18:35, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Most importantly see Help:Referencing for beginners. Maybe see why Misplaced Pages:Why create an account? or why Misplaced Pages:Why not create an account?. Cwater1 (talk) 00:35, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

First AfC Draft declined

I submitted a very basic draft about an author, but it was declined. I used online sources for all of the facts I mentioned, but I got this feedback: "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Misplaced Pages article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

Can someone help me with examples so I can do this right?

The subject is Robert Christiansen, who is an author of multiple books, owner of several businesses, and was a VP of Strategy at Hewlett Packard. I strongly feel his accomplishments and his mission are important enough to warrant an article. Anyone can google him and read tons of things about him. Jpadilla-mfl (talk) 19:51, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Jpadilla-mfl. I suggest you read WP:42, WP:RS, WP:N, and WP:BIO. Understanding the notability required on Misplaced Pages can be complicated, especially as a new editor. My advice is to focus on other elements on Misplaced Pages first before attempting to write an article. Tarlby 20:23, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Draft:Robert Christiansen has several problems. In addition to the references not meeting the criteria mentioned in the above comment, the refs are URLs. See Help:Referencing for beginners on how to format refs. Per the refs, first is a blog, second his website, third confirms he wrote a book, fourth a webinar, fifth about a presentation he gave, but not about him. None of these qualify for notability. David notMD (talk) 20:41, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Jpadilla-mfl. I echo what the other replies have said. Please understand that Misplaced Pages has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Misplaced Pages is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 22:52, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello @Jpadilla-mfl! Please read Misplaced Pages:Notability (books),And read Help:Your first article. Making a Article can be hard, So please read these resources. Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 22:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
@Nedia020415 Misplaced Pages:Notability (books) applies to articles about books. It is not relevant here. Perhaps you meant WP:NAUTHOR. Shantavira| 09:56, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you @Shantavira. I meant that Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 00:50, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Interpretation of NOLEGALTHREAT policy

While editing the article on Tushar Rao Gedela I saw it had the off-wiki legal threats reported at Delhi HC slams Misplaced Pages for its dedicated page on the ongoing lawsuit against it by ANI. On 14 October 2024, a Delhi High Court Bench comprising acting chief justice Manmohan and Gedela criticised Misplaced Pages for hosting a page titled Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation related to an ongoing defamation lawsuit filed by Asian News International (ANI) against the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF). The page claimed that the court had threatened to block Misplaced Pages in India if certain editor identities were not disclosed, which the court found objectionable. Since this is a clear ongoing legal threat by a foreign Court against Misplaced Pages editors and Misplaced Pages itself, should the quoted text be reproduced on Misplaced Pages ?Ngenazulu (talk) 09:09, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Ngenazulu. Certainly. If a legal threat against Misplaced Pages has been reported in reliable sources, it is appropriate to say so in a relevant article.
The point of the policy you refer to is that an editor who has made legal threats towards Misplaced Pages may not edit Misplaced Pages while those threats have not been withdrawn. It says nothing about what may be reported from reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 13:43, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Actually, I discern this policy as a legal policy to be strictly implemented to protect the Misplaced Pages itself from actions of its users. Do not post legal threats on Misplaced Pages. A legal threat, in this context, is a threat to engage in an off-wiki ("real life") legal or other governmental process that would target other editors or Misplaced Pages itself. It does not refer to any dispute-resolution process within Misplaced Pages.. By my interpretation the foreign court has threatened to ban Misplaced Pages in India for discussing on-wiki the case which is sub-judice before it. They have gone as far as telling Misplaced Pages that (paraphrased) because you Misplaced Pages are the party in the litigation you especially should not publish anything about this matter since it is an interference in the judge's functioning, and if you do so again we will block you and hold you in contempt. This is unambiguously an ongoing legal threat against the Misplaced Pages and its editors if anything about the ongoing case is published on-wiki. So as per my reading of the NOLEGALTHREAT policy (with legal implications) this threat ought not to be uploaded to Misplaced Pages, irrespective of whether it is reliably sourced or factual or neutral etc. It must also be considered that this is an actual real world ongoing legal threat and not one that can be brushed off as an idle threat which are a dime a dozen for creating chilling effect. Ngenazulu (talk) 19:52, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Ngenazulu. I think your interpretation is perverse and nonsensical. Nobody can stop people (and courts) making threats. If a court is doing so, it is clearly in the interest of Misplaced Pages and its editors that that fact be reported - not necessarily in an article, but certainly in talk and discussion pages. Reporting that somebody has raised a legal threat is not the same os posting a legal threat. ColinFine (talk) 15:12, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
@ColinFine Ignoring (for the moment) your personal remarks, I find it difficult to take your advice seriously. We both apparently agree that the statements of a court which has the power to direct that Misplaced Pages be blocked in India is a legal threat. That court had previously directed Wikimedia not to publicly discuss or publish anything related to the case on Wikimedia platforms while the case was sub-judice, and Wikimedia intervened in a rare office action to delete the discussions. Now you advise that Wikipedians can persist in uploading these clear and direct legal threats on this Wikimedia project by disregarding that WP:NLT is an over-riding policy with legal implications mandated by Wikimedia who have themselves kowtowed to that court. You also overlook that these legal threats has been published (you describe it as reporting) in article space on the judges who issued that threat to block Misplaced Pages, and not in talk space. I also fail to see the distinction you do between reporting (Misplaced Pages is not WP:NOTNEWS for WP:ROUTINE, WP:NOTWHOSWHO) qua posting a legal threat. I think this needs a 3rd opinion. Ngenazulu (talk) 04:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
It is not our job to determine whether the court is making a binding/mandatory "request" or not. All we have to worry about is to edit. The WMF exists to defend itself in court, and if they get a court order they feel they must comply with, they will make any changes/adjustments to articles needed, up to temporarily or permanently removing content.
NLT is about a Misplaced Pages user making a threat of legal action against another user, or against the WMF. It has no bearing whatsoever on our articles' content. The case is being reported by multiple reliable sources that I've seen over the past couple months, and that means we must cover it with due weight in affected articles. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 04:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@berchanhimez Thanks for your assistance. I see that WP:DUE resolves to WP:NPOV. It is precisely because Misplaced Pages is a PARTY in the case that the court in question directed (ie. not requested) WMF to remove the earlier discussions (which WMF kowtowed to) and to ensure no future publication as long as matter is sub-judice (which it is). Since the English Misplaced Pages community is before the court, with 2 or 3 editors also being targeted, through WMF I am unable to see how any NEUTRAL content can be posted on a WMF project when both Misplaced Pages as well as WMF are parties before the court. Also, I am unable to see anywhere that NLT says that it is limited to users making threats against other users or WMF, while certainly that is one of the use cases. The clear meaning is A legal threat is a statement by a party that it intends to take legal action on another party, generally accompanied by a demand that the other party take an action demanded by the first party or refrain from taking or continuing actions objected to by the demanding party. and here the court is the demanding party and Misplaced Pages+WMF are the other party. The demand being "don't publish anything about a pending case in which you are a party" which is very different from WP:CENSORSHIP. BTW, it seems you believe that Misplaced Pages should be blocked in India by this kangaroo court so I'll await opinions of uninvolved editors thank you. Ngenazulu (talk) 05:28, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
We are not the WMF. Editors do not make decisions based on legal grounds - except those which are enshrined in our policies (such as copyright, BLP, etc). Let me rephrase it this way - NLT does not apply here because we are not posting a threat of legal action against anyone. We are merely posting information about an ongoing legal case. If the WMF feels that they must remove or prohibit such information to comply with a court order, they will step in, trust me. Until they do, there is no policy based reason that said information about the case cannot be posted. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 05:34, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@berchanhimez Yes I knew the distinction between WMF and Misplaced Pages. At the most basic level my question is this - "Whereas in the USA the sub judice no publication rule is not usually enforced, it is followed extensively in Commonwealth countries putting users from Commonwealth nations at risk of prosecution and contempt, so, would the situation you describe be different if the USA also had a sub judice no publication rule ?" Ngenazulu (talk) 17:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Each user would need to consider their own personal risk, sure. But you can’t stop others from including information on an article. If you think you are legally at risk from you editing an article, simply don’t edit that article. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 20:55, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Need to remove issues symbol

Hi, i have contributed to Misplaced Pages through a page creation. but it is showing multiple warnings. i could not understand. i have replied the messages came from Misplaced Pages representatives. but still the error symbol is persist. help me to come out of this. The page link is Archana Singh (Indian Actress) M3mediachennai (talk) 17:58, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, M3mediachennai. I've moved the article to draft space because it appears promotional. Could you please clarify whether you have a connection with the subject of the article? You've uploaded two photos of the subject, marking them as your own work, so I presume you have a business or personal relationship with her. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:09, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Yes, She is my well known friend. We worked together Miss. Cordless Larry M3mediachennai (talk) 18:14, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @M3mediachennai. In that case, you have a conflict of interest - which doesn't prevent you from working on an article about her, but you need to be aware of the advice in that link.
Your user name suggests that you are part of a media agency - presumable M3 Digital Media. There are several problems with this:
  1. User names which suggest that you are editing on behalf of an organisation are forbidden. So are usernames which suggest that this is not a personal account but might be shared. You must change your username - or abandon this account and create a new, personal, account - immediately. See Username policy.
  2. The fact that you appear to be associated with a media agency creates a very strong impression that you are a paid editor. If this is the case, then you must make a formal declaration of this fact before you do any more editing - see that link for how to do so. If you are not, please clarify what is your relationship to that agency.
Turning to your draft, Draft:Archana Singh (Indian Actress): like most new editors who attempt the challenging task of creating a new article before spending time learning much about Misplaced Pages, you have created something which is at present entirely unsuitable for Wikiepdia. Misplaced Pages has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Misplaced Pages is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.
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) 18:29, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Archana Singh. See Help:Referencing for beginners on how to insert properly formatted refs into text. For a living person, all content needs to be ref'd (education, career, etc.). Listing her films does not contribute to establishing notability. What is required are references about her. David notMD (talk) 23:03, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Pinging a wikiproject

Hello! I am currently writing a GAR for the Xinjiang People's Anti-Imperialist Association which is listed as a good article currently. A recommended action in the WP:GAR is pinging the wikiprojects relevant to the article. in this case it would be WP:socialism and WP:China. i have looked through two pages in the archive looking for an answer on how to ping a wikiproject since i couldnt really find an explaination on the GAR page, (they same line it recommeneds doing this has a template but as far as i understand this is for GAR navigation rather than WP communication). i appreciate any and all help with this AssanEcho (talk) 21:55, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @AssanEcho. I've never heard of pinging a WikiProject, and I don't think the notification system can do this. I guess that the word is being loosely, and I would interpret it as meaning "put a notice of the matter on the Talk page of the WikiProject". ColinFine (talk) 22:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
thanks for the quick response @ColinFine! perhaps i did misinterpret the sentence. I'll post the GAR and if another editor adds that there is such a feature, then ill make a quick response to it making the notification. i'll manually notify each of the two major Wikiprojects of the GAR tommorow, as im fairly tired atm. if they dont also explain that there was better way to notify them of this then ill take it as caseclosed that theres no such pinging feature for wikiprojects. thanks again AssanEcho (talk) 02:36, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Appendix Documents

I’ve been sourcing a lot of history on a region named Mizoram. I have several books on the topic and their appendixes have government documents and letters written by individuals. The books publish these documents in the appendix. Some of these documents are too long to be quoted reasonably in article but I want to know the copyright status of government documentation. As for the letters if they’re published in books (no mention of permissions, plus writer died long ago) does that make it copyable? I want to preserve the documentation and letters on wiki source or would wiki quote be more appropriate? I just wanted some advice, I normally type out the documents and keep them as personal research tools but wanted to know the possibility of publifying it. Mmis325 (talk) 03:19, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Before going into the other questions you raise, Mmis325, it seems to me that you want to cite primary sources. This surprises me, as I'd have thought that suitable primary sources would have been identified and summarized (and in places quoted) within secondary sources (books, academic papers, etc). Copyright issues aside, are you sure that your proposed use of primary sources would be in accordance with "Misplaced Pages:Identifying and using primary sources"? -- Hoary (talk) 06:37, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
The books are secondary sources but they include an appendix of primary sources and I wanted to know the feasibility of publicising them as they are obscure and can provide insight into the political nature at the time. That was my intention. The books using these sources provide their own recounts and perspectives which I’ve cited myself. Mmis325 (talk) 08:42, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Mmis325, I'll interpret "publicising" as "publicly reproducing". Andy Mabbett has already commented (below) on the legal aspect of publicly reproducing them in some bulk: which is that he doesn't know. (And I don't know either.) I can't imagine that there'd be any copyright barrier to quoting small samples from within them; after all, this is commonplace in Misplaced Pages even when what's quoted is indisputably copyrighted. But talk of " the documentation and letters on wiki source" is another matter. You'd better ask at Wikisource (of which you have more experience than I). If you're asking about, say, a patchily decipherable letter written in 1896 and laboriously deciphered and edited by a much later scholar for her book published in 2003, I wouldn't assume that the letter in its (2003) published form would be in the public domain (even if stripped of editorial annotations): I really don't know. But why not simply cite/quote the book appearance of the letter? What's cite/quoted doesn't have to be available on the web. -- Hoary (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@Mmis325: "the copyright status of government documentation." This will depend on which country they govern, and possibly then when they were published, and - if known - who wrote them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:39, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Linking to other language wikipedias?

Hi,

I was reading an article and saw a blue link, clicked it and was redirected to an article on Swedish Misplaced Pages. This has never happened to me before, so is this normal/ok or should I remove that link? Ribidag (talk) 10:39, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

What article was this on? Inter langauge links should normally be well labeled. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 10:53, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
It was in the Sweden section of Punch (drink) : Punch (drink) - Misplaced Pages (I hope this makes a link, I don't have much experience with this) Ribidag (talk) 10:55, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Ok, it didn't make a link :I, anyway it's the word "bål" Ribidag (talk) 10:57, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
@Ribidag The syntax that has been used there is ] instead of the more standard interlanguage link using {{ill}}. These sorts of links are better, in my opinion, on Talk Pages than in articles, as they will look like conventional Wikilinks to most readers. There is a large list of such links that can be used: see H:IW. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:47, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Ribidag. I have replaced the link with {{ill|bål|sv|Bål (dryck)}}, which shows as bål . That link was inserted in December 2017 and though the "Ill" template had been around for a while, I suspect it wasn't widely known then. ColinFine (talk) 14:43, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

John James (businessman and philanthropist)

Can I now remove the COI message at the top of the page? The issue has been addressed, back in November, and can be viewed on my talk page. Jjarchivist (talk) 11:16, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Jjarchivist! You are not supposed to remove the template, since any person who views your edits on the John James (businessman and philathropist) article will come to your user page and then know that you had a close connection to the subject, which is the reason for the tag on the article TNM101 (chat) 11:22, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Oh, okay, thanks. Just wondered how it works. Jjarchivist (talk) 11:28, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
No problem! Feel free to ask if you have any more questions TNM101 (chat) 11:33, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Have added a link on the "John James may refer to" page but it's come up in purple, not blue. Have I done something wrong? Jjarchivist (talk) 12:54, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
What you are referring to is Misplaced Pages's way of letting you know that you have visited that page before. Nothing to be worried about TNM101 (chat) 13:10, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks. Jjarchivist (talk) 13:11, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Um - where did you get that idea, @TNM101? There is no suggestion of that as any part of the function of the template at Template:COI, and in fact it says This tag may be removed by editors who do not have a conflict of interest after the problem is resolved, if the problem is not explained on the article's talk page, and/or if no current attempts to resolve the problem can be found. ColinFine (talk) 14:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
I just realized what I did. For some reason, I thought Jjarchivist was referring to his own user page, and not the article. Whatever I said was in relation to the user page. @Jjarchivist, apologies, and if you have resolved the problem, you are free to remove the tag. Thanks @ColinFine for pointing it out! (I really need to get whacked for that) TNM101 (chat) 14:52, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Don't feel all that bad. Mistakes is how we learn on Misplaced Pages and in real life. Cwater1 (talk) 21:16, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

I somewhat swore

In a new section in User talk:Semsûrî‬, I typed the F-word admitting my own wrongdoings but I replaced the u with an asterisk. I know that if I didn't censor it, I would get a "one last warning before I get blocked" notification. What happens now? I promise I'll never do this again. Underdwarf58 (talk) 15:41, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

You're allowed to say fuck and shit if you want to. WP:CIVILITY and WP:NPA aren't about not saying specific words (although I'd refrain from any slurs). So long as you are being civil towards your fellow editors and keeping a collegiate atmosphere, nothing should happen and you can go about your business. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 15:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Okay, but I'm never doing it again as my religion says that profanity is comparable to malice and slander, should never be repeated, and contradicts blessing. Underdwarf58 (talk) 15:51, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
There's nothing wrong with using either f*ck or even fuck, depending on the context. It's inappropriate when it's used as an attack on someone. It can also be inappropriate if done in an obviously disruptive fashion, like making every other word in a long discussion a swear word. You merely used it to put an exclamation point on your own frustration. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 15:52, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
We can say whatever the fuck we want, mate! Run fucking wild!
Shit piss fuck cunt cocksucker motherfucker tits! Shovel Shenanigans (talk) 19:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Indefinitely protect Teahouse

Moved to Misplaced Pages talk:Teahouse § Indefinitely protect Teahouse

Made an article in place of an redirect

Hello everyone, I just created an article (Tübingen School), which turns out was created in place of an older redirect. Is there a way to fresh start the article? Best. Xpander (talk) 19:13, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Xpander1. I'm not quite clear what you are trying to do. Is this an article about a different Tuebingen School, or intended to replace the existing article?
If it is a different school, the articles will need to be disambiguated - and unless there is a WP:DAB#Primary topic, they'll both need to have a qualifier in the name - in that case, you can create the article with the disambiguator, and afterwards move the existing article to its new name. (I am assuming that you have a track record successfully creating articles - if not, I strongly recommend that you go through WP:AFC)
If you are wanting to replace the existing article, it is recommended practice to edit it in place, incrementally; but if you are convinced that that is not practical, you can create the article in your sandbox, or in draft space, and then request it be moved over the existing article - you'll probably want to get agreement on the talk page of the existing article before doing that, though.
In either case, the redirect is not really relevant, as the article(s) should have capital S on "School" - if you end up moving the article, the redirect should be repointed.
Does that answer your question, or have I misunderstood? ColinFine (talk) 19:45, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
@ColinFine Yes, It does. It was concerning the latter case. Before creating the page, the article was an empty redirect, so if it's edited in place, it doesn't indicate where the edit history really begins. So I'm still not sure what the best practice here is. Thanks. Xpander (talk) 19:55, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Oh, I see. Tübingen School existed, but was a redirect (to various places) until you created an article there a couple of hours ago. I thought you were talking about the redirect Tübingen school.
Apart from the fact that you have no inline citations, and so it is not an acceptable article in English Misplaced Pages, I don't see the problem. The previous edit history is short and not really significant. ColinFine (talk) 21:06, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
@ColinFine I wonder why the community is so hesitant about this, I made a move request but my request was deleted without a response (I can't seem to find the history on the page or any description of why my request was discarded), I also asked @Wikishovel who subsequently moved and edited the page. Perhaps I shouldn't have created the page in the first place. Xpander (talk) 08:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
The move request was declined here. You requested that Draft:Tübingen School be moved to the existing article Tübingen School, so User:Sennecaster replied that a merge can be done instead. The new draft is nearly identical to the original article though, so I'm not sure why this new version was created, can you please explain? Wikishovel (talk) 08:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@Wikishovel Thanks for locating the diff. This is what @ColinFine suggested above ("create the article in your sandbox, or in draft space, and then request it be moved over the existing article"). I created the page, by translating the page from the German WP, but that doesn't seem to satisfy page creator attribution requirements here? Xpander (talk) 18:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
The edit history of Tübingen School shows that first there was a redirect to Ferdinand Christian Baur, and then you expanded that redirect into an article. I and others, such as User:Reconrabbit, User:Utopes, also made some minor improvements to the article. You then copied and pasted the contents of that article, without attribution, to Draft:Tübingen School. Are you saying you want that copy you made of the article to replace Tübingen School? So there are no traces of the edits made by other editors? Wikishovel (talk) 18:55, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@Wikishovel No actually those edits are helpful, I just think it's only fair that the page be attributed to whoever created it. Is there another way to do that? Xpander (talk) 19:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
All the required attribution is there in the edit history of Tübingen School, as far as I can see. Wikishovel (talk) 19:04, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@Wikishovel But the page doesn't appear on my created pages list . Xpander (talk) 19:06, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
I can recreate the page based on my initial edit, and then User:Reconrabbit, User:Utopes And you are welcome to add your edits. Xpander (talk) 19:09, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@Wikishovel If not I will return the article into its original redirect condition. Xpander (talk) 19:15, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Per our licenses, every significant edit to the page must be preserved, not just the person that started the article. The created pages list is not the only way for users to see what content you have worked on; many users proudly list out what pages they have created, created from a redirect like you have done here, or simply rewritten and taken to our content review processes. Not being the page creator does not negate that you created this article on the English Misplaced Pages. Sennecaster (Chat) 01:47, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Sennecaster, Yes it does, it's also not displayed on the Page information. Xpander (talk) 06:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Xpander1: I have no issue seeing that you are the page creator under §Edit history. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:19, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Some svg files cannot be displayed

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T384128
Not displaying on my devices
Shows up just fine

This seems to not be a universal problem, but I've found that some svg files are not showing up in articles or when I visit commons.

I've tried looking at it on Firefox and Safari, using a Windows laptop, on an Android phone, and on an iPhone. I also tried clearing my cashe and restarting my computer. My account is using the default Vector (2022) skin responsive mode is enabled and so it limited width mode. I think those are all the defaults, I cannot recall that I changed anything and certainly not in the last few weeks.

The error message when I clicked on the file https://commons.wikimedia.org/File:NuclearReaction.svg from the page Lise Meitner at reaching https://en.wikipedia.org/Lise_Meitner#/media/File:NuclearReaction.svg

"Sorry, the file cannot be displayed There seems to be a technical issue. You can retry if it persists. Error: could not load image from https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/NuclearReaction.svg/1024px-NuclearReaction.svg.png".

As with the IUCN svg other svg files on the same page are fine. https://en.wikipedia.org/Lise_Meitner#/media/File:Lise_Meitner_signature.svg

I initially asked at Tree of Life because I initially thought it was just the one file. One other editor said they were having a similar problem. Asking here because I'm not quite sure where I should ask a question about this and if this is something that might already being worked on or not. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 21:08, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Top one is broken for me too, appears to be an issue with Commons generating the preview images. Not sure if it's a known issue or not, but the best place to ask is probably the Commons technical village pump if nobody else here knows. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 22:17, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
I've reported it to the Commons Technical Village Pump for you, there was another user who had commented about a .jpg image doing the same thing. Server gremlins appear to be afoot! -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 03:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Works fine for me, seems to be a device or browser-specific problem TNM101 (chat) 04:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
From what I can read, it's an issue with only one data center having some corruption (codfw, located in the Dallas Fort Worth area) so it may only be happening for some people depending on what datacenter your computer or internet is pulling from. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 04:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Ah ha! That seems to fit with where I live and that it is broken across a wide range of devices. Thanks for cross posting the information here. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 22:20, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Is this NPOV?

So im currently working on User:MrFattie/Rise of Kingdoms, and I just finished the lead. Looking for feedback here - does the tone feel too negative? MrFattie (talk) 22:13, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

It feels negative because the sources you've cited say negative things about the game. That's how it should be. (It's odd that you've started with the lead. The lead is meant to summarise the rest of the article. Normal practise is to write the body of the article first, basing it on what's said in the sources it cites; and then to write the lead as a summary, generally without references becasue they're there in the body. If you start with the lead, you're likely to need to rewrite it once the rest of the article exists.) Maproom (talk) 23:19, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
To clarify, should I rewrite it to be more balanced? Or leave it? MrFattie (talk) 23:47, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
One thing I'll suggest is that "which reviewers have deemed excessive" should probably be supported by a source explicitly saying that this is the general opinion of reviewers or that this is the reaction it always gets. If it's a specific reviewer saying this, then the article should clarify that it's that one reviewer's opinion. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 07:04, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Collapsible userbox template

Hi, so I’ve finally sorted out how do I sort my templates into 1 template. So I found the template userboxtop, and can someone provide how do I make it collapsible in wikitext? Waited2seconds (talk) 22:29, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Try to see Template:Collapsible option. Hope it is helpful. Cwater1 (talk) 03:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

on tfa dates

admittedly a question i likely won't be able to make use of before 2028, and even then said use won't be particularly important or consequential, but curiosity exists to be sated, so...

assuming tfa nominations can have any say on the date an article is shown, provided it's nominated ahead of time, is there anything against suggesting dates that would be funny given its topic (i.e. christmas on november 1, garfield on a monday, 9 in july 8 or august 7, and so on)? yes, i know those aren't featured articles at the time of writing this, it's purely hypothetical consarn (speak evil) (see evil) 03:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Generally speaking, Today's Featured Article isn't the place for most humor. There are some topics that may merit specific days of the year, such as Back to the Future (franchise) being run on November 5 (the date traveled back to in the first movie), for example. But it is not generally (or primarily) for humor, but instead because it's a relevant date to the topic at hand. I don't think there's an explicit prohibition on recommending purely humorous/joke dates.. but there should at least be some connection between the date selected/requested and the topic at hand other than the joke, imo. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 03:41, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
meaning that, in the case of those thankfully hypothetical scenarios, it's a "probably not" for christmas and 9, and a "maybe" for garfield, which might be worrisome
either way, thanks consarn (speak evil) (see evil) 16:05, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

PediaPress/Book Creator not working

Hello. I've ordered four books from PediaPress within the past 5 years, with two of them being in 2023. Even though Misplaced Pages says that the Book Creator "has been withdrawn," it has worked normally for years. Though I haven't ordered many of these Misplaced Pages Books, I still like making outlines for them. I suppose it's kind of weird but it's just how my brain works.

Today, I went to see how many pages this book I made a few months ago would have. I went to the section that said "Order a printed copy from: PediaPress" and clicked the link. I received an error message I've never seen before that said "There was an error while attempting to render your book." This is the first time I've ever received this error and it confused me because the link worked as recently as December 17th 2024.

I am very confused here. Is the feature glitched? Is it intentionally gone? The PediaPress website is still active but I think the URL is slightly different. Meanwhile the PediaPress page on Misplaced Pages makes no mention of any new updates. What's happening here? ShadeTheNarwhal (talk) 04:01, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

@ShadeTheNarwhal welcome to Teahouse! It’s a 3rd party service. I did look at their website homepage which state that it’s updating its servers so temporary disruption is expected. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:55, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Ah! I must've missed that when I went to the site. Thanks! ShadeTheNarwhal (talk) 21:11, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

How to do good referencing?

I'm new to[REDACTED] and I wanted to make a article about my favorite band. I talked and got some interviews articles and articles by somewhat popular sites from the band I wanted to make the article for. I spent some time adding references and then after some waiting I see my submission got declined and I'm a little unaware what is wrong. I would think the sources I put are good or the placement of the citations are badly put on. The message left with the decline said "submission is about a musician or musical work not yet shown to meet notability guidelines" and I see what help I can get. Draft:Her New Knife GranolaWad (talk) 04:11, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

@GranolaWad: The important thing is the general notability guidelines (or, in this case, the notability guidelines for music). Either can be met. The important thing is that references must be to reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the subject and are independent of the subject.
  • The first - reliable sources - means that the source must have a reputation for reliability. User generated content such as blogs, random webpages, and the like are not permitted. Reputable magazines or news organizations would qualify as reliable sources. Reliable sources should have clear editorial policies, a clear editorial "hierarchy" (i.e. an editor in chief or other person responsible for the material), and should provide a clear mechanism for error reporting and correction - that they actually act on.
  • The second - significant coverage - means that it must not just be a sentence or two in a longer article that discusses the subject. There is no hard and fast rule over how much coverage a subject must get in any given article for it to be significant - but it should ideally be at least multiple paragraphs that cover the topic in depth (rather than a passing mention).
  • The third - independent of the subject - means that we don't care what the subject has to say about themselves or who they convince to interview them or publish a press release from them. While interviews and talking-about-self works (like their website) may be able to be used to cite specific facts about themselves (ex: if they said in an interview that they're 30 years old, you could use that interview to cite that fact alone)... they do nothing to contribute to notability. Notability is all about what others say about someone.
Ultimately, all but the first of the sources in the draft right now fail the third point - independence. The second and third sources are both interviews - not independent. I am not sure on the first one - it looks like it may be a lesser known/smaller music magazine of some kind - but their contact page does not list an editorial board, or any error reporting mechanism. It only lists a PR contact and an advertising contact. That doesn't rise to the level of a reliable source, in my mind. Ultimately, you'd need to show that the band meets one of the criteria at WP:BAND or you'd need to find multiple (i.e. 3 or more) sources that meet the three criteria above. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 04:38, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Well guess it will take a while for the article to get published then. They are still somewhat popular but not enough to get mainstream or bigger publications to talk about them. I did see some but they seem to be shady kinda AI generated responses I seen some people people mention. Thanks for the advice and hope it can get published one day! GranolaWad (talk) 05:35, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Hellom, @GranolaWad, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Misplaced Pages. Unfortunately, this is what tends to happen when new users rush into creating articles before they have understood how Misplaced Pages does things. 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.
(And yes, I see you've had your account for most of a year, but you hardly edited before creating this draft). ColinFine (talk) 21:36, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Yea sorry about that. I really wanted to do something and I thought I had some good stuff, which I believe was good for the first source but I ended up not thinking about the second and third one too. Mostly because I thought the interviews were a fine source. I tried to look for other articles but the band is slowly getting more eyes on them (Plus they are a small band so I thought it would be fine for an article). But I thank you and the person above for giving and keeping the info in mind. I'll definitely be making sure to put more effort in and seeing stuff carefully. Not to mention because of the draft I see writing articles fun so I hope to make or help add to some articles. GranolaWad (talk) 03:51, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Comment?

Is this proper to comment about something on here? Anyways, it is confusing that there are two Allen DeGraffenreids. I saw it on the Did You Know. Cwater1 (talk) 04:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

@Cwater1: that's kind of why it's a DYK; it's interesting that we have two people sharing the same uncommon name of sufficient notability to merit an article here. In any case, the Allen links in the DYK section on the main page are properly disambiguated. Iseulttalk to me 04:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
I know. Thanks! We learn something new each day. Cwater1 (talk) 15:34, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Complied

I think all are complied to publish now. Farzana Farzana.1970 (talk) 05:46, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Farzana.1970! Welcome to the Teahouse. If you are talking about Abu Hasan Muhammed Jahangir, well it's probably not ready at all for inclusion in Misplaced Pages. Firstly, you have used Misplaced Pages as the only reference in the whole article. Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source, according to WP:RSPWP. You'll need sources that are independent and provide significant coverage in order to demonstrate that this topic merits an article. You'll also need to fix the formatting of the article, as presently it has no headings or sections. When you have fixed all of this, then you can consider resubmitting the article TNM101 (chat) 08:10, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi,
Some external link with sources are quoted other than Misplaced Pages. I thought Misplaced Pages will trust more on wilki sources. Will add other sources in citation in next edit.
Farzana Farzana.1970 (talk) 21:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Farzana.1970, and welcome to the Teahouse. Like most new editors who have not spent time learning how Misplaced Pages works before trying to write an article, you have written your draft BACKWARDS - that is, you have written what you know about the subject and then looked for references. But Misplaced Pages isn't interested in what you know (or what I know, or what any random person on the internet knows). Misplaced Pages is only interested in information which has been published in reliable sources.
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) 21:43, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
You know, prior to 30 minutes from now I didn't know where should I reply. We all are on learning curve.
Farzana Farzana.1970 (talk) 22:13, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Needed reliable sources for an article

this is for an article called Draft:Daxflame and i don't know where to find some reliable sources according to Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources. it's also hard to find when youtube, know your meme and imdb are not reliable sources and since i mostly use youtube as reliable source. im just so new to make an article. Maxi Ruan (talk) 06:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Maxi Ruan! If you need a list of reliable sources, you can find them at WP:Reliable Sources/Perennial. And as for reliable sources in general, we need independent and secondary sources that are not related to the subject of the article. Your current sources are user generated, and all those youtube videos are made by Daxflame himself. If you are not able to find at least three reliable sources, then the topic is probably not notable enough for inclusion on Misplaced Pages TNM101 (chat) 08:00, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@Maxi Ruan You have missed a couple of possible BBC sources and one in Wired (magazine). There is a special Google-based search engine you can used for Wiki-reliable sources. These are the results in this case. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:03, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Universally agreed facts

Hypothetical: If all 8 billion humans on the planet universally agreed on something, could an opinion that is voiced by all 8 billion on a human matter be presented as objective fact?

Hypothetically, if all 8 billion humans on the planet just woke up one day and said, for example "Genocide is wrong", could a wikipedian then write "Genocide is wrong" on an article and not have it deleted as violating NPOV? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 06:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

SimpleSubCubicGraph, there is no value in discussing highly implausible hypotheticals. We do not say in Misplaced Pages's voice that anything is "wrong". Take a look at Murder, an act almost universally considered by humans as "wrong". But the Misplaced Pages article does not overtly call it "wrong". Instead, the article neutrally describes the social and legal norms about murder, and the various definitions of murder and its intersection with Manslaughter and the broader concept of Homicide. The same is true of Genocide. Cullen328 (talk) 06:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@SimpleSubCubicGraph: See WP:BLUE. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:34, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Paid editors

Where can I see a list of all undisclosed paid editors and people who did not disclose other COI's

Is it possible to do so? Can I have some of the most famous examples of this? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 06:36, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

SimpleSubCubicGraph, since Wikipedians are not infallible detectives, it seems almost certain that some undisclosed paid editors have never been detected. Even more so for conflicts of interest, which almost every editor has to a greater or lesser extent. It is only when a severe conflict of interest prevents neutral editing that a COI becomes a problem. We have several mechanisms to allow positive contributions from COI editors. Among these are the Articles for Creation process and the formal Edit request process. Cullen328 (talk) 07:06, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@SimpleSubCubicGraph Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Undisclosed_paid may be a start. It lists the articles which currently have a UPE template included. "Famous" is in the eye of the beholder but there have been WP:Signpost articles about some cases, for example Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/2024-12-12/Disinformation_report. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:57, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Note also that it has not always been mandatory for paid editors to disclose. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Is the material WP:Synth and WP:RS compliant?

I have proposed some changes to the contested material here: ] But I want to be sure that it is policy compliant/ that it doesn't get removed in bad faith. The contested text:

Subhash Velingkar, a former member of the Hindu extremist organisation of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), has demanded DNA tests of Francis Xavier's relics (corpse) for veracity, they are also attempting to cancel Francis Xavier's patronage of Goa, where his relics are exposed periodically, to replace him with Parshuram, a sage of Hindu mythology.

The sources are here: ]

What do you reckon/ suggest? Nolicamaca (talk) 13:03, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

I think a better one would be: Subhash Velingkar, a politician formerly linked to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), has demanded DNA tests of Francis Xavier's relics (corpse) for veracity. The organization is also attempting to cancel Francis Xavier's patronage of Goa, where his relics are exposed periodically, to replace him with Parshuram, a sage of Hindu mythology.
I will say that you must carefully source these statements; I have done my best here to make it as neutral as possible. I removed the Hindu extremist and Hindu nationalist part since a reader can open the respective articles of the politician and the organization where they can find out what views they hold TNM101 (chat) 13:15, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
User:TNM101 Thanks for the suggestion Nolicamaca (talk) 13:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Emanuele Naboni

Draft:Emanuele Naboni Hi everyone, I recently submitted a draft article about Emanuele Naboni, but it was declined with the reason that the subject does not meet the academic notability criteria. I have included several references to peer-reviewed publications, books, and independent sources from academic journals and conferences. However, the draft was still considered not notable enough. I would greatly appreciate any guidance on: What specific improvements are needed to meet Misplaced Pages’s academic notability guidelines? Are there additional types of sources or formatting that could strengthen the draft? Would restructuring the content help in emphasizing the subject’s impact better? Thank you for your time and suggestions! EngTechAdvisor (talk) 13:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @EngTechAdvisor: the decline notice contains within it an explanation of the two notability guidelines relevant to this, namely WP:NACADEMIC and WP:GNG. Please follow each of the links in the notice, and study the guidance carefully; it is there for exactly that reason. The additional comments provided by the reviewer are also useful to note. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
So, in your opinion, is the person on the Misplaced Pages page not well known enough to have one? Google identifies them as a public figure, and I don't understand what doesn't comply with the mentioned guidelines. Could you be more specific? I've read the guidelines, but I'd appreciate some clarity. Thanks for your help. EngTechAdvisor (talk) 17:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
WP:NACADEMIC lists eight criteria that may qualify a person with an academic position as article-worthy. Naboni does qualify for any. "Too soon" may apply. David notMD (talk) 17:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your feedback. However, according to Misplaced Pages's guidelines on academic notability (WP:NACADEMIC), a person does not need to meet all eight criteria; satisfying just one is sufficient to establish notability.
In this case, the subject has authored several books, which can be found in the references provided. This meets the criterion related to significant published works, contributing to their notability in the academic field. EngTechAdvisor (talk) 18:52, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@EngTechAdvisor: I make no comment on this person's notability, since I haven't reviewed the draft. I'm just saying that the decline reasons are given in the decline notice (and the accompanying comments, if any). Often authors overlook those, thinking that they are just some meaningless boilerplate, whereas they actually give the decline reasons in a succinct manner. I could regurgitate them for you, but chances are I would only be making things less clear. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:50, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for your clarification. I appreciate the reminder about carefully reviewing the decline notice and accompanying comments.
Regarding the notability criteria outlined in WP:NACADEMIC, it is important to highlight that it is not necessary to meet all eight criteria—meeting just one is sufficient to establish notability. In this case, the subject has authored several books, which are listed in the provided references, thus fulfilling the criterion related to significant published works.
Additionally, it is possible that the reviewer may not fully grasp the importance of the subject in the field of sustainable engineering and architecture, which is gaining increasing relevance on an international level.
I have carefully reviewed the decline reasons, but I still do not fully understand why the draft was rejected. It would be helpful to receive further details to improve the content in accordance with Misplaced Pages's guidelines. EngTechAdvisor (talk) 19:04, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
EngTechAdvisor, you're correct that a professor only needs to satisfy 1 of the 8 criteria (though some people satisfy several). Based on what you've said above, it sounds like you think he meets Criterion 1. Is that correct? If not, please specify which criterion you think he does meet. Assuming that I was correct, first note that it says "The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources" (emphasis added). These links will tell you what Misplaced Pages means by "independent" and "reliable sources." Second, look at the section elaborating on the specific criteria, specifically at how Criterion 1 is assessed. For example, it's not enough that Naboni has written several books; you'd need to show that these books are widely cited in his field. Does this help? FactOrOpinion (talk) 21:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@FactOrOpinion Thank you for the clarification. We both agree that it is necessary to meet one or more criteria, but not all eight. However, I believe that Emanuele Naboni meets multiple criteria of WP:NACADEMIC, specifically criteria 1, 2, 4, and 8.
Regenerative Design in Digital Practice - TU/e Research https://research.tue.nl/en/publications/regenerative-design-in-digital-practice-a-handbook-for-the-built-
KGL Akademi – Regenerative Design & Digital Practice https://kglakademi.dk/da/regenerative-design-digital-practice
YouBuild - Ripartiamo dalle città https://www.youbuildweb.it/ripartiamo-dalle-citta/ EngTechAdvisor (talk) 10:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
If you think that he meets multiple criteria, then for each one, you need to look at the Specific criteria notes (the section I directed you to), paying attention to what kind of evidence you need to provide for it. For example, as I said, it's not enough to provide evidence that Naboni has written several books; you'd need to show that these books are widely cited by others in his field. None of your three links above shows that Regenerative Design in Digital Practice is widely cited by others in his field. FactOrOpinion (talk) 13:24, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@FactOrOpinion Thank you for your clarification. I understand that demonstrating the impact of Naboni's work requires showing that his publications are widely cited within his field.
I would like to point out that Regenerative Design in Digital Practice has been mentioned on the official website of the Royal Danish Academy, which is a recognized academic institution, and it has been cited 52 times on platforms such as ResearchGate https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336121907_Regenerative_Design_In_Digital_Practice_A_Handbook_for_the_Built_Environment, which is widely used by the academic community to share and cite research work.
I find it challenging to understand why citations from well-known and reputable academic databases might not be considered sufficient, especially when I have observed citations from less reliable sources being accepted in other profiles. Could you please clarify what specific types of citations would be considered valid in this case?
I appreciate your guidance on this matter. EngTechAdvisor (talk) 14:35, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Yes, the Royal Danish Academy is a well-established academic institution, but in this context, that webpage is not itself a citation or a review; rather, it's more of a brief overview of the book + access to the book. In many fields, being cited 52 times means that the work has been cited in a typical way rather than being widely cited. (And I have no experience with Naboni's field, so I cannot say whether it's different in his field for some reason.) It is often difficult to show that a work is widely cited; this is discussed a bit here. Many professors do interesting work, work at well-known institutions, and get cited in their fields, but don't meet the standard for being "notable" in Misplaced Pages's sense. And an argument based on what you see in other articles isn't effective, as discussed here. FactOrOpinion (talk) 15:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

I see that you have changed the image in the Infobox, but this one also identified as your own work, meaning you personally took this photograph. That is being reviewed at Commons, and may end up being removed at Commons. If you were not the photographer I suggest you remove the image from the now resubmitted draft. Images or lack of are not part of the AfC review consideration. David notMD (talk) 08:54, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. Regarding the first image, I had obtained permission to use it as it was also published elsewhere. However, I later uploaded my own photographs taken during various congresses around the world. Additionally, I have sent an email to Misplaced Pages declaring that the photo is my property and have also obtained permission from the professor to use it.
I didn't think that dealing with photo usage could be this complicated, but I understand the need to comply with the platform's policies. EngTechAdvisor (talk) 09:33, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Wikimedia is EXTREMELY sensitive about copyright infringement. What was needed is confirmation that you took the photograph; the subject's permission is not required. David notMD (talk) 11:07, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages archiving bot

In the past, I've seen Wiki articles with very neatly archived sources. All references get archived and archival links are put into the references. There is some publicly accessible bot that does that. I've been searching for it for a while now, without finding it. Where do I find that bot? Modular science (talk) 17:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Found it Modular science (talk) 17:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

help with potential BLP violations in an AfD discussion

conversation is now at the BLPN

In response to a BLPN section started by another editor, I asked for guidance there yesterday re: acting on potential BLP violations in this AfD discussion. It's been over a day, and no one has responded at the BLPN. As I noted there, I am hesitant to delete people's comments myself, due to my extensive participation in that AfD discussion, and also because I'm not that experienced an editor (though I'm not a newbie) and have never deleted discussion comments. I did post a note at the bottom of that AfD discussion yesterday, expressing my concerns and suggesting that people review their own comments and remove inappropriate content, but no one has done so. (No one has edited that page at all since my comment, and I don't know whether anyone has seen my comment.) I recognize that BLPN is the most appropriate place for my question; I'm asking here since I didn't get a response there. I'd appreciate some input. Thanks, FactOrOpinion (talk) 19:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

You now have got feedback at Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Ido Kedar. (And when you still hadn't, the best thing to do would have been just to wait.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Hoary, no, there is no response to me there. And my concern about waiting is that the BLP policy is pretty explicit that "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced ... must be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." Several degrading statements about the BLP subject haven't been removed. Other statements are sourced to blogs, which are not acceptable sources for BLP claims, even outside of article space. FactOrOpinion (talk) 02:23, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Oolong and Bilby have responded there. If their responses don't satisfy you, then that message thread, not this one, is where you should ask for other responses. -- Hoary (talk) 02:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
You misread the exchange there. The first comment was posted by Bilby, not me. Oolong responded to Bilby, and Bilby then responded to Oolong. I only entered after Bilby's second comment, and then I waited for a day to see if anyone would respond, which no one did. It wasn't a matter of their responses not satisfying me, as no one had responded to me. But Bilby has just responded to me there, a minute after you posted your second response here, so I won't respond further here. FactOrOpinion (talk) 02:45, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
FactOrOpinion, you're right, I'm wrong, I'm sorry. (Perhaps my brain is frazzled by a slightly earlier, unrelated set of edits.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:51, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@FactOrOpinion: My advice would be to ignore it. Not because you are right or wrong, but because the conversation is already pretty complicated, and about a very sensitive issue, and the more you get bogged down in meta-conversations the more energy will be wasted. I know thats probably not what you want to hear, but on Misplaced Pages picking your battles is an incredibly important skill (one at which I suck) and often shrugging and ignoring certain aspects of a situation is a great strategy which helps you achieve your goals. Hope that helps, if not then please ignore me. Polygnotus (talk) 04:52, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
By the way Louis Theroux has an interesting documentary about facilitated communication called Tell Them You Love Me. Not an easy watch! Polygnotus (talk) 04:57, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
This isn't about facilitated communication, though. That's part of the problem. Apparantly Ido's mother tried it and found that she did not have any confidence that it actually worked. Anyway, the primary concern is that without knowing if he can commuicate or not, statements that it is all faked and he can't possibily communicate have considerable potential to be degrading. - Bilby (talk) 05:18, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Bilby: I still recommend the documentary because I am a big fan of Louis Theroux. Debating if those statements on that talkpage are degrading does not lead to improvements to the encyclopedia. Polygnotus (talk) 05:22, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Debating if the statements are BLP violations does lead to some sort of improvement, though, at least in the sense of protecting subjects. I find Theroux a mixed bag, but certainly enjoyed some of his work. That one my not really relevant to the disussion, but may well be relevant as a matter of interest. - Bilby (talk) 05:51, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
protecting subjects It won't. Further discussion is far more likely to cause a Streisand effect. Polygnotus (talk) 06:08, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
I'll have to disagree with you. Determining that something is a BLP violation and removing it seems better than leaving it there and hoping no one notices. - Bilby (talk) 06:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Bilby: Publicly talking about it draws attention to it, so if your goal is to protect that BLP subject (who is unlikely to read that AfD) then its best to move on. If you start editing someone elses comment that will draw loads of attention, someone will revert, and then an administrator will have to jump in and it is unlikely that that administrator will agree that those are BLP violations, see WP:OTHERSCOMMENTS. But even if they do, which probably won't happen, then all you've done is draw far far more attention to BLP violations than they would've gotten if you ignored them. This is not something you can agree or disagree with, because it is not an opinion but a statement of fact. Polygnotus (talk) 06:24, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
I am aware of the difficulties. But I will never be happy working in any environment where degrading comments about another person are simply left in place because we do not want to draw attention to them. If you are happy with such a scenario, then so be it. I am not. - 06:59, 20 January 2025 (UTC) Bilby (talk) 06:59, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
I thought that the goal was protecting the BLP subject, not making you happy. Polygnotus (talk) 07:30, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
WP:REMOVEUNCIVIL is very clear: In the event of rudeness or incivility on the part of another editor, it may be appropriate to discuss the offending words with that editor, and to request that editor to change that specific wording. Some care is necessary, however, so as not to further inflame the situation. It is not normally appropriate to edit or remove another editor's comment. Exceptions include to remove obvious trolling or vandalism, or if the comment is on your own user talk page. Derogatory comments about another contributor may be removed by any editor. Polygnotus (talk) 06:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:BLPTALK: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced and not related to making content choices should be removed, deleted, or oversighted, as appropriate". - Bilby (talk) 07:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Since you won't be able to delete those comments you consider degrading, or at least not for long, your options are to keep drawing attention to them, or to not do that. Polygnotus (talk) 07:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
No, I have options. The main one is to ask the community for consensus about how to handle them. Which I have done. - Bilby (talk) 07:54, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Because you are trying to protect a BLP subject or because you are unhappy? Bit confusing tbh. Asking the community about something surely won't draw attention to it. Polygnotus (talk) 07:55, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
or because you are unhappy?: See WP:AGF, WP:NPA (Without clear evidence that the action of another editor is actually in bad faith or harassment, repeatedly alleging bad faith motives could be construed as a personal attack). Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 08:02, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Is this "The first person who falsely accuses someone else loses the debate"? Should I insert some links to irrelevant behavioural policies and guidelines here? Polygnotus (talk) 08:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Ok. Let's keep any discussion about this to BLPN. The Teahouse is not the place for it. - Bilby (talk) 08:08, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Agreed. I pointed out that Hydrangeans made a mistake on that other page, but that is no reason to worsen the mood here. Polygnotus (talk) 08:09, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
There's no need to say false things about another user either. I described user behavior at the AfD (someone saying that Kedar can't independently communicate, contrary to what reliable and BLP-appropriate sources have said), and then I provided a diff to an example of that behavior. I don't see what the mistake could be. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 08:14, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
There's no need to say false things about another user then please stop doing that. And please stop trying to export drama to the Teahouse, a place intended for friendly collaboration. I can explain it over at that other page if you don't understand the mistake you made. Thank you! Polygnotus (talk) 08:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
'Because users break the rules, we shouldn't bother with the rules' is a pretty uncompeling argument for ignoring the BLP rules. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 07:56, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
See Strawman. Polygnotus (talk) 08:00, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

How to unsubmit a page for review?

Can I unsubmit a page that I recently submitted for review? If so, how? If not, can I delete the page? LilyXChloe (talk) 03:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello @LilyXChloe:, welcome to Misplaced Pages! I think you are referring to Draft:Impel. I have unsubmitted the page for you. I visited the HELP:HISTORY page and then I used the WP:UNDO functionality to undo the submission. You can't delete that page, Misplaced Pages:Administrators can, but if no one is working on it it will automatically be deleted after some time has passed, see Misplaced Pages:Drafts#Abandoned_drafts. Polygnotus (talk) 04:32, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Answered on editor's Talk page on how to ask for deletion. David notMD (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you! LilyXChloe (talk) 13:55, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Should I be linking this word?

Editing the page I'm currently working on, Sacred Reich, I'm confused on whether or not I should be linking the word "tempo" on the page. In music, tempo is the speed of piece of music, measured in beats per minute. On the page Metallica—a featured article—it's only linked once in the page very deep in the body despite being mentioned in the lead and other parts of the body but are unlinked. Per MOS:UL, technical terms, jargon or slang expressions or phrases should be linked to their corresponding articles. The question is does tempo qualify as a technical term in this context? Will laypeople reasonably understand what tempo without requiring linking? Sparkle and Fade (talkcontributions) 06:22, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

As a layperson I understand "tempo". Of course I can't speak for everyone, so you can just do what you prefer, of flip a coin if you have no preference. Polygnotus (talk) 06:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

How To Create Page For This Site IAC News

DUPLICATE SECTION BELOW See later section about the same question. Valereee (talk) 16:47, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


I want to create a page for IAC News. Url: iacnews.com. Will you help me? Gaziismail (talk) 08:03, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi Gaziismail and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Unfortunately I can't seem to find WP:COVERAGE in WP:RELIABLE sources, which could mean that iacnews.com is not (yet) WP:NOTABLE. For more information see WP:GNG. If I am wrong, please list some independent reliable sources that have discussed iacnews.com here. Thank you! Polygnotus (talk) 08:13, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Agreed with Polygnotus, Gaziismail. And even if you succeed in demonstrating that IAC News is notable (as "notability" is defined by and for en:Misplaced Pages), it will be your job to try your best to create a worthwhile Draft:IAC News. In order to have a significant chance of succeeding, you should first get a lot of practice in improving existing articles. If your Draft:IAC News is already promising, and shows effort, when you ask for help with it, you're likely to get help, but you're unlikely to get much help before then. -- Hoary (talk) 08:22, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
I have some evidence like some profiles and live websites, here I have given the link. Website: IAC News X: IAC News
Crunchbase: IAC News Will this be possible ? Dear Hoary Gaziismail (talk) 08:41, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Profiles and their own website do not establish notability. You need independent reliable sources that on their own chose to write about IAC news and describe what they see as important/significant/influential about it.
Are you associated with IAC News? 331dot (talk) 08:44, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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)

Author notability guidelines

My draft article was decline as a result of non notable author. But author clearly passes WP: NAUTHOR, here is the draft.

Ok1616 13:57, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

@Okwanite Your first and second references are reviews of one of Afenfia's books but says nothing about him. Hence they don't contribute to his notability, except indirectly. The other two sources are an interview, so are not independent, as required by our notability guidelines. That's why the draft has been declined. If you find further material with sourcing meeting our golden rules you may be able to develop the draft and re-submit it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Author Guidelines

Please I'm here to learn, I don't want to contribute to any article here without knowing the guidelines.

My area of interest is creating article for notable authors.

Please assist me check the if any of these authors meet WP:GNG or WP: Author. Thanks.

  1. Bisi Adjapon
  2. Ndifreke Ukpong
  3. Chukwuebuka Ibeh
  4. Nestor Udoh

Ok1616 15:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Okwanite, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to present your evidence for them meeting the criteria, we'll look at it. But it is unlikely anybody is going to do the research that you want done. ColinFine (talk) 15:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi, ColinFine the evidence could be what?, Please explain it in a way I can understand Ok1616 15:30, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Check this two Bisi Adjapon and Ndifreke Ukpong Ok1616 15:32, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Would you start learning to play tennis, and immediately enter a tournament? Or start learning the violin and immediately book a public recital?
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) 16:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Show us how they meet the criteria: what is the evidence? What are the sources that you claim are of adequate quality (check out WP:42}? ColinFine (talk) 15:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Okwanite (Ok1616)? ... have you discovered and gone through Help:Introduction yet? That's where you can get a good introduction to the guidelines, which you rightly understand you need to know before contributing to articles. The senior editors who staff the Teahouse expect us to know something about those guidelines when we ask questions, not make them "do our homework." Augnablik (talk) 16:12, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Second the recommendations that you gain experience working to improve existing articles before trying to create an article, and that Teahouse Hosts are here to advise, not to do your 'homework' of researching potential notability for these authors. David notMD (talk) 16:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Your Draft:Michael Afenfia has been declined for lack of valid references. I advise you work on only one draft (MA or another) rather than starting four more. David notMD (talk) 16:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Ok1616 18:54, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

How To Publish This Page IAC News

Sir, I have drafted it here with some information. Is there any problem in updating it later? Draft:IAC News Gaziismail (talk) 15:44, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

I commented on the draft that it was just advertising. I was weirdly called racist for doing so. Theroadislong (talk) 16:00, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you so much User:Theroadislong Gaziismail (talk) 16:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Gaziismail The whole idea of having drafts is so that editors can work on them until they are ready for submission: see WP:AfC for details. Your draft is not yet suitable for mainspace, since it only cites X (unreliable) and Crunchbase, which is a deprecated source (see the link I supplied about it). Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Can I remove these links now? Gaziismail (talk) 16:09, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Yes, certainly. What your draft needs is sources/text to show how IAC news is notable in the way Misplaced Pages defines this. Also, please remove the categories, as we don't categorise drafts. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Gaziismail.
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) 16:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Sir, I have removed the bad words, if there are any more bad words, please tell me. Draft:IAC News @Theroadislong Gaziismail (talk) 16:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
As advided above, articles are based on what independent, reliable sources have reported, you have none? Theroadislong (talk) 16:20, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Gaziismail, you will need to disclose your conflict of interest on your user page, which is at User:Gaziismail. Instructions are at WP:COI.
The article currently has no sources. It is impossible to accept an article that has no sources. We generally need three that represent significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the article subject. You can find more information at WP:RS. Valereee (talk) 16:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

I found this construction in Jack Teagarden:

Teagarden was born in Vernon, Texas, United States.

It seems to add an extraneous superscript after a reference. I am tempted to remove it, but I'm not sure what it is. There are several throughout the article. Thanks for your advice

References

  1. Colin Larkin, ed. (1997). The Virgin Encyclopedia of Popular Music (Concise ed.). Virgin Books. p. 1165. ISBN 1-85227-745-9.

Ben (talk) 16:05, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Someone used <sup> to insert those numbers, no idea why. I removed them. Schazjmd (talk) 16:09, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Littenberg Someone has used the source code <sup>1]</sup>. I'm not sure what they were trying to achieve but perhaps page numbers, although that seems unlikely in the example you gave. There is a template {{rp}} if that's what they wanted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:10, 20 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)

References Help

Hello, I have been trying to publish a page on American Film producer and writer Austin Hoyt. I have done everything I can to find sources and cite everything in my draft, but it is still being rejected. Are you able to give me more in-detail reasoning as to why this draft is getting rejected? What about the sources I provided is not correct? My draft is Draft:Austin Hoyt Sophiakutch (talk) 16:58, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Note that it has only been declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means it may be resubmitted.
You have not summarized independent reliable sources that show how he is a notable creative professional; you've pretty much just listed his work. 331dot (talk) 17:07, 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!

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 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)
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 distinguihed 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)

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)
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)
Categories:
Misplaced Pages:Teahouse: Difference between revisions Add topic