Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cordless Larry, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!

Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

Can't edit this page? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2–3 days.

Help Wikipedia

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

The Teahouse is frequently semi-protected, meaning the Teahouse pages cannot be edited by unregistered users (users with IP addresses), as well as accounts that are not confirmed or autoconfirmed (accounts that are at least 4 days old with at least 10 edits on English Wikipedia).

However, you can still get direct assistance on your talk page. ; a volunteer will reply to you there shortly.

There are currently 0 user(s) asking for help via the {{Help me}} template.

Who's doing this to me

I am a sockpuppet and I can't figure it out 2600:100D:B005:DB62:0:4F:E2FA:1D01 (talk) 00:13, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

You don't give sufficient details for a proper answer, but its possible that your shared IP address has been used by someone else. Try creating an account. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:45, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Anuradhapura invasion of Chola Kingdom

What’s the problem with this article, I have given plenty of strong sources. TeenX808 (talk) 06:58, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Anuradhapura invasion of Chola Kingdom (114-136)- the link TeenX808 (talk) 06:59, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

You should ask the reviewer, RangersRus. The decline reason was about not meeting requirements for inline citations, but the draft has plenty of them, and no embedded external links as far as I can tell. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 07:03, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

@TeenX808 The main issues appear to be mentioned in the comment just below the decline notice, specifically that we already have an article on similar topic at Chola conquest of Anuradhapura and that many of your sources are too old (see also WP:RAJ). Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:35, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull:The article contains a mix of old and new sources and it makes no sense for the article to be declined. TeenX808 (talk) 14:58, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Again, you need to ask the reviewer. That should have been your first step, rather than asking here. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 15:02, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Asking here is fine; that's what The Teahouse is for. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:53, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: should I submit for review.TeenX808 (talk) 15:41, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I would do so, but only after leaving a comment about the sources; otherwise, the next reviewer might just look at the history, see nothing has changed, and decline it again, immediately. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:54, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: how to leave a comment.TeenX808 (talk) 08:04, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Find the comment by RangersRus and copy the format of that, using {{AFC comment}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:42, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Anachronist: the reviewer seems to be inactive .TeenX808 (talk) 15:40, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Inactive? It's been only a week. That isn't inactive. Ask anyway if you aren't satisfied with the fact that we already have an article on a similar topic as Mike Turnbull pointed out. Did you read WP:RAJ as suggested? ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 17:50, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@Anachronist: These sources are written by historians but I do agree they are old, i will try talking to the reviewer. Thanks TeenX808 (talk) 08:06, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

we already have an article on similar topic at Chola conquest of Anuradhapura: If I skim-read correctly, Mike Turnbull, the one topic is separated from the other by almost a millennium. -- Hoary (talk) 08:17, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I was just quoting what the reviewer said. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:29, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Lot going on with this draft that has made to multiple platforms like 3O, dispute resolution and different reviewer's talk pages. The draft it seems to be written on a legend, myth, chronicle centuries ago and some sources by historians doubt this event. Dispute discussion on this draft here and here and here and here. I have been quite busy with activities in real world but I will try to continue discussion with the creator on my talk page. RangersRus (talk) 11:52, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@RangersRus: Check my response in your talk page.TeenX808 (talk) 12:28, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes , Draft is written based on the myth and legend. Could you change the title by adding the prefix as Myth and Legend Ranithraj (talk) 05:07, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

New article about Swedish accordionist Lars Ek

Hello! I’ve just created a new article about Swedish accordionist Lars Ek, based on verified sources and his contributions to Nordic music. I would appreciate any feedback or suggestions for improvement. The article includes biography, discography, awards, and historical preservation efforts. Thank you! LarsEkMusik (talk) 17:09, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Your edit history indicates no edits by you other than the above; could you link to the draft? 331dot (talk) 17:14, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

If you are not the person you wrote about, you will need to change your username as you shouldn't use his name if you are not him. See Special:GlobalRenameRequest. 331dot (talk) 17:15, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict):Hi LarsEkMusik - I don't know where this article is, but this is the only edit you have made to the English Wikipedia. Moreover, your user-name suggests that you may have a WP:Conflict of interest in writing such an article. Please explain where the "article" is and what your relationship with Lars Ek is - Thanks -Arjayay (talk) 17:15, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

There's a long history of creations and abandoning drafts of that name. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:18, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Here is the article: Lars Ek. LarsEkMusik (talk) 17:19, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

No references means no article. Take a look at WP:REFB which is a small tutorial on how to create them. WP:SECONDARY sources are needed for WP:BLP's to prove notability, i.e. folk who are talking to other folk about the subject and don't know them. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 17:43, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

The current lack of references results in a draft that could be mere fiction, for all the reader knows. 27.134.48.132 (talk) 20:20, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Lars Ek. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:57, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Request to move sandbox article to mainspace: Lars Ek

Hello,

I would like to request the move of my completed sandbox article User:LarsEkMusik/sandbox to the main article space under the title Lars Ek.

The article is a fully translated and wikiformatted version of the approved Swedish Wikipedia article , which is now live. It includes verified references, neutral tone, and structured sections covering biography, publications, awards, and cultural contributions.

As I am not yet autoconfirmed, I kindly ask for assistance from an experienced editor to move the page.

Thank you in advance for your help!

— User:LarsEkMusik LarsEkMusik (talk) 19:26, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Your draft is not suitable for publication. Please improve it (see WP:Your first article and WP:Referencing for beginners), including declaring your Conflict of interest, then submit it for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it as an article. If not, they will give you further advice.

Note that you have two versions; the other is at Draft:Lars Ek. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:39, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @LarsEkMusik. This has no sources at all? I have added a button to allow you to submit for review, but it is not suitable for mainspace at the moment.

Since you are writing about yourself - which we strongly discourage - you are required to declare a conflict of interest. Please also read Wikipedia:Autobiography qcne (talk) 19:39, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Sources are present, but malformed, and not inline. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:43, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

They must be extraordinarily malformed, as they are invisible! (Mobile view.) 27.134.48.132 (talk) 20:25, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps inspired by the article on the "legendary" Pietro Frosini, which has existed for 18 years with virtually no referencing. 27.134.48.132 (talk) 20:45, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Craziest thing I've seen (as is the template saying sufficient sources exist without disclosing them). MmeMaigret (talk) 11:57, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

• LarsEkMusik, please stop making duplicate sections here. Beyond your first request, you have tried to post essentially the same text two more times (and all of these are somewhat redundant with your prior posts from earlier today). Other editors have already explained the shortcomings of this draft and how you can work towards improving it, as well as the need for you to properly disclose your conflict of interest. Continuing to make identical posts is disruptive and will have consequences if continued. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:45, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Hej, @LarsEkMusik. Jag hittar ingen artikel som heter "Lars Ek" på svenska Vikipedia. Jag hittar bare sv:Användare:LarsEkMusik/sandlåda/Lars Ek. Deras referenser räcker inte för engelska Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 22:33, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Lars Ek

Hello!

Thanks for earlier feedback. I’ve now restored my article about Lars Ek in my sandbox: User:LarsEkMusik/sandbox.

The article is wikiformatted, sourced, and follows encyclopedic style. I’ve removed incorrect additions and duplicates, and added reliable references from Dagens Nyheter, SDR, SKAP, Akademia Music Awards, and Frosini Society.

I’ve also submitted a request to move the article to mainspace. I’m new to this programming environment and have worked with AI to document a lifelong cultural contribution. I appreciate your patience and any help from experienced editors.

Best regards, User:LarsEkMusik LarsEkMusik (talk) 05:59, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

You say that it's "sourced". How? I see no references. You say that you "have worked with AI". Perhaps invisible sources were an AI contribution. 126.156.251.217 (talk) 07:11, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

New editor here! Some questions:

1. How can I get my edit count up without making needless edits?
2. Editing in my school would be nice, but I already forgot my password and my school is blocked from editing. What can I do?
3. How can I keep a neutral point of view? I typically struggle with using the "sterile" sort of language used here.
4. What really defines notability?

I do realize some of these are probably a few clicks away, but I have no idea what clicks that would be, so oh well.

Thank you. - Pss.master (talk) 21:45, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I'm wondering why you want to get your edit count up.

Most blocks on school IPs allow the use of accounts.

Notability is described at WP:N.

I'll let someone else answer the third point. 331dot (talk) 21:48, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure how much reputation really matters here. Just want to be sure and try to get a positive track record early.

Everything else is good from here.

Thanks again. - Pss.master (talk) 21:51, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

The quality of your edits matters much more than the number of edits. 331dot (talk) 22:00, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

(1) Make needed edits.

(2) Edit from home.

27.134.48.132 (talk) 21:56, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

(4) WP:N

27.134.48.132 (talk) 21:59, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

1. This really doesn't matter. Make edits that you think are needed and, most importantly, are actually good.
2. I'm not too tech savvy regarding Wikipedia, but my school does allow me to edit (in fact, that's where I am right now). Perhaps you just need to log in on your device at home so that it'll stay that way at the school.
3. I'm not too sure what to say with this one, and it looks like others are struggling with answering this too. Interesting.
4. WP:N Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 22:17, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Pss.master, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'll try and answer 3: Find reliable independent sources, and summarise what they say: don't put in what you think, know, or believe about the subject, or what the subject or their associates say, but what these independent sources say.

The sources themselves don't have to be neutral, as long as they are reliable; but you should try to find a range of sources. If the sources disagree, you can say this sot of thing: According to Joe Bloggs in [1], "XXXXX". Fred Smith at [2] described it as "YYYYY" ColinFine (talk) 22:41, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

@Pss.master:

1. Edits: Join the unreferenced article project.
2. Account: You should still be able to recover your password but if your school is blocked, why bother? What's wrong with the account you're using?
3. Neutrality: Become more familiar with the style of good articles.
4. Notability: I think Wikipedia:42 explains it the simplest. MmeMaigret (talk) 11:25, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Unrelated redirect

I was reading the Touch Typing page: Touch typing

which notes that:

"Dactylographer" redirects here. For the racehorse, see Dactylographer (horse).

Which..... is great, but completely unrealted? From looking it up, Dactylography is the analysis of fingerprints for identification. Looking up fingerprints: Fingerprint

It mentions dactylography under the "Fingerprint identification" heading. It would make more sense to redirect Dactylography to this page. (I don't really know how to do that, and really should be working rather than learning to edit wikipedia - but I thought I'd ask here) Quentin Christensen (talk) 00:05, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Quentin Christensen. You can access Dactylography with this link. You can then edit the page and move the redirect's target if you so wish. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 00:27, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks heaps! I've submitted that update :) I wasn't quite sure how to get to redirects like that, I've never tried editing one before - I've learnt something, thanks again :) Quentin Christensen (talk) 01:37, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I was alerted to this off-wiki by Codeofdusk. I've removed the hatnote from Touch typing. Graham87 (talk) 02:09, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

And I moved the hatnote to the Fingerprint article and adjusted the redirect. On a quick look, Spanish has the word dactilografía. Edited to add later: the French article about typing is at fr:Dactylographie, the Italian article is at it:Dattilografia, and the Portuguese article is at pt:Datilografia. Graham87 (talk) 02:15, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Feedback on Frisoni Giovanni Draft

Hello! I'm close to finishing the draft for the article on Frisoni Giovanni. I have already disclosed my COI on both my User page and on the talk page of the Draft, but I disclose it here too to be as transparent as possible.

I think I've found enough reputable sources to establish notability but of course, since this is my first article and since I have a COI, I think I need a second opinion before submitting it for publication. I'm using the articles on Philip Scheltens and Michel Godert as references as to how to write this thing.

Noemilio (talk) 01:33, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Noemilio. You have chosen to model your draft on Philip Scheltens, a start class article that has been flagged for problems with its references for 3-1/2 years, and Michel Goedert, which is rated stub class, Wikipedia's lowest rating. It is as if you were taking a university class and aspiring to the same quality level as the C and D students. Instead, you should model your work on Good articles and Featured articles that are biographies of academics. I assume that your customer is paying for excellence instead of mediocrity. Cullen328 (talk) 04:18, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Well Cullen, you do have a point. In my defense, I didn't take them as MODELS, and that's also why i've tried my absolute best to reference every single claim of the articleand why i've kept the biography short, to avoid the issues Philip's article has been flagged for. I didn't know that stub class is Wikipedia's lowest rating. Thank you for the feedback though, I will definitely look into the articles you've linked. Noemilio (talk) 07:31, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm pretty new here so take my word with a grain of salt. A lot of the the time for draft articles there's not much references, but you have added very many which could possibly help into it getting accepted and the article overall looking more trustworthy. One thing though, I think you should expand upon the biography, although one's achievements and impact are very important, if i am coming to an article i also want to read about things like, why this guy decided to do this career, who he might be inspired by, if he was interested in the sciences as a young boy, etc. if there's not a lot of sources to find that info then obviously don't worry about it, but it would make the article feel more organic and natural. HeavyMetalChicken (talk) 05:55, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I would like to expand on the biography but the only source about that are interviews he’s given and so I’ve discarded them entirely: they’re by definition not independent sources. 2A0E:41A:954D:0:450A:B886:9211:7397 (talk) 07:23, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

replying to you again because I wasn't logged in. also, i forgot to thank you Noemilio (talk) 07:44, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure wp:aboutself would apply for some things that ought to be included in the biography (other editors should correct me if I'm wrong) mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 16:54, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

oh that's perfect! I ended up following this article Wikipedia:Interviews - Wikipedia but what you've linked is maybe even more fitting. thanks! Noemilio (talk) 04:05, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Noemilio.

As is often the case when new editors try to create articles (especially where they have a conflict of interest) you're making the mistake of writing either what you know about him, or what he says about himself. Wikipedia is basically interested in neither of these. Having found the sources (excluding any where he or his associates have any connection), you need to put aside everything you know, and write a summary of what those sources say - even if you disagree with them.

All the stuff about his childhood ambitions doesn't belong in the article (you haven't cited a source, but even if you had it seems very unlikely that that information could have come from an independent source). Also "He was an early leader in ..." is the kind of evaluative statement that is acceptable only if it is a direct quotation from an independent source.

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 Wikipedia 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. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 23:21, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Bu that's not really what i'm doing though: he explicitly mentions his childhood ambitions in the 2011 Lancet Interview ' But that is not to say he was not a willing pupil: “I've always liked studying. My pastime when I was a kid was reading…when I was a kid I was dreaming of becoming an astronomer, or a chemist.” ' (source number 4) Giovanni Frisoni: an innovator with his head in the cloud - The Lancet Neurology. I have put the reference at the end of the paragraph not to put the same reference twice in the same chapter at a single sentence of distance. Is that not how it works when writing citations? should I add the same reference multiple times even for consecutive statement? And from the article about using interviews on wikipedia Wikipedia:Interviews - Wikipedia, he is an authoritative source for what concerns personal information, that's what I've understood. (from the article)

• Alice Expert says she was thrilled to win the Big History Prize last week: primary source for her feelings

For the "early leader" statement I forgot to add the source, you're right, thank you for catching that, I'll fix it right away. Noemilio (talk) 03:13, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

ERRATA CORRIGE: (i'm sorry Colin, I'm writing this in the middle of the night so bear with me) The lancet source is not an interview, but I thought that, since the statement I'm using from the article it's a "verbatim" statement written in the article, the same rules applicable to interviews might apply there, especially for what concerns using personal statements as sources. 'Independent sources are more generally reliable than sources that have a conflict of interest or are otherwise involved in the subject. However, non-independent sources can be the most reliable source possible, depending upon the material to be supported. An artist stating their motivation is more reliable than an independent person speculating upon it.' Wikipedia:Interviews - Wikipedia

Also yeah, you were right, the source about the early leader was not independent, yikes, thanks for pointing that out.

I hope I'm making sense and thank you for taking the time to read all this stuff Noemilio (talk) 03:53, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I think your opinion might have been influenced by the narrative tone of the biography, I was mislead by the "the prose is engaging" part of Wikipedia:Featured article criteria - Wikipedia. I have rewritten it in a more neutral tone, referencing every single claim Noemilio (talk) 05:23, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Noemilio The main issue that I think you're going to have is I only see one piece of sig cov - The Lancet Neurology article. Suggest you go through the references and, for each source:

• insert a translated title for each article that isn't in English;
• add the access level, if the article requires registration or a subscription to view.

MmeMaigret (talk) 13:04, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

ok, I will, thank you! what does sig cov mean? Noemilio (talk) 13:43, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Noemilio See WP:SIGCOV: basically "significant coverage" so with details, not just mentions or listings. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:50, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

so does that mean that the topic of the draft is not notable enough? because I don't understand this: in the subject specific notability guidelines for academics, the first criterion is having impacted their academic field and Frisoni satisfies criterion 1.a (highly cited according to web of science which is considered a decent, although not enough on its own); 1.d (publications on lancet and nature) arguably 1.b (lancet defined his work "pioneering"). Maybe criterion 7 (multiple interviews for La repubblica, the second biggest italian newspaper, a couple for La tribune de geneve). But at the same time, there's only a couple of articles centered on his PERSON, the most important one by far the lancet one. So does that mean that criterion 1 is not satisfied or that criterion 1 is not enough? Noemilio (talk) 14:25, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

WP:42 is the simplest explanation. MmeMaigret (talk) 16:41, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I've read it but it doesn't answer my question. QUESTION 1: is notability ENOUGH to warrant an article?

QUESTION 2: based on the answer to the QUESTION 1, how should I interpret the second bullet point of Wikipedia:Notability (academics) - Wikipedia i.e

• Many scientists, researchers, philosophers, and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources.

Also, how is sig cov defined? because you said you see a single sigcov: is it because all the other sources I've brought do not consitute sigcovs or is it because they are hidden behind a paywall? Noemilio (talk) 17:28, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Sig cov: To use your own words, the Lancet article is the only one centred on him.

Notability: There's a difference between notability and Wikipedia notability. There's no point in arguing that a person is notable irl or they "should be" notable. A subject must either meet the WP criteria for presumed notability (which are organised by categories) or meet the general notability requirements. General notability requires significant coverage (eg. 250 words or more) in multiple (more than two) independent (not connected with the subject) reliable (think NY Times not a blog) secondary (work by the subject is a primary source, a birth certificate is a primary source) source. The coverage also has to be about the subject. So if the subject is an artist but the coverage is about their album - it doesn't count (but the album might qualify for an article. MmeMaigret (talk) 12:17, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

yes. frisoni satisfies, as I pointed out, criterion 1 of the wp criteria for presumed notability of academics but not the general notability requirements. My question was: must BOTH the category specific and the general notability requirements be met or is one enough(what seems to be implied by your answer since you used the "or" conjunction and the other editor partaking in this conversation) Noemilio (talk) 12:32, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

"or" means "or". MmeMaigret (talk) 14:36, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Second bullet point: Do you mean highly prestigious academic award or honour at a national or international level?

Did you read further down the article where it goes into more depth?

For the purposes of Criterion 2, major academic awards, such as the Nobel Prize, MacArthur Fellowship, the Fields Medal, the Bancroft Prize, the Pulitzer Prize for History, etc., always qualify under Criterion 2. Some less significant academic honors and awards that confer a high level of academic prestige can also be used to satisfy Criterion 2. Examples may include certain awards, honors and prizes of notable academic societies, of notable foundations and trusts (e.g., the Guggenheim Fellowship, Linguapax Prize), etc. MmeMaigret (talk) 12:22, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

the second bullet point is not only about "highly prestigious academic award or honour at a national or international level" though, as you can clearly read in its phrasing, it's a bit more generic than that. And, in fact, this reflects the wide array of criteria (7) available to establish the notability of an academic. what you're describing is criterion 2. what frisoni satisfies is criterion 1, as i have written in my previous answer. Noemilio (talk) 12:28, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

for reference, here again the second bullet point on the page Wikipedia:Notability (academics) - Wikipedia

• Many scientists, researchers, philosophers, and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources.

Noemilio (talk) 12:35, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

First of all, I asked you to clarify what you meant by the second bullet point. Second, I'm not interested in arguing with you. You asked "how should I interpret the second bullet point". But if you know ("as you can clearly read in its phrasing"), then you don't need my help. MmeMaigret (talk) 14:34, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

also, i've seen you've edited the draft, thank you so much! there's a single line in your edit I don't agree with (i think the [2] source used in the context of founding neuGRID is out of place because [2] doesn't talk about that) but since you're a very experienced editor I feel like it would be rude and a bit arrogant to just edit your edit. what's the etiquette in this case? should i just do the edit and explain my reasoning in the talk section? Noemilio (talk) 14:33, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

If I made a mistake, you can just fix it. (You can say in the edit summary that you eg, moved the citation to the fact it supports.) MmeMaigret (talk) 16:40, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Noemilio I've now read the draft and commented that, IMO, WP:NACADEMIC#1 is met owing to his publication record. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:50, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Where can I find the best research?

For sites outside of Wikipedia, where can I make the best searches and improve my queries? I want to edit but also be good and informative to people :3 67wikidude (talk) 07:44, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@67wikidude Your question is not very clear, but you will find the best research using the thousands of reliable sources rather than the millions of unreliable sources. See WP:RSP for a summary of some of the best and worse sources. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:11, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Help:Find sources also has some good tips. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:01, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@67wikidude: Google books is quite good. Being logged in will ensure you get treated better. The internet archive is decent for older stuff. Refseek is a reference search engine. Archival search per a country basis is quite good, e.g. Gallica, Jstor. Scopus, Google Scholar is good for searching for academic authors. If you can get membership of the Wikipedia Library assuming you edit decent articles and have a need. Its good for searching specific libraries and archives. You specify what archives you want to search and you get membership of search domain. Eventually if your doing a lot of quality you will have sufficient membership to search across multiple archives quickly. Google Translate and Deepl are good for translating foreign language content. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 08:19, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

For newspapers: newspapers.com, Google news archive, and the Library of Congress' Chronicling America. MmeMaigret (talk) 13:07, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Series end date.

If the company or network of the series announced that the series will end in 3 weeks let's on their twitter page. And after a few weeks with no news article stating the series is on its final 3 weeks. Can I use twitter as a source if the one posting it is the official page of that company or network? 139.135.78.227 (talk) 08:21, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

You can. This is a WP:PRIMARY source; secondary ones are definitely better, but as long as it is the official network or twitter account for the series, it should be fine to use. I do have to ask what show this is for? Rather unusual to only announce this on Twitter. jolielover♥talk 08:27, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

There's a series called Akusada and it's twitter account announced on it's last 3 weeks but the user said to look for third party sources.

here is the source though since there are no news articles saying this.

https://x.com/gmanetwork/status/1977611521866842383/photo/1 139.135.78.227 (talk) 08:45, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

It's a difficult situation, where coverage in reliable sources lags behind "the truth", but in this case, I would use the primary source unless somebody disagrees and reverts it. In which case, I think your best bet is to simply wait, and assume that other sources will appear in the next three weeks. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:11, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Is it a stupid move to upload a non-free image in an SVG file, and why do I see people do it anyways?

Context: I'm thinking of turning the File:Logo of the Al-Nour radio station.png into an SVG file but with non-free files, they have to be low resolution so that it doesn't affect the original owner in any way, shape, or form.

But yet I still see images like File:Liwa Fatemiyoun Flag.svg, File:Logo_of_the_Hezbollah.svg, and File:Flag of Hezbollah.svg being classified as Fair use, but still in a HD file format with nobody in the file history doing anything to convert it to something like a PNG or JPG.

So, Is it a bad move to upload a non-free image in an SVG file, and why do I see people do it despite violating the low resolution policy?

GuesanLoyalist (talk) 10:47, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@GuesanLoyalist The guidance at WP:Non-free content#Multiple restrictions says that .svg files are OK if they were produced by the copyright holders of the logo. I've not checked whether that's the case for the ones you mention. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:37, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Feeling discouraged from Wikipedia

I'm feeling a bit discouraged from Wikipedia and I feel like everyone just hates me. I don't like Wikipedia. I would like some help PEPSI697 (💬) (📝) 11:02, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I don't think anybody hates you. The best advice I can give you is to have a read of some of our good and featured content and see what we've accomplished so far. Then, after a while of reading articles, you might find a typo or something that needs improving, and can fix it. Start small, and make incremental improvements. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:09, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@PEPSI697 My best advise would be; doing something else for a bit. Varying what, why and when you contribute tends to help me a lot. I've taken multiple months long breaks over the years, but I've also switched in and out of various topic areas. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:40, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm also feeling like people are ignoring my apology and don't want to read it. Do you accept my apology at ANI? PEPSI697 (💬) (📝) 08:18, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

No one hates you, my friend. Wikipedia has unspoken rules and sometimes you only find out what they are when you break them. MmeMaigret (talk) 12:42, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Feeling ignored

I feel like my apology at ANI is being completely ignored and no one likes my apology. See WP:ANI#PEPSI697's apology. What can I do? I really feel like others are hating me at the moment and still feel discouraged. I'm really sorry for starting another question here. PEPSI697 (💬) (📝) 09:30, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

If people did not accept your apology, then they would tell you so. I suggest you follow the advice given by the DJ, above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:50, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Deadmau5 and Source Cleaning: Where Now?

Hello, my favorite question forum. On September 12, 2025, I submitted the article Deadmau5 for peer review (see peer review) and received the advice that I should consistently wikilink every publicator in the citations. (Courtesy of Dxneo.) This step is now complete (at least according to my checking) and now what I imagine I need to do now is make these citations even more consistent: maybe by changing some to cite=magazine and the like.

The problem is I don't know if that's even a thing I need to do, or even how to practically do it. Help! Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 13:07, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Typically, you do need consistent citation styles if you want your article at FA quality. It is very strict, and everything & anything will be questioned. jolielover♥talk 13:14, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Jolielover, thank you or clarifying :) I don't think the article has Featured Article status in it-- yet-- or anytime soon. But If there's a thing I can do to make it the best it can be, than I am interested in doing it. Awhile ago, I tried for Good Article but got promptly smited. Now, since I do need to fix the citation styles, is there a way I can do this simply or without any headaches? Like, is there a tool in the visual editor that can alter the style without completely breaking the ref, for example? Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 13:45, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I don't know of one, sorry :( (but granted, I don't think I've looked very hard!) I typically just do it manually: command + f (I'm on macbook), see if the source is from a magazine/newspaper/website, and adjust accordingly. If there's a lot of, say, Rolling Stone on a page, I'll command + f that to do things a little quicker. jolielover♥talk 13:48, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Does this diff look right to you? Don't know if this approach is right or not :P Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 14:16, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello! There is no script written specifically for linking refs. You have to do it manually. I have improved articles to GA and FL standard, but failed FA twice, not because of refs of course, but because they question literally everything. You have to make sure that your sentences are readable and written in proper English, make sure you didn't miss a spelling or left a stray comma. The comma thing was an issue in my failed FAC. Normally, I would advise going thru WP:GOCE before FAC. Best of luck! dxneo (talk) 14:28, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

General Notability Guidelines

Hello, I submitted a draft, which was declined on October 7th by CurryTime7-24 because it didn't satisfy notability requirements (and also "read more like an advertisement"). Draft:Slapin-Solomon Viola Duo

I had consulted here in the Teahouse before submitting the draft and made necessary revisions, so I was surprised that the draft was declined. Nevertheless that's not the main reason I'm writing now.

On the same date, the same editor (CurryTime7-24) flagged another Wikipedia article I edited with a similar 'Notability tag'. If you look in the history of this particular article, GNG ("General Notability Guidelines") were met on August 6th 2014 with submissions by a Joe Decker. Scott Slapin

My concerns are

1. Once an article has been accepted and the subject has specifically met notability guidelines, is that not a settled issue?

And 2. Since I had not submitted this article for any sort of review, it appears any draft I submit will cause review of everything I might edit--- even long-standing accepted articles--- and could potentially be slapped with the same tags.

My main interest is Classical viola-related topics. It's true that it's a niche genre, but I have to disagree that the 20-some sources in either article are mostly "passing mentions". If my recent draft can't be accepted,

I would at least like to 1. see if the Notability Tag could be lifted from the established article, and 2. I would also like to know what might be done regarding the draft I submitted. I am genuinely surprised that it wasn't accepted.

Thank you in advance! Violetsmith5346 (talk) 15:39, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Violetsmith5346, Wikipedia is not perfect. Mistakes get made, and can be corrected. The acceptance of Scott Slapin may have been one of those mistakes – of the references I can check, many give a "404" message. "What might be done" is going through those references, and fixing them or replacing them. Maproom (talk) 16:07, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Scott Slapin's article is old, the links were clearly valid in 2014, when it was first published...it's not a surprise that many of them don't work anymore. Websites redo formats all the time and take things down or move them. I can go through and try to replace some of the links that don't work, assuming I can find them, as I'm not the one who added most of those links. I will get to work on this! This again goes back to the original issue though...is notability always in question? Violetsmith5346 (talk) 16:18, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@Maproom: @Violetsmith5346: Scott Slapin was never accepted. It was kicked back to draft, then the draft's creator simply moved it back to mainspace after significant edits in 2014. And its original incarnation was created in 2006, well before AfC existed. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:36, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the link! I have researched the history of the article, and what I found is that in 2014, Joe Decker, a former administrator at Wikipedia, himself added sources to the article to bring it into compliance with GNG and moved it back into mainspace. Here is a picture of the old page at that time, with all of that noted at the top.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scott_Slapin&oldid=620031760

(Here is also some Teahouse correspondence I found at Joe Decker's page from the same time, should it be of any interest. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Joe_Decker&oldid=620032730 )

I have so far replaced six outdated links in the article. However I'm left wondering as to whether the article will ever have a chance of acceptance. If it doesn't meet today's notability requirements (and 2014's don't count), I may decide not to continue. Thanks again for your advice! Violetsmith5346 (talk) 18:02, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

As far as Scott Slapin goes, the links that I've checked out work for me, and those feature multiple reviews of compositions which easily satisfy WP:NCREATIVE and therefore demonstrate notability.

The case for Slapin-Solomon viola duo would always be a trickier one, though, since WP:NBAND applies. There may be enough independent, RS reviews of the duo to satisfy NBAND 1, which means that an article is not of the question. However, the "mood" of enwiki has always been hostile to articles for musical groups compared to composer biographies, IMO. As an alternative, it might be more acceptable to have a redirect from Slapin-Solomon Viola Duo to an appropriate section of Slapin's biography. Newimpartial (talk) 18:50, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to look things over! I'd be happy to merge the duo article into a section of Scott Slapin's Wikipedia page (for a redirect) *IF* there would be a way to stabilise that page's acceptance at Wikipedia.

Although its notability (GNG) was accepted in 2014 (see above) by an administrator at Wikipedia, as you can see it's now being questioned again. While I think the Slapin-Solomon Duo deserves a presence at Wikipedia (and my article on them shows an equal number of sources, reviews etc.!), at this point I am reluctant to continue work that seems only to lead to articles being flagged and/or declined.

If anyone has a suggestion how to stabilise the Scott Slapin Wikipedia article (how to get rid of questions about notability), I'd be happy to get to work on creating a Slapin-Solomon Duo section on that page. Thanks again, and I really appreciate the help. Violetsmith5346 (talk) 19:26, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Articles are nominated for deletion everyday. So the simple answer to your question is, no, once an article is accepted, it's not safe from being questioned in the future. Because no article is in fact "settled" - the very nature of Wikipedia means the article is always being amended. However, if a person is truly notable, they don't cease being notable and you should be able to revise the article to highlight their notability (and show significant coverage in multiple reliable independent secondary sources).

• Scott Slapin: As with @Newimpartial, the article seems to me to have multiple reliable independent sources so I've deleted the notability template. However, that article is not really written like a wikipedia article and could use some copyediting.
• Draft:Slapin-Solomon Viola Duo The reviewer has highlighted two issues: tone and signficant coverage. Regarding tone - the draft is very short and again not written like a wikipedia article. Suggest you work the most on this issue. Re significant coverage, you seem to have sig cov but they appear to be in blog/websites. You might seek a second opinion about whether these are reliable industry publications. Inline citations - each fact in the article should be supported by a source (which, unlike the requirement for sig cov, can be a passing mention). But there is nothing to be gained by having multiple citations for a single point, particularly not 4 of them.

MmeMaigret (talk) 09:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for having a look and for taking the time to write here!

Perhaps I have been given bad advice, but another editor believed that reviews of recordings counted as significant coverage (if the review was solely dedicated to a specific recording of the relevant subject.) As an example, that's what Fanfare Magazine, Interlude, the Journal of the American Viola Society are--- simply well-known collection of reviews within the Classical (viola) world. It's true I did include a couple of blogs as sources, and if I reedit the article, I will leave those out.

The strong majority fell into the category of reviews dedicated to the viola duo's recordings, and I think part of the problem in all of this is that the viola world is very niche, and it might simply not fit easily into every Wikipedia editor's idea of what the best sources are. I've been mostly discouraged so far, but if I decide to push on, I really want to thank you for taking the time to give some constructive criticism and advice as to how to improve things! I'm very grateful for that. Should I come to the conclusion that the learning curve here is too steep for me at the minute, I do hope someone else might decide to run with it. Violetsmith5346 (talk) 15:55, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Sig cov: Some of reviews discuss Slapin/the Duo or their performance and so they could/might constitute sig cov. But where the reviews are, in the main, about the album/work, they don't necessarily constitute sig cov for the artist - bearing in mind that the albums or songs can also have their own Wikipedia article. Take the news article, Violists' Music Meant for Fellow Refugees in the Morristown Daily Record, it seems like it's about the Duo but it's a better source for Slapin himself.

Draft article: I don't think you need to worry so much about sig cov for the Duo album, it seems to be out there. I think the more important thing is to make the article more encyclopedic.

Learning curve: Nah, you're learning by doing and making mistakes (or not making them) and interacting with other editors. MmeMaigret (talk) 12:59, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Warning templates for LLM use

Wikipedia has various templates to warn new users about vandalism, edit warring, &c.; I'd like to ask whether such templates exist to warn users about violations of WP:LLM. Thanks (: lp0 on fire () 16:11, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi, @Lp0 on fire. Template:Uw-ai1 is such a template. WP:LLM isn't a policy, so I don't think it can be violated per se – it is an essay that explains how most AI-generated content violates policies like WP:OR. Perception312 (talk) 16:58, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry, hadn't read the banner at the top. Would it be reasonable for me to suggest adding Template:Uw-ai1 to the templates described at Wikipedia:Recent changes patrol? lp0 on fire () 17:47, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Sure, that's reasonable, and it's reasonable to add it to WP:WARN if not listed there already.

@Perception312: while WP:LLM isn't a policy, we do have a policy related to LLM, which is WP:CSD#G15, allowing for speedy deletion of LLM-generated content that appears to be unreviewed for factual accuracy, hallucinations, etc. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 17:54, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, that's good to know. Perception312 (talk) 19:08, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Help identifying whether MEDRS applies

I hope there isn't a limit to how much I'm meant to use this page. Sorry if I'm violating it. WP:BMI and WP:MEDRS give lots of examples of things that aren't biomedical, but they don't mention topics like psychology which are adjacent to medicine. I don't really see why an article like Gender empathy gap shouldn't have to comply with the same sourcing standards as something like ADHD, but it doesn't seem to be anywhere near that standard. I would like to know whether these standards apply, and, if so, whether there's somewhere to report this as opposed to just tagging it. Thanks :) lp0 on fire () 18:38, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

No worries, feel free to ask for help at the Teahouse as much as you need to! It seems like these apply to any medical content in any article. So if there's an article that's even somewhat related to medicine but makes any sort of medical claim, it would have to follow those guidelines. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 01:20, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Universal Code of Conduct article

Does anyone find secondary sources relating to Wikimedia Foundation's Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) it starts with the lead:

The Wikimedia Foundation's Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) is a set of global behavioral standards for everyone who interacts with Wikimedia projects, both online and offline. It defines acceptable behavior, outlines what constitutes harassment and abuse of power, and aims to create a safer, more inclusive, and harassment-free environment for the community.

There are several sources listed as mentioned (but not in circular reference):

• Dhapola, Shruti (2021-02-05). "Wikipedia has a new 'Universal Code of Conduct' to deal with harassment, misinformation". The Indian Express. Retrieved 2025-10-15.
• Maher, Katherine; Sefidari, María (2021-02-03). "Elevating Wikimedia: a Universal Code of Conduct for free knowledge". Wikimedia Foundation. Retrieved 2025-10-15.
• "Making Wikipedia Safer: Enforcement Guidelines for Wikimedia Universal Code of Conduct provide a model for governing online behavior". Wikimedia Foundation. 2023-03-21. Retrieved 2025-10-15.
• "Wikipedia Embraces First-of-Its Kind Universal Code of Conduct, Conceived For The New Internet Era". Wikimedia Foundation. 2021-02-02. Retrieved 2025-10-15.

Absolutiva 02:55, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

What is your question? Buddhimatta (talk) 08:19, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not exist in the article about the Universal Code of Conduct, beginning in 2021 and the recent amendment in 2023. Absolutiva 10:41, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Absolutiva A simple Google search led me to this and this, which are secondary sources discussing the code of conduct. No doubt there are others. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:51, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Absolutiva What does Circular Reference have to do with the UCoC or with these articles? David10244 (talk) 23:49, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

The site wikimediafoundation.org/news/ is about the news from the Wikimedia Foundation and does not affect on circular reference. However, according to MOS:CIRCULAR, wikimedia.org (including Wikipedia) are circular references and WP:SELFREF. Absolutiva 07:33, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

I meant to add that the UCoC itself does not list any references (and it doesn't need to), so Circular Reference would not apply. David10244 (talk) 23:52, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

The Green And Red Color Contributes

Hello My Genuine Question Is That, When We Edit Something Articles/Pages And Getting A High Contributions of Greens Numbers So Whats Actually Is This Green Counts Or, Number (+) Or, Even (-) Red Counts/Numbers Is For Actually? For Any Goals ? Thank You. Ajrun Amir'za-da (talk) 04:03, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi there! Those are bytes. They indicate how many characters have been added/removed in each edit. They don't signify any goals, and are just a little useful indicator for how much content you removed or added. jolielover♥talk 04:08, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Bear in mind it's just the overall change; if you remove 100 characters and add a different 101 characters, the difference only shows as "1". And if you change, say, all the letter "e" characters to "x", the change would show as zero. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@Ajrun Amir'za-da: ...so, strictly speaking, despite of how many characters you add, replace or remove, the number displayed is a net change of the article's length in bytes. You might even add a thousand spaces, not affecting the visible contents at all, and still see (+1,000) in the summary. On the other hand, you might rewrite a page completely and see a grey zero (0) as a result if you happen to end up at exactly the same number of bytes of contents as before. Please also note that some characters may take more than one byte; for example, diacritic characters of other languages, as well as non-Latin based alphabets. (As an example, replacing three characters in this edit Special:Diff/1317125041 increased the article's size by 6.) Plus there is lots of wiki markup, including wikilinks, headers, tables, images etc., which do not always easily translate into visible characters, but also contribute to wiki-text length. --CiaPan (talk) 12:47, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Seek a quick review & comments on my draft article

Hi, I am a BBA student and find the geopolitics of technology (like chips and semiconductors) of interest. I am a fan of TATA brand from India and learned they are doing some work in this space a few months ago, and as such drafted a page about them: Draft:Tata Electronics which seems to be missing, surprisingly.

I will be grateful for someone to review and give comments on the quality and whether I have fixed my last declines reason. You can leave comments here or on the articles talk page.

I will be happy to invest time on one of your projects too in exchange. Buddhimatta (talk) 08:16, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Buddhimatta, and welcome to the Teahouse. The way to get a draft rereviewed is ... to resubmit it for review. That's what the AFC system is for. ColinFine (talk) 08:36, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

thank you @ColinFine ... I have had mine rejected with suggestions for improvements, so just want someone to review it quickly so I do not eat up admin time for another failed review. thank you so much! Failing an unoffocial reviewer, I will of course just submit it as is. Buddhimatta (talk) 12:59, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Buddhimatta. Reviewers are not usually admins.

The thing that takes up reviewers' time, frankly, is editors creating drafts and submitting them for review before spending any time getting experience with Wikipedia's unique ways of working.

You appear to have got more experience first than many editors do; but glancing over your reference list, there seem to be a lot of sources which are run of the mill corporate activity, so if there are souces which meet WP:42, they are rather swamped. ColinFine (talk) 15:12, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

How to make article about a music Artist

help me to do a better biography about a music artist I don't see any page for that MheraKhalidev (talk) 09:16, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Please see Your First Article. I highly suggest, however, that you wait until you have more experience and knowledge before undertaking the very difficult task of creating a new article. Doing so without experience usually leads to frustration and anger, which we don't want for you. Please use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia, and spend some time editing existing articles.

If you still wish to proceed, you may use the Article Wizard to create and submit a draft. You should first review the definition of a notable musician to see if this person meets at least one aspect of it, then gather independent reliable sources that offer significant coverage of this person, but are not connected to them in any way(like interviews, press releases) that you can summarize in a draft. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

As @331dot said, use the Article Wizard to start with a stub (a mini summary). Once that is there, review other musicians articles in code format (edit source) and copy things you think fit in (like categories, or headings, or the way certain sections appear) ... not the actual content but the wrapper items. Learn from these othwer articles and build the artists page one line at a time and reference each fact you claim. good luck. Buddhimatta (talk) 13:02, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I concur with ColinFine, this is extremely poor advice. 331dot (talk) 12:33, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @MheraKhalidev, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid I disagree strongly with @Buddhimatta: what they are advising you to do is to create an article backwards, which is the worst and least effective way of doing it.

Start with finding the sources, and then (if you have found sources that meet the requirements in WP:42), write a summary of what those sources say. Absolutely anything you do before finding adequate sources - creating the draft, writing so much as a single word - is quite possibly time wasted, if it happens that you cannot find sources.

But I strongly recommend you follow 331dot's advice - not just in how to go about creating the article, but in not even thinking about creating an article until you have learnt about how WIkipedia works. ColinFine (talk) 13:45, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok thanks Daniel Cliff Rec (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Calor Ireland

User:Vaibhvkale/sandbox

Click the above link so check the draft copy which has been sent for the approval

I have submitted this article for calor ireland organisation which operates in ireland and northern. added all the references and required information. Can someone please let me know if there are any mistakes that need to be fixed ? Vaibhvkale (talk) 11:10, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Vaibhvkale By submitting the draft for review you will get feedback. At first glance, you have far too many non-independent sources. See this summary of the best type of source. Even the book you quote extensively from is, I assume, produced by someone related to the company. You also need to make the article conform to MOS:BOLD. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:42, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

New editor! Want advice on editing and maybe article making

Hi! My name's Corleson (online name) and I'd really like advice from more experienced people. I've been on Wikipedia for about 7 months, more active on the Romanian one, and are more into correcting mistakes and if I even make articles I normally translate them. Please, give advice! Corleson (talk) 11:12, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi, Corleson, and welcome! One piece of advice, is only translate into your native language. If it is Romanian, you can translate from English Wikipedia to Romanian Wikipedia, but not in the opposite direction. Hope this helps! Mathglot (talk) 11:32, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Romanian articles can be translated into English, provided they meet en.Wikipedia's criteria for notability and sourcing; see WP:Translate. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:55, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I don't think @Mathglot was suggesting otherwise, @Pigsonthewing; but that for most people it is more successful to translate into your native language than out of it. ColinFine (talk) 15:14, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Corleson, you mentioned that you are into correcting mistakes. If you see factual errors, correcting them is a very good idea. I would be very cautious of correcting grammar unless you are extremely strong in English. English frequently permits multiple ways to express an idea; well-meant attempts to apply rules taught in EFL courses often change good English into English that is no better (a pointless change), but also often change good English into equally good English that means something subtly different (so subtly different that the grammar-improving editor is unaware of what they've done) - this is dangerous! I see you've been doing some translation from German. That's fine, but be aware that different Wikipedias have different standards for sourcing and notability. In particular, the German Wikipedia often uses general referencing at the end, rather than inline citations for individual sentences and paragraphs. This can make for problems when you try to get the translation through the AfC process or the new page patrol. Elemimele (talk) 16:49, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Corleson! Adding on to the above, in terms of general advice, check out Wikipedia:Everything you need to know! It is often recommended that newer editors try editing existing articles before creating new ones, because editing existing articles can help you learn Wikipedia policies, which makes creating a new article much smoother. Hope this helps! Perfect4th (talk) 17:00, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I truly believe you should do what interests you. Too many people want to create articles but so many pages need maintenance so suggest you continue doing what you're doing. You might even find a niche. MmeMaigret (talk) 15:04, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Help submitting my first article

I recently used one of OLM Medias services and saw they didnt have a correct wikipedia page so I tried making one stating all of the facts from there website www.media-olm.com. How do i get this reviewed and passed since it said its not nutural. Revieweres35 (talk) 13:05, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Revieweres35: As the notice at the top of Draft:OLM Media indicates, to qualify for a Wikipedia article, a subject needs to have sustained in depth coverage in independent sources. Of course, anybody can make a webpage and include any content they like, which is why Wikipedia doesn't count official webpages when determining whether a subject qualifies for an article. GMG^talk 13:13, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

so what should i write about them then so help them get a wiki page. i cited there website and can sight anything else needed/ ask the owner to send me over any more info Revieweres35 (talk) 14:14, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Probably nothing; it seems very unlikely they meet the criteria at WP:NCORP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:44, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Revieweres35. Their own website is the last place to find information for a Wikipedia article.

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively 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) 15:16, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

help adding youtube embeds on page

How can I add a youtube embedded onto a page on en.m.wikipedia.org?

This is what i want to put on to the embed: https://youtube.com/watch?v=fSfnrRNUfs4 StevieStandardNo1 (talk) 16:55, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@StevieStandardNo1: Hello and Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid we do not support embeding videos hosted elsewhere (regardless if its YouTube or some other place) for multiple reasons including copyright, the fact that we cannot control or are otherwise notified should the external content get deleted, data protection reasons (all those tracking cookies google in particular sets) and the fact that external sites might not be prepeared to handle the traffic Wikipedia articles get. You might want to check out {{External media}} though. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:31, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

The only page you've edited so far is your userpage. Is that where you want to put the link? MmeMaigret (talk) 15:07, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

file upload: APKPure.png

Hello, I am editing an article titled Draft:APKPure.

I want to upload this file to wikipedia as APKPure.png: https://static.apkpures.xyz/www/static/imgs/logo_new@2x.png

I am not autoconfirmed so can somebody upload this file? StevieStandardNo1 (talk) 18:14, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, StevieStandardNo1. Non-free images of logos should only be used in an accepted encyclopedia article about the entity represented by the logo, not in a draft article. So, it is too soon to upload that logo. Please see WP:NFCI for the relevant policy language. Cullen328 (talk) 22:53, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @StevieStandardNo1, and welcome to the Teahouse. To add to what Cullen328 says: images play no part in whether a draft gets accepted or not, so don't worry about the logo until you have got the draft through review successfully.

Unless and until you find several reliable independent secondary sources (see WP:42) anything else you do to the draft is probably a waste of your time and effort.

To use a house-building analogy, you are worrying about painting the windows before you have started digging the foundations.

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 Wikipedia 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. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 13:51, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Responding to responses on the Talk page of Extended confirmed protected articles

I have not made 500 edits yet, so can I respond to responses on the Talk page of Extended confirmed protected articles (the Talk page is unprotected)?-Baangla (talk) 20:06, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I believe that you can, yes. Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 21:43, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

However, you still cannot participate in discussions on topics which have been designated as a contentious topic. Yeshivish613 (talk) 11:33, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Using Fan Site as Reference

Well met, fellow editors;

I've been diving into the Six Flags Great Adventure page (associated and main) and noticed that a lot of links and references could be added if we could link to Great Adventure History, an external fan site.

From my understanding, WP:FANSITE and WP:V would normally apply, but GAH has been active for almost 20 years, and has also been recognized by Six Flags Great Adventure themselves with their own exhibit. Additionally, the site founders authored a book with the history of the park. There is much media and history that would have been lost were it not for this page.

Is it possible to have a exception for this rule? If so, how would one go about petitioning for it?

Appreciate your time and advice on this matter. Sab The Moose (They/Them/Moose) (talk) 20:07, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Probably best for WP:RSN. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:11, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Sab The Moose, my opinion is that use of this (or any) fan site should be avoided. Since people associated with the fan site have written a book issued by Arcadia Publishing, then that book can be cited with caution, avoiding anything controversial. See WP:ARCADIA. Cullen328 (talk) 22:39, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I suppose my first question would be "why?" Is the page lacking inline citations? Do you need to quote the fan page. Second, why wouldn' t you cite their book? MmeMaigret (talk) 15:09, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

It is lacking inline citations, most prevalently in the history section, which the fan site has extensive information on. However as @Cullen328 stated, the book would fall under WP:ARCADIA Sab The Moose (They/Them/Moose) (talk) 15:21, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Unanswered ECP edit requests

There are some unanswered extended confirmed protected edit requests (not just mine) on the Talk page of the Noakhali riots article. What can I do about those (to get someone to respond to those requests)?-Baangla (talk) 20:49, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

There was only one, and I have just deactivated the request template because there is clearly not yet consensus for the change that was requested. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:49, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Help requested to refine and resubmit declined draft biography

Hi! I’m the subject of a declined draft, Draft:Alina Chau - children's book author, illustrator and animator. I understand Wikipedia discourages autobiographies, so I’d like to ask if an experienced editor might be willing to help review, polish, or adopt the draft.

The article is fully cited with independent sources (national media coverage, awards, major publishers, and animation credits), and I’ve added the connected contributor disclosure tag.

I’d be grateful for any guidance or help improving it so it meets notability and tone guidelines. Thank you! AHFChau (talk) 20:49, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Here is the link to my draft: Draft:Alina Chau - children's book author, illustrator and animator — Preceding unsigned comment added by AHFChau (talk • contribs) 20:52, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

It is highly inadvisable (though not forbidden) for people to write about themselves, please see the autobiography policy. Also be aware that there are good reasons to not want an article. 331dot (talk) 21:04, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification and the reminder about the autobiography policy.

I understand and respect that I should not be writing the article about myself.

My intention is simply to ensure that, if an article is eventually created, it’s based on reliable, verifiable sources and presented neutrally.

I’ve already gathered independent press coverage, awards, and references that may meet notability standards.

I’d appreciate any feedback on improving neutrality and formatting of the existing draft so that, if another editor chooses to take it up later, it’s in good shape.

Draft:Alina Chau - children's book author, illustrator and animator. AHFChau (talk) 21:22, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

AHFChau, your draft is completely lacking in references to reliable published sources entirely independent of you, your publishers and your creative works that devote significant coverage to you. Such sources are the essential building blocks of a biography of a living person on Wikipedia. You mention independent press coverage but I am not seeing it. The one reference that looks at first glance like it may qualify, the Business Insider source, is a reprint of a press release and is glaringly not independent on closer inspection. Improving neutrality and formatting is a waste of valuable volunteer editor time if notability has not been established. I am sure that you are a wonderful person given your work, but it is unwise to try to write a Wikipedia autobiography this way. Cullen328 (talk) 22:26, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

AFC review translation and copyright question

I'm doing an AfC review of Draft:Pavle Bibic, which ways the text was translated from [1]. Srpkaenciklopedija.org seems to be a website very similar to Wikipedia, except entireyl in Serbian. The content on srpskaenciklopedija.org is liscensed under CC BY-SA 4.0, which means the content is free to use as long as it is unchanged from the original, and proper attribution is given (which is the case in Draft:Pavle Bibic). However, it's still not content original to any version of Wikipedia, so can it be used on Wikipedia, or is this a copyright violation? I'm thinking it wouldn't be allowed, but I'd like y'all's input. Thanks in advance! Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 21:38, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Commandant Quacks-a-lot! I would err on the side of caution and request the page creator to rewrite in their own words. Besides that, the Serbian Encyclopedia link is not properly formatted as a citation. The information on that page is too unsourced, as the external link to the SANU website gives me an error (We're sorry, but the content you requested was not found. It takes some time for Google to adapt search to the new version of our site. Please select the desired link from the menu on the left.).

TL;DR: In my opinion, the draft does not seem ready for mainspace regardless of the licencing concerns. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 22:44, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

CC-by-SA does not require that the content remain unchanged if it is reused; that would not be compatible with Wikipedia. It looks like that site uses the same license Wikipedia does, so as long as there is attribution I think using its content directly would not be a copyright violation.

The problem with that source is that wikis are not considered reliable sources, per WP:USERGENERATED, so the translated content would need to get citations added. (As mentioned above, the existing one is broken.) -- Beland (talk) 23:51, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Request to move draft: Ahmed F. M. Hamdan to mainspace

Could an administrator please move User:Maria_Garcia Jimenez/sandbox/Ahmed F M Hamdan to mainspace?

The draft meets notability with multiple independent reliable sources (Yahoo Finance, MarketWatch, Bloomberg). It’s a neutral biography with verified citations. Thank you! Maria Garcia Jimenez (talk) 23:23, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Could you explain why your submission is more important than all the others? DS (talk) 23:34, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Maria Garcia Jimenez has helpfully pointed out that the draft (which I've moved from user space to draft space) was written "on behalf of Univers" (Ahmed F M Hamdan's company). Perhaps this is related. Payment and urgency aside, the draft shows clear signs of having been produced by an LLM. -- Hoary (talk) 23:57, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Maria Garcia Jimenez, the draft is in very poor shape and is not ready to be moved to mainspace. Six of the seven references are copies of the same press release, so they are not Wikipedia:Independent sources, and furthermore, three of those six sources have links that do not work. The seventh source does not even mention the subject of the article. Moreover, the article is poorly formatted, with two References sections, two malformatted Template links visible, several terms using what seems to be italicization using Markdown instead of Wikitext, and the same photograph used twice. This article needs a lot of work, especially in sourcing, before it could even be considered to be moved to mainspace. CodeTalker (talk) 00:02, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

guys where can you find good info

guys where can you find good info Amproyu (talk) 00:57, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Amproyu, try the online encyclopedia called Wikipedia. More seriously, your question is too vague to answer well. The places to find "good info" about neurosurgery are different than the places to find information about basketball. And that does not address what "good info" actually means. As a general rule, public libraries are excellent places to find good information. Cullen328 (talk) 01:06, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

this is Wikpedia Amproyu (talk) 01:09, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Of course it is, Amproyu. But you still have not clarified your vague question. Cullen328 (talk) 05:06, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

If it's for adding information to an article about a novelist, Amproyu, I'd start with Google Scholar and Google Books. NB if these do point to sources, a high percentage of these sources are likely to be inaccessible. Very often, searches for good info are frustrating and need plenty of patience. Best of luck! -- Hoary (talk) 06:32, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Help:Find sources also has some good tips. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

"Constructive"

A recent edit of mine was reverted because it "doesn't appear to be constructive," despite being phrased in neutral and encyclopedic language and citing sources. What does this mean? 206.162.104.17 (talk) 01:26, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@LuniZunie: This involves you. The diff being referred to is this. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 02:08, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi there, I reverted your edit because claiming "she is known for making controversial tweets", while citing only a tweet seemed like a personal synthesis about a pretty substantial claim. I used the wrong template for that so I apologize, and I probably should have found more citations rather than reverting it, but I hope you can at least understand my reasoning behind the revert. – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 02:13, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

The WP:ONUS is on the person who's adding poorly sourced content, not you. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 02:16, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Fair, however this was clearly in good faith, and at the end of the day, we are all here to build an encyclopedia. Not everyone is going to get everything perfect first try. – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 02:19, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, but if you see something like ...many Jewish people and other reputable scholars believe are overtly antisemitic sourced to a single Bluesky post, it's best to revert immediately per WP:BLP. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 02:33, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Fair, which is why I did it. – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 02:35, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Great introspection from you, LuniZunie. Keep up the good work. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Twitter and Bluesky are not reliable sources, and you need really good sourcing to make such claims on BLPs. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 02:13, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Surely they are reliable sources--primary sources, even--for establishing that someone made a particular Tweet? 206.162.104.17 (talk) 04:04, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Primary sourcing is not allowed, especially for controversial claims about BLPs. If a reputable news agency, etc. doesn't talk about it, don't add it. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 04:10, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Primary sourcing is allowed... when the claim cited is completely uncontroversial. Calling someone's tweets controversial while only citing one of those very tweets is very controversial. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 04:20, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

How do I find better sources on niche things?

I’ve been working on a draft for the article Draft:Tranebergssund, but I’m having trouble understanding what makes a source poor. I understand that something like a personal blog about a park wouldn’t be the best source, but I’m not sure if all the sources on my page are considered poor.

Since I don’t speak the language or live in the area, I find it difficult to find these sources. Tranebergssund has really grown on me since I've tried to make this article, and I’d love to see it have its own article on Wikipedia. I just need help/materials to find sources for foreign or niche places. Are there any browsers, tools, websites or anything else that can help me?

Thanks for any help or advice! A Stupid Horse (talk) 02:40, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, A Stupid Horse. The relevant notability guideline is Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). What is required are references to reliable sources that devote significant coverage, also called in depth coverage, to this body of water. A Google Books search shows a lot of hits but it is difficult to tell from snippets whether the coverage is in depth. Swedish speaking editors may be able to help. Check out the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Sweden and see if you can find any that are currently active or have active email links. Cullen328 (talk) 05:38, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

A [redacted] horse, however it was that you got hold of Stockholms tekniska historia: Trafik, broar, tunnelbanor, gator, does your method not give you access to other books in Swedish? That aside, Cullen328's suggestion of going via WikiProject Sweden is good; but in your place I'd instead ask at WT:WikiProject Sweden, and perhaps also WT:WikiProject Transport. (And it's very slight, but: this.) -- Hoary (talk) 06:22, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

If you haven't, try digging at [2]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:41, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Help:Find sources also has some good tips. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:16, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Syntax to combine functions of two templates

How do I make {{flatlist}} and {{chem2}} work together so that I only write on one input/parameter and both do their modification?

What's cool about {{chem2}} is that I can just write the plaintext of the chemical compound/reaction formula and it'll do the sub-/superscripting for me – in just one parameter input; {{flatlist}} also generates a horizontal bulleted list in just one parameter input, it uses line breaks from the input to recognize where new items begin and mark them with bullet points. Surely, there must be a way I can just put one inside the other, right? CheckNineEight (talk) 04:09, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@CheckNineEight So

{{flatlist| :* {{chem2|CH3CH2OH}} :* {{chem2|PhCH3}} :}} :

gives

• CH₃CH₂OH
• PhCH₃

See source code and the instructions at {{flatlist}} for details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:01, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I was thinking more in the lines of using just one of each template, rather than making multiple {{chem2}}s inside {{flatlist}}. My idea is that, if {{chem2}} can output formula (formatted) text with line breaks, then putting it inside {{flatlist}} should make bulleted entries of each line-breaked formulae; conversely, if what {{chem2}} does is modify plaintext formulae, then I could put them inside {{flatlist}} and hopefully {{chem2}} can modify an entire horizontal bulleted list.

That answer is straightforward and easy, but inefficient in terms of character count. CheckNineEight (talk) 11:47, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm assuming that's how that template works, or that it can work like that. CheckNineEight (talk) 11:49, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: Your example seems to have sucked up the post's indentation formatting as well. The actual code should be:

{{flatlist| * {{chem2|CH3CH2OH}} * {{chem2|PhCH3}} }}

Bazza 7 (talk) 11:34, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you're right! I should have used the source editor, not the "reply" button. No doubt the OP could work out what to do. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:39, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Ideas for contributing on mobile

Hey everyone, I’ve been contributing to Wikipedia quite a bit recently and I normally use my laptop or desktop. I just wanted to ask if anyone has any ‘favourite’ or recommended contributing tasks that can be done on mobile?

Maybe simple things that are quick and easy to do on the go? I couldn’t seem to find any pages about this so please let me know if I’ve missed them! SnowyRiver28 (talk) 05:02, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, SnowyRiver28. I have written an essay that you may find useful, User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing. Cullen328 (talk) 05:18, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Make sure you install User:Plantaest/TwinkleMobile, makes it easy to contribute with any sort of patrolling. Nil🥝 05:27, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Request for Assistance with IP Block and Name Change on Wikipedia

I’m reaching out for your kind guidance on a persistent issue that’s prevented me from contributing to Wikipedia for far too long. For a while now, my IP address was blocked, which has completely barred me from editing—including a simple request to correct the spelling of my name on my user page or any related article. I’ve tried everything I can think of, but without access, I’m at a loss. This block came as a complete surprise, as I have no recollection of any violations on my part, and I’ve been unable to find details about what led to it. Could you please assist me in appealing this block? I’d greatly appreciate any steps I can take to resolve it, along with an explanation of the original violation (if possible), so I can understand and ensure it doesn’t happen again. My goal is simply to maintain accurate information about myself and continue enjoying the Wikipedia community. Thank you sincerely for your time and expertise—your help means the world to someone eager to get back involved. Rabka49 (talk) 13:32, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Which IP do you wish to have unblocked? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:38, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

User reverts talk page comments for no reason

I wanted to start an RFC today when I've noticed there's a user patrolling the page Talk:Matt Walsh (political commentator) for the last couple of years and reverting talk page comments and edit requests, sometimes without giving any reason for it. Is this allowed? It seems really strange. Here are the reverts that I've noticed:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. <---they even reverted my RFC twice ...2A00:FBC:EE1F:2437:51C:3C72:D59:1BD6 (talk) 14:50, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

It looks to me like they're just reverting obvious trolls per WP:DENY. Correct me if I'm wrong, but "Far-right" seems to be well-sourced and has consensus. Fractal-Dreamz ✯ 15:19, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hmm no, I don't think you understand what an WP:RFC is, but someone starting such a thing is generally not considered trolling 2A00:FBC:EE1F:2437:15BC:C394:A8C:4D8F (talk) 15:25, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I was referring to diffs 1-9, especially 2's "This is 75% lies I have real information about what Matt Walsh really is" [sic]. If you don't view that as being not here, I have to say I disagree. Fractal-Dreamz ✯ 15:30, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I was the editor who responded to their request, and so in case they come back to this thread from a different IP, I'd just like to tell them I've written them a message on their talk page. I think it is quite sad that this happened, and I hope this does not bite them out of trying to contribute (constructively next time, please) to this wonderful project. Slomo666 (talk) 17:05, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Just btw: the IP's requested edit ended up being done anyways. Slomo666 (talk) 17:13, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

The article is subject to two distinct sets of editing restrictions, each of which include "refrain from gaming the system.". "RFC" is not a magic free pass to bypass that.

Your edit summary referring to another editor as as "some weirdos" [SIC] is also unacceptable.

You may be blocked from editing if you persist in such behaviour. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:57, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Submission declined for album, need guidance or a volunteer alt reviewer

Sorry for wasting bandwidth, but I'm new to the discussion arena at Wikipedia.

A charity album, Draft:The Flood: Music for MANNA, was declined for supposedly insufficient media coverage.

1. I think this assessment was incorrect. The album received an entire segment on regional public radio discussing, four songs from the album placed on a television documentary, and there were entire web articles where the album was the focus. Perhaps someone can point to a quantitative rulebook on what constitutes sufficient coverage.
2. Given that the rules appear subjective, I'd like to recruit a new review volunteer to reassess the draft and approve it.
3. I would gladly take input on specific changes concerning how the draft was composed than makes the significant coverage more appeatent to reviewers. Guyshomenet (talk) 15:44, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello. First, you're going to need to disclose your connection to the album or its makers(I see that you claim you personally created and hold the copyright to the album cover). Please see WP:PAID and WP:COI.

It's not the reviewer that was the problem- nor was the reason "insufficient media coverage". You have not shown that the album meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable album. Most of your sources seem to be interviews with the food bank or those that produced the album, which are not independent sources. 331dot (talk) 15:48, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

OP was advised about COI, and then claimed both to be the album's producer, and that "there is no conflict of interest". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:48, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hmmm. That may be where I and/or the reviewer got confused.

I'm the [unpaid] producer of thIS charity album. When the media responded to PR outreach, they occasionally declined to interview the songwriters, preferring to tap me as a "one and done" interview point. But as with WNCW, regional NPR network, they interviewed more that just me.

One point #2, I'm a bit confused. When the media wanted to learn more about the album and the charity it severed, why would those outlets interviewing the album's producer and the charity in quest be non-independent? The media took the initiative and defined who they wanted to talk to.

Since I'm unpaid (my labor was an in-kind contribution), WP:PAID is not applicable.

Likewise, WP:COI is not applicable since I gain nothing in the process.

Perhaps one point of clairy on those two bits: The project's website will go away in a year. I need to give the project the recognition it and the artist deserve for responding the the Helene disaster and a permeate home reference point. Given the WNCW radio interview, the WXII documentary, and the other indie media outlets, I think the page warrants publication. Guyshomenet (talk) 17:48, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

In other words....you want to promote the album. Wikipedia is not intended as a form of recognition(quite the opposite). We're here to summarize what independent sources choose to say about a topic like a notable album. We're not here just to tell the world about good works. That's precisely what social media is for. 331dot (talk) 17:57, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

You asked for a "second opinion" here before, and one was given. You're not going to get a different answer by asking repeatedly. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:45, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Because I'm new to the Teahouse, I lost many responses and the ability to reply in archives, hence my apology up-front for wasting bandwidth. Guyshomenet (talk) 17:38, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Conflict of interest is not about personal gain. You absolutely have a conflict of interest that you must formally disclose. 331dot (talk) 17:52, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Guyshomenet. I notice that you emphasised "charity", which suggests that you thought that that would make a difference. It doesn't. Worthiness (or unworthiness) doesn't feature anywhere in the determination whether or not a subject is notable; and charities can be written about promotionally just as much as commercial subjects. ColinFine (talk) 14:49, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Requesting peer feedback

I work less in Film articles hence less well versed. After help from couple of copy editors I took my well sourced new article Draft:My Choice (2015 film) to main space. Another user (who seem to work on FA level articles) transferred back the article to draft space saying there is still scope to improve language and grammar. That is okay. I can request c/e help from other users.

The second point they felt/ noted 'promotional/ad' in their edit summary. (Certainly I do not have conflict of interest - women's rights articles are my usual area of interest). Besides during draft development phase I covered criticism thoroughly before covering any appreciative reception. Though I asked the user which specific sentences/ promotional they find, I didn't get reply and I respect their prerogative.

On my own I could think of two sentences.

1)".. The short film, My Choice, gathered twelve million views on YouTube as of 2024. .."

Figures as such are taken note of by academic resource.

2)".. The short film, though lacking in traditional dialogue or plot, builds a powerful narrative through striking visuals and music. .."

This is also academically sourced and I tried to change as below

".. According to Mallika Khanna, notwithstanding its absence of story and dialogue, the film builds a powerful narrative through striking imagery and a sonic atmosphere. .."

This sentence has come first to inform users that film does not have usual dialogues and plot structures, still the film creates certain impact in certain way. Whether word "powerful" is seeming like promotional? replacing with any other adjective may keep having same effect and we remove the adjective it may not give complete picture.

Requesting peer feedback if above sentences or any other sentences of the article Draft:My Choice (2015 film) are giving feeling of being promotional. So it will be helpful for copy editors to do needful.

(am I supposed to ping to the user who took the article to draft namespace or not disturbing them will be better?) (Brief check of user page didn't indicate pronoun preference so used 'they' meaning whichever preferred pronoun of the user/ whichever applicable) Thanks Bookku (talk) 15:54, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Bookku. "builds a powerful narrative" is an evaluation, which should never appear in Wikipedia's voice. ColinFine (talk) 14:51, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@ColinFine, Many thanks, Yes you are right, that is why, now I have updated the sentence by attributing to the source author, 'Mallika Khanna'. Besides if I replace words 'builds powerful' with just 'conveys it's message' the sentence will be something like following:

".. According to Mallika Khanna, notwithstanding its absence of story and dialogue, the film conveys it's message through striking imagery and a sonic atmosphere. .."

Whether the above would be better or any other suggestions? Bookku (talk) 15:53, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

References

Bookku (talk) 15:54, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Draft:DrM, Dr. Mueller AG – tagged for G11 (advertising)

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.

---

Hi everyone! My draft about Draft:DrM, Dr. Mueller AG was recently tagged for speedy deletion under G11.

I tried to keep it neutral and based only on independent, reliable sources, and I’ve disclosed my connection to the company on my user page.

I’d really appreciate some guidance on how to adjust the tone or structure so it meets Wikipedia’s neutrality and notability requirements.

Could someone please help me restore the deleted draft or point me in the right direction to improve it?

Thanks so much for your time and help! Mcmrgz (talk) 15:58, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, your draft will need to pass the criteria at WP:NCORP and please note that company listings, profiles, patents and other primary sources are not helpful. Theroadislong (talk) 16:26, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Also asked, and answered, at AfC help desk. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:25, 16 October 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.

First Wikipedia page

I would like to write a page about a person that has influenced a small town and directly saved a couple of people lives. Who started as a prostitute child given up for adoption and had quite a few adventures through out his life. I don't have any experience or knowledge of what to do. Any help would be appreciated. UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 1 (talk) 16:00, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 1 Wikipedia has a threshold for inclusion called "notability", which is really a test: has enough been written about this person in independent, reliable sources for us to write a good article about them?

To start, you'll have to meet WP:ANYBIO criteria to prove the subject is notable. Sob stories don't make them more notable for the encyclopedia. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 16:18, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 1, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.

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 Wikipedia 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. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 14:53, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Sandbox edit reversion

Why don't I get notifications when my edits to the sandbox are reverted unlike other pages? Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 16:01, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I think it's because the bot that reverted yours and other editors' edits after yours has manually reverted those edits. Everytime when someone manually reverts an edit of mine, I never get notified for it for some reason. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 16:07, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion: Draft:Progressbar95

Hello. I want to request speedy deletion to this article titled Draft:Progressbar95.

There is already a Draft article titled Draft:Progressbar95 (video game), so what is the best category for speedy deletion? StevieStandardNo1 (talk) 17:08, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I do not think the draft is eligible for speedy deletion. Why do you want it to be deleted? jlwoodwa (talk) 18:26, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

It's not eligible for speedy deletion. I've left a note on the latter draft mentioning the former (which was rejected in April 2025). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:27, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I am trying to make a wiki-table for the first time

I think I formatted it correctly, but it does not come out right. Can someone more experienced take a look here: Chronic kidney disease. Many thanks, Apoie ApoieRacional (talk) 17:26, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I have undone your attempt, which was irredeemable.

Please see Help:Table. I suggest you start by making small (3x4, say) tables in your sandbox, until you are familiar with how they work in this medium.

If you're starting from a CSV, you can use the converter here: https://tableconvert.com/csv-to-mediawiki Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:42, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

It seems that instead of following my advice, you just went ahead and added another version of your table to the article; making a horrible mess, which another editor has now had to undo.

Please do not do that again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:48, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Natureligion

Just looking for help to add Natureligion, I had ChatGPT help but it got rejected. As I read the instructions, Natureligion is a book and I am the author for full transparency? Any help or direction would be appreciated.. Thank you.. Keenan157 (talk) 17:29, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

The best help and direction I can give you is to cease your efforts to promote your book. Wikipedia articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the subject. A Wikipedia article about a book must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable book. This is not easily accomplished by someone with a conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 17:33, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Keenan157, a Google Books search shows no results for a book with that title. A book that is eligible for a Wikipedia article will have been the subject of several in depth book reviews published by reliable sources. ChatGPT and other AI programs are utterly incapable of writing acceptable Wikipedia articles, although they can assist skilled human editors who already understand the Wikipedia requirements and have selected an acceptable topic. Self-promotion is not permitted on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 17:55, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Keenan157, I took a look at the "deleted" draft. Really, "draft" too needs its scare quotes. Why? I'll take the section titled "Reception" as an example. This read (and I quote it complete and verbatim): Summarize third-party coverage (reviews, analysis) when available; avoid self-published sources. There was no summary of third-party coverage. With or without the "help" of ChatGPT, you hadn't bothered to make an attempt to follow the recipe for a draft; you instead pretended that the recipe was a draft. -- Hoary (talk) 22:20, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Question(s) on uploading a fair use image

I am trying to upload a fair use image for Esther Swirk Brown. I'm using the Wikipedia:File upload wizard, using the recent FA Jozo Tomasevich as a template. In that it mentions how the quality of the image was reduced in order to comply with minimal use guidelines. Do I have to do that to do that to comply and what tool should I use to do that? Also, is there any guide to specifically uploading a fair use image of a historical person, all the guides I could find were pretty non-specific. 1brianm7 (talk) 18:20, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

You don't need to reduce the resolution yourself; a bot will come along and reduce it for you. jlwoodwa (talk) 18:28, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! 1brianm7 (talk) 18:29, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

So I uploaded the file but I don't know if it worked, I can see the file but there is no image attached. I tabbed out and when I came back there was an error message. It said it could take 1-2 minutes, but its been 10. Is this usual? (Link to file) 1brianm7 (talk) 18:54, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

1brianm7, the relevant policy language regarding use of non-free images of people who have died can be found at WP:NFCI, specifically point #10. Cullen328 (talk) 19:04, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I checked that, it meets that, and I think I filled out all the rationale correctly. The issue I have now is that when looking at the file page, I see an error where the image would be. I don't know if this is normal or because it failed to upload or something like that. 1brianm7 (talk) 19:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@1brianm7: When I go to the file page, I see the image, so I assume that you uploaded it correctly. You might try clearing your cache and see if that helps. If you add it to the infobox of Esther Swirk Brown, you should be able to see it there. Deor (talk) 22:53, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I do not see an image, and when I click on where the image should be, I get the text "File not found: /v1/AUTH_mw/wikipedia-en-local-public.c4/c/c4/Esther_Swirk_Brown.jpg". jlwoodwa (talk) 23:04, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@1brianm7: I added the image to the article; do you see it there? Deor (talk) 23:08, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@Deor I do not see it in the article. I see a white box and then with the placeholder image of a hill, sky, and cloud in it. 1brianm7 (talk) 01:26, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Amusingly, I am able to see it when I turn on a VPN. What hilarity that I uploaded an image, some error occurred, and I end up as one the users who cannot see the image. 1brianm7 (talk) 02:12, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

It's probably this image. Versions111 (talk) 23:28, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I have filed a bug report for this: phab:T407589. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:57, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I've added what I was doing to the bug report, hopefully it helps. 1brianm7 (talk) 01:34, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

I re-uploaded the same image (that is, the image from the stated source) using the "Upload a new version of this file". That seems to have resolved the issue. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:43, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

connected contributor or COI

 Courtesy link: Draft:Videojet Technologies

Hi. I'm a new editor. I am attempting to make the required edits to confirm my account so I can help get my company's new article page reviewed and published. I edited another page about a technology that my company and many other companies sell. My edit clarified a description of the technology. Am I a connected contributor? Should I indicate a conflict of interest? I already initiated a discussion on the edited article's talk page, asking if I should add "connected contributor" to the talk page. DL548 (talk) 21:06, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for asking. Yes, you are what we call a paid editor because you are editing about your employer; even if your employer doesn't specifically ask you to edit Wikipedia, your salary is sufficient to trigger this Terms of Use requirement. Please see WP:PAID for more information and instructions. 331dot (talk) 21:13, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

You do not need to "make the required edits to confirm [your] account" to submit a draft for review. You are not a connected contributor if you edit an article about the industry, and neither mention your company nor cite its (or its employees') publications. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:34, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @DL548, and welcome to the Teahouse.

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 Wikipedia 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. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia.

When you do continue with this draft, remember that almost nothing that you know and almost nothing that your employer says, has any place in an article about them.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what several people wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, and little else.

If you write so much as a single word before first locating several sources which meet all the requirements in WP:42, you will be writing the article backwards, and probably wasting your time. ColinFine (talk) 15:29, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Article

 Courtesy link: Draft:Heis

i want to upload an article about an artist can someone help me Heispabio (talk) 22:29, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Do you happen to be the artist you are trying to write about? – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 23:03, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

yah i am , why Heispabio (talk) 23:10, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@Heispabio Typically we discourage users from creating articles that they have a conflict of interest in. – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 23:12, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

can you help me write one 197.250.134.118 (talk) 23:14, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the article you're trying to create doesn't seem to match the WP:NOTABILITY criteria. However, you're welcome to create other articles if you'd like. If you wish to do so, I'd suggest you first take a look at some tutorial articles such as Help:Getting started. Feel free to ask if you need anything else! Wikieditor662 (talk) 02:09, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, how did you know they were talking about themselves? That was a very good guess. Wikieditor662 (talk) 00:38, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Look at the username and look at the article draft they created. – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 00:44, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Oh... Yeah, that makes a lot of sense now. Wikieditor662 (talk) 02:05, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Please Look At My Draft

Draft:Rowsby Woof (Watership Down).

I worked 3+ days on it, worked VERRRRY hard on it, and really would be happy if it would be accepted!!!! ColinCorgi (talk) 00:27, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey, congrats on what you've been working on so far!

I don't see any sources in the article, have you taken a look at WP:Reliable Sources? I would also consider taking a look at Wikipedia:GLAM/Beginner's guide to Wikipedia. Thanks for your contributions, and let us know if you need anything else! Best of luck with the article.

Wikieditor662 (talk) 00:37, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

I am NOT a beginner, btw! I worked very hard and literally just read the book and typed. It would mean a lot to me if you could accept it, and I would want to tell you that I have had multiple Wikipedia accounts and I have forgotten my password and can't login back into them, so I created new ones. Thanks so much, and it would mean a lot to me if you accept it (^///^) ColinCorgi (talk) 00:47, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

My bad for assuming you were a beginner! If you got it from the book, that would appear to be a reliable source, but you would still need to cite it in the article. Also, in general it's also good to use more than one source.

It also appears that on the article page it was declined; I would suggest taking advantage of the suggestions they gave you.

It might not necessarily mean you can't write the article, it would just mean you'd have to work on it more if you wanted a chance for it to be published. But if you want to publish it you'd probably first need to address the concern the reviewer gave to you of "No mention of this character in Watership Down." Thanks again and let us know if you need anything else! Wikieditor662 (talk) 02:03, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @ColinCorgi. Please remember that everything written in a Wikipedia article needs to be verified to a reliable, published source. Your draft has no sources at all, so can't be accepted in it's current state, sorry. qcne (talk) 10:48, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Submission was reviewed and declined. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:23, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @ColinCorgi, and welcome to the Teahouse.

An article should be based on what independent sources have said about a subject. It is relatively rare for a character from a book to meet the criteria for notability; but it would certainly require you to find some places where people unconnected with Adams have written at some length about the character, in reliable publications. ColinFine (talk) 15:33, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Essay suggestions

Hey everyone, I recently wrote the essay called Wikipedia:Once and for all. Any advice on it would be appreciated. Thanks! Wikieditor662 (talk) 00:33, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

You'd be better off asking at some "village pump", I think. But meanwhile: However, if the two users were debating whether Donald Trump should be called a felon in his first sentence, then getting a third opinion would clearly not suffice in most cases. Uh, in most cases of a disagreement over whether the first sentence of the main article on Trump should call him a felon? This looks to me like an attempt to posit most cases of a single case ... a puzzling notion. -- Hoary (talk) 01:32, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary Thanks for your help! Strangely, though, for some reason, I can't press "reply" to your comment because the up arrow is blocking it. I changed the essay based on your suggestion though. Wikieditor662 (talk) 01:56, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Wikieditor662, I found those arrows very annoying, and finally decided to remove them from my view of the page, without affecting anyone else. You can do the same; just edit your common.css file, and add this line:

#skip-to-top-button {display: none;}

and that will remove the up arrow. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 06:59, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, but when I pressed common.css it said it does not have a page, do I need to create one? Wikieditor662 (talk) 15:12, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Brine spreading in Ohio

Can someone move Brine spreading in Ohio to Draft space. I would myself, but don't know how. Thanks --Lexiconaut (talk) 02:44, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Done. Please see Draft:Brine spreading in Ohio. Hoary (talk) 04:39, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Lexiconaut That seems like a very niche topic, which isn't in itself a bad thing. However, you might like to incorporate some of your more general text and references into road salt, which is currently not very comprehensive. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:51, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Music links as source

Is it possible to use Apple Music or spotify as source if adding a soundtrack let's say on Draft:It's Okay to Not Be Okay (Philippine TV series) since the soundtrack is available on all music streaming platforms? There are no news articles about this and the series is almost going to end so there might be no chance of a news article announcing the soundtracks. 139.135.78.227 (talk) 06:54, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Streaming platforms aren't acceptable sources, full stop. (Either they've licenced the work for play or are pirating it; neither case makes the source any good.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 06:58, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Edit on Transportation for the Ansedonia Wikipedia Page

Hello, I am a new editor, and I was wondering how I could make the Ansedonia Wikipedia Article better. Therefore, I started writing a new heading, about Transport included for the fraction of Ansedonia. This is my draft. I was wondering if you could give me any suggestions or tips on how to make it better!

Considering the transportation options available in Ansedonia, there is a notable lack of quality in the connections between nearby towns. There are two main modes of transport: a bus that works only during the summer season, which brings as far as Orbetello, and then, nearby, there are two main train stations:

The Capalbio railway station has fixed trains, passing every day or every week at a specific time. The trains bring to the nearby towns all around Capalbio and Orbetello. There are even trains that go towards the north: the one going to Pisa, or to the south, the one going to Rome. These are the fixed trains, but the possibility of exceptional trains is not excluded. The Chiarone railway station was the southernmost railway station in Tuscany, before the border with Lazio. The Railway station operated on the Tyrrhenian railways, connecting cities from Pisa in the north to Rome in the South. The Chiarone railway station was closed in 1999, and was substituted by a bus that operated from the center of the city to Capalbio scalo (the nearest railway station), Orbetello (the nearest big city), or Civitavecchia (the nearest port with international ferries). The bus line was discontinued in 2021, and now Chiarone is poorly connected.

-- Asromafan2025 (talk) 09:08, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

• Use this; with references

Considering the transportation options available in Ansedonia, the area is characterized by relatively limited connections with nearby towns. Public transport is primarily seasonal, with only a summer bus service operating to Orbetello. Rail transport is available through two nearby stations:

The Capalbio railway station provides regular train services on a fixed schedule, with daily or weekly departures to surrounding towns, including Capalbio and Orbetello. The station is located on the Tyrrhenian railway line and offers connections both northward, towards Pisa, and southward, towards Rome. While most services follow a regular timetable, additional trains may operate during periods of increased demand.

The Chiarone railway station, formerly the southernmost station in Tuscany before the border with Lazio, also lay on the Tyrrhenian line, providing connections between Pisa and Rome. The station was closed in 1999 and replaced by a bus service linking the area to Capalbio Scalo, Orbetello, and Civitavecchia. The bus service was discontinued in 2021, resulting in reduced public transport links for Chiarone and the surrounding areas.

== References ==

"Contratto di servizio per il trasporto pubblico ferroviario di interesse regionale e locale (Toscana)". Regione Toscana (in Italian). Regione Toscana. 30 December 2009. Retrieved 17 October 2025.

"Stazione di Chiarone - scheda archivio". Archivio Fondazione FS Italiane (in Italian). Fondazione FS Italiane. Retrieved 17 October 2025.

"Bollettino ufficiale delle Ferrovie dello Stato (archivio)" (PDF). Trenidicarta / FS archives (in Italian). Retrieved 17 October 2025.

"12O ANDATA Feriale CAPALBIO-ORBETELLO (orari)" (PDF). Autolinee/route timetable (PDF) (in Italian). Retrieved 17 October 2025.

"Come arrivare a FS Chiarone - orari e fermate". Moovit (in Italian). Moovit Inc. Retrieved 17 October 2025.

Versions111 (talk) 15:12, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Found some sources that could help:

Versions111 (talk) 14:56, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Asromafan2025 Our article on Ansedonia is, at present, very weak so it is well worth your working on it. The issue with your draft and the version with wikilinks created by User:Versions111 is that neither has citations to sources which would allow a reader to verify what you have written. If you can back up your writing with reliable sources for this or any other aspect of relevance to the town, please be bold and make the additions to the article. Note that you should not make evaluative statements like the area is characterized by relatively limited connections unless you can quote a source which explicitly says that: Wikipedia does not allow original research. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:44, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Music producer's page review request

is anyone available for help me....? Kindly, review my one of the most favorite Artist's page. thanks Draft:Ariyan Mehedi. Bollywoodboss1 (talk) 12:11, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

It looks like it's been reviewed as you posted your message, @Bollywoodboss1. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 12:18, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Article was reviewed and declined; The referencing needs more work. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:19, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

How to post a GoogleMap to a wiki-page

I made a map using Google tools https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1CpmsteHtfTl6z2J6M1wAys-16S9RSE8&usp=sharing. I see, that it should be possible to post a Google map to a wikipage, but it is not working for me. Can someone more experiences add this map to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nuclear_submarine&section=7&veaction=editsource  ? ApoieRacional (talk) 12:12, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

No, that is not possible. Nor, if it were possible, would it be appropriate to add that map to Wikipedia.

If you can clearly explain what you are trying to show with the map, someone may be able to assist you in doing so properly. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:51, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Unprotected articles

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.

---

There are many unprotected Wikipedia articles which I thought anybody could edit and sentences with reliable sources could be added if the sentences are paraphrased appropriately. Now, an editor, ZDRX is WP: WIKIHOUNDING me and reverting my extended confirmed protected (ECP) edit requests even if it is posted on the Talk page of the article - please see my Talk page. What can I do about this? I ask because I am distressed by this.-Baangla (talk) 13:31, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

What are the articles restricted this way?-Baangla (talk) 13:46, 17 October 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.

Bare URL and permanently dead link

I am currently working on the backlog at Category:All articles with bare URLs for citations, and some articles I encounter in that category have references that are tagged both with "Bare URL" and "Permanent dead link". Other articles have bare references that are tagged with "Permanent dead link", but not "Bare URL". Does this mean that if a bare reference is permanently dead, I should remove the Bare URL tag? Thank you in advance. Dbrusilo (talk) 14:25, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Question about editing and talk pages for contentious topics

I recently got a notice about contentious topics, especially edits related to South Asia. I understand that some topics like caste or political organizations fall under stricter rules.

I just want to understand that am I allowed to edit or participate in talk page discussions about organizations within India, such as the RSS or similar groups, even if I don't yet meet the 500 edits and 30-day requirements? Or are those also restricted under the “social groups or political parties” rules?

Thank you for your help!! Dreamer765 (talk) 14:57, 17 October 2025 (UTC)