Revision as of 08:09, 26 November 2015 view sourceGronk Oz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users41,596 editsm →Is it okay to edit stubbed articles not marked as such?: Finger trouble← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 21:25, 11 January 2025 view source Iljhgtn (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users39,411 edits →Whites and blues and purples: ReplyTag: Reply | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Community Q&A hub for new editors}} | |||
{{pp-sock|small=yes}} | |||
{{skip to top and bottom}} | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
|archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | |archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | ||
|maxarchivesize = |
|maxarchivesize = 400K | ||
|counter = |
|counter = 1246 | ||
|minthreadsleft = |
|minthreadsleft = 15 | ||
|minthreadstoarchive = |
|minthreadstoarchive = 25 | ||
|algo = old( |
|algo = old(48h) | ||
|archive = Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Questions/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Questions/Archive %(counter)d | ||
}} | |||
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn | |||
|target=Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Questions/Archive Index | |||
|mask=Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Questions/Archive <#> | |||
|leading_zeros=0 | |||
|indexhere=no | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{clear}} | |||
{{TH question page}} | |||
{{Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Header}} | |||
<!-- Questions go here. Please post new questions at the BOTTOM of the page. --> | |||
==Permission from the copy right owner== | |||
I need to post a software image file from the software owner website on a wikipedia (the article is ]). I intend to ask the software owner the permission to post the screenshot on wikipedia. How should the licence agreement with the software owner I need to send to Wikimedia's copyright service look like? ] (]) 08:08, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Wikitext == | |||
==Is it okay to edit stubbed articles not marked as such?== | |||
I recently found the page for ] and noticed it's not marked as a stub article, despite not possessing even a Table of Contents. Might it be okay to add more possible information to the article? | |||
I am trying to make a userbox and let users put It in their user page. But it will go to wikitext instead of plain text. How to make wikitext go to plain text? and I can't change it to visual because I am editing a ] ] ] 02:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
(This is all kinda confusing...) | |||
:@] I'm not really sure what you mean, but ] has instructions for creating new userboxes. <span style="white-space:nowrap"><span style="font-family:monospace">'''<nowiki>''']<nowiki>]]'''</nowiki>'''</span> (] • ])</span> 03:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:If I understood correct: To display wikitext as plain text in a userbox, use the <nowiki> tags around the code. For example: <nowiki>{{YourUserboxCode}}</nowiki > ] (]) 07:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Thank you ] ] 22:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::@] ] is nice and generates something like {{tl|Example}} for example or use ] for the code/outpout: {{markup| | |||
<nowiki>{{Example}}</nowiki>|{{Example}}}}<!-- Template:Mra --> ~ 🦝 ] (he/him • ]) 18:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:ooh! Thank you I will put that. ;) ] ] 22:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
'']'' '''] ]''' 07:53, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Why are the icons so weird == | |||
:Absolutely! That is what we're here for, {{U|Zexcoiler Kingbolt}} - to improve the articles and build a better encyclopedia. So if you can improve an article - anything from fixing a spelling mistake to adding good references to writing the bulk of the content, then ] and do it.--] (]) 08:08, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I was looking through Misplaced Pages and special articles and noticed the icons are in frutiger aero style, why so? | |||
==Differences== | |||
I mean, you could just ask wikipedians to volunter to redesign the icons or hire a graphic designer ] (]) 22:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
All the latest edits are showing: | |||
:I don't know why, {{U|IsaqueCar}}. I for one only ask fellow volunteers for help when I'm stuck, or when I'm acutely aware of my ignorance. (Thus I've recently asked for help with numismatics, of which I'm ignorant, and, indirectly, with the Czech language, which I can't read.) Hiring professionals of course costs money. Is the alleged weirdness likely to impair understanding of encyclopedic content? -- ] (]) 01:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
|| || in green, blue and red. ] (]) 05:13, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hello, @]. Until I searched and found ] I hadn't the slightest idea what you were talking about. I still have no idea which icons you mean. | |||
==May I use translated material in an article?== | |||
:If you are talking about part of the user interface, then be aware that most Misplaced Pages editors (who are generally the people that hang out at this page) don't have any involvement in this, and it's better to bring this up at ]. If you're talking about something within an article or series of articles, then the talk page of those articles, or of a relevant ], is the best place to bring the matter up. ] (]) 15:53, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I am writing a new article about a Yiddish singer. The best source is a multi-page article in Yiddish, published in 1937, available online through the Internet Archive in collaboration with the Yiddish Book Center. May I translate directly, & then cite the source? Or cite the source first, & follow with the translation in quotes or italics? Thanks for answering my very first Teahouse question;it is a thrill to collaborate with my new invisible friends. ] (]) 03:55, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::@]: I looked for ], which was more enlightening. | |||
:Welcome to the Teahouse, {{U|Nadnie}}. You can cite a reliable source in any language, and should include a link to the online archive. If you are reasonably fluent in both English and Yiddish, you can include a few translated sentences. Adding a complete translation of the entire article here on Misplaced Pages would be considered a copyright violation, and should be avoided. ] ] 04:08, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::@]: Why not so? Design is a subjective thing: as long as the icons are visible and clear in meaning, then there's not really a problem, is there? ] (]) 15:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::it just feels weird to have such old looking icons on a modern website ] (]) 17:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::I mean, it is very subjective. I exclusively use Monobook because I like the older look of it. Every design can have wildly differing opinions depending on who you ask. ] (]) 20:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Icons like in those info boxes "this article contains information..." | |||
::Some icons of wikiprojects will show you what i mean ] (]) 16:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Also special articles normaly have lots of notices so it's also a good example ] (]) 17:20, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::: points out that Misplaced Pages, even with its new look, is trying to make subtle interface changes at most. I personally agree with this approach. Additionally, I feel that older-looking websites have more of an air of reliability. ] <small>(]) | :) | he/him | </small> 05:49, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== |
== Translation and references issue == | ||
] | |||
Do I need to go through the regular deletion process if I want to turn an article into a redirect? Since it is a redirect it's not technically a deletion and it isn't a merge either so I'm not sure how to proceed. ] (]) 02:26, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
This artist was marked as missing in the ] and so I decided to translate the Norwegian article. I was, however, not allowed to do so, so I've saved my suggestion at the link mentioned first in this post. | |||
:{{u|Opencooper}}, welcome. No need to delete. Are you sure about doing this? What is the page name? You should put the redirect in a category or more (up to seven) also. | |||
Secondly: The references I've added are not recognised as such. I'd be grateful for any pointers as to why. Thank you! :) ] (]) 13:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:A redirect looks like this: | |||
:<nowiki>#REDIRECT ]</nowiki> | |||
:For References, if using double curly brackets, use "reflist", not "references". I fixed it ] (]) 14:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:{{tl|R from historical name}} (or an appropriate category) | |||
::Thanks! ] (]) 16:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:{{tl|R from verb}} | |||
:Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse. | |||
:When you say you're "not allowed to do so", I'm guessing that you tried to use the ]? This is only available for editors who have at least 500 edits (which you have not, even though your account is nearly ten years old). This is because so many newer editors do not understand English Misplaced Pages's requirements on sourcing and ], and that many other Misplaced Pages's have less stringent requirements. | |||
:In the case of your draft, you have three references for one single claim in the article, and no references for anything else. This is not adequate sourcing for an article in English Misplaced Pages, which should be a summary of what people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable places. (As far as I can make out, few if any of the sources in the original ] meet the criteria of ]). | |||
:Unless the original is well-sourced to approaching the standard required of new articles in English Misplaced Pages, I believe that the best approach to translating is to treat it like a new article with perhaps some input from the original, rather than relying on translating the content . ] (]) 16:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Thank you, Colin. The sources I include are mainstream (albeit local/regional) newspapers, and the offical website (management) for the artist. There is not much else to reference than the explanation of who she is and her most known performance. ] (]) 17:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Hello, @]. Regional newspapers are often ], but the source needs to be ] and have ] of her too. The sources I looked at only had a line or two about her (generally in that one role). And anything from her official website is not independent, and cannot contribute towards establishing notability. | |||
:::If you cannot find sources to establish that she meets either ] or ], then she does not meet English Misplaced Pages's criteria for ], and no article is possible. ] (]) 17:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Ok, I'm fine with that, but admittedly a bit annoyed since she was on the "red list" and all I did was trying to make her blue. Should there not be a curation of that list before we are encouraged to red-to-blue fix it? Or is deciding that someone isn't notable a part of the fixing process? If so, how does one go about to let others know that the best is to not publish the article? Simply edit the source of the list and delete from there? ] (]) 17:22, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
{{od}} | |||
:Be sure to put the word redirect in ALL CAPS; put it on the 1st line; put the R category(s) on the 3rd line and so forth. | |||
{{Ping|Birdesigns}} I can understand you frustraton, but please remember that the top of that page has a panel including the words: | |||
:Good luck. Cheers! <code>{{u|]}} {]}</code> 02:51, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{Blockquote|Please note ... that the red links on this list '''may well not be suitable''' as the basis for an article. All new articles '''must satisfy Misplaced Pages's ]''' with ] ] sources.}} | |||
::There's no need to go through the deletion process, see ]. ] (]) 02:53, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:{{ping|Checkingfax}} I appreciate the answer. Thank you for the tips about creating redirects as well. The article in question is ], a '']'' article that was later turned into a book, '']''. The issue with the former is that it is redundant with the latter article which contains much more information and is cited, so a merge isn't needed. ] (]) 03:14, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
(emphasis in original). <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 16:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Because the article has 32{{nbsp}}authors over a 10-year period, and because the article is about the magazine article and not about the book, I don't think a straight away deletion (redirect) is in order. IMHO, it should go through the standard ''']''' process. Once merged, then create the redirect. The Merge templates will give other editors a chance to chime in. The redirect category will be: R from merge. Cheers! <code>{{u|]}} {]}</code> 05:21, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::That sounds like a reasonable approach. Thank you for looking into it and providing your advice. ] (]) 07:04, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks, Andy – appreciate the pointer. :) So, do I simply ignore those on the list which I reckon aren't meeting the requirements, and let others decide whether or not to delete them? Is there somewhere I can write a small note on my thoughts on the person's notability? ] (]) 17:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==expanding a stub article== | |||
::A number of other shows are mentioned, but without citations/sources/proofs. Adding sources to them might make the article satisfy notability and hence inclusion. ] (]) 12:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Hello everyone! | |||
== Notability == | |||
Question - I would like to expand/replace an article that has been marked as a stub. Should I create the article in my sandbox first (so that I could work on it before publishing it) and then copy/paste it in place of the stub article, or is there another way? | |||
Is he notable ] ? ] (]) 16:22, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Thanks a lot!! | |||
:Yes, ] appears to meet Misplaced Pages's notability guidelines based on his roles in notable films and coverage in independent sources. ] (]) 16:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 02:10, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::What about sources doesn’t meet ] ] (]) 16:33, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Thank you for asking, IP. I looked in all of the sources that are currently referenced. Here they are, with my comments: | |||
:{{u|Kamengrossi}}, welcome. I disagree with sandbox editing because then you have to marry your sandbox to the existing article assuming there are subsequent edits by other editors which there invariably are. There are also copyright attribution issues. Micro editing in the actual article is a better way to go. By editing in the article itself the copyright trail is clean. If you want to edit the article for a period of time and don't want edit conflicts, use the {{tlx|in use}} template. Click on the blue link here so you can read the variables so you can set a custom timer, your time in, and a message. Cheers! <code>{{u|]}} {]}</code> 02:58, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
*"": a mere interview. (Even its title doesn't make sense to me, though perhaps "with an entertainer" was intended to mean "as an actor". Note that I'm linking to a ] scrape of the page linked to in the reference.) | |||
*"": A mere interview. | |||
*"": "''X'' takes ''Y'' by storm" is a cliché of promotional junk; this piece is no exception. | |||
*"": A mere interview. | |||
*"": Based on an interview. | |||
*: In Telugu, which I cannot read. If Google Translate can be trusted, this is a rather lightweight review of one film in which Chetan Maddineni appears. It's not junk, but it says little about him. | |||
''None'' of these six sources counts toward evidence of ]. For all I know, ''other'' sources, not referenced here, show that Chetan Maddineni is notable. I haven't looked (and perhaps am hobbled by my ignorance of Telugu and Hindi). Which independent sources are you describing above, ]? -- ] (]) 00:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== How does editor classification work? == | |||
how is an editor considered either new, intermediate, advanced or mentor, and what are the requirements for such roles? ] (]) 17:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Thank so much for such a detailed reply! I'll do that! | |||
:Hello, @]. I'm not aware of any such classifications used in a formal sense. "Mentor" is a role that an editor may take on. Where have you seen these used? ] (]) 17:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 04:11, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::special articles that include info about editing "(type of edit) is suitable for intermediate editors" | |||
::"copy-editing is suitable for begginer editors" ] (]) 17:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Oh, right. I don't think those are formal, defined, terms. They're being used loosely, to give an indication of the level of experience required. ] (]) 19:03, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Not aware either, ] page doesn't specifically mention "new," "intermediate," "advanced," or "mentor" classifications. However, it outlines various user groups based on permissions, such as unregistered users, autoconfirmed users, extended confirmed users, and administrators, which represent different levels of experience and access. ] (]) 17:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::I forgot what page i saw it on ill search for it ] (]) 17:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Experience levels are recommended for various functions (For example being a Teahouse Host, at least 30 days and 500 edits). ] (]) 18:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:] uses this style. I'd describe it as based on self-assessment. In reality it's going to relate to experience and knowledge of policies, guidelines, and other relevant practices. I'd think almost all editors with fewer than 100 edits are going to be noobies, but there could be exceptions for some tasks, such as people who have used a similar wiki platform before, or people with professional writing experience. There are people with many thousands of edits and years of experience who couldn't do stuff within an 'intermediate' category, but also many people who could do things within a few weeks of learning. As mentioned above, Misplaced Pages:User access levels are formal classifications. Everything else is woolly and hand-wavy. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 19:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:The ] describes tasks similarly, although with ‘Easy’, ‘Medium’, and ‘Hard’: for when you are beginning to edit, for when you have completed some easy edits, and for when you have learned Misplaced Pages best practices, respectively. But there are no requirements for new/intermediate/advanced as said above and that too is based on self-assessment. Happy editing, ] (]) 19:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::We also have something at ], which admittedly is also informal and self-assigned, and actually is only seen in context to ]. ] (]) 12:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Needing help with contest == | |||
==Hello, I need a copy editing volunteer.== | |||
Hello, recently I saw a banner on my article that I need a copy editing done. This is my article: ''']'''. I would like to politely ask a copy edit volunteer to edit my article on grammar, structure etc. Thank you very much in advance and I appreciate any help or assistance. Sincerely, ] (]) 02:04, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I want to join the guild of copyeditors' backlog of Jan 2025 but the signup instructions are too confusing ] (]) 19:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==Regarding: Rendering process died with non zero code: 1 (Possible reason)== | |||
:Hello and welcome, {{u|IsaqueCar}}! To sign up, go to ] and click the blue “Create your article list” button in the Signing up section and save the page. That will sign you up for the drive. The Totals section below the signup explains how to use your article list. Be sure to read the ] first, and happy (copy)editing! ] (]) 19:55, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I think I might have accidently discovered the problem. | |||
== How to add a category to a page/talk page == | |||
I was creating a pdf on early civilizations and got the same error message as everyone else. | |||
Hi, | |||
After trying a few dozen times, I decided to just download each page as a single pdf and merge them later. | |||
I’d like to add a category to an article’s talk pages and cannot see the HTML in the source code. | |||
Every page worked. | |||
According to my searches as to how to do it, I should see the category source code to add a category to, but I don’t see it. Thanks for your time ] (]) 19:09, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:In the source editor which I presume you are using, you add a category by adding a link to the category at the bottom of the page. An example would be <nowiki> ]</nowiki> ] (]) 19:53, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Except one: Babylon. | |||
::Thank you for your help! That’s exactly what I expected, but when I try to edit the entire page, I don’t see any source code for the category. If I try pasting the category at the very bottom of the page, nothing appears in the preview. | |||
::Do you have any suggestions? | |||
::] (]) 20:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Hello, @]. I'm not entirely sure what you mean. | |||
:::The Wikicode <nowiki>]</nowiki> may actually go anywhere on a page: it's just convention to put it at the bottom. And you won't see anything when the page is rendered except in the list of categories at the bottom. | |||
:::If you are talking about your user page, and you mean that when you edit source you can't see any "<nowiki>]"</nowiki> statements at the bottom, that's because the categories are inserted by the templates that you have added to the page, and since it doesn't show you the expanded code of the templates, you don't see the "Category" statements. | |||
:::Does that answer your question? ] (]) 20:53, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::If not then please link the page and name the category. ] (]) 21:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::Managed it eventually! ] (]) 21:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::It worked - I was confused by it not showing up on the preview. When I published, it appeared. Thank you. ] (]) 21:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== R-Salt == | |||
When I tried to download that page I received this message: "! Package polyglossia Error: The current roman font does not contain the Syriac". | |||
This was mentioned in connection to the recent New Orleans attack, but there does not seem to be Misplaced Pages article for it. If someone in the chemistry world wants to write an article about it, please do. ] (]) 20:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I removed Babylon from my book...and it worked perfectly. | |||
1,3,5-trinitroso-1,3,5-triazine (R-Salt) is an insensitive energetic that has previously been used as an improvised explosive. ] (]) 20:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I doubt it's really as simple as a font problem...but maybe? | |||
:Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse. While you're certainly allowed to post such a request, I want to tell you that the chances of anybody acting on that request are very low. Misplaced Pages is a volunteer project, and prople work on what they choose. While it's ''possible'' that somebody will see your request and act on it, it's not very likely. | |||
] (]) 21:01, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:There is a recognised place for requesting articles, ]; but in all honesty, the take-up there is very low as well. Something that ''might'' work better is to ask at a relevant WikiProject - perhaps ]: that will at least be seen by people who have an interest in Misplaced Pages's coverage of chemistry. | |||
:Thank you for that {{u|Ccmstf77}}. It may be due to the Old Persian text in the infobox of ]. It doesn't display with the fonts on my computer. —] ] ] 03:25, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Generally, if you want to see an article created, the most effective way is to do the research (find the sources to establish ]) and do it yourself. Doing that will have the side benefit that if you can't find suitable sources, you'll know that the article cannot be written. ] (]) 21:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:The intersection of WT:CHEM and WP:TH is non-null:) Feel free to add cited info to ], which I just turned blue. ] (]) 02:06, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Thank you! ] (]) 16:11, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Good job! It's sometimes said around here that Teahouse-people don't start articles on request, but that isn't ''always'' true. Sometimes we feel like doing it. ] (]) 12:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Indeed. @] will remember leading me creating this one about ]s a couple of years ago. It's far less likely that anyone would ever want to create one about a businessman, cryptocurrency fad or 'some here-today-gone-tomorrow' minor celebrity. ] (]) 21:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Sometimes we really want WP to have that article. ] was inspired by a question at Commons, but still. ] (]) 21:44, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::That’s incredible! I love the name ] (]) 18:58, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::I'm often on the fence for these...promoting involvement by newer editors to create articles on topics of their interest (increased involvement is good, and demonstrated willingness to engage in collaboration) vs doing it myself (especially if it could benefit from specialized literature resources or where some people might not feel comfortable writing publicly about certain topics even if "anonymous"). ] (]) 00:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Youtube == | |||
==What shall I do after delete discussion and the draft is to "keep"== | |||
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Draft:Hongchi_Xiao&redirect=no Shall I wait for the picture issue to be resolved or submit now? Is there anything else that I can do to improve the draft? jdxzhu 17:35, 25 November 2015 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
If a reliable source posts a video on Youtube, is the video a good source to rely on? ] (]) 23:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Hello, {{U|Jdxzhu}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have looked over the draft and made some edits to it, in particular removing some unnecessary detail and some ] wording. I also corrected some of your reference formatting; you should be able to follow the examples I did to correct the rest of the references. (In particular watch out for switching the <code>work = </code> and <code>title = </code> fields, and note that references should follow directly after a word, punctuation or another reference without any spaces in between: <nowiki>example,<ref>{{citation}}</ref><ref>{{citation}}</ref> next word,</nowiki> ''not'' <nowiki>example, <ref>{{citation}}</ref> <ref>{{citation}}</ref> next word.</nowiki> On the other hand I may have gotten some of the Chinese authors' first and last names confused, so please check those. Also note that the <code>language = </code> field is required when the <code>trans-title = </code> field is used, and whichever specific Chinese language — e.g. Mandarin Chinese or Cantonese — is used in a source should be listed in the <code>language = </code> field; I wasn't sure which one was correct, so I just listed them as Chinese.) It looks to me like you've done well at including criticism of Xiao to balance the article. I think the draft will be ready to be re-submitted after just a little more cleanup. Feel free to return to the Teahouse if you require any further assistance. —] ]] 20:54, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::{{ping|Jdxzhu}} As stated: "The result of the discussion was '''Keep'''. Note (mostly to ]) that this means keep the draft. It bears no indication to whether it should be moved to article space, or not; nor to the draft not being eventually deleted later on" | |||
:: What that means is that the current version is not so irredeemably promotional that it should be immediately deleted. It now proceeds under the normal process - you keep attempting to 1) demonstrate ] and 2) that you can write the content in a ] manner that ]. If you continue to submit without without making significant progress in addressing the concerns, you can expect fewer and fewer reviewers to waste their time even checking on it. -- ] 21:07, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:YouTube as a source is generally usable if the outlet themselves posts the video to their verified channel. As an example, a video by CNN uploaded to CNN's own channel is fine. That same video uploaded to "NewsLieTracker"'s channel isn't. —] ] <sup><small>] ]</small></sup> 00:02, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Thank you both very much for your help. I will find time to work on the draft later. Your detailed instructions are greatly appreciated! jdxzhu 21:44, 25 November 2015 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
::Thank you, but in ''name of the website'' do i put the publisher, or YouTube? ] (]) 00:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::You'd put the publisher, and put YouTube in the ''via'' parameter. ] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">]</sup></i> 02:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Hi {{u|WikiPhil012}}. You should probably take a look at ] and ] before adding any links to YouTube videos to any Misplaced Pages, even as part of a citation. If the source itself is considered to be a reliable source (]), you can still cite it without providing a link to YouTube; just make sure you provide as much information as you can about the original source in the citation as explained in ]. -- ] (]) 02:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::You can put YouTube videos on Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 02:53, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::That last comment is true in some cases, but false in most. See ], as already cited. ] (]) 11:59, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== promotional template == | |||
==Removing a Tag== | |||
Hi, I have just copyedited an article. It had the tag or banner saying it needed copyediting at the top of the page. Should i remove it (and if so how) or do I leave it in place? ] (]) 10:48, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:hello {{ping|Janifrax12}} and thanks for copy editing! | |||
:you are correct that the banner needs to be removed manually. at the top of the page will be something in braces, called a ]. It probably looks like <nowiki>{{copyedit|date=May 2015}}</nowiki> just remove that. | |||
:You may also be interested in joining the ]-- ] 11:20, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:{{ec}} Hello, {{U|Janifrax12}}, welcome to the Teahouse and thank you for copy-editing articles! It looks to me like you did a good job with ], so I took the tag off for you. In future all you need to do is remove the <code><nowiki>{{copy edit|date=November 2015}}</nowiki></code> (or whatever date is included) tag from the top of the article. —] ]] 11:26, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
can white44tree please add ] template to ] article on wikipedia? ] (]) 00:28, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Well i added the promotional template. ] ] 00:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==Southwest University, U.S== | |||
::Does the content appear promotional? -- ]-'']'' -- 00:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Oh yea... removed it sorry ] ] 00:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Vacuity (see the article, and ]) isn't the same as promotionalism. -- ] (]) 01:35, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::what about ] page add ] template? ] (]) 01:07, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Does anything about the contents of that article appear promotional to you? -- ]-'']'' -- 18:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::yes and same with ] and ] ] (]) 23:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::What seems promotional about them? Is there any particularly promotional language or framing? -- ]-'']'' -- 02:11, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Are primary sources okay for a (minor) controversy section? == | |||
I submitted a page with the above title but it was deleted by JMHamo. I need assistant on how I can resubmit the same | |||
page with some modification. Nomsu] (]) 10:37, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hello {{ping|Nomsu}} - welcome to the Teahouse. | |||
:The three things I would recommend are: | |||
:Utilize the ] to create the article. It will start out in draft space rather than live space and will generally not be under such scrutiny so that you can get help to make it appropriate. | |||
:The second is to head the advice of why the first version was deleted. We are writing an encyclopedia, not hosting free advertisements. | |||
:The third would would be to read ] and the ] and ensure that the subject of the article and your draft meet those requirements. | |||
:(and the semi optional fourth which may or may not be applicable): read and follow the ]. -- ] 11:16, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Currently working on the article ] (a section at ]), and I'm considering adding a (specifically minor) ] controversy paragraph pertaining to the name of the band, sitting under the "Name" heading after the name's origin. Currently, the only relevant sources are these two interviews with and with respectively. The former has a story about how they were nearly stopped by police from doing a gig, being mistaken for a ] rally because of the name, and the latter having a sentence about the band receiving a letter from someone after the release of ], who "had the wrong idea about us and didn’t like the One Nation lyrics." (Note: One Nation is a song about anti-racism and bigotry.) However, since these are both primary sources, I still hold concerns on whether or not this should be included in the final article. If anyone can provide another opinion, it'd be highly appreciated. | |||
:Hello, {{U|Nomsu}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. I recommend that you use ] in order to create any new articles. I see that the previous version was deleted for using overly promotional language, so you should probably read ] to get an idea of what kind of wording to avoid in your next draft. You will also need to cite sources for any facts in the article which someone might question, and it's best to use ], such as newspaper or magazine articles which discuss the university, or coverage in a published book — the university's own website, as a primary source, should ''only'' be cited for facts which you can't find a secondary source for. ] should help. | |||
—] <sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 04:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Once you think you have everything you need in the draft, submit it using the button at the top of the page. An experienced editor will review the draft, and if necessary point out areas which need further improvement. The draft and review process prevents new articles from being deleted when you're still working on them. Just make sure you address any issues raised by the reviewer(s) before you re-submit it, if the draft is initially declined. And of course feel free to return to the Teahouse for any further help you may need. —] ]] 11:16, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hello —]. I know nothing about the band, but I suggest you write that during an interview Wiley Arnett stated the band got its name because of – whatever reason was given. Perhaps a better source for the name origin could be found later on, and then the article can be edited. ] (]) 05:50, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Hi @]: primary sources can be used to verify facts (straightforward and non-contentious ones). If the question is "where did this band get its name?", then arguably there is no better source to answer that, than the people who actually named it, ie. the band members. Even if you find a secondary source, say a magazine telling us where the name comes from, the information almost certainly ultimately traces back to the band members anyway. But as Karenthewriter suggests, rather than simply stating it as an absolute fact like "the name comes from" you should refer to that primary source and phrase it as "''according to Arnett'', the name comes from" (or words to that effect). -- ] (]) 07:56, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== susanhollowayscott.com reliable? == | |||
==Timing of BLP PROD== | |||
This is more a question of Misplaced Pages etiquette than strict rules, I think. Looking through new pages, I often find stubs that are BLPs with no references, such as ]. The rules say I must BLP PROD these. But a couple of editors have suggested (always in the nicest possible terms) that it would be better to give the authors some time to finish working on the article before doing this, as dealing with the PROD is a distraction that takes time and effort away from the job. But how long should I wait - a day? A week? A month? Or should the rules be carried out as written, and raise it straight away?] (]) 08:58, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:if they haven't made an edit to the article in an hour, or even 30 minutes then its appropriate. You want to catch them while they are still here. Even better, if they are still editing go to their talk page and let them know whats going to happen if they dont take action. -- ] 09:13, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:For a brand new article, it should not be marked "reviewed" until it is BLP PRODded or sourced. The PROD itself includes a 7-day waiting period. I agree with the TRPOD that sourcing BLPs should be a priority and can't reasonably be called a "distraction" unless it is done minutes or seconds after the article was created. ] (]) 09:16, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I'm currently working on upgrading an article to Good Article status, but there's still one citation left that's needed. Unfortunately, the only source I can seem to find is susanhollowayscott.com, which is a blog. I know that some blogs are allowed, so is this one trustworthy, or is it unreliable? Help! ] <sub>] ]</sub> 18:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks to you both! {{smiley}} --] (]) 14:33, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::If the rules didn't say BLP PROD, there would be a lot more than the 3,300 currently sitting in pile. ] (]) 17:05, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::Searching yields plenty of recent sources for Josh Schache. Often, it is better to do a quick notability check and add a couple of sources than to PROD an article. Our first choice is to save articles, not to delete them, if the topic is notable. ] ] 17:33, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{od}} | |||
{{U|Gronk Oz}}, it is not correct to say that "{{xt|The rules say I must BLP PROD these}}". There are no rules that say you "must" do anything at all to the article or indeed to any article. It is true that you should not mark an article as reviewed or patrolled if it is an unsourced BLP. You may always elect to find and add sources if you choose. Personally I wouldn't add a BLPPROD tag to an article that is only a few hours old, or to one where the creator has been editing within the last hour or so. You have the option of sending a talk page message directly to the article creator on his or her talk page, or of adding an {{tl|unsourced}} tag, or of trying to source it yourself, or of simply leaving the article for a bit in hope that someone will add sources. This is one reason to do NPP from the back of the backlog, or at least not the front. All that said, BLPPRTOD gives 7 days for a source to be added, it isn't exactly sudden death. But when a single simple google search leads to a valid source, it doesn't take much longer to find and cite that source than it does to add the BLPPROD tag, and there is a net gain. ] ] 18:07, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hello, @]. ] says {{tq|when produced by an established ], whose work '''in the relevant field''' has previously been published by ], independent publications}}. According to our article on ], she is a writer of historical fiction, and her blog seems to be mostly on historical subjects, as you might expect. She has no doubt done her research, but unless she has a track record as a reliably published writer about history, it doesn't sound promising. ] (]) 18:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==]== | |||
::<s>Your refs 1,2 and 3 are to her website, and therefor not independent and not contributing to confirming notability. ] (]) 20:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)</s> | |||
I reviewed ], and declined it as a BLP lacking in-line citations. I then received a message on my talk page from ], saying that he or she had added footnotes and resubmitted the draft, but that ] had then similarly declined the draft. It appears to me that the current version does have in-line citations, so that maybe Cult of Green meant that they were not enough to establish notability. I am bringing this here to discuss with other experienced editors what can be done to improve the draft. ] (]) 03:37, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:: |
:::<s>The article content states what she has written, but does not have content or refs for what has been written about her. This is Start class at best (the current rating) and needs significant work before being upgraded to C-class, let alone nominated for GA. ] (]) 20:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)</s> | ||
::::OP nominated ], not Susan Holloway Scott. ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 20:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Thank you. ] - Please provide more inline references. I think that the subject is ] but it is up to you to establish that. A few editors go beyond the call of duty in building up an article to where it can be accepted. Maybe you can ask them for help, or maybe you can add the references to the article. ] (]) 04:47, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::Yes, query pertains to raising ] to GA, and want to know if effort can use Scott's blog as a reference. In that case, I agree with ColinFine that while Scott publishes historical fiction, she does not quality as an academic historian with bona fides. ] (]) 20:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Although the draft has a variety of problems, I think that it is clear that this artist is notable. He has had a solo show at a major museum and many solo shows at respected commercial galleries. He has been the subject of significant coverage in ]. And so on. It is better, in my opinion, to give the primary author help and suggestions for improving the article than to keep declining the draft. ] ] 04:52, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Sources and Notability == | |||
==adding a link to verify a person on a bio page== | |||
Help - I just created three new pages - all for writers and story editors for the NBC sitcom Undateable. But they've all been flagged to be deleted because I didn't cite a source. Can someone tell me how to edit the page and insert the link to the official NBC website that lists these people as writers on the show?] (]) 23:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hello, {{U|CatBrewer}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added one for ], you can use it as an example. Please read ] for more detail. ] ] 23:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC) {{ping|CatBrewer}} ] ] 23:24, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Just because sources exist for a subject does not necessarily mean that it is notable enough to have a Misplaced Pages article, correct? ] (]) 22:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::{{ping|CatBrewer}} click the History tab at the top of the page and then click the radio dial buttons on the 2 versions you wish to compare. Also, it is a much better idea, particularly for new editors, to create new articles in your sandbox work space and via the ] as you will have much more time to make the content "ready for prime time" . -- ] 23:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
: |
:@] Correct. ] sources are wanted, not, for example, subject's social media. ] (]) 22:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
::Hello ]. There can not be an Misplaced Pages article unless the subject is considered notable. Sources exist about me, including mentions in a few local newspaper articles, but that doesn't make me Misplaced Pages-article-notable. If you haven’t already done so reading ] may be of help to you. ] (]) 03:49, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::{{ping|CatBrewer}} you added a link <s>that validates the existence of a person</s>, but it does not address the concern that noted in the template that there is a credible claim of notability. See ]. | |||
:::Alright, thanks. I was just wondering cause I very recently obtained NPR rights, and wanted to know if just because an article with sources meant that it was notable, since I forgot. ] (]) 06:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::And then you may wish to see ] for how to properly format the links. -- ] 23:37, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::I didnt look at the link, but apparently it doesn't mention Terrell, so no, apparently you did not do it correctly. -- ] 00:09, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::(edit conflict) I made a reflist and ref section on this article. ] (]) 23:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== A Page about Indian Educational linguist - Rama Kant Agnihotri == | |||
::::{{ping|CatBrewer}}, you say that you created three pages, but looking at your history I can only find ] and ]. I checked, and I can confirm {{U|TheRedPenOfDoom|TRPoD}}'s comment - Terrell Lawrence is not mentioned on the link at {{URL|http://www.nbc.com/undateable}}. There is a Bill Lawrence mentioned as one of the three Executive Producers, and I see that in an earlier version of the page you clarified that they are not related. But there is no mention of Terrell.--] (]) 01:50, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::from the notice on their talk page, i believe the third was ]. -- ] 02:10, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Ah yes, I see - I didn't know that deleted articles would also vanish from the editor's list of contributions. Now that I have learned something for today, I'm happy. Thanks.--] (]) 02:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I am in doubt if the person is nitable and whether he should have a wikipedia page. | |||
==Reliable Sources== | |||
Hi all, | |||
Full name - Rama Kant Agnihotri | |||
A few days ago GrammarFascist so nicely found some articles for me. | |||
Profession - Professor (Retd.), faculty at Uni. of delhi. | |||
'']'', which is a university paper but may be one of the few of those which counts as a reliable source; I encourage other Teahouse volunteers to share their opinions about that. and are the articles in question. | |||
Wrote many books, including, Routledge published: an essential Hindi grammar. ] (]) 22:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::I'm not sure about this source, either: It's published by ], but I can't tell how much fact-checking or editorial control are in place. | |||
:@], do you mean ]? ] ] 22:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Well, ], it's merely a draft. Let's see how the draft develops. I have to say, though, that it's seriously defective. Consider this somniferous sample: "Rama Kant Agnihotri’s work has been pivotal in leveraging India’s rich linguistic diversity as a tool for social justice and educational equity." I think this means "Rama Kant Agnihotri’s work has made India’s linguistic diversity a tool for social justice and educational equity"; but I'd have to look at the source to be sure. However, the only source provided is by Rama Kant Agnihotri himself, so it can't be used to verify a claim for an achievement by him. -- ] (]) 00:31, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I wanted to know if anybody else has thoughts on if they are reliable sources? And if so what other college Newspapers would be considered reliable? Major college newspapers? | |||
::Aside from the draft, you should not have article-like content on your Use page and should stop any work on ]. As for the unsubmitted draft ], needs work before being submittedfor review. ] (]) 04:49, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Jean-François Ballester == | |||
Thank you all for your input! And thanks again GrammerFascist for finding these! | |||
2 weeks ago someone added something in French to the article ]. According to Google translate it's about the place and grave, where he was buried. As they put malformed "ref"-tags around it, it's not clear to me, what they intended to do. So: should the sentence be deleted, or could it be used somehow? ] ] 23:30, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 22:37, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:I wonder if you're getting two issues confused here, ]. College newspapers are usually considered reliable sources for ] facts, but they are not particular well regarded when it comes to establishing ]. I'm sure that these sources are perfectly reliable on the topics they are reporting, but whether they establish its notability is not so clear. ] (]) 22:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:The reference was for his mother and sister being coaches, so I moved it back up to that line. I removed the addition in French (location of his grave), as there was no source to support it. ] (]) 23:39, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Thank you, Would the two from the Michigan count for his notability because they state information about him and his work, in addition to others opinions about him? Or do the opinions not count toward notability? | |||
] (]) 22:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:For the uninitiated, the article concerned is ], as ]. ] (]) 23:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Hello, {{U|Aagreeny4}}. In my opinion, the Michigan Daily sources are weak for establishing notability. In effect, they are fairly brief and formulaic descriptions in a student newspaper of a speaker appearing on campus. They do not offer extensive biographical details about the person, and in my opinion, they do not rise to the level of significant coverage. As for the Virginia Medical Monthly source, the snippet I can see is so brief that I can express no opinion. ] ] 00:48, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::Having done some searching, I've found many mentions of Mike Green - mainly in events listings - but a lack of in-depth coverage. Has a newspaper or magazine ever published a detailed article about your father, ]? That would definitely help in establishing notability. ] (]) 08:00, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Copyright question == | |||
The only newspapers would be college newspapers. There are some from a couple local newspapers in New Jersey. He does have notable mentions in the Chronicle of Higher Education and Scholastic coach which I have in my article. There are some other articles in "Athletic Management" but I am having trouble finding that source since it would be an older issue. I know he was also listed among the outstanding young men of America, and I am thing to find and article about that and his work, I think they either have a book or release that would describe his work. | |||
] (]) 08:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
https://www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/data/images/1315374-Thomas_Robert_Bugeaud.jpg | |||
:If you provide information about the local New Jersey newspaper articles, {{U|Aagreeny4}} — newspaper name, article title, author if given, page number, and date published — we can evaluate whether those sources would help establish notability. —] ]] 19:02, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Can I just check this is out of protection, it was painted in the 1840s, does it being a digital image have different / changed protection? ] (]) 09:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
These are the two I have | |||
Avedissian, Eric. “Cape May resident counsels students on dangers of drug and alcohol abuse”. Cape May Star and Wave. 13 March 1997. Print. | |||
Explains his background and his work. It describes his message and the job that he does, while listing a few schools he speaks to. States his sobriety and the message or content in his speech. Emphasizes how his approach to the message is different than others. Provides detail and some quotes from his speeches. | |||
Kelly, Shannon. “Wall parents get a look at “one nighters””. The Herald. 11 Dec. 1997. Print | |||
From Wall township in NJ, explains the speech his gave to the students at the local high school. States his work across the country, names his business and his background. Explains quotes and the message from the speech. Explains how he got into the business. Tells how he travles the country with this message. | |||
:@] Faithful 2D representations/photos of paintings that old would be in the ], as that article explains. When you upload the image to Commons, make sure you include your immediate source, i.e. the weblink you gave here. More complex copyright questions should be directed to the Commons helpdesk at ]. ] (]) 14:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I have a few others but I don't have complete source information. | |||
::Cheers ] (]) 16:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
"Anyone given drink...Can cost you everything" by Ned Hartwick- but I don't know the papers name. | |||
"Drug farce eclipsed by SADD asembly" by Aidan Finley- I don't know if this in the name of the paper or just the section, the paper is only of the article about Greeny and doesn't have the whole paper but I can tell it says Opinion on the very top. and its from Haverford PA. | |||
I also have one from the Oklahoma Daily, but I don't know if that is a school paper or which it is. | |||
== I need a biography written on Misplaced Pages == | |||
Thank you for helping. ] (]) 06:38, 26 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
As a naturopath and holistic healthcare practitioner, I'd like an experienced Wiki writer to feature an article on my expertise. If any of you can help then please reach out soon. ] (]) 11:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==When is "on" grammatically correct when it preceeds a month and year date?== | |||
Example: "On May 2015, the Philippines expressed interest in acquiring a number Lockheed P-3 Orion from Japan, which the Japan Maritime Self Defense Force (JMSDF) is planning to retire within a few years time." I was told by another editor that "ON" is correct instead of the "IN" that I supplied. What is what here?] (]) 21:38, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Welcome, ]. "On" is correct for a specific date, as in "On 5 May 2015". "In" is correct for a month without a specific date, as in "In May 2015". ] (]) 21:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Well, there seems to be in the course of my correcting this grammatical happenstance of those that claim without reserve that "on MONTH YEAR" is correct.] (]) 22:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::I can confirm that "On May 2015" is without question grammatically incorrect. ] (]) 22:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::Not to belabor the point but I have never said that "on MONTH YEAR" was grammatically correct but that there have been some editors who believe so.] (]) 22:20, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::I know, ]. I'm confirming that you are correct! ] (]) 22:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::: I've {{diff2|692323579|corrected}} a heap more instances of the same error in the same article. --] (]) 22:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I have been going through a search "on MONTH YEAR" from 1500 to 1920 to review these instances to see if they are grammatically incorrect and have corrected those that I believe are. Then I have been working by month from November 2015 backward to review and correct when necessary so unless an article has "on MONTH" (say "on April") then I do not get to that review until that particular MONTH/YEAR come up. That way I can somewhat cover all the instances that pop up. So for those articles that I have already for any particular "date" reviewed there could be more present. This may seem a tedious way of doing it but then I do concentrate on an absolute identified through the search rather than a potential merely because through happenstance with another date it has appeared in the search hits. It seems that the presence of "on MONTH YEAR" appears where it was intended to supply a DAY but never was done. Whenever it has been found please feel free to edit.] (]) 23:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:@] Posting a request here at the Teahouse is more-or-less an invitation to ] to "reach out" and take your money, as the link I've added explains. If you are (or become) a ], then a volunteer will likely notice and write about you. There are ]. ] (]) 12:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Cotton Family == | |||
:Hello, @]. To put your request in other words "I want to use Misplaced Pages to promote my business". ] of any kind is forbidden on Misplaced Pages. | |||
:''If'' several people who have no connection with you, and have not been commissioned or fed information on you behalf, choose to write at some length about you in ], then you would probably meet Misplaced Pages's criteria for ], and an article could be written about you. Such an article would not belong to you, would not be controlled by you, would not necessarily say what you want it to say, and would be able to be edited by almost anybody in the world ''except'' you and your associates. If it happened that there was reliably published material that was negative about you, that would probably be discussed in the article. See ] | |||
:If you have not been written about in that way, then no amount of work, and no amount of money, is going to be able to put an article about you in Misplaced Pages: see ]. | |||
:Please focus on other means to promote your business. And don't, whatever you do, pay somebody to write a Misplaced Pages article about you: see ]. ] (]) 13:38, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Your submission of a draft about yourself at ] has been declined. For a living person, all content must be verified by valid references (see ]). References need to be to publications about you, not sci journal articles for which you were a co-author. Those are useless. ] (]) 16:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:{{ping|Dr. Mojibul Haque}} I feel I should point out that alternative medicines (and those who practice with same) are in a ] ], with part of the issue in the topic area being promotion such as you're attempting to do. —] ] <sup><small>] ]</small></sup> 16:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::See that ] is designated on its Talk page as a contentious topic. ] (]) 23:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== What is the WikiCup == | |||
This may be a bit weird. This one is based on Eastenders. Nick Cotton and Dot Cotton are in the same family but went don't people make a page for this family. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Hello, {{U|Kobbs}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. Not every aspect of every television show is ] and ought to have an article on Misplaced Pages. Have any published ] ] ] sources discussed this fictional family in depth? If so, you could start an article yourself. If not, no article would be appropriate. ] ] 21:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::The answer to your question is undoubtedly yes, ]. In fact, ] already created a stub article at ] before posting this question, but ] redirected it to ]. ] (]) 21:42, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
What is the WikiCup, that’s my only question. ] (]) 12:06, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Instead of making a definite statement about a particular article not being developed, maybe it would be best to leave it open to when it is appropriate that an article be developed when the appropriate sources are available and notoriety is present. That way the idea of a particular article is not now and forever deemed unnecessary. Some times people "offer" a course of action that does not undertake the changing nature of subjects and need for additional articles.] (]) 21:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:See ] ] (]) 12:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::This point is sort of covered by ], but I don't think anyone is saying that this topic will never be notable. In fact, given how long this family has been in the programme, there are already likely enough sources to establish notability. I'm not convinced that there is much value in having an article on the family though, given that articles about some of the individual characters concerned already exist. ] (]) 21:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hey @], The ] is an annual writing competition on Misplaced Pages, where participants earn points by contributing to articles across various categories. The goal is to encourage high-quality contributions and promote engagement. ] (]) 13:30, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::{{ec}}I didn't make any definite statement that an article would not be appropriate, except that it wouldn't be appropriate '''unless''' there were sources to establish notability. If there are such sources, then an article could be created, but whether to do so is a matter of editorial judgement and, ultimately, community consensus. If there is not much to say on a topic, or what there is to say is better included as part of another article (here ]) then there is no requirement to create the article, but there is no rule against it, either. It could be discussed on ], or on the talk page of the redirect. That one editor converted a stub into a redirect need not be the final outcome. An article was ] created, another editor has converted it to a redir, in effect reverting the creation, and now, in accord with the ] cycle, it is time to discuss the matter among interested editors. All Misplaced Pages articles (and other pages) are always works in progress, and whether to change an existing one or create a new one should pretty much always be open when such action seems appropriate. One method that is often followed would be to add sourced content to the existing article (here ]) until there is enough that a ] seems like a good idea, and a useful spin-off article can be created. ] ] 22:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::So basically you just edit to get points? ] (]) 20:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Absence is just as impactful as calling attention to standards and guide lines so temperance probably offers more perspective about fleeting interest and considerations of longer endearment.] (]) 23:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::@] it's friendly competition, and for some people a fun way to motivate themselves. We're both ] and ]. ~ 🦝 ] (he/him • ]) 21:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Ok ] (]) 21:22, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::Wait, then what are the judges for? ] (]) 20:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Is Muck Rack a Self-published source? == | |||
==]== | |||
I reviewed ], and declined it as not providing evidence of ]. I suggested that it be merged with ]. The author, ], then posted to my talk page: "Hi - For my first new page I tried to keep it short and factual with links to online articles. Where did I go wrong? Thank you!" My own thought is that the draft is ''too'' short and doesn't indicate notability. What is the advice of other experienced editors? ] (]) 19:20, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:You could explain to ] that they did not "go wrong" – the problem is that the subject lacks any notability, and there is nothing they can do about it. ] (]) 19:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Hey, Hope you are doing great, I'm here to ask about ]. Is it a ]? ] (]) 13:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
This is not a game of someone wins and someone losses. This is a very tenuous situation. Opinion is a very subjective action. This reminds me of a school assignment where we were all asked to locate and critique sources of information about various subjects/incidents. There came in the assignment a particular subject that was five sentences long in another work. When asked what was the best available work on "X", what is your answer. We all made mention of the existence of the work in question but no one said it was the then best available so we all got zeros when all we had to do to pass was say "X" is the best available work although it is only five sentences long. Not every subject can stand alone as a complete article but certainly there should be every opportunity taken to at least make mention in a article on a wider scale than a subject specific article. WP will never be perfect and to exclude something on the basis that by doing so makes WP more perfect is basically giving credence to an action that in short-sided. The worst thing you can do to understanding a subject is skewing the content. As for being able to not do any thing about something seems to discount public opinion.] (]) 22:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:It's really not as complicated as that. The article simply lacks sufficient citations to establish notability. ] (]) 22:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:I am not sure but their journalist profolios/profile are automatically generated and may contain errors. I wouldn't consider it a reliable source for a comprehensive list of any journalist's article. But I'd consider it fine to put it in an 'external links' section, especially if the profile is a verified one. ] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">]</sup></i> 14:53, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::{{ec}} {{U|Srednuas Lenoroc}}, no one has '''excluded''' this subject or indeed this draft from Misplaced Pages. it has not been deleted. {{U|Robert McClenon}} has said that it is not currently suitable for the main article space, and he is correct as the draft stands. <s>He</s> {{U|Maproom}} has also given it as his opinion that sources to establish notability do not exist, but that view is not final until one has done an exhaustive search for sources, which is well beyond the normal scope of an AfC reviewer. {{U|SunshineState 1}}, or you, or I are all free to search for additional ] that might help to establish notability and meet the ]. Anyone may add such sources to the draft. Misplaced Pages does run on more absolute standards than "the best available work". If a topic cannot be shown to be notable (in Misplaced Pages's rather specialized use of that term) it will not have a separate article. Whether it should be included as part of a larger article is a judgement call, with no single answer being correct in every case. I hope this is helpful. ] ] 22:17, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::@] Thank you for your reply. ] (]) 16:22, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::I have now added several sources to ]. I don't think it is yet at the point of fully establishing notability, but I think it may get there. ] ] 22:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::As well as sources, the article will need to say what the "Bethesda Urban Partnership" ''is'', not just what it does. ] (]) 23:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::I'm not sure I fully agree. If an organization is notable for what it does, than what it '''is''' is simply an organization that does those sorts of things. In any case this is a minor addition that will easly be added once more sources, and content derived from them, have been added. ] ] 23:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== |
== about create new page == | ||
Hi, I'm here to ask for help making edits recommended via ]. Another editor suggested I post here, since I have a financial COI and don't want to make the edits myself. | |||
it require article to create new page you might help me to understand ] (]) 13:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
To summarize the situation, I've been working on behalf of The Wyss Foundation on the ] article for the past few months. Recently, ] on the amount of information that should be included in one section. I posted to Third Opinion to get another editor involved. You can see the conversation ]. The third opinion was that the section should be reduced, but the editor didn't want to make the changes and ] instead. Would someone be able to help or tell me what I should do next? This is the first time I've used the Third Opinion process. Thanks! ] (]) 17:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
==] and ]== | |||
The posts in the pages are similar. Under what circumstances users visit WP:AN not WP:ANI. ] (]) 10:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse. | |||
: The explanation at the top of ] says: | |||
:Trying to write an article before you have spent time learning how Misplaced Pages works is likely to lead to disappointment and frustration, and probably a lot of wasted effort. | |||
* Issues appropriate for this page could include: General announcements, discussion of administration methods, ban proposals, block reviews, and backlog notices. | |||
:{{User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst}}. | |||
* If you are seeking administrator intervention for a specific issue or dispute, you should post it at the Administrators' noticeboard for incidents (]) instead. | |||
:Looking at ] (which is where your attempted article currently is), it appears that you have done the obvious thing of starting by writing what you about a subject. Unfortunately this is writing the article ] - because Misplaced Pages does not have any interest at all in what you know about Umubwiriza (or what I know, or what any random person on the Internet knows). Misplaced Pages is almost ''only'' interested in what has been published ''about'' him in ] by people completely ]. Unless you ''start'' by finding such sources, you are very likely wasting your time. ] (]) 14:53, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
: In some cases the boundary is rather blurred, but that is the guidance. --] (]) 11:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:If English is not your first language, I recommend editing in a Misplaced Pages version that is in another language. You can see ] for a list. ] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">]</sup></i> 14:55, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Redirect note == | |||
:I guess i ''was'' in the right place, when i wrote on AN yesterday to ask about administrative practices that might help to address bullying behaviors, but instead of an answer, i got , ridiculed, derided, insulted, called stupid (Dunning-Kruger effect) and dark motives imputed to me just for asking about this, and then they closed the discussion. It was not a good response. I had wondered if i was posting in the right place. I suppose i was, but i think something is broken about Misplaced Pages if i ask about how to address bullying and i get bullied for asking. ] (]) 13:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{collapse top|Collapsing this tangent per comments from ]. ]]}} | |||
::I have not been following the underlying case closely, so my response is based entirely on the closed thread you linked to. You did get answers, several of them, some of which could not by any stretch of the imagination be construed as bullying. "Dark motives were imputed" because you appeared to be asking for alternative remedies in a case already before ArbCom (and in which it seems you did not participate by giving evidence or proposing solutions) which you have been around long enough that you should know was inappropriate. Sometimes behavior can feel to the person affected by it like attack even when it is not; I was recently involved with an ] case involving a ] whose subject was noteworthy in part for having been the victim of concerted bullying, and who therefore reasonably — but incorrectly — interpreted the article's nomination as more bullying. You may be experiencing a similar situation. The editor who closed the WP:AN discussion noted in closing it that you had moved on to another forum, so I don't see how closing the WP:AN discussion was unfair to you. I also see that a decent amount of discussion went on before it was closed. Just because you didn't like all of the responses you received doesn't mean there wasn't any appropriate response, and characterizing what happened there the way you have done here does make ''you'' look somewhat unreasonable. I can see I'm not the first to suggest you reconsider your own approach. Hopefully my advice in that regard will not be in vain. —] ]] 14:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::: Oh my god. There ''you'' go again. There ''is'' no "underlying case". This was a question about admin methods in general. Can anyone not ask what are methods for addressing bullying behaviors without getting ulterior motives imputed as you just did right here? And you think that someone who has a bullying history toward me saying simply "Dunning-Kruger effect" is not bullying? It's an insult that says "You are too stupid to know you are stupid." Yes, dark motives ''were'' imputed. I asked how i might address bullying behaviors and i get a long diatribe that i am probably "forum shopping" and such things. I was seriously asking for how to address bullying behaviors and i got the opposite to a good answer. I got "Go home you good for nothing stupid devious jerk!" in so many words! The editor who closed the WP:AN discussion did so wrongly, because i had *not* moved it to another forum. I had posted an ''idea'' at another forum for an anti-bullying task force, in part because of the very bad response i got at WP:AN that made me ask "where can one go to address these behaviors?" All of what you wrote, do you really believe it to be true? Are you really not able to hear me honestly? You again are saying that i am unreasonable for asking how one can address bullying behaviors in Misplaced Pages. When i do so, i get more bullying behaviors. In fact it seems like people take it as an invitation to pummel upon the person who asks. I say '''ENOUGH!!!''' There is a breaking point and this is '''ENOUGH!!!!''' This is a toxic editing environment and there is nowhere anyone can go for remedy to bullying! This is a very real problem. I have seen good editors say things like "I don't even edit in that topic area anymore because of the toxic editing environment." Just yesterday, i stood up for one user who was being seriously railroaded by a bunch of people and made to grovel, when their editing was actually friendly and good when i looked into it. It was a kangaroo court, and this user who was doing good work was about to leave Misplaced Pages for good. It was a new user being bullied and misrepresented and ganged up on by admins and editors, and blocked, and then made to grovel to be unblocked... it was NOT good. I stood up for that user and they said "I was about to leave Misplaced Pages altogether, but you gave me hope that it may be worth it." That is the sort of advocate that some people need. Someone who will stand up against ganging-up bullying behaviors. ] (]) 14:37, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::Considering a similar discussion here, ], it is not wise to start conversations on the same subject in more than one location. Focus the discussion in one forum rather than spreading it to several noticeboards and talk pages. <font face="Papyrus" size="3" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 14:42, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::This is '''not''' the same subject. One is an idea for a new thing that might help to fill the gaping void that is apparent because the arbitrators noticeboard seems to be doing the exact wrong thing. Please listen, this is not the same thing in two places. It's a question about current methods to the AN and then when that resulted in pummeling me for just asking the question, i posted an idea to the ideas lab. Do you think that is wrong when i explain it this way? I've also asked a question to many of the candidates for ArbCom about how they might address bullying. I am free to speak in more than one location at once. ] (]) 14:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::No. You weren't in the right place, ], at ]. You either weren't asking for admin action, and didn't supply diffs, which are the basis for admin action, or you were asking the community at AN to override the ArbCom. If you had a complaint about being bullied about genetically modified organisms, the proper venue was ArbCom. You didn't enter any evidence at ArbCom. You did go to a reasonable place to ]. However, you weren't in the right place You haven't provided concrete evidence that you were bullied, and you haven't provided concrete evidence of anyone else bullying anyone. We are aware that sometimes there is bullying in Misplaced Pages. In my opinion, many complaints of bullying are unfounded, but those that are substantive are usually based on ] behavior. You weren't in the right place. ] (]) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{od}} | |||
Robert, the answer here in the teahouse says that AN is the place for "discussion of administration methods" and i was asking for help in what methods exist for dealing with bullying behavior, in general. If i had posted about a specific incident, then i would have gone to ANI and would be correct according to this explanation here. Let me refute '''again''' (for i have already refuted and you either didn't hear or chose not to listen) some things you say in error above. I saw '''not''' asking the AN community to override ArbCom. Not at all. I find that suggestion to be derogatory especially after i have clarified over a the AN discussion already. I never said that my question related to genetically modified organisms. I did ''not'' in my question to AN about general methods provide evidence of bullying, because i was asking a question about '''procedure''' and '''methods''' in general. Did you not get that? I believe that AN was a very reasonable place to ask about what methods exist to deal with these behaviors. You imply that it's not. I think you're actually in a bullying mode right here and now, and you were also in a bullying mode in your response to me at AN. Why are you being so pushy, so hostile, so oppositional, so derogatory, and so accusatory to me? Was i not in the right place to ask about methods and procedures within Misplaced Pages? I don't understand why the pushing away. ] (]) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{collapse bottom}} | |||
When I go to ] from my Chrome browser, a note appears at the top, (Redirected from ]). This note does not appear in the editor, and also does not appear if I go to the article from within Misplaced Pages. Why does it appear, and how can it be eliminated (or should it)? ] (]) 15:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==Help with my new article, what is wrong?== | |||
Hi. I sent in my article draft:kresten bjerg for review. He is more or less the only psychologist in denmark to talk about "domestic psychology", and has a lot of publications behind him. I have a source for everything i wrote, but it keeps getting declined. Do you have any ideas to solve that matter? | |||
BR ] (]) 07:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:You need more third party sources i.e. ones which are independent of the subject. Just glancing at it, you've provided 4 references, one is a Facebook page, which doesn't establish notability as anyone can set one up, the second is the subject's own website, which suffers the same issue as Facebook, the third seems to be written by a family member of the subject. You need to find references which people not affiliated with the subject have written. ] (]) 07:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:This note means that you were sent to the article from a ]. This is not a problem and likely just means that the page that is saved in your browser is the redirect page and not the actual page. (What probably happened here is that the first time you visited the article, it was a draft, which was then ] to the final article, leaving a redirect.) Again, this is not anything you need to worry about - it is completely normal to be redirected sometimes. ] (]) 16:08, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Hi valenciano. When writing who his parents are, isn't a page written by his mother the best source? ] (]) 15:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks very much. Looks like I need to clear my browser. ] (]) 20:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Glitch? == | |||
:Hello ] and welcome to the Teahouse. I took a look at your article and found that the text was copied from a website. That is a copyright violation. If you want to write an article you should do it with ], provide good and accurate ] for all the facts and preferably not in the style of the hoax you created at ]. ]<small>]</small> 08:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
The copied text was list of his book publications. What is wrong with copying them? | |||
] (]) 15:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:{{ping|Magnus bjerg}}You can use the ''facts'' from the list, but not copy the text as it is with comments and all, since it is copyrighted by the person who wrote that. Look at how the publications are listed in ] for example. ]<small>]</small> 15:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::The article in question is ]. I would suggest that the original poster should read ] before creating any more drafts about members of their family. ] (]) 16:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I'm currently working on ], and while updating the "Aftermath" section I noticed that one of the links in the lead bugged out, producing "post-open">Fujita Scalepost-close">" in regular text instead of ]. Does anybody else see this? It's been happening for months, and I can't for the life of me figure out what's happening. ]<sub>]</sub><sup>]</sup> 16:17, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==]== | |||
:It was in the wikitext, no idea why. I've removed it. ] ] 16:35, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I reviewed ] and asked whether more references could be added, neither accepting nor declining. ] then asked me on my talk page whether I meant that more references could be added to what she had already written or whether the article should be expanded. I meant that I was asking whether she could add more references to what she had already written. However, expanding a draft article is usually welcome. I would like the advice of other experienced editors as to whether I should go ahead and accept the article, which looks good enough to me. ] (]) 02:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Hm, that’s… odd. I’m not sure what it is, but I’ll ask around at the VP. ]<sub>]</sub><sup>]</sup> 16:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
: It looks pretty good to me. The sources, well, I'm not familiar with British poetry magazines but they seemed to be reliable in nature and cover Loydell broadly. The article has wikilinks, which a lot of the drafts seem to lack. The article could stand to be expanded, of course, but that could be done after it's moved to mainspace. In my view it's good enough to accept. ] (]) 03:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::Sometimes you use the visual editor, and I've seen VE add odd stuff to wikitext occasionally. ] ] 17:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::There are a couple of things that would be good to do, but I don't know which ones ''need'' to be done before accepting it: | |||
::#Check the close paraphrasing between the "Personal Life" section and his staff profile at - I think that needs to be resolved first (another common rookie mistake). | |||
::#It would be good to add his birth year (1960), from the Shearsman Books reference. | |||
::#I had to work hard to restrain myself from using reFill to convert those bare-URL references, but that wouldn't be polite, would it... | |||
::#Most of those "External links" should not be there. Some are already used as References, and should just be removed (e.g. "2005 interview with Rupert by Dee Rimbaud"). Consider which of the others should be References, if they support material in the article, or removed. | |||
::#Finally, only the first word in headings should be capitalized. | |||
::Hope that helps.--] (]) 03:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::{{U|Gronk Oz}} (and others) drafts are not ]ed any more than articles are, and there is nothing wrong with filling in citation metadata, whether through a tool such as reFill or manually. (If you do use refill, please modify the results manually. It has a nasty habit of sticking things in the title= parameter that really should be separate.) Similarly, correcting formatting such as section title case is fine. ] ] 16:38, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== unblocking request == | |||
::::Yes, {{u|DESiegel|DES}}, I agree - and yet I also remember how frustrating it can be, especially as a new person, to have other people "helping" all the time. Part of the review process is to help the new editor learn, as well as producing the article at the end. So my own philosophy (at least for now until I change my mind) is that I am happy to do things like that if they will give the new editor an example to learn from, without making them feel that somebody else is "taking over" from them. BTW, I couldn't resist, so I did fill in those references - they look much better now, and I did have to make several adjustments to reFill's suggestions.--] (]) 16:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Can someone help me with request please? ] (]) 16:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==How to set a speedy delete after another deletion proposal== | |||
I saw this new page, ] and noted it had been tagged for possible deletion, but it's a duplication of ] and should have been tagged for a Speedy as a duplicate. I removed the original delete & tried to place the speedy, but the system won't let me. Help? :) ] (]) 02:21, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
: An editor set this as a redirect, it's taken care of. Thanks! ] (]) 03:18, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
: I think that you intended to refer to ], not ], hence the ] in your question. --] (]) 17:18, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:@] Welcome to the Teahouse. In a word: "No". | |||
==correction to an article== | |||
:You have been partially blocked ''on one article page only'' for continued disruption across a three-year period. Your appeal was reviewed today by an administrator and declined. Feel free to edit constructively anywhere else on Misplaced Pages's other 6.9 million articles, but do not try to assert your own view of how things should be; always base everything upon what ] actually say. Regards, ] (]) 17:27, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
> The table of winners in the article: | |||
::@] There was no need to email me off-wiki. There was nothing private that needed discussing, so I am replying to you here instead. I took a look at your edits made when you were logged in and as an IP. Your edits were repeatedly reinserted after their removal, and were unsubstantiated. There was no attempt to discuss things on the article talk page and one administrator that repeated attempts to make these edits had been happening over a 9 year period. Actions that are repeated over and over again without any attempt to justify them and gain concensus on the relevant talk page are disruptive — hence your single page block. You are free to edit elsewhere and are asked to leave your personal views behind when you do so. Please don't email other editors off-wiki without good reason. We edit openly and publicly here, and emails should be used very sparingly, and only when a degree of privacy is absolutely necessary. ] (]) 19:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
> https://en.wikipedia.org/Sporting_News_Executive_of_the_Year_Award shows 1962 | |||
:::I think my message was direct and clear: No explanation was given about reversing the changes and instead, someone repeatedly was just deleting them. I'm not sure where you got 9 years history of my change because I've started using Misplaced Pages since 2022 only. I'm sorry if you are unhappy with the message which I sent, but anyway the same message and concern indicated here. ] (]) 20:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
> winner Fred Haney as representing the Los Angeles Dodgers of the National League | |||
:@] See ] and consider joining the discussion at ]. Btw, do you see why this edit wasn't helpful? ] (]) 20:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
> when, in fact, it was the Los Angels of the American League. | |||
::Thanks, I responded your query there. ] (]) 21:05, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
> Per your article about Haney: | |||
> https://en.wikipedia.org/Fred_Haney "Then, the following year, the American | |||
> League granted an expansion team to Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Angels, and its owner, Gene Autry, chose Haney to operate the team and its organization for him. While the Angels usually struggled on the playing field during Haney's tenure as GM from 1961 to 1968, they did finish a surprising third in 1962, and contended for the 1967 pennant as well."] (]) 00:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== MiszaBot configuration == | |||
:The two articles disagree, but neither article has any references supporting this information. Any baseball fans out there know of a suitable reference that can resolve this?--] (]) 03:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::{{Done}} - Found it in the "Baseball Almanac", in External links of ]. LA Angels it is - I have made that change to the article. Thanks for bringing it to our attention, anonymous IP editor. --] (]) 04:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
On the MiszaBot config for automatically archiving talk pages or other pages, what does the "counter" part do? What if that field is left blank? I just adjusted the parameters for the MiszaBot on ] for instance if anyone wants a real example to answer me in relation to. ] (]) 18:28, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==How to start my 1st Edit-a-thon== | |||
I'm a Misplaced Pages newbie and a part-time employee of a literature & history educational nonprofit. I've been asked to help organize an edit-a-thon, and I'd like some advice on getting started. | |||
(1) Is it better to create a Wiki page for the event, or a Meetup? | |||
(2) If I create a Wiki page, is it a good idea to make a sub-page under the GLAM Wiki? | |||
(3) Since User IDs aren't supposed to be shared, will there be a problem if I create the edit-a-thon page with my own user ID? Does the organization I work for have to have an institutional user ID--or is such a thing even allowed to exist? | |||
Thank you! | |||
] (]) 21:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Welcome to the Teahouse, {{U|Grindall Reynolds}}. I suggest that you start by reading ], which should answer most of your questions. Misplaced Pages accounts are for one individual person, so no, the institution should not have an account. Since you are editing in connection with your job duties, our require you to disclose your employer. | |||
:@] It is the current number of the last used archive. It can be left empty so that it operates using default numbering. You can read further documentation at ]. Hope this helps. Regards, ] (]) 20:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:I have attended lots of edit-a-thons. I recommend that new articles be written in draft or user sandbox pages, and only moved to main space when they are developed a bit, and have several references. Otherwise, the risk of speedy deletion is high, and that can be disheartening for new editors. ] ] 22:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Why would someone ''not ''leave it blank then? Leaving it blank looks to me like it would nearly always be the best option. ] (]) 20:10, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::@] in this case, it could be removed entirely so no one is tempted to fill in answer, but as the documentation mentions, sometimes the format isn't a number, but prefixed with text, e.g "Archive #1" instead of "1". ~ 🦝 ] (he/him • ]) 21:11, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Thanks Shushugah. ] (]) 21:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::{{ping|Iljhgtn}} <code>counter</code> is used for numbered archives. It tells the bot which number to use in the next archiving. You start by manually setting <code>counter = 1</code> unless there are already archives. When the bot has filled up an archive to the allowed size, it automatically increments <code>counter</code>. I don't know what happens if you omit a <code>counter</code> value while asking for numbered archives with <code><nowiki>Archive %(counter)d</nowiki></code>. Maybe the bot will refuse to archive. Or maybe it will set <code>counter</code> to 1 and start archiving like if it had already been set to 1. ] (]) 00:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::Ok so whenever you are creating a new one from scratch and there is no archive, "counter" should be populated with "1"? ] (]) 00:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::::{{ping|Iljhgtn}} Yes, if you want numbered archives and not yearly or monthly archives. ] (]) 01:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Where to start a conversation about naming of natural disasters? == | |||
==world's richest country in 1900== | |||
Why Has the British empire depleted it's monetary to become one of the poorest country's in the list of richest today as they were in the 1900 ] (]) 20:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hello, IP editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is a place to learn and ask questions about editing Misplaced Pages. Could you please explain the issue you have in a bit more detail, such as whether your comment relates to a specific article? ] (]) 20:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:If you have a general question like that which is not about editing articles, you should ask it at ] and they will try to answer it for you. <font face="Papyrus" size="3" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 21:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Hi, | |||
==Want to Create a personal-info page== | |||
I am an actor and I likely to create one here on Wiki like other actors do. Plz help me. | |||
https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Upasanamohanty/sandbox | |||
Upasanamohanty 18:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Hello {{U|Upasanamohanty}}, Misplaced Pages doesn't have "personal-info pages". It has articles, about ], that include information derived from ]. It strongly discourages ] and other articles where the contributor has a ]. If you have been covered at some length in newspapers, magazines, or comparable web publications, then an article could be written, but ] isn't even a good start for such an article, I'm afraid. For one thing, an actual article about an actor would give the actor's real name, or stage name, or most likely both. What you have linked might be appropriate for a facebook page, or some other personal site, but not, I'm afraid, for Misplaced Pages. See ]. ] ] 18:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
It occurs to me that as climate change increases the number of natural disasters, and those disasters lead to more destruction, there will be more and more confusion around names. Therefore I feel it would be helpful to start a discussion that might lead to a policy / guidance on how to name them. | |||
: Welcome to Misplaced Pages. You have obviously misunderstood what Misplaced Pages is. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia. It is not here as a website which you can use for ] and ]. Please read the advice, and various links, on your ]. I see that you have told another editor that you want to advertise yourself as an actor. You therefore need to read Misplaced Pages's views of ] and of ]. --] (]) 18:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
This is currently happening with the Palisades Fire (2025) and Palisades Fire (2021). See the 2025 fire talk page for more (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/search/?oldid=1268426822&title=Talk:Palisades%20Fire%20(2025)) | |||
==Edit to correctness. == | |||
How do I correct a narrative with a source that is not commonly known but historically accurate. There has been extensive Edit wars with the Blue Lantern Wiki page and all I have asked is correct citations as to the origibnal artist and narrative as Geoff did NOT draw or wriote this name or character first as I was both the author as an early comic aficianado. I know it was a bit part and not a national publication but ACCURATE. Can you review and have citations locked when there is vandalism and edit wars by thise who are stubbiorn and IGNORE the truth and accuracy. I just ask the three publications be noted and not ciited to an erroneous source in the interest of accuracy. It is not about legal rights as it is the truth or the name and drawing that does morror the Comic character of the 1960's/ Please help as I would like this to stop and those who choose to ignore the issue and waste my time reverting improperly blocked and the narration frozen to a correct narrative, Thanks. Dan H (Spiffiest)] (]) 16:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Where do I start that sort of discussion? I know it takes time to create policy, and it may or may not lead to any. But it seems useful to start that conversation now. | |||
:Hello, {{U|Spiffiest}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. There are several issues here. Foremost, it is not clear from the source you have been trying to introduce to ] that the comic strip published under the Dan Hatem byline in 1980 dealt with the same Blue Lantern Corps that is a ] property; since only a small preview of the page is shown, it's impossible to determine whether the same organization was depicted as in the later DC Comics publications, or if it is a mere coincidence of name. (If it is the same organization, then Dan Hatem — who may or may not be you; we have no way of knowing — may have violated DC Comics ]s, which are distinct from copyright, in creating the strip.) Another issue is that ''Boston Heights'' newspaper, as a college rather than a community newspaper, may not be considered a ] for Misplaced Pages sourcing. Even if it was, the link in question is to the comic strip itself, which makes it a ], and for any information which may be contentious, Misplaced Pages generally requires secondary sourcing — something like an article in an independent newspaper or magazine, or a chapter in a book, stating that ''Blue Lantern'' was first published in 1980. So while the actual proof of publication may be of the utmost value in proving a claim as to who originated character(s) in a legal setting, on Misplaced Pages, it's pretty much beside the point. I hope this clarifies the situation for you. Feel free to ask any further questions you may have. —] ]] 19:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Thank you! | |||
::<small>(copied from GrammarFascist's talk page by ] ]] 05:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC) )</small> | |||
::I see the link referencing the publication being discussed and am glad that you have taken the time to review the dispute. Your reference to require a secondary source is patently absurd as even DC comics published once and is done for characters. Their own reference does not make the reference any more valuable for historic references. Both DC publication and the Heights are referenced in the Library of Congress, so publications both have secondary sources unlike high school papers. IT IS this reference you yourself seem to think makes it inclusive to Wikipaedea. For this reason there should be an inclusion of this character and timeline as the sources are supported for both and origination as stated as the earlier date referenced. Not every book is referenced by its source and even the Bible that has been republished almost an uncountable amount of times does not require the original author to be referenced by a secondary source. I consider your guide like the Overstreet guide as a reference to only commercial publications but not all publications of character or storyline. ] (]) 22:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::<small>(copied from GrammarFascist's talk page by ] ]] 05:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC) )</small> | |||
delecto ] (]) 18:55, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::{{U|Spiffiest}}, I have moved this conversation back here from my talk page for two reasons: first, to keep the discussion all in one place, and second, to make it easier for other Teahouse volunteers to help explain Misplaced Pages policies to you so that there's no mistaking what I say for merely one editor's opinion. ''']''' is not "patently absurd"; it's how things are done at Misplaced Pages. Whether a periodical is referenced by the Library of Congress is also not a deciding factor as to whether it is considered ''']'''. (Tangentially, the Bible was a poor choice of example, since in fact the vast majority of its authors are agreed to be not merely unknown but unidentifiable.) You're free to hold any opinion you like, but the information you want included in the ] article ''will'' continue to be removed by other editors unless and until you provide a source that is both reliable and secondary by Misplaced Pages's definitions of those terms — I bolded the links to the relevant policies this time in the hope that you would read them. There is no amount of arguing with me or anyone else that is going to change these policies, so I recommend you study them, and either find an appropriate source to use on this site, or take the source you have elsewhere. Another policy you might benefit by perusing states that ''' is a ''great'' place to set the record straight and Right Great Wrongs, but that's not the case."]]''' I'm sorry if this is disappointing, but I would be doing you no favors to hold out false hope. —] ]] 05:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:{{ping|Delectopierre}} Perhaps ] is a good place to start?-- ]<sup>]</sup> 18:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::: {{u|Spiffiest}} - Hi, please take time to review {{u|GrammarFascist}}'s well-provided links. There are some pretty good reasons why Misplaced Pages has its guidelines in place, and this is one of the best, to require reliable, secondary sources when something contentious is added. Grammar's analysis of the sources is pretty spot on. If the information you have is accurate, it must be out there somewhere in a reliable independent source. If not, it probably will continue to be deleted. Hope this gives you a better understanding of Misplaced Pages's guidelines and procedures. Take it easy. ] <sup>]</sup> 15:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:@] I'm not sure if this is relevant to the particular fires you refer to, but I would just add to the above by stating that we do not invent names for things here. Misplaced Pages ''follows'' what other reliable sources say about things and how they call them. Should multiple high-quality sources use alternative names, we do have the ability to create ] pages so that anyone typing one, lesser-used name, will be sent to the right page using the most accepted name. This is not fixed in stone. Thus you can search for ] and ] and arrive at the same page. That particular change took a lot of discussion before a consensus was reached. With ongoing events such as the most recent Palisades fire, it may be that hindsight and ] will allow the best form of discussion of page nomenclature in each case. Regards, ] (]) 19:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::{{ec}} {{U|Spiffiest}} I think you are misunderstanding what is meant by a secondary source, and why it is needed. I think you are also misunderstanding what constitutes an acceptable reference. For example, "Heights Boston College 1980", which you inserted as a citation in is not an acceptable source, as a) it is not a publication, and b) does not give such details as volume, number or date of publication, nor any author. Misplaced Pages is not the place to do ] which includes analysis of conflicting sources. Instead, we cite ] who have already done such analysis, and who are not directly connected with the topics being written about. This helps provide a level of objectivity and distance (although it is surely true that some secondary sources are biased). Misplaced Pages only uses ] with care and for limited purposes, and not to support controversial or contested statements. The demand for secondary sources is made on every article on Misplaced Pages, this article is not being singled out. | |||
::@] thanks. I'm not talking about naming things. This is occurring because fires -- at least in CA -- are named by dispatchers as a way to make it easier for the firefighters to communicate over the radio. e.g. the fire at 123 main st becomes the 'Main St. Fire' and nothing is preventing the same thing from happening the following week/month/year. This creates a situation where there can be multiple fires known as the Main St fire. | |||
::::I gather that you are claiming that the original version of the Blue Lanterns was drawn in a college newspaper as a comic strip, and only later appeared in the publications of DC comics. This is a somewhat extraordinary claim, and thus requires extraordinary evidence. At a minimum, we would need a critical review or analysis published in a ] that is ] of the creators of the comic, saying both that a comic by the name of "Blue Lantern" had been published at that time and place, and that the characters or content was recognizably the same or similar to the later DC publication. It is especially that last conclusion that Misplaced Pages must not draw without a source. It is not for you or I or any editor here to decide that the earlier comic is the same as the later, better known, DC publication; even if we had the entire run in front of us. We need a published reliable source that says so, and a proper citation to that source. | |||
::This is in contrast to hurricanes, for example, as the national weather service retires a name once a storm with that name becomes significant; at least as I understand it. | |||
::::I also note that you, and someone editing without logging in, who may well be you, have been ] to insert this content, and to insist on particular details of format and wording, at least one of which seems to be an error of grammar. ("{{xt|he Blue Lantern Corps ... is an organization ''appeared'' in the Heights , a Boston College Newspaper...}}") Please do not engage in any further edit warring on this (or indeed any other) article. Edit warring is disruptive to the project, and can be a reason for an editor to be ] from further editing for a period, or indeed indefinitely should the editor persist in warring. Instead follow the ] cycle, and once there is a known conflict, use the article talk page to discuss the matter and, I hope, reach consensus. If consensus cannot be reached through such discussions, then please use the avenues of ]. | |||
:: |
::As such, it seems to me that it would be helpful to come up with some guidance on how articles are named for natural disasters that share a name in the real world. ] (]) 00:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
:::{{ping|Delectopierre}} Don't overthink this. The existing policies cover this just fine. If–and ''when''–sources change the ], we follow accordingly. Future fires in this area will be unlikely to be named "Palisades Fire" even though it isn't formally codified, just like the ] isn't a name you're going to hear again out of all likelihood.--] ] 00:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Please do not patronize me by suggesting I am overthinking this, and please don't WP:BLUDGEON me by responding to every comment I've made to someone else regarding this. ] (]) 00:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::I'm afraid you ''are'' overthinking it, which is common when you encounter Misplaced Pages's policies and procedures anew. It's not bludgeoning when I'm saying nothing ''about'' you and am answering the questions you pose pretty directly.--] ] 00:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::I just asked you not to use that phrase and you repeated it. This has gone from patronizing to willful disrespect. Cut it out. ] (]) 00:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::::I've been treating you with great patience but you refuse to trust me. I have about 200 times the amount of edits and 3 times your tenure here and I'm sharing the thorough understanding of policies and guidelines I've accumulated. Call it what you want, but ] becomes beautifully simple once you read it. If you need more specifics, different ] may have their own guidelines about how that general policy applies, but they're all ultimately basically just that. I've been through your situation numerous times. Don't cast the ] of "willful disrespect".--] ] 00:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:{{ping|Delectopierre}} To add to what Nick says, it is frowned upon to post about an ongoing decision making discussion elsewhere (unless it is to raise serious misconduct concerns) as it could be considered ], particularly when the incipient consensus is leaning against your position.--] ] 21:15, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::{{u|Delectopierre}}, in this case, the relevant guideline is ] and the applicable subsection is ]. It is all clear and well-established. ] (]) 22:16, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::I don't see anything in ] that discusses how WP would treat, eg, two planets named Mercury. ] (]) 00:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Which one is the ]? In that hypothetical situation there probably wouldn't be a primary topic. But this is not analogous to that situation. This is more like ] being by far the most notable storm named Tip, even though the name was never formally retired.--] ] 00:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::@] can you point me to any policy that says its frowned upon to discuss future improvements based on a current conversation? ] (]) 00:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::{{ping|Delectopierre}} I already did. You can't do it with the appearance of trying to sway a discussion you're involved in.--] ] 00:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::You did not. You said it's frowned upon and referenced a policy. ] "it is frowned upon to point to a policy shortcut without explaining ''how'' it applies to the exact situation at hand." | |||
::::I came to teahouse because I am relatively new and want to improve this encyclopedia. You coming here and inserting yourself in this discussion is not a friendly thing to do to a newcomer such as me. ] (]) 00:43, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::Unlike them, I explained clearly how that policy applies here instead of just pointing to it. You linked the ongoing discussion. How do you expect others to react to that? I'm explaining things in a civil manner. Misplaced Pages is complicated and there are many rules to learn. Please read others' responses too as I agree with them as well.--] ] 00:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Userbox == | |||
Well I made a ] with an image. But when I use the full image like normal just takes the screen up. and when I use thumbnail image it has this border around it. How will I fix it? ] ] ] 00:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==Creating an article== | |||
:@] {{fixed}}, by specifying a size for the image. <span style="white-space:nowrap"><span style="font-family:monospace">'''<nowiki>''']<nowiki>]]'''</nowiki>'''</span> (] • ])</span> 02:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I wish to create an article on the physicist René Wurmser. However, I do not know whether this article is needed or not. Is there a place where I can discuss this with other Wikipedians? ] (]) 14:48, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Thank you @]! ;) ] ] ] 02:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:You could ask at ]. However, in searching Misplaced Pages, I see that several articles refer to him. If you have ] to construct a biography, please create it via ] and, if it is good, it will probably be approved. ] (]) 15:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Help with draft article == | |||
:{{ec}} Hello, {{U|The Pokémon Fan}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. Whether René Wurmser is an appropriate candidate for a Misplaced Pages article depends on whether he met Misplaced Pages's ] — that is, whether articles and/or books by ] have discussed him and his work in some detail. A quick look in Google showed several possible sources, but most of them are in French, which I can't read. The good news is that references cited on English Misplaced Pages can be in any language so long as they are both relevant and ]. | |||
Hello! | |||
:If M. Wurmer was indeed ] enough (as Misplaced Pages defines notability), then you can create an article so long as you cite sources which demonstrate his notability. I see that the French Misplaced Pages already has an article on René Wurmser; if you understand French well enough, you're welcome to translate some or all of the content of that article for an article here at English Misplaced Pages, though you would have to attribute translated content properly. ] explains how to do this. There are only two sources cited in the French article, which is generally not enough at English Misplaced Pages unless one of the sources is a book entirely devoted to the subject of the article. But those sources may be useful, if you can access them (there are no links to them at French Misplaced Pages, so they may not be available online; offline sources are also allowed, though online sources and sources in English are preferred). Thank you for your interest in improving Misplaced Pages, and feel free to return with any futher questions you have. —] ]] 15:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::{{U|The Pokémon Fan}}, A quick books.google.com search suggests a definite likelihood that there are enough sources even in English that discuss him to merit an article and if one has access to French sources, too ... well! In addition to the ] mentioned earlier, see also ] -- ] 00:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::from what I see in the previews, it looks like he might be more of a physiologist than a physicist so you might want to try at ] as well. -- ] 00:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I am a new wikipedia user, I was hoping to create an article for a song: | |||
==Colourful names== | |||
Some editors have colourful names in Talk Pages. ] (]) 14:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
: Hi {{U|Eden's Apple}}, you can get a colorful name yourself by going to ] and changing your signature there. Be sure to check the box that says "treat the above as Wikimarkup", or it won't work. For a full description of what's allowed and disallowed in signatures, see ]--some colors, particularly very light ones, are not allowed because they are too hard for others to read. Hope that helped you. ] (]) 14:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:Bird_On_The_Buffalo | |||
:Hi ] and welcome to the Teahouse. For customizing your signature you will find information at ], there is also this page: ] on how it's done and where you can find examples of signatures. When you have entered the new signature at "Preferences → User profile", the four tildes will automatically create the signature when you type them and click on save. ]<small>]</small> 14:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I have used several independent sources, but seem not to qualify for article creation at this time, due to not meeting notability criteria. | |||
==What is "hasten the day" in Wikiculture?== | |||
I have heard this phrase a few times "hasten the day" most recently in that one candidate for Arbitrator was called a "hasten the day" candidate. What is the meaning of this phrase? ] (]) 13:11, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hi ], welcome to the Teahouse. "hasten the day" is an English expression and doesn't have a more specific meaning in wikiculture. ] means to make something happen quicker, and "hasten the day" means to make it happen on an earlier day. I think it's usually used by people who consider the anticipated event to be revolutionary, whether in a good or bad way. At ], the poster indicated what they meant in the next sentence. ] (]) 13:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks for your answer, but i guess i don't understand your answer because i don't see the explanation of what was meant there in the poster's question. Hmm... i have surely heard this term around within Misplaced Pages recently, a couple times. Thanks for the try. ] (]) 14:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::], as I've seen it used, it's a philosophy that the arbitration committee needs to come to an end--perhaps to be replaced by something else, perhaps not--and so their preferred candidates are the ones they believe would be most disruptive to the committee either because they are viewed as opinionated, intransigent or because they wouldn't work well with other members of the committee. It's an approach you can see in the essay ]. <font face="Papyrus" size="3" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 17:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::{{Ping|SageRad}} I saw the talkback on your talk page, and came here from that. Actually, the answer is a little different from what other editors here have said. There ''is'' a very specific meaning that has arisen in Wiki-culture, but it mostly arose at other websites, not here. (Poor me, I've been on Misplaced Pages so long that I know about this.) It is primarily a slogan that used to be used on forum board discussions at ] and continues to be used at ]. It is used there, often by people who have become very alienated from past experiences as Misplaced Pages editors, to denote "the day" when the English Misplaced Pages and all the Wikimedia projects (and not just ArbCom) go out of business, when the websites go dark. It is used pejoratively with respect to Misplaced Pages. One typical usage would be that when someone trolls on Misplaced Pages, they are doing something good, because by harming Misplaced Pages, they are "hastening the day". Another would be, that if so-and-so gets elected to ArbCom or becomes an administrator, or if some particularly odious decision is made by ArbCom, that it will contribute to the downfall of the project, proving that the critics of Misplaced Pages were right all along. If you look closely at the GMO PD talk page, you will see that one editor made a post, lambasting the PD, and referring to "hasten the day" in the sense that the editor thinks a bad decision will hasten the downfall of the project. --] (]) 18:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
If I could have a couple pointers in the right direction, that would be great. Thank you! ] (]) 00:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==should i create this article ?== | |||
:While ] is considered article-worthy, as are his six albums, and a small number of songs on those albums, perhaps ''Bird on the Buffalo'' does not have enough published about it to justify an article. Most of your refs acknowledge the song and video exist, but do not provide at-length reviews of the song or how it was received. ] (]) 12:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Xiamen university Xiang'an campus .It is second campus of xiamen university.Its quiet big and there is no information about it on wikipedia.] (]) 12:25, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hello {{U|Dr. Pankaj Sharma}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read ] and consider, has this campus been written about in several published ] ] that are not merely local, with significant coverage, say at least several paragraphs, in each? This means not blogs, not publications of the university itself, not directory entries, and not purely local newspapers. It means publications with editorial control and a reputation for accuracy. In other words, is this topic ]? If and only if the answer is "yes" should you consider an article. In which case please also read ] and ]. Alternatively, the campus could be included in the existing article about the university. ] ] 12:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Asking about wiki Inuit == | |||
==Speedy Deletion Tag== | |||
My first submission was tagged - Speedy Deletion. No understanding of why. Not sure it was submitted correctly in total or whether references were adequate or correctly inserted. | |||
Hello, I’m reviving the Inuit Misplaced Pages, but sadly I don’t know Inuit and the rest of the ones I know doesn’t even know the existence of the language. What I do then? ] (]) 01:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Subject matter Chadwick Mobile Digital Mall explains new patented mobile digital technology. | |||
Can someone help with 2nd attempt? | |||
] (]) 10:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:], I'm not sure that you have correctly understood what a reference is in this context. The references section of ] contains a list of e-mail addresses. References should list the details of sources for the material in the article, such as newspaper articles, books, etc. While the article you created has not yet been deleted, I would suggest having a read of ] and perhaps following the procesdure for creating an article that is outlined there. That will take you via the drafts process, where you can get feedback on your proposed article and not have to worry about speedy deletion. ] (]) 10:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Regarding , ], to remove the e-mail references, you just need to edit the article and delete that content from the edit window. Instructions on how to insert proper references are given at ]. ] (]) 10:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::That said, a returns no results for "Chadwick Mobile Digital Mall", apart from pages related to the Misplaced Pages article. That doesn't bode well for the availability of references, ], unless a different name is being used? ] (]) 11:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::I am sorry, {{U|Robertson Drew}}, but I have deleted this as being excessively promotional. It also violated ] in that it was about a product not yet released, without any evidence of significant outside discussion on the planned release. In fact, it read like a press release. If you want to try again, I urge you to first read ] and ], then if you think the article can establish ] of its topic, assemble a list of ] ] that have covered the topic in some detail. Then and only then, use the ] to create a draft under the ] project. This allows the draft to be improved without being subject to all the ] until it is reviewed and accepted by an experienced editor. ] ] 12:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Inuit wikipedia is ] ] ] ] 01:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Draft Lleyson Hopkin Davy v2 == | |||
::Still, can you revise my work to fix possible grammar mistakes? ] (]) 02:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::What work? ] ] ] 02:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::My new articles on Inuit Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 02:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::Tell me specificly, Which articles? ] ] ] 02:08, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::All articles i create there, (Example: the Jal 123 article) ] (]) 02:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Don't. Just follows ] comment ] ] ] 02:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
*If you do not speak a language, you should not be writing articles for that Misplaced Pages project. Someone did that on Scots Misplaced Pages and severely set back the project, creating a ton of additional work for people. Left unchecked, you can actually end up corrupting databases of the Inuit language that assume that the Misplaced Pages project is in well-written Inuit. <sub>signed, </sub>] <sup>]</sup> 02:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Please don't write articles in languages that you aren't fluent in. That's a recipe for disaster. ] (]) 17:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Added a couple extra references here. Comments/ constructive edit welcome. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 09:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:For reference, the draft is ]. —] ] ] 09:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Welcome to the Teahouse {{u|Davymi}}. Without getting to your draft yet, let me give you some mechanical advice: | |||
:*To start a new section at the Teahouse please click the blue "Ask a question" button at the top. This will post your question at the top of the page. At the Teahouse the questions at the bottom of the page are old questions. I moved your question to the top for you. | |||
:*Please enter a link the page you are asking about: That will save hosts from having to look up your contributions. I linked it for you above but entering <nowiki>]</nowiki>. | |||
:—] ] ] 09:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::], there are a couple of newspapers/journals cited - the ''South Australian Register'' and the ''London Mining Journal''. Is it possible to add article titles and page numbers to these? ] (]) 10:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Thanks, yes I am in the process of tracking these down. . bit tricky being so old, but the Mining Journal still exists and I have made enquiries. Fingers crossed they will be added shortly. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 08:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:OK, fair enough, but can I ask how you know what the sources say if you haven't seen them, ]? ] (]) 08:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I have digital screenshots of the txt excerpts (several contempory newspapers) referencing the information, but not the page numbers from the original journal entry. As you say I need to go back to the original journal to get the page no.s etc. to cite correctly - this is in train. Cheers davymi. 20.25pm 24/11/15 std. East. Time Aust. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 09:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Protoeus, I note you've ''already'' created one article on Inuit Misplaced Pages. Creating articles in Inuit Misplaced Pages without knowing how to speak Inuktituk is not a bannable offense, because I don't think that's ever been considered before, but I think it's a reasonable argument for deleting the article. ] (]) 03:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==Captcha == | |||
I have opened an account, still i have to enter captcha while editing. This is time waste.] (]) 07:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Welcome to the Teahouse {{u|Eden's Apple}}. Your account is a little under two days old. When it is four days old, you will be ] and will not have to enter captchas. —] ] ] 08:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Writing quoted material from ancient books in the Library of Ireland to credit source and also the host family it was written about. == | |||
::Hello {{ping|Eden's Apple}}, As ] says your account is a little new. When your account will be four days old and have at least 10 edits you will not have to enter captchas again in future. Please read more about ]. Have a great time on Misplaced Pages Happy editing. Regards ]<sup style="font-style: italic; color:#0000FF;">]</sup> 15:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
All of the information has been rewritten from the source of the Annals of the Four Masters! An Ancient Book from the Library of Ireland! And a Lineage has been added! if someone else used this first it is still not copyrighted as it is source material taken from the same place for a different purpose but still withing the same context! ] (]) 02:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==Is there a place for help on leads?== | |||
Hey guys! Name's DannyMusicEditor. I mostly edit articles strictly related to music, mostly rock and metal at that, but there are exceptions. Recently, I have been wanting to help Thirty Seconds to Mars' third album, ''],'' become a GA article. However, it has a very poor lead, and I would like to know how to get some help to fix that (I'm just as poor at writing them). '''] <sup> ] </sup> 19:34, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:{{ping|DannyMusicEditor}} welcome to the teahouse! | |||
:The guidance for lead sections is at ]. Essentially the first sentence should provide the ''Who/what/Where/When'' essentials about the subject of the article (not necessarily the ''Why'' because that can get too complicated to work into a simple sentence), and then the rest of the lead should summarize the rest of the article (The ''Why'' can be detailed here). Often times the content we have for singles and albums does not necessitate anything other than a "lead" - artificially creating a "body" that merely is section bloat. -- ] 20:10, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Please leave everything you write in your sandbox or draft space, because it's clear you aren't yet ready to create articles that have a chance of acceptance. Submit for review if you like - that will give you a better idea of the problems. ] (]) 08:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Welcome indeed, {{u|DannyMusicEditor}}. There is a good summary essay on creating leads here: ''']''' initially created by a Misplaced Pages editor {{u|BullRangifer}} to help other editors cut through the more official MOSLEAD guidelines. It has a handy table for creating a lead too. A lead is supposed to include elements of each section of an article in summary form. Encyclopedia sentences are easy to write: e.g.- John Smith drove his car to the store. No need to get flowerly. Cheers! <code>{{u|]}} {]}</code> 22:30, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hello, @], and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read ] carefully. What you have put in ] does not in the least resemble a Misplaced Pages article, which should be a summary of what ] have published about a ] subject, and little else. ] (]) 11:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== DOB == | |||
::Thanks {{u|Checkingfax}} for the WP:CREATELEAD mention above. I updated the ] tip accordingly. Cheers! ] (]) 17:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Just recently I entered into a discussion with another editor regarding a DOB edit for a BLP: ]. It raised several questions regarding contentious content and RS when it comes to DOB and BLPs. Since leaving my last reply, I have been perusing similar BLP pages on WP and having stopped at 50 found that 48 did not have ''any'' cited sources; let alone ones that were backed by RS which would satisfy the editor in question's reasoning. I could list them all here, but toward what end? It is extremely rare to find multiple "widely published" RS that state DMY for BLPs. It has already been backed by RS that this BLP was born in 1979; how "contentious" could it be to include "March 26"? I am at a loss here, considering there are countless articles at WP that allow DOB without "widely published" RS. ] (]) 03:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==Moving an image to Commons== | |||
Hi, in the article ] is an image, that I would like to use in another language Misplaced Pages (File:Oliver Theatre Royal Bill Board.JPG). For over a year this image is marked for transfer to Commons, but it still hasn't transferred and I don't know how to do this (all my tries went wrong). Is there any person who would be so kind, to do that, so that it can be used in other language Wikipedias? ] (]) 08:39, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:I am working on it now. I'll give a holler when done.--] (]) 14:12, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::All done. I tweaked the name slightly to lowercase the JPG. It's at ]. Best regards--] (]) 14:28, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::Thank you so much. I'm in a hurry at the moment, but tomorror I will use it in the German Misplaced Pages. Thank you! ] (]) 20:25, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::I have integrated it into the corresponding article in the German Misplaced Pages now. Thank you very much again. ] (]) 18:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::Glad to help.--] (]) 00:03, 25 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:"Allow" is an interesting word. If you see a detail in an article that doesn't have a proper source, feel free to remove it. ] (]) 04:18, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
==Making an article live in search engines.== | |||
Dear Representatives, | |||
I'm Trying to write a information flowing article of my Idol (Local Actor/director) from Nepal. And i guess, i made it up with good contents too, but when i search it in search engines like Google or Yahoo i couldn't find the listing of the particular article. Hope you will guide me in a ease way, | |||
Misplaced Pages Article name : Arpan Thapa | |||
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/Arpan_Thapa | |||
::"If you see a detail in an article that doesn't have a proper source, feel free to remove it." That is rather a unrestrained invitation to an open season for removal of practically any sentence found at WP lacking a "proper source" at the end of it. Not only is that incredibly unproductive, but highly nonsensical. I am specifically referring to DOB of a BLP and it being labeled "contentious content" when search engines render the same DOB (MDY) innumerable times over, and certain WP policy apply: "the subject does not object to the details being made public." It's one thing to argue WP policy, but quite another to defend ]. ] (]) 13:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
regards, | |||
:::I haven't looked at the discussion you mention but I think that you should be weighing ] against ]. If, for example, someone says on their own verified social media "It's my birthday today", or their website includes their DOB, I would be happy to use that, despite such media in general being ] and unreliable. ] (]) 15:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Nikhil | |||
::::] The BLP herself has confirmed she was born in 1979: "I'm 41" (2020 Interview) and "Conaty was born in Camden 40 years ago" (2019 Interview). How much more of a public statement directly from the BLP can one get? ] (]) 17:00, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 07:00, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::These are perfectly fine sources. I thought that your issue was the exact date, not just the year. Note that there is a template {{t|Birth based on age as of date}} that can be used to cover a level of uncertainty. ] (]) 17:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Welcome to the Teahouse, {{U|AkhilThakuri}}. Misplaced Pages has no direct influence on how Google or Yahoo will display search results. They determine that with their own algorithms. In my experience, a Misplaced Pages article will usually display high in an online search. The most likely way to make a specific Misplaced Pages article display higher in search engine results is to improve and expand the article. | |||
::::::I was - in a way. I was arguing the policy: "the subject does not object to the details being made public." One would think if the BLP in question saw the innumerable search engine hits that state MDY that at some point - it would stand to reason - they would make a statement of correction: "This is not my birth date." In keeping with Martha Stewart who pointed out on television certain details on WP that were incorrect; or BLPs who have taken to the Talk Page to correct errors at their articles. If the BLP is open to disclosing being born in 1979, why one earth would they object to March 26? considering it is widely stated over the internet and associated with 1979? It makes absolutely no sense. I understand WP requires RS; but this one is a little over the top. Why would March 26 be contentious but 1979 not? Simply because the BLP didn't add the MD in an interview? As I wrote, there are very little RS articles that state: "Such-and-such was born on DMY" in an interview / profile piece. Copy editors find this to be trivial filler / fluff. Exactly how many celebrity websites (as the original editor suggested as a RS) state: "I was born on DMY"? Just thinking out loud here. Regardless, thanks for the template {{t|Birth based on age as of date}}. ] (]) 17:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::::May not be relevant in this case but DMY dates are more of a privacy issue than just the year as many bank accounts etc. use that as part of their security checks, as do many website logons. Also, don't forget that search engines often take WP, especially Wikidata as gospel, so our figure can get copied all over the place. ] (]) 17:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::::Well, now you've just created a "chicken and the egg" scenario when it comes to search engines taking from WP. Considering more people today believe sources that WP have deemed "deprecated" than WP itself. I simply do not buy into the concept that WP manufactured March 26 from which all other search engine hits have copied from across the WWW; since there were sources that claimed the DOB long before the 2011 WP article creation. I understand ''The Sun'' is considered a deprecated source, but this article interview: with the BLP which links to this article states March 26, 1979. If someone wants to "steal bank accounts etc", I'm quite sure "The Sun" (1.2 million subscribers) would be a great place to start; not WP. ] (]) 19:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::I said {{tq|May not be relevant in this case}} and was tying to make a wider point about why the precise DMY as DOB is something we need to be careful of when contributing. ] (]) 12:21, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::I understand. But I'd rather discuss the actual individual case at hand rather than umbrella WP policy. Like the original editor, it is sometimes the case that umbrella WP policies (wider points) get argued more than discussion of the actual individual case at hand. That's all. Thanks again for your help. I still strongly believe this BLP is safe with MDY inclusion. ] (]) 15:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== How to get suggestions on Talk page be seen by editors? == | |||
:I live in California, and when I search Google for "Arpan Thapa", the Misplaced Pages article about him is #7 on the search list. That isn't bad. ] ] 08:04, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Hi community, | |||
:Welcome to the Teahouse. The way to link to a Misplaced Pages page is to provide a ]; <code><nowiki>]</nowiki></code> renders as ]. Your question about Google and Yahoo needs to be addressed to Google and to Yahoo, not to Misplaced Pages, but you may find that it will take a little while for their databases to be updated. --] (]) 08:02, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I'm on Misplaced Pages on behalf of Tencent, hence I would not make any direct edits to any branded pages. I have left some suggestions onto the ] page and would appreciate if any editors who may be interested in the Tech space would help us review our suggestions there. | |||
:Hi ], when I search with Google for Arpan Thapa from Sweden the article is right there on the first page. As Cullen328 points out, the time it takes before the servers in a country pick up on a new article varies. I'm sure it will pop up in Nepal soon. Also, when David Biddulph wrote about a Wikilink, that link has nothing to do with Google or Yahoo. It should not be in the article itself (I have removed it now) it is the way ''other'' articles ''in'' the Misplaced Pages links to the article. ]<small>]</small> 10:10, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hi {{u|AkhilThakuri}}, when I want to find something quick on Misplaced Pages I go to Google or Bing and type in: | |||
:Arpan Thapa Misplaced Pages, or if I'm feeling lazy I type in: arpan thapa wiki | |||
:Your actor shows up #2 on Google this way. Arpan Thapa is indexed. Cheers! <code>{{u|]}} {]}</code> 01:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 03:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Thank you, Wikipedians for all the suggestion and effort that you have made to lead my article with a proper guidelines. | |||
:@]: The best way to do this is with the {{tlx|COI edit request}} template. See also: the ]. ]<sub>]<sub>]</sub></sub> (]/]) 03:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Hope for future talks, | |||
::@]: please also see {{slink|Misplaced Pages:Edit requests#General considerations}}: you are far more likely to get a response to an edit request if you provide ''detailed'' and ''specific'' suggestions. We also discourage ].<span id="ClaudineChionh:1736491471401:WikipediaFTTCLNTeahouse" class="FTTCmt"> — ''']''' <small>(''she/her'' · ] · ] · ] · ])</small> 06:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)</span> | |||
regards, ] (]) 05:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Adding Filmography == | |||
::But let's not forget that we don't really care about search engine rankings. We are here to build an encyclopedia.--] (]) 14:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I am looking to add a filmography to a page. I am using the template "filmography simple" and have added the first listing. When adding subsequent line items, they are in their required fields, yet do not show/populate on the page. How can we make the additional credits visible? Thanks. ] (]) 04:21, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== ] (again) == | |||
:Hello, @]. Would I be right in guessing that 1) you're talking about ], and 2) that you've actually solved the problem? I'm afraid my mind-reading skill isn't working very well today. ] (]) 12:09, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I reviewed the eighth submission of this draft. It had already been declined seven times. I declined it an eighth time, on notability grounds (as usual). I observed that, in response to a request to insert wikilinks to other articles, the author had single-bracketed them rather than double-bracketing them. This resubmission cycle has been going on for more than two months. I nominated it for ]. The author, ], then posted the following to my talk page: | |||
::Yes. Task completed. ] (]) 16:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
"I have taken this paper to the writing center at my school, Eckerd College 4 times. Each time with the comments and suggestions after my declines. They are professionals and have written Misplaced Pages pages, and they can not see what the problem is and why I am being declined. | |||
I would like to talk to your supervisor to see why I am being declined and to discuss with them why you are treating me so rudely with your remarks." | |||
== Using LLMs for finding sources == | |||
First, we are all volunteers here, and no volunteer editor has a supervisor, but you are welcome to discuss with my peers. Second, as to the advice that you are getting at ], I assume that when you say that they are professionals, you mean that they are professional writers and faculty members. The fact that they have written Misplaced Pages pages doesn't mean that they are experienced Misplaced Pages editors or how familiar they are with Misplaced Pages, only that they are Misplaced Pages editors. Maybe the pages that they have written have had to do with literary criticism or language, topics for which many reliable sources are available. They may not be familiar with Misplaced Pages's policies as to ]. You have been declined by multiple volunteer editors, so that presumably your question is addressed to multiple volunteer editors, not just to me. (I agree that I drew a line in the sand that they hadn't drawn by requesting deletion.) Some of them had commented that you weren't addressing the comments of other reviewers. | |||
Ok, I don't understand this, What is the problem in using chatbots for finding sources(reliable). Is there any rules regarding this? | |||
I welcome the comments of other editors (who, as noted, are my peers). | |||
My submission got declined partly due to this.----] (]) 05:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:The problem is that chatbots will never say "I don't know". If they don't have an answer, they'll make something up. | |||
:If a chatbot pointed you to a real source, and you used it, then that's not why your submission was declined. ] (]) 06:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::The cites in ] (which is what I assume we're talking about here) have the URLs appended with <code>utm_source=chatgpt.com</code>, which doesn't necessarily invalidate the source, but suggests that the draft may have been LLM-generated. | |||
::@]: if (?) these are genuinely ''bona fide'' sources, then do yourself the favour of at least unappending the utm source parameter from the citations. -- ] (]) 10:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:@] DS pretty much covereged it, but, essentially, chatbots and LLMs (Such as ChatGPT) are really good at finding <em>patterns</em>. If you show a new one a collection of red triangles and blue circles, then ask it to guess what colours circles are, it'll tell you that "circles are green". Doesn't that sound silly to you? Circles dont have colors! Well, it's how machine learning works - they don't think, they find patterns. And they're really good at it! If I gave one a thousand scans of human brains, and asked it to look for anything that seemed weird, it could probably tell me if any of the brains had a tumour. But it doesn't know what a tumour is, or how to treat one, or why we even care about tumours in the first place! The same in true in the case you're asking. If you ask a LLM to give you a list of reliable sources, it will give you sources that ] resemble reliable sources. For example, it might "know" that websites which talk about astronomy using long words are more likely to be reliable than websites which don't talk about astronomy using long words. So it gives you websites which talk about astronomy, regardless as to whether or not those websites are reliables sources or not. Alternatively, it may know that print sources are often very reliable. LLMs can't read print sources, however, so it makes up a fake one because that's what large language models are designed to do - talk to you. You actually probably could have an AI search sources for you, and pull out sources with the most relevant keywords. However, again, that's not what current large language models are designed to do. Could that change someday? Absolutely! But for now, you're going to get much better results by doing the research yourself, say, at a library or by using Google Scholar. | |||
:In this particular case, I see you're trying to write an article about a metereor shower. I've had a look around for you: this meteor shower is already mentioned in a mainspace article, at ]. There, it is supported by one source- an article published in 2012 in '']''. Perhaps before you try writing an article from scratch (which is one of the most difficult tasks possible - I edited Misplaced Pages for six years as an IP before creating this account and making an article), you expand the section there? You can always ] your work into a new article at a later date, if you think it's worthy of a stand along page. ] (]) 11:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks a lot...👍👍You certainly made editing more easier ----] (]) 13:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::You may certainly use a chatbot to ''find'' a source. But you should not ''cite'' that source in a Misplaced Pages article without checking that the source exists, and that it says what the chatbot claimed it says. ] (]) 15:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::{{u|Warriorglance}}, at this point, chatbots and other AI/LLM tools are incapable of determining whether or not a given source is reliable for use as a Misplaced Pages reference. So, a request to a chatbot is just roughly equivalent to a Google search. In either case, you will get a list of possibilities, and it is up to the human editor to separate the wheat from the chaff to identify the highest quality reliable sources that convey information useful to include in an encyclopedia article. The ability to identify truly reliable sources is the most important skill of a Misplaced Pages editor, and expecting "artificial stupidity" to do that job is a big mistake, at least in 2025. ] (]) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::@] A better search engine than Google for this at the moment may be ]. They have incorporated the latest LLM technology into their product but avoided the pitfalls of hallucinations by still only showing, and sometimes summarising, results linked to actual web sources. There is no guarantee that these sources are reliable, of course. Note that there is a special version of Google search which has been customised to focus on Misplaced Pages-reliable sources. You can access it ] (]) 12:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:], LLMs are basically trained on an accumulation of (stolen) material which can include outdated info and they also tend to ]. If you are still going to use these programs to find sources (even though Google is an option), exercise caution and verify their existence by searching them via a search engine.<span id="LunaEclipse:1736535303832:WikipediaFTTCLNTeahouse" class="FTTCmt"> — 💽 ] 💽 🌹 ⚧ <sup>(''']''')</sup> 18:55, 10 January 2025 (UTC)</span> | |||
== Expanding a contents index for categories == | |||
] (]) 04:22, 21 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I have posted a suggestion to expand a contents index for categories to cover non-default name spaces. Anybody interested in discussing or implementing the idea please see {{section link| Template talk:Automatic category TOC| Special subsections for namespaces}}. --] (]) 06:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I wanted to know if you went to college? Where did you graduate from what was your degree in and was it a PH.D. ? | |||
I would like to be contacted by one the cofounder of Misplaced Pages, if Jimmy Whales is available I would like to talk to him about this. | |||
== Requesting or creating a list article == | |||
] (]) 04:55, 21 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Robert's educational background has no bearing on whether or not the article you are trying to write is based on ]. If it is not, it will be declined again. If such sources do not exist, the article will not exist. --]] 05:42, 21 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I'd like to request or create the article ], with links to existing articles for animals that have been in memes. I'm not sure if I will have enough time and sources to create a full article on my own, and this would be my first. I considered submitting a ], but I'm not sure if I need to include sources or proofs of notability. Additionally, I considered submitting to ] specifically, but the page is inactive and I assume it's not supposed to be used. | |||
::{{U|Aagreeny4}}, any editor may contact Jimmy Wales - he gives details at ]. Your particular question seems to fall into the category of "General Misplaced Pages questions" there. --] (]) 07:01, 21 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Would it be more appropriate to request an article, or start a draft myself and ask for help reviewing or completing it? ] (]) 07:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::First, as Jimmy Wales says, for General Misplaced Pages questions, go to the Help Desk or the Teahouse. We are here at the Teahouse. You can post to the talk page of ], and you will definitely get an answer, but it may or may not be from Jimmy Wales, and it may or may not be useful. ] (]) 16:49, 21 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:{{u|Nick McCurdy}}, what you would want to look at is ]. Has "animals in memes", as a group, been discussed substantially by ]? (It's possible it has been; I really don't know.) If so, a list of them might be notable, but if not, such an article would be a nonstarter. So, as always, first thing to do is look for sourcing. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 14:18, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::{{u|Nick McCurdy}}, to clarify, a reliable source noting "this meme included a chimpanzee" and another reliable source commenting "that meme over there included an elephant" is not enough. What you would need are references to several reliable sources saying something like, "Memes frequently use animals, like this chimp meme and that elephant meme and that porpoise meme and that parrot meme and this octopus meme and that salmon spawing while being eaten by bears meme. Here's the reasons why . . . " That is the type of coverage that transforms an indiscriminate list into an encyclopedic list. It is all about the quality and depth of coverage of the reliable sources that you cite. ] (]) 09:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Page citations == | |||
:::Hi {{U|Robert McClenon|Robert}}, I understand your frustration. I find it hard to understand why some new editors ignore the advice they are given and continue submitting their drafts without correcting the issues pointed out to them. All the same, I'm not entirely certain that deleting the draft is the optimal outcome here. | |||
The article for ] has the maintenance message about needing additional citations. Some parts said "citation needed", and I added reliable sources to those parts, and now I'm wondering: should I remove the message, or are there still more citations needed in order to remove it? Thank you! ] (]) 07:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::It's a shame that the ''Chronicle of Higher Education'' source doesn't seem to be online; it might at least begin to establish notability, but unless someone who volunteers here has access to back issues, I don't think it would be appropriate to AGF that there is substantial coverage in this case. I've never heard of ''Scholatic Coach'' before, and I don't know whether it counts as ]; several Misplaced Pages articles reference the magazine, but it does not have an article about it here. | |||
:Hi, @]! If you think you've solved the problem that the maintenance tag was calling attention to, then please feel free to ] and remove the tag! The worst thing that will happen is somebody adds the tag back. If you're ever unsure, however, you can always ask for the opinion of the person who placed the tag - which in this case was {{yo|Cordless Larry}}. At that point, either they'll agree that the article doesn't need a tag, or they can point to other, maybe more subtle issues, that they feel need addressing. Either way, the article is improved and everybody is happy. Thank you for doing your part to add information to Misplaced Pages! ] (]) 11:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::I did some Googling for sources. Using newspaper search, I found a couple of articles in '']'', which is a university paper but may be one of the few of those which counts as a reliable source; I encourage other Teahouse volunteers to share their opinions about that. and are the articles in question. | |||
:Thanks for your efforts, {{u|Wikieditor662}}. However, I feel it would be premature to remove the template because there's still material in the article that isn't supported by references, even if it's not indicated by in-text "citation needed" tags (the template at the top of the page is an alternative to those). The "Teaching" and "Educational improvement" sections are where the remaining sourcing issues appear to be. ] (]) ] (]) 12:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::@]How do I know in general then, when it should be removed? | |||
::@] Well if I sent a message to them I doubt they'd reply, especially if the sign was put up a while ago. | |||
::Thank you both for your help either way. | |||
::] (]) 21:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::When should it be removed? When all of the material in the article is supported by reliable sources. ] (]) 22:05, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Accurate Article writing == | |||
:::I'm not sure about this source, either: It's published by ], but I can't tell how much fact-checking or editorial control are in place. | |||
Good morning team, please as a Research student, i want to know the accurate ways i can contribute to wiki projects especially in terms of Article writing. i want to know the 'do's and don'ts of article writing, and secondly, aside national newspaper reference which other sources are accepted? ] (]) 09:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::I also found , which is more than a mere mention, and the ''Blade'' is indisputably RS. It's not as meaty a source as would be ideal, but it does get us started establishing "Greeny"'s notability. | |||
:@] Welcome! | |||
:::I think that if other editors consider at least one of the sources I found other than the ''Toledo Blade'' article usable for notability purposes, that would tend to indicate that there's a decent chance of there being additional usable offline sources. The draft creator's poor compliance with Misplaced Pages standards of behavior shouldn't lead to the draft's deletion if other, more experienced editors can establish the subject's notability. | |||
:] is a good start on WP-editing in general. Do's and don't on creating articles: ] and ]. If you intend to write about living people, see also ]. It is recommended to get a hang of WP-editing ''before'' trying to write new articles, if these are not good enough they will be deleted. University press books are often good sources. ] discuss what is reliable ''in general'', and at ] you can find a list of sources that has been repeatedly discussed, and the current view on them. Hope this helps some. ] (]) 11:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Since starting your account you have been very busy doing copyedits. For some, your work was reverted. I suggest you revisit those to understand why an editor took this action. It could be as simple as a disagreement on writing style. As to creating and then submitting drafts for new articles (see ]), I second the advice on learning by improving existing articles before essaying to create an article. What you created and submitted from your Sandbox was far too short and unreferenced to be a valid submittal, and thus jsut wasted a reviewer's time. ] (]) 12:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Unclear why link doesn't work in add a citation tool == | |||
:::So, I ask you, Teahouse colleagues: Do any of you have access to the offline sources already cited in the draft, and what do you make of the sources I found and listed above? Thanks in advance for your input. —] ]] 07:44, 21 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
To whom it may concern, | |||
::::Second, I agree that deleting the draft is not the optimal outcome. However, the optimal outcome is not one that we, the Teahouse editors, can achieve. The optimal outcome would have been for the original poster to accept advice from multiple reviewers and make improvements to the draft. It is obvious that the original poster is not paying attention to advice, and is resorting to arguments from authority, and is otherwise being tendentious. The question is whether deleting the draft is the least sub-optimal option available to use. Since I don't want to spend hours essentially ], which is what some of us are willing to do, it was at least a way to decide where to go from here. ] (]) 16:49, 21 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I have tried to use the add a citation tool on the ] page with the following link: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2025/01/10/do-they-know-its-payday/ but it doesn't work. I am unclear why the link isn't being picked up or identified as such. | |||
::::Third, the issue where some editors are willing to go above and beyond the call of duty is finding reliable sources. There are several problems with the draft. One of them is the sources. Another is the cruft (such as the Awards section). Another is the (recently introduced) need for copy-editing of malformed links (introduced because the original poster apparently didn't view the revised draft after adding the malformed links). As a result, the real question is whether we, the Teahouse volunteers, should essentially write a new article, because that is essentially what we have to do, since the original poster isn't responding to advice. I thank anyone who is willing to write the new article, but that is beyond the call of duty. ] (]) 16:49, 21 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Any ideas how to fix or resolve this issue? | |||
:"They are professionals and have written Misplaced Pages pages, and they can not see what the problem is." Ask for their Misplaced Pages account names, so you can discuss the draft with them directly. Or ask for them to discuss on your talk page. ] (]) 09:52, 21 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 12:10, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
{{od}} | |||
I am not convinced that "blowing up and starting over" is needed here, although some additional work would be. I have determined that the ''Chronicle of Higher Education'' is held by a university library near me, and I am arranging to view or obtain a photocopy of the cited article. That will be a start. ] ] 17:53, 21 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:I have electronic access to the Chronicle of Higher Education via ProQuest, but unfortunately only from 1988 onwards (the article is from 1987). Thanks to ] for his efforts to get a copy. ] (]) 18:29, 21 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
===Tone of Discourse=== | |||
On the one hand, I would like to thank those editors who are making a special effort to find the needed sources for this draft. On the other hand, there is a tangentially related topic that I would also like to mention. I think that the original poster approached the repeated declines of his article with a non-collaborative attitude, coming to my talk page and demanding to speak to my supervisor and complaining about rude treatment, after having ignored our comments, preferring to seek advice from professors and then use them for an argument from authority. If an editor comes to Misplaced Pages to participate in Misplaced Pages as an electronic workplace, they will do well to work collaboratively with other editors. Editors who treat other editors with respect are likely also to be treated with respect, while editors who show that they do not want to listen often are not listened to, or acquire reputations as difficult editors. I would like to know whether other editors agree that Aagreeny4 started off with a non-collaborative attitude. I would ask AAgreeny4 to consider how their tone of discourse (and habit of ignoring suggestions) is likely to be received. ] (]) 03:21, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:I agree, ]. Asking to speak to your supervisor and asking whether you have a PhD is not the way to engage with other editors. It seems that ] has some fundamental misunderstandings about how Misplaced Pages works (and specifically its collaborative nature as a project). I would suggest that you do some reading about the project, Aagreeny4, perhaps starting with ] and ]. ] (]) 08:21, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::I note that Aagreeny4 had not received a welcome message, so I've that contains lots of links to help new editors learn about Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 08:25, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Also, Aagreeny4's user name suggests a possible conflict of interest. Has that been enquired about anywhere? ] (]) 08:33, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::I asked whether the article was an ], and was told that it is not. However, I did not ask whether he had a close connection to the subject. Does Aagreeny4 have a close connection to the subject that would constitute a ]? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:14, 22 November 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
:Tested with reftoolbar but no, no autofill. All I can say is "that sometimes happen". When it does, I fill in the blanks manually. ] (]) 12:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
First I want to thank those who are willing to help me with my page, especially GrammarFascist, DES, and Cordless Lary. Thank you fro the welcome not also. Thank you for going to research the Chronicle of Higher Education and for asking about others views on the sources you found to seek notability. | |||
== deleting Draft:Church of Our Lady of Zvonik page == | |||
Hello, I have been having trouble with '''Draft:Church of Our Lady of Zvonik'''. I created the arical, but it was sent to draft for being incomplete... after further edits, I converted it back into an arical, however there is still a redirect... can that be deleted? and if so how? thank you! ] ] 13:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:{{u|The Emperor of Byzantium}}, the article ] includes the verbless sentence "The remains of The Church Our Lady of Zvonik, located over a cavity of the west wall above the Porta Aurea of Diocletian's Palace." ] is now a redirect to that article. Are you claiming that these are in fact two different churches? ] (]) 15:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Hi @], Thank you for your quick reply, No its the same article, however it has its own talk page Draft talk:Church of Our Lady of Zvonik, and appears on Xtools as a draft... I know I made a mistake in the recoding of it, but not sure where I screwed up? ] ] 15:21, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::I see that neither talk page contains any discussion. I thnk there's no harm in a redirect having a talk page, though it's not usual. I don't know about Xtools, maybe someone else can help? ] (]) 15:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Shortcut to indicate "Citation Needed"? == | |||
Hi all, | |||
New to Misplaced Pages here. I find it useful to interrogate whether sources are cited or not, and I like visual editing more than source editing. But is there a way to indicate that a citation is needed on the visual end? I read about ], but it can be a pain to go switch the type, find the same sentence in a whole different layout, then copy over the template. Any suggestions? ] (]) 17:11, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Robert, I have collaborated with everyone, who has declined my page. I have gone to their talk page and asked for advice, suggestions, and help or to clarify any questions I had. I have taken all of their advice except for one reviewer, who I thought contradicted others suggestion and advice. Each draft has changed significantly since the original. I have rephrased my wording, added many sources, cut out many of the primary sources, added more secondary notably sources, cut out more primary sources, and finally i trimmed down each section of the article almost in half. Can you tell me how any of this is not showing improvement, ignoring comments, and not collaborative? Also I tried the wikilinks, which are a type of citing I have never seen before. I made one small error that you keep fixating on, a simple mistake not putting in 2 brackets and only using one. You should have just stated it was wrong and how to correct it instead of insulting me and my writing by stating "you don't review why you are submitting". I would assume this mistake is common for new users. I feel you have not reviewed all my drafts and the changes I have made from each draft submitted, and how much of a change there has been from the beginning to this latest draft. Your comments to me have been rude, disrespectful, and unprofessional. If you want to talk about tone of discourse, I think you should look at yourself also. You have insulted me, my writing, and my college. That is the reason that I asked to speak to your supervisor. I have called Jimmy Whales and left a message and am waiting to talk to him about you. I also asked you a question on your educational background, which you ignored. Can you answer that question? And it does have bearing on the article, if you are going to make these comments and the way you make them I want to know your credibility to make them. Additionally you wanted to talk about conflict of interest. I think you have a conflict of interest with my article and should excuse yourself from commenting or reviewing my article, because each time someone has commented on this talk page stating they don't think it should be nominated for deletion, you come back and attack me. They make other suggestions and are willing to help with article and sources, you again tell them not to do this and attack me. And then you write about my discourse after the fact that others are willing to help. Without looking at your own discourse towards me. | |||
:Hi, welcome to Misplaced Pages! The visual editor lets you insert templates such as {{citation needed}} by clicking Insert > Template and searching for the desired template. ] (]) 17:19, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Thank you to everyone for giving me advice that I will use in revising, and for your willingness to help me. | |||
:Hello @]. I believe there should be a puzzle piece icon on the top bar. Clicking it would allow you to insert any template in the visual editor. ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 17:21, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks so much, @] and @]! That is super helpful. I just gave it a go on the daily page, and it worked! ] (]) 17:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== I read a lot but I still don't understand how images work here? == | |||
My father stayed up late last night and into the early morning talking with someone who had an alcohol problem. This is above and beyond his job, but that is the type of person that he is. He is the most notable person in his profession and had saved countless lives with his message. I want others to know about him and how much of an impact he has on others lives. | |||
For example, what if there's only one image of something OR if the person who made like a song cover art cannot be contacted or is unknown? ] (]) 19:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I have worked very hard. made changes, and taken advice from editors. I don't want to be deleted. I really want to create this page, that I have worked so hard on. | |||
:Hello and welcome. It might help us to better answer you if you describe exactly what it is you are trying to do. ] (]) 19:43, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Thank you all for the help. I look forward to hearing what others think of the mentioned articles from Grammerfascist, and the others who are trying to access the article in the Chronicle of Higher Education. Thank you for helping, being nice, and respectful to my questions and concerns. | |||
::Basically: copyright is complicated. For historic images and cover art, we use small, reduced-resolution versions, and a ]. ] (]) 20:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::{{u|CrimsonScarletBurgundyy}}, there is no need to contact the creator of cover art when a low resolution version is being used as non-free content. It is necessary to fully comply with ], and cover art is covered by #1 of that policy language. ] (]) 20:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== x page == | |||
] (]) 22:25, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:{{U|Aagreeny4}} You need to understand some things about how Misplaced Pages works. First of all, all of us are volunteers, and none of us has a "supervisor", not even Jimmy Whales is a supervisor. Secondly, Misplaced Pages runs on displayed editing skill and citations provided, not on credentials. The academic degrees or qualifications an editor may have (or claim to have) are pretty much ignored, and it is generally seen as hostile to demand statements of such qualifications. Such demands are routinely ignored. Thirdly, while I have sometimes disagreed with {{U|Robert McClenon}}, including about the draft you started, he is a respected editor who puts in a great deal of time and effort reviewing AfC submissions (among other tasks), a generally thankless job. He sees a great many hopeless submissions, and a great many new editors who seem determined to get those hopeless submissions into Misplaced Pages. | |||
:Also, you were asked about your connection, if any, with Mike Green. You have stated that you are not Green. Do you have any connection with him? If you do, what is it, (in general terms) please? ] ] 22:59, 22 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::He answered that question, although not intending to answer it, and that answers that. He wrote: "My father stayed up late last night and into the early morning talking with someone who had an alcohol problem. This is above and beyond his job, but that is the type of person that he is. He is the most notable person in his profession and had saved countless lives with his message. I want others to know about him and how much of an impact he has on others lives." He is writing this ] for his father. It is not an autobiography, but it has the same flaws as an autobiography. I will note that, just as your father often went above and beyond the call of duty, some of the editors here have gone above and beyond the call of duty to try to help you (when you will not help yourself) to establish ] for your father. Give them a great deal of respect. ] (]) 04:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Also, ] has a very specific meaning in Misplaced Pages. Please read the conflict of interest policy. AAgreeny4 wrote: "Additionally you wanted to talk about conflict of interest. I think you have a conflict of interest with my article and should excuse yourself from commenting or reviewing my article, because each time someone has commented on this talk page stating they don't think it should be nominated for deletion, you come back and attack me." I do not have a conflict of interest, and Aagreeny4 does have a conflict of interest, but I will recuse myself from further reviews on the grounds of having become ]. Is that satisfactory? ] (]) 04:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::I will not review your draft again. I do reserve the right to comment, and will probably do so. ] (]) 04:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::], it may be that you haven't understood what "conflict of interest" refers to in the Misplaced Pages meaning of the term, but please refrain from accusing other editors of having a conflict of interest without providing evidence - particularly in cases such as this, where you have an acknowledged family relationship to the article subject, and hence a conflict of interest yourself. On the qualifications point, ] does not need a PhD to interpret ]. In general, it is not considered acceptable on Misplaced Pages to ask other editors to reveal personal details about themselves. ] (]) 09:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
what happen to page on wikipedia? ] (]) 20:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
DES, I understand that you all are volunteers and that no one has a supervisor. I learned that after Robert told me in the beginning. The only reason I mentioned supervisor after that is because he brought it up again, and I was explaining my actions. But thank you fro explaining that to me. I understand that the job requires a lot of time and effort that goes thankless. I do thank everyone who has helped me and for all their effort. Especially everyone who has treated me with respect, and have commented with suggestions, and put in care to help me. I have realized that editors don't like sharing their educational background and don't think it is necessary to be provided. However I think that should be changed to at least show that editor have some type of college degree or attaining it now, to show that they are knowledgeable on the subject and can critique others work. It just I don't know everyone's background what credibility they have, or if they are just a random person trying to make comments. Thank you for your responses to my statements and help. | |||
:It redirects to ], if you're wondering why it's named Twitter instead of it's current name, X, see ]. ] (]) 20:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Robert, i would like to state that I am a She, and I did intend to answer that in my response. I do give other editor a great deal of respect as long as they are respectful to me, which everyone else is. I have helped myself to establish notability, and others are adding additional notability, so I don't know what you are talking about. i think you do have a conflict of interest with my article, why else would you attack me and my work so many times? Even if you do not know me or my father it is still a conflict with way you respond so negatively toward me and repetitively. It is satisfactory that you will no linger review my drafts, but I do wish that you stop commenting also, unless you do it in a respectful manner. I would also like an apology from you for the way you have treated me and attacked me. | |||
== Picture Formatting == | |||
Cordless Lary, I did provide the evidence of Roberts conflict of interest, how he negates what others are say, and attacks my work and me. He clearly has some type of deep involvement in my work, or my article, that he needs to stay away from. I do recognize that I am related to the subject as he is my father. But I have had several neutral parties read my work so I can keep my own personal sides out. I have realized that editors don't like sharing their educational background and don't think it is necessary to be provided. However I think that should be changed to at least show that editor have some type of college degree or attaining it now, to show that they are knowledgeable on the subject and can critique others work. It just I don't know everyone's background what credibility they have, or if they are just a random person trying to make comments. Thank you for your time and i will take your comments into account when editing my article. | |||
I was editing the ] page to try and fix something where the picture would "bump" the table of contents. I fixed this, but now I'm wondering, is it permissible for a picture to be above the infobox, and if not, where do I put it? ] | ] 21:08, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Thank yo to everyone who has commented, offered suggestions, and for treating me and my work with respect. I will use your advice in my articles. I look forward to hearing others views on the articles that GrammerFascist kindly found, and if others agree with their notability. And i look forward to hearing about finding the Chronicle of Higher Education in a library by DES. | |||
:I should mention that I've put it below the infobox, but that puts it into the background section ] | ] 21:09, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 17:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:], the reason why ] has made so many comments on your draft article is that he commits a significant portion of his time on Misplaced Pages to reviewing drafts. On your conflict of interest, it is not sufficient to say that you have asked some neutral parties to read your edits and that you will take our concerns into account. You need to follow the guidance at ]. ] (]) 17:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Can I close my own RfC? == | |||
::It is clear to me that ], in accusing me of ], doesn't know what ] is, since she has one and I do not, and there is no way that she can claim that I have one. Her willingness to go on with this claim after she is corrected implies that she doesn't really want to know about Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. I will interpret her argument as meaning that I am ], and I have already agreed to recuse from any further reviews. If she really thinks that I have a personal non-Misplaced Pages interest against her, she is free to present it, but she should first read ] and realize that idle allegations of conflict of interest, when she just means involvement, are ]. ] (]) 19:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::There are several reasons why people edit Misplaced Pages. Most of us do so out of some sort of commitment to the concept of Misplaced Pages as a free source of knowledge. All of the regular editors here at the Teahouse fall into that class, even if we disagree on details. There are a few editors who want to cause trouble, vandals and trolls. ] is neither. She isn't trying to cause trouble, but she isn't trying to enhance Misplaced Pages. She is what is known as a ]. Her only agenda is to get an article about her father accepted. As the Misplaced Pages policy on single-purpose accounts explains, single-purpose accounts are not prohibited, but are likely to be viewed unfavorably. I would like to thank those editors who are going beyond the call of duty to help an editor who won't help herself. ] (]) 19:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
I opened a RfC at ] in large part to divert attention from another discussion which I felt was no longer productive. Would I be considered ]? I haven't given much of an opinion on my RfC, and I've added a few neutral comments. For what it's worth, if I were to close it, I'd close it as '''accident''' leading to a '''crash'''. ] (]) 21:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Generally this is a bad idea and can provoke further arguments. ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS apply. And expected standards of behaviour includes avoiding COI such as this. SO if you close it, you may be sanctioned. ] (]) 22:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:If you feel the discussion needs a formal closure, it would be best to request it at ] so that an ''uninvolved'' editor can do the close. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 07:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Overreliance? == | |||
Okay Robert, by Misplaced Pages's definition it would not be classified as a Conflict of interest on your part. However in real life it would, something is obstructing the proper judgement of me and my writing. I don't know your reasoning, but it is clear in the way you have negatively commented, negate what others are saying, constantly try to offend me, and treat me rudely. Involvement is closely related to conflict of interest, as shown by the Misplaced Pages definition. "This is because involved administrators may have, or may be seen as having, a conflict of interest in disputes they have been a party to or have strong feelings about. Involvement is generally construed very broadly by the community, to include current or past conflicts with an editor (or editors), and disputes on topics, regardless of the nature, age, or outcome of the dispute". Saying that these are not personal attacks are wrong. Saying "do you even read your articles before submitting", claiming that I am lazy, or dumb. Fixating on my bracket error. Creating a section on my tone of discourse, that I am non-collaborative, again attacking me. Being at a college I know how to collaborate and work with others, taking their advice, which I have also done here and on my page. You stated "Editors who treat other editors with respect are likely also to be treated with respect", I have never felt respect from you whatsoever. You also attacked my school by saying that those helping with the article probably have not written this type and don't know anything. Finally you keep claiming that I won't help myself. Another attack on me, I have asked numerous users for help and take everything they say into consideration and use in my article. I have revised many times, and am constantly working on the paper, and always welcome others input that is said respectfully. Finally I am trying to enhance Misplaced Pages with this article. How do you know that I am a single-person account? You have no proof. I will work on other articles after this one is accepted. | |||
So I've basically almost finished writing an article on this historical 19th-century Haitian party (]). Does the citation distribution seem too concentrated, or is it acceptable? It's a pretty niche topic admittedly. <span style="color:brown;">🍫</span> ] (]) (]) <span style="color:brown;">🍫</span> 02:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 22:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hello @]. Based solely on the concentration of citations, it looks fine to me. In fact, some sentences are ''lacking'' citations. You can also remove the citations in the lead if you wish (]). ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 03:21, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:But will you work on other articles even if this one does not get approved? Having one's own article deleted or not approved from the draft status are quite common and normal things for new users. Getting fixated on this article will not help you, if you want to keep contributing in the future. Many of the Misplaced Pages's common terms like "notability" and "conflict of interest" may seem rude at first but they do not mean same thing as in the common real life language. I think you should calm down a bit. These fine folks have been trying to help, and have even been trying to get their hands on the references you cited to check if your father is notable within Misplaced Pages's standards. ] (]) 23:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
::I think I fixed it. (hopefully) <span style="color:brown;">🍫</span> ] (]) (]) <span style="color:brown;">🍫</span> 06:50, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::@] Looks like a very interesting article (now in mainspace). I don't know if you usually do so for your new articles but you should think of doing a ]. Maybe I'm being picky but I found it odd that the very last sentence in the article has no citation. Does the immediately previous citation cover that also? ] (]) 11:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Regarding DYK, I’ve never nominated one of my articles because I don’t think they contain anything interesting or fun facts. However, while researching the Liberal Party article, I did recall that it, along with the National Party, were the first political parties formed in Haiti. Unfortunately, none of the major sources corroborate that, so I’m not sure where exactly I got that information from. A potential DYK hook I did come up with though is: Did you know... that Haiti’s Liberal Party was founded in 1870 by two leaders who believed the "most competent" elite should govern the nation? | |||
::::Anyhow, I trimmed the article down a little and fixed the no citation issue in the process. | |||
::::Note: While writing the article, I was somewhat thrown off when all the sources covered the tug of war between the Liberal Party and the National Party during the 1870s through the 1890s, yet made next to no mention of either party in the 20th century. This seemed to contradict the "List of Heads of State of Haiti" wikipedia article which suggests that the last National president was Tancrède Auguste in 1913, while the last Liberal president was Élie Lescot in 1946 - well into the 20th century. So, i'm not exactly sure where the article got their party affiliations from. <span style="color:brown;">🍫</span> ] (]) (]) <span style="color:brown;">🍫</span> 16:43, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Force browser Ctrl+F == | |||
Hi, Ceosad. Possibly. I don't think those terms are rude, that wasn't the problem for me. I know I have to find sources that show notability. I agree that they have all been trying to help and I really appreciate that, and am taking all their advice in working on my article. I think it is so nice that they are taking the time to help and even finding sources. The only person I have not taken into consideration is Robert because of his attitude toward me. I thank everyone again, and thank you for commenting and helping. | |||
Perhaps a silly question, but while editing recently (VisEditor), I kept trying to use Firefox Ctrl+F, only for Misplaced Pages to force its own page search function on me; it was rather annoying. Is there any way to disable this feature or the keyboard shortcut that calls it? Thanks in advance! ] <small>(]) | :) | he/him | </small> 05:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 23:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:{{u|JuxtaposedJacob}}, just let the Mediawiki software do its own thing, without trying to force that software to imitate Firefox or anything else. It powers the #7 website in the world with tens of billions of monthly pageviews. It may seem antiquated to code monkeys who are addicted to the very newest thing, but it works just fine for what it is intended to do, and does so every day. Firefox itself is over 20 years old. ] (]) 09:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:], the term is ], not "single-person". I hope that there is only one person operating your account, as sharing of accounts is not allowed. Robert says that you are a single-purpose account based on ]. If you plan to edit other articles, why don't you consider doing that now? It would show a commitment to the aims of Misplaced Pages and demonstrate that you aren't just here to promote your father. ] (]) 08:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:@]: {{welcometea}} If you click outside of the VisualEditor editing area (such as the sidebars), you should be able to use the browser's native find feature. —] ( ] • ] ) 15:35, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::You are so beautiful and amazing. Thank you @]. ] <small>(]) | :) | he/him | </small> 15:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Minecraft TTS. == | |||
==Article title incorrect== | |||
How do I change an article title? My article about SAP S/4HANA recently went live but with an incorrect title of "4HANA". So the “S/” is missing from the title, the "S/" is important because it signifies that it is a “suite” of software. Some where along the editing, someone removed the "S/". The page should be called "SAP S/4HANA" (you will see the rest of the info in the text refers to it as SAP S/4HANA too). I contacted the editor (SwisterTwister) last week but still no response/edit, can you help make change it from 4HANA to SAP S/4HANA? Many thanks! | |||
] (]) 17:24, 19 November 2015 (UTC)Olivia0452 | |||
:You will have to move it, {{u|Olivia0452}}. (Click ] for more information) <span style="color:green; text-shadow: 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em gray;">Frank (]) (])</span> 17:28, 19 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:: But she won't be able to move it yet, as she needs more edits to become ]. Note also that with a slash in the article name there might be slight confusion in regard to the talk page, see ] (in that ], if it existed, would presumably have a link to the non-existent page ]). ] (]) 18:20, 19 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::I suggest that we instead move it ot the "full" name of "SAP Business Suite 4 SAP HANA" which avoids the issues with a name containing a slash, and is less cryptic as well. {{U|Olivia0452}}, would you object to this? If not, I will do the move. ] ] 23:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
] ] (]) 08:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
{{reply to|Imfrankliu|David Biddulph|DESiegel}} What if we try to cover all bases and do the following as the title: SAP Business Suite 4 SAP HANA (SAP S/4HANA) . Would that work too? | |||
:@] do you have a question about editing Misplaced Pages? <span style="white-space:nowrap"><span style="font-family:monospace">'''<nowiki>''']<nowiki>]]'''</nowiki>'''</span> (] • ])</span> 09:06, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 09:18, 20 November 2015 (UTC)Olivia0452 | |||
:Hello, @]. That sound file was attached to the article ] in January 2012, when it was recorded, and was removed at some time later, presumably because the article had been changed so much that it no longer reflected the article. Recorded versions of articles are made by volunteeers who choose to spend their time that way - there is nothing automatic about creating, updating, or removing them. If you want to get involved in this, see ]. ] (]) 11:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Removing from template. == | |||
:The key question is what is its ]? That's what should be used as the article's title per guidelines.--] (]) 13:58, 20 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
Hello! ] was incorrectly labelled as Pharaoh for many years, I had edited few weeks ago that she was only queen consort. However, there is this template that includes all Pharaohs and she is listed there here - I tried to remove her, but it is autogenerated and when I am trying there is too much 'mess' there to find one name. Can someone please be kind and remove her? Also, she should be removed from another autogenerated template that includes hellenistic monarchs, as she wasn't one. ] (]) 17:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:{{reply to|Olivia0452}} That would have the same problem of containing a slash. --] (]) 14:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
: {{Ping|Sobek2000}} Which template? <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 19:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Interestingly, I see that the article has been moved and ] does now exist, but it doesn't have the spurious link to ] which ] suggests it would have. Does anyone understand why? - ] (]) 14:09, 20 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
: |
::"Pharaohs" and "Hellenistic rulers". I do nor know what rose to say. I removed both from her page, but she is still listed on template. Go to any other Pharaoh's page and then on template below the page were all pharaohs are - she is still there. ] (]) 20:19, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
:::*what else ] (]) 20:20, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::*:Hello, @]. Your account appears to be autoconfirmed, so you should be able to edit ]. What happens when you try? ] (]) 20:35, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::*::Ok, when you provided link I was able to go and edit this. Thank you and sorry for your trouble. ] (]) 20:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Whites and blues and purples == | |||
::{{reply to|David Biddulph}}, so now that ] exists the page has been corrected to have the correct SAP S/4HANA title? Am I understanding that correctly? Otherwise, I guess the name "SAP Business Suite 4 SAP HANA" would also be OK as a page title (although "SAP S/4HANA" is more commonly used but if it causes problems... then "SAP Business Suite 4 SAP HANA" is fine). Thanks for all the help trying to sort this out, appreciate it. ] (]) 06:48, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Olivia0452 | |||
Occassionally I am looking at the blue color of a fresh link, and the purple-ish color of an already clicked link, and when they appear one on top of another in a list, it is hard to visually tell the two apart. Is there some setting on my computer or within Misplaced Pages that I can adjust to heighten this contrast somehow? I do not use dark mode, but maybe I could try that. ] (]) 18:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::: The article has been moved to ] as you originally requested, and there don't appear to be any consequential problems, so there is no need to look for any less commonly used name. - ] (]) 08:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
:@]: {{welcometea}} It sounds like you may need to tweak the CSS of whichever skin you're using for Misplaced Pages. There's more info at ], especially the section {{section link|Help:Link color|Styling all links just for you}}. —] ( ] • ] ) 19:04, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::I just want to make the purple "Link to a Misplaced Pages page that exists and that you have visited" a slightly different shade of purple and that would be enough probably to make it stand apart from the blue unvisited links. ] (]) 19:43, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::Yes, that's what the page I linked is for. —] ( ] • ] ) 20:33, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::I think making visited links orange might help too. ] to see if that works if you want to check my work please. ] (]) 20:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::The code looks fine to me. I can't see what it looks like on your end, but it should work. —] ( ] • ] ) 21:07, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::Still showing as the standard purple. ] (]) 21:08, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::Ah, you may have to enter the actual hexadecimal code for it to work. Bypass the cache once you've done that just to be safe. —] ( ] • ] ) 21:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::::How do I bypass the cache again? And what is the "hexidecimal code"? Do you mean the numbers? ] (]) 21:25, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 21:25, 11 January 2025
Community Q&A hub for new editors
Shortcuts
jmcgnh, a Teahouse host
Welcome to the Teahouse!Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Misplaced Pages. Ask a question Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host New to Misplaced Pages? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2–3 days.
- To read the newest questions, skip to bottom
- About the Teahouse
Most recent archives
1227, 1228, 1229, 1230, 1231, 1232, 1233, 1234, 1235, 1236, 1237, 1238, 1239, 1240, 1241, 1242, 1243, 1244, 1245, 1246
Wikitext
I am trying to make a userbox and let users put It in their user page. But it will go to wikitext instead of plain text. How to make wikitext go to plain text? and I can't change it to visual because I am editing a Misplaced Pages page. Ned1a Wanna talk? 02:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nedia020415 I'm not really sure what you mean, but WP:UBXCREATE has instructions for creating new userboxes. ''']''' (talk • contribs) 03:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- If I understood correct: To display wikitext as plain text in a userbox, use the tags around the code. For example: <nowiki>{{YourUserboxCode}} Ayohama (talk) 07:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you Ned1a Wanna talk? 22:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nedia020415 Template:Tl is nice and generates something like {{Example}} for example or use Template:Mra for the code/outpout:
- Thank you Ned1a Wanna talk? 22:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Markup | Renders as | ||
---|---|---|---|
{{Example}} |
| ||
~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- ooh! Thank you I will put that. ;) Ned1a Wanna talk? 22:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Why are the icons so weird
I was looking through Misplaced Pages and special articles and noticed the icons are in frutiger aero style, why so? I mean, you could just ask wikipedians to volunter to redesign the icons or hire a graphic designer ❦⌬ IsaqueCar ⌬❦ (talk) 22:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- I don't know why, IsaqueCar. I for one only ask fellow volunteers for help when I'm stuck, or when I'm acutely aware of my ignorance. (Thus I've recently asked for help with numismatics, of which I'm ignorant, and, indirectly, with the Czech language, which I can't read.) Hiring professionals of course costs money. Is the alleged weirdness likely to impair understanding of encyclopedic content? -- Hoary (talk) 01:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @IsaqueCar. Until I searched and found Frutiger (typeface) I hadn't the slightest idea what you were talking about. I still have no idea which icons you mean.
- If you are talking about part of the user interface, then be aware that most Misplaced Pages editors (who are generally the people that hang out at this page) don't have any involvement in this, and it's better to bring this up at WP:VPT. If you're talking about something within an article or series of articles, then the talk page of those articles, or of a relevant WP:WikiProject, is the best place to bring the matter up. ColinFine (talk) 15:53, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- @ColinFine: I looked for Frutiger Aero, which was more enlightening.
- @IsaqueCar: Why not so? Design is a subjective thing: as long as the icons are visible and clear in meaning, then there's not really a problem, is there? Bazza 7 (talk) 15:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- it just feels weird to have such old looking icons on a modern website ❦⌬ IsaqueCar ⌬❦ (talk) 17:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- I mean, it is very subjective. I exclusively use Monobook because I like the older look of it. Every design can have wildly differing opinions depending on who you ask. Thx56 (talk) 20:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- it just feels weird to have such old looking icons on a modern website ❦⌬ IsaqueCar ⌬❦ (talk) 17:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Icons like in those info boxes "this article contains information..."
- Some icons of wikiprojects will show you what i mean ❦⌬ IsaqueCar ⌬❦ (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Also special articles normaly have lots of notices so it's also a good example ❦⌬ IsaqueCar ⌬❦ (talk) 17:20, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- This article points out that Misplaced Pages, even with its new look, is trying to make subtle interface changes at most. I personally agree with this approach. Additionally, I feel that older-looking websites have more of an air of reliability. JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 05:49, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Also special articles normaly have lots of notices so it's also a good example ❦⌬ IsaqueCar ⌬❦ (talk) 17:20, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Translation and references issue
This artist was marked as missing in the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Women in rock music and so I decided to translate the Norwegian article. I was, however, not allowed to do so, so I've saved my suggestion at the link mentioned first in this post.
Secondly: The references I've added are not recognised as such. I'd be grateful for any pointers as to why. Thank you! :) Birdesigns (talk) 13:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- For References, if using double curly brackets, use "reflist", not "references". I fixed it David notMD (talk) 14:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks! Birdesigns (talk) 16:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @Birdesigns, and welcome to the Teahouse.
- When you say you're "not allowed to do so", I'm guessing that you tried to use the content translation tool? This is only available for editors who have at least 500 edits (which you have not, even though your account is nearly ten years old). This is because so many newer editors do not understand English Misplaced Pages's requirements on sourcing and notability, and that many other Misplaced Pages's have less stringent requirements.
- In the case of your draft, you have three references for one single claim in the article, and no references for anything else. This is not adequate sourcing for an article in English Misplaced Pages, which should be a summary of what people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable places. (As far as I can make out, few if any of the sources in the original no:Christine Meyer meet the criteria of WP:42).
- Unless the original is well-sourced to approaching the standard required of new articles in English Misplaced Pages, I believe that the best approach to translating is to treat it like a new article with perhaps some input from the original, rather than relying on translating the content . ColinFine (talk) 16:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, Colin. The sources I include are mainstream (albeit local/regional) newspapers, and the offical website (management) for the artist. There is not much else to reference than the explanation of who she is and her most known performance. Birdesigns (talk) 17:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @Birdesigns. Regional newspapers are often reliable, but the source needs to be independent and have significant coverage of her too. The sources I looked at only had a line or two about her (generally in that one role). And anything from her official website is not independent, and cannot contribute towards establishing notability.
- If you cannot find sources to establish that she meets either WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG, then she does not meet English Misplaced Pages's criteria for notability, and no article is possible. ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ok, I'm fine with that, but admittedly a bit annoyed since she was on the "red list" and all I did was trying to make her blue. Should there not be a curation of that list before we are encouraged to red-to-blue fix it? Or is deciding that someone isn't notable a part of the fixing process? If so, how does one go about to let others know that the best is to not publish the article? Simply edit the source of the list and delete from there? Birdesigns (talk) 17:22, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, Colin. The sources I include are mainstream (albeit local/regional) newspapers, and the offical website (management) for the artist. There is not much else to reference than the explanation of who she is and her most known performance. Birdesigns (talk) 17:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
@Birdesigns: I can understand you frustraton, but please remember that the top of that page has a panel including the words:
Please note ... that the red links on this list may well not be suitable as the basis for an article. All new articles must satisfy Misplaced Pages's notability criteria with reliable independent sources.
(emphasis in original). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, Andy – appreciate the pointer. :) So, do I simply ignore those on the list which I reckon aren't meeting the requirements, and let others decide whether or not to delete them? Is there somewhere I can write a small note on my thoughts on the person's notability? Birdesigns (talk) 17:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- A number of other shows are mentioned, but without citations/sources/proofs. Adding sources to them might make the article satisfy notability and hence inclusion. Riteze (talk) 12:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Notability
Is he notable Chetan Maddineni ? 175.101.60.14 (talk) 16:22, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, Chetan Maddineni appears to meet Misplaced Pages's notability guidelines based on his roles in notable films and coverage in independent sources. Ayohama (talk) 16:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- What about sources doesn’t meet WP:ICTFSOURCES 175.101.60.14 (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for asking, IP. I looked in all of the sources that are currently referenced. Here they are, with my comments:
- "Actor Chetan Maddineni is ready with an entertainer after learning method acting": a mere interview. (Even its title doesn't make sense to me, though perhaps "with an entertainer" was intended to mean "as an actor". Note that I'm linking to a Wayback scrape of the page linked to in the reference.)
- "Interview : Chetan Maddineni- Small films need more support from the audience": A mere interview.
- "Chetan Maddineni’s striking transformation takes social media by storm": "X takes Y by storm" is a cliché of promotional junk; this piece is no exception.
- "Interview with Chetan Maddineni about First Rank Raju by Maya Nelluri": A mere interview.
- "Birthday special! Chetan Maddineni: My upcoming film will be on the lines of 'Ready', 'Dhee' and 'Chiru Navvutho'": Based on an interview.
- ‘ఫస్ట్ ర్యాంక్ రాజు’ మూవీ రివ్యూ!: In Telugu, which I cannot read. If Google Translate can be trusted, this is a rather lightweight review of one film in which Chetan Maddineni appears. It's not junk, but it says little about him.
None of these six sources counts toward evidence of notability. For all I know, other sources, not referenced here, show that Chetan Maddineni is notable. I haven't looked (and perhaps am hobbled by my ignorance of Telugu and Hindi). Which independent sources are you describing above, Ayohama? -- Hoary (talk) 00:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
How does editor classification work?
how is an editor considered either new, intermediate, advanced or mentor, and what are the requirements for such roles? ❦⌬ IsaqueCar ⌬❦ (talk) 17:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @IsaqueCar. I'm not aware of any such classifications used in a formal sense. "Mentor" is a role that an editor may take on. Where have you seen these used? ColinFine (talk) 17:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- special articles that include info about editing "(type of edit) is suitable for intermediate editors"
- "copy-editing is suitable for begginer editors" ❦⌬ IsaqueCar ⌬❦ (talk) 17:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oh, right. I don't think those are formal, defined, terms. They're being used loosely, to give an indication of the level of experience required. ColinFine (talk) 19:03, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Not aware either, Misplaced Pages:User access page doesn't specifically mention "new," "intermediate," "advanced," or "mentor" classifications. However, it outlines various user groups based on permissions, such as unregistered users, autoconfirmed users, extended confirmed users, and administrators, which represent different levels of experience and access. Ayohama (talk) 17:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- I forgot what page i saw it on ill search for it ❦⌬ IsaqueCar ⌬❦ (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Experience levels are recommended for various functions (For example being a Teahouse Host, at least 30 days and 500 edits). David notMD (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- I forgot what page i saw it on ill search for it ❦⌬ IsaqueCar ⌬❦ (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages:Task Center uses this style. I'd describe it as based on self-assessment. In reality it's going to relate to experience and knowledge of policies, guidelines, and other relevant practices. I'd think almost all editors with fewer than 100 edits are going to be noobies, but there could be exceptions for some tasks, such as people who have used a similar wiki platform before, or people with professional writing experience. There are people with many thousands of edits and years of experience who couldn't do stuff within an 'intermediate' category, but also many people who could do things within a few weeks of learning. As mentioned above, Misplaced Pages:User access levels are formal classifications. Everything else is woolly and hand-wavy. -- zzuuzz 19:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- The Newcomer Homepage describes tasks similarly, although with ‘Easy’, ‘Medium’, and ‘Hard’: for when you are beginning to edit, for when you have completed some easy edits, and for when you have learned Misplaced Pages best practices, respectively. But there are no requirements for new/intermediate/advanced as said above and that too is based on self-assessment. Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 19:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- We also have something at Category:User Wikitext, which admittedly is also informal and self-assigned, and actually is only seen in context to Wiki syntax. Lectonar (talk) 12:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Needing help with contest
I want to join the guild of copyeditors' backlog of Jan 2025 but the signup instructions are too confusing ❦⌬ IsaqueCar ⌬❦ (talk) 19:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello and welcome, IsaqueCar! To sign up, go to this backlog page and click the blue “Create your article list” button in the Signing up section and save the page. That will sign you up for the drive. The Totals section below the signup explains how to use your article list. Be sure to read the guide to basic copyediting first, and happy (copy)editing! Perfect4th (talk) 19:55, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
How to add a category to a page/talk page
Hi,
I’d like to add a category to an article’s talk pages and cannot see the HTML in the source code. According to my searches as to how to do it, I should see the category source code to add a category to, but I don’t see it. Thanks for your time Elinoria (talk) 19:09, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- In the source editor which I presume you are using, you add a category by adding a link to the category at the bottom of the page. An example would be ] Thx56 (talk) 19:53, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help! That’s exactly what I expected, but when I try to edit the entire page, I don’t see any source code for the category. If I try pasting the category at the very bottom of the page, nothing appears in the preview.
- Do you have any suggestions?
- Elinoria (talk) 20:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @Elinoria. I'm not entirely sure what you mean.
- The Wikicode ] may actually go anywhere on a page: it's just convention to put it at the bottom. And you won't see anything when the page is rendered except in the list of categories at the bottom.
- If you are talking about your user page, and you mean that when you edit source you can't see any "]" statements at the bottom, that's because the categories are inserted by the templates that you have added to the page, and since it doesn't show you the expanded code of the templates, you don't see the "Category" statements.
- Does that answer your question? ColinFine (talk) 20:53, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- If not then please link the page and name the category. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Managed it eventually! Elinoria (talk) 21:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- It worked - I was confused by it not showing up on the preview. When I published, it appeared. Thank you. Elinoria (talk) 21:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- If not then please link the page and name the category. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
R-Salt
This was mentioned in connection to the recent New Orleans attack, but there does not seem to be Misplaced Pages article for it. If someone in the chemistry world wants to write an article about it, please do. Keith Henson (talk) 20:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
1,3,5-trinitroso-1,3,5-triazine (R-Salt) is an insensitive energetic that has previously been used as an improvised explosive. Keith Henson (talk) 20:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @Hkhenson, and welcome to the Teahouse. While you're certainly allowed to post such a request, I want to tell you that the chances of anybody acting on that request are very low. Misplaced Pages is a volunteer project, and prople work on what they choose. While it's possible that somebody will see your request and act on it, it's not very likely.
- There is a recognised place for requesting articles, WP:RA; but in all honesty, the take-up there is very low as well. Something that might work better is to ask at a relevant WikiProject - perhaps WT:WikiProject Chemistry: that will at least be seen by people who have an interest in Misplaced Pages's coverage of chemistry.
- Generally, if you want to see an article created, the most effective way is to do the research (find the sources to establish Notability) and do it yourself. Doing that will have the side benefit that if you can't find suitable sources, you'll know that the article cannot be written. ColinFine (talk) 21:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- The intersection of WT:CHEM and WP:TH is non-null:) Feel free to add cited info to R-salt, which I just turned blue. DMacks (talk) 02:06, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you! Keith Henson (talk) 16:11, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Good job! It's sometimes said around here that Teahouse-people don't start articles on request, but that isn't always true. Sometimes we feel like doing it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Indeed. @Gråbergs Gråa Sång will remember this question leading me creating this one about Armored mud balls a couple of years ago. It's far less likely that anyone would ever want to create one about a businessman, cryptocurrency fad or 'some here-today-gone-tomorrow' minor celebrity. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Sometimes we really want WP to have that article. Earl Bailly was inspired by a question at Commons, but still. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:44, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- That’s incredible! I love the name Delectopierre (talk) 18:58, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'm often on the fence for these...promoting involvement by newer editors to create articles on topics of their interest (increased involvement is good, and demonstrated willingness to engage in collaboration) vs doing it myself (especially if it could benefit from specialized literature resources or where some people might not feel comfortable writing publicly about certain topics even if "anonymous"). DMacks (talk) 00:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Indeed. @Gråbergs Gråa Sång will remember this question leading me creating this one about Armored mud balls a couple of years ago. It's far less likely that anyone would ever want to create one about a businessman, cryptocurrency fad or 'some here-today-gone-tomorrow' minor celebrity. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Youtube
If a reliable source posts a video on Youtube, is the video a good source to rely on? WikiPhil012 (talk) 23:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- YouTube as a source is generally usable if the outlet themselves posts the video to their verified channel. As an example, a video by CNN uploaded to CNN's own channel is fine. That same video uploaded to "NewsLieTracker"'s channel isn't. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v 00:02, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, but in name of the website do i put the publisher, or YouTube? WikiPhil012 (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- You'd put the publisher, and put YouTube in the via parameter. Ca 02:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi WikiPhil012. You should probably take a look at WP:YOUTUBE and WP:COPYLINK before adding any links to YouTube videos to any Misplaced Pages, even as part of a citation. If the source itself is considered to be a reliable source (as defined by Misplaced Pages), you can still cite it without providing a link to YouTube; just make sure you provide as much information as you can about the original source in the citation as explained in WP:CITEHOW. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- You can put YouTube videos on Misplaced Pages. 2001:44C8:455C:91:C1B3:EC6C:4318:1D05 (talk) 02:53, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- That last comment is true in some cases, but false in most. See WP:YOUTUBE, as already cited. ColinFine (talk) 11:59, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- You can put YouTube videos on Misplaced Pages. 2001:44C8:455C:91:C1B3:EC6C:4318:1D05 (talk) 02:53, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, but in name of the website do i put the publisher, or YouTube? WikiPhil012 (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
promotional template
can white44tree please add promotional template to Deko article on wikipedia? White44Tree (talk) 00:28, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Well i added the promotional template. Ned1a Wanna talk? 00:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Does the content appear promotional? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 00:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oh yea... removed it sorry Ned1a Wanna talk? 00:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Does the content appear promotional? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 00:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Vacuity (see the article, and its earlier AfD) isn't the same as promotionalism. -- Hoary (talk) 01:35, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- what about Bryce Gheisar page add promotional template? White44Tree (talk) 01:07, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Does anything about the contents of that article appear promotional to you? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 18:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- yes and same with tp link and appvalley White44Tree (talk) 23:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- What seems promotional about them? Is there any particularly promotional language or framing? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 02:11, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- yes and same with tp link and appvalley White44Tree (talk) 23:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Does anything about the contents of that article appear promotional to you? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 18:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- what about Bryce Gheisar page add promotional template? White44Tree (talk) 01:07, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Are primary sources okay for a (minor) controversy section?
Currently working on the article Sacred Reich (a section at my sandbox), and I'm considering adding a (specifically minor) two-to-three-sentences-long controversy paragraph pertaining to the name of the band, sitting under the "Name" heading after the name's origin. Currently, the only relevant sources are these two interviews with lead guitarist Wiley Arnett and with the band respectively. The former has a story about how they were nearly stopped by police from doing a gig, being mistaken for a neo-nazi rally because of the name, and the latter having a sentence about the band receiving a letter from someone after the release of Surf Nicaragua, who "had the wrong idea about us and didn’t like the One Nation lyrics." (Note: One Nation is a song about anti-racism and bigotry.) However, since these are both primary sources, I still hold concerns on whether or not this should be included in the final article. If anyone can provide another opinion, it'd be highly appreciated.
—Sparkle and Fade edits 04:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello —Sparkle and Fade. I know nothing about the band, but I suggest you write that during an interview Wiley Arnett stated the band got its name because of – whatever reason was given. Perhaps a better source for the name origin could be found later on, and then the article can be edited. Karenthewriter (talk) 05:50, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi @Sparkle & Fade: primary sources can be used to verify facts (straightforward and non-contentious ones). If the question is "where did this band get its name?", then arguably there is no better source to answer that, than the people who actually named it, ie. the band members. Even if you find a secondary source, say a magazine telling us where the name comes from, the information almost certainly ultimately traces back to the band members anyway. But as Karenthewriter suggests, rather than simply stating it as an absolute fact like "the name comes from" you should refer to that primary source and phrase it as "according to Arnett, the name comes from" (or words to that effect). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:56, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
susanhollowayscott.com reliable?
I'm currently working on upgrading an article to Good Article status, but there's still one citation left that's needed. Unfortunately, the only source I can seem to find is susanhollowayscott.com, which is a blog. I know that some blogs are allowed, so is this one trustworthy, or is it unreliable? Help! Ali Beary (talk2me!) (stalk me?!) 18:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @Ali Beary. WP:BLOG says
when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications
. According to our article on Susan Holloway Scott, she is a writer of historical fiction, and her blog seems to be mostly on historical subjects, as you might expect. She has no doubt done her research, but unless she has a track record as a reliably published writer about history, it doesn't sound promising. ColinFine (talk) 18:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC)Your refs 1,2 and 3 are to her website, and therefor not independent and not contributing to confirming notability. David notMD (talk) 20:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)The article content states what she has written, but does not have content or refs for what has been written about her. This is Start class at best (the current rating) and needs significant work before being upgraded to C-class, let alone nominated for GA. David notMD (talk) 20:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)- OP nominated Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton, not Susan Holloway Scott. Tarlby 20:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, query pertains to raising Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton to GA, and want to know if effort can use Scott's blog as a reference. In that case, I agree with ColinFine that while Scott publishes historical fiction, she does not quality as an academic historian with bona fides. David notMD (talk) 20:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- OP nominated Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton, not Susan Holloway Scott. Tarlby 20:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Sources and Notability
Just because sources exist for a subject does not necessarily mean that it is notable enough to have a Misplaced Pages article, correct? RedactedHumanoid (talk) 22:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- @RedactedHumanoid Correct. WP:GNG sources are wanted, not, for example, subject's social media. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello RedactedHumanoid. There can not be an Misplaced Pages article unless the subject is considered notable. Sources exist about me, including mentions in a few local newspaper articles, but that doesn't make me Misplaced Pages-article-notable. If you haven’t already done so reading Help:Your first article may be of help to you. Karenthewriter (talk) 03:49, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks. I was just wondering cause I very recently obtained NPR rights, and wanted to know if just because an article with sources meant that it was notable, since I forgot. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 06:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello RedactedHumanoid. There can not be an Misplaced Pages article unless the subject is considered notable. Sources exist about me, including mentions in a few local newspaper articles, but that doesn't make me Misplaced Pages-article-notable. If you haven’t already done so reading Help:Your first article may be of help to you. Karenthewriter (talk) 03:49, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
A Page about Indian Educational linguist - Rama Kant Agnihotri
I am in doubt if the person is nitable and whether he should have a wikipedia page.
Full name - Rama Kant Agnihotri
Profession - Professor (Retd.), faculty at Uni. of delhi.
Wrote many books, including, Routledge published: an essential Hindi grammar. Ruderaksh11 (talk) 22:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Ruderaksh11, do you mean Draft:Ramakant Agnihotri? Schazjmd (talk) 22:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Well, Ruderaksh11, it's merely a draft. Let's see how the draft develops. I have to say, though, that it's seriously defective. Consider this somniferous sample: "Rama Kant Agnihotri’s work has been pivotal in leveraging India’s rich linguistic diversity as a tool for social justice and educational equity." I think this means "Rama Kant Agnihotri’s work has made India’s linguistic diversity a tool for social justice and educational equity"; but I'd have to look at the source to be sure. However, the only source provided is by Rama Kant Agnihotri himself, so it can't be used to verify a claim for an achievement by him. -- Hoary (talk) 00:31, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Aside from the draft, you should not have article-like content on your Use page and should stop any work on Draft:Rama Kant Agnihotri (2). As for the unsubmitted draft Draft:Ramakant Agnihotri, needs work before being submittedfor review. David notMD (talk) 04:49, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Jean-François Ballester
2 weeks ago someone added something in French to the article Jean-François Ballester. According to Google translate it's about the place and grave, where he was buried. As they put malformed "ref"-tags around it, it's not clear to me, what they intended to do. So: should the sentence be deleted, or could it be used somehow? Maresa63 23:30, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- The reference was for his mother and sister being coaches, so I moved it back up to that line. I removed the addition in French (location of his grave), as there was no source to support it. LizardJr8 (talk) 23:39, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Copyright question
https://www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/data/images/1315374-Thomas_Robert_Bugeaud.jpg
Can I just check this is out of protection, it was painted in the 1840s, does it being a digital image have different / changed protection? LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 09:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @LeChatiliers Pupper Faithful 2D representations/photos of paintings that old would be in the public domain, as that article explains. When you upload the image to Commons, make sure you include your immediate source, i.e. the weblink you gave here. More complex copyright questions should be directed to the Commons helpdesk at c:Commons:Village_pump/Copyright. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
I need a biography written on Misplaced Pages
As a naturopath and holistic healthcare practitioner, I'd like an experienced Wiki writer to feature an article on my expertise. If any of you can help then please reach out soon. Dr. Mojibul Haque (talk) 11:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Dr. Mojibul Haque Posting a request here at the Teahouse is more-or-less an invitation to scammers to "reach out" and take your money, as the link I've added explains. If you are (or become) a wikinotable person, then a volunteer will likely notice and write about you. There are reasons why you may regret having such an article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @Dr. Mojibul Haque. To put your request in other words "I want to use Misplaced Pages to promote my business". Promotion of any kind is forbidden on Misplaced Pages.
- If several people who have no connection with you, and have not been commissioned or fed information on you behalf, choose to write at some length about you in reliable sources, then you would probably meet Misplaced Pages's criteria for notability, and an article could be written about you. Such an article would not belong to you, would not be controlled by you, would not necessarily say what you want it to say, and would be able to be edited by almost anybody in the world except you and your associates. If it happened that there was reliably published material that was negative about you, that would probably be discussed in the article. See an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing
- If you have not been written about in that way, then no amount of work, and no amount of money, is going to be able to put an article about you in Misplaced Pages: see WP:AMOUNT.
- Please focus on other means to promote your business. And don't, whatever you do, pay somebody to write a Misplaced Pages article about you: see WP:SCAM. ColinFine (talk) 13:38, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Your submission of a draft about yourself at User:Dr. Mojibul Haque/sandbox has been declined. For a living person, all content must be verified by valid references (see WP:42). References need to be to publications about you, not sci journal articles for which you were a co-author. Those are useless. David notMD (talk) 16:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Dr. Mojibul Haque: I feel I should point out that alternative medicines (and those who practice with same) are in a contentious topic, with part of the issue in the topic area being promotion such as you're attempting to do. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v 16:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- See that Naturopathy is designated on its Talk page as a contentious topic. David notMD (talk) 23:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
What is the WikiCup
What is the WikiCup, that’s my only question. Yuanmongolempiredynasty (talk) 12:06, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- See Misplaced Pages:WikiCup Lectonar (talk) 12:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hey @Yuanmongolempiredynasty, The WikiCup is an annual writing competition on Misplaced Pages, where participants earn points by contributing to articles across various categories. The goal is to encourage high-quality contributions and promote engagement. Ayohama (talk) 13:30, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- So basically you just edit to get points? Yuanmongolempiredynasty (talk) 20:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Yuanmongolempiredynasty it's friendly competition, and for some people a fun way to motivate themselves. We're both WP:SERIOUS and WP:FUN. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ok Yuanmongolempiredynasty (talk) 21:22, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Wait, then what are the judges for? Yuanmongolempiredynasty (talk) 20:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ok Yuanmongolempiredynasty (talk) 21:22, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Yuanmongolempiredynasty it's friendly competition, and for some people a fun way to motivate themselves. We're both WP:SERIOUS and WP:FUN. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- So basically you just edit to get points? Yuanmongolempiredynasty (talk) 20:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Is Muck Rack a Self-published source?
Hey, Hope you are doing great, I'm here to ask about Muck Rack. Is it a Self-Published source? Taabii (talk) 13:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- I am not sure but their journalist profolios/profile are automatically generated and may contain errors. I wouldn't consider it a reliable source for a comprehensive list of any journalist's article. But I'd consider it fine to put it in an 'external links' section, especially if the profile is a verified one. Ca 14:53, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Ca Thank you for your reply. Taabii (talk) 16:22, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
about create new page
it require article to create new page you might help me to understand Jeandamour.rw (talk) 13:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @Jeandamour.rw, and welcome to the Teahouse.
- Trying to write an article before you have spent time learning how Misplaced Pages works is likely to lead to disappointment and frustration, and probably a lot of wasted effort.
- My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Misplaced Pages works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft..
- Looking at Draft:Sheka umubwiriza (which is where your attempted article currently is), it appears that you have done the obvious thing of starting by writing what you about a subject. Unfortunately this is writing the article BACKWARDS - because Misplaced Pages does not have any interest at all in what you know about Umubwiriza (or what I know, or what any random person on the Internet knows). Misplaced Pages is almost only interested in what has been published about him in reliable sources by people completely unconnected with him. Unless you start by finding such sources, you are very likely wasting your time. ColinFine (talk) 14:53, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- If English is not your first language, I recommend editing in a Misplaced Pages version that is in another language. You can see List of Wikipedias for a list. Ca 14:55, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Redirect note
When I go to Aliasing_(factorial_experiments) from my Chrome browser, a note appears at the top, (Redirected from Draft:Aliasing (factorial experiments)). This note does not appear in the editor, and also does not appear if I go to the article from within Misplaced Pages. Why does it appear, and how can it be eliminated (or should it)? Johsebb (talk) 15:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- This note means that you were sent to the article from a redirect page. This is not a problem and likely just means that the page that is saved in your browser is the redirect page and not the actual page. (What probably happened here is that the first time you visited the article, it was a draft, which was then moved to the final article, leaving a redirect.) Again, this is not anything you need to worry about - it is completely normal to be redirected sometimes. TypoEater (talk) 16:08, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks very much. Looks like I need to clear my browser. Johsebb (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Glitch?
I'm currently working on Draft:Cooper Pants Factory fire, and while updating the "Aftermath" section I noticed that one of the links in the lead bugged out, producing "post-open">Fujita Scalepost-close">" in regular text instead of Fujita Scale. Does anybody else see this? It's been happening for months, and I can't for the life of me figure out what's happening. EF 16:17, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- It was in the wikitext, no idea why. I've removed it. Schazjmd (talk) 16:35, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hm, that’s… odd. I’m not sure what it is, but I’ll ask around at the VP. EF 16:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Sometimes you use the visual editor, and I've seen VE add odd stuff to wikitext occasionally. Schazjmd (talk) 17:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hm, that’s… odd. I’m not sure what it is, but I’ll ask around at the VP. EF 16:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
unblocking request
Can someone help me with request please? Elliyoun (talk) 16:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Elliyoun Welcome to the Teahouse. In a word: "No".
- You have been partially blocked on one article page only for continued disruption across a three-year period. Your appeal was reviewed today by an administrator and declined. Feel free to edit constructively anywhere else on Misplaced Pages's other 6.9 million articles, but do not try to assert your own view of how things should be; always base everything upon what Reliable Sources actually say. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:27, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Elliyoun There was no need to email me off-wiki. There was nothing private that needed discussing, so I am replying to you here instead. I took a look at your edits made when you were logged in and as an IP. Your edits were repeatedly reinserted after their removal, and were unsubstantiated. There was no attempt to discuss things on the article talk page and one administrator even recently observed that repeated attempts to make these edits had been happening over a 9 year period. Actions that are repeated over and over again without any attempt to justify them and gain concensus on the relevant talk page are disruptive — hence your single page block. You are free to edit elsewhere and are asked to leave your personal views behind when you do so. Please don't email other editors off-wiki without good reason. We edit openly and publicly here, and emails should be used very sparingly, and only when a degree of privacy is absolutely necessary. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think my message was direct and clear: No explanation was given about reversing the changes and instead, someone repeatedly was just deleting them. I'm not sure where you got 9 years history of my change because I've started using Misplaced Pages since 2022 only. I'm sorry if you are unhappy with the message which I sent, but anyway the same message and concern indicated here. Elliyoun (talk) 20:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Elliyoun There was no need to email me off-wiki. There was nothing private that needed discussing, so I am replying to you here instead. I took a look at your edits made when you were logged in and as an IP. Your edits were repeatedly reinserted after their removal, and were unsubstantiated. There was no attempt to discuss things on the article talk page and one administrator even recently observed that repeated attempts to make these edits had been happening over a 9 year period. Actions that are repeated over and over again without any attempt to justify them and gain concensus on the relevant talk page are disruptive — hence your single page block. You are free to edit elsewhere and are asked to leave your personal views behind when you do so. Please don't email other editors off-wiki without good reason. We edit openly and publicly here, and emails should be used very sparingly, and only when a degree of privacy is absolutely necessary. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Elliyoun See WP:COMMUNICATE and consider joining the discussion at Talk:Elyon#What's_"Elliyoun"_all_about?. Btw, do you see why this edit wasn't helpful? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, I responded your query there. Elliyoun (talk) 21:05, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
MiszaBot configuration
On the MiszaBot config for automatically archiving talk pages or other pages, what does the "counter" part do? What if that field is left blank? I just adjusted the parameters for the MiszaBot on this page for instance if anyone wants a real example to answer me in relation to. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:28, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Iljhgtn It is the current number of the last used archive. It can be left empty so that it operates using default numbering. You can read further documentation at User:MiszaBot/config. Hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Why would someone not leave it blank then? Leaving it blank looks to me like it would nearly always be the best option. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:10, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Iljhgtn in this case, it could be removed entirely so no one is tempted to fill in answer, but as the documentation mentions, sometimes the format isn't a number, but prefixed with text, e.g "Archive #1" instead of "1". ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:11, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks Shushugah. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Iljhgtn:
counter
is used for numbered archives. It tells the bot which number to use in the next archiving. You start by manually settingcounter = 1
unless there are already archives. When the bot has filled up an archive to the allowed size, it automatically incrementscounter
. I don't know what happens if you omit acounter
value while asking for numbered archives withArchive %(counter)d
. Maybe the bot will refuse to archive. Or maybe it will setcounter
to 1 and start archiving like if it had already been set to 1. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)- Ok so whenever you are creating a new one from scratch and there is no archive, "counter" should be populated with "1"? Iljhgtn (talk) 00:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Iljhgtn: Yes, if you want numbered archives and not yearly or monthly archives. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ok so whenever you are creating a new one from scratch and there is no archive, "counter" should be populated with "1"? Iljhgtn (talk) 00:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Iljhgtn:
- Thanks Shushugah. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Iljhgtn in this case, it could be removed entirely so no one is tempted to fill in answer, but as the documentation mentions, sometimes the format isn't a number, but prefixed with text, e.g "Archive #1" instead of "1". ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:11, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Why would someone not leave it blank then? Leaving it blank looks to me like it would nearly always be the best option. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:10, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Where to start a conversation about naming of natural disasters?
Hi,
It occurs to me that as climate change increases the number of natural disasters, and those disasters lead to more destruction, there will be more and more confusion around names. Therefore I feel it would be helpful to start a discussion that might lead to a policy / guidance on how to name them.
This is currently happening with the Palisades Fire (2025) and Palisades Fire (2021). See the 2025 fire talk page for more (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/search/?oldid=1268426822&title=Talk:Palisades%20Fire%20(2025))
Where do I start that sort of discussion? I know it takes time to create policy, and it may or may not lead to any. But it seems useful to start that conversation now.
Thank you!
delecto Delectopierre (talk) 18:55, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Delectopierre: Perhaps Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Weather is a good place to start?-- Ponyo 18:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Delectopierre I'm not sure if this is relevant to the particular fires you refer to, but I would just add to the above by stating that we do not invent names for things here. Misplaced Pages follows what other reliable sources say about things and how they call them. Should multiple high-quality sources use alternative names, we do have the ability to create WP:REDIRECT pages so that anyone typing one, lesser-used name, will be sent to the right page using the most accepted name. This is not fixed in stone. Thus you can search for Kiev and Kyiv and arrive at the same page. That particular change took a lot of discussion before a consensus was reached. With ongoing events such as the most recent Palisades fire, it may be that hindsight and WP:RS will allow the best form of discussion of page nomenclature in each case. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes thanks. I'm not talking about naming things. This is occurring because fires -- at least in CA -- are named by dispatchers as a way to make it easier for the firefighters to communicate over the radio. e.g. the fire at 123 main st becomes the 'Main St. Fire' and nothing is preventing the same thing from happening the following week/month/year. This creates a situation where there can be multiple fires known as the Main St fire.
- This is in contrast to hurricanes, for example, as the national weather service retires a name once a storm with that name becomes significant; at least as I understand it.
- As such, it seems to me that it would be helpful to come up with some guidance on how articles are named for natural disasters that share a name in the real world. Delectopierre (talk) 00:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Delectopierre: Don't overthink this. The existing policies cover this just fine. If–and when–sources change the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, we follow accordingly. Future fires in this area will be unlikely to be named "Palisades Fire" even though it isn't formally codified, just like the Thomas Fire isn't a name you're going to hear again out of all likelihood.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Please do not patronize me by suggesting I am overthinking this, and please don't WP:BLUDGEON me by responding to every comment I've made to someone else regarding this. Delectopierre (talk) 00:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'm afraid you are overthinking it, which is common when you encounter Misplaced Pages's policies and procedures anew. It's not bludgeoning when I'm saying nothing about you and am answering the questions you pose pretty directly.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I just asked you not to use that phrase and you repeated it. This has gone from patronizing to willful disrespect. Cut it out. Delectopierre (talk) 00:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I've been treating you with great patience but you refuse to trust me. I have about 200 times the amount of edits and 3 times your tenure here and I'm sharing the thorough understanding of policies and guidelines I've accumulated. Call it what you want, but WP:PRIMARYTOPIC becomes beautifully simple once you read it. If you need more specifics, different wikiprojects may have their own guidelines about how that general policy applies, but they're all ultimately basically just that. I've been through your situation numerous times. Don't cast the WP:ASPERSION of "willful disrespect".--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I just asked you not to use that phrase and you repeated it. This has gone from patronizing to willful disrespect. Cut it out. Delectopierre (talk) 00:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'm afraid you are overthinking it, which is common when you encounter Misplaced Pages's policies and procedures anew. It's not bludgeoning when I'm saying nothing about you and am answering the questions you pose pretty directly.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Please do not patronize me by suggesting I am overthinking this, and please don't WP:BLUDGEON me by responding to every comment I've made to someone else regarding this. Delectopierre (talk) 00:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Delectopierre: Don't overthink this. The existing policies cover this just fine. If–and when–sources change the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, we follow accordingly. Future fires in this area will be unlikely to be named "Palisades Fire" even though it isn't formally codified, just like the Thomas Fire isn't a name you're going to hear again out of all likelihood.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Delectopierre: To add to what Nick says, it is frowned upon to post about an ongoing decision making discussion elsewhere (unless it is to raise serious misconduct concerns) as it could be considered WP:CANVASSING, particularly when the incipient consensus is leaning against your position.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:15, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delectopierre, in this case, the relevant guideline is WP:DISAMBIGUATION and the applicable subsection is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. It is all clear and well-established. Cullen328 (talk) 22:16, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- I don't see anything in WP:DISAMBIGUATION that discusses how WP would treat, eg, two planets named Mercury. Delectopierre (talk) 00:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Which one is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC? In that hypothetical situation there probably wouldn't be a primary topic. But this is not analogous to that situation. This is more like Typhoon Tip being by far the most notable storm named Tip, even though the name was never formally retired.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I don't see anything in WP:DISAMBIGUATION that discusses how WP would treat, eg, two planets named Mercury. Delectopierre (talk) 00:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Jasper Deng can you point me to any policy that says its frowned upon to discuss future improvements based on a current conversation? Delectopierre (talk) 00:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Delectopierre: I already did. You can't do it with the appearance of trying to sway a discussion you're involved in.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- You did not. You said it's frowned upon and referenced a policy. And in your words "it is frowned upon to point to a policy shortcut without explaining how it applies to the exact situation at hand."
- I came to teahouse because I am relatively new and want to improve this encyclopedia. You coming here and inserting yourself in this discussion is not a friendly thing to do to a newcomer such as me. Delectopierre (talk) 00:43, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Unlike them, I explained clearly how that policy applies here instead of just pointing to it. You linked the ongoing discussion. How do you expect others to react to that? I'm explaining things in a civil manner. Misplaced Pages is complicated and there are many rules to learn. Please read others' responses too as I agree with them as well.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Delectopierre: I already did. You can't do it with the appearance of trying to sway a discussion you're involved in.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Delectopierre, in this case, the relevant guideline is WP:DISAMBIGUATION and the applicable subsection is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. It is all clear and well-established. Cullen328 (talk) 22:16, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Userbox
Well I made a userbox with an image. But when I use the full image like normal just takes the screen up. and when I use thumbnail image it has this border around it. How will I fix it? Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 00:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nedia020415 Fixed, by specifying a size for the image. ''']''' (talk • contribs) 02:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you @CanonNi! ;) Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 02:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Help with draft article
Hello!
I am a new wikipedia user, I was hoping to create an article for a song:
https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:Bird_On_The_Buffalo
I have used several independent sources, but seem not to qualify for article creation at this time, due to not meeting notability criteria.
If I could have a couple pointers in the right direction, that would be great. Thank you! Forester56 (talk) 00:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- While Angus Stone is considered article-worthy, as are his six albums, and a small number of songs on those albums, perhaps Bird on the Buffalo does not have enough published about it to justify an article. Most of your refs acknowledge the song and video exist, but do not provide at-length reviews of the song or how it was received. David notMD (talk) 12:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Asking about wiki Inuit
Hello, I’m reviving the Inuit Misplaced Pages, but sadly I don’t know Inuit and the rest of the ones I know doesn’t even know the existence of the language. What I do then? Protoeus (talk) 01:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Inuit wikipedia is here Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 01:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Still, can you revise my work to fix possible grammar mistakes? Protoeus (talk) 02:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- What work? Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 02:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- My new articles on Inuit Misplaced Pages. Protoeus (talk) 02:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Tell me specificly, Which articles? Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 02:08, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- All articles i create there, (Example: the Jal 123 article) Protoeus (talk) 02:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Don't. Just follows rosguill's comment Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 02:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- All articles i create there, (Example: the Jal 123 article) Protoeus (talk) 02:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Tell me specificly, Which articles? Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 02:08, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- My new articles on Inuit Misplaced Pages. Protoeus (talk) 02:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- What work? Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 02:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Still, can you revise my work to fix possible grammar mistakes? Protoeus (talk) 02:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you do not speak a language, you should not be writing articles for that Misplaced Pages project. Someone did that on Scots Misplaced Pages and severely set back the project, creating a ton of additional work for people. Left unchecked, you can actually end up corrupting databases of the Inuit language that assume that the Misplaced Pages project is in well-written Inuit. signed, Rosguill 02:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Please don't write articles in languages that you aren't fluent in. That's a recipe for disaster. Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Protoeus, I note you've already created one article on Inuit Misplaced Pages. Creating articles in Inuit Misplaced Pages without knowing how to speak Inuktituk is not a bannable offense, because I don't think that's ever been considered before, but I think it's a reasonable argument for deleting the article. DS (talk) 03:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Writing quoted material from ancient books in the Library of Ireland to credit source and also the host family it was written about.
All of the information has been rewritten from the source of the Annals of the Four Masters! An Ancient Book from the Library of Ireland! And a Lineage has been added! if someone else used this first it is still not copyrighted as it is source material taken from the same place for a different purpose but still withing the same context! CRBradley8051 (talk) 02:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Please leave everything you write in your sandbox or draft space, because it's clear you aren't yet ready to create articles that have a chance of acceptance. Submit for review if you like - that will give you a better idea of the problems. Deb (talk) 08:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @CRBradley8051, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read your first article carefully. What you have put in Draft:House of O Brolcháin does not in the least resemble a Misplaced Pages article, which should be a summary of what reliable independent sources have published about a notable subject, and little else. ColinFine (talk) 11:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
DOB
Just recently I entered into a discussion with another editor regarding a DOB edit for a BLP: Talk:Roisin Conaty. It raised several questions regarding contentious content and RS when it comes to DOB and BLPs. Since leaving my last reply, I have been perusing similar BLP pages on WP and having stopped at 50 found that 48 did not have any cited sources; let alone ones that were backed by RS which would satisfy the editor in question's reasoning. I could list them all here, but toward what end? It is extremely rare to find multiple "widely published" RS that state DMY for BLPs. It has already been backed by RS that this BLP was born in 1979; how "contentious" could it be to include "March 26"? I am at a loss here, considering there are countless articles at WP that allow DOB without "widely published" RS. Maineartists (talk) 03:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- "Allow" is an interesting word. If you see a detail in an article that doesn't have a proper source, feel free to remove it. DS (talk) 04:18, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- "If you see a detail in an article that doesn't have a proper source, feel free to remove it." That is rather a unrestrained invitation to an open season for removal of practically any sentence found at WP lacking a "proper source" at the end of it. Not only is that incredibly unproductive, but highly nonsensical. I am specifically referring to DOB of a BLP and it being labeled "contentious content" when search engines render the same DOB (MDY) innumerable times over, and certain WP policy apply: "the subject does not object to the details being made public." It's one thing to argue WP policy, but quite another to defend WP:COMMONSENSE. Maineartists (talk) 13:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I haven't looked at the discussion you mention but I think that you should be weighing WP:BLPPRIVACY against WP:ABOUTSELF. If, for example, someone says on their own verified social media "It's my birthday today", or their website includes their DOB, I would be happy to use that, despite such media in general being primary and unreliable. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Mike Turnbull The BLP herself has confirmed she was born in 1979: "I'm 41" (2020 Interview) and "Conaty was born in Camden 40 years ago" (2019 Interview). How much more of a public statement directly from the BLP can one get? Maineartists (talk) 17:00, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- These are perfectly fine sources. I thought that your issue was the exact date, not just the year. Note that there is a template {{Birth based on age as of date}} that can be used to cover a level of uncertainty. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I was - in a way. I was arguing the policy: "the subject does not object to the details being made public." One would think if the BLP in question saw the innumerable search engine hits that state MDY that at some point - it would stand to reason - they would make a statement of correction: "This is not my birth date." In keeping with Martha Stewart who pointed out on television certain details on WP that were incorrect; or BLPs who have taken to the Talk Page to correct errors at their articles. If the BLP is open to disclosing being born in 1979, why one earth would they object to March 26? considering it is widely stated over the internet and associated with 1979? It makes absolutely no sense. I understand WP requires RS; but this one is a little over the top. Why would March 26 be contentious but 1979 not? Simply because the BLP didn't add the MD in an interview? As I wrote, there are very little RS articles that state: "Such-and-such was born on DMY" in an interview / profile piece. Copy editors find this to be trivial filler / fluff. Exactly how many celebrity websites (as the original editor suggested as a RS) state: "I was born on DMY"? Just thinking out loud here. Regardless, thanks for the template {{Birth based on age as of date}}. Maineartists (talk) 17:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- May not be relevant in this case but DMY dates are more of a privacy issue than just the year as many bank accounts etc. use that as part of their security checks, as do many website logons. Also, don't forget that search engines often take WP, especially Wikidata as gospel, so our figure can get copied all over the place. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Well, now you've just created a "chicken and the egg" scenario when it comes to search engines taking from WP. Considering more people today believe sources that WP have deemed "deprecated" than WP itself. I simply do not buy into the concept that WP manufactured March 26 from which all other search engine hits have copied from across the WWW; since there were sources that claimed the DOB long before the 2011 WP article creation. I understand The Sun is considered a deprecated source, but this article interview: with the BLP which links to this article states March 26, 1979. If someone wants to "steal bank accounts etc", I'm quite sure "The Sun" (1.2 million subscribers) would be a great place to start; not WP. Maineartists (talk) 19:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I said
May not be relevant in this case
and was tying to make a wider point about why the precise DMY as DOB is something we need to be careful of when contributing. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:21, 11 January 2025 (UTC)- I understand. But I'd rather discuss the actual individual case at hand rather than umbrella WP policy. Like the original editor, it is sometimes the case that umbrella WP policies (wider points) get argued more than discussion of the actual individual case at hand. That's all. Thanks again for your help. I still strongly believe this BLP is safe with MDY inclusion. Maineartists (talk) 15:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- I said
- Well, now you've just created a "chicken and the egg" scenario when it comes to search engines taking from WP. Considering more people today believe sources that WP have deemed "deprecated" than WP itself. I simply do not buy into the concept that WP manufactured March 26 from which all other search engine hits have copied from across the WWW; since there were sources that claimed the DOB long before the 2011 WP article creation. I understand The Sun is considered a deprecated source, but this article interview: with the BLP which links to this article states March 26, 1979. If someone wants to "steal bank accounts etc", I'm quite sure "The Sun" (1.2 million subscribers) would be a great place to start; not WP. Maineartists (talk) 19:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- May not be relevant in this case but DMY dates are more of a privacy issue than just the year as many bank accounts etc. use that as part of their security checks, as do many website logons. Also, don't forget that search engines often take WP, especially Wikidata as gospel, so our figure can get copied all over the place. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I was - in a way. I was arguing the policy: "the subject does not object to the details being made public." One would think if the BLP in question saw the innumerable search engine hits that state MDY that at some point - it would stand to reason - they would make a statement of correction: "This is not my birth date." In keeping with Martha Stewart who pointed out on television certain details on WP that were incorrect; or BLPs who have taken to the Talk Page to correct errors at their articles. If the BLP is open to disclosing being born in 1979, why one earth would they object to March 26? considering it is widely stated over the internet and associated with 1979? It makes absolutely no sense. I understand WP requires RS; but this one is a little over the top. Why would March 26 be contentious but 1979 not? Simply because the BLP didn't add the MD in an interview? As I wrote, there are very little RS articles that state: "Such-and-such was born on DMY" in an interview / profile piece. Copy editors find this to be trivial filler / fluff. Exactly how many celebrity websites (as the original editor suggested as a RS) state: "I was born on DMY"? Just thinking out loud here. Regardless, thanks for the template {{Birth based on age as of date}}. Maineartists (talk) 17:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- These are perfectly fine sources. I thought that your issue was the exact date, not just the year. Note that there is a template {{Birth based on age as of date}} that can be used to cover a level of uncertainty. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Mike Turnbull The BLP herself has confirmed she was born in 1979: "I'm 41" (2020 Interview) and "Conaty was born in Camden 40 years ago" (2019 Interview). How much more of a public statement directly from the BLP can one get? Maineartists (talk) 17:00, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I haven't looked at the discussion you mention but I think that you should be weighing WP:BLPPRIVACY against WP:ABOUTSELF. If, for example, someone says on their own verified social media "It's my birthday today", or their website includes their DOB, I would be happy to use that, despite such media in general being primary and unreliable. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- "If you see a detail in an article that doesn't have a proper source, feel free to remove it." That is rather a unrestrained invitation to an open season for removal of practically any sentence found at WP lacking a "proper source" at the end of it. Not only is that incredibly unproductive, but highly nonsensical. I am specifically referring to DOB of a BLP and it being labeled "contentious content" when search engines render the same DOB (MDY) innumerable times over, and certain WP policy apply: "the subject does not object to the details being made public." It's one thing to argue WP policy, but quite another to defend WP:COMMONSENSE. Maineartists (talk) 13:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
How to get suggestions on Talk page be seen by editors?
Hi community,
I'm on Misplaced Pages on behalf of Tencent, hence I would not make any direct edits to any branded pages. I have left some suggestions onto the Tencent Cloud page and would appreciate if any editors who may be interested in the Tech space would help us review our suggestions there.
TencentCommsYeran (talk) 03:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @TencentCommsYeran: The best way to do this is with the
{{COI edit request}}
template. See also: the edit request wizard. JJPMaster (she/they) 03:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC)- @TencentCommsYeran: please also see Misplaced Pages:Edit requests § General considerations: you are far more likely to get a response to an edit request if you provide detailed and specific suggestions. We also discourage promotional content that reads like a press release. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 06:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Adding Filmography
I am looking to add a filmography to a page. I am using the template "filmography simple" and have added the first listing. When adding subsequent line items, they are in their required fields, yet do not show/populate on the page. How can we make the additional credits visible? Thanks. Luv888 (talk) 04:21, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @Luv888. Would I be right in guessing that 1) you're talking about Draft:Best Psychology in Film, and 2) that you've actually solved the problem? I'm afraid my mind-reading skill isn't working very well today. ColinFine (talk) 12:09, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes. Task completed. Luv888 (talk) 16:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Using LLMs for finding sources
Ok, I don't understand this, What is the problem in using chatbots for finding sources(reliable). Is there any rules regarding this? My submission got declined partly due to this.----Warriorglance (talk) 05:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- The problem is that chatbots will never say "I don't know". If they don't have an answer, they'll make something up.
- If a chatbot pointed you to a real source, and you used it, then that's not why your submission was declined. DS (talk) 06:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- The cites in Draft:Desom, Kerala (which is what I assume we're talking about here) have the URLs appended with
utm_source=chatgpt.com
, which doesn't necessarily invalidate the source, but suggests that the draft may have been LLM-generated. - @Warriorglance: if (?) these are genuinely bona fide sources, then do yourself the favour of at least unappending the utm source parameter from the citations. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- The cites in Draft:Desom, Kerala (which is what I assume we're talking about here) have the URLs appended with
- @Warriorglance DS pretty much covereged it, but, essentially, chatbots and LLMs (Such as ChatGPT) are really good at finding patterns. If you show a new one a collection of red triangles and blue circles, then ask it to guess what colours circles are, it'll tell you that "circles are green". Doesn't that sound silly to you? Circles dont have colors! Well, it's how machine learning works - they don't think, they find patterns. And they're really good at it! If I gave one a thousand scans of human brains, and asked it to look for anything that seemed weird, it could probably tell me if any of the brains had a tumour. But it doesn't know what a tumour is, or how to treat one, or why we even care about tumours in the first place! The same in true in the case you're asking. If you ask a LLM to give you a list of reliable sources, it will give you sources that superficially resemble reliable sources. For example, it might "know" that websites which talk about astronomy using long words are more likely to be reliable than websites which don't talk about astronomy using long words. So it gives you websites which talk about astronomy, regardless as to whether or not those websites are reliables sources or not. Alternatively, it may know that print sources are often very reliable. LLMs can't read print sources, however, so it makes up a fake one because that's what large language models are designed to do - talk to you. You actually probably could have an AI search sources for you, and pull out sources with the most relevant keywords. However, again, that's not what current large language models are designed to do. Could that change someday? Absolutely! But for now, you're going to get much better results by doing the research yourself, say, at a library or by using Google Scholar.
- In this particular case, I see you're trying to write an article about a metereor shower. I've had a look around for you: this meteor shower is already mentioned in a mainspace article, at Ursa Major#Meteor showers. There, it is supported by one source- an article published in 2012 in Sky & Telescope. Perhaps before you try writing an article from scratch (which is one of the most difficult tasks possible - I edited Misplaced Pages for six years as an IP before creating this account and making an article), you expand the section there? You can always split your work into a new article at a later date, if you think it's worthy of a stand along page. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 11:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot...👍👍You certainly made editing more easier ----Warriorglance (talk) 13:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- You may certainly use a chatbot to find a source. But you should not cite that source in a Misplaced Pages article without checking that the source exists, and that it says what the chatbot claimed it says. Maproom (talk) 15:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Warriorglance, at this point, chatbots and other AI/LLM tools are incapable of determining whether or not a given source is reliable for use as a Misplaced Pages reference. So, a request to a chatbot is just roughly equivalent to a Google search. In either case, you will get a list of possibilities, and it is up to the human editor to separate the wheat from the chaff to identify the highest quality reliable sources that convey information useful to include in an encyclopedia article. The ability to identify truly reliable sources is the most important skill of a Misplaced Pages editor, and expecting "artificial stupidity" to do that job is a big mistake, at least in 2025. Cullen328 (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Warriorglance A better search engine than Google for this at the moment may be Microsoft Bing. They have incorporated the latest LLM technology into their product but avoided the pitfalls of hallucinations by still only showing, and sometimes summarising, results linked to actual web sources. There is no guarantee that these sources are reliable, of course. Note that there is a special version of Google search which has been customised to focus on Misplaced Pages-reliable sources. You can access it here Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Warriorglance, at this point, chatbots and other AI/LLM tools are incapable of determining whether or not a given source is reliable for use as a Misplaced Pages reference. So, a request to a chatbot is just roughly equivalent to a Google search. In either case, you will get a list of possibilities, and it is up to the human editor to separate the wheat from the chaff to identify the highest quality reliable sources that convey information useful to include in an encyclopedia article. The ability to identify truly reliable sources is the most important skill of a Misplaced Pages editor, and expecting "artificial stupidity" to do that job is a big mistake, at least in 2025. Cullen328 (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- You may certainly use a chatbot to find a source. But you should not cite that source in a Misplaced Pages article without checking that the source exists, and that it says what the chatbot claimed it says. Maproom (talk) 15:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot...👍👍You certainly made editing more easier ----Warriorglance (talk) 13:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Warriorglance, LLMs are basically trained on an accumulation of (stolen) material which can include outdated info and they also tend to make stuff up. If you are still going to use these programs to find sources (even though Google is an option), exercise caution and verify their existence by searching them via a search engine. — 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ 18:55, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Expanding a contents index for categories
I have posted a suggestion to expand a contents index for categories to cover non-default name spaces. Anybody interested in discussing or implementing the idea please see Template talk:Automatic category TOC § Special subsections for namespaces. --CiaPan (talk) 06:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Requesting or creating a list article
I'd like to request or create the article List of animals in memes, with links to existing articles for animals that have been in memes. I'm not sure if I will have enough time and sources to create a full article on my own, and this would be my first. I considered submitting a requested article, but I'm not sure if I need to include sources or proofs of notability. Additionally, I considered submitting to requested lists specifically, but the page is inactive and I assume it's not supposed to be used.
Would it be more appropriate to request an article, or start a draft myself and ask for help reviewing or completing it? Nick McCurdy (talk) 07:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Nick McCurdy, what you would want to look at is the list notability guidelines. Has "animals in memes", as a group, been discussed substantially by reliable sources? (It's possible it has been; I really don't know.) If so, a list of them might be notable, but if not, such an article would be a nonstarter. So, as always, first thing to do is look for sourcing. Seraphimblade 14:18, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Nick McCurdy, to clarify, a reliable source noting "this meme included a chimpanzee" and another reliable source commenting "that meme over there included an elephant" is not enough. What you would need are references to several reliable sources saying something like, "Memes frequently use animals, like this chimp meme and that elephant meme and that porpoise meme and that parrot meme and this octopus meme and that salmon spawing while being eaten by bears meme. Here's the reasons why . . . " That is the type of coverage that transforms an indiscriminate list into an encyclopedic list. It is all about the quality and depth of coverage of the reliable sources that you cite. Cullen328 (talk) 09:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Page citations
The article for Tony Sewell has the maintenance message about needing additional citations. Some parts said "citation needed", and I added reliable sources to those parts, and now I'm wondering: should I remove the message, or are there still more citations needed in order to remove it? Thank you! Wikieditor662 (talk) 07:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi, @Wikieditor662! If you think you've solved the problem that the maintenance tag was calling attention to, then please feel free to be bold and remove the tag! The worst thing that will happen is somebody adds the tag back. If you're ever unsure, however, you can always ask for the opinion of the person who placed the tag - which in this case was @Cordless Larry:. At that point, either they'll agree that the article doesn't need a tag, or they can point to other, maybe more subtle issues, that they feel need addressing. Either way, the article is improved and everybody is happy. Thank you for doing your part to add information to Misplaced Pages! GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 11:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for your efforts, Wikieditor662. However, I feel it would be premature to remove the template because there's still material in the article that isn't supported by references, even if it's not indicated by in-text "citation needed" tags (the template at the top of the page is an alternative to those). The "Teaching" and "Educational improvement" sections are where the remaining sourcing issues appear to be. Cordless Larry (talk) Cordless Larry (talk) 12:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Cordless LarryHow do I know in general then, when it should be removed?
- @GreenLipstickLesbian Well if I sent a message to them I doubt they'd reply, especially if the sign was put up a while ago.
- Thank you both for your help either way.
- Wikieditor662 (talk) 21:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- When should it be removed? When all of the material in the article is supported by reliable sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:05, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Accurate Article writing
Good morning team, please as a Research student, i want to know the accurate ways i can contribute to wiki projects especially in terms of Article writing. i want to know the 'do's and don'ts of article writing, and secondly, aside national newspaper reference which other sources are accepted? TessiDon (talk) 09:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @TessiDon Welcome!
- WP:TUTORIAL is a good start on WP-editing in general. Do's and don't on creating articles: WP:BACKWARD and WP:YFA. If you intend to write about living people, see also WP:BLP. It is recommended to get a hang of WP-editing before trying to write new articles, if these are not good enough they will be deleted. University press books are often good sources. WP:RS discuss what is reliable in general, and at WP:RSP you can find a list of sources that has been repeatedly discussed, and the current view on them. Hope this helps some. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Since starting your account you have been very busy doing copyedits. For some, your work was reverted. I suggest you revisit those to understand why an editor took this action. It could be as simple as a disagreement on writing style. As to creating and then submitting drafts for new articles (see WP:YFA), I second the advice on learning by improving existing articles before essaying to create an article. What you created and submitted from your Sandbox was far too short and unreferenced to be a valid submittal, and thus jsut wasted a reviewer's time. David notMD (talk) 12:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Unclear why link doesn't work in add a citation tool
To whom it may concern,
I have tried to use the add a citation tool on the Do They Know It's Christmas? page with the following link: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2025/01/10/do-they-know-its-payday/ but it doesn't work. I am unclear why the link isn't being picked up or identified as such.
Any ideas how to fix or resolve this issue?
Greenpark79 (talk) 12:10, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Tested with reftoolbar but no, no autofill. All I can say is "that sometimes happen". When it does, I fill in the blanks manually. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
deleting Draft:Church of Our Lady of Zvonik page
Hello, I have been having trouble with Draft:Church of Our Lady of Zvonik. I created the arical, but it was sent to draft for being incomplete... after further edits, I converted it back into an arical, however there is still a redirect... can that be deleted? and if so how? thank you! ✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 13:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- The Emperor of Byzantium, the article Church of Our Lady of the Belfry includes the verbless sentence "The remains of The Church Our Lady of Zvonik, located over a cavity of the west wall above the Porta Aurea of Diocletian's Palace." Church of Our Lady of Zvonik is now a redirect to that article. Are you claiming that these are in fact two different churches? Maproom (talk) 15:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi @Maproom, Thank you for your quick reply, No its the same article, however it has its own talk page Draft talk:Church of Our Lady of Zvonik, and appears on Xtools as a draft... I know I made a mistake in the recoding of it, but not sure where I screwed up? ✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 15:21, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I see that neither talk page contains any discussion. I thnk there's no harm in a redirect having a talk page, though it's not usual. I don't know about Xtools, maybe someone else can help? Maproom (talk) 15:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi @Maproom, Thank you for your quick reply, No its the same article, however it has its own talk page Draft talk:Church of Our Lady of Zvonik, and appears on Xtools as a draft... I know I made a mistake in the recoding of it, but not sure where I screwed up? ✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 15:21, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Shortcut to indicate "Citation Needed"?
Hi all,
New to Misplaced Pages here. I find it useful to interrogate whether sources are cited or not, and I like visual editing more than source editing. But is there a way to indicate that a citation is needed on the visual end? I read about how to add it in source editing, but it can be a pain to go switch the type, find the same sentence in a whole different layout, then copy over the template. Any suggestions? Oraclesto (talk) 17:11, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi, welcome to Misplaced Pages! The visual editor lets you insert templates such as by clicking Insert > Template and searching for the desired template. Perception312 (talk) 17:19, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello @Oraclesto. I believe there should be a puzzle piece icon on the top bar. Clicking it would allow you to insert any template in the visual editor. Tarlby 17:21, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks so much, @Tarlby and @Perception312! That is super helpful. I just gave it a go on the daily page, and it worked! Oraclesto (talk) 17:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
I read a lot but I still don't understand how images work here?
For example, what if there's only one image of something OR if the person who made like a song cover art cannot be contacted or is unknown? CrimsonScarletBurgundyy (talk) 19:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello and welcome. It might help us to better answer you if you describe exactly what it is you are trying to do. 331dot (talk) 19:43, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Basically: copyright is complicated. For historic images and cover art, we use small, reduced-resolution versions, and a fair-use rationale. DS (talk) 20:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- CrimsonScarletBurgundyy, there is no need to contact the creator of cover art when a low resolution version is being used as non-free content. It is necessary to fully comply with WP:NFCI, and cover art is covered by #1 of that policy language. Cullen328 (talk) 20:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Basically: copyright is complicated. For historic images and cover art, we use small, reduced-resolution versions, and a fair-use rationale. DS (talk) 20:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
x page
what happen to x page on wikipedia? White44Tree (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- It redirects to Twitter, if you're wondering why it's named Twitter instead of it's current name, X, see Talk:Twitter/FAQ. Thx56 (talk) 20:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Picture Formatting
I was editing the Huapalcalco page to try and fix something where the picture would "bump" the table of contents. I fixed this, but now I'm wondering, is it permissible for a picture to be above the infobox, and if not, where do I put it? User: Thx56 | Talk to me! 21:08, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I should mention that I've put it below the infobox, but that puts it into the background section User: Thx56 | Talk to me! 21:09, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Can I close my own RfC?
I opened a RfC at Talk: Azerbaijan Airlines Flight 8243 in large part to divert attention from another discussion which I felt was no longer productive. Would I be considered WP:INVOLVED? I haven't given much of an opinion on my RfC, and I've added a few neutral comments. For what it's worth, if I were to close it, I'd close it as accident leading to a crash. guninvalid (talk) 21:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Generally this is a bad idea and can provoke further arguments. ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS apply. And expected standards of behaviour includes avoiding COI such as this. SO if you close it, you may be sanctioned. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you feel the discussion needs a formal closure, it would be best to request it at the noticeboard for that purpose so that an uninvolved editor can do the close. Seraphimblade 07:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Overreliance?
So I've basically almost finished writing an article on this historical 19th-century Haitian party (User:TheBrowniess/sandbox/Liberal Party (Haiti)). Does the citation distribution seem too concentrated, or is it acceptable? It's a pretty niche topic admittedly. 🍫 TheBrowniess (talk) (contribs) 🍫 02:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello @TheBrowniess. Based solely on the concentration of citations, it looks fine to me. In fact, some sentences are lacking citations. You can also remove the citations in the lead if you wish (WP:LEADCITE). Tarlby 03:21, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think I fixed it. (hopefully) 🍫 TheBrowniess (talk) (contribs) 🍫 06:50, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- @TheBrowniess Looks like a very interesting article (now in mainspace). I don't know if you usually do so for your new articles but you should think of doing a main page DYK. Maybe I'm being picky but I found it odd that the very last sentence in the article has no citation. Does the immediately previous citation cover that also? Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Regarding DYK, I’ve never nominated one of my articles because I don’t think they contain anything interesting or fun facts. However, while researching the Liberal Party article, I did recall that it, along with the National Party, were the first political parties formed in Haiti. Unfortunately, none of the major sources corroborate that, so I’m not sure where exactly I got that information from. A potential DYK hook I did come up with though is: Did you know... that Haiti’s Liberal Party was founded in 1870 by two leaders who believed the "most competent" elite should govern the nation?
- Anyhow, I trimmed the article down a little and fixed the no citation issue in the process.
- Note: While writing the article, I was somewhat thrown off when all the sources covered the tug of war between the Liberal Party and the National Party during the 1870s through the 1890s, yet made next to no mention of either party in the 20th century. This seemed to contradict the "List of Heads of State of Haiti" wikipedia article which suggests that the last National president was Tancrède Auguste in 1913, while the last Liberal president was Élie Lescot in 1946 - well into the 20th century. So, i'm not exactly sure where the article got their party affiliations from. 🍫 TheBrowniess (talk) (contribs) 🍫 16:43, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- @TheBrowniess Looks like a very interesting article (now in mainspace). I don't know if you usually do so for your new articles but you should think of doing a main page DYK. Maybe I'm being picky but I found it odd that the very last sentence in the article has no citation. Does the immediately previous citation cover that also? Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think I fixed it. (hopefully) 🍫 TheBrowniess (talk) (contribs) 🍫 06:50, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Force browser Ctrl+F
Perhaps a silly question, but while editing recently (VisEditor), I kept trying to use Firefox Ctrl+F, only for Misplaced Pages to force its own page search function on me; it was rather annoying. Is there any way to disable this feature or the keyboard shortcut that calls it? Thanks in advance! JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 05:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- JuxtaposedJacob, just let the Mediawiki software do its own thing, without trying to force that software to imitate Firefox or anything else. It powers the #7 website in the world with tens of billions of monthly pageviews. It may seem antiquated to code monkeys who are addicted to the very newest thing, but it works just fine for what it is intended to do, and does so every day. Firefox itself is over 20 years old. Cullen328 (talk) 09:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- @JuxtaposedJacob: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you click outside of the VisualEditor editing area (such as the sidebars), you should be able to use the browser's native find feature. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:35, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- You are so beautiful and amazing. Thank you @Tenryuu. JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 15:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Minecraft TTS.
File:Minecraft.ogg 에스파윈터 (talk) 08:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- @에스파윈터 do you have a question about editing Misplaced Pages? ''']''' (talk • contribs) 09:06, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @에스파윈터. That sound file was attached to the article Minecraft in January 2012, when it was recorded, and was removed at some time later, presumably because the article had been changed so much that it no longer reflected the article. Recorded versions of articles are made by volunteeers who choose to spend their time that way - there is nothing automatic about creating, updating, or removing them. If you want to get involved in this, see WP:SPOKEN. ColinFine (talk) 11:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Removing from template.
Hello! Cleopatra IV was incorrectly labelled as Pharaoh for many years, I had edited few weeks ago that she was only queen consort. However, there is this template that includes all Pharaohs and she is listed there here - I tried to remove her, but it is autogenerated and when I am trying there is too much 'mess' there to find one name. Can someone please be kind and remove her? Also, she should be removed from another autogenerated template that includes hellenistic monarchs, as she wasn't one. Sobek2000 (talk) 17:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Sobek2000: Which template? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- "Pharaohs" and "Hellenistic rulers". I do nor know what rose to say. I removed both from her page, but she is still listed on template. Go to any other Pharaoh's page and then on template below the page were all pharaohs are - she is still there. Sobek2000 (talk) 20:19, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- what else Sobek2000 (talk) 20:20, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @Sobek2000. Your account appears to be autoconfirmed, so you should be able to edit Template:Pharaohs. What happens when you try? ColinFine (talk) 20:35, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ok, when you provided link I was able to go and edit this. Thank you and sorry for your trouble. Sobek2000 (talk) 20:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, @Sobek2000. Your account appears to be autoconfirmed, so you should be able to edit Template:Pharaohs. What happens when you try? ColinFine (talk) 20:35, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- what else Sobek2000 (talk) 20:20, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- "Pharaohs" and "Hellenistic rulers". I do nor know what rose to say. I removed both from her page, but she is still listed on template. Go to any other Pharaoh's page and then on template below the page were all pharaohs are - she is still there. Sobek2000 (talk) 20:19, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Whites and blues and purples
Occassionally I am looking at the blue color of a fresh link, and the purple-ish color of an already clicked link, and when they appear one on top of another in a list, it is hard to visually tell the two apart. Is there some setting on my computer or within Misplaced Pages that I can adjust to heighten this contrast somehow? I do not use dark mode, but maybe I could try that. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Iljhgtn: Welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds like you may need to tweak the CSS of whichever skin you're using for Misplaced Pages. There's more info at Help:Link color, especially the section Help:Link color § Styling all links just for you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:04, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- I just want to make the purple "Link to a Misplaced Pages page that exists and that you have visited" a slightly different shade of purple and that would be enough probably to make it stand apart from the blue unvisited links. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:43, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, that's what the page I linked is for. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:33, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think making visited links orange might help too. I just entered this to see if that works if you want to check my work please. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- The code looks fine to me. I can't see what it looks like on your end, but it should work. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:07, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Still showing as the standard purple. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, you may have to enter the actual hexadecimal code for it to work. Bypass the cache once you've done that just to be safe. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- How do I bypass the cache again? And what is the "hexidecimal code"? Do you mean the numbers? Iljhgtn (talk) 21:25, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, you may have to enter the actual hexadecimal code for it to work. Bypass the cache once you've done that just to be safe. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Still showing as the standard purple. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- The code looks fine to me. I can't see what it looks like on your end, but it should work. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:07, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- I just want to make the purple "Link to a Misplaced Pages page that exists and that you have visited" a slightly different shade of purple and that would be enough probably to make it stand apart from the blue unvisited links. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:43, 11 January 2025 (UTC)