Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cassiopeia, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

Can't edit this page? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

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

To read the newest questions, skip to bottom
About the Teahouse

Most recent archives
1232, 1233, 1234, 1235, 1236, 1237, 1238, 1239, 1240, 1241, 1242, 1243, 1244, 1245, 1246, 1247, 1248, 1249, 1250, 1251

Iron Meat

Should we make a page on the game Iron Meat I mean it has gained a lot of attention and many know it’s lore and bosses Lordofcallofduty (talk) 03:21, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think the game is notable ?

Do you think there are reliable sources about this game ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 03:31, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The company Retroware made the game and it’s on steam and others sites as I know of I haven’t checked if it does or not Lordofcallofduty (talk) 11:43, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By reliable sources we mean are their published news reports or other stories about the development of the game, or professional reviews of the game? 331dot (talk) 12:43, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt there's much for the latter; Metacritic doesn't have a rating for the game as there's a lack of professional reviews. (It requires at least 4 professional reviews; there's only three.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:28, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The game updated recently adding some new achievements like Why??? When you break the engines on the sky level and another the game is still fairly recent so I can’t blame metacritic for not doing it yet Lordofcallofduty (talk) 03:06, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked metacritic currently it has 9 reviews and is set at 9.0 Lordofcallofduty (talk) 03:13, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Lordofcallofduty. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

If there are few or no such sources, then there is nothing which can be put in an article, and it is not permitted to create it. That is (mostly) what our requirement of notability comes down to. ColinFine (talk) 19:17, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the game appears to be going well for a game rated 9.0 because I checked metacritic on the game and don’t correct me on this it currently has 9 reviews and I just reviewed it a 10 because I have played and finished it and correct me on this Lordofcallofduty (talk) 03:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lordofcallofduty, the fact that you yourself were able to submit a review is an indication that such reviews are not a reliable source. Content that anybody can submit is user-generated content and such content is not suitable for use as a source. There is a section at WP:RSP about Metacritic, which says that, although its review aggregation is generally reliable, "There is consensus that user reviews on Metacritic are generally unreliable, as they are self-published sources.". So the user ratings are irrelevant; we will need to wait until metacritic aggregates critic reviews and publishes a metascore before that particular source can be used. Furthermore, the actual rating is also irrelevant; a game with a 1.0 rating could have an article here if there are sufficient reliable sources that have written about it. CodeTalker (talk) 00:18, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And how long do you think it would take I know it took retroware months and maybe years to make Iron Meat and it didn’t go to waste at least making a Wikipedia article about it would at least be a gift to them that their game got recognized and not left in the dark by other popular games Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is going nowhere clearly my efforts to get the game popular and do a good deed by supporting a game isn’t working guess it won’t happen and I will stop trying Iron Meat really shouldn’t be known even if people want to know the lore Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:20, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I’m not backing down and here’s some info on it if you want Iron Meat is a contra styled game with a thing of meat from another world takes on humans on earth and player plays as Vadim the man the myth the soon to be legend Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:27, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lordofcallofduty: Lots of things exist in the world. Wikipedia only has articles on subjects that are wikinotable, which is demonstrated through the use of sources that meet the golden rule. Many people with long political careers exist, but they don't always get an article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The basic issue is that all of this is against the very purpose of Wikipedia. It's an encyclopedia, not a publicity platform for deserving individuals or companies. The Wikipedia project doesn't intend to confer notability, but to recognize it; if Iron Meat were to become notable, Wikipedia ought to be the last place to recognize this, not the first. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 03:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I get that but the game released fully in 2024 last year technically I felt like we missed it there was a demo and all I never found a trailer though Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:03, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't notable, stop. For future reference read WP:NOT Mgjertson (talk) 15:06, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You really want me to forget a game that took a company months to do and leave to rot like any other game this site forgot they also deserve a mention instead of popular games you all keep mentioning those I really don’t care what call of duty does Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:17, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a gamedev, I know how hard it is to make a game. Just because something took a lot of effort doesn't mean it has enough material to make a Wikipedia article. If it did, I'd gladly help make it but it simply isn't notable enough yet mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 13:22, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is the game because I may have time to play it the worst game I have played was and hate me for saying this but the worst one was Universe Sandbox Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:09, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't released anything yet but that's not the point, I was trying to make it clear to you that putting effort into something doesn't make it notable. mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 13:27, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yknow I was working on something but I can’t do code but I had the idea but anyway Iron Meat definetly took the devs months to do Lordofcallofduty (talk) 18:10, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Do you understand the point though? mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 19:21, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here’s one thing MANY OTHER SITES HAVE DONE IT FIRST!!

Wikipedia ain’t the first this game surely isn’t big like Iron Lung for a prime example but iron lung only became popular when several idiots used an unstable submarine and iron meat is a game with no related tragities it’s perfect in my opinion so shut up Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:20, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iron Meat isn’t like Iron Lung it has a storyline unlike iron lung Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:24, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lordofcallofduty: Cool it with the personal attacks.

Have you considered starting a wiki for this game on Fandom? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:25, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fandom is for people who know nothing about games Lordofcallofduty (talk) 18:10, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, the subject does not appear to satisfy Wikipedia's general notability guidelines, so it will not survive any scrutiny on this site. Find an alternative outlet that is okay with documenting this game. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:14, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lordofcallofduty: Hello! Usually, video games get articles on Wikipedia when they have been reviewed in professional publications, like IGN or PC Gamer, so that the game meets the notability guideline. The critic reviews of the game on Metacritic include articles on TheXboxHub, Video Chums and ZTGD. Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources has a list of generally reliable and unreliable sources, along with situational ones. TheXboxHub and ZTGD are described as generally unreliable on that list, so to prove notability, you'd have to dig in for more reviews on reliable game outlets - even if Video Chums is reliable, more reliable coverage is needed so that the article can cite it. ObserveOwl (talk) 19:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then how haven’t they known iron meat existed yet huh? Can you answer that? Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:16, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not for everything that exists - reliable sources provide information on whatever topic the authors want. Without reliable sources, a Wikipedia article would fail verifiability. ObserveOwl (talk) 08:19, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's one of the hundreds of indie games that release on steam weekly. There is nothing particularly notable about it and their advertising budget seems to have gone to recruiting someone to bitch about it on wikipedia, they have no reason to know it exists. Please go contribute something meaningful to the encyclopedia before you run the risk of being WP:NOTHEREd mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 19:49, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

I am recently reading pages related to demographics in Tripura where I found that some pages related to ethnicity were vandalised by IP address users, I tried to revert but not know how to revert, please seniors editors help me. 獅眠洞 (talk) 06:27, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Like this page Halam tribe, I request u please tell me how to revert, to fight this type of vandalism, and disruptive edits 獅眠洞 (talk) 06:29, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@獅眠洞 I've reverted that article. This can be done by clicking the "undo" link in the page history or using a tool like WP:Twinkle or WP:Ultraviolet. Ultraodan (talk) 06:37, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

why do people keep vandalizing Wikipedia articles

i have the answer

The people who do are insecure and dumb and hate me for saying this the people who do deserve to rot in hell Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:11, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lordofcallofduty i can agree, but please try to remain civil! :( ogusokumushi^{( ୧ ‧₊˚ 🎐 ⋅ )} 17:11, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thank you sensei 獅眠洞 (talk) 02:59, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i am mobile user undo option is not showing. 獅眠洞 (talk) 03:21, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am a mobile editor, undo does not shown on my phone while I am visit the page 獅眠洞 (talk) 03:31, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@獅眠洞 You need to click on page history, where you can see all the edits and undo them. Yeshivish613 (talk) 20:34, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That option doesn't show 😭 獅眠洞 (talk) 20:41, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your on phone don’t you have another device to do so?? If not I don’t think we can help Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:02, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have mi note 10s with miui 14version 獅眠洞 (talk) 23:18, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone got any tips on how easily convert long bullet point lists into a table?

Normally when its better to do so, I just put the contents of lists into tables by hand, but this is impractical if the list is really long. Bloopityboop (talk) 00:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bloopityboop: If you are doing source mode editing, you can copy and paste your code into text editor. Then do a find and replace with regular expressions. Syntax may vary a bit, but on Geany I can covert list items to rows by searching for "\*\s" and replacing with "\|-\n\|" or for row headers "\|-\n\!". You can try out regex find and replace online at http://regex101.com/r/kUW4Ug/ . Then just add "{| class="wikitable" to the start and "|} to the end.

If you want to add columns and rows once your list, you can flip into the VisualEditor, add them, and then flip back to source editing. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 03:48, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And there is a tool on Wikipedia called "Regex editor", so you don't actually have to copy to another editor.

Also it is possible to write a javascript add-on that would do that too. I have one that adds the bullets to the beginning of each line: function(editor) { editor.replaceSelection(function(selected) { return selected.replace(/^\n/gm,"").replace(/^/gm,"*").replace(/^\*/gm,"* ").replace(/^\* */gm,"* "); }); }

So if you replaced the "* " with "\|-\n\|" it would do what Bloopityboop said. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:37, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett, can you replace a character with a new line using the "Regex editor" in the tools menu? And if so, how? Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 02:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you use the \n in the replacement field which means new line. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:54, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett I wonder if there are multiple regex editors like there are multiple dark modes. I can search for and replace newlines with "\n", but trying to replace literally replaces with that characters "\n" rather than a newline. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 02:22, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at User:Graeme Bartlett/monobook.js where it uses mw.loader.load('//tools-static.wmflabs.org/meta/scripts/pathoschild.templatescript.js'); Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:49, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question

What happens if a user keeps on not using edit summaries when editing an article? Let's take user Axl7Rose as an example (I'm not here to report anything though). If you check most of his recent contributions, a good majority of his edits don't have edit summaries. If that happens to a user, will he/she be permanently banned from Wikipedia? If not, what will happen? Underdwarf58 (talk) 14:35, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The user has received a temporary block for ignoring final warnings and requests for edit summaries. While not using edit summaries in edits would probably not receive a permanent ban by itself, failure to WP:COMMUNICATE as shown by that user could result in a permanent ban. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 16:17, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So that means if the user still doesn't use edit summaries after the 2-day block expires, he/she will get a permanent ban as he/she would probably not read warnings in the talk page? Underdwarf58 (talk) 05:04, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not permanent, it depends on if their editing is useful or just causing trouble. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:13, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, it depends if their edits are constructive or not. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 09:36, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would this be an example of one of his more recent edits that caused trouble? Underdwarf58 (talk) 09:47, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How to address a situation where an editor cites multiple books with invalid ISBNs (books non-existent)

I first noticed an issue in the WP:BLP article on Zhao Liying, where a 2019 edit by Huangdan2060 cited a source claiming to be a book published in 2019 titled 那些草根出身的明星 (Stars who came up from Nothing). However, no such book exists. The ISBN provided (978-7-229-09693-9) corresponds to a different book published in 2015 titled English Street entrance 6th edition, Series June 2015 TEENS SPACE. Since the cited book does not exist and this concerns a BLP article, I removed the content.

This raised concerns about Huangdan2060’s citations, so I further investigated the edits. In the recently created article Longxing Temple (Yanling County) by this editor, there’s a cited book with ISBN 9787535728746. Despite thorough searches, I found no record of this book online—except for Huangdan2060’s own citations on the Chinese and Japanese Wikipedias. I then checked the China PDC Database (where all officially published Chinese books are listed), but neither the ISBN nor the cited book title appeared. This makes me think that this cited book is either unpublished or does not exist..

As this is my first encounter with such a situation, I would like to seek guidance (I have no idea on how to deal with this). Thank you. EleniXDD※Talk 16:35, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have further investigated and there are two more questionable edits (I'm not sure whether these four total examples suffice to initiate a talk page discussion). For this edit by Huangdan2060, I cannot find the cited book titled 中国共产党历届湖南省委书记 in both Worldcat and the database I mentioned. Other online search doesn't provide me with this book, which makes me question of its existence. The other one is in the article Gu Jinchi created by Huangdan2060. The cited book is said to be titled 中华人民共和国年鉴 1998 [Yearbook of the People's Republic of China 1998], published in year 1999 with ISBN 7-80056-903-9. Yet with this isbn, both database I mentioned and Worldcat give a book (also published in 1999) titled 《中华人民共和国会计法全书》(I try to translate this Chinese title, The Complete Book of Accounting Law of the People's Republic of China). While this time, the cited book title seems to be this, but I am not sure. For the first three sources, I question their existence entirely. As for this one, while the book might exist, the title does not match the provided ISBN. EleniXDD※Talk 04:21, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Huangdan2060: It would be great if you could explain the above 4 edits. Thank you. EleniXDD※Talk 15:46, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming most, if not all, of his cites are to these nonexistent books, it sounds to me like we may need to block Huangdan2060 here for rampant source fraud. Once is an innocent mistake; anything beyond that is a wilful attempt to deceive. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:39, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first step should be to ask Huangdan2060 if they can explain their edits and/or resolve the issue on the article talk page (or on their user talk page if it affects multiple pages). If they can't provide a satisfactory answer in due time, then you should file a case at WP:ANI, providing the WP:DIFFs of the exact edits where they appear to have gone wrong. I do agree with Jeske that the outline of the problem you're highlighting here does appear to be quite serious and will likely result in a block. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 16:42, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should I take a look on more articles created/edited by Huangdan2060 first, or ask about the above two edits? There're actually quite a number of articles created by this editor, and I am not sure if this goes like the most cases, as its 2-4 edits among 25329 edits. EleniXDD※Talk 16:46, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd look at a few more edits, at least. If those are likewise poorly-sourced (read: citing non-existent sources) then AN/I would be the next stop. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:54, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your advice, I will look at more isbn edits. EleniXDD※Talk 16:56, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve identified two additional questionable edits (I can continue investigating further if needed). Is this sufficient, or should I proceed with more checks? Additionally, I noticed that Maineartists invited Huangdan2060 to this discussion on Huangdan2060's talk page. Should I re-address the issue on Huangdan2060’s talk page, or document the two new edits directly here? EleniXDD※Talk 03:27, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm far to be a well experienced user even if I made more than 500 edits on "Wikipedia in English".

If only some edits are problematic among more than "25 000". This is certainly a mistake in good faith of the user.

I think the others editors gave you right advices. Happy editing ! Anatole-berthe (talk) 17:01, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is absolutely the wrong take. Source fraud is a direct attack on the accuracy and reliability of our articles, and people have been blocked for citing non-existent sources or citing a source that says the complete opposite of the claim it's cited for. We have to treat it with very minimal tolerance. Again, one bad cite can be chalked up to a mistake. Multiple bad cites grievously strains any sort of good faith. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:13, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Easy there. Source fraud? I would be very careful before slinging accusations of this kind around without proper evidence. First of all, I take issue when any editor at WP uses the term: "our" articles. This is a community. There is no "us" against "them". No one owns anything. This is the Teahouse. For the first example, I would assume WP:GF in this instant. While one editor is looking for a definitive book based only on an ISBN; it may just be a simple error in template choice. Rather, the contributing editor should have used a template for the magazine TEEN SPACE. I have seen in other instances where inexperienced editors (assuming good faith) have entered an erroneous ISBN to complete templates for books when a magazine is being cited. I cannot imagine that the contributing editor made up an entire quote in this instant; when it seems there actually is a magazine issue: English Street entrance 6th edition, Series June 2015 TEENS SPACE, in their language. In defense of the contributing editor, if they are editing from a non-English speaking country (which I believe they are), this may also be a factor. I would strongly advise approaching the editor first. Blocking seems a bit in haste. They honestly may not know what they are doing is wrong. That's what "good faith" is about. Maineartists (talk) 17:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As well, the second example: Bai Li (柏立); Gong Shaoshi (龚绍石) (2000-01-01). 丰富的文化遗存 [Rich Cultural Relics]. 《怀化市初中乡土教材：历史》 [Junior High School Local Textbook of Huaihua: History] (in Chinese). Changsha, Hunan: Hunan People's Publishing House - A Chinese textbook from a local Junior High School? It may not have an ISBN. I would also assume good faith for this one. The editor may just need to understand that they do not need to fill in the ISBN, or may use a different template, or does not need one at all to cite. I honestly do not believe with 25,000+ edits, that this editor is going around fabricating content with such detailed references. Maineartists (talk) 17:25, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They also couldn't find it via its title, Maine. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:27, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Find what? This isn't the magazine? [1] Maineartists (talk) 17:31, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From above, in re Longxing Temple: In the recently created article Longxing Temple (Yanling County) by this editor, there’s a cited book... I... checked the China PDC Database (where all officially published Chinese books are listed), but neither the ISBN nor the cited book title appeared. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:38, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is your point? The first one is a magazine (which the above editor keeps calling a "book"). The second is a "Chinese textbook from a local Junior High School". Do you really believe either one of these have ISBNs? Once again, assuming good faith would err on the side that these do not fall within the norm for English WP templates and that the editor most probably entered erroneous ISBNs to satisfy the criteria citation. I'm not saying it was right; but probable. These are only two examples that need an explanation from the contributing editor; and more likely a warning for correction moving forward. Not an immediate block without outreach. BTW, EleniXDD, just what exactly is the: China PDC Database? I have been searching and have come up with nothing except several resources related to China's global activities. Can you provide a link? Thanks! Maineartists (talk) 17:57, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For the China PDC database (i hope i provide a good translation name?) Its 国家版本数据中心, a database provided by 中国国家版本馆 china national archives of publications and culture. EleniXDD※Talk 01:29, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For the first one, (my fault for calling it generally as a book, I will be more specific next time) at first I do thought it maybe a translation error. Yet, the part concerns me is that both the cited publication year and the Chinese and English titles do not match with the exact magazine. Its cited to be a 2019 magazine 那些草根出身的明星 (Stars who came up from Nothing), which do not match with the exact 2015 magazine English Street entrance 6th edition, Series June 2015 TEENS SPACE - 英语街高考版第6辑 2015年6月 TEENS SPACE. Btw, in the database, it also showed the same result to be a 2015 magazine (with the latter title), content is focus on gaokao, suggested by the title. For the quote (in Chinese), I can only find it on mubi, not sure whether its reliable enough for blp. Also, China has strict laws on isbn. I have checked, restricting one isbn per book (see item 28) （so it definitely refers to the 2015 one)EleniXDD※Talk 00:27, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As for the second one, before searching it on database, I also searched about its textbook name titled 怀化市初中乡土教材：历史 on online (textbook) selling platforms, such as taobao and pinduoduo, no relevant book result appears, which is a very weird case. Regarding isbn, China has laws on the published book, requiring a shuhao（isbn）for all legally published books(shuhao in china after 1986 is isbn. Before 1986, its another one called 統一書號 So if the book is (legally) published in China, it must have a identified number (which can be traced). But I can't trace it both in the database I mentioned, and WorldCat.EleniXDD※Talk 01:16, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If it's as you say, "entered erroneous ISBNs to satisfy the criteria citation", that's substantially worse than an honest mistake (transcription error from a website or bibliographic database). How is that not as bad as wholely making up any other piece of the bibliographic information? Even assuming good faith does not make the behavior acceptable. DMacks (talk) 01:13, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Who said it was "acceptable behavior"? I surely didn't. That would imply that once it was brought to the attention of the editor, they were allowed to keep doing it. I was simply offering probable suggestions as to the "why". Not condoning the behavior. That's all. This discussion hasn't even heard from the editor. As I wrote below, I cannot find evidence of initial questioning regarding the edits; let alone any warnings or direction toward WP policy. Their TALK PAGE looks quite commendable with BARNSTARS and recognitions. 2 edits out of 25,000 is a bit assuming at this point to threaten blocking, ANI, etc ("It is serious enough that you could be blocked from editing as a result. I recommend you respond to explain yourself") before even having heard from the editor in question. That's all. Maineartists (talk) 15:02, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can think of several possible explanations they might give for their edits and/or lack of talkpage response, but I'm not going to put words in their mouth or make this a multiple-choice for them to just say what I say they should say. Given they have clearly made many edits timestamped well after you alerted them, we are easily into WP:ANI territory. Has even one of the edits they made after you alerted them had a problematic ISBN or other detail? DMacks (talk) 04:37, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So yeah, I forgot it's now March. Their most recent edit was a month ago (February 14). Their most recent edits anywhere on WMF appears to be March 11 (on commons). So I would give some time for them to respond. ANI is still a possibility, but only because it's chronic and it needs more eyes to help be sure of what is happening, not because it's urgent. DMacks (talk) 04:49, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, let's wait for the response. EleniXDD※Talk 05:03, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have left an invitation on the editor's TALK PAGE: [2]. I am having difficulty in finding evidence where another editor has "warned" them or "brought to their attention" these problematic issues; or where they have made continuous edits after the outreach. The editor in question Huangdan2060 has not even been pinged at this discussion. I cannot find discussions on the articles' TALK PAGES either: [3], [4]. But I have been known to miss things before; so if someone could bring them here, that would be helpful. Many are lighting torches for the trek over to ANI and I see no trail of outreach, warning or continued violations after the fact as have been alluded to above. Thanks! Maineartists (talk) 14:51, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your invitation and thought the discussion would be better held here after the notification, as it concerns quite a few articles. Originally I planned to write a whole paragraph in talk page. Thanks for your reminder, I have pinged. EleniXDD※Talk 15:39, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What "notification" did you give them? Could you please provide a link to that? Thank you. Maineartists (talk) 16:05, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mean they shall be notified by your talk page invitation. EleniXDD※Talk 16:32, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I had already pinged them. BTW, you mentioned a book by a title: 怀化市初中乡土教材：历史 in your second set of claims. Could you please translate so we at this WP know exactly what book you are referring to. In Google translate, the book renders: Huaihua City Junior Middle School Local Textbooks. Haven't you already addressed this in your first claim? It seems much is being "lost in translation" here. Do you have other examples where Junior Middle School Local Textbooks can be found online via their ISBN? Also, have any questions been raised on the Chinese WP regarding this editor? I could not find other listings at ABEBOOKS for the exact issue of TEEN SPACE (2019). I suspect the editor was linking this listing to prove the magazine exists. If they had simply entered the information without a template with the correct information: magazine, issue, date, page; we may not be having this discussion. Last, the translation for the title of the magazine that you provided renders: Those Grassroots Stars. How exactly do we know the precise title? Maineartists (talk) 16:04, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to bed soon, so I shall respond briefly first. For the title those grassroots stars, I think you might misunderstand, it's the translated title provided by Huangdan2060 in the 2019 edit I mentioned earlier (which a book with such title doesn't exist). That's the problem that initiates my investigations, the magazine with that isbn is a 2015 magazine, yet the cited book by Huangdan2060 is a 2019 non-existent one. I think I have mentioned clearly that by China law, one isbn per book, so the 2015 one has taken that isbn. The cited 2019 one doesn't exist. For the textbook example you'd like, I will provide you tomorrow. But I think I had make it clear that all legally published book in China should have a isbn/shuhao, making it traceable. The problem now is the isbn cannot be traced/mismatched EleniXDD※Talk 16:29, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For example, this 2015 published junior middle school math textbook, can be traced in the database by isbn 978-7223046855. EleniXDD※Talk 00:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the information entered, I see a magazine issue trying to be fitted into a "book" cite template: cite book |language=en, zh|author= |trans-title=Stars who came up from Nothing |script-title=zh:那些草根出身的明星们 |journal=TEENS'SPACE |volume=6 |year=2019 |publisher=Chongqing Publishing House |location=Chongqing |pages=12-15. The "Journal" is titled TEENS SPACE. I assumed the "script-title" that the editor put in: 那些草根出身的明星们 (tr: Those grassroot stars) was merely a poor translation entered into "trans-title": Stars who came up from Nothing. Have you actually tried to search for the MAGAZINE with the criteria: TEENS SPACE, Volume 6, 2019, Chongqing Publishing House, pg 12-15? Rather than solely focusing on the ISBN and trying to match it? I translated the entered quote provided by the editor in the template: 我出生在农村，但就是这样的农村生活经历，磨炼了我坚强的生活意志，也造就了我坚忍顽强的个性。正是这些经历，成就了今天的我。所以我认为：英雄的出处是来自内心的强大，来自对梦想的执著追求和对你所从事职业的坚持与踏实，以及面对浮躁浮华的淡定和定力. I also placed the Chinese quote into Google and it brought up several hits for: Zhao Liying saying these very same words (sometimes verbatim) in other interviews: [5], [6], [7], [8], etc. This particular article: [9] is titled: "Is Zhao Liying a grassroots star?" (Zhao Liying was born in the countryside ... etc) I find nothing out of the ordinary within the entry except the ISBN. If that had been left out, and Template:Cite magazine was used, it would be a perfectly acceptable citation entry. I would suggest, since you have more resources at your disposable, to search for the magazine with the information provided. Having the quote continually validated and attached to the BLP in other interviews seems to validate the entry (just not the ISBN). As for the textbook, the editor has (as well) given this information: Bai Li, Gong Shaoshi, (2000-01-01), Rich Cultural Relics, Junior High School Local Textbook of Huaihua: History, Changsha, Hunan: Hunan People's Publishing House. Have you tried to search for this book based on this given information within your resources instead of focusing only on the ISBN? Just a thought. Maineartists (talk) 02:23, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The problem of this quote from other sources you provided is that they are blogs or unreliable sources (user-generated content on platforms like sohu) and do not meet the blp source standard. (I have listed the mubi one above too, I hope you saw my yesterday reply. Its the only one among these that may fit, yet it has the possibility of user-generated too, so making it not adequate enough for a blp entry) As for the 2019 book, at first I searched the titles (both in English and Chinese), which gave no result as well. Thats why afterwards, I searched its isbn, and it resulted another magazine. I hope you understand that I actually first entered and searched all entries, including publishers and titles. After all these gave me no result, I took isbn as my last resort. EleniXDD※Talk 02:36, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying that those other sources are RS. I am only saying that when I entered the given editor's quote, several hits came up with the same quote for the BLP, giving merit to the quote. Meaning, the editor didn't simply make this quote up out of thin air. You keep saying that the ISBN for the "magazine" doesn't exist and that it: "resulted another magazine". No, it actually didn't. It only resulted a different "issue". The ISBN provided links to this [10], which is the same magazine, just a different date. Meaning, the editor could have been in the same situation as you: couldn't find the exact publication online, so they wanted to at least prove that the magazine "itself" existed. If you can't find the exact issue that the editor is citing, how do you expect them to? As well, for the second entry, the only reason you found the textbook is because someone listed it as a used copy on Amazon. There is no history of its title or ISBN online anywhere else; even though you wrote: "I think I had make it clear that all legally published book in China should have a isbn/shuhao, making it traceable." If that is true, where is the proof other than an Amazon listing? Having an ISBN and finding it online are two separate things all together. Unless a magazine is listed online (in any manner), the ISBN is useless. So, once again, if you are having trouble finding these titles physically on line, then perhaps (just perhaps) the editor - in good faith - did as well, and was trying to provide as much information as possible in a template that required everything. When in reality, they could have simply line cited it without a template and it would have been fine without challenge. BTW, here is an issue of TEENS SPACE 2019: [11]. I can't read Chinese so I do not know what issue it is. It is the only one I can find online from that entire year; only because someone listed it on eBay. Maineartists (talk) 11:16, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really hope you understand that, as I mentioned, by Chinese law, it requires legally published book to have an isbn (and I have cited that exact law for you earlier). So it’s not ‘if that is true’, but rather a fact. And Wikipedia requires a published book as reliable source, while a published book in China must have isbn by law. Having isbn means the cited source is traceable. I have provided you the textbook example you want, and it can be searched in the database I mentioned (not Amazon alone).

I think both of us shall not continue to guess and give Huangdan2060 the chance to explain the four edits, cause we will never know their explanation or reasons behind etc. Right now I still have doubts about those edits. EleniXDD※Talk 11:34, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the point, I think wiki has a high standard on the source cited, for accuracy and reliability. My belief is that if an editor wish to add in content supported by source that can’t be accurately cited or found, then they shall not add in such content, especially in Wp:blp. One who add in a source should have the responsibility, making sure it can be checked later on. EleniXDD※Talk 11:40, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Lewis Nitikman

Hello, everyone. May be delete this draft, thanks. СтасС (talk) 17:58, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

why? ogusokumushi^{( ୧ ‧₊˚ 🎐 ⋅ )} 18:08, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@СтасС you have requested deletion at least three times already without providing a valid reason for deletion. If the article is left unedited for six months it will automatically be deleted without you needing to request it. Yeshivish613 (talk) 18:24, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK.--СтасС (talk) 23:48, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does WP:NEWSORG guidance regarding academic topics apply to politics

I've been having a minor disagreement with another editor regarding the applicability of this policy and was looking for a sanity check.

The context is an RfC concerning the framing of statements made by Donald Trump regarding the Unite the Right Rally. The other editor has been arguing that we should balance academic sources with news sources for a greater diversity of perspectives. I have expressed a preferential weighting for academic source from peer reviewed journals, which are abundant. I've argued that the guidance in WP:NEWSORG should apply to this topic as it is specifically about the parsing of rhetoric - which is an academic discipline. There are also elements of political science and sociology at play with an exploration of political speech. The opposing editor appears to be arguing for a narrower definition of "academic" arguing that the topic isn't "a complicated physics topic" or something similar.

My assumption is that political science, sociology and the study of rhetoric apply (as such sources exist on this topic) and that the definition of "academic" within the policy refers to those domains that exist within the academy and not merely hard sciences. Am I off base? Simonm223 (talk) 18:43, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simonm223, first of all, WP:NEWSORG is part of a guideline, and is not a policy. That being said, the main guideline, Wikipedia:Reliable sources, enjoys almost universal support among active editors. The Unite the Right Rally took place nearly eight years ago, and is now in the realm of history as opposed to current events. I am in complete agreement that academic, peer-reviewed sources or books by widely respected authors are superior to news reporting articles in a case like this, although news sources are fine in the early stages of development of an article about an obviously notable current event. They are OK for articles about less controversial, more obscure topics. But when an abundance of academic sources are available years later, then the full range of academic sources should be preferred as references to news reporting articles. Cullen328 (talk) 22:00, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That's basically what I thought. Simonm223 (talk) 22:03, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Politely addressing poor English skills?

Hi all,

I've recently come across an editor that, while well-intentioned, has a seemingly rather poor grasp of English, which often necessitates substantial cleanup and copyediting of their contributions. On one hand, their contribs clearly show a genuine desire to help the project - they're very much not WP:NOTHERE. On the other, though, the frequent and substantial grammatical errors throughout said contribs suggest that a better handle of English is needed to contribute effectively - I don't enjoy referencing WP:CIR, but as it states, A mess created in a sincere effort to help is still a mess that needs to be cleaned up.

I've wanted to address them on this, but I know CIR:

1. is not to be used lightly, and

2. can often come off as insulting to editors it's used towards.

How should I politely address this editor about their problematic grasp of the language, without coming off as insulting/demeaning? The Kip ^(contribs) 19:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, The Kip. You are right that this is a sensitive subject. I think there is a continuum here. Consider an editor "A" whose English prose is clumsy and awkward with some grammatical errors, but is easily comprehensible. The editor accurately if ineptly summarizes reliable sources. Then consider editor "B" whose prose is so mangled that many readers genuinely cannot understand what they are trying to say. The editor either uses unreliable sources or fails to accurately summarize reliable sources, or both. Editor "A" types should be encouraged and gently supported with copyediting help and grammar tips. I have seen several editor "A" types improve gradually over a period of months. Editor "B" types need to be monitored, given escalating warnings and blocked if necessary. Finding the "sweet spot" is difficult and requires careful consideration. Cullen328 (talk) 23:58, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cullen328 Thanks for the response. I definitely think they fall more into A than B - their prose is somewhat mangled, but I can usually mostly tell what they're trying to say, and it's almost always genuinely rooted in the source provided. I'll try to come at it from a more genial approach - hopefully it works. The Kip ^(contribs) 05:04, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Kip, articles can be a mess for a lot of reasons: non-neutral, and unsourced or poorly sourced, questionable content in a biography of a living person, written primarily by a COI editor, being some of the main ones. I rate 'poor English' way down the scale, as long as it is clear what they are saying, no matter how poorly they say it. If that is the situation, then try to steer them towards articles that have a decent number of watchers that can fix up the quality of the English. A couple of other things occur to me:

If we know what their native language is, you could ping some translators or bilinguals or notify a related country- or language-WikiProject on their Talk page to help out.
If there is a maintenance template for poor English, tag the articles, and maybe we can get the Growth team to add a newcomer task to copyedit an article for better English. That would be a big, win-win in my book, and give newcomers a great starting point, without having to have any special knowledge about Wikipedia. Adding Trizek (WMF). The templates listed at Wikipedia:Template index/Translation are kind of close, but don't seem to quite capture your situation. If we need a new template for this, I can write one for you; just figure out what you would like it to say, and write me on my Talk page, or some central location.

Bottom line: encourage them to keep editing, but in areas where there are sufficient editors around to deal with the inevitable cleanup. Cleanup is a big part of what we do, there's no reason that their efforts need be perfect, when we don't apply that standard to others with POV, Verifiability, and other problems. Hope this helps. Mathglot (talk) 07:08, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot I'll try to think of a message for a possible template - thanks for the suggestion! The user's already editing some articles that're high-vis, so a good amount of their issues do get cleaned up somewhat quickly, but the issue's moreso just the tediousness of having to clean them up in the first place (ex. the "good faith mess" principle invoked above). The Kip ^(contribs) 08:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Kip, how about this: Draft:Cleanup English? I think the newcomer task idea will relieve the veteran editors of the tedium, while simultaneously giving eager newcomers something they can excel at while starting out. Hope Trizek agrees. Mathglot (talk) 08:21, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That works for me! My only suggestions would be:

Change "reworked" to rewritten, and/or add copyedited (ex. This article may need to be rewritten and/or copyedited...)
Might want to have it be a yellow tag rather than orange, considering many of the current copyediting-related tags.

The Kip ^(contribs) 08:23, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Kip, how's this? Mathglot (talk) 08:29, 13 March 2025 (UTC) Although, that makes it pretty close to {{Cleanup rewrite}}, so maybe they should be merged. On the other hand, if we add it as a newcomer task, a complete rewrite seems like a stretch, so, maybe we shouldn't mention 'rewrite'. I dunno which way to go with it. Mathglot (talk) 08:32, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot As for the difference between the two/merging, I think it can be delineated that Cleanup English is solely for fixing English grammar/style issues, while Cleanup rewrite is for fixing broader violations of the MoS as a whole. Perhaps "copyediting" is the better term? It's also somewhat close to Template:Cleanup-copyedit, but that one doesn't specify English issues. The Kip ^(contribs) 08:43, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Kip, I agree about the goal as you stated it, I just want to make sure that the goal is clear in the wording the template produces, as well as in the /doc page, and is sufficiently different from the other templates, otherwise there will be pressure to merge it, and then we would lose the possible benefit of having a newcomer task assigned to it. The template and the /doc page are not restricted; feel free to try your hand at editing them. Don't worry about breaking something: 1) it's only a Draft, and 2) the 'undo' link is always available. (P.S., I am subscribed, meaning you never have to {{ping}} me here. What about you?) Mathglot (talk) 09:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe get some ideas from the wording at {{Rough translation}}, or others listed at WP:Template index/Translation. Mathglot (talk) 09:04, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Mathglot for the ping.

You can add any template that fits under the Homepage's copyedit task through community configuration. Then, articles that use this templates will be highlighted to newcomers. Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 09:26, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Kip, this discussion is likely to get archived soon. If there is still a need and/or you want to keep discussing it, pick a venue, probably Wikipedia talk:Template index/Cleanup or maybe Wikipedia talk:Cleanup or some other central location, or it will just fade away. (See {{discussion moved to}} and {{discussion moved from}} if so.) Mathglot (talk) 08:36, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Vandalism

Hello! I'm not very smort so I don't have much info to add to individual pages. However, i would like to do some anti-vandalism work, so if someone could point me in the right direction, it'd be greatly appreciated. Also, is there a portal somewhere that automatically takes you to the editing side of wikipedia (not editing mode in pages, editing as in all the groups, pages, and talks that people only looking for info on wikipedia won't find.) Cdominic8 (talk) 01:30, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about being "smart enough" to add to articles - the idea is to use WP:RS to write everything, not just your memory, so as long as your reading comprehension is good, that's most of what you need. For anti-vandalism patrolling, you're looking for WP:CVA - but honestly, vandalism tends to get cleaned up pretty quickly, so I'm not sure how much mileage you'll get out of that. You might want to try clearing out some of the easier-to-fix maintenance backlogs instead of or in addition to that. For the "editing side", I think most of us end up watchlisting a handful of "backroom" pages about the thing we're specifically interested in doing rather than using this main portal, but here you are: WP:COM. Hopefully you can find something that catches your eye from there. -- asilvering (talk) 01:42, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not "most of us" in saying that I personally frequent WP:DASHBOARD (WP:-). LightNightLights (talk • contribs) 07:20, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, which reminds me of Template:Backlog status, which is a bit buried on that page but is a good one to point out individually. -- asilvering (talk) 14:26, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft declination inquiry

Hello, my draft at Draft:Cultural impact of The Shining was recently declined for the reason that its information could be moved to The Shining (film). Is there any way to improve the draft as it is? I'm asking mainly because it was declined and not out-right rejected, which makes me think it still has the potential to be an article. LeGoldenBoots (talk) 12:39, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. "Declined" allows for the possibility of resubmission, whereas "rejected" would not. Instead of using the draft process I would also suggest expanding the article about the film first, then argue it should be spun off in a talk page discussion. 331dot (talk) 12:42, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks for the advice. The first prose in your response was the point I was trying to make. Cheers. LeGoldenBoots (talk) 15:13, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The 50,000 destubbing project

In order for an article to be counted as destubbed, does it have to be reevaluated and labeled as start class or higher? Vestrix (talk) 00:55, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No need to ask twice, for specifics for the destubathon you're looking into- ask at the contest page.

Otherwise check out WP:DESTUB. aquarium substrate^talk 17:14, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Destubbing

When I destub an article, how do I get it reevaluated. Vestrix (talk) 16:06, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vestrix, you can do that yourself for any ratings lower than Good article and Featured article. GA and FA have formal processes. If a stub has been expanded and improved, a "Start" rating is always approriate. Cullen328 (talk) 20:59, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Needed vs Better Source Needed?

Typically, I replace unreliable sources with ^{[citation needed]}, however I realized today that there's likely many scenarios where I should keep the ref and add ^{[better source needed]} instead. When should I remove an unreliable source vs requesting a better one? Is bsn meant for sources with simply questionable reliability as opposed to sources that are outright unreliable? Taffer 😊💬_(she/they) 21:01, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LaffyTaffer, a citation needed tag is a request for someone else to find a citation. If the unreliable source might be at all helpful for the search, use a more specific tag like "better source needed", or "fails verification". See Wikipedia:Template index/Cleanup. StarryGrandma (talk) 22:38, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great to know! Thank you so much 💗 Taffer 😊💬_(she/they) 22:42, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit filter for subscribing to signpost

In my edit filter log, it says I tripped an edit filter by subscribing to the signpost. Did I subscribe incorrectly? Justjourney (talk) 22:03, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Justjourney Don't worry - that filter is a test filter, where an admin is trying some things out. No action was taken as a result of your edit, and your filter log isn't held against you. Lots of harmless edits trip many log-only edit filters all the time. Sam Walton (talk) 22:32, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I urgently need help, my page keeps getting rejected

Why was the page rejected again? I revised all the points exactly as instructed. What else do I need to change for the Wikipedia entry to be accepted?

I based my entry on the Wikipedia pages of two actor friends, both of whom were approved. Their content is almost identical to mine, yet my entry was rejected.

I would greatly appreciate any helpful tips or support!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Imad_Mardnli J0ker76 (talk) 22:34, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@J0ker76, on a first glance over, I would tell you to be mindful of two policies: WP:OVERCITE and WP:OTHERSTUFF. Essentially, just because something else exists on Wikipedia doesn't mean an equivalent thing also needs to be on it.

As reviewers are denying on the basis of WP:General Notability Guidelines (GNG), I will analyze your sources. I am inclined to ignore citations 1 through 6 as they seem to only back up the name. Honestly, one citation is too many for backing up a name. I am also not sure what seven through nine are backing up. Eight and twelve seem to be primary sources, and therefore, do not contribute to GNG. Nine might work but it is in German, making it hard for me to check it. Ten I would deny as it seems it may be autogenerated or something of that fashion. Eleven is a database and I don't believe those contribute to GNG. Overall, that leaves two sources that I question and six that may not be relevant. If you have any questions, you can reply here, or if this gets archived, message me on my talk page. ✶Qux yz ✶ 23:36, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

After eight Declined your draft Draft:Imad Mardnli has now been Rejected. David notMD (talk) 02:10, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@David notMD, For future reference, is there anyway that a user can undo the rejection and what are the thresholds? ✶Qux yz ✶ 02:12, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You could query the person Rejected the draft. David notMD (talk) 02:25, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is been submitted 7 times which is three more than the usual 4 when it gets rejected. At 4, on the 5th attempt, its seen as time wasting and at 7 it is complete waste of time and more so, is a WP:CIR issue. I would suggest stop trying to move forward on it. Its not going to go anywhere. scope_creep^Talk 13:58, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help with uploading short film poster

Hi, I was wondering if someone could help me with uploading a short film poster for the Brighter Days Ahead article. The poster has been posted by both Ariana Grande and her official team’s X account Olivergrandeee (talk) 00:49, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Olivergrandeee. Please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content very carefully. Specific language about cover art and posters can be found at WP:NFCI #1 and #4. Cullen328 (talk) 17:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing a filing issue on my User page

I understand this is not even close to a priority, but I'm finding it difficult to code a "collapsible collapsed" for years in the following code:

No.	Article	Date
2013
1	Bring Back British Rail.	31 July 2013
2025
207	Line A4 (Athens Suburban Railway)	30 January 2025‎

I'm doing something wrong, but for the life of me can not figure out what? Any help would be appreciated, and thank you in advance... ✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 00:51, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The Emperor of Byzantium. There is no "collapsible collapsed" in your code for that table. I have added it.[12] PrimeHunter (talk) 01:40, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you =) ✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 00:40, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How should we integrate articles about ML models with articles about specific models?

Situation 1: currently, Wikipedia has an article about Large Language Models and a separate list of large language models. But what about reflective models? Should we create a general article about reflection in models along with a separate article listing reflective models, including details about individual implementations, benchmarks, etc? This solution feels somewhat cumbersome.

Situation 2: there's an article about Intelligent Agents, but does it need a companion list of specific intelligent agents? So far, I've found only the article on the OpenAI Operator, but there seem to be no articles covering agents such as Claude Computer Use, Runner H, or Manus. TheTeslak (talk) 01:06, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TheTeslak These are good questions but responders here at the Teahouse are not specialists on LLM. I suggest you ask again at one of the main talk pages for computing. For example, WT:COMP has over 500 page watchers. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:21, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

Philosophical Investigations has three notes (as opposed to footnotes), which, as is customary, are labeled [a], [b], [c] in the text. At the bottom, however, above "References," they are numbered 1, 2, 3. I can't identify the problem. Maurice Magnus (talk) 01:22, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. I suspect {{Notelist}} used a strange value for one of its parameters; I moved it to the appropriate place, used the template without any parameters at all, and see that the labels seem to behave as expected now. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 03:22, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question about infoboxes for art colonies or art residencies

Hello Teahouse,

May I please ask if there is guidance around infobox preference for pages on Art colonies or artist residency program locations?

For example, some of the pages listed on the Art colony page have settlement infoboxes, but this is not always applicable.

Thank you for your help! SunnyBoi (talk) 03:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SunnyBoi Perhaps an organisation infobox might be a beter fit, if it's not actually a place in the geographic sense. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:43, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Expanded footnote (efn)

Hi! I've been trying to create an expanded footnote in my sandbox, but the only problem I face is that it does not display when I hover my cursor over the inline footnote. I've seen several articles like India which have inline footnotes and when you hover over them, They get displayed. Can someone please explain how to get the footnote displayed when you hover on them? Thank you, Warriorglance(talk to me) 12:09, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Warriorglance It does work, it's not showing up when you hover over it because it's too close to the notes list. If you can't see the notes list on your screen it will show when you hover over it. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:41, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Warriorglance(talk to me) 13:47, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Warriorglance Your sandbox is working fine. The issue is that, when the explanatory footnote (not "expanded footnote") is within the viewing window of your browser, the hover-over just highlights it in grey where it is located in the notes section. You only see the note as a tooltip if the notes section is off the visible page, which is the case for India. If you add a bunch of white space to your sandbox and move the notes off the bottom of the visible area, you'll see the tooltip. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:41, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Warriorglance(talk to me) 13:48, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you also please tell me how to add citations inside these footnotes? Can it be done in the Visual editor or only in the Source editor? Warriorglance(talk to me) 13:51, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Warriorglance See Template:Efn/testcases for examples. I don't try complicated things like that in the visual editor but it may be possible. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:57, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tacking onto this, I just make the citation in the visual editor, go into the source editor and then copy the new citation into the footnote using the visual editor. It's the quickest way I know personally, but I don't doubt there are easier ways. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 19:09, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do I warn someone for violating NOTHERE?

I have been looking through Twinkle and I can't find any template to warn a user for violating WP:NOTHERE. How should I do this? Is there a warning? Thanks, loserhead (contribs) 15:51, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me like gaming the system? Knitsey (talk) 16:01, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't really a warning for it per se because WP:NOTHERE sort of encompasses the motivation behind a wide range of conduct rather than the conduct itself. The thing to do is instead to identify the more specific conduct they're doing wrong (which makes you suspect they're not here to build an encyclopedia) and warn them about that. If they're intransigent, then you might conclude that they're NOTHERE and take them to ANI or the like over it; but it's more something that you conclude based on more specific individual problems, like gaming the rules or stonewalling or bludgeoning, and those problems are the ones you'd warn for. Like, what would a NOTHERE warning even look like? "It looks like you're not here to build an encyclopedia. Have you tried, instead, being here to build an encyclopedia?" --Aquillion (talk) 16:09, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explaination. I will warn them and see where it goes from there. loserhead (contribs) 17:34, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think Special:Diff/1280448040 at User talk:TWC YMCA3TWC#Hello is a bit overkill. Newbie was not even disruptive in WP:mainspace; this was the first warning (or welcome, for that matter). Blocks for only editing userpages—absent other disruptive actions like ignoring warnings against repeatedly creating speedily deleted promotional content on said userpage—are rare, and does not seem to be happening here besides. I would've just used {{subst:welcome-no-edits}} (intended for new users who have created their user page, but have not yet contributed elsewhere) or {{subst:welcometest}}. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:26, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Rotideypoc41352 Oh, I didn't mean to bite them, I was just trying to tell them what could happen. Should I remove my message? loserhead (contribs) 18:31, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What's done is done. Just make a note for next time. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:09, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Loserhead4512, I disagree; it's bitey, and they haven't replied, and may not have seen it, so yes, definitely, I would just remove it. Mathglot (talk) 09:28, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Far far too early. You have to let folk develop confidence. I've removed it as unsuitable. Its not impacting the corpus. scope_creep^Talk 14:05, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's kind of odd that a three-week old account feels it has the experience to apply such a warning, or indeed to know that NOTHERE is even a thing. Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 14:18, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1250#Not sure what to title this Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:40, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List/catalogue of parameters for {{ }}-text

Example:

I write "convert|12|nm" in such brackets {{ }}

12 nanometres (4.7×10⁻⁷ in)

I understand that the last characters here (in this case "nm") are the unit to be converted (in this case "nanometers").

Where can I find a full list of all possible values (says, miles, km, meters) that can be used here? Mariusm98 (talk) 15:59, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can find a list at Help:Convert units. TypoEater (talk) 16:30, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there an error message on an article I have improved ?

Specifically, the article on musical composer Thomas Newman...there is an error message to do with his birth date, which blocks the rest of the info on him. I have compared it with a similar entry, and it seems OK. Anne8Ko (talk) 16:04, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was a bracket missing. I think I got it. --Onorem (talk) 16:09, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article creation.

Howdy! I would like to make an article on the Japanese rapper Lotus Juice but am unsure if he would meet WP:NOTE and would like to ask the larger editor community on their opinion on if he meets WP:NOTE. or not.

Thanks, Polaris (She/Her/Hers) (talk) 16:24, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I looked and I'd like to state I think he does as he does have a page on Japanese Wikipedia. Polaris (She/Her/Hers) (talk) 16:35, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Polaris548 Unfortuately, having an article on another Wikipedia does not mean that someone meets the requirements at WP:SINGER. A quick web search finds only social media and wiki coverage, which is not sufficient. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:54, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Shantavira He wrote the lyrics for a considerable amount of Persona 3, and then came back to re-write lyrics to better fit the remake Persona 3 Reload. Which wouldn't just be good for WP:SINGER because he also preformed them but also WP:COMPOSER because both games are notable, in addition his collaborations with people like Mori Calliope for the songs he has written and preformed. Polaris (She/Her/Hers) (talk) 20:16, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like his role in the Persona would have enough coverage to warrant a page. If you need help, let me know I can help with translating some of the sources on Japanese Wikipedia mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 19:29, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Logged out

Sometimes my computer seems to log me out without me asking to be logged out of Wikipedia. I often leave my account logged in, but then I come back another day to edit, and overnight it appears to have logged me out since I have to log in again. Is the only way to prevent this to click to "Keep me logged in for up to 365 days" feature? Iljhgtn (talk) 17:36, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 19:31, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you ever also log on on a different device? If you don't also choose "Keep me logged in for up to 365 days" there, it will log you off in both places when you leave one of them. HiLo48 (talk) 02:56, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback on a new page

Hi Everyone! I recently created an article on the National Braille Press and I'm looking for any feedback on how to improve the page. Let me know if there's anything that could be updated or changed. I specifically want to make sure that the formatting of my headings and subheadings is correct. Thanks for anything anyone can recommend! Serenat03 (talk) 18:26, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Serenat03, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks to me as if you have made the classic beginner's error of supposing that Wikipedia has any interest in what the subject says about itself, or what its associates say about it. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

It's possible the Boston Globe pieces meet that description - I haven't read them because they're behind a paywall (it's permitted to use such sources, but I didn't look at them) - but I don't think any of the others is independent of the Press.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 22:27, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know how to title this

In a nutshell, there was a user I was helping via Discord DMs to improve an article. The (now deleted) article in question was Mercury Ai, and the user in question has since been blocked. Now, both the blocked user and a person claiming to be the CEO of the company that runs Mercury Ai have DMed me asking me to remake the article and make another article about the company, join their Discord, etc. I don't know what to do so the first thing that came to mind was to come here and consult the Teahouse. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 18:31, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would advise against taking either of them up on the offer. One is similar enough to meatpuppetry to be (at least in my opinion) not a good idea. The other also would violate WP:COI mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 19:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I told them what Wikipedia guidelines and such they should follow (NPOV, sources, etc), and then left and blocked them (on Discord) after they asked me to write the article for them in return for a payment. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 22:09, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @RedactedHumanoid, WP:SCAM comes to mind. It says to email paid-en-wpwikipedia.org. That might help. Best, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:30, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, thank you for bringing WP:SCAM to my attention. However, I've looked over WP:SCAM and related pages...I kind of don't have any images, etc, of the conversation that occurred in the Discord server (I left and blocked the people). RedactedHumanoid (talk) 02:43, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you felt motivated to write the article and believed there were enough sources to meet WP:NORG, you would not be breaking any rules by accepting payment, provided you followed all the policy advice at WP:PAID. You would point out to your client that there was no guarantee your draft article would be accepted and that you and they would not own it once it was. How you would ensure you got paid, I don't know! Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:44, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was just the first thing that came to mind. If you know the company name, it may still be useful to email it. Cheers, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 18:47, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael D. Turnbull @CF-501 Falcon @Mgjertson Thanks for the advice and help, I've decided not to go through with this whole thing and just forget it ever happened since I don't want to get involved in a whole thing. Again, thanks for the help. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 19:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CrowdTangle draft input

Hello editors,

Per the reviewing editor's suggestion, I am looking for additional advice on this CrowdTangle draft.

From the rules the replying editor linked, for corporate notability, the sources in the draft need to:

Contain significant coverage addressing the subject of the article directly and in depth.
Be completely independent of the article subject.
Meet the standard for being a reliable source.
Be a secondary source; primary and tertiary sources do not count towards establishing notability.

I think that the articles from Business Insider, The Verge and Poynter show clear interest from when CrowdTangle was first created and in use. Further articles from Bloomberg, Axios and Reuters covered CrowdTangle up until it was disbanded, showing a continuous, sustained interest in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.

All of these articles listed are in-depth, independent, secondary, and reliable.

Could someone please offer additional guidance on how to improve this draft? I think the language in it is supported by these sources in a neutral, unbiased way while also trying to not violate copyright. Thank you very much! Brandonsilverman (talk) 18:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would advise against writing this article yourself for COI reasons mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 19:41, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Died in The Hague cremated in London ?

Hello, following a discussion on WP Fr [13], does it seem possible that Anna Pavlova died in The Hague and was cremated in Golder Green Thank you for any answer, best regards, Pierrette13 (talk) 19:06, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities might be a better place to ask. ObserveOwl (talk) 19:10, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pierrette13: As advised, ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. I can tell you from a very quick search that there are multiple newspaper sources of the time about her death in the Hotel des Indes in the Hague, the transport of her body to London, its lying in state at the Russian Church in Buckingham Palace Road, and cremation at Golders Green Crematorium. DuncanHill (talk) 19:51, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting help

Hey! I messed up the citations somehow when I was adding my source, any idea how to get the other one back? Thanks! Rufous-sided honeyeater Sock-the-guy (talk) 22:12, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait I may have figured it out... Sock-the-guy (talk) 22:13, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did not figure it out Sock-the-guy (talk) 22:14, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sock-the-guy: I've edited it - does it look like what you intended? ObserveOwl (talk) 22:21, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic. Can I ask what exactly you did? Sock-the-guy (talk) 22:22, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oh just realized I can look through the history. Thanks! Sock-the-guy (talk) 22:22, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Making an article with a draft article failing an article submission

There's currently a draft article - Draft:Slay (TV series) which was recently turned down for article submission. Today, the person who edits the draft article - User:Zanbarg, created a duplicate article in the mainspace.[14], stating "they are clean now." I find the editing habit of the user disruptive. Is there something that can be done with this? Hotwiki (talk) 02:18, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hotwiki, have you tried talking to the user about the matter? — 🌙Eclipse (she/they/all neos • talk • edits) 02:21, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion in the talkpage of the draft article. I don't think the editor I mentioned, understands the importance of using first-party reference. They just created another issue when they made a duplicate article into the mainspace. Its definitely not the first time, they've done this (creating a mainspace article before the draft article gets approval). Hotwiki (talk) 02:25, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hotwiki, from what I see, this seems to be a behavioral issue. I suggest going to Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents over this. Remember to inform the user on their talk page with {{subst:ANI-notice}}. — 🌙Eclipse (she/they/all neos • talk • edits) 12:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response @LunaEclipse:. Hotwiki (talk) 12:24, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help to improve this draft

Can anyone help to improve this draft: Draft:Pranic Healing. User:Velella suggested to add more in-depth citations. I am unable to find any good reference on Google. Can anyone help? I also want to invite the users who have knowledge about this topic can contribute here. Interdel (talk) 06:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interdel, if I had knowledge of the topic [I do not], then I'd have to put this aside and depend on published, reliable sources, independent of "Pranic Healing". I imagine that if these sources exist, Google would find them; and I suppose that you can use Google as well as I could. What kind of material, irretrievable by Google, do you think exists? -- Hoary (talk) 08:14, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Interdel There are over 1000 hits on Google scholar for the phrase "pranic healing". Your task is to summarize the main points into a decent draft, much more extensive than the one you have created so far, citing some of these sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:13, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dislodge a stuck draft? It’s been 9 months

Is it normal for a draft to be dependent on an initial reviewer re-engaging with it, even after other reviewers have looked it over ?

Draft:Mary Beth Goodman was rejected last June by a reviewer. On their talk page, I asked the reviewer for feedback, to clarify what they found objectionable, and they agreed to provide it. They never did. In November, I resubmitted after making some changes. The next reviewer didn’t find the issues the first reviewer had identified, yet wanted to consult with the first reviewer before advancing the draft. It’s now been another five months: the first reviewer has never returned to the draft. Is it normal for a later reviewer to insist an earlier reviewer take another look?

The article has been in limbo waiting for the first reviewer to reengage. How do I unstick it? If it needs more work, I’ll gladly do it. I just want to get eyes on this page I drafted a year ago. Lfdigests (talk) 09:10, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lfdigests It was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted.

As noted on your draft, "This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,480 pending submissions waiting for review." 9 months is on the longer side, but not an impossibility. This is a volunteer process, please be patient. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's only been four months since you last submitted it; you resubmitted just today. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lfdigests: the first concern of any reviewer will be "does this article establish that the subject is notable?". To do this, they'll go through the sources cited, looking for independent sources with extensive discussion of her. When they've found that there's nothing useful in the first few, and there's another hundred to check, they're likely to give up in despair, throw your draft back in the ~~queue~~ heap, and find a better use for their time. It's no wonder that it's taking a long time to get reviewed. Maproom (talk) 13:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lfdigests, what we're looking for initially is the best three and only three sources that support a claim to notability. 104 sources to sift through is daunting. If you can tell us which three sources meet all three of the following criteria:

significant coverage
in reliable sources
that are independent of the subject,

that will make the job look like a TON less work for a reviewer. Other objections can be dealt with after we decide she's actually notable, but no one will put that work in until we confirm notability. Valereee (talk) 13:44, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is the "Add local description source" option?

Will my user page on Meta still be transcluded here if I add this local description? Least Action (talk) 13:04, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is the proper tone for articles

Kind of a starter at the writing process, what do i do for the language i use?

Notonmyname (talk) 14:27, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Notonmyname: See Wikipedia:Writing better articles#Tone - it should be formal and easily understood, in a straightforward "just the facts" style. The simplified manual of style has some further general considerations, like not using "you" or "note that" in the article's own voice. Hope this helps! ObserveOwl (talk) 14:34, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Instructional and presumptuous language has some examples of less-than-ideal language. ObserveOwl (talk) 14:40, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image

How do I reduce the image size for File:Del. Rozia Henson Official Photo.PNG ? When updating the image on Rozia Henson it takes over the page Bippityboppityboo1913 (talk) 15:32, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bippityboppityboo1913, I've used the filename you give above in the article's infobox, and it seems to me to work as it should. Maproom (talk) 15:52, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bippityboppityboo1913 This seems to be your first and only contribution to WP. Just a little heads up: currently this image has been placed for deletion (Saturday, 22 March 2025) due to "no source information" and "no copyright status" provided. You will have to supply this information in order for it to remain. WP:UPIMAGE Maineartists (talk) 16:31, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I own the rights to the photo since its mine. Not sure what else to say Bippityboppityboo1913 (talk) 16:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bippityboppityboo1913: You still need to provide evidence that you took the photo or that it is under a free license. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials#Granting us permission to copy material already online for guidance. ObserveOwl (talk) 16:49, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bippityboppityboo1913 A quick image search renders that this photo has been uploaded to the BLP's Facebook account [15], X (Twitter) [16]. Are you saying you "own the rights to the photo since its mine" because you are the photographer? or because you are the subject (BLP) of the article? Maineartists (talk) 18:57, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m the BLP Bippityboppityboo1913 (talk) 19:27, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bippityboppityboo1913: Is the image a self-portrait? If not, you do not own the copyright to the image, the photographer does. You will need their permission for the image. If you want, you could alternatively take a self-portrait/selfie - not taken by any other person - and upload it here. ObserveOwl (talk) 19:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it might behoove you to read WP:CONFLICT before making future edits to the page. At the very least, disclosing that you are the BLP on the article TALK PAGE page would be helpful. Maineartists (talk) 20:05, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Help with Draft Review

Hello everyone,

I have been working on a Wikipedia draft article about Arun Chockalingam, and I want to make sure it meets Wikipedia's guidelines before submitting it for review. Could someone please review my draft and help me:

If the article is ready for submission.
Whether the citations I added are correct and reliable.
Any improvements I need to make to ensure it meets wikipedia's notability and sourcing standards.

Here is the link to my draft: Draft:Arun Chockalingam

I would really appreciate any guidance from experienced editors.

Thank you in advance! BioEditss (talk) 19:01, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BioEditss, I have left you a message on your Talk page entitled, § Do you know Arun Chockalingam?. Please respond there, on your Talk page, first. Your question here can be answered afterward. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 20:04, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]