Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:IMNEW)
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


Technical question about the long hyphen

[edit]

Hi!

I've been editing the timeline of Polermo where the long hyphen dominates, but I can't seem to generate one.Typing a regular hyphen, gives me just that - a regular hyphen, typing two hyphens gives me two hyphens (--) and trying to make one through the keboard shortcut which I found on internet forums (Alt+0151), just gives me one that's too long (—). So far I've been copying and pasting existing long hyphens which is kind of annoying, does anyone have any better solutions?

Thanks! Moonshane1933 (talk) 14:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Moonshane1933. I think you're talking about an em-dash. See MOS:EMDASH ColinFine (talk) 14:52, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes! That's what I meant! Thank you! Moonshane1933 (talk) 15:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you could find a better character in "unicode table".
This "article" is listing the most common characters.

There are also the "Unicode block" entry on Wikipedia that can be maybe helpful. Anatole-berthe (talk) 14:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. Thank you too! Moonshane1933 (talk) 15:16, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think ressources I shared with you will help you but I hope it will. Anatole-berthe (talk) 15:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ignoring the Minus sign, there are three 'horizontal line' characters most commonly used in text, the hyphen, the N-dash and the M-dash. There are various ways to insert the latter two; usually I do so with [alt]+0150 and [alt]+0151. Despite being a former professional book editor, I have not previously encountered a "long hyphen" (a term not found anywhere in Wikipedia). Note that the lengths of all these characters may look different in different typefaces: I suspect your "long hyphen" is an N-dash. [Apologies for semi-overlap with answers above.] {The poster formerly known as 897.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 17:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Moonshane1933 If you use the source editor, which you can do even if you mainly edit with the visual editor, you'll find that the N-dash and M-dash appear at the foot of the editing window, where you can click on them to insert them into text. Other useful tags like <ref></ref> are also available with a single click. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OOOOOOOHHHH... THANK YOU! That makes life easier! I hadn't even thought of looking at the source editor, because it always looks headache inducing to me. I'll give it a try. Thank you so much. Moonshane1933 (talk) 13:07, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, well, the "long hyphen" is a term that I coined, simply because I lacked the knowledge of its correct name, So I would have been very surprised if it had appeared in Wikipedia. Anyway, thank you, oh mysterious IP poster, I hope our paths cross again! Moonshane1933 (talk) 13:03, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Moonshane1933, some Christmas goodies for you:
Merriam-Webster Dictionary has a nice clear explanation about the both kinds of dashes and the hyphen, with good examples.
— The way the two kindts of dashes is written is em-dash (for —) and en-dash ( for – ), even though we pronounce the terms "M dash" and "N dash."
— Why these terns? Because the em-dash is exactly the width of capital M and the en-dash is exactly the width of capital N.
— If you have a Macintosh, there's a real simple way to make the dashes: the em-dash by pressing Control Option Hyphen at the same time, and the en-dash by pressing Option Hyphen at the same time.
—Did you notice how Nick Moyes creatively renamed Dasher, one of Santa Claus's eight reindeer, in his "Seasonal Greetings from all at the Teahouse" post to fellow editors below?
—You may be pleased to know that I found an online reference to a "long hyphen." So, then, you weren't completely alone in doing that. But as 94.1.223.204 commented above, in professional editing we just don't use it. Like ColinFine, )I think anyone who did say "long hyphen" would probably be thinking of the em-dash; though I also think what 94.1.223.204 said above is also technically correct, that the term would have to refer to the en-dash (that's the next size up for a hyphen, after all). Augnablik (talk) 06:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Augnablik, What a great reply! I thoroughly enjoyed every bit of it! And I learned a lot (not to detract from the other contributors, each of whom taught me something new - thanks, everybody) - a special thank you for the meanings of the em-dash and en-dash (I love that type of thing), and for drawing my attention to Nick Moyes' "Seasonal Greetings", and of course for finding me an ally in calling the en-dash a "Long hyphen" (don't worry, now that I know the correct terminology I will use it and hopefully amaze my friends...). Thank you again and Merry Christmas! Moonshane1933 (talk) 12:58, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Augnablik Not to be a naysayer, but I think the bit about em dashes being named for being 'M' width is a false etymology. I too would have loved if it were true, but I think it's actually based on the em unit as described in Dash#Em dash.  — Kilvin the Futz-y Enterovirus (talk) 10:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, @Kilvin the Futz-y Enterovirus, not to be a counter-naysayer (!) but there are many online sites with support for the width of the em-dash equal to M and of the en-dash equal to N. Here’s just one, offered by Grammarly. (Scroll down to What Is an En-Dash? and What Is an Em-Dash?) Augnablik (talk) 12:06, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hm... not to be a counter- counter- naysayer I mean I don't really think 'many online sites' and Grammarly (unsourced, could just be mirroring untrustworthy sources) are WP:RS. But you're right; my searches show similar results and don't really yield great answers to this matter (ideally there'd be a page like "Many people say that an em dash is named for X, but actually it is Y, and this misconception came from Z" linking to many reliable sources). I guess my personal bias is towards the people going "false etymology!" that acknowledge both X and Y rather than one group who simply assert the "fun" explanation with seemingly no awareness of the other explanation. I mean, as linked previously, the em and en are typographical units whose pages describe their origins, even addressing Em (typography)#Obsolete alternative definition.  — Kilvin the Futz-y Enterovirus (talk) 22:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oooh, @Kilvin the Futz-y Enterovirus, you’re acknowledging “personal bias” towards “false etymology?” That requires a declaration of COI! 🙂 Augnablik (talk) 18:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! I found something! In the Historical thesaurus on the OED site. And I quote:
"em dash1836- A long dash , originally and usually the width of one em (see em, n.)." Moonshane1933 (talk) 13:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Add a page?

[edit]

Hello - How can somebody submit a page for a notable person? My husband has one of the country's worst wrongful convictions in the United States and I'd love to have somebody neutral put information up regarding his wrongful conviction case. We believe he will be exonerated someday. His name is Temujin Kensu and you can google search his name to learn more about this horrible case. Thank you! 65.111.210.82 (talk) 06:21, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Based on my Google search, I consider it almost certain that Temujin Kensu is notable and that Wikipedia ought to have an article about him. Cullen328 (talk) 07:39, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For anyone interested in starting a draft some of these Google hits could easily be used to pass WP:GNG. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:21, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Realistically, you may not get a volunteer. Teahouse Hosts volunteer here to advise, not to be authors or co-authors. David notMD (talk) 20:18, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If your husband is notable enough, he will be talked about. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 05:37, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
IP editor: I have now started to draft an article at Draft:Temujin Kensu. In view of your conflict of interest it would be best if you did not edit it directly (although that's not forbidden while it remains a draft). I would welcome your suggestions for additions and corrections at Draft talk:Temujin Kensu, especially where you can provide additional published sources I can use. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Isotopes lists download

[edit]

Is there a to download these lists ? ( For example : the list in "https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Isotopes_of_sodium" )

I have written a c# application that describes the relations between elements, isotopes, decays, fusions ... etc.(originating from the question "Where the carbon atoms in the cafeine in your coffee come from ?")

When you make normal modifications to these lists, it takes me about 2 weeks to refresh my database for over 3000 isotopes and 5000 decays coming from 118 pages (and subject to typing errors...)

I have tried to download one of these pages but I get one of these mumbo-jumbo network message ( about security and the correction looks like "set the web_client.Tchic_Tchac to Fling_Flang" ... and none of them works... )

Do you have a suggestion ?

Thank you very much Michel Béliveau (talk) 17:49, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Describing a message as a "mumbo-jumbo network message" is not very helpful in determining what your problem is. If you quote the error message exactly it might be more useful. In any case, I can successfully download articles using curl like this:
curl -k https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Isotopes_of_sodium
CodeTalker (talk) 19:52, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for this fast (and good) answer.
The mumbo-jumbo error message was : "The request was aborted: Could not create SSL/TLS secure channel." I was not using the good approach to download the content of the web page.
>>> However the CURL function does what I need.
Here is want to do In my application :
For each Element ( 118 !!! ) get the "List of Isotopes" for this Element. Then for each Isotope : get its mass, half-life, decay mode(s) and decay product(s). This yields for over 3500 isotopes and over 4500 decays. Refreshing the data took quite a long time.
Analyzing the results of the curl command is not so hard and will eliminate typing mistakes. Even if I need a few days to program the analysis, it will be faster than re-typing the data.
I will take a look at Wikidata.
Thanks again. Michel Béliveau (talk) 23:02, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Without really understanding what you are trying to do, I would suspect that Wikidata was a more useful resource than Wikipedia for your purpose, as it is a database which contains relations between its elements. ColinFine (talk) 21:34, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Michel Béliveau Wouldn't it be easier to download from the original sources, for example NUBASE? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:48, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Mr. Turnbull.
You are correct. It would be easier to download from the original sources.
I have found (and used) a NUBASE file (namely for nucleus values) . So far, I have found only 1 NUBASE file that I could use ( coming from "The Ame2020 atomic mass evaluation (I)"   by W.J.Huang, M.Wang, F.G.Kondev, G.Audi and S.Naimi -  Chinese Physics C45, 030002, March 2021) .
The purpose of my request to Wikipedia is to avoid re-typing the values. The NUBASE file allowed this.
Do you know other NUBASE files ? Or other sources ? (I also found some data in PeriodicTable.com)
Thanks again for your interest Michel Béliveau (talk) 19:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Michel Béliveau: Hello! This kind of question is something you might want to take to the Computing reference desk, where you can get people with computing expertise to assist. --Slowking Man (talk) 20:39, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Locked out of account

[edit]

I got locked out of my DooplissTTYD account because I forgot the complex password and didn’t have an email address linked to it. Is there any way that account can be renamed to something else and I change this one to DooplissTTYD? TTYDDoopliss (talk) 21:50, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You would have to request a renaming from the account you want renamed. It can't be requested by in essence a third party(as we have no way to know who is on the other end of the computer). The best you can do is post on your current and previous user pages that you lost access to your old account and have a new one. 331dot (talk) 00:06, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is why the first thing you want to ensure you do right now is verify an e-mail address for your account, so you can restore it: follow this link if you haven't. Step 2: I highly recommend using a password manager to save passwords—as well as generate secure passwords. I suggest trying out Bitwarden.

Now in this particular case, your prior account has only a few edits; this means if you wait a bit, say 6 months, you can request to "usurp" it which will accomplish what you want. (Also, a very good game.) --Slowking Man (talk) 18:06, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean that’s what I did. I generated a password using a feature on my phone, and it kept saying the one I had on my phone was incorrect.
and yes I have an email linked to this account now. 6 months is a very long time though… TTYDDoopliss (talk) 19:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

donating - would like to donate

[edit]

Hail... Would like to donate 50 quid to the cause but stop at the name and address part. Don't really see the need for full name and address. Just old and not particularly wise. Any suggestions? 81.96.25.61 (talk) 12:28, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP editor, the Wikimedia Foundation deals with all donation issues and questions - editors here at the Teahouse don't have any input. Please direct your query to the email address at the bottom of donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ways_to_Give qcne (talk) 12:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to elaborate slightly: all editors here give their time entirely voluntarily and gain absolutely no financial benefit from any contributions made to keep the broader Wikipedia projects going. So we have little knowledge of how the donation systems work - despite being grateful for everyone's contributions. The advice above is sound. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:21, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also I'm not certain (not WMF personnel), but I am pretty confident the reason for requiring that info is fraud protection and banking and money laundering laws; it's not something the Foundation has any control over. WMF is a registered 501(c)(3) organization in the US, meaning it has to comply with a bunch of laws and regulations. (For furrin types, this is near-synonymous with "non-profit/charity" in the US, being simply the section of the Internal Revenue Code setting out the criteria said organizations have to meet to get tax exemption.) Note, a way that one can make semi-anonymous donations, is to pass them through what's called a "donor-advised fund" in the US, but this is a bit more involved and requires going through a bank or brokerage that will arrange your transfer. Alternatively, I suppose if one is accepting of the fact there are no guarantees in life one could always send cash to the WMF's front door with no return address and leave its final disposition up to them. --Slowking Man (talk) 18:38, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't find the ressource to add books wrote by someone

[edit]

Hello ! I'd like to add a book on the article about "David Murphy (CIA)".

This is a book wrote by him not mentionned in the article.
I don't find the ressource explaining how to add the bibliography of someone. Anatole-berthe (talk) 16:17, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Anatole-berthe The standard template to use for book citations is {{cite book}}. It is usual, but not essential, to use its |URL= parameter to link to Google Books for the convenience of our readers. In this case that would be this link, from which you can also find the ISBN and full list of authors. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Anatole-berthe. Why do you want to add that book to that article? Has the book been discussed by independent sources? If not, why is it significant ednough to feature in a Wikipedia article?
More to the point, that article is woefully short of sources, and does not establish that Murphy meets the criteria for notability. ColinFine (talk) 17:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The book was wrote by himself as I said.

The ISBN-10 is "0300107803" and the ISBN-13 is "978-0300107807" for the first edition.
The title is "What Stalin Knew: The Enigma of Barbarossa" , it was published by "Yale University Press" in 2005.

The ISBN-10 is "030011981X" and the ISBN-13 is "978-0300119817" for the second edition.
The second edition was published in 2006 by the same publisher.

In this edition , it's mentionned the review of the first edition by "Niall Ferguson" for "New York Time Book Review".
The first edition was also reviewed by "Andrew Nagorski" for "The Weekly Standard".

There are also a review by "Henry Kissinger" but I consider it doesn't count to add this book on Wikipedia.
This person have to be considered as a reviewer among others even if he's notable accorded to criterias.

He didn't wrote the review for a magazine or a journal and therefore the fact "Kissinger" wrote a review should not be taken into account. This is what I think.

The same for the review by "Donald Kagan" for "Yale University" for a particular reason. This person worked for "Yale" and the book was published by "Yale University Press". Therefore , I consider it's like a review by the publisher itself.


Conclusion : I think this book met the criteria n°1 for "Wikipedia:Notability_(books)" to create an article on this book.
I don't want to create an article on the book itself.

The "Threshold standards" is met because "Library of Congress" catalogued this book.
LCCN is "2004065916".

If it is considered as notable to create an article , I consider it is notable enough to mention this book on the article "David Murphy (CIA)". Anatole-berthe (talk) 12:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

can you give me a lnk of the Roblox page

[edit]

i need Roblox link to sign in 24.192.134.19 (talk) 01:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse. Did you have a question about editing or using Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:07, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tenryuu I think hes trolling. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 02:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's my standard reply to anyone who doesn't ask questions about Wikipedia here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does this link help at all? If you have general computing questions that aren't Wikipedia-specific, go to the Computing reference desk. --Slowking Man (talk) 18:46, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Sources for Articles

[edit]

G-Day

I wanted to ask if there is any reliable source for Articles. I cannot afford my personal favourite, The "Britannica" Encyclopedia, since they seem to be rare and expensive. Thank you. (I know this isn't about a specific Article but I need to know this) PizzaFrank (talk) 13:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PizzaFrank there are all sorts of reliable sources, not just Encyclopædia Britannica, and most don't require a purchase of any kind. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources for a detailed overview of RSes here on Wikipedia. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talkcontribs) 13:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I will check that out. PizzaFrank (talk) 14:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PizzaFrank Note that you don't have to personally own the source- it just needs to be publicly accessible, like online, or in a library. 331dot (talk) 14:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understood Thank you for the help. PizzaFrank (talk) 14:04, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PizzaFrank I have used https://www.britannica.com a few times, and there is no fee to use the online version of Encyclopedia Britannica. Karenthewriter (talk) 18:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And besides public libraries which are great, Wikipedia editors with some experience can access The Wikipedia Library which grants free access to tons of "paywalled" "digital content"! Pretty neat! Also see there: even if your account is not "seasoned" enough yet, you can request experienced editors assist you with researching sources through it. --Slowking Man (talk) 17:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph attribution

[edit]

I want to use a portrait of my grandfather taken in 1915 by a company that no longer exists. I can show an attribution in the caption, but there is nobody I can seek permission from. How do I proceed, please? Gangnam Woodford (talk) 16:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. It depends on the laws of your country, but a photo taken in 1915 is likely in the public domain. According to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/United_States in the US anything published before 1929 is public domain(other than sound recordings), so it would just depend on your own country. 331dot (talk) 16:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes BUT (big but!), "publication" in the context of US copyright law has a specifical technical, legal definition. It doesn't mean "creation" or even "giving a copy to a particular person". Hirtle chart. A photograph of a private individual is almost certainly an "unpublished work" under the US copyright meaning of that term, which matters significantly for the length of its copyright term especially if an "older" work. Copyright is a subject that gets quite technical, so if not familiar and experienced with copyright issues, it is best to hesitate to advise others before researching things in detail and double-checking, and if in doubt, direct others to forums like Commons where experts can be found. --Slowking Man (talk) 20:02, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gangnam Woodford Is this an American picture? If so, you can upload it as public domain, see [1]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, should have said: UK. Gangnam Woodford (talk) 16:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gangnam Woodford Still good, see this example: File:Archibald Joyce.jpg. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:02, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Gangnam Woodford (talk) 17:06, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please also see MOS:CREDITS ".... do not credit the image author or copyright holder in the article. .... as long as the appropriate credit is on the image description page." - Arjayay (talk) 17:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Gangnam Woodford (talk) 17:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To editor Gangnam Woodford: "Congratulations", you've just tripped onto one of the fun little copyright law landmines that are out there (alternately: "job security for lawyers"). Everything on Wikimedia Commons must be public domain in both the US, and origin country. This means you have to care about US copyright law and all its nuances: see Hirtle chart. Unless the picture was like put on display in an art gallery or something, it is an "unpublished" work and therefore still under copyright in the US until 2035! (120 yrs from creation date) Really! Welcome to copyright law!

Here are the practical implications for you in this case: Is this image going to be used in an article? If so, upload it here on enwp (not Commons) by following this link, and tag it {{PD-UK-unknown}}, as well as adding a fair use rationale since it's still under US copyright.
Add it to the article(s), nothing more needed—some bot should automatically transport it over to Commons when it finally lapses into PD-US. However, if you just, say, want to use the image on your user page, I'm afraid you aren't going to be able to for 10 more years. So stick a pin in the calendar for that. --Slowking Man (talk) 19:54, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An Article About CK

[edit]
Resolved
 – Young person goofing off --Slowking Man (talk) 20:14, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended content

I was asked by christen kuikoua representation to write an article about him and it was declined saying I didn't correctly reference it. Please if anyone wishes to jump in and help me with Will appreciate it Draft:Christen Kuikoua

Silvernet123 (talk) 18:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Silvernet123, I've left some instructions on your talk page about the mandatory paid editing disclosure that is required by Wikimedia's terms of service. Please follow those instructions before making any other edits. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 19:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thank you Silvernet123 (talk) 19:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Silvernet123, are you actually being paid to write complete garbage like He is known as one of the most philosophical minds in the 21st century with a record of 200+ Quotations and 89+ Poetry highlighting themes of love, patience, self-worth, discipline, and Christ-like values about an unknown 17 year old? That is the complete opposite of how an encyclopedia article should be written. Would you take a job as a chef if you don't know how to cook? Cullen328 (talk)
Silvernet123 I would add that our incentive to help you is low......if you're being paid to be here, it's up to you to learn our standards and what we're looking for. We're here for free. 331dot (talk) 19:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair. I appreciate your feedback and will take the time to learn and meet Wikipedia's standards. Thank you for pointing me in the right direction. but still if you can assist I will appreciate Silvernet123 (talk) 19:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Silvernet123. This is probably not what you want to hear, but: 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. ColinFine (talk) 20:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The entire article is written as self-promotion. One of your references is to fan writing on Medium claiming "(Account Not Own By Christen Kuikoua)", but appears to be copy/paste of material written by the subject. Promotional material does not belong in Wikipedia. Trying to create some fake noteriety by sneaking badly ghost-written articles into Wikipedia and elsewhere is unethical. If you wish to fake fame, then low-accountability social meda sites are probably more appropriate. Just Al (talk) 21:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yo, I got here ‘cause I’ve been hearing you say I paid or my "representation" paid you to write an article. Like, not trying to be rude, but you gotta chill. I didn’t send you anywhere, and no one representing me sent you either. Bro, if you’re one of my friends messing around, you gotta stop.
I looked at the draft, and while it’s kind of you to try writing something for me, you gotta do it the right way. Don’t go around saying I sent you somewhere—just saying, it’s not a good look. I’d like Wikipedia to delete the draft because I didn’t pay anyone, and I’m not planning on paying anyone either. Christenkofficial (talk) 23:54, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Christenkofficial,
Thank you for reaching out and clarifying your position. First, I want to say that I genuinely admire your work, which is why I was inspired to write about it. However, I now realize that my actions may have caused confusion or unintended trouble for you. I’m really sorry for using your name like that without your knowledge or permission it wasn’t my intention to create any issues.
If you’d like the draft to be deleted, I completely understand and will fully support that. Thank you for bringing this to my attention, and I’ll be more careful moving forward.
Best regards,
Silvernet123 Silvernet123 (talk) 00:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the account Christenkofficial has (correctly or not, I'm just reporting) now been blocked as a sockpuppet of Silvernet123, per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Silvernet123. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 03:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to add sources

[edit]

I need a simplified tutorial in how to add the number reference and the cite the source. M. Chris Tucker (talk) 19:02, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello M. Chris Tucker (talk · contribs), might I suggest Referencing For Beginners. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 19:06, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @M. Chris Tucker and welcome to Wikipedia! The simplest way to add references is, directly after the sentence or paragraph that your source supports, add <ref>, followed by the text of your reference, followed by </ref>. The software will sort out the numbering for you. Others here should be able to give you more detailed advice, and the guide that D'n'B linked above looks like a great place to learn more. Thanks for your additions to Edward Dickson (Canadian politician)! Best, Wham2001 (talk) 19:07, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2607:FEA8:7D00:95A0:FDD3:6EB9:68D5:D6D7 (talk) 00:38, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much! I will follow up on your suggestion and wish you a Happy New Year. M. Chris Tucker (talk) 00:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add a "Main Article" to Wikipedia

[edit]

I updated our "Cornhusker Council" section under Boy Scouts of America, Nebraska Scouting. and would like to create a main article for our council. how do I do that?

Cornhusker324 (talk) 21:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cornhusker324 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, please see conflict of interest, as that needs to be formally disclosed. For a standalone article about your specific council, you would need to show with significant coverage in independent reliable sources that your council meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. That coverage can't just be the reporting of its routine activities, but in depth coverage as to what makes your council important/significant/influential. Be aware that writing a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia, and it's even harder with a conflict of interest. Also be aware that an article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 21:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Cornhusker324. I have just reverted your edits in accordance with our conflict of interest policy. Please request specific edits on the article's respective talk page. Thanks. Tarlby (t) (c) 21:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And I'm not sure why the council itself would merit a standalone article from the article about scouting in Nebraska. 331dot (talk) 21:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many other Councils already have a standalone article. I would think this would be supported for consistency sake. Cornhusker324 (talk) 21:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cornhusker324, please see WP:42. Some council have articles. Others don't, and maybe they shouldn't. It all depends on the reliable sources that we need to use so that an article can be made. An article on Cornhusker Council won't be made if there are no such sources. Tarlby (t) (c) 21:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Noted Cornhusker324 (talk) 21:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed my user name in hopes of complying with your COI policy. The stand-alone article seems too difficult at this point. Perhaps in the future.
As such, I would simply like to update our section, "Cornhusker Council," in "Scouting in Nebraska." and will attempt that in the 'talk page,' as you suggested. Cornhusker324 (talk) 21:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your name change does not show up yet, and regardless of a name change, you still have a COI. I see that you are proposing changes on the Talk page of the article, but much of what you wrote is not referenced. See Help:Referencing for beginners to understand how to insert inline refs. David notMD (talk) 05:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I provided four references which is more than what is currently listed. Those currently used are not authoritative and factually incorrect. 209.92.187.50 (talk) 15:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How exactly did you change your username? It should be done via either Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS. You should continue to use your original username until it is changed, at which time you can begin using the new name. 331dot (talk) 15:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, I see it is changed now. 331dot (talk) 15:49, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is not how references are created. Also, you now appear to be editing as an IP address, i.e., not logged into an account versus a name-change. David notMD (talk) 16:54, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've used two different means to source the information I provided, both of which were recommended by this site and/or a moderator. CCJLJ (talk) 17:04, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, see Help:Referencing for beginners to understand how to insert inline refs. What you posted on the Talk page of the article (below) are not properly formatted references. David notMD (talk) 21:22, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References supporting change:

  • Salistean, John, "A History of the Cornhusker Council 1940-1975," Houchen Bindery LTD of Utica, Nebraska, 1st ed., 2011.
  • Golden Sun Lodge Website, www.goldensunlodge.org
  • Cornhusker Council Website, www.cornhuskercouncil.org
  • Brown, Elinor L., "History of Lancaster County, Then and Now," ASIN‎ B0006CJTC2, Jan 1971.

Notability and Independence.

[edit]

My grandmother, Ethel Margaret Streit Harrison, was the first woman elected as Clerk of the Montana Supreme Court, one of the founders of the Montana Association of Female Executives and one of the original board members of the Holter Museum of Art. There are printed sources that talk about her achievements but according to wikipedia the only thing notable about her was that she was married to John C. Harrison (judge). I understand that, as a relative, there is a potential conflict here, but I think it is important her contributions are documented on something other than microfiche. Any thoughts? / Thank you :) Mehap dwhx (talk) 22:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mehap dwhx, none of those three roles that you describe automatically confers Wikipedia-defined "notability" on a person. And the sum of the three doesn't either. But it's possible that she's "notable" all the same. Regardless of your conflict of interest, you're free to create Draft:Ethel Margaret Streit Harrison. If this demonstrates her notability and follows Wikipedia's other policies, it will be promoted to an article (possibly with a slightly different title), whereupon you shouldn't continue to edit it but would be free to make suggestions and requests on its talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 23:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To expand an aspect of Hoary's excellent advice above: in Wikipedia, 'Notability' boils down to "is there enough substantial material, published independently of the subject, in multiple Reliable sources, to form the basis of an article about the subject. It doesn't necessarily require that the subject is 'famous', or in one of many possible senses 'important'.
Also, the fact that your grandmother's achievements are not yet in Wikipedia doesn't mean Wikipedia asserts they aren't, or she as a whole isn't, notable; merely that no volunteer editor has yet gathered the necessary sources and added the information (with citations), whether in her husband's article or in a draft for her own. I encourage you to try. Good luck!
While we're here, I notice that John C. Harrison's article is on shaky ground, because it's entirely cited to a single (though reliable) source: we usually prefer a minimum of three, so if you could flesh out that article with further referenced material, it would be a good thing. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 03:56, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Add Ethel Margaret Streit Harrison to: John_C._Harrison_(judge)#Personal_life
69.181.17.113 (talk) 04:45, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
can you find at least 4 WP:RS sources ? 69.181.17.113 (talk) 04:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
She's already mentioned in that section as Ethel Harrison, cited to the article's (only) reference. Even to add her middle names would require a further citation to a published reliable source that mentions them (the existing one does not: I've downloaded and searched it). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 06:56, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being married to JCH can be mentioned in her Personal life section, but does not contribute to establishing her notability. David notMD (talk) 05:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring previously unmerged articles

[edit]

I would like to create a new article but it once existed back in 2009 and got merged without consensus. Is it okay if I restore the article but with more and better sources from my sandbox later on? Because one user tried to restore a merged article and it got immediately undone because a consensus existed to merge it. I'm not saying that I'll do it right now as it's still unfinished but I need to ask because if I can't then I'll just cancel. Underdwarf58 (talk) 00:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's very little about the original subject 'Cyprus–Jordan relations' in Foreign relations of Cyprus that it was merged into, so I think that if you think you have enough Reliably sourced material (bearing in mind there's also been another 15 years of history) you should go ahead and create a new Draft on the subject, via the normal Wikipedia:Articles for creation process, which can be submitted for assessment. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 04:11, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

template

[edit]

Hello, I'm need of some assistance with creating a Wikipedia page about a music artist. Can anyone advise which template to use? RATHOMP (talk) 02:45, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

look at other Wikipedia pages about music artists ... 69.181.17.113 (talk) 04:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. From your question, I suspect that you are focussing on the layout of your proposed article (I'm guessing that that's what you mean by a "template" - we use the word a bit differently here). But while the layout of an article is important, it is MUCH less important than the quality of the sources used. Until you have found adequate sources to establish that the artist meets Wikipedia's criteria for [[WP:notability|}], it's pointless spending any time thinking about the content or the layout. To use a house-building analogy, you may have an idea for what you want your house to look like, and even a plan; but until you've surveyed the site to make sure it's fit to build on, and checked that your plans meet local building regulations, it would be a waste of effort to start building.
More generally, 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. ColinFine (talk) 10:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a specific place you're currently working on the article at? I can't seem to find it on your userpage as a subpage. For advice, I'd recommend looking at other music artist articles (specifically various quality articles from The Beatles [FA] to Sepultura [C-class]) for general outlines on how to write it. For infoboxes, use {{infobox musical artist}} and fill out the template using it's template page at Template:Infobox musical artist. For general advice on writing, see Wikipedia's content policies and guidelines, I'd recommend WP:Nutshell as a starting point.
Thanks, Sparkle and Fade talkedits 08:23, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

how can I rigth a article in wikipedia

[edit]

how can I rigth Daniel Muanga (talk) 03:49, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Article wizard
69.181.17.113 (talk) 04:39, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
New editors are strongly advised to first gain skills by doing time improving existing articles. References required. David notMD (talk) 05:39, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Find a Grave = WP:RS ?

[edit]

Is Find a Grave = WP:RS ?

69.181.17.113 (talk) 04:37, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse. Please consult Wikipedia:FINDAGRAVE. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:03, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The answer is "no" because Find a Grave consists of user generated content, and is specifically mentioned in the WP:USERGENERATED section of the reliable sources guideline as a source that should not be used as a reference on Wikipedia. That does not mean that Find a Grave is of no value to Wikipedia editors. You may be able to find nuggets in those listings that will inform your searches about various people. Some but not all Find a Grave listings include references to reliable sources, and those sources may be useful as Wikipedia references. One thing that Find a Grave can teach editors is that many people down through the years share the same name, and we need to be very careful to avoid including biographical details about one Andrew Wilson in an article about another Andrew Wilson. That's just one of countless examples. I have been working on Andrew Stephen Wilson today, so that's why I chose that example.. Cullen328 (talk) 06:22, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello -- I would like to start helping, but I'm having trouble finding what to do!

[edit]

I see lots of support for ultra basics, but I know what the concept is, and how to edit, and how to make italics and hyperlinks, and that I should use a neutral voice, etc. I am trying to find some guidance on WHAT to contribute. I found the Typo Team (or at least, this typo team), but I haven't found guidance on interacting with it. (Do I delete entries if I resolve them? Yesterday I found many entries to check, but today none of the articles seem to HAVE the potential typo that was listed, or even a fixed version). I have found this Growth page, but can't get the features working. For example, it says to enable the Help panel in the Editing tab, but I don't see such a thing in the Editing tab. I also can't find "Display newcomer homepage" in my user preferences. Similar with Suggested Edits -- how can I "use Special:NewcomerTasksInfo"? Etc., etc. I must be missing some key piece of advice -- where can I figure out how to get things rolling? SKM (talk) 05:08, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Skmccormick. As a volunteer project, you're free to do whatever you wanna do best. Want to copyedit a bunch of articles and bring our grammar up to shape? Join the Guild of Copy Editors and go wild. Wanna fight vandalism? Go patrol Special:RecentChanges and stop those dang vandals! Wanna go help out that typo team? Go right ahead. It's your choice. Tarlby (t) (c) 05:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Skmccormick
Thank you! These links are helpful. I found "display user homepage" under User Profile. So maybe a silly question, but: how do I find this user homepage? I don't really go to Wikipedia generically, I usually jump straight to an article. Tasks and Requests seem like what I'm looking for. SKM (talk) 01:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The link should be right at the top of every page when you're logged in, in the same place/menu as the link to your userpage. -- asilvering (talk) 02:05, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Skmccormick, do you have any particular topics that you'd like to edit about? One way to find a lot of articles that need help is to go through our various maintenance backlogs (Gråbergs Gråa Sång has already linked you to WP:TASKS). Some people are content to plug away at a particular backlog chronologically, but if you prefer to edit on things you're generally interested in, it's helpful to filter these by wikiproject. Alternatively, do you have any particular skills or outside knowledge that might be helpful here? There's always demand for multilingual editors, the copyright folks are always backlogged, etc. -- asilvering (talk) 10:16, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I would prefer to get into the groove with smaller contributions before I start throwing any weight around. Sadly, I cannot offer multilingual help; I am American. I'm mostly having trouble navigating the various pages and internal tools like TASKS or RecentChanges (anything labeled "Special:" is still new to me). SKM (talk) 01:50, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a fan of Category:Wikipedia introduction cleanup as a newbie task - not small, exactly, but hey, no time like the present to learn to WP:BEBOLD. You don't (or shouldn't) need to do any research to fix these articles - most of them are here because they are tagged with "lead too short". Find one of those, read the article, then rewrite the lead so it summarizes it accurately. Then remove the tag. All this requires is good English literacy, and since the lead is what most people read and what is used in the google knowledge box etc, it's a high-impact change that requires very little wiki-knowledge. -- asilvering (talk) 02:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Different images for Light/Dark mode

[edit]

Is there any way to tell Wikipedia to display different images / media for Light vs Dark mode users? Due to transparency, some SVG and PNG images have bad contrast when viewed in Dark mode. CrushedAsian255 (talk) 06:04, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CrushedAsian255 This question is likely to have a better audience at WP:VPT. That board has a more technically oriented team than here. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 09:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wider vs specific consensus

[edit]

Can a case-specific consensus triumph a wider topic consensus already established? Not that consensus over wider topic is changed but maybe because that case is viewed from a different perspective. ExclusiveEditor 🔔 Ping Me! 07:33, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ExclusiveEditor I doubt it. Were that to be the case we would not have consistency of operation. This question is likely to have a better audience at WP:VPP. That board has a more policy oriented team than here 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 09:28, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @ExclusiveEditor, and welcome to the Teahouse. While I agree with FiddleFaddle's advice, I would also remark that general questions like yours are very frustrating for people who attempt to answer questions here. If you explain the specific issue you want guidance on, you are much more likely to get a useful answer (and also be less likely to be suspected of wikilawyering).
I am aware of the possible irony in my answer, given your question. ColinFine (talk) 10:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for replying! Being a half-host on Teahouse myself I get you. I was inspired to ask this question by the discussion happening here. The latter part of the discussion specifically focuses on if 'Nobel prize' should be added or not in Jimmy Carter's death blurb on Main page's ITN section. It was initially proposed by the nominator and many supported it (albeit not mentioning specifically the Nobel prize) and it got posted without the mention of the prize. However later there was some more scrambling, this time with more regard to the Nobel prize and so it currently updated to include the prize in the blurb. The opposers are generally arguing that it is editorializing and other things. I may not be very good in summarizing discussions, so I left it in the question. --ExclusiveEditor 🔔 Ping Me! 10:58, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to upload a >100 MB file to Wikipedia?

[edit]

I've uploaded plenty of files to Commons before, but I've only uploaded a few (non-free) files to WP. I would like to upload a short film that will become public domain in the US at the start of 2025 (won't be PD in its country of origin for a few years, so no uploading it to commons), but the file is over 100 MB, the maximum file size listed on the upload page. I don't want to compress it any more than it already is, so how to I get around this? I've seen several films large than 100 MB on WP already (1, 2), so it must be possible.

Any help with this is greatly appreciated. Thanks. — Toast for Teddy (talk) 07:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Toast for Teddy This question is likely to have a better audience at WP:VPT. That board has a more technically oriented team than here 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 09:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Toast for Teddy That first file you linked was uploaded with the aid of a userscript discussed at Commons:User talk:Rillke/bigChunkedUpload.js. I don't pretend to understand the details, but you may ;-) Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:27, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even if you're uploading "locally", Commons:Upload tools is likely helpful. All the projects use the same MediaWiki software, all that needs adjustment is the destination for the upload. --Slowking Man (talk) 20:54, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Editing a sandbox, references number is doubling

[edit]

Hi there! I was editing my sandbox and for some reasons all the different references I am adding are doubling the number of them and the previous ones are not disappeared. I was following your suggestions to add COI edit to my text, eliminating the internal sources and the bold words. Can you help me or it is just a matter of viewing and once I publish the sand box they will all disappear? Andrea Biographer (talk) 09:10, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Andrea Biographer: it seems that with this edit you've duplicated the contents by pasting an earlier edit into the page, thus embedding a copy of the entire page within the page (if that makes sense). You should undo your most recent edits up to and including that one. Or if you'd like me to do it, let me know. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:16, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @DoubleGrazing, thanks for your prompt answer! I think you made sense, could you check and fix this for me? I don't want to commit any further mistakes in the editing process or in the COI different templates, thanks in advance! Andrea Andrea Biographer (talk) 09:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Theroadislong has already sorted this out. Also, your draft is now located at Draft:Gridspertise. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

how to give feedback

[edit]

i had a question on why an article was written and sent it to info@ wikipedia. they told me that I needed to engage in the "talk" feature and ask the editors, since wikipedia is only a platform. I did that and not only was the answer not given I was ridiculed, because I am not actually sure why. I am not interested in editing wikipedia, I am only interested in engaging with the editors, to understand inconsistencies. How exactly would I do that, if I should not be using the talk feature. thanks Mommer264 (talk) 12:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Discussion about an article usually takes place on its talk page. Discussion with an editor directly can occur on their user talk page.
Note that your only other edit was about the Israeli-Arab/Palestinian conflict, which is a topic area with special rules that I will notify you of on your user talk page. One of those is that you must be an experienced user in order to make edits to any type of page about it. Your account must be 30 days old with 500 edits. 331dot (talk) 12:53, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also answering your query: :You asked a question that is now at Talk:State of Palestine/Archive 21. Talk pages of articles are not for 'open' questions. Instead, the proper method is to propose a specific change of text, as in replace A with B, and include a reference to support your proposal. Given that State of Palestine is a very controversial article, editors who participate there - at both article and talk - can be short on tact. David notMD (talk) 12:54, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not interested in editing wikipedia If you're not interested in contributing to the project, then you probably ought to go elsewhere. The purpose of Wikipedia is to produce an encyclopedia; notably, talk pages are for constructively discussing the project and its content, not general Internet forums for discussion. There are many many discussion forums elsewhere on the Internet, and Wikipedia can even help direct you to some of them. If you do wish to contribute to the encyclopedia, take a look at WP:Welcome. Thank you and I hope you have a good day. --Slowking Man (talk) 21:03, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

VisualEditor

[edit]

I've just changed my Preferences > Editing

Turned on "Enable the visual editor" (which, I think, it's on by default in Wikipedia in Italian language)

But i can not find out how to edit with VisualEditor.

I've looked at Help:VisualEditor and it says (Help:VisualEditor#Opening VisualEditor to click on the "Edit" tab (in the picture I can see a "drop down" menu to choose the editor).

But I've not this choice. My tab is named "Edit source". Centrodiurnomilano (talk) 14:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've found out, reading Help:VisualEditor#First step: enabling VE (which seems a bit outdated, by the way).
After I've changed my Preferences > Editing > "Enable the visual editor" = ON
and the press "save" button at the bottom.
Only then, a "drop down menu" show up in the same section: "Editing mode", which is setted by default "Remember the last editor". I've changed it to "Show both editor tabs".
It's not easy to find out. Centrodiurnomilano (talk) 15:04, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I've looked at the settings on Wikipedia in Italian language and "Enable the visual editor" it's enough there (there is no "Editing mode" option at all) Centrodiurnomilano (talk) 15:08, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Italian Wikipedia and English Wikipedia run on the same system, MediaWiki, but are two different Wikipedias. So if this is a question about itwiki, then you should go to a help board on itwiki. If this a question about enwiki, you should be able to switch between the source editor and visual editor by pressing the pencil button next to the preview button in the source editor. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 16:07, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But, @Centrodiurnomilano, do note that you can only use the VisualEditor is some namespaces but not all. You can in mainspace, userspace, draftspace but not in wikispace which is the space with the Wikipedia: prefix. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 16:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, @Cowboygilbert . I've tried in main space and the in user space. Centrodiurnomilano (talk) 16:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Were you able to fix it using the instructions that I put, you should be able to switch between the source editor and visual editor by pressing the pencil button next to the preview button in the source editor.? Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 16:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"No Such Number tone" / "crybaby tone" (type of intercept error)

[edit]

Hello everyone. This is one of my first times writing a brand-new article, and I'm not sure if this is a notable enough topic for its own page or a subsection in the intercept message.

This technically isn't a message, but before the intercept message was used, a different type of tone could also be returned instead of connecting to an operator. This is known under many different names, such as the "no such number tone" or even the "crybaby tone." This tone would be returned if a caller attempts to dial a number that can't possibly exist according to the numbering plan. The call would not be allowed to go through because some of these numbers could be reserved for private use. The tone itself is continuous, sweeping from 200-400Hz back to 200Hz again over the course of one second.

The issue is that it's almost exclusively used in North America, if not, completely exclusively. It was introduced by the Bell System in 1941, but I've also heard of it in use by the 3CX Asterisk system. However, my intent is to preserve information about this tone, as next to no information seems to exist about it. An excerpt from the Bell Labs Record describes it here. It also seems to be exclusive to crossbar systems.

[2] Bell Labs record

[3] Article about this record

[4] Sample of this sound

What do you think of this? ZetaformGames (talk) 19:01, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ZetaformGames, welcome to the teahouse and welcome to Wikipedia! I think that this could be a good idea as a subsection in the article for Intercept message or some other related article. I don't think that there is enough for a full article with the sources you've posted but could definitely be an interesting paragraph! Justiyaya 07:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thank you! And thanks for the welcome. I made this account a while ago, but haven't felt confident enough in my editing skills until now to contribute. ZetaformGames (talk) 17:46, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maryam Mirzakhani

[edit]

Can someone fix the error in the Maryam Mirzakhani article?

Mirzakhani solved this counting problem by relating it to the problem of computing volumes in moduli space—a space whose points correspond to different complex structures on a surface genus Failed to parse (SVG (MathML can be enabled via browser plugin): Invalid response ("Math extension cannot connect to Restbase.") from server "http://localhost:6011/wiki.riteme.site/v1/":): {\displaystyle g} . In her thesis, Mirzakhani found a volume formula for the moduli space of bordered Riemann surfaces of genus g {\displaystyle g} with n {\displaystyle n} geodesic boundary components. From this formula followed the counting for simple closed geodesics mentioned above, as well as a number of other results. This led her to obtain a new proof for the formula discovered by Edward Witten and Maxim Kontsevich on the intersection numbers of tautological classes on moduli space.

Thanks. 76.14.122.5 (talk) 19:28, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP 76.14.122.5. Generally, the best place to discuss something like this is on the talk page for the article in question, which in this case would be Talk:Maryam Mirzakhani; however, if you truly believe there's an error in the article, you can be WP:BOLD and fix it yourself if you think you can. Please understand though that "fix it" in this context means to correct the article in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and the policies/guidelines most likely applicable in this case are going to be Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research. Ideally, you're going to need to find WP:SECONDARY reliable sources (as defined by Wikipedia) to cite in support of the change you want to make; even if you know such changes to be true, you're still going to need to cite reliable sources in support to allow others to verify the changes. If you just make a change without providing any citations to a reliable source in support, there's a good chance the change will be undone by another user. Given that this seems to be related to mathematics, you might argue that "proving" the information to be incorrect based on Mirakhani's academic thesis is more than sufficient in and of itself, but Wikipedia generally requires something more and a thesis is going to be, for the most part, considered a WP:PRIMARY source and could have other issues as explained in WP:SCHOLARSHIP. You could also try asking about this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics since that's where you're going to have a better chance of finding someone sufficiently versed in mathematics who might be able to help sort this out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 19:52, 31 December 2024 (UTC);post edited. -- 22:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please disregard my reply IP 76.14.122.5. I misunderstood what you were asking about. ColinFine's suggestion below seems to be the best course of action here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IP user. What you are reporting is a problem in the software, the network, or the user interface, and not in the content of the article. Generally, technical problems of this sort are better handled at WP:VPT than here. However, I'm not seeing that problem, either on the browser on my laptop, or on the Android app. Is it repeatable, or might it have been a temporary glitch?
Actually, now I look at it, the URL above appears to be a local proxy, so it may be that whoever manages your local network has not configured the proxy in a way that Wikipedia requires. Again, WP:VPT is a better place to ask about this.
@Marchjuly. The problem that the IP is reporting is obviously a technical one, so your answer is entirely off the point. ColinFine (talk) 20:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for catching my mistake and pointing the OP in the right direction ColinFine. I've stricken my reply so as to not confuse the OP or anyone else. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stuck on Puerto Rico outages notability.

[edit]

Hi, new to Wikipedia here and probably gonna create a draft on the Puerto Rico power outage crisis but wanted to ask: I’m stuck in the notability of this topic, so, is the Puerto Rico power outage crisis notable enough for Wikipedia? By power outage crisis I mean the beginning of the Puerto Rican outages from Hurricane Maria to now since it has lasted multiple years with sustained media coverage when an outage does occur. Cheers! 66.50.50.222 (talk) 20:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than a new article, you could expand on the outages already documented in Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority and in LUMA Energy. Schazjmd (talk) 20:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A search within Wikipedia on "Puerto Rico power outage" yields a list of several articles, including Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority and in LUMA Energy David notMD (talk) 21:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. Will expand those articles then instead. Thanks! 66.50.50.222 (talk) 21:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My first impression would be that an article is likely warranted. PR is an island of ~3 million people, in the same neighborhood as Los Angeles. If Los Angeles were having sustained multi-year-long Issues with electrical service, there would be an article about it. Non-English language sources are perfectly acceptable for citing in articles, as long as a little care is observed.
Note, to the anonymous editor: if you create an account you get your own shiny neato userspace to use mostly at your leisure, where for instance you can work on draft articles with no hurry. I have one underway in mine in fact. And thank you again for being interested in contributing to Wikipedia!
(Regarding LA: some may have had come to mind the California energy crisis, but, neat fact, LA actually escaped impact from that because of having its own municipal utility with its own generation capacity!) --Slowking Man (talk) 01:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note to User:Slowking Man: The userspace is the wrong place to draft an article. Either use your Sandbox or else follow instructions at WP:YFA to create a draft. David notMD (talk) 03:33, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is "userspace" not the colloquial term for "your user page and any and all subpages of it"? The "official" user sandbox link is Special:MyPage/sandbox, which takes you to the /sandbox subpage of your user page. --Slowking Man (talk) 05:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, the IP editor (66.xx) here, just created my account, and I mainly refrained from creating an article due to being worried about a potential conflict-of-interest (I live in Puerto Rico myself). I might work on a draft later today and collect sources (as @BusterD suggested), thank you all btw for helping me clear up this question I’ve had for some time now! Atheions (talk) 04:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, User:Slowking Man is correct that an article might be created on this newsworthy subject and that one shouldn't necessarily rely strictly on English-language sources. Looking at the existing material, it certainly seems a sequence of outages could be established from some of the reliable sources already applied to pagespace. I agree with User:David notMD that WP:YFA is a place to consider how to start a new page. I would start collecting sources, online and in print. BusterD (talk) 03:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies if jumping the gun or creating a draft too early, but I have created one. Won’t be able to do much progress today but will def collect sources to use. Atheions (talk) 07:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Am I allowed to post something about a game I am making on Wikipedia?

[edit]

Am i allowed to post somthing about a game i am making? On Wikipedia Aaronfart14 (talk) 22:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Allowed? Yes. Good idea? No. Likely to remain on Wikipedia? No. Writing an article is difficult, particularly for new editors. And since this is about your game, you have a conflict of interest in writing about it. See H:YFA and WP:COI. Simply posting information about your game rather than writing an article would be promotion. See WP:PROMOTION Meters (talk) 22:20, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aaronfart14, the relevant content guideline is WP:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. Cullen328 (talk) 02:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If your game goes public, and if it becomes so popular that people are publishing about it, then there is a chance that someone other than you will create an article about it. David notMD (talk) 03:37, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Writing about Childhood and Early Life

[edit]

I am writing an article about Andrea Sheridan Ordin, who is already included in two existing wikipedia articles entitled, "List of first women lawyers and judges in California" and "United States District Court for the Central District of California." I am interviewing her personally and have reputable sources about her career notability, but I'm not sure how to write her "early life" section, since there are not many sources describing her childhood aside from her firsthand account. How to I write about her early life without secondary sources? Aharten97 (talk) 22:17, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aharten97: It's not possible without reliable secondary published sources. For the policies, see WP:V. Personal notes from an interview are neither published nor reliable, and self-published statements are rarely reliable. If it's noteworthy it will have been published somewhere. If not then it isn't. -- zzuuzz (talk) 22:45, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://ethics.lacity.gov/news/murray-and-ordin-re-elected-as-ethics-commission-leaders/ provides some info for an Early life and education section. David notMD (talk) 04:24, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What to write on your talk page?

[edit]

Above question HELSINKI!233 (talk) 22:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and welcome, @HELSINKI!233. Your talk page is where other editors can leave messages for you or begin conversations with you. You can learn more at the guidelines for user pages. Schazjmd (talk) 22:37, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not for chat, or your thoughts/opinions about stuff. Also, with a few exceptions, you are allowed to delete content from your Talk page, although some people prefer to archive older content instead. David notMD (talk) 04:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Citations about movies

[edit]

I'm trying to improve The Lincoln Lawyer (film)

1) Is IMDB considered a good citation for the cast list, producer name, etc?

2) How do I add a citation to an existing infobox? (Visual or Source editor)

Many thanks

Ben (talk) 22:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and welcome, @Littenberg. Imdb is not considered a reliable source because much of its information is user-generated. You can learn how to add citations at Easier Referencing for Beginners. Schazjmd (talk) 22:39, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you click on Edit at the top menu it allows you to edit the entire article, including the Infobox. David notMD (talk) 04:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do I create a Wikipedia article

[edit]

How do I create an article on Wikipedia? Красный Октябрь (talk) 23:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте, @Красный Октябрь, and welcome to the Teahouse. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 23:33, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you help me learn how to make one? I want to make an article on the Kazan bombing that happened about a 1.5 week ago. Красный Октябрь (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Красный Октябрь, please be aware that the Russo-Ukrainian War is a designated contentious topic. You cannot write new content about that war until your account is Extended confirmed, which means the account is over a month old (it is) and has made over 500 constractive edits (you have a long way to go). Cullen328 (talk) 02:56, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then can someone else make an article about it? Красный Октябрь (talk) 04:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse Hosts are here to advise, but not to be authors or co-authors. David notMD (talk) 04:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Who do I ask about it? Красный Октябрь (talk) 08:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Красный Октябрь, if you persist in discussing a designated contentious topic such as the Russo-Ukrainian War before you are extended confirmed, you may be blocked. So, please edit other topic areas until then. Cullen328 (talk) 09:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You could ask on Talk:Russo-Ukrainian War. Normally such talk pages are protected, but that one doesn't seem to be at this time. What might happen is that someone adds a paragraph about the incident to the existing article rather than create a new article.
I'll add that editors who aren't extended-confirmed generally aren't permitted to use the talk pages of such articles either, and I have always disagreed with this, mainly because constructive edit requests end up in WP:RFED, making extra work for administrators. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why are padlocks not automatically added when an article is protected?

[edit]

Sorry if this is the wrong place. Heyaaaaalol (talk) 02:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Heyaaaaalol Because an administrator needs to add a protection notice (the padlocks) to a page in order to show the padlock on pages. Sometimes the padlocks do not get placed on a page, especially if it's a user page, unless if the protection notice is placed by an administrator. NicePrettyFlower (talk) 03:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Heyaaaaalol, I have done some page protection myself. Usually when I apply protection, I wish to see the "padlock" icon applied. Sometimes when I use the protection script, I forget to click the toggle which leaves the padlock icon. In that case, there's a bot which usually fixes that mistake automatically. If you see a protected page without an icon, you might tell someone. Do our answers help? BusterD (talk) 03:44, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Heyaaaaalol. To actually answer your question: because nobody has implemented that function in the software. I don't know whether there is a technical reason for that, or whether it's just that nobody's got round to it. Questions about the software and user interface are better asked at the Village pump: either WP:VPT or WP:VPR ColinFine (talk) 13:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Heyaaaaalol: Protecting a page is a log action in the MediaWiki software which powers Wikipedia and thousands of other wikis. It does not make an edit to the page. Logs are separate from edits. Displaying a padlock with a link is a Wikipedia practice. We do it by editing the page and adding special code which places a padlock in the corner instead of the normal text area. Other wikis may use no or other symbols for protected pages, place them in other places, and make no or other links on them. A MediaWiki feature to automatically display a symbol on protected pages was recently added at phab:T12347 but it's disabled by default. I haven't examined how flexible it is but I guess it would be non-trivial for us to convert to using it when we already have a well-functioning system. There is so far only a single Wikimedia wiki which has set wgEnableProtectionIndicators to true in https://noc.wikimedia.org/conf/highlight.php?file=InitialiseSettings.php. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple non-free album covers on one page

[edit]

For the album Breakfast with Girls, there's an associated EP located at the section Brunch. The EP has an infobox but is currently without cover artwork, so I'm wondering if it's appropriate for the article to have another non-free image when one is already in use for the album's artwork. If not within free use, Brunch's artwork (seen here) is mostly text on a black background, so would I be allowed to crop out the non-text part and use that as a public domain text logo image in an infobox? Koopastar (talk) 04:50, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Koopastar, I do think that another cover would be within fair use. There's also been instances of this in the past like In Rainbows#In Rainbows Disk 2. Happy editing! Justiyaya 06:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

afd

[edit]

I really like a certain article, but it's afd, if it is deleted, is there a way to still view it 🐢 (talk) 05:24, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

History checker SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 05:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If the article is still "public" currently, you can save a copy for yourself: Download as PDF (maybe see also Help:Export). Otherwise go to: CAT:RESTORE. --Slowking Man (talk) 06:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be about X11 color names, which has been in existance since 2003 and has been edited more than 700 times since then. While it is unlikely that it will be deleted, as noted, you can save a copy to your computer. David notMD (talk) 13:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hypothetically, could it be possible to write a netural autobiography?

[edit]

Hypothetically, would it be possible for someone on Wikipedia to write a neutral autobiography of themselves? Showing the good and bad and making no favor to either side, providing proof and checking all of the boxes. How would that go and would it be accepted? What if say a Wikipedia administrator that is not really well known becomes for example the president of the US? Can they have oversight over their own article? Are they removed from their position? Can they no longer edit anything involving US politics due to their inherent bias? And finally has there been any real examples of this over the past 20+ years? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 05:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SimpleSubCubicGraph. Hypothetically, what you describe is possible but the president of the US example is implausible because credible candidates for that office would already be the subject of a Wikipedia article. More plausible would be a longtime editor elected to a state or provincial legislature. I see no reason why that person could not submit an autobiography through Articles for Creation with full disclosure, have the article accepted and continue as an editor or even as an administrator. They should certainly recuse from the current legislative affairs of their state or province but otherwise I would not see a broader problem. As for whether anything like that has ever happened, I do not know. Maybe another editor does. Cullen328 (talk) 06:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SimpleSubCubicGraph welcome to the Teahouse! Interesting questions. I would say that while it is hypothetically possible, guidelines still strongly discourage creations of autobiographies and I haven't seen an instance of it being successful outside of early Wikipedia. This would have to go through articles for creation and the editor should declare their conflict of interest. Subjects do not have oversight of their own article.
I would argue that if someone is elected president of the US they would have a financial relationship with the federal government and should stay away from editing those topics. I think they would have potentially less of a conflict of interest with state governments and historical united states politics. I don't think one would be removed as an administrator because they are elected to a public office here. I don't know of any Wikipedian that has been elected. CongressEdits is probably the closest to an example of this. Justiyaya 06:46, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Succeeding at autobiography is more likely to occur in an area such as WP:NACADEMIC. A senior professor at a university would have as models articles about other professors at their university. David notMD (talk) 14:02, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The only time I recall a good autobiography being written was when the CEO of a small business wrote one, submitted it for review, and it was accepted after some minor revisions. So it is possible.
By now I've gained enough experience on Wikipedia that I could probably write a neutral biography about myself, but because I am not notable, there's no point. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
a) It would probably go over reasonably well, presuming they followed the Correct way to do that kind of thing: don't create your own bio article (meaning here the literal "creating a new page in Main namespace") and don't edit it directly but put up stuff on the Talk page for others to evaluate, revise, and put into the article if they decide.
b) No, no one "owns" articles and gets special "powers" over them. Since all Wikipedia content is "free as in freedom" you and anyone else can copy it put it up elsewhere and do whatever with the copies, as long as you credit the original creators.
c) Why would they get adminship removed if they haven't misused it?
d) They probably ought to stay away from US politics content yes, being rather WP:INVOLVED. Also realistically the POTUS is not going to have ample free time to devote to Wikipedia contributing, or to be inclined to devote what little precious free time they get to, doing more work.
e) Have a look at WP:List of Wikipedians with articles. --Slowking Man (talk) 17:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki page written by subject or friend of subject?

[edit]

Hello, I saw a page on Wikipedia that looks like it was, based on the way it's presented, mostly written by the person who is the subject of the page, or a close friend. What is the standard flag or way to raise this on the page's talk page? Thank you for your help. FireBatV (talk) 08:05, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @FireBatV! Welcome to the Teahouse. The standard way is to tag the article with the Template:COI on the main article page. Alternatively, you can use Twinkle to tag it as well. TNM101 (chat) 12:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the help! I've added the {{Template:COI}} to the page in question (Rhett Ayers Butler) and as per the instructions on the template page I am have also added{{Connected contributor}} to the talk page, so editors can take it from there. Thank you again for the help and the friendly welcome, my issue has been resolved. FireBatV (talk) 21:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Editing the Wikipedia page of "The crown"

[edit]

i want to edit the Wikipedia page of "the crown" on netflix why i wont add the seventh season of "the crown" if you cant tell the staff at netflix please add aditional information like the royal wedding of prince william and kate Middleton and the queen involvement in the 2012 summer olympics in london england alongside James bond!!! 89.128.137.159 (talk) 14:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP Editor: there was no 7th season of The Crown, so your additions were inappropriate and were removed. Please don't add fake information to Wikipedia. qcne (talk) 14:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
False information is vandalism, which if continued can lead to your IP address being blocked and any account your subsequently register being blocked. David notMD (talk) 15:20, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The show button doesn't work on phone

[edit]

Hi. Some articles have this dialouge box on top of them. But when we touch the show button on phone (Chrome for Android for me), nothing happens. I don't know about desktop. Aminabzz (talk) 15:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is an example of such an article? What happens when you use the Wikipedia app? Does it work then? ~Anachronist (talk) 16:21, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Aminabzz, and welcome to the Teahouse.
I agree. If I look at Amathus, I get that box (from template {{expand language}}) at the top, but on a browser on my Android phone, when I pick "Show" it replaces the word "Show" with "Hide", but doesn't expand the box, so I can't see additional information.
However, the box has a "Learn more" button, and if I pick that it shows me a little more, but not the full information that I see on my browser on a computer.
This looks like a bug in the user interface: WP:VPT is a better place to ask/report such things than here, and I suggest you post there. Thank you for pointing it out. ColinFine (talk) 18:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How to find the full form of abbreviations on phone?

[edit]

Hi. On Wikipedia, some abbreviation words have dotline underlines. When we hover the mouse cursor on them on PC we can see the full form. For example, TBA reveals to be "to be announced".

But on mobile phones (Chrome for Android for me) there is no mouse so that we hover the cursor on them! So how can we find the full form of abbreviations on these dotline-underlined words in cellphones? Holding the word doesn't work.

Look at this for seeing the dotlines. Aminabzz (talk) 15:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's one of the limitations of using a smartphone as a browser. There is no notion of "hover". I have seen hovering implemented in some Samsung phones, in which holding your finger near to the screen without touching it is sensed as a hover, but this worked only in certain apps and wasn't a universal experience across all apps on the phone. Unless someone has a better answer, I'd say that features reliant on hovering are generally not accessible on smartphones. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Samsung devices with S Pen support actually support "hover" by well, hovering the S Pen close to the display. The display has an "active digitizer" that can sense the Pen with NFC. Shows a little cursor and pops up stuff and you can hit the Pen's button to do things, very neat actually. ...Buuuut still doesn't work for the abbr stuff in browsers because it's handled differently in the system software (as it's not "really a mouse", it's handled by different code) and so doesn't "pass through" a mouse hover event down to the browser software. Shucks. --Slowking Man (talk) 17:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah this is a known problem for years. Abbr and friends use the standard HTML tags for such things, and browsers don't gaf apparently about making them "work" when there's no pointing device (mouse), and the attitude appears to be ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. WP could implement some sort of JavaScript "workaround" that pops up a thing, but, that requires deploying something "globally" site-wide and that is a Big Deal so it needs Official approval: ask around at WP:VPT whether there's any effort in this direction. (FYI templates can't have JavaScript, it needs to be JS to "dynamically" add new page elements and display them)
In the meantime the "workaround" is to hit edit and look at the wikitext. Or you could also view the page HTML source and use the browser's "find" to go to the abbreviation which will show its definition. Also also there might be some userscript someone has made to make it pop up, which you can "install" to use while logged-in. (You could also always plug in a mouse/trackpad/etc or connect a wireless one ) --Slowking Man (talk) 17:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA Spotcheck

[edit]

Apparently I might've misunderstood what is needed for a source spotcheck in a good article review. Could someone please explain what is needed? History6042😊 (Contact me) 15:53, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appears that at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations, date 1/1/25, there has been a question raised about GA nomination reviews conducted by History60432. David notMD (talk) 17:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is why I am asking. History6042😊 (Contact me) 17:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@History6042, note 2 on the Wikipedia:Good article criteria page explains source checking. If you're concerned that your interpretation isn't in line with the community's, you might find it helpful to discuss with other editors involved with the good article process at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations. Schazjmd (talk) 17:33, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So it means Verifiable with no original research:
it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
it contains no original research; and
it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism? History6042😊 (Contact me) 19:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The note says "Ideally, a reviewer will have access to all of the source material, and sufficient expertise to verify that the article reflects the content of the sources; this ideal is not often attained. At a minimum, check that the sources used are reliable (for example, blogs are not usually reliable sources) and that those you can access support the content of the article (for example, inline citations lead to sources that agree with what the article says) and are not plagiarized (for example, close paraphrasing of source material should only be used where appropriate, with in-text attribution if necessary)." Schazjmd (talk) 20:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I think i did that but do I just need to like write it down? History6042😊 (Contact me) 21:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Saying in your review what you checked is helpful. Perhaps read through this discussion on spot checks. You might also find it useful to read through some GA reviews by experienced reviewers, see what they're doing in their written reviews that you can learn from. Schazjmd (talk) 21:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Creating an article heavily lacking sources :/

[edit]

I've been working on trying create an article (Draft:Millennium Force's effects) but I've run into some issues; including after initial submission. The only sources I can find are mainly from various YouTube videos (not tied to the subject) and very few separate links; so it's no wonder why it wasn't accepted.

So I know what I've written down is true, but I don't have the secondary sources to prove it and that makes my info Original Research. What can I do? I was told I could try another Wiki (ex: Amusement Park Wiki) but is there anything I can do to keep it on Wikipedia? Thanks! Therguy10 (talk) 16:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Therguy10 Welcome to theTeahouse. I'm afraid not. Reliable sources are fundamental to Wikipedia articles. See WP:42. Shantavira|feed me 18:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Therguy10. I agree with Shantavira. Please see also No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability ColinFine (talk) 18:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Shantavira @ColinFine Thank you both! I do believe that the article has potential in the future, but I also understand it isn't notable enough as of now. With the article being a history of a subject, there is older information that I fear may not be written about. My hope is that the new changes made this year were important enough to spark some kind of interest for a source; I'll have to wait and see. Therguy10 (talk) 18:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
well i guess technically the changes were made last year...lol Therguy10 (talk) 18:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you can find reliable sources, why not improve the Ride experience section of Millennium Force? Schazjmd (talk) 18:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That was a strong consideration of mine. I certainly won't be able to fit everything inside of the main article but it might not hurt to add a little more than what I already have there. Once again my biggest issue would be collecting sources; this seems more doable. Thanks! Therguy10 (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do i delete a Wikepedia page?

[edit]

a school has a wikepedia page, (carlisle public schools) i have moved the page to inside the town page (carlisle masssachusetts) so how do i delete the old school page? it is useless (i moveed the page because it contains about only 1 paragraph, so why not make it a section) so yeah, if someone knows how to delete a page, please delete Carlisle Public Schools

how to find page - go to the education part of carlisle, massachusetts, press carlisle public schools, and you will be there. Theawezomefriend12 (talk) 19:39, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Carlisle Public Schools is an article. If you believe it should be deleted, the process is to nominate it for deletion via the WP:AFD process. What you added to Carlisle, Massachusetts was rightfully deleted because you did not include any references. See Maynard, Massachusetts for an example of a referenced education section. I was going to point you to Acton or Sudbury, but those have unreferenced content. There is also Concord-Carlisle High School, but that has its own problems. David notMD (talk) 20:02, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, Thanks! Theawezomefriend12 (talk) 20:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Theawezomefriend12: I'm going to offer some slightly different advice. For a small article in this situation: First copy the relevant text to the target article (the article about the town). If there are no references then be sure to add one or some. See WP:CWW for the correct process, if you are moving any text. Once that has been successfully done, turn the former article (the school district) into a redirect to the town as you did previously. There is no need to actually delete anything: redirects are useful for people trying to find things, such as information about Carlisle Public Schools, and can be safely left behind. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice, i will remove the deletion (i dont know if thats possible i am new) and make the page redierect to Carlisle, Massachusetts. Theawezomefriend12 (talk) 21:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Theawezomefriend12: I've helped a bit with the deletion part. The best way to learn is to just do things, so I'll leave you to continue the process (and will probably pop back in a bit). I'll just mention that it appears that the only reason your previous attempt was reverted was because you didn't include any references for the content you were adding/moving to the town article. Sufficient references probably exist in the district article so they can just be copied. If not, I'm sure they won't be difficult to find. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
oh ok, i am propably going to be moving the main description and the new gallery part i added, i probably will not be added refrences and external links. Theawezomefriend12 (talk) 21:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! PARIS

[edit]

Good morning, good afternoon or good evening. Happy new year 2025. Please how to move to the main space the Draft:Hi! PARIS. This research center in AI is now one of the most important in France : https://www.lesechos.fr/tech-medias/intelligence-artificielle/une-dotation-de-70-millions-pour-la-formation-de-lelite-de-lia-en-france-2096150 and https://www.lemondeinformatique.fr/actualites/lire-hec-et-l-institut-polytechnique-remportent-l-appel-a-projets-cluster-ia-93818.html. Many thanks in advance for your help. Have a great day. 2A01:CB00:B48:9900:1C67:231F:4C2F:9933 (talk) 21:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On the AoPS Wiki go to special:move. I don't know bout wikipedia tho 73.31.42.97 (talk) 22:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry its Special:MovePage 73.31.42.97 (talk) 22:23, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bonsoir, IP user.
73. is right that the technique for moving pages is to use the Move function (though most people do it from their user-interface, rather than going to Special:MovePage.
However, not logged in users do not have access to that function.
I was going to advise you to submit it for review. However, I see that the draft was created in mainspace user BobVillars (since blocked for sockpuppetry) was then moved to Draft space by @Rosguill, was submitted for review by an ipV6 user in the same range as you, then moved to main space again by McSyl, also blocked as a sockpuppet of BobVillars, and moved back to draft space again by @Janhrach.
Neither you nor anybody else has since made any substantial edits to the draft.
I am finding it very difficult to assume good faith. I will ask you directly: are you BobVillars/McSyl? If so, you are evading your block, which is not permitted. ColinFine (talk) 22:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AoPS page

[edit]

Why isn't there a page for Art of Problem Solving? 73.31.42.97 (talk) 22:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP 73.31.42.97. There could be a couple reasons why: (1) nobody thought enough about the book/series to try and create one; or (2) somebody did try to create one, but the subject wasn't deemed to meet Wikipedia:Notability (books) and was either deleted altogether or added to Richard Rusczyk. Art of Problem Solving current WP:REDIRECTs to the "Rusczyk" article and its page history shows that there once was a stand-alone article about the book/series, but it was "redirected" per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Art of Problem Solving (2nd nomination). If you feel something has changed since then, you might want to first explain why to the administrator who closed the Articles for Deletion discussion. That administrator's name is Liz. Perhaps by asking at User talk:Liz, Liz can tell you what is needed for the article to be recreated or restored. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where is Wikipedia year in review for iOS?

[edit]

I am looking for Wikipedia year in review in iOS where is it? 172.59.25.192 (talk) 22:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thread about Wikipedia on X

[edit]

FYI:

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1873966681242132845 ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 00:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How to find vandalism on Wikipedia?

[edit]

The closest thing I have found to vandalism is on the page for the number 3, where someone changed references to “3” with “2.” I’m wondering how to find vandalism, so I can revert it. Most of my edits are fixing grammar. Thank you. Heyaaaaalol (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Series of small edits"

[edit]

I find it difficult to follow and review edits for valid constructive contributions when an editor makes a "series of small edits" (example: 1, 2, 3) where several of the edits could, IMHO, easily and conceivably be made in a single edit with a single edit summary encompassing all of what is edited. Is there policy or guidelines about this practice that could help me in a talk page discussion I am currently engaged in? Iljhgtn (talk) 00:23, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]