Wikipedia:Teahouse

GreenMeansGo, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

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

Help Wikipedia

Iron Meat

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

Do you think the game is notable ?

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

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

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

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

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

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

@Lordofcallofduty: User reviews do not count as far as we're concerned (as that's user-generated); we'd be looking at the aggregated average for professional reviews (such as from Kotaku and the like). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 21:41, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@Lordofcallofduty: Cool it with the personal attacks.

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

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

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

Avoid Ad hominem. Guylaen (talk) 08:27, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

I checked for hours no single vote on the game I will keep checking Lordofcallofduty (talk) 02:02, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Page Created not Reviewed Since October

Hi, I have created Sikh Heritage Month but this page hasn't been reviewed and doesn't even appear in a simple Google Search. This was created 6 months ago and have 0 luck with any progress getting a review on this.

Please can I get help ! Jattlife121 (talk) 11:55, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

@Jattlife121 I'm not sure why you think it isn't reviewed. The logs show this was done on 20 January. Quite often, Google doesn't index the page until another edit is done after that date. If you make a minor edit now, I'm sure it will appear very soon thereafter in search engines. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:04, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

But Basics of Sikhi hasn't also been reviewed per the log, this was made in October 2024 ? Jattlife121 (talk) 00:12, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

@Jattlife121 Correct but it is now indexed in Google (here in the UK) now you made a small edit yesterday. Articles automatically become available to search engines after 90 days, even if not reviewed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:19, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Faster Review/Approval for AfC on notable recent events? r.e. Dr. Rasha Alawieh

Draft:Dr. Rasha Alawieh I created an article for Dr. Rasha Alawieh, who has just been unlawfully detained and deported this past weekend. A page for "The Detention of Mahmoud Khalil" went up very quickly and I think a page for Alawieh should be up as well as these are absolutely historic cases.Can anyone help me to get my article reviewed and approved faster since it records recently occurring events? How do articles on timely matters get approved quickly? Thank you Jdftba (talk) 20:37, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Jdftba Hello and welcome. There is no means of getting a speedy review. Reviews are conducted by volunteers doing what they can, when they have time to do it. Wikipedia has no deadlines and cannot accommodate the deadlines of editors.

You are capable of moving the draft into the encyclopedia yourself, if you desire, but without a review you run the risk it could be nominated for deletion. 331dot (talk) 21:41, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Jdftba, the policy language found at Subjects notable only for one event is likely to be an obstacle to your effort. It may be better to reframe your draft as "Deportation of Rasha Alawieh". We do not use professional titles like "Dr." in article titles. Cullen328 (talk) 23:03, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Draft has been moved to mainspace without AfC approval (!). I've opened a RM. 🌙Eclipse (she/they/all neos • talk • edits) 00:33, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

_{Worth noting, the AfC process is optional for autoconfirmed users - I advised @Jdftba in #wikipedia-en-help that they could move it to mainspace themselves as an autoconfirmed user, if they felt it met all our policies.} qcne (talk) 12:00, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

@Qcne: I'm aware of autoconfirmed users not having to rely on the AfC process. I was unaware that Jdftba was autoconfirmed, though. 🌙Eclipse (she/they/all neos • talk • edits) 23:04, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Better display of audio files on Snoring

Hello please could someone who is able check the above article. Is there any better way to display the 3 audio files  ? Thank you Moribundum (talk) 10:41, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

@Moribundum: {{listen}} allows for embedding multiple audio files in a box. ObserveOwl (talk) 09:43, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

@ObserveOwl Yes, that's perfect. Thank you, Moribundum (talk) 16:51, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Help with new Article Major Food Group

Hi everyone. I am a new editor in a wikipedia course and have published the above page, Major Food Group. I am looking for some help editing and polishing up my article. The biggest problem I had been having is removing promotional content and making sure I keep a neutral point of view. I feel like I have made progress with this but was hoping for some feedback from more experienced editors, thank you all in advance! SpressNEU (talk) 18:58, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

I read a bit of the article. I can't found a source inside the article that seems "reliable" and indicating "notability" of "Major Food Group. Anatole-berthe (talk) 19:13, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

@SpressNEU: A good place to start would be ensuring that the content in the article is directly supported by the cited source. There seem to be a whole lot of instance where you include one or two facts that are in the source, and then layer on a bunch of extra content that comes from...presumably somewhere else.

Just taking the section on Parm as an example, nowhere in the source is it referred to as casual dining. The source doesn't seem to talk about comfort food. There's nothing there about having Parm locations in Vegas or Boston. That's just doing a quick overview of one small piece. But you really can't use a source to support some detail in an article, and make space to insert a lot of other stuff on top of it. GMG^talk 19:25, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @SpressNEU, and welcome to the Teahouse. A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what reliable independent sources say about a subject, and very little else. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 14:11, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

@SpressNEU Do you consider ours answers are sufficient or do you think you need more guidance ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 19:09, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Report a potential interwiki link error regarding a category

Hello ! I need to know where I can report a potential mistake with an interwiki link regarding a category.

Is it better to discuss it on "Wikidata" or one of the relevant Wikipedias ?

This concerns the English speaking Wikipedia "Category:French Foreign Legion in popular culture" and the French speaking Wikipedia "Catégorie:Tradition de la Légion étrangère." Anatole-berthe (talk) 19:28, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Anatole-berthe. Interlanguage links are rarely discussed. People usually just make the wanted edits. If fr:Catégorie:Légion étrangère dans les arts looks like a better match to Category:French Foreign Legion in popular culture then just click "Wikidata item" at the latter (may be in a "Tools" menu depending on your skin) and change the French entry (somebody already did [1]). PrimeHunter (talk) 19:45, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Thanks ! The problem is now resolved. Anatole-berthe (talk) 19:58, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Improve Draft:David Hynam article

Hi, I am working on improving the David Hynam article and have added recent awards he received in the Recognition and Awards section. He has received significant media coverage and has been recognized by multiple LGBTQ+ awards. Could someone review the additions and let me know if they improve the article? Are there other areas that could be strengthened?

Additionally, I came across the page for Evelyn Bourke, who has a similar background and profile. Any insights on how to further develop Hynam’s article to meet Wikipedia’s standards would be appreciated.

Thank you! KP070707 (talk) 20:40, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Answered at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk § 20:34, 18 March 2025 review of submission by KP070707 Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:21, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

If I'm using the edit request wizard to request an edit on an extended-protected article, does my request need to be non-controversial?

I wanted to give my opinion in an RFC discussion (and/or the general issue) of the Gaza genocide article, but I can't do so in the standard method as I am not an extended-protected user. I was going to make an edit request to raise my concern, though a part of the "what can I do" section raised some problems with this. The part in question reads as follows:

• If you have noticed an error or have a suggestion for a simple, non-controversial change, please check the talk pagefirst in case the issue is already being discussed. If the issue has not been discussed yet, you can submit an edit request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit. Make sure to clearly describe which page your request is about, and which change exactly you are requesting.

Not only is the RFC discussion surrounding a controversial issue, but obviously the discussion means that the issue has already been discussed. Is there anything I can do to voice my thoughts, or do I just have to sit it out? LordOfWalruses (talk) 21:35, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

@LordOfWalruses: It's unlikely you'll be allowed to participate in the discussion regardless, since the General Sanctions apply to the Arab-Iraeli conflict topic area writ large. You'd only be able to request specific edits to the article; edits that involve content currently being debated thru an RfC will be summarily declined due to the ongoing discussion. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 21:40, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for the info. LordOfWalruses (talk) 21:51, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

One follow-up question that I must ask: does this apply to non-RFC issues? LordOfWalruses (talk) 22:12, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

LordOfWalruses, general sanctions restrictions on non-extended confirmed editors regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict apply to every edit to every page on Wikipedia, with the only exception being requests for simple, non controversial changes. This would apply only to typographical errors, spelling errors, date errors and little else. Cullen328 (talk) 23:26, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

OP blocked due to WP:ECR. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 22:25, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Searching by source

Is there a way to search all of Wikipedia, or all of a certain category or segment of the encyclopedia by a source? For example, could you search all article that cite The New York Times, Time magazine, or Fox News? Iljhgtn (talk) 23:16, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Iljhgtn: and welcome to the Teahouse! To answer your question, type insource:"INSERT WEBSITE URL HERE". For example, to search for all uses of The New York Times, enter insource:"nytimes.com" (see here for a completed example). Regards, Grumpylawnchair (talk) 03:12, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Janine Ling Carr

Hi!

I was wondering if the musician Janine Ling Carr should have an Article. I have several sources and news articles to access, and thought it would be a good idea. She is a beatboxer, who placed in the top 10 in the 2018 Female Beatbox world championships. As well as that, she is briefly mentioned on the page for Applications of 3D printing, for creating the first 3D printed (emotions)?

Thanks, I have several sources and articles giving useful information. 23r2 (talk) 23:48, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Her mention can be found here 23r2 (talk) 23:57, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

• Here

23r2 (talk) 00:39, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

How can we judge her level of "notability" and if the sources are "reliable" if we haven't the sources ?

Please , can you give sources you're mentionning ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 00:43, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Given that OP tried to create a hoax (Wikipedia:Teahouse#Ainu Baluchi), I am pleasantly surprised Janine Carr is indeed mentioned at Applications of 3D printing. That said, it is one mention sourced to her own social media account. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 01:22, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Ah! Ok, I didn't realise it was sourced to a social media account. I'm sure the gallery will have some news on it, otherwise I have other articles about her beatboxing career, from BEATBOX UK and other official sources under the topic. If you did want to do some research, her stage name is J9 Beatbox.

Thanks, 23r2 (talk) 08:33, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi!

They are also sourced as J9 on 'UK BEATBOX CHAMPIONSHOPS' under 2014 (or 2015?) /Woman's/ Semifinalists. 23r2 (talk) 22:48, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

I would suggest you do as @Anatole-berthe, has said and provide all of the citations that you think are "significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

If you are intending to write it as a musician's bio see WP:BAND if otherwise see Wikipedia:BIO. Cheers, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:33, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

@23r2 I searched reliable sources about her with "Janine Ling Carr" then "J9 Beatbox" as keywords.

I wasn't able to find this kind of sources about her. I consider she's not notable. Anatole-berthe (talk) 18:23, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

How can I expand a page topic?

I would like to expand a page topic (it currently covers only gen 1 of a smartphone, but i have information & sources on later versions/ "pro" variation of that phone, but i dont think they warrant their own pages individually). Can I change the page title and expand to cover the whole phone series or else what is the procedure? Tioseafj (talk) 09:05, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Which article do you want to expand ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 11:48, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Tioseafj. The best thing to do in such circumstances is to open a discussion on the article's talk page. It might also be helpful to put a note on the talk pages of any relevant WikiProjects pointing to the discussion on the talk page. (Relevant WikiProjects are usually linked at the top of the article's talk page). ColinFine (talk) 14:14, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

I would just boldly move it to a new title referring to the series, unless anyone complains or it's a really popular page, in which you want to open a talk page discussion. If you don't have the permissions to move it, see WP:Requested moves. Overall it seems like a fine thing to do to me. Basically you can do it unless anyone complains, in which case you have a discussion on the talk page until a consensus emerges. The procedure for opening such a discussion, if the move is controversial, is also at WP:Requested moves. Mrfoogles (talk) 22:17, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Mielle_Organics

Hi in december i have published a wikipedia page which got declined first beacuse of less refrences. After adding more information and relavent refrences i resubmitted again in Jan but it still under review. So, i wanted to know how much more time will it take to get published.

here is the link:- Draft:Mielle Organics

Thanks, Chirag232 (talk) 10:25, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

@Chirag232 your answer is at the top of the draft page: Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,386 pending submissions waiting for review. Yeshivish613 (talk) 10:38, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Query from a Newbie

Hello all. I a newbie and seek help regarding citing an information. I have been reading a page on Theriogenology, when I suddenly realized that there exists a prominent journal on this subject. There is no mention of this in the page and I thought it was worth adding this information. However I simply do not know how to cite it. The information pages, which confirm the existence of this journal are (1) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog/421510 (2)https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/theriogenology. Can someone please advise? Can we use the parameters for a regular website? Or is there some other parameter for scientific sites like the ones I am citing? Thanks. Neotaruntius (talk) 10:36, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Welcome! If there is a specific text you would like to cite from the journal, use Template:Cite journal ({{cite journal}}). I believe you cannot just cite the journal exists, it has to be text that the journal published. Good luck, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 11:16, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

The article has an External link to the Society, and at that website, at the top, there is a link to Clinical Theriogenology. I suppose you could add another external link if the journal you mention is not the same one. David notMD (talk) 12:24, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes, thanks David notMD. I did visit that just now [after the hint given be you]. Actually - and quite interestingly - this is another journal, though similar sounding. The exact NLM link is here - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog/101681552. But yes, this is a good lead. Actually coming to think of it, I could mention both journals at the original site. Mentioning the journal as an external link [as you indicate] is one thing, and you would agree, mentioning it within the article is yet another. But a good lead. Thanks. I would anyway want to know how to cite the NLM journal site. Neotaruntius (talk) 14:27, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes, Thanks. That exactly is my problem. I am indeed aware of the "Cite journal" template. But it was a bit tricky to cite just the National Library of Medicine site. That is why I was wondering if I could just use a "cite web" template. However NLM is not an ordinary website, and hence the query. Thanks anyway. Neotaruntius (talk) 14:20, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for the unclear explanation. Cheers, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 18:00, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

CF-501 Falcon, no problem. You tried to help and that is enough. Neotaruntius (talk) 04:08, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

I am still of the mind that organization of journal websites are better as External links rather than references. David notMD (talk) 16:10, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

David notMD thanks. I would then go by your vision. Shall put an external link to both journals. Regards. Neotaruntius (talk) 04:47, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't think there is any problem with using a "Cite web" template to cite the main page of a journal -- in fact, you don't strictly have to use any template at all. You can technically just write an MLA citation if you feel like it. Mrfoogles (talk) 18:53, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

ability to revert multiple edits at the same time?

Hello, I have just used the "revert" function to revert vandalism by an IP address editor on 2 articles. On a third article, the IP had made two consecutive edits - I had to manually undo those edits. I have noticed other edit summaries where it seemed editors had the ability to revert multiple edits at the same time. How can I accomplish this easily? Oliver Phile (talk) 11:48, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Can you mention which edits seem to be a part of a multiple revert ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 11:51, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

The user was https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Contributions/78.101.255.126. The place where I reverted two edits was Julián Alvarez. Oliver Phile (talk) 11:54, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

@Oliver Phile I was talking of the edits that seem to be a multiple revert at the same time.

I saw only yours reverts. Anatole-berthe (talk) 11:58, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes, perhaps I did not explain clearly what I am trying to accomplish. One example of edits that revert multiple edits would be here: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Joy_Behar&diff=1050412251&oldid=1050411378

It appears that 3 edits were reverted simultaneously. I think "rollback rights" is how that was accomplished. Oliver Phile (talk) 12:13, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Rollback rights aren't the only way to do that. Twinkle provides a similar functionality, and doesn't require any special user rights. JJP_Master (she/they) 12:51, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! I have just installed the Twinkle gadget now. Oliver Phile (talk) 13:07, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

I have also researched the topic - I believe "Requesting rollback rights" is the place I should go. Is that correct? Oliver Phile (talk)

Oliver Phile, using the "history" of the article, find the most recent non-vandalized version. Opt to edit it. You'll get a message warning you that you've opted to edit an old version. "Publish" (save) it (without actually making any changes to it), with an informative edit summary. It's as simple as this. (No, you do not need "rollback" rights.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:14, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Oliver Phile (talk) 12:15, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Help settling a dispute on the Kieran Culkin page?

I'm not sure if this is the right place to be asking this question. So, maybe someone can tell me where if not (and sorry for the length of this). Over two weeks ago, I tried to add an edit to the Kieran Culkin page after his Oscar speech about the speech and public response (which was extraordinarily well-covered in the media).

I'll admit that I wasn't quite sure the best way to phrase it, and best parts to keep. So, I even put in my edit summary "Not sure the best way to talk about/phrase everything everyone is saying about his speech, but I feel like it should be mentioned as it has been extremely well-covered" And someone just reverted it completely, saying it was trivia. So, I re-put it in, saying in my summary "It's fine if you want to shorten the paragraph/not include the speech, but I don't think the entire thing should be deleted as this is not WP:TRIVIA. It's not a "disorganized and unselective collection of facts or examples." It is also "supported by reliable secondary sources that discuss the subject's cultural impact."

Then it got reverted again, by DiaMali, with absolutely no explanation as to why. So, I took it to the talk page, so as not to engage in edit warring. I let my message on the talk page sit there for two weeks with no one arguing on the talk page against it being included. So, then I added it back to the page, saying "Added more about his Oscar speech. Before this, there was only *one* line about his award show speeches. There's no reason not to add more detail. Just b/c we don't want overly detailed e.g. what someone ate for breakfast doesn't mean skip relevant extraordinarily well-covered details. WP: FACTCHECK says consider each fact as potentially precious. Initially, this was reverted, so I took to the talk pg (avoid edit war) 2 weeks ago & not one opposing comment. So pls don't revert w/o convo. Thanks!"

DiaMali then reverted it again saying, "Adding an entire speech, word-for-word, is very unnecessary."

First off, there's more than just the quoted part of the speech. I also say some reactions from various well-known publications. But secondly, I put in my summary, "It's actually not his whole speech. His *entire* speech was longer. This was the part directed at his wife - the part that was reproduced in the *secondary* source cited. As when I originally added it, I said if anyone wants to shorten it, or put it in a quote box, etc., obv this is a collaborative environment where we can make it better. But there's *no* need to *completely revert* my edit. There *do* deserve to be at least *some* more details of something so overly-well covered"

And someone else now has reverted and said I'm being disruptive, but I feel I'm following all protocols correctly? I brought it up on the talk page and let it sit for two weeks? I cited wikipedia policies for my reasoning? I'm not married to my *exact* words being used. (I don't think I'm like the arbiter of good writing or the owner of a page (when no one owns a wikipedia page), so I'm not trying to like get my exact way or whatever. I'm just trying to add some info in however people best want to present it.)

I think it would be reasonable to either put part of the speech in a quote box, or say something shorter, like, "When accepting the Best Supporting Actor Academy Award in 2025, Culkin went viral for using his speech to ask his wife for more children, saying he'd really like to have four and ending with, "I just have to say to you, Jazz, love of my life, ye of little faith -- no pressure. I love you. I'm really sorry I did this again. And let's get cracking on those kids. What do you say? I love you. I love. I love you." When talking about the speech, Slate Magazine to called him "the best part of this Oscar season." Esquire said Culkin "saved his best victory speech for last [of awards season]."" (obv with inline references that I did already add when trying to edit the article.)

But I feel like I can't even add something like that now when now I'm being called "disruptive." I'm not trying to add something completely trivial like what he ate for breakfast this morning). I'm not trying to add anything with a slanted POV. I'm not trying to add something from gossip sites. (His speech was talked about in depth on CNN, Today Show, ABC, NBC, Town & Country, Slate, Huffington Post, Esquire, Entertainment Weekly, People, British GQ, The Economic Times, and numerous more.)

Currently the *only* line I can find in his article about his speeches is "His acceptance speeches during various awards ceremonies have been praised for its humorous and self-deprecating nature." That's it. His *Oscar* speech (not just any speech from "various ceremonies" but very specifically his Oscar (arguably the biggest American acting award) speech was extraordinarily well covered in several reputable publications and I'm being disruptive because I don't want my edit *wholly reverted*? (Again, I don't mind if people want to change it around, or make it shorter, but I'm being shut down from saying *anything* about it?)

This article is currently just labeled a C-class article, which makes sense. It really doesn't have a ton of detail, especially for an Oscar winner who's so exceedingly well-covered in the media. But I don't know how we're ever going to make it a better article if we can't add well-sourced details?

Anyway, do I have any more options here and/or is anyone willing/able to give this a second look and see if they can offer any solutions to this dispute or add an edit that these couple of reverters would find palatable? Thanks very much Wikipedian339 (talk) 12:32, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

@Wikipedian339: Hello! Have you tried to notify the users disputing the content to take part on the discussion, like by mentioning/pinging them on the talk page? ObserveOwl (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Ongoing templates

I am new to Wikipedia and I have been discovering templates, such as the "ongoing" one. On pages about ongoing events, like the M23 Campaign or the Sudanese civil war, it is not used. Is there a specific reason why ? Should I add this template to similar articles or not ? HalikhSovar78 (talk) 12:40, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

HalikhSovar78 according to Template:Current#Guidelines, it is only used for events that have just occurred with many editors on the article, and only left on the article for about a day. Events like M23 campaign (2022–present) are longer-term and only edited a few times per day (as opposed to the expected dozens or hundreds warranted by the template). Hopefully this clears things up. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 12:56, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Dang, you beat me while I was writing my comment. I applaud you. MallardTV (talk) 13:00, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Same! Xd ObserveOwl (talk) 13:01, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I added this template on two pages, I'll revert those edits. HalikhSovar78 (talk) 13:02, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

I've really only seen the Template:Current used. These are its guidelines.

Guidelines

• Every article on Wikipedia has a general disclaimer that the article contents may not be accurate.
• As an advisory to editors, the template may optionally be used on those extraordinary occasions that many editors (perhaps a hundred or more) edit an article on the same day (for example, in the case of natural disasters or other breaking news).
• It is not intended to be used to mark an article that merely has recent news articles about the topic; if it were, hundreds of thousands of articles would have this template, with no informational consequence.
• This and closely related templates are generally expected to appear on an article for less than a day, sometimes longer.
• If you would like an article on a significant current event to be noticed, please see Wikipedia:How the Current events page works and

MallardTV (talk) 12:59, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Trying to move an article, getting an error

Hello,

I am trying to move First Horizon Coliseum (Greensboro Coliseum) to First Horizon Coliseum (I want to remove the unneccessary disambiguation in the title) but I am getting this error: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. It looks like this is because there is a redirect from First Horizon Coliseum to First Horizon Coliseum (Greensboro Coliseum)? How would I go about doing this move?

Thank you, Esb5415 (talk) (C) 13:43, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

@Esb5415: Hello! You can request the move at WP:RM/TM and a page mover will do it for you. ObserveOwl (talk) 13:59, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Esb5415. I have made the move. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:01, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Esb5415 (talk) (C) 14:46, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Refining Draft: Draft:Tsitsi Masiyiwa

Good day Teahouse Members, I have recently received feedback on a resubmitted draft and would appreciate some further insight on 2 of the feedback points received.

1. "The Draft does have many sources, however, they are primary or interview based sources" - please can you confirm whether Vanity Fair is considered a secondary source? They have been renowned for investigative journalism. I have also included a source from Sunday Mail, please confirm why this is not considered a credible source?
2. "Missing citation for Education" - The University of Zimbabwe does not have a publicly available resource for Alumi, what other sources could be considered credible for an MBA?
3. "Draft is written in a flowery way" - I have gone through the article again to ensure any promotional content does not exist in the draft. I am battling to pin point any further Peacock terms and would appreciate any guidance in this regard. Thank you in advance

Substantiator (talk) 14:25, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome Substantiator. The whole url is not needed when linking; I've fixed this for you.

Vanity Fair is probably a reliable source, but it is not an independent source because it is an interview with Ms. Masiyiwa, her speaking about herself.

She must have a source somewhere where she states where she was educated; this would probably be a valid use of a primary source as someone could ask the university to confirm that she received a degree from them. 331dot (talk) 14:31, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Sunday Mail is also an interview with her, and reports a routine activity- that her organization received a grant.

I would also note that it is redundant to resubmit for review and then ask for feedback; the reviewer will leave you feedback if not accepted. 331dot (talk) 14:34, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Substantiator, and welc ome to the Teahouse. The thing to remember is that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 15:59, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey, I made a new page about a asteroid moon, Selam and I need some help

Hi there, I am Shaneapickle, and I am wondering about the page I made (linked here) And I am wondering how can I improve this draft? Link: Draft:Selam (moon)

Shaneapickle (talk) 14:47, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I'd say that is a pretty good start to an article. To improve the page, perhaps you can add academic sources. There seem to be a lot of coverage about this object in Google Scholar [2]. However, there is already an article on the larger satallite 152830 Dinkinesh, which already contains a detailed description of the moon. I think you should focus on improving that section instead of splitting a new article. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:07, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Then why does Dimorphos have a page on it then? Shaneapickle (talk) 15:37, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

If you believe there is so much to be written about Selam exclusively that it would clutter the 152830 Dinkinesh article, feel free to continue working on the draft. Currently the draft is much smaller than the pre-existing section on 152830 Dinkinesh. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:57, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

ok Shaneapickle (talk) 16:02, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Shaneapickle, it should be quite obvious why we have the article Dimorphos. It is, after all, the only moon of an asteroid that was deliberately struck by a massive spacecraft that ejected about a million kilograms of debris and permanently altered the orbit of this object. The purpose was to develop and test technology for protecting earth from potentially catastrophic meteor impacts. The widespread coverage of this object and the collision with it in reliable sources makes its notability a no brainer. Cullen328 (talk) 19:03, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Could I get some help with my draft?

Hi, could I get any help regarding to my draft Draft:Taiyoukei Erika as it's been declined and I'm not sure what to do. Applesauce666 (talk) 15:19, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Applesauce666, and welcome to the Teahouse. On a quick look, it appears to me that you have based your draft on what the Originator wants people to know. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

Far more seriously, as the originator of the software, you are regarded as a paid editor, and it is mandatory for you to make a formal declaration of this, usually on your user page.

If you create an article about your own software, it is likely to read as promotional, unless you do something like this:

• Find reliable sources that are wholly independent of you - not written or commissioned by you, not quoting you, but independently written.
• Forget everything you know about the software, and write a summary of what those sources say even if you think they are wrong.

Of course, this is hard to do, which is why writing about your own creation in Wikipedia is rarely successful. ColinFine (talk) 16:05, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Applesauce666, please be aware that Fandom is not a reliable source for use on Wikipedia. Read WP:FANDOM for community consensus on this source. Cullen328 (talk) 16:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Leytonstone House history

Hi, I’d like to add detail about Leytonstone House and the Bethnal Green Industrial School which are only mentioned briefly on the page about Leytonstone. Should I create new pages or add to the existing page? I’d like to create new pages but there would be repetition of what is already there. I’ll need help as I haven’t made a contribution for years! Tanzi22 (talk) 16:50, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

You can add to the existing page first; it can eventually be split or spun-off into its own article. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:22, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Does description of a topic or the mention of a specific author(s) merit citation?

Hello everyone! I am a self-admitted absolute beginner with editing Wikipedia, so I appreciate your patience for any confusion. I've done a lot of peeking through Wikipedia's provided pages/guides on citation, but this is an oddly specific type that I can't find an answer for. I read Socialist economics, and I noticed a section (Self-managed economy) that named a subsect of the topic plus its details and relevant authors, but didn't have a citation for any of those authors works on the subject, nor any kind of citation at all to learn about or confirm the information written. Would this be an appropriate place to add reference to those aformentioned authors flagship work on the subject for further reading/confirmation? Or is the mere mention of the authors considered enough? Thank you! TBlack7205 (talk) 21:05, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

@TBlack7205: Hello! Adding reliable sources does seem appropriate here, as virtually every fact on an article should be verifiable through inline citations (outside the initial paragraphs of an article, which summarize the rest of the article). However, in my view, the article's claim that the model was "most extensively" developed by them might require an independent reliable source attributing them as such. ObserveOwl (talk) 22:05, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much! TBlack7205 (talk) 22:05, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Dealing with identical references

Hello. I joined Wikipedia fairly recently and after discovering scripts I've been cleaning up articles, particularly those with duplicated references. The problem I have noticed is that sometimes two references are flagged as duplicated for having the same URL but they are not really the same; for example both refer to a book but one points to a different page. Or maybe they highlight different quotes, which are included in the reference. In that case, they clearly cannot be fixed by naming one reference and replacing the other with that. So what would be the best way to deal with this? Paprikaiser (talk) 21:23, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi, @Paprikaiser, great question! There's a few different ways to deal with that kind of issue. If it's just a matter of different page numbers, you can merge the references and then use an additional template like {{rp}} to mark the page number. Alternatively, you could use one of the varieties of shorted form references, such as with the {{sfn}} or {{harvnb}} templates. Those last forms in particular are good for quotes. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 21:40, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Paprikaiser (talk) 21:53, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Redirect from a category to another category

Hey there, are we allowed to redirect from one category to another category like: Category:Cat to Category:Cats? If we are allowed, then I will add a redirect to it, but if we are not allowed, then I will not add it. Thanks.

Some tea for you if you are thirsty!

thetree284 (talk and edits) 00:53, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

It can be done, but it requires some special tricks and typically shouldn't be done proactively or for such simple cases. See WP:CATRED. DMacks (talk) 01:31, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Citation date

So if am citing a website, in the access date field, do I put the date I've accessed the website as the current date in utc, or my local date/time? Justjourney (talk) 05:19, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Justjourney. Ideally UTC but don't worry if you miss it. Our citation documentation doesn't even mention the issue. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:23, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter If I find more information about the subject from the same source later on, do I change the access date? Justjourney (talk) 22:55, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

@Justjourney: If the citation is referenced where you add the information then it's best to update the access date. Certainly do it if there is any doubt whether the source already said it on the earlier access date. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:17, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Looking for someone to review an article

Hi - I am looking for someone who can reveiw an article that I have been working on. Previous two versions of the article were quick to be reviewed, and made changes according to the feedback. But the article is pending a review since more than a week now. Will be really glad if someone could review the article.

It is a biography of a living author, who has published a lot of caste issues, Ambedkar, Buddhism, and political theory in general.

Here is a link

Thanks Ips.delhi (talk) 07:46, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

lps.delhi Your draft was just reviewed. Note that we cannot guarantee a speedy review, the timeframe is given when it is submitted; it's usually weeks or even months, because this is a volunteer project with people doing what they can, when they can. 331dot (talk) 08:38, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Move infobox

Hi, is it possible to move an infobox to the left side of the page? Humaan316 (talk) 09:00, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

No, you can not change the alignment/position of an infobox. It's technically impossible. — 🌙Eclipse (she/they/all neos • talk • edits) 11:03, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Humaan316, welcome to the Teahouse. We don't do it in articles so there is no infobox parameter for it but it actually is possible by wrapping the infobox. Which infobox on which page is it about? PrimeHunter (talk) 13:12, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

@Humaan316: it is possible to move all infoboxes to the left, just for yourself (everyone else will still see the infoboxes on the right) by editing your user stylepage Special:MyPage/common.css and adding the following:

div.mw-parser-output .infobox { float: left!important; }

MKFI (talk) 08:20, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Tomas Kalnoky on the Gibson wiki?

I'm not sure if I should add Tomas Kalnoky to the Gibson page, since for a long time he used a Gibson ES-335. Some photos of him show the headstock of his guitar taped up. I'm really skeptical. Coretto958 (talk) 11:33, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

If you mean adding the name of Tomas Kalnoky to the List of Gibson players Wikipedia article, you would first need to find a reliable source for this. His article doesn't mention his ever using a Gibson. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:37, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Edit request notices just like edit notices?

(If this question is too technical for the Teahouse, feel free to point me to the proper venue)

An article is drawing attention mainly from IP editors desiring a change that has no consensus. This results in repeated edits that gets reverted and edit requests that get denied.

Our normal tool is to add an edit notice to help the editor not waste time (theirs and ours) editing a page.

However, if a page is protected in some way, some users will get a message saying something like "This page is protected so that only certain users can edit it. You can submit an edit request." without getting the edit notice (since they're not editing the page).

How do I convey the same "before you waste your time" message to users about to make edit requests as an edit notice would help someone about to make an edit?

Can I complement the existing standard "About edit requests" message to intercept edit requests before they are made, in a similar fashion to how edit notices are intended to intercept edits before they are made? If so, how?

Best Regards CapnZapp (talk) 13:38, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi CapnZapp. Please always be specific and include a relevant link. Can you give an example of a page which has an edit notice for that specific page but doesn't show it if you cannot edit the page due to protection? I still see Template:Editnotices/Page/1988 Hamas charter if I try to edit 1988 Hamas charter while logged out. If you are thinking of the biographies of living persons (BLP) notice on Raegan Revord then it's not a page-specific notice. There is no Template:Editnotices/Page/Raegan Revord. A BLP notice is automatically loaded on all BLP's in another way. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, PrimeHunter. An edit notice is meant to be displayed to users BEFORE they post edits. What can be displayed to users BEFORE they make edit requests? Edit notices won't show for users that can't edit pages. This in itself is perfectly normal, but how do we intercept edit requests in a similar way? CapnZapp (talk) 19:08, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

@CapnZapp: GIVE AN EXAMPLE of a page which has an edit notice for that specific page but doesn't show it if you cannot edit the page but try to start an edit. I gave an example which does show an edit notice, at least for me. If I log out then I cannot edit 1988 Hamas charter. If I click "View source", or manually add ?action=edit to the url, or enter the page at Special:EditPage, then I get a page which shows both Template:Editnotices/Page/1988 Hamas charter and a button to make an edit request. Do you not see the edit notice or are you referring to something else? If so, give a clear example with a link. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:30, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

I get it now. I need to put the edit notice both on the page (for edits) and on the talk page (for edit requests). CapnZapp (talk) 21:15, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Author doesn't want their works to be referenced on WP?

Hello! I recently left a note on User talk:SOCAMX about unexplained content removal, and @SOCAMX said "I don't want my book cited on this page". I'm assuming the editor is an author who does not want their works to be referenced on Wikipedia. What should be done in this situation? x RozuRozu • ^tea_cups 18:42, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

This is a case where involved parties needs to be informed of basic Wikipedia policies, like "Don't edit your own page" and "You can't control how notable literature you've written is used by Wikipedia". CapnZapp (talk) 19:12, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

User has also edited the article about themselves here... Frank McDonough. Theroadislong (talk) 19:28, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

I was just looking at this article. Take a look under "Other books"... only the first paragraph has a citation to a secondary source, the rest has no citations at all or is cited to the author's website. That can actually all be taken out, not necessarily because the author asked, but because it doesn't seem like it's actually discussed by secondary sources. MediaKyle (talk) 19:30, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

And again it's removing mention of this book. There can be a lot of reasons that an author wants to down-play one of their works. Most of those are things Wikipedia is likely to be agnostic toward. However it might not hurt to ask @SOCAMX: why he doesn't want his book mentioned here. Simonm223 (talk) 19:30, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't think there's any reason the author of a book should be able to decide who cites it for statements -- once you publish a book, you can't just stop people from reading it and talking about it. If he's saying it doesn't say the thing Wikipedia claims it says, then it would make sense to remove the citation, but if it does say what it cites, and is reliable, there's no reason to remove it. Mrfoogles (talk) 22:09, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

GUNREL

Can a source considered "generally unreliable" still be used to establish notability of a article for a non-controversial or overly contentious claim? Iljhgtn (talk) 20:45, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Iljhgtn, no. Coverage in reliable sources is required to establish notability. Cullen328 (talk) 22:27, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

What then, if anything can an "unreliable" source be used for that is different? And how is that further changed from "deprecated"? Iljhgtn (talk) 22:29, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the ping by the way. I often miss responses on my Teahouse questions when there is no ping. Iljhgtn (talk) 22:30, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn WP:DEPRECATED points out that there may be active filters preventing anyone from adding them as citations. Source reliability is a spectrum (see WP:SOURCEDEF) so a source unreliable for, say, establishing notability may be OK for other uses. WP:ABOUTSELF is a perfect example of that. As editors, we have to learn when to use what type of source, or ask for help at the reliable sources noticeboard. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:40, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Jewish leader

This template has had a full support for a merge for several months now. Who makes that change happen? Template:Infobox Jewish leader is to be merged into Template:Infobox religious biography, but months go by and it hasn't been done. Iljhgtn (talk) 22:02, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

And I do not believe that I have the permissions to do so even if I could. Iljhgtn (talk) 22:03, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

This link is what the closer did, it appears -- they're not required to actually do the merging. The template is in fact present on the Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Holding_cell page. I'm not sure how template merging actually works? But I assume that someone with the permissions to edit semi-protected articles has to replace the content of the template with essentially an invocation of the merge target template that translates the parameters; or people have to manually go and replace every use of the template with the merge target and then it's deleted. Probably the former is better. Mrfoogles (talk) 22:16, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't know. Iljhgtn (talk) 22:29, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Quotation marks

At this diff, I ran the citation bot on the article. It changed the quotation mark within the citation to another version. Is this normal? Justjourney (talk) 23:36, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't know whether it's normal for Citation bot to do it, but the change is a good one, so I wouldn't worry about it. A number of bots seem to make good changes that aren't part of their ostensible purpose. Deor (talk) 23:53, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

@Justjourney: Forgot to ping. Deor (talk) 23:56, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Justjourney (talk) 00:07, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

WP:HOAX and the sandbox

May I ask if WP:HOAX applies to the sandbox? I used to use it to store templates for me to use(so I did not have to search for hours for which template it was), and for some of the infoboxes I just simply wrote random stuff or filled it in with school-related inside jokes. Keep in mind, I have removed the school related inside jokes, my sandbox was never published(and now that I am more experienced, I don't need to use it to store templates) and in the near future I will likely repurpose it. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 00:52, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

If your sandbox page does not mimic a real article, and is related to Wikipedia(as your infboxes seems to be), I see no problems with your sandbox pages. 👍 Ca ^{talk to me!} 06:03, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Oh ok. I removed the infoboxes with inside jokes two years ago anyways, just be safe and because I no longer need them. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 06:24, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

My film is being released

My film is set to release on 18th April 2025 and it's very disappointing that as a maker, I have to rely on news portal as wikipedia is not helping me approve my article and yet I need to connect with people where Wikipedia can pay a part a bridge between me and the people. Why this point isn't considered by Wikipedia? Sushilranakoti (talk) 05:08, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a venue for promotion. Please read WP:NOT. Sarsenet (talk) 05:46, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

If you want a bridge between you and the people, use social media. WP is not that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:36, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Notability question

I'm trying to complete an article on Gerald L Burke (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:Gerald_L._Burke) who first discovered and refined the method of successfully using tantalum as an implant material in surgery and dentistry in 1940. His work was documented in detail in medical journals of the time, and Google Scholar turns up hundreds of references to his work in the years since. However my submission was rejected by the Wikipedia reviewer who said the man and his work was not notable. Google Scholar shows 216 primary journal articles mentioning Burke's discoveries and research. Should I include them in the article to establish notability? It seems like overkill, but I'm not an expert at Wikipedia. Here's Google Scholar's result pointing to the 216 journal articles: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Burke+GL.+the+corrosion+of+metals+in+tissues;+and+an+introduction+to+tantalum.+Can+Med+Assoc+J.+1940;43:125–8.+20321780++ . There's more on Burke's other research, but this one topic is about all I can handle for now. Henrilebec (talk) 08:24, 21 March 2025 (UTC)!

Henrilebec, no-one doubts that tantalum is used in surgery and that Burke originated that use, see Tantalum#Surgical_uses. What is missing from your draft is sources that discuss Burke himself. Maproom (talk) 17:31, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Yup. Answers are the same as the ones in the November 2024 Teahouse and AfC help desk (AHD) posts, as well as the more granular January 2025 AHD thread on this draft. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:57, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Is this a requirement to establish notability? Like, information about his personal life, etc? He appears to have been a rather private individual, devoted to extraordinary research projects. There is some information on his work during the war, how his parents were killed by the Germans, etc. He spent his spare time(?) helping repair war-wounded, amputees, etc. Would that help? Henrilebec (talk) 08:43, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

Request for Review: Draft:Areen Masrour Barzani

Hello,

I recently revised my draft **Draft:Areen Masrour Barzani** based on feedback I received from the previous reviewer. I have improved the sources, added inline citations, and ensured that the content meets Wikipedia’s guidelines.

Since there are many pending drafts, I was wondering if any experienced editor could take a look at my submission and provide feedback or review it if possible.

Thank you so much for your time and help!

Best regards, Daniah Albanaa (talk) 08:39, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Daniah Albanaa Hello. You have resubmitted your draft and it is pending. Drafts are reviewed in no particular order by volunteers, doing what they can, when they can. Please be patient- in essence you are asking to "jump the line" and be reviewed ahead of thousands of other drafts; everyone would like their draft reviewed next, but we can't treat you different than anyone else. 331dot (talk) 08:42, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@Daniah Albanaa I am not an AfC reviewer but would suggest you 1) remove external links in the main text (see WP:EL), or convert them to citations that verify details about Barzani. 2) Place the section on early life immediately after the WP:LEAD. 3) Remove bolding per MOS:BOLD. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:24, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Tables - Specifically how do I make an illustrated table or list

Over a decade ago I made this list with some students, and some anonymous help, https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/List_of_university_art_museums_and_galleries_in_New_York_State

I want to make another similar list, but i want it to be illustrated. So, a sortable list, with illustrations. I would also like it to be numbered.

Are there examples I could look at? I swear I have seen some, like buildings lists or something... Vhfs (talk) 09:39, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@Vhfs List of cryptids? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:00, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Have I demonstrated notability?

My draft https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:Esteban_Campod%C3%B3nico was declined since the references did not show that the subject is sufficiently notable. The article as originally submitted only included 2 references. There are not a lot of references about him since he died in 1938. I have added references for a total of 8. He should be considered notable because an annual prize of USD 50,000 in his name is awarded each year. He was also a scholar of international reputation (as evidenced by the obituary by a US colleague published in a journal of the AMA shortly after his death, reference 4). Reference 1 is a 528-page biography of him, indicating notability.

Have I sufficiently demonstrated notability? If not, what else do I need to provide? RobertMoniot (talk) 15:13, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@RobertMoniot The usual criteria for determining if the person whose name is used for an award makes that person notable is if we have an article about the award itself here: Nobel prize would be an obvious example. I don't think that is the case for Draft:Esteban Campodónico. On the other hand, you have now shown that he was himself awarded several honors where we do have articles, so I think you are now likely to be OK if you re-submit the draft (but I'm not a reviewer). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:22, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@RobertMoniot: If there's a 500-page biography of him, then he's notable. I added a handful of "citation needed" tags. Can you add sources for the sentences with "citation needed" tags and then I'll accept it? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:52, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@BeanieFan11 will do, thank you. RobertMoniot (talk) 19:16, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Category of museum

Hello! I would like to ask what is the difference between Category:Types of museums and Category:Museums by type? I feel confused and I think one of the categories should be redirected Badak Jawa (talk) 17:33, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Badak Jawa, welcome to the Teahouse. Category:Types of museums is for general articles about a whole type of museum, e.g. Architecture museum. Category:Museums by type is for subcategories with individual museums of a specific type, e.g. Category:Architecture museums. Every entry in Category:Museums by type is under "Subcategories". There is no "Pages" heading like in Category:Types of museums. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:57, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

How do I find other people to read foreign sources?

I'm trying to edit Ivan Aleksandrovich Flerov but all of the sources are in Russian and I don't trust the machine translation. BadEditor93 (talk) 20:18, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@BadEditor93 We have a category Category:Translators ru-en, so you could ask one of these editors for help via their talk page(s). Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:24, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Notability

 Courtesy link: Draft:Ellen Roy Herzfelder

Hello, Teahouse! I have been working on the draft for the former politician. She was Secretary of the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs for Governor Mitt Romney. The draft was declined with the comment saying doesn't pass WP:NPOL. She has received significant coverage from Independent reliable sources. WP:POLOUTCOMES says "Sub-cabinet officials (assistant secretary, commissioner, etc.) are usually considered notable". She meets WP:GNG, If I was to push it, she technically counts for WP:NPOL too. The Governor of Massachusetts appoints the Secretaries, even though they aren't members of legislative bodies, they can bring bills and such.

This office is notable. There are multiple article for Cabinet member of politicians. (Rick Sullivan, Edward A. Flynn, John Cogliano, Jennifer Davis Carey, Thomas G. Kelley, etc.) Thank you, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 21:06, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@CF-501 Falcon An autopatrolled editor has now moved this to mainspace. My only observation is that you have one deprecated source, the Mail online. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:13, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Just saw Silver seren moved it. Thank you for pointing out the deprecated source, it gave me a message but didn't tell me which one it was. I will replace it, Thank you! CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 21:46, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@CF-501 Falcon I suggest you install the script described at User:Headbomb/unreliable. It highlights sources according to their reliability (or not) and quickly shows the ones you should definitely worry about. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:01, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Huh, never heard of it. Thank you, I will try to add it. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 22:07, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

How does a draft move to being published?

Hello, I'm pretty new here- hoping someone can review a draft I submitted for https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:CitrusAd and let me know if there is anything else I need to do or what the process is from here. Thank you in advance. TLN27 (talk) 21:23, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@TLN27 You can use the process described at WP:AFCSUBMIT to submit your draft for review. If you did that now, it would rapidly be declined because your sources are not specific. See Help:Referencing for beginners. By policy, the citations must allow readers to verify the information you have added. I suspect that most of the ones you have used are from the company itself, so will not establish its notability. That's always the issue that newcomers here stumble over. See also the essay WP:BACKWARDS. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:34, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

TLN27, 12 of your 14 references lack URLs or full bibliographic information. One that does have a URL is to the company website, which is of no value in establishing notability. Please read the Notability guideline for companies carefully. Cullen328 (talk) 22:54, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Images for Company Articles

So I have been adding logos to Canadian company articles, but I've noticed something else missing in these articles. An image to go along with the company. And what I am curious about is if I am able to screenshot a company location, headquarters, etc on Google Maps to add to the article? Liam9287 (talk) 22:58, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

One problem about this though is that when you look closely on Google Maps, there is a small watermark (when you are on street view) and that would look bad on a Wikipedia article Liam9287 (talk) 23:03, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@Liam9287: Hi Liam9287, and welcome to the Teahouse. What I would recommend is to go to the company's website, right click on the logo, save it, and upload it under a non-free license if it meets WP:FREER, which is the part of the non-free content policy that says that non-free images should not be used if there can be a free replacement. You can do this using the file upload wizard and selecting "non-free". Hope this helps! Regards, Grumpylawnchair (talk) 04:08, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

Liam9287, with regards to Google Street View, the short answer is "no". Any image that you find on the internet is presumed to be restricted by copyright, unless you have evidence in writing that it is in the public domain or is freely licensed in a way acceptable on Wikipedia. Google's image use policy is too restrictive for use on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 04:27, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

The finer points of under/overlinking to major geographical features

I need input from experienced editor(s) regarding overlinking and underlinking policy as per MOS:OL. Specifically, I am trying to determine when is it valid to link to "major geographical features, countries, settlements"? Policy states these should "generally" NOT be linked. My understanding is that one exception would be if the target is strongly associated with the article topic. Thus it is valid if London links to England, or Canada links to North America. But an article on The Beatles should NOT link to London (but ok to link to Liverpool). If this is better asked elsewhere (Village Pump?) please advise. Thanks! Jp2207 (talk) 01:07, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

I agree with your interpretation. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:38, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

Resolving a broken reference

Hello! I have been working on resolving some broken reference names in various articles, and have encountered an issue I'm unsure how to resolve.

In the article Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria, there are two broken reference names in the Crovalimab section, which are defined in the Crovalimab article, but outside the section that is taken as an excerpt in the PNH article.

Would it be best to move the definition of the reference to the section that is an excerpt in the other article, or could that cause issues on other pages that might take an excerpt from the Crovalimab article? Or is there a way to link the references from the original article, or some other option that would help resolve the broken reference names at the PNH article? NovaHyperion (talk) 02:02, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi @NovaHyperion and thank you for fixing broken references. This can be a major headache with using excerpts. There isn't a way to link to the references in the source article. The simplest solution is to move the full definition of the named references that are giving the problem into the section that is being excerpted. (I usually mutter imprecations against the whole transclusion system while doing this.) I have also used the solution of copying the full references into the target article as list-defined references. StarryGrandma (talk) 04:20, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

@StarryGrandma: Thank you! I had once previously moved the full citation to section being excerpted, but figured I should check to make sure that was the recommended strategy before I went ahead and broke something.

In the interest of generalizing this issue beyond this one article, is there a way to see/search for all pages that take an extract from a certain article? If fixing a reference for one page causes a broken reference on a different page, it seems like list-defined references would be preferable. NovaHyperion (talk) 07:18, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't know how to search for that. You might ask at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). There are various methods for doing such transclusions. See Help:Transclusion#Selective transclusion. StarryGrandma (talk) 08:25, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

Okay, noted. Thanks so much for your advice, I appreciate it. NovaHyperion (talk) 09:49, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

May contain irrelevant references

what's the point of the box at the top of a section saying "this article may contain irrelevant references to popular culture". If they are irrelevant, why have them there at all? It just seems to me to be a cop-out for lazy editing or research?? I've seen it in the entry for Charles Bukowski SRC0933 (talk) 09:42, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

Non-English content

A user has added non-English content to an article without a reference, claiming "a name written in its original language doesn't need a source". When challenged, the user has added an elementary grammar book in that language claiming it supports the content added. Does a source need to be provided for a name written in its original language? Mugsalot (talk) 10:26, 22 March 2025 (UTC)