Wikipedia:Teahouse

TooManyFingers, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

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

Help Wikipedia

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

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

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

There are currently 1 user(s) asking for help via the {{Help me}} template

[Teahouse volunteers: If you have helped such a person, please don't forget to deactivate the request template.]

Tornado Emergency Preparation...

....How can I State in the Tornado article about the use of goggles, like those used in machine and woodworking, lab work for preventing shrapnel generated by tornadoes from causing blindness? I have seen a article on a sister site called WikiHow that in the reader tips on surviving a tornado, that 🥽 s are to be used, along with a 🪖 to prevent injury in a tornado. The Tornado article appears to be protected due to repeated protection requests due to vandalism at the timestamp shown here, so I had to come here. Also, I am expecting two more severe storm/ tornado outbreaks. I had one real recently in which the Dominator and the TIVs were in my area. The Dominator was in Kirksville, MO. Can this be used in any articles?~2026-16963-29 (talk) 06:59, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

If you're saying that WikiHow is a "sister site" of this one, then what do you mean by "sister site"? In order to add material to an article here, you have to cite the reliable, published source(s) from which you've derived the material: your (or my) personal observation counts for nothing. -- Hoary (talk) 07:04, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome! I hope you stay safe from any tornadoes.

On Wikipedia, every claim (should) be supported by a reliable source (you can read more at WP:Golden rule). Do you know of any sources which mention people using goggles as protection against debris or a risk of being blinded by such storms? GGOTCC 07:12, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

The Weather Channel mentions 🪖 s and other safety aids, during their tornado/ storm explanations on how to survive these storms,so 🥽 s are implied if not stated. Imagine flying debris in "your" house when a tornado and/ or severe storm hits it. I just had to deal with that in general nearly a week ago when my area had two 🌪️s in the area and multiple severe 🌩️s, and found out we are expecting more of this. Luckily my place did not get hit at all. A safety official said that I had the right idea to handle this kind of thing. ~2026-16963-29 (talk) 07:26, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

@Hory, WikiHow is similar to this one in that one can contribute "How To" articles on that site and readers can contribute tips of all kinds that, once verified by their people, will appear on the article, such as how to make a paper plane, or , in this case, how to survive a tornado.~2026-16963-29 (talk) 07:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

We can't include things in our articles that are "implied [but] not stated," that contravenes our policy on original research.

In general, our article on tornadoes should not include advice on surviving a tornado; we're an encyclopedia, not a how-to guide; that's precisely what WikiHow is for. Athanelar (talk) 13:18, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Also, wikiHow isn’t Wikipedia’s sister site. However, it uses a forked version of MediaWiki. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 07:29, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Did not know that.~2026-16963-29 (talk) 07:34, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-16963-29, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see WP:NOTHOWTO. ColinFine (talk) 15:41, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

yeah wiki just means "...a collaborative website that allows users to easily create, edit, and link pages directly from a web browser" Goetia (talk) 01:17, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-16963-29 "Can this be used in any article?". Can what be used? If you mean the fact that you are expecting two more tornados in your area, no, that is not encyclopedic. You wouldn't see that printed in Encyclopedia Britannica, for example. David10244 (talk) 08:06, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Reverting without explanation (and not much honesty either)

I asked this before, and it was archived rather promptly. How does Wikipedia enforce its rules? Are there administrators or ombudsmen or something?

How does it deal with very religious topics, like "Jesus?"

I have asked for a source for single sentence about five times under the "Talk" tab. No sources have been provided. I also provided evidence that the sentence is, at least in part, very disputable. Then, I made a 2-3 word change to the sentence, which was reverted without explanation. I again asked for sources, several times, under the "Talk" tab, and none were provided. I made a different change to the sentence, taking out the most clearly unsourced and disputable parts--about half a sentence. It was again reverted without an honest explanation (the given, false, explanation was that it had not been discussed). The basic tactic is to ignore most attempts to discuss, and then revert the change claiming there isn't a consensus. Mevsherd (talk) 05:36, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

There are indeed "administrators", Mevsherd. Wikipedia deals with very religious topics just as it deals with religion-irrelevant topics: according to its policies. Wikipedia has extensive documentation of all of this, but you'll have to put a little effort into finding what you're after. What and where is this single, problematic sentence? - Hoary (talk) 05:55, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Jesus. On a more mundane note, why do I randomly get this message: "Preceding unsigned comment added by...." when usually (like above) it automatically appends my name after the comment? Mevsherd (talk) 06:36, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

The thread is "Literal vs. notional". You attempt to discuss a matter; however unsatisfactory the response is -- I shan't pretend to have read the thread, and don't propose to read it -- you do get a response. As for your "more mundane" matter, perhaps you are clicking on "Reply" when replying; my imperfect memory tells me that yes, this automatically attributes and time-stamps the new comment. By contrast, I'm editing "source" and clicking not on "Reply" (which isn't even available to me) but instead on "Edit"; this does not attribute or time-stamp my comment. (I just hit ⟨~⟩ four times in a row -- or, on occasion, forget to do so, whereupon you might, but won't necessarily, get an additional little message, saying what I omitted to say.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:01, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Some feedback on your help: it isn't helping. Comments like "I shan't pretend to have read the thread, and don't propose to read it " don't help. There was no response. Typing stuff that doesn't address someone's concern is not responding to the concern. The request, made repeatedly, was for sources. None have been provided. I discussed everything in "Talk" first, was mostly ignored, and then my edits were reverted, also without truthful explanation. How do I get an administrator to enforce the rules on sourcing? Mevsherd (talk) 15:21, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Mevsherd, I am an administrator. Administrators have no special powers to resolve or adjudicate content disputes. If an adminstrator comments on a content matter, they are speaking as just another editor. There are various forms of Dispute resolution available for you to use. Cullen328 (talk) 04:51, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

As I've said a million times, or at least ten, the rules are being broken. I said: "enforce the rules on sourcing." Not a content dispute. The meaning of calling something a "rule" is that you "resolve or adjudicate" violations. If you're not going to do that, don't call them "rules." Call them "hopes."

Here is a summary of the "Talk" tab on the "Jesus" article, regarding a statement about what "most Christians" believe.

Me: "Is there a source for this?" An editor tells me to look in a different section. I say I looked and didn't find a source.

Me: I provide a source that contradicts the sentence in question. It is low-quality, but better than nothing, and I don't propose adding it to the article, only that it shows the statement is disputed. There are responses which provide no sources. I reply: "I wasn't actually proposing it as a source, I was asking for a source for what's already there." No source is provided.

Me: "I think the answer to my initial question is that there is no source for that statement." No source is provided.

Me: "I looked at the sources down in 'Religious Perspectives' and there is no source..." No response.

Me: "I propose changing the sentence to something like 'Most Christian denominations view...' or 'Christian doctrine states...'" No response.

Me: I make the change I proposed, and it is reverted.

Me: "A survey contradicting the article...." with a link. No source is provided.

Me: "I can't find a source for the statement." No response.

Me: "Can somebody provide sources for the sentence in question?" No response.

Me: I take out the last part of the sentence, which doesn't even have a weak source and is probably factually false. It is instantly reverted with a not-very-honest explanation.

Me: "The request, made about 6 times now, is for sources on what most Christians believe. None have been provided, yet people are reverting the edits I made that I discussed first here, and claiming I didn't discuss them first here."

(One of the reverting editors posted some comments on my homepage as well.)

So, I ask for help here, and Hoary unhelpfully replies "I shan't pretend to have read the thread, and don't propose to read it " and you misrepresent everything I've said as a "content dispute."

If that depicts a "content dispute" and not a violation on the rules for sources and consensus, then help me understand why. Mevsherd (talk) 17:57, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no firm rules. Hi, I'm Max!|Talk to me here.|See what I've done here. 23:15, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

So, if the consensus on an article is to break the rules, what happens? That page "Dispute resolution" does not help here. It is about discussion and resolving content disputes through an interactive process. I asked for a source a million times, and none was provided. I proposed a change under the "Talk" tab and nobody responded and then my edit was reverted with a demand I propose changes first. Do you enforce rules on sourcing and consensus, or not? Mevsherd (talk) 15:30, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

@Mevsherd, I’m happy to walk you through the dispute resolution process. What few sentences do you find the most egregious? Dw31415 (talk) 03:41, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

On the "Brett Kavanaugh": "Three other women also accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, one of whom later recanted her story."

On "Jesus": "Most Christians consider Jesus to be the incarnation of God the Son and the awaited messiah, or Christ, a descendant of the Davidic line prophesied in the Old Testament."

To be honest, I've concluded the other editors have agendas and are not sincerely interacting, and the summary I gave above is a good indicator. So, I wonder if Wikipedia actually enforces rules on sourcing, and if not, why it calls them "rules" at all. Mevsherd (talk) 22:39, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, there are enforcement mechanisms, but they are slow, messy, and frequently disappointing like you might expect from any volunteer-driven effort. Please pick one of the two above that you’d like my help on. Dw31415 (talk) 22:46, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Jesus. Mevsherd (talk) 22:48, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

@Hoary You actually reply by editing source? But the "reply" button is so handy! David10244 (talk) 00:48, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Your previous query is at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1291#Reverting without explanation, with a link to further discussion. The query was closed when that link was added, after you had taken the advice to start the additional discussion, and automatically archived three days later, which is the agreed standard for this page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:38, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

WP:NMUSIC criterion 1?

I've been working on Draft:Mike Rowe (musician), a British session keyboardist who was a member of Oasis, Sheryl Crow's touring band, and Noel Gallagher's High Flying Birds. The draft has been declined three times for insufficient independent sourcing.

My strongest source is a dedicated artist profile in Keyboard magazine (Vol. 35, No. 4, April 2009, p. 13, ISSN 0730-0158), titled "Mikey Rowe: Retro Rock with Sheryl Crow" by Jon Regen. Rowe is the sole subject, with a photograph of him with Sheryl Crowe, biographical detail, and extended quotes about his career and playing approach. It's a full-page profile in the magazine's "Keyspace: Artists" section.

I also have 19 page-specific citations in Paolo Hewitt's Forever the People (Boxtree, 2000), a published book documenting the Oasis Be Here Now tour, plus mentions in Vanity Fair, NME, Music Week, and two published biographies of Noel Gallagher himself.

My questions:

Does the Keyboard profile satisfy WP:NMUSIC criterion 1 (subject of a non-trivial work in a notable publication)?

Would criterion 9 (prominent member of multiple independently notable ensembles) apply here, given his credited roles in Oasis, Sheryl Crow's band, and NGHFB? Is there anything else I should be doing with the sources I have?

Thank you for any guidance. Fax&Figures (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2026 (UTC) Fax&Figures (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

British keyboardist/producer

credited on 40+ Wikipedia articles...how to establish notability for their own page?

Hello, I'm working on Draft:Mike Rowe (musician), a British session keyboardist who has been declined three times at AfC for insufficient independent sourcing. I'd appreciate guidance before attempting a fourth submission. The subject: Mike "Mikey" Rowe has been a credited member of Oasis (1996–2002; confirmed for the 2025 reunion tour per NME), a touring member of Sheryl Crow's band (1999–2010), and keyboardist/musical director of Noel Gallagher's High Flying Birds (2011–present). He is currently credited or mentioned on over 40 existing Wikipedia articles, including pages for Noel Gallagher, Be Here Now, Rattle That Lock (David Gilmour), In Your Dreams (Stevie Nicks), ÷ (Ed Sheeran), SuperHeavy (Mick Jagger), and four Stereophonics albums — all added by independent editors, not by me. My strongest source: Keyboard magazine (Vol. 35, No. 4, April 2009, p. 13, ISSN 0730-0158) published a dedicated artist profile titled "Mikey Rowe: Retro Rock with Sheryl Crow" by Jon Regen. Rowe is the sole subject, with a photograph, biographical detail, and extended quotes. It is in the magazine's "Keyspace: Artists" section and runs approximately half a page. The full issue is viewable here (page 13 of the PDF). Other independent secondary sources:

• Paolo Hewitt, Forever the People (Boxtree, 2000, ISBN 978-0752271866): Published account of the Oasis Be Here Now world tour by Paolo Hewitt, a notable music journalist. Rowe is mentioned on 19 pages across all 5 chapters, with descriptions of his musical contributions, his role on stage, and interactions with band members. Page-specific citations are provided.

• Two NME articles: (1) Mark Beaumont (August 2024) describes Rowe as having "a glittering CV featuring work with Mick Jagger, Sheryl Crow, Stevie Nicks and, yes, Oasis"; (2) Laura Molloy (May 2025) names Rowe at the Oasis reunion rehearsals.

• Other mentions: Vanity Fair (2006), Music Week (2016), Decider (2018), two published Gallagher biographies (Randall 2012, Harrison 2025), Emm Gryner's The Healing Power of Singing (ECW Press, 2021), plus concert reviews in Scottish Music Network and At The Barrier (both 2023). My questions:

1. Does the Keyboard magazine profile satisfy WP:NMUSIC criterion 1 (subject of a non-trivial published work or feature in a notable publication)? It is a dedicated profile where Rowe is the sole subject, but it is half a page rather than a multi-page feature.

1. Would WP:NMUSIC criterion 9 apply (prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles)? Rowe is a credited member of three groups that each have their own Wikipedia articles: Oasis, Sheryl Crow's band, and Noel Gallagher's High Flying Birds.

1. The subject is already mentioned on 40+ Wikipedia articles by independent editors. Does this carry any weight in establishing notability, or is it purely a sourcing question? # Given three declines, is there a better path than simply resubmitting — such as WP:AFC/R, requesting a specific reviewer, or another approach? Thank you for any guidance.

Fax&Figures (talk) 15:16, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

@Fax&Figures The Hewitt book would give you 1 good SIG COV but you need at least 2 for GNG. Also you can't say he's on 19 pages - that's not encyclopaedic - that's you trying to making the case that there's sig cov instead of letting the source speak for itself. If there's 19 pages of coverage, then you'd have facts to add to the article that the source would be a citation for. The DISCOGs sources aren't helping you. The lead could better highlight the criteria you're relying on. The Gallagher sources are clearly related and therefore not independent. The NME and Keyboard article sound promising but I wonder if this is the case of burying the lede where your article is drowning under unencyclopedic content. In my experience a good length for an AfC article is about 500 words. I can have a look at it but I'm travelling so it might be a couple of weeks. Mme Maigret (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, this is really helpful feedback. I'll trim the article significantly, remove the Discogs-heavy citations, and let the Hewitt, Keyboard, and NME sources do the work. I'd be very grateful if you could take a look when you have time...no rush at all. Fax&Figures (talk) 08:45, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

review

Help please — I'm lost and don't know what I'm doing 😊

Dear Wikipedia Reviewer,

I hope you don't mind me writing to you like this. My name is Lulee and I am 75 years old. I am not very good with computers — I think that's pretty obvious because the first time I tried to submit my draft, I accidentally submitted it completely blank. I didn't even know how that happened. My grandkids would have a good laugh at that one.

I wrote a page about a character I created called Cristina Lard. She came from a little pink pig bathing sponge my daughter gave me, and she turned into something much bigger — a whole series of children's books about kids with disabilities. It's my life's work, and it means the world to me to share it.

The problem is, I honestly cannot figure out where to look to see if my draft has been reviewed, or if it was declined, or if I need to resubmit it. I've been clicking around and staring at the screen, but everything looks the same to me. I don't know where the buttons are or what the notices mean. I feel silly asking, but I really do need a little help.

If my draft was declined, I completely understand — I'm still learning how all of this works. I would just appreciate it so much if someone could point me in the right direction so I know what to fix and how to try again. I promise I'll do my very best.

Thank you so much for your time and your patience with me. I know you're a volunteer and you don't have to help, which makes it even more special that you do.

With gratitude, Lulee 🌸 StoriesOfBelonging (talk) 19:01, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello. Your draft is in your sandbox, you may click on User:StoriesOfBelonging/sandbox to access it. It has been reviewed, the reviewer left comments on the draft. 331dot (talk) 19:09, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

this is what I see

This draft appears to be blank. If you have not written your text yet, please add your content before resubmitting. If you did write the text, it may be hidden by a formatting error. Please check the "Edit" tab to ensure your text is not inside a comment tag. StoriesOfBelonging (talk) 19:35, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

That has now been fixed. Please try the above link again.

However, before you resubmit it, you should know that articles are only published if they meet the guide at WP:42. We need evidence that people—independent of you—have written about the subject. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:40, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! I've moved your draft to the page Draft:Cristina Lard. You may edit it from there. When you're ready to submit it, you may press the "Resubmit" button on this page. Cheers! BSH (talk) - (they/them) 19:53, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @StoriesOfBelonging, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid that what I'm going to tell you is probably not very welcome.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source.

It follows that unless several people wholly unconnected with you have written at some length specifically about your character, (and been published in reliable sources), then there is no chance of a Wikipedia article about the character, and you are probably wasting your time trying to create one.

Furthermore, even if an article about Cristina Lard is possible (in Wikipedia jargon, that the character is notable), it is inadvisable, and incredibly difficult, for you to be the person who writes the article. Having found the required sources (which meet all of the conditions in the golden rule you would then need to effectively forget everything you knew about the books and the character (and yourself) and write a summary of what those independent sources said.

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

I'm guessing, from what you said above, that you want to write this article in order to bring your books to the notice of more people, specifically because of your noble aim of supporting children with disabilities. I'm afraid that Wikipedia regards that purpose as promotion, which is forbidden, irrespective of how noble the aim may be. ColinFine (talk) 09:26, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

@StoriesOfBelonging As Andy has pointed you to the document with the link "42" (please click on that and read what's there), you'll see that what you write needs sources. Your draft has no sources. David10244 (talk) 00:57, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm hoping for some guidance on a declined AfC submission.

I recently submitted Draft:Adams, Cameron & Co., Realtors and received a decline with the note "all local press." I don't disagree with the reviewer's statement that much of it is local press but that's what we have along with a citation by local city government. The local press in this case is the Daytona Beach News-Journal, the local paper since 1883, now a Gannett-owned publication, and the coverage includes three dedicated feature articles written by named staff reporters spanning 46 years, which I hope speaks to sustained independent interest rather than routine coverage.

The subject is a real estate brokerage founded in 1963 that has been the dominant firm in its market for over 40 years. My sources include: A 1977 news article from the Daytona Beach News-Journal (a Gannett publication) reporting the company's merger as a significant business event Dedicated feature articles about the company from the same paper in 2013 and 2023, written by named staff reporters An official government proclamation from the City of Ormond Beach issued in 2023 A 2017 feature focused on the company's community role

My question is whether coverage in a Gannett-owned regional newspaper — including three dedicated feature articles spanning 46 years — can satisfy the independent reliable source requirement for a regional business that has simply not attracted national trade press coverage. I want to understand whether the issue is the sources themselves or whether the article needs to be rewritten to better demonstrate notability.

I have disclosed my conflict of interest on my talk page. Any guidance is appreciated. JJA-93-Nole (talk) 22:59, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

If your business is a regional business that has simply not attracted national trade press coverage, then it may simply be time to consider that your business, like the vast majority of businesses in the world, does not meet our notability requirements; in this case, WP:NCORP.

The notability requirements are designed to exclude, because we are neither a directory of companies nor an indiscriminate collection of information. Your job as an article creator is not to try to stretch and hammer whatever coverage you do have to technically meet the requirement, your job is to determine whether you can find the necessary coverage to meet our deliberately quite strict criteria for inclusion.

Local press is normally regarded as insufficiently independent to establish notability without being backed up by less regional coverage; why? Well, because local press obviously has a vested interest in covering locally 'notable' matters; like local businesses, local events etc; but if nobody from the rest of the country or world has taken interest in your company, that's generally a good indication that we don't need to take interest in it either.

I want to understand whether the issue is the sources themselves or whether the article needs to be rewritten to better demonstrate notability. Contrary to what the AI chatbot you seem to be asking questions to is telling you, (apologies if I'm wrong, but your question here follows a boilerplate formula we get from AI a lot) the problem is never how the article is written. If you have provided sources that demonstrate sufficient notability, then the reviewer will know that. If your draft has been declined on notability grounds, it means the sources you have provided are not sufficient. Athanelar (talk) 23:44, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

@JJA-93-Nole I don't see how a real-estate brokerage is important enough (or notable enough) to warrant publishing in an encyclopedia. How many real-estate brokerages appear in the Encyclopedia Britannica? David10244 (talk) 13:43, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

I would agree that no brokerage is in Encyclopedia Britannica. I use Wikipedia everyday precisely because it has information that I would never have found as a kid looking in the Encyclopedia for book report content. So much more is available today.

More importantly, I also have to agree that it may not be sufficiently notable for inclusion. I saw similar companies and thought I would include this one as much for the legacy and the impartance to the local community. However, I certainly wouldn't think it is important to everyone. Only those who might be looking for this type of information.

That being said, I disclosed my impartial information, did my best to present it in the format that I read up on, and thought it was relevant considering the local market. However, I'm fine to concede defeat and accept that the community doesn't think it warrants the page. JJA-93-Nole (talk) 21:11, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

@JJA-93-Nole I understand what you are saying. However, there are lots of articles on Wikipedia that probably shouldn't be here, and second, if I were looking for a realtor, I would use a search engine (or ask friends) instead of an encyclopedia. The "yellow pages" were a good resource for that kind of thing, but I think those are mostly gone... David10244 (talk) 01:03, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Error Resolution

I have received an error message saying I am a bot. I am not a bot, but have downloaded several artworks for personal use only. I can not now download any more. Advice on how this could be resolved will be appreciated ~2026-25842-44 (talk) 05:25, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

About how many artworks have you downloaded? -- Hoary (talk) 05:32, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Over a period of a few months now, probably in the region of 30,000. ~2026-25842-44 (talk) 05:33, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

I have been educating myself and want to be able to look through the works offline. ~2026-25842-44 (talk) 05:35, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, that's gonna be a problem. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 06:01, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

None of the works are in copyright, all deceased for over 100 years, sometimes several hundred. ~2026-25842-44 (talk) 06:12, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

The volume is still an issue. Server load is a thing, if nothing else. Those protections exist for a reason. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 06:17, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Would it reset after some days, or would I be permanently unable to download anything else? ~2026-25842-44 (talk) 06:20, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

If "several" may refer to "the region of 30,000", Wiktionary may need updating. Onomasiological matters aside, for what the limit is, and whether/how it might reset, etc, perhaps the place to ask is c:Commons:Village pump/Technical. -- Hoary (talk) 08:05, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

We'll also need to consult basic math re: the plausibility of manually downloading that kind of volume without using any kind of automation that would trip these safeguards. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 07:10, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I do have an account, just have not reset forgotten log in details ~2026-25842-44 (talk) 06:14, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Who's starting the new list?

[1] 🙃 ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 05:50, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia seems never to have had that (miscapitalized) article, but nevertheless tries to help, wondering: Did you mean: kennedy family abandoning woman to their face -- Hoary (talk) 08:35, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

It would indeed be noteworthy if the Kennedys were unconcerned about a woman's face but the word in the quote was actually "fate" ;-) Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:55, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, Mike Turnbull. I know. (Such countersuggestions often use words that the questioners could have misspelled.) -- Hoary (talk) 10:13, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Gotta love when the "suggestions" don't actually exist either. So very helpful. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 06:41, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

So we don't actually have a Kennedy family abandoning women to their fate page?

I mean surely we should redirect it at least? Jon Stewart asked us to after all. Serendi^podous 09:16, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

You have over 78,000 edits; any particular reason you've posted to the Teahouse and not the Help Desk? You are free to try listening to Jon Stewart and see what happens. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Because they're replying to my tongue in cheek post and no one here is actually in need of any help? ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 06:35, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

If you can find sufficient reliable sources about the topic as a topic (not just about instances of it) to establish that the topic is notable, you're welcome to create an article about it. ColinFine (talk) 10:24, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

I suspect the notability requirements for WP:Stand-alone lists would be easier to meet, but a humorous essay is probably more realistic, if anyone actually cares to attempt it. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 06:40, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I have to admit I checked for it too... Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

MOS:SANDWICH keeps happening

Im so confused, why the MOS:SANDWICH when I put a picture in an article keeps happening? I did "[[File:image name|thumb|left|text]]" I copied how Makemake's article's image is placed, IvalTheBoneless suggested me to do that, but when I tried to fix that in Actaea's article it even made the whole image went into a whole different section, so I just used the "<gallery>" thing but images will be centered in an awkward way Homlos (Message me bro) 08:37, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

And without saying the left or right part, the sandwich problems is still there, which should be why Thirtyfourninety reverted me in 174567 Varda's article Homlos (Message me bro) 08:40, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Seemingly about Actaea (moon) and 174567 Varda. -- Hoary (talk) 08:42, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes Homlos (Message me bro) 08:43, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm not an expert, but I think there's two things happening here. One: because the infobox is on the right, any picture aligned to the right has to be below the infobox, so it's pushing them all into other sections. Two: because the infobox is tall, any images aligned to the left are going to sandwich text between them and the infobox. Basically the right half of the sandwich extends through most of the article so any images are either going to be the left half of the sandwich, or they're going to go below the infobox.

As far as fixing it, there's a couple things that might help. Personally, I don't think the image of the hubble is particularly necessary when it's not the subject of the article. The other images are much more relevant, so removing it wouldn't hurt the article. The comparison of object sizes is large, but even at that size it's not very readable. Reducing it to a more typical size would leave more room for text. And finally, expanding the content of the article would give more breathing room for the images and infobox. Because the infobox is so big, it really takes up a lot of the overall space, making formatting tricky. More (relevant) text would mean the sections start further down and the images don't have to compete with one another.

It's possible there's a way to arrange the current images and text in a pleasant way, but I couldn't figure it out. dylansan (talk) 12:08, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know Homlos (Message me bro) 12:19, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Hope it was helpful. Don't forget too that you can preview your changes before publishing them to see if it looks right. Because the arrangement of images and text depends on the size of your browser window, it's worth doing a preview and changing the size of your browser to see if anything breaks. There's also mobile, which is harder to test for, but is worth considering. dylansan (talk) 12:33, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

I edit on mobile and on my phone regularly, that's why it's hard so I'm considering to use the desktop mode, but the things looked way too complex and I feel like an old man first time seeing a computer, on the phone everything looks perfectly fine Homlos (Message me bro) 13:56, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

@My planet is Homlos: If you have problems with left-aligned images being pushed down then see Template:Stack and note you may have to place the code of right-aligned elements together for that method to work. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:20, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Formatting from mobile and not checking the results on desktop will bite you in the butt every time. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 06:44, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Definitely a case of WP:INFOBOXTOOLARGE, and I agree that the telescope images feel crufty. I'd nix those, prune the boxes and drop most of the technical specs into new sections instead, and attempt to expand the ledes and/or history sections as you said. I think that would give a cleaner presentation than trying to force awkward formatting to cooperate. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 06:53, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Adding already existing articles in other languages

Hello,

I have recently been working on the article "Chrysojasminum fruticans" and during said work, I found that there are a lot of other pages under an old name of the species, Jasminum fruticans. It is my first time adding pages in other languages.

I get the following error when trying to add the French page:

"Could not save due to an error.

• The save has failed.
• The link frwiki:Jasminum fruticans is already used by Item Q872077. You may remove it from Q872077 if it does not belong there or merge the Items if they are about the exact same topic. If the situation is more complex, please see Help:Sitelinks."

How can I solve this issue?

Thank you in advance. MGatta (talk) 15:22, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @MGatta, and welcome to the Teahouse of English Wikipedia.

Normally you should ask questions about the French Wikipedia there, not at the English one.

But in this case, I can help you.

If you go to the Wikidata item d:Q872077, you'll see (down the bottom) that it currently links to fr:Jasminum fruticans (and the same in several other Wikipedias).

You could simply edit that section to remove the link, create your new article, and make the Wikidata item point to your new article fr:Chrysojasminum fruticans instead.

However, there are a number of other issues that arise.

• I wonder why you are creating a new article, rather than simply editing and moving the existing article? That would be the normal way to handle it, and moving the article would leave a redirect pointing to the new article, which is helpful in case people search for the old name.
• If the botanical name has been changed, then the Wikidata article should be updated to reflect that. Since I'm sure you are not familiar with editing Wikidata items, I suggest you ask for help at d:WD:Project chat: explain that the botanical name has changed, cite a reference, and ask if somebody will edit d:Q872077 accordingly.

ColinFine (talk) 16:28, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @ColinFine

Thanks for your help.

I am not creating a new article at all. I'm just trying to "link" the 14 existing articles in other languages (starting with French) to the existing English language article (which currently has 4 other languages too) - aka: edit interlanguage links.

I'm not quite sure how to edit or remove the wikidata item in question [2]. There is a lot of data attached to it. How do I know which ones to remove? And what does the removal entail? Is there a help page that explains how it works?

I'll try for now asking in a project chat and see how it goes. MGatta

Oh, I see, MGatta. It looks as if the Wikidata items D:Q872077 and D:Q91408337 refer to the same thing, and should be merged. See D:Help:Merge. --ColinFine (talk) 20:46, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @ColinFine, thanks for your help. It seems for merging I need to create an account with Wikidata & I don't really have the bandwidth for that right now. So I'll let the issue rest for now. Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MGatta (talk • contribs) 18:23, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

how do u make a userbox

hi where is a userbox that i can tell if he or her is a cathlotic AutumnHornet (talk) 16:59, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

WP:Userboxes/Religion/Catholicism. Please don't create a new topic every time you'd like a new userbox; you can easily find userboxes yourself with WP:Userboxes/Galleries. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 17:01, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

See Template:Userbox PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 17:01, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

If you want a userbox that doesn't exist yet, head to Wikiproject Userboxes/Ideas Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 00:41, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

where is a userbox

hi where is a userbox to see where he or her hails from ( for example nc etc) AutumnHornet (talk) 17:22, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

@AutumnHornet, I would recommend looking for these specific Userboxes using the search in Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries. I would also say that you do not need to be making a new topic for every new userbox you would like to find, as was said above :) Rooney!^chatter 17:26, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

thank you rooney can we be frineds AutumnHornet (talk) 17:27, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @AutumnHornet, and welcome to the Teahouse and Wikipedia.

While it's fair enough to spend some time getting your user page right, so far you have made 35 edits, and not one of them to an article in the encyclopaedia - which is what we are here for. Can I suggest that you have a go at actually contributing to Wikipedia? See the Task Center for suggestions, or perhaps find a WikiProject relating to somethign that interests you (perhaps, whichever sport it is that you evidently are keen on) and see what articles they suggest there could do with improvement. ColinFine (talk) 20:53, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Entry for Hugh Prather, Author

Error: John S. Armstrong cannot be both Prather's great grandfather and his father-in-law as has been written by the writer of Prather's bio. Please correct. Martha S. Lyon (talk) 17:23, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Martha S. Lyon Hello and welcome. This should be raised on the relevant article talk page(I'm not clear on which article you are referring to); but could it not be two different people of the same name? (Like Angus King and Angus King III) 331dot (talk) 17:28, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Hugh Prather#Family, early life, and_education says: "With his father-in-law John S. Armstrong and Armstrong's other son-in-law Edgar Flippen, Prather, Sr., helped plan and build the town". It's a convoluted formulation and I think the comma after "Prather, Sr." should be removed. The sentence is apparently about Prather, Sr. (Hugh Prather's grandfather), so "his father-in-law" refers to the father in law of Prather, Sr., but this is only reavealed much later in the sentence so readers are likely to think "his" refers to the article subject Hugh Prather. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:37, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

@Martha S. Lyon@PrimeHunter@331dot I've made some changes to the article which should clarify this. ~2026-20856-07 (talk) 21:45, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Help ensuring new article is sufficiently notable

Hi there, it's my first time here! I hope you can help.

I've written the draft for a new article, for the British comedian Cody Dahler. However, it was recently declined due to the concern that the sources aren't thorough and independent enough. They're a significant person, but they haven't really been reviewed in a major newspaper or anything, since they haven't done any stand-up or anything much to be reviewed and would hence provide a substantial source, if you understand me.

I've tried adding a few more sources which I think help, but I'm still struggling. I'm certain he is major enough to get an article - he has millions of followers, has worked with politicians, was a writer for the BBC, and has a book deal - but not sure how to prove that, I think?

Okay, thank you! SamH29 (talk) 17:41, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Your draft relies too much on primary sources and sources without significant coverage. From some brief research, I have found that the topic is highly unlikely to be notable. Popularity doesn't equate to notability. The topic of Battle for Dream Island was once in a similar position to Dahler, and the article on why that was might be of service to you. Happy editing! Mikeycdiamond (talk) 18:20, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Notability on Wikipedia is less about what someone has done so much as what others have said about them; so when you say things like he has millions of followers, has worked with politicians, was a writer for the BBC, and has a book deal, that's all well and good, but if nobody has taken note of them, then they are not what we consider notable. This is summarised by the golden rule; or even more succinctly, WP:Noted not notable. Athanelar (talk) 19:40, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Would a Holocaust survivor who's participated in the Shoah Foundations interviews, and received local news coverage be notable? Mevsherd (talk) 22:43, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Oc help

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I want to make my object oc (bowy) and idk how to make the page

Noofa bfdi lover (talk) 17:55, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Noofa bfdi lover. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for notable subjects that already exist. A page for your OC is fit for a different website, not here. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 17:59, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Need feedback of my new article

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Dr. Rajesh Kumar (politician) how's it? And i first time use commons for image AS025 (talk) 18:33, 28 April 2026 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:15, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @AS025! It looks pretty solid to me, but many of the government sources are primary sources, so they won't count toward notability. Could you add an additional obituary reference or two? Sdkb ^talk 20:22, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! I’ll try to add a few more independent obituary/news sources. If you still feel the notability is currently weak, would adding a stub tag be more appropriate for now? AS025 (talk) 20:27, 28 April 2026 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:15, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

The image looks appropriately licensed; nice work uploading that! Sdkb ^talk 20:23, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks again and could you help me with the article assessment? It’s still showing as “Unknown” AS025 (talk) 20:29, 28 April 2026 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:15, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

I assessed it as start-class. When the new page reviewer comes along they may make some additional tweaks. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 05:17, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Increased/decreased protection for article

Elie Wiesel is an article that is semi-protected, however the edit rules say you must be extended confirmed. Is this intentional, or not? Xboxfan38 (talk) 19:06, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Where does it say it's semi-protected? 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 19:11, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Per the log, its semi-protected. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 19:25, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

The notice on the talk page (and the edit notice) say that parts of the page relate to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Non extended confirmed editors are not allowed to edit in relation to that topic area, but other parts of the article are fine. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 19:28, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

@Xboxfan38: Only articles that are strictly about aspects of the Arab-Israeli conflict are XCP'd on discovery. Articles about other topics that have Arab-Israeli conflict related content don't get XCP unless it would ordinarily be warranted (such as an escalation if semi-protection isn't working). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^MUSHROOM 02:19, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Mobile edit?

Can I create and edit Wikipedia articles properly using only a mobile phone?.Will I get the same functions/features that are available on PC like Move, Twinkle, HotCat Categories, etc.? Or are some advanced tools only available on desktop? AS025 (talk) 19:54, 28 April 2026 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:16, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

You can use the full desktop version in a browser on your device/phone. If it comes up as the mobile version, scroll to the bottom and click "desktop" to switch. The mobile and app versions are not fully functional; not all talk page content is displayed(mostly templates). I'm sure there are other differences- but many people successfully edit that way. 331dot (talk) 19:57, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. That’s why I asked — I travel a lot and cant carry a PC everywhere 🥲😅 AS025 (talk) 20:06, 28 April 2026 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:16, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @AS025, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I hardly ever edit on a phone myself, but you might find User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing helpful. ColinFine (talk) 20:56, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks(: I’ll check that guide. Mobile editing is really important for me🤍 AS025 (talk) 22:18, 28 April 2026 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:16, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate the recommendation of my essay. Thank you. (This edit was made on a smartphone). Cullen328 (talk) 01:00, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

@AS025, I am editing with a smartphone. it contains all features from Desktop, you don't need to change to desktop mode seperately, the mobile web version is fine. you can enable hotcat, Move etc from preference menu. However, you cannot run Twinkle directly, you have to put some code in your common.js page to run Twinkle. Everything else is smooth as butter. Once mobile editing becomes comfortable, you won't be able to let it go.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 07:30, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Cool Thanks 😊 AS025 (talk) 07:33, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

I edit almost exclusively on mobile. If you enable "advanced mobile editing" in your preferences, the functionality is pretty much the same. Athanelar (talk) 13:01, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Athanelar please note that AS025 has now been blocked so they won't reply Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:31, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

new babel?

I'm working on some languages for my user page, and I would put cpi-1, but it seems the template isn't there. what do I do? do I just give up? AtTheTownHouse (talk) 00:54, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Presumably you could make the template yourself. But if I were you, I wouldn't bother. -- Hoary (talk) 01:07, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Instead of making a new template, you can force it by not using the local {{Babel}} template, but rather MediaWiki's Babel extension, like this: {{#babel:en-4|zh|cpi-1}}. HyperAnd [talk] 01:28, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

thanks! AtTheTownHouse (talk) 02:33, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Should we do an artice about the band The long faces?

I don't know where to suggest an article so I ask here. After the sleeping hit of Jane! we should probably cover the band itself. ~2026-26084-02 (talk) 01:21, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi @~2026-26084-02 and welcome to the Teahouse!

To create an article on this band, it must meet English Wikipedia's notability guidelines. To briefly summarize this policy, multiple reliable independent sources must cover the subject. After a quick search on Google, I failed to find any independent sources reviewing this band.

Before creating an article, make sure to find enough independent reliable sources covering the topic, otherwise you'll end up creating the article backwards.

Other more experienced editors in the field of creating articles may be able to give you other suggestions as well.

Happy editing!

✓ Courtesy link to the existing article on Jane!: Jane! Paolo Roland Self (talk) 01:51, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Jane! doesn't even start to describe its subject. Where the song was used, and its popularity: yes, these are described -- but not its lyrics (if any), its instrumentation (if any), its genre(s) (if any), comments on it (if any) by music journalists, et cetera. How about attempting to improve the article Jane!? -- Hoary (talk) 08:07, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Signature

I'm trying to edit my Signature for a black background and a light blue text and i tried using WP:SIGTUT to start and as you can see it's not working <span style="background-color: maroon">[[User:The Ars Goetia|<span style="color: khaki">Goetia</span>]] [[User talk:The Ars Goetia|<span style="color: khaki">(talk)</span>]]</span> (talk) 01:59, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Please help I feel so exposed with my signature broken like this [[User:The Ars Goetia|<span style="color:blue;">Goetia</span>]] (talk) 02:17, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi The Ars Goetia. Enable "Treat the above as wiki markup" below the Signature field at Special:Preferences. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:56, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

{{See also|Article}} hatnote disappears after publishing when I use Interlanguage link

I want to create a 'See also...' hatnote from Mikkel Rønnow to da:Mikkel Rønnow and vice versa. I tried using {{See also | :da:Mikkel Rønnow}} near the top of the article, and when I click Show Preview, a live :da: link appears that branches to the Danish equivalent of the article. However, when I click Publish changes, the text vanishes. I also tried {{See also | da:Mikkel Rønnow}} which did not work either. How can I make the hatnote remain visible after saving? Chrisdevelop (talk) 02:29, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

It's normal for there to be an article in two or more languages on a given subject. And there's a standard way to inform the reader using "desktop view" of these other-language alternatives. (The enterprising user of "mobile view" will know how to switch to "desktop" and view such links, if they exist.) Why does an article on this "theatrical producer and musical director" warrant a supplement to this? -- Hoary (talk) 03:05, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for responding and clarifying. It occurred to me that someone, perhaps a bilingual person or a polyglot reading the article in one language might benefit from knowing it was available in another, since I have made contributions to both the English and Danish versions of the article. It was more my curiously at to why 'See also' as a hatnote works in preview mode, but disappears when published. This has been explained by PrimeHunter (talk · contribs) below. Chrisdevelop (talk) 16:56, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

@Chrisdevelop: The Danish article is already correctly linked under "1 language" at the top right (assuming you have the default skin Vector 2022). {{See also}} omits links to non-existing pages. Apparently the language prefix is treated differently in preview where it thinks the page eixsts and the saved page where it thinks it doesn't exist. You could force display in the saved page with |ifexists=false which omits the test and always displays the link, but don't do that. We don't make hatnotes to other languages. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:09, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Many tbanks for getting back, and for the information. I'll go back and have a look at all of this. Chrisdevelop (talk) 16:57, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Is this a warning?

This was posted on my talk page. Is it a warning? Is it something else?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Guz13/Archive_5#c-Newslinger-20260220005900-Contentious_topic_alert_(WP:CT/AP) Guz13 (talk) 02:45, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

It is a contentious topic alert. You are on notice that you may be summarily sanctioned for misbehaviour in the post-1992 politics of the United States topic area. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^MUSHROOM 02:47, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

It incudes the wording (emphasis and link in original):

This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.

I'm not sure that could be clearer, but if you have suggestions, please give them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:49, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Bob Marley

Why is Bob Marley's wikipedia page not mentioning he raped his wife. She, Rita Marley, came out about it in 2004. Her book is "No Woman no cry, my life with Bob Marley", she states he raped her. Citing googleable facts of her book, "In No Woman, No Cry: My Life with Bob Marley, she detailed incidents where, after refusing sex, Bob would force her, leading her to describe the acts as rape because she did not give consent", and furthermore "In her book No Woman, No Cry: My Life with Bob Marley, Rita Marley revealed that Bob Marley forced himself on her sexually when she refused his advances, stating, "Bob wouldn't take no for an answer... So he forced himself on me, and I call that rape". She described this as a recurring, painful aspect of their marriage, noting he believed that as his wife, she was obligated". These are clearly indicating her book states he raped her, which is a furthering of formal "coming out about" situations of rape. She is 79 now, she wrote this in her 50's, she may have mentioned it prior, I don't know the whole story on that because I am not her close friend, but as a third-party civilian of the United States and consumer of media and music and academia, as well as a former sexual assault victim, so I am a living sexual assault and domestic violence survivor, I find it upsetting or negligent to not have included the update in Bob Marley's wikipedia page that he raped her. Bob Marley is not a quality of paint that people get to have their own private interpretations of and flaws be nothing to do with the quality or color of, regarding he's a celebrity and I'm largely assuming that's why it wasn't mentioned as to not damage not only the reputation of but the idolatry of him of what it would mean for the general public, no, it is that he is a human and a celebrity and that movement he was a part of the reggae and rastafarian movement was much larger than him, and fortunately there's so much access to such alternatives to him now if his image was kept pristine for sake of retaining the opportunity for rastafarian and reggae to come up in modern culture without stifle from his offenses. IF that is true, it still is very rude that was done, I'm just trying to have some logistic understanding of what was thought to avoid it rather than agreeing with it, basically spelling out what I imagined happened to arrive at this remaining negligence to labor of keeping up to date on things. Change the information of Bob Marley's wikipedia page for afformentioned reasons. Sincerely, Samantha Carroll Leigh Samanthacarrollleigh (talk) 03:56, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

I added the allegations here. Thank you for letting us know. jolielover♥talk 04:03, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

In the future, you may want to bring issues like this up at the specific article's talk page instead of here. Hi, I'm Max!|Talk to me here.|See what I've done here. 16:43, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Somebody did and nothing happened. At least here, they get editors who understand that new editors don't understand the nuances of Wikipedia. jolielover♥talk 17:01, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

What kind of nothinghappenedness is this, Jolielover? As I view the talk page's history, it took AndyTheGrump's response just three minutes to happen. (He tersely requested, or asked about, a source. That could have prompted "What do you mean?", or of course a source. It didn't.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:25, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

"nothinghappenedness" as in, nothing happened to the page. jolielover♥talk 23:31, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

And without a source, nothing should. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:43, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Italicizing one word in article title (infobox ship)

For my newly created article R.V. Soela I need the word "Soela" (only) to be italicized on display, since it is the name of a vessel (ship), but I cannot find how to do it... I tried inserting "//Italic title prefixed|5//" (curly quotes replaced with slashes for purposes of this message) but got an error message "Warning: Display title "R.V. Soela" overrides earlier display title "R.V. Soela" " which I presume is a property of the infobox, however without that there is no italicization by default. If anyone could fix this where it needs to be done (maybe somewhere in or around the infobox??) I would be grateful... Thanks in advance. Tony 1212 (talk) 05:26, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Fixed you should see the proper R.V. Soela styling now. it comes from the |display_title= param of template:infobox ship nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 06:16, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! Tony 1212 (talk) 06:19, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Resolved

nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 06:20, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

@Tony 1212: You should remove the full stops from "RV" (and "FRV") the text of the article and move the article accordingly. See WP:PREFIXSHIP—"Do not use punctuation within the ship prefix"—and compare the other article titles in Category:Research vessels of Australia. Deor (talk) 13:40, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

OK thanks, will do. I was following the literature - in part at least - which is not very consistent. Thanks - Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 15:04, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Need help with "main article on this is so and so"

Hey im looking at the Bjelke Petersen article (specifically Bjelkemander section), and im curious how i do those "for the main article on this subject, go to x" thingies. Mormissen (talk) 07:53, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

template:for and template:main? nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 08:00, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia App: no switching from one website from one to another language possible

Wikipedia App: no switching from one website from one to another language possible

yesterday I got the WikipediaApp. if you are on a special topic in German it’s not possible to switch to the analogue topic/article in English. i checked Websites and KI for help: they all said I should use the globe …. But the globe doesn’t show up at the different corners, nor at the recommended three dots nor at the three lines.

only when I go out and switch to the browser I can reach the article in English. when I get back to the App: the English articles pops up But 1 can’t be also then not be connected to the German topic 2. and it can’t be saved either.

would be happy for support, thx in advance! VanSuntum (talk) 08:16, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

@VanSuntum What app and operating system are you on ? nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 10:51, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Dear rchard2scout

and all the nice other ones

so wonderfully asking back:

First of all: it’s working now!

Right lower side:

The first sign of the 4 signs:

If I press at this first sign on the button on the pair of compasses combined with an „A“ I can choose on the next page in which language I want to switch. I choose the language: and it works wonderfully: >>>I am with the same topic in the world of another language.

I am an analaphabet in the digital world, so sorry about my not differentiated comments here.

Why does it work now?

1.Someone of you switched something.

2.may be wrong memory and I didn’t do it properly - but I see n o w as well that the 3 other buttons are n o w working ( save the article, checking for a combination of letters and the possibility of changing the size of the letter).

3.I had an update dot IOS 26.4.2 yesterday evening

Thanks a lot to everyone!

Sorry when I may have been causing problems because of not having the proper apprehension.

Hoping for much much better times for/to the country of origin of Wikipedia. Hope you manage to get this change soon.

Cheers

Van Suntum VanSuntum (talk) 20:06, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

I think part of the issue is that different language Wikipedias are essentially separate websites entirely, not just translations, so if you're on English Wikipedia everything you see is part of this site, and you need to navigate back to German Wikipedia to reach other articles on that site - it's not like just using a browser translation tool. You certainly SHOULD be able to swap between them within the app, but I've been generally unimpressed by its functionality so it may be either a glitch or oversight. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 07:17, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi VanSuntum, are you using the iOS or Android app? I don't know about the iOS app, but in the Android app there's a set of buttons at the bottom of the screen, one of which says "Language" and has this icon: . Do you see that? --rchard2scout (talk) 07:57, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Dear rchard2scout

and all the nice other ones

so wonderfully asking back:

First of all: it’s working now!

Right lower side:

The first sign of the 4 signs:

If I press at this first sign on the button on the pair of compasses combined with an „A“ I can choose on the next page in which language I want to switch. I choose the language: and it works wonderfully: >>>I am with the same topic in the world of another language.

I am an analaphabet in the digital world, so sorry about my not differentiated comments here.

Why does it work now?

1.Someone of you switched something.

2.may be wrong memory and I didn’t do it properly - but I see n o w as well that the 3 other buttons are n o w working ( save the article, checking for a combination of letters and the possibility of changing the size of the letter).

3.I had an update dot IOS 26.4.2 yesterday evening

Thanks a lot to everyone!

Sorry when I may have been causing problems because of not having the proper apprehension.

Hoping for much much better times for/to the country of origin of Wikipedia. Hope you manage to get this change soon.

Cheers

Van Suntum VanSuntum (talk) 20:07, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Feedback on my entry

Sock

Heelo everyone, I am requesting for review on my article in my sandbox User:Bugie123/sandbox. I have made it basing on what we have been discussing on the help desk but I am requesting for any experienced editor who can review and give me feedback or help move it because I cannot move it the name is protected to extended confirmed users only.

Thank you, I am eager to learn and improve. Bugie123 (talk) 08:53, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

To obtain a review, please click the "submit your draft for review!" button on the screen. 331dot (talk) 09:02, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay, have click submit for review. Bugie123 (talk) 09:06, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

For some background, see this thread. -- Hoary (talk) 09:04, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you sir but can you help me and I also learn how you link such content to other. Bugie123 (talk) 09:07, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Weird coding at Draft:Myint Myint Khin

Hi, Teahouse hosts. Hoping this is an easy one for someone - I've just declined Draft:Myint Myint Khin, and something about my decline has produced odd code on the page,

[[Category:AfC submissions by date/<0030Tue, 28 Apr 2026 13:08:00 +0000202641 2026-04-28T13:08:00+00:00Tuesdaypm0000=error>EpTue, 28 Apr 2026 13:08:00 +0000UTC00000820264 UTCTue, 28 Apr 2026 13:08:00 +0000Tue, 28 Apr 2026 13:08:00 +00002026Tue, 28 Apr 2026 13:08:00 +0000: 17773816804Tue, 28 Apr 2026 13:08:00 +0000UTC2026-04-28T13:08:00+00:0020261408117UTC28 pu42026-04-28T13:08:00+00:0030upm300820264 2026-04-28T13:08:00+00:0001pmTue, 28 Apr 2026 13:08:00 +0000pm2026-04-28T13:08:00+00:0030UTCTue, 28 Apr 2026 13:08:00 +0000 &qu202630;:&qu202630;.</0030Tue, 28 Apr 2026 13:08:00 +0000202641>April 2026|Myint Myint Khin]]

The submitter is a new editor, and I don't want to confuse them by leaving this on the draft, but can't see why it is there or how to remove it. Any ideas? Thanks, Tacyarg (talk) 09:55, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Have seen you commented that the draft is written by Ai, it merits for speedy deletion I think. Bugie123 (talk) 10:05, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

I have cleared the draft @Tacyarg. Bugie123 (talk) 10:29, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Tacyarg. The problem started in the page creation [3] where the edit summary shows the user wrote {{AFC submission|t||ts=~~~~~}}. I don't know where they got that code from but it's wrong. It caused problems when you declined the draft. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:30, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Proposed deletion

Sock

Hello Teahouse, i have tagged subject Afro Mobile for deletion under G11 because the sources used are from the nilepost which is also the brand for next media which owns afro mobile making this promotional and from un independent source as required. Any knowledge on this please. Bugie123 (talk) 10:34, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

If you would prefer to discuss a deletion, you should start an Articles for deletion discussion, not use the speedy deletion process; or you should discuss first before tagging it. 331dot (talk) 10:45, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay, thank you Bugie123 (talk) 10:46, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

I have failed to add new request, its complicated. Bugie123 (talk) 11:04, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Try WP:AFDHOWTO...having twinkle would be helpful here. Lectonar (talk) 12:56, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

okay, let me consider that. Thanks Bugie123 (talk) 13:14, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Bugie123 The page is now live at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afro Mobile - I amended the spelling Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:03, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the assistance however there are some topics I have seen while reading randomly especially from Uganda in media sector without references but having articles on name space or they were not patrolled I think. Bugie123 (talk) 15:06, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

If you see any more articles that fail WP:NCORP and you are unable to locate sources (see WP:BEFORE) then feel free to propose their deletion. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:07, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

okay Bugie123 (talk) 15:08, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

@Spiderone no reliable sources covering Radio Simba, I think it falls the notability for inclusion. Based on my research I only saw a mention from The Independent and a tabloid Sqoop. Bugie123 (talk) 17:35, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

If you reckon it needs deleting, please create Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radio Simba with a brief explanation of why it should be deleted. I can help you with the formatting after you make the page. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:40, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Help with Draft:Nyanzi M Luther

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Draft:Nyanzi M Luther

Heelo 331dot, i am requesting for help regarding that topic as in have failed to move it to the correct name as sources give due protection, any advice about that and the draft itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bugie123 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

@Bugie123 Your draft was declined by @Theroadislong, after which you proceeded to move it to mainspace anyway. The fact the draft was declined means the article is not ready to be in mainspace. I have moved it back to draftspace at Draft:Nyanzi M Luther. Athanelar (talk) 12:56, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay, I have passed through the reviewers comment and the reason I have have seen I hard already got it on the Help desk with another editor yesterday just he was not sure but it's lack of detailed biography from independent secondary sources the subject is only having primary sources from news not biography and yet the article is about biography. I have got it then thank you.

Look forward to learn more and contribute. Bugie123 (talk) 13:13, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Once you feel you've addressed the reviewer's concerns, you can press the "Resubmit" button on the decline notice to send it for another review. Please don't move the page to mainspace yourself. Athanelar (talk) 13:18, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

I have got it clear. Thank you for the information. Bugie123 (talk) 13:20, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Resolution issue (Baptist confessions dispute)

Hi, I am new to Wikipedia and was just interested in putting some sources in a page I thought were important to include concerning the Baptist denomination of Christianity. In time however, a user came to dispute it on the grounds of schism (this is an on-going dispute and they have yet to define exactly what each group is by which they might be determined in their relation). This user has not only been uncivil (on their own talk page primarily, but it also exists on the page for the article proper; and of course this is not to say I am free from error), but has prior to the engagement failed to follow normal protocol as an experienced user. When I openly expressed openness to correction for anything I might have done wrong, the user proceeded to suggest I was insincere in my comment rather than allowing any genuine correction to take place. Based on the descriptions of each area for dispute resolution what I am looking to handle doesn't appear to match any of the requirements/advice exactly on how to handle the situation. Most importantly of all for the dispute itself, the user has failed to address the central point of contention and any of the points relating to it I brought up (in which definition of groups play utmost significance). What I speak here only addresses my perspective of the shape of a situation, please review Talk:List of Baptist confessions of faith - Wikipedia if that will help establish what is occurring.

What approach would you suggest to resolve the dispute? Shadowkindred (talk) 12:18, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Follow WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:51, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

New article question

Can I create a page about my ancestor? This is a family member but one who died before I was born. TulsaExplainsEverything (talk) 12:40, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Here are some more details. I would like to create an article about Russell Cobb (1898-1962). He was son of Henry Ives Cobb, architect, who has a Wikipedia page. Russell was part of the Soviet Famine relief project, Police and Fire Commissioner of Tulsa (1940-1942), and later a charter member of the CIA (1949). He was also a noted oilman.

I am Russell Cobb IV (1974--) TulsaExplainsEverything (talk) 12:44, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

If they meet our notability criteria, you can do, but you should create a draft for independent editors to review, and declare your conflict of interest when you do so.

It is vital that you only write what is substantiated by reliable sources; not what you know from family lore.

You may find WP:Your first article helpful.; and we strongly recommend you get some experience editing existing articles before you start. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:50, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Requesting help to publish an article on a religious figure

​"Hi, I am Reuben. I have finished a draft for a new article about Jurayj, an Islamic figure,in my sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rubendx/sandbox . Could a mentor please help me move this to the mainspace? I have multiple included scholarly sources of my article. Rubendx (talk) 13:14, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Rubendx, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I have added a header to your sandbox which will allow you to submit it for review. That is the recommended way to get a draft moved to mainspace, or to get feedback if the reviewer thinks it is not ready for that. ColinFine (talk) 13:25, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

how do i sort out my userboxes

hi its me agian i need to sort my userboxes for example ( personal info etc ) how do i sort them i know rooney has them AutumnHornet (talk) 13:30, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

To sort your userboxes, use Template:Userboxtop and Template:Userboxbottom. It wraps the userboxes in a horizontal box.

Example code:

{{Userboxtop}}

{{User Human}}

{{Userboxbottom}}

Versions111 (talk • contribs) 14:19, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

quote page =

In the description of the cite web Template there is an item |quote page= but when i try to use it to give the page of a longer Pdf, it just doesn't display it. Where is my mistake? Naomi Hennig (talk) 13:41, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

@Naomi Hennig The documentation at Template:Cite_web#csdoc_quote is a bit complicated. You have to have a |quote= parameter as well as the quote page one. Did you do that? Note that you can usually open a link to a .pdf at a specific page by putting #page=x at the end of its URL, which may be a better solution. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:58, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer, Mike Turnbull. I will try the #page-thing tomorrow! Kind regards,

Naomi Hennig (talk) 21:00, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Inquiry about SPI

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Bugie123 (talk) 13:52, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Heelo Teahouse and @Athanelar I am requesting for a brief note about this because I have seen my name has been tagged there. What is it about probably. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joanvumilia Bugie123 (talk) 13:54, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

That means someone suspected you as a sockpuppet of Joanvumilia. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 14:08, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

okay, what did I do wrong to be a suspect . Help please. Bugie123 (talk) 14:22, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

You could provide evidence that you are not Joanvumilia perhaps by mentioning behavioral differences. but don't worry if you are innocent this will be proven by a CheckUser PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 14:30, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

ohh, okay that is good then. Thank you Bugie123 (talk) 14:38, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

6 ~2026-25977-60 (talk) 15:19, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

@Bugie123 If you aren't affiliated with any of the previous accounts, then don't worry about it. A CheckUser will soon check whether you are affiliated, and if you're not then nothing will happen. Athanelar (talk) 15:32, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

okay, thanks Bugie123 (talk) 15:34, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Seconding this - I don't remember seeing anyone who didn't dig themselves in further by responding at SPI.

Trust that the evidence will speak for itself, only experienced admins will be looking into this and they can see false reports a mile away. Blue-Sonnet 15:48, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Yeah Bugie123 (talk) 17:28, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked and global lock requested as per all the others. KylieTastic (talk) 17:47, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Cited website being a copy of the Wikipedia article

Good day. I was browsing the sources cited in the article for real life and noticed that current citation #4 (linking to here) has the linked option to redirect you to another page (this one) which completely copies the real life article (I don't think it's vice versa, since at the top it does say "Wikipedia Encyclopedia").

I cannot tell if this is a breach of Wikipedia's attribution rule as per our CC-BY-SA 4.0 or not. Obviously it doesn't seem like a good citation to have around, but I'm unsure of next steps, i.e. if we need to contact the website or something since I'm not sure how explicitly they are stating that Wikipedia is the source (I missed the header the first time and thought real life was about to be WP:G12...).

Could someone with a wider knowledge of this assist, please? Tiny Toast (talk) 17:14, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

At a minimum the cite to the mirror needs to be removed. As to the website, it does state that it is copied from, and links to, the original article, but fails to link to the history of that article as required by the CC-By-SA licence, so it's technically in noncompliance. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^MUSHROOM 17:19, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

I have removed the citation (it likely doesn't need replacement since "not on the internet", as per the article, is already colloquially accepted as the meaning of "IRL").

I'm not sure how to resolve the copyright problem myself, but thanks for the help with the citation itself! Tiny Toast (talk) 17:26, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Adding templates for article series

Hello!

Can anyone add a template to an article that fits within a series or is this only done by project members or administrators? I ask because I think the article Separate legal entity should be included in the series Corporate Law|US. Am I allowed to add the template or is there someplace I can go to make the suggestion? USnoozieULoozie (talk) 18:00, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi USnoozieULoozie. Please link a page with the template you refer to. I found {{Corporate law}} but it isn't US-specific. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:33, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

The template I thought would be appropriate is the {{Corporate Law|USA}} one used on the Limited liability company article. USnoozieULoozie (talk) 18:35, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Zuber K. Khan

Zuber K. Khan

i see this article very day there have tag of red but still not deletion ~2026-26093-66 (talk) 18:25, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

That tag isn't a deletion tag; it's an {{undisclosed paid}} tag. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^MUSHROOM 18:28, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

New pages feed

HI :)

I came across this New pages feed and im wondering if im allowed to work on the articles that show up in there? not to review them of course, but to add necessary templates, sources, content and general maintenance? Happypenguins82 (talk) 18:57, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, please do. Be bold! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:08, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll do that.

Any guidelines i should pay attention to? I noticed this isn't a regular project page, there aren't many written instructions. Happypenguins82 (talk) 19:32, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Just the instructions on the page feed and the blue-linked articles in the instructions (e.g. Wikipedia:New pages patrol).

BTW I searched "WP:New pages patrol" & got a few hits that you might find useful, including Wikipedia:New pages patrol source guide, so you might want to do the same? Blue-Sonnet 02:37, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much, i'll do that :) Happypenguins82 (talk) 07:50, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

linking to other langs

hello! i was editing the Marisela wiki and noticed there is a wiki for her album Porque tengo ganas, but only the Spanish version. my 2 q's are:

1. is it appropriate to link a wiki pg in english to one in spanish?
2. if the above is "yes", then how do i do that?

tysm! Spindella000 (talk) 19:01, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

this is in fact allowed and can be done using Template:Interlanguage link, for more info see Help:Interlanguage links PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 19:16, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

The nature of beefing up edits

Hey fellow Wikipedians. I have been hanging around Wikipedia for over a year now, but my activity is so far, and especially recently, mostly patrolling changes. So reverting and thanking. It is valuable work for keeping Wikipedia clean. It does, however, drive my edit count up quickly. I have been wondering whether this ends up conflicting with WP:PGAME. While reverting vandalism is constructive, is it also non-trivial? Making trivial edits can be considered gaming and these edits could be seen as trivial, because they do not expand or concretely fix wikipedia. They just restore it. At some point this WP:WCAT behavior will make me extendedconfrimed. Should I feel I in some way unfairly reach it if it's all recent changes patrolling, or is it a fair genuine way to contribute to Wikipedia if one feels it is what they are best suited for? I in ways do feel so. I have some areas where I want to work on articles when I have time, but they are limited and in generally good condition. Motivation comes in passionate spurts, but I want to keep helping between the occasional writing booms. I find myself most usefull this way, but it doesn't stop me from thinking I might be unintentionally gaming the system. So what say the more experienced Wikipedians? Finfixer (talk) 20:40, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Gaming is determined entirely by intent. It's the act of deliberately gaining advanced permissions by rapidly making edits with the primary purpose of gaining those permissions, usually with the intent to then use those permissions to edit in, for example, a contentious topic area.

Simply passively gaining those permissions through natural, small-scale editing isn't gaming.

Besides, if you intend to continue editing in the manner you have been, then having the perms won't make any difference to you. Athanelar (talk) 21:26, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Well it should not be understated that I do intent to gain those permissions at some point, since my knowledge and interest lies in politics and law, areas often under restrictions. I want to reach a point where I can constructively contribute freely if I ever encounter a strongly protected page that is of interest to me. But on the other hand I do not want to agressively seek those permits. Even though I want them, I want to earn them by being helpfull and learning the policies of Wikipedia. I do that by my described method. I feel it is helpfull to Wikipedia. I definetly don't have a particular current cpntentious topic that I aim to make edits to. Even if I wanted to, my method would be too slow. My intentions are to improve Wikipedia, but they could still qualify as unintentional gaming, which apparently is a concept that exists. Finfixer (talk) 21:48, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Not all contentious topics are under the extended confirmed restriction, just the most problematic. You can find the list of contentious topics here (and the related general sanctions list here), meanwhile topics under the extended confirmed restriction can be found here. I don't think counter vandalism patrolling really counts as PGAMEing, or at least not in the context of your edits. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 22:02, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Concur with Athanelar – you're fine. You're legitimately trying to improve Wikipedia and you're doing actual work in doing so. I'm pretty sure I got extended confirmed largely through RC patrolling too, it's pretty common. Based on ANI reports I've seen, trivial edits that are counted as gaming often are more like removing or adding/readding spaces or links or individual letters in individual edits. Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 22:28, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Lack of Cyprus on the Southern Hemipshere page

Hello! I'm not overly experienced in editing articles or Wikipedia edits in general, but I was advised to make post here to inform people that The Global hemispheres image (labeled File:Globalhemispheres.svg) on the Southern hemisphere page is missing the island of Cyprus, which I found a bit odd considering the file it links as being based on seems to have Cyprus (or at least blip representative of the island). Is there a way for me to replace it, or should I just leave it? Thank you so much! ~2026-26313-65 (talk) 00:16, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

The question is about File:Global hemispheres.svg (created by an editor last seen here in early '24). -- Hoary (talk) 01:43, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Fixing it is going to involve creating (or finding) a new image and adding that to the page instead as a replacement. I don't really have any experience editing maps for use on Wikipedia so I can't help much, but I'd add encouragement that we should replace that map, as in addition to missing Cyprus the whole hemispheres appear to be unequal thing is just sloppy, we could just as easily use an image that shows part of Antarctica and is evenly divided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:09, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-26313-65. You might ask at WP:Graphics Lab/Map workshop. ColinFine (talk) 09:14, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Unable to create user page

Self-explantory, using a temp account, and yet I need an "account" to make an user page FOR MYSELF. This is geninuely so dumb... ~2026-25032-90 (talk) 05:30, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

G'day @~2026-25032-90, and welcome to the Teahouse™.

Temporary accounts generally cannot create userpages, or anything in the "User" category. However, may I ask for your reason for not signing up in the first place? /genq

(Not to be harsh or condescending, of course.) ★ Campssitie (msg) (contribs) 🧋🏖 05:58, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-25032-90 Stating just my opinion: 1.) TAs were primarely created to protect the privacy of "anonymous" IPs. IPs didn't have userpages either, so why should TAs?

2.) As TAs only last 90 days, what would be the benefit of having one? -- Maresa63 ^Talk 09:37, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

1. The TA's have a dedicated user page, but even then, we can't even edit it.

2. Would be a good place to put miscellaneous stuff instead of clogging up the talk page. ~2026-25032-90 (talk) 14:33, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

IPs technically had user pages, but they weren't allowed to create them, either. It's a benefit that comes with a permanent account. As a TA only lasts 90 days, you'd be repeating the process every 90 days with a new account. If you would like a user page and the storage space that comes with it, you need to create a permanent account. 331dot (talk) 14:42, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Second question...

Why is bludgeoning a thing anyways? Back in my older temp account (It expired and I used it before this temp account, don't worry), I had gotten a notice for "Bludgeoning". I already know what it means, but isn't this basically just anti-discussion? From my point of view, I feel like commenting a ton can help get your point across, and also to socialize as well. So I don't think warning/blocking people for "bludgeoning" should be a thing.. ~2026-25032-90 (talk) 05:55, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Bludgeoning is when you try to force a subjective point of view into an article. This violates WP:NPOV and is frowned upon, as it can cause unneeded edit wars.

See WP:CONSENSUS, and cheers. Hopefully this gets the point across. ★ Campssitie (msg) (contribs) 🧋🏖 06:04, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Isn't edit warring basically when someone is constantly reverting and undoing someone's edits in a time span of 24 hours? ~2026-25032-90 (talk) 22:50, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Precisely. Trying to force a point of view into an article can be a form of edit warring, which itself can be caused by bludgeoning.

I'll leave this discussion now, so cheers. ★ Campssitie (msg) (contribs) 🧋🏖 04:38, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

"Commenting a ton" risks giving the impression that you are a brainless bully. Maproom (talk) 06:46, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

The link you posted clearly explains it: by posting so much, you risk crowding out others' opinions. A position stands or falls on its merits, not the volume and repetition of it. A point can get more consensus if you take a few minutes to think it through and write it concisely and clearly so others can easily understand it. If instead you appear to be trying to drown out others and have nothing new to say, that's what is disruptive. DMacks (talk) 10:09, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

@Maproom Glad to see that you are "assuming" instead of giving proof that I am this "brainless bully". How nice of you. ~2026-25032-90 (talk) 14:03, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, but no, that would be WP:NPA if they called you that. They said that bludgeoning gives you the initial impression of a brainless bully.

Please try to WP:AGF next time, cheers. ★ Campssitie (msg) (contribs) 🧋🏖 14:59, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I didn't even know what bludgeoning was before this TA was made? They're not even telling me anything that relates to my question at all, that seems to be a Personal Attack in my opinion. That comment was unexpected and just felt rude to me. ~2026-25032-90 (talk) 15:08, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

That answer seemed to be rhetorical, it wasn't referring to you specifically but to a person who is theoretically bludgeoning/"commenting a ton". I can't see that anyone here is specifically saying that you are personally bludgeoning, they're just talking about it generally. Blue-Sonnet 21:26, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-25032-90 TA, given that your activity both here and on your self-identified previous TA seem to mostly be dedicated to discussing current events at the "In the News" section, I must remind you that Wikipedia is not a forum, and if you are not intending to actually contribute to the encyclopedia then you are likely to be blocked from editing eventually. Athanelar (talk) 11:44, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

So... Opposing/Supporting a nomination in ITN/C is considered not to be a contribution? ~2026-25032-90 (talk) 14:01, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

When it's your only activity relating to the encyclopedia? Not really, no. And you're hardly just opposing/supporting; you do seem to enjoy arguing with other editors about the merits of the nominations, too. Athanelar (talk) 14:13, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

The comment that you just linked was before I even knew what bludgeoning was. I didn't know it was a thing at first. ~2026-25032-90 (talk) 14:30, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I understand. My main point still stands; I encourage you to start contributing more productively if you're planning to stick around. Athanelar (talk) 15:08, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Bludgeoning runs the risk of creating false consensus. Many discussions are trying to understand what the community as a whole believes/feels. When one individual dominates the conversation, it is harder to understand what the community as a whole believes/feels on a topic. While debate in community conversations is great, it isn't the main point of those conversations. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 15:28, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Two versions of person's name

I am writing an article about a chessplayer born in Ukraine but now playing in US. Both the US and the international chess organizations transliterate her first name as Natalia. An article about her quotes her as saying that she prefers Natalya and it is her legal name. Publications about her sometimes show one spelling, sometimes the other. How do I decide which spelling the article should have as its title? What is an appropriate way to represent the name situation in the infobox?

This seems difficult to me. The name that is most strongly connected to her chess activities is not the name she states she prefers. Both answers are rather awkward as a result.

M kuhner (talk) 07:46, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey @M kuhner, welcome to the Teahouse™.

If the majority of sources say "Natalia" then use "Natalia", If the majority of sources say "Natalya" then use "Natalya". It depends on what the majority of notable sources prefer.

Hopefully this gets the point across, cheers! ★ Campssitie (msg) (contribs) 🧋🏖 09:44, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

The basis of that recommendation is our WP:COMMONNAME guideline to use what English-language third-party sources use. DMacks (talk) 10:05, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

You mean the majority of notable sources that are actually cited, right? David10244 (talk) 04:14, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

I assume so, the WP:COMMON NAME guideline has this section: "Although official, scientific, birth, original, or trademarked names are often used for article titles, the term or name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred." ★ Campssitie (msg) (contribs) 🧋🏖 04:28, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Notability for "nation at the Olympics"-type articles?

Hi everyone, I recently made the articles Yemen at the 2020 Summer Paralympics and Zimbabwe at the 2020 Summer Paralympics, since there seem to be several "nation at <multi-sport event>"-type articles missing despite the fact these nations competed. Another editor has raised concerns about them not being notable, and unfortunately neither of us are an expert on sports articles, so I wanted to ask here for further advice.

There's plenty of coverage on the 2020 Summer Paralympics themselves (it's definitely a notable event), but as for these specific countries' performances, there isn't very much. Neither one won a medal or had anything incredibly significant happen, they just competed as usual. This doesn't seem to be unusual for these sorts of articles, so I thought there was precedent - I brought up Liberia at the 2020 Summer Paralympics and Zimbabwe at the 2024 Summer Paralympics as examples, although the other editor (correctly) mentioned this was a case of WP:OTHER. I had thought WP:NOLYMPICS suggested these would be notable (Significant coverage is likely to exist for nations participating at an individual Summer or Winter Olympic or Paralympic Games), although it only says SIGCOV is likely to exist. There don't seem to be any other guidelines on these types of articles.

Unfortunately I'm not really sure what to do here. There's definitely secondary sources for the Games themselves, but for Yemen/Zimbabwe's specific performances (or any other country that didn't win a medal, for that matter), I'm not sure. There are probably news outlets covering the results of certain events, but I don't see much point in including those, as they're just going to be copies of the official results anyways without any relevant commentary (hence why I directly cited the official results books as a source).

My question is this: do "<nation> at the <year> <event>" articles (and also, "<sport> at the <year> <event>" articles, since they're also mentioned in WP:NOLYMPICS) generally count as notable, assuming the event they're a part of is also notable, or can they only be created if the country in question has done something significant (other than just competing) during the Games? This specific case is about the Paralympics, but I would also be interested in other multi-sport events like the World Games, Commonwealth Games, Asian Games, etc... as I've been trying to fill in Wikipedia's coverage of those as well.

(If it helps, I've also made similar articles for the World Games - the participation of Aruba, Jordan, Kuwait, Montenegro, Nepal, and North Macedonia in 2022, Iceland in 2017, and the "sport at event" articles for gateball in 2001, aikido in 2001, and tug of war in 2005 and 2013.)

Thanks in advance. Tymewalk (talk) 08:00, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

In my view (others may differ), the short answer is: even if such topics carry an assumption of Notability, they cannot actually be Notable unless sufficient material fully conforming with WP:42 can be cited and summarised to create an article. In Wikipedia's terminology, "notable" means "has been noted in multiple published Reliable sources".

Now, it may be that such sources simply don't exist. Or it may be that they do exist, but are difficult to find. Coverage of the topics you are interested in may have appeared in, for example, news or sports publications in the languages of the relevant countries, and those publication may or may not be available on the internet. Non-English and non-digital, printed, Reliable sources are perfectly acceptable in the absence of equally good English-language online ones. You may however have to go to considerable lengths to find them, perhaps via third parties in the countries concerned willing to help you. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 11:15, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

@Tymewalk In my opinion, it sounds like there's not enough that has been published about the countries' participation to support articles. David10244 (talk) 04:17, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

I have sources for actor sarish can someone help create

 ~2026-26342-42 (talk) 09:13, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-26342-42 Your Draft:Sarish has already been declined by an experienced reviewer. Please read their comments carefully. If you have more sources that meet our definition of the best type, then you can add content from them and re-submit. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:58, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

AUTHORIZATION

I am From a country where there is so much going on, it could from the J{Cruise Fiction} to an enforcment officer shooting a passerby to asset himself into the constitution of money laundering and i think i am having issues with my account.. ~2026-26402-75 (talk) 11:56, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-26402-75 Please specify the exact issues you are having logging in and the error messages you are seeing. Clearly there is no fundamental problem if you can contribute from this temporary account. WP:VPT may be a better venue to get technical help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:01, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-26402-75. Is it your Wikipedia account you are having trouble with, or something else? If it is not your Wikipedia account, we cannot help you here. ColinFine (talk) 15:01, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Draft:Philip R. Ford (filmmaker)

Hello — I’ve submitted a draft biography at Draft:Philip R. Ford (filmmaker) through Articles for Creation. It relies entirely on independent secondary sources (major newspapers, film journals, and trade publications). Because I may have a conflict of interest, I’m not submitting it directly to mainspace and would appreciate any feedback or a neutral review if someone has time. Thank you. InherentWind (talk) 21:39, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi InherentWind, I just took a quick look, and there are a few issues I saw right away. First, there are zero links to any other articles on Wikipedia, you need to add some to avoid this being a dead end. Second, there are a few very short sections that are completely unsourced. Also, there seems to be a lot of content about the one film, and not as much actual biographical information, it seems there is a little undue weight for the one film versus the entire rest of his life and career. I added a couple maintenance tags to the article to show where it needed more, but did not make any actual changes. I'm sure others will have better notes, but this is at least a good starting point while waiting on further comments. - Adolphus79 (talk) 21:52, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

@InherentWind An experienced reviewer has declined your draft again and has left comments. The main issue is the need to comply with the policy on WP:Biographies of living people, especially the bit about providing inline citations throughout. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:09, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Images

How do you upload images Public guava (talk) 22:29, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello. Please see WP:UPIMAGE. 331dot (talk) 22:31, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

AI image generation prompts on talk pages?

Does anybody know why anonymous editors sometimes add AI image generation prompts on talk pages, like this? I can't imagine it accomplishes anything, but I see it a fair amount. Do that many people think Wikipedia is an AI chatbot? –CWenger (^ • @) 00:23, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

I think it's people accidentally copy-pasting their AI prompt into wikipedia, or just someone being disruptive. Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 03:03, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Improving a draft?

I am still working hard on the NK-9's draft. I have managed, through a massive effort, to translate some of the Russian Wikipedia into English (they have a full article on it). Any feedback? Anything else I should add? AZenit3 (talk) 00:47, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Also, I found images of the NK-9's variants at [4], but I have no idea what the license is. Help please? AZenit3 (talk) 00:48, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

If the images do not have a license stated, they are usually presumed non-free and cannot be uploaded to be included in the article. However, there may or may not be a chance that it has fallen into the public domain, but I don't fully understand Russia's copyright rules, so ask at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. HyperAnd [talk] 08:52, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Review for neutrality and sourcing

I have revised this article to address the concerns raised by the maintenance tags on Jidex

The following improvements have been made:

• Removed promotional and interpretive language to ensure a neutral tone
• Eliminated duplicated content across sections
• Rewritten sentences to reflect verifiable, sourced information only
• Improved citation placement and consistency throughout the article

The article is now based on independent reliable sources and avoids subjective or promotional wording.

I would appreciate if an editor could review the current version and consider whether the neutrality dispute and LLM-related maintenance tags can be removed. Distrigency (talk) 00:55, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Distrigency. Whenever I see a claim that a living person is a "philanthropist", I look into that claim, because it is deeply promotional unless impeccably referenced. And the reference in this case is an interview with Jidex, which is not an independent source. Interviews are inherently self-promotional, and Jidex is discussing his business practices and does not claim to be a philanthropist. So, the very first thing in your draft that I looked at does not check out and is a big problem. The overall tone of the draft remains promotional. What is your relationship with Jidex? Cullen328 (talk) 02:13, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughtful feedback and for taking the time to review the draft so carefully.

I understand your concern regarding the use of the term “philanthropist,” especially given the sourcing. You’re right that interviews are not independent sources and can come across as self-promotional. I will remove or revise that claim unless I can find a strong, independent reference that clearly supports it.

Regarding the tone, I appreciate you pointing that out as well. I will work on making the article more neutral and ensure it aligns better with Wikipedia’s standards on notability and verifiability.

To clarify, I do not have any personal or professional relationship with Jidex. My intention was simply to contribute an article based on available information, but I understand the importance of maintaining strict neutrality and reliable sourcing. What other thing would you consider so i can make the changes in due time?

Thank you again for your guidance. I’ll make the necessary revisions accordingly.

Best regards,

Distrigency Distrigency (talk) 06:13, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Please stop using AI/LLMs to communicate here. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 09:40, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Distrigency, I agree with Sarsenet. You must stop all use of artificial "intelligence" tools to converse with Wikipedia editors. We want to talk directly to genuine human beings, not to robots cranking out platitudes and drivel and hallucinations. Cullen328 (talk) 16:45, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Is this vandalism? If so how do i deal with it?

[5] Goetia [She/they/any] (talk) 03:33, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hey @The Ars Goetia, welcome to the Teahouse.

Aside from the fact they edited around a staggering 45 times to this article, It seems to not be. How about we get a response from @~2026-26507-73? ★ Campssitie (msg) (contribs) 🧋🏖 04:46, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Draft:Kristie Kim

Draft:Kristie Kim

Hey, I created this draft stub page of illustrator Kristie Kim. And I was wondering if this needs an another ref that she is an illustrator?. As well with how can I improve this despite it being declined. Thanks. ~2026-25450-02 (talk) 04:54, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

No i think you have all of the things needed however is the blog that u used a credbile soruce? along with the other ones? if you dont know then check the article about sources or something Dommer simpson (talk) 06:13, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Dommer simpson, perhaps you could specify which "article about sources or something" you mean, and link to it. -- Hoary (talk) 07:08, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliablesources/perennialsources Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources - Wikipedia here Dommer simpson (talk) 09:34, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Pace Dommer Simpson, but Draft:Kristie Kim does not have all of the things needed. The draft's subject is described as an illustrator. We read that "In 2014, Kim won as a first quarter of illustrators at the Writers and Illustrators of the Future". The source cited for this is peculiarly uninformative; however, Kristie Kim – Winning Illustrator of 2014!" (also cited) does say more. This is "L. Ron Hubbard Presents Writers of the Future Volume 30" (an award series underwhelmingly described in Writers and Illustrators of the Future). BlueStaticHorse stuck atop your draft a template saying that The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that: provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis. Where are these sources? -- Hoary (talk) 07:08, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

About the teahouse

Can new users also guide newer users? Dommer simpson (talk) 05:25, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

If you mean becoming a Teahouse host, you need at least 500 mainspace edits and your account needs to be 30 days old. If you just mean in general, trying to help newer users, then sure, if you know how to help them.🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 06:06, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hey, Please don't think I am discouraging you, but I would advice that it would be better if you just wait till you have at least 500 mainspace edits. Currently you have 47. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 13:59, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

I think it's fine, as long as you're sure you have the correct answer. Hi, I'm Max!|Talk to me here.|See what I've done here. 15:58, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

@Mxwllhe, @Dommer simpson But, some newer editors have given incorrect or unhelpful advice here in the past. If you find these pages interesting, it might be good to browse them for a long time before trying to answer any questions. Max, you don't have that many edits here yourself... Also, Max, replying to you is a bit confusing when your account name doesn't match your signature. It's not the end of the world, though. David10244 (talk) 04:30, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Improving draft to meet guidelines

Hi everyone,

I recently edited a draft article about a living person JIDEX and i have been working to improve it in line with Wikipedia’s guidelines. I’ve revised the tone to remove promotional language, ensured claims are properly attributed, and adjusted sections to better comply with NPOV and BLP policies.

Before moving forward, I’d really appreciate if an experienced editor could review the draft and advise on the following:

• Does the article meet Wikipedia’s notability requirements based on the current sources?
• Is the tone now neutral enough, or are there still areas that read as promotional?
• Are there any structural or formatting issues that might affect acceptance or visibility?
• Based on the current improvements, would it be appropriate to remove any existing maintenance or error tags, or are further changes still needed first?

I want to make sure the article is compliant and stands a good chance of being accepted without issues.

Thank you in advance for your guidance and help.

Cheers to the good work Distrigency (talk) 07:03, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

So, Distrigency, you want to have it reviewed before you have it reviewed? -- Hoary (talk) 07:11, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

go ahead and review it genius. I will be grateful to let you proceed from here.

Thanks so much for your help and prompt response. Community is truly a powerful tool. Distrigency (talk) 07:15, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

@Distrigency There are clear signs in both your comment and the article that you have used AI to generate the text, which is not allowed in articles. This includes sources that appear to be entirely hallucinated.

For example, your article cites reference 9 twice, claiming that it is evidence of him being covered as one of Nigeria's "top emerging creators", but the actual linked article says nothing of the sort. Not only that, but in your reflist you claim the article was written by "Emmanuel Okogba," but the byline on the actual article clearly says "Ekene Jimeba".

I'm going to move your article to draftspace because of these issues. Please submit it for review via Articles for Creation using the template I will place at the top of the draft, so that a reviewer can more thoroughly check it for signs of AI and any other issues before it goes back to mainspace. Athanelar (talk) 12:30, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Moved to Draft:Jidex

Athanelar (talk) 12:33, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

@Distrigency Did you read the answers just above? David10244 (talk) 04:32, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Review request: Pius Bigirimana

Hello, I created the article Pius Bigirimana from my sandbox and moved it to mainspace in February. It has been up for a few months now, but I’m not sure whether it fully meets Wikipedia’s expectations, especially in terms of sourcing and notability. I would really appreciate if someone could review the article and point out any issues or areas that may need improvement. Thank you. --BusyEditor (talk) 08:00, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Did you use any kind of AI tool to help you create this article in any way? There are signs of AI generated text, which is not allowed. Athanelar (talk) 12:18, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi Athanelar, thank you for the question.

Yes, at an earlier stage I used a rephrasing tool to assist with wording of my original draft. Following your feedback, and after reviewing Wikipedia:Writing articles with large language models, I carried out a full manual review of the article, removing peacock terms and revising all sections to ensure the content aligns with WP:NPOV and standard encyclopedic style.

This includes the recent edits made via the IP address while I was away, where I completed a comprehensive manual overhaul of the article.

The current version has been carefully checked to ensure it is neutral, factual, and supported by reliable sources. I would appreciate it if you could take another look and let me know if any sections still need further improvement. --BusyEditor (talk) 19:58, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Did you edit the article as ~2026-26457-70? It looks like you're still using AI and you've introduced more un-encyclopaedic phrasing (e.g. "On a personal note"). [6] Your edit summary is definitely AI-generated. Blue-Sonnet 21:52, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Soundsation Wiki (UK Progressive house)

Draft:Soundsation

Hi, I’m looking for some guidance on a declined draft (Soundsation – UK progressive house, mid-late 1990s). The feedback says there isn’t enough significant independent coverage. I understand the requirement, but I’m unsure how it applies to electronic acts from that era. At the moment I have: – Multiple mentions and short reviews in Muzik magazine (1996–1997) – Chart listings and some BBC Radio 1 support – References to DJ support (e.g. Sasha, Digweed), although I understand that on its own may not count as a reliable source One difficulty I’ve run into is that a lot of mid-90s progressive house activity seems to have been documented mainly through short reviews, charts, and DJ coverage rather than full-length artist features. Given that, I’m unsure how notability is typically assessed for artists from scenes where in-depth coverage was relatively limited at the time. Would several independent reviews and recurring mentions in a publication like Muzik be enough to establish notability, or is more in-depth coverage (for example full articles specifically about the artist) generally required? Any advice on how to approach this properly would be really appreciated. Simon9191 (talk) 09:04, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Simon9191, and welcome to the Teahouse.

If such a house "seems to have been documented mainly through short reviews, charts, and DJ coverage rather than full-length artist features", that is an indication that it probably does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability.

Notability is basically assessed the same way for all subjects: is there enough wholly independent, reliably published coverage to base an article on? The specific topic criteria for notability are nearly all "if one of these conditions is met, then it is likely that suitable sources exist to establish notability"; but the person creating the article still has the responsibility of finding those sources.

Unfortunately, some classes of subject are not typically written about sufficiently for Wikipedia's purposes. See no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. ColinFine (talk) 14:01, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

@ColinFine: - If such a house.... - for info, in this context "house" is referring to a genre of music. The editor isn't trying to write about an actual house..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:31, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you @ChrisTheDude. Without looking at the draft, I assumed that it was talking about a company and that "house" was a term used in that industry. ColinFine (talk) 15:29, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

RPM spiking

I'm confused when I use the "Vandalism statistics" option on Ultraviolet, there are sometimes huge spikes at random times, at 7:00 AM today there was a spike to 3000 RPM randomly. What usually explains these spikes? User97104 (t•c•r) 15:18, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure why it went to 3000 (besides a bug or math error), but the spike in rollbacks is likely due to a mass rollback by ScottishFinnishRadish roughly here. Similar spikes at other times are likely due to a mass rollback occurring. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 21:41, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Readiness for Articles for Creation

Hello everyone.

I have a disclosed conflict of interest with a nonprofit that I founded 7 years ago. I’ve put together a draft article based on independent sources and would welcome an uninvolved editor’s perspective on neutrality, sourcing, and readiness for Articles for Creation. I’m seeking advice only, not promotion.

Thanks very much. PGurtman10901222 (talk) 15:47, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @PGurtman10901222, and welcome to the Teahouse.

You haven't told us where to see the draft, and this is your only edit from this account, so we can't give you any advice specific to the draft.

Generally:

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source.

For an inexperienced editor to create a new article is extremely hard, and I very strongly advise you to forget all about your draft for several weeks at least, while you acquire an understanding of Wikipedia's principles and processes by making improvements to existing articles.

When you have a good understanding of fundamental principles such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable sources, referencing, and the BRD cycle, then I recommend you read your first article and see if you can find suitable sources (each of which meets all the criteria in WP:42).

If you can, then you may consider creating a draft.

• Make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor (even if you do and did not receive payment from the non-profit, as its founder you probably count as a paid editor).
• Forget absolutely everything you know about the non-profit. (Do you see why this is difficult for an editor with a COI?) Nothing that you or the nonprofit want to say about it belongs in the article, unless it is found in one of the wholly independent sources. If there is so much as one sentence of what you or the non-profit want people to know (and is not said by an independent source), that will be promotional.
• Write a neutral summary of what the indendent sources say about the non-profit. Even if they miss important things out. Even if they are unpleasantly critical about it. Even if they are wrong - the fundamental principle of Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.

This probably sounds negative. I'm afraid that it is. The chances of the founder of an organisation successfully creating a Wikipedia article about it are pretty low, and I'm trying to save you a lot of frustration, and probably a lot of wasted time and effort. ColinFine (talk) 16:16, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Unsure of notability requirements.

I wish to create an article on Ljubo Mlađenović, but I'm unsure if he meets the notability requirements. I've once before created a biography article that was taken down due to notability, (that I today completely agree doesn't meet the criteria) and I want to be completely sure.

Ljubo Mlađenović (born 9 July 1922, Yugoslavia) wrote Beisfjordtragedien and was a prisoner in a German prison camp in Norway.

Thank you in advance! LillaRis87 (talk) 16:50, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hey @LillaRis87, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Have you seen WP:NOTE or its summary? If there are multiple reliable and verifiable sources on the topic over a long period of time, then it should probably pass. ★ Campssitie (msg) (contribs) 🧋🏖 17:07, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @LillaRis87, and welcome to the Teahouse.

As Campssitie indicates, whether a subject is notable or not cannot be determined just by asking what the subject is or was, or what they have done or produced: none of that is directly relevant. What matters is what has been indepedently published about them - see WP:42. ColinFine (talk) 17:20, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

I know what makes a subject notable, but based on what I could find I was unsure if they manage to reach the threshold, I was more asking if anyone could spare the time to look for themselves and see if they can find out if he would be considered notable. LillaRis87 (talk) 08:51, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

You are basically asking "Will someone duplicate all the research I have already done without me revealing what I have already found?" It is unlikely that anyone reading your request here will be willing to do that.

Can I suggest instead that you create a WP:Draft via that page or WP:AfC that cites the sources you are most confident about, and add on its Talk page a list with links and/or bibliographical details and/or descriptions of further sources you are unsure of?

That will give anyone willing to help something to assess, and avoid unnecessary duplicated effort for them.

When you've created the draft you can come back here and solicit advice on something that people can actually look at. You will also have at least the foundation of something you can in due course submit via for assessment via the normal route, and it will automatically contain the 'Submit' button with which to do that. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 10:46, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi @LillaRis87, here's a humorous article that might explain things: Wikipedia:User Somebody "Notme" Else

Wikipedia thrives on editors being bold and making edits themselves.

When it comes to drafts you can always ask questions here, but we're all volunteers so the chances of someone doing a blind search from scratch into a specific person is probably unlikely.

Please go ahead and make a draft, you can start in your personal sandbox if you want to work on it in peace, in your own time. You can then move it to a draft and submit it to AFC for review. Or you can link your sandbox here and see if anyone is happy to take a peek and see what they think - it's your sandbox so you can wipe it and start writing something else at any time if you feel like it.

You can also read these pages for help to get you started, I've included a few since you're probably already aware of some of these, but there could be something else that you find useful:

• Wikipedia:Notability (people)
• Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons
• Wikipedia:Golden rule
• Help:Introduction
• Help:Your first article
• Wikipedia:Can't break it

Blue-Sonnet 12:45, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

im sorry

i was trying to edit a page just to show something funny to my friends but i didnt think it would edit for everybody, im really sorry, how can i make it up ~2026-26617-82 (talk) 17:54, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

You don't need to make it up; your edits were easily reverted. Just please don't vandalize Wikipedia again in the future. Happy editing! Mikeycdiamond (talk) 18:04, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Need help on moving an article to main space

 Courtesy links: User:Yubudirsi/sandbox2, Draft:Energy of Somalia

Hello, I had made a draft a few months ago titled "Natural resources of Somalia" in my sandbox, I was planning on posting it but I didn't quite know where or when.

Then I started improving the Economy of Somalia page recently, until I arrived at the Natural resources heading, and I was kinda stuck because I wanted to make a main article encompasing the whole topic, the page Mineral industry of Somalia seemed kinda empty and outdated so I proposed to change it into a "Natural resources of Somalia" article and add new content, other users didn't agree so I had to split everything to other pages (Wind, Solar, etc headings), but when it came to the newly added Oil and Gas heading I had made for the new article, there was nowhere to move it.

I had seen that multiple countries already have a page titled "Energy in.." so I decided it would be a good idea to make a new article titled "Energy in Somalia", however I couldn't just make the article because Energy in Somalia already redirected people to the Economy of Somalia article, so I chose to publish it as "Energy of Somalia" instead of "in Somalia" and I was planning on starting a RM to change the of into in.

This was just the backstory, now the problem I'm facing is that when I moved content from the old page to the new Energy of Somalia page, some citations weren't transfered along with it, and my page was flagged for being written by AI (missing sources), which I had clarified was not the case (in my talk page) and had fixed the missing sources problem.

It's been a couple of days, the user that had moved the page to Draft hasn't replied back since, and I'd really like to move my article to the mainspace, but at the same time I don't want to do something I shouldn't, I haven't removed the LLM template as you can see, and even if there were no problem with the article, I still wouldnt be able to move it as "Energy in," what's the proccess if I want to remove a redirect? I hope this wasn't too confusing for whoever will read this. Yubudirsi (talk) 20:07, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Added courtesy links. For your energy article, you don't need to resort to tricks with prepositions. You could request a round-robin move or move over redirect, but you already submitted it to AFC, so why not just let it proceed, and when it is accepted they will move it to main space for you, and you won't have to request any special handling. Mathglot (talk) 06:54, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. How long is the wait usually for AFC? Yubudirsi (talk) 13:34, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm not gonna lie this round robin thing seems complicated, can't really understand how it works. Yubudirsi (talk) 13:36, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Review request for Green Agora GmbH

Hi, I have created a draft for my company Green Agora GmbH on my user subpage: User:Green Agora/Green Agora GmbH. I have disclosed my COI on my user page. Could an experienced editor please review the draft and, if it meets the criteria, help me move it to the main article space? Thank you!Green Agora (talk) 20:23, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Green Agora, it looks like you might have used AI to generate the draft, which would be against the Wikipedia:LLM guideline.

Beyond this, the biggest issue with the draft is that your company doesn't appear to be notable (please see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)) and you've not included any independent, reliable sources to indicate notability.

It's important to remember that this is an encyclopedia, so not every company is entitled to an article - very few do, actually, since Wikipedia isn't a business directory.

I'm afraid it's very unlikely that you'll be able to successfully write an article about your company that will be eligible for inclusion.

That said, if you really want to try again after reading this post, I'd like you to please read this essay that will explain things a bit further for you. Blue-Sonnet 21:09, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

If this were tagged for WP:G11, I would have already deleted it as unambiguously promotional. BusterD (talk) 21:12, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

I think that's the one thing I didn't mention, in retrospect!

I think I might do that actually after looking at it a little more - I really don't think it's salvageable, there are too many issues. The editor has been blocked for a username violation so can't reply/edit the draft right now. Blue-Sonnet 21:36, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Oh, it's been edited by a TA during the block and one reference has been removed before it was submitted to AFC. Blue-Sonnet 21:38, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

The TA actually made it substantially worse (though it did make some of it less obviously LLM). DMacks (talk) 04:44, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Standalone articles for iconic Yu-Gi-Oh cards?

Today I came across several standalone Pokémon articles on Wikipedia for iconic pokemons such as Pikachu, Charizard, and Mewtwo.

How does that look for iconic Yugioh cards? Was thinking to create standalone articles for: Blue-Eyes White Dragon, Dark Magician, and Exodia.

My thought is that some of these cards may have enough real-world coverage through cultural impact, competitive history, collector market attention, and long-term recognition, but I also understand that fan significance alone is not enough. 𝓛𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓣𝓗𝓔 (talk) 22:56, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

I think you're right, there's a good chance these cards are notable. One would just have to be careful about what sources you're using... I imagine there's more than a few books about Yu-Gi-Oh cards that would be considered reliable sources. No need to self-censor yourself, if you want to write about something I say go ahead and do it. Worst thing that might happen is a merge. My gut tells me that Blue-Eyes White Dragon would be the best one to start with. MediaKyle (talk) 23:07, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, @MediaKyle. There may be some risk of content bias if I start the article, since I’m a longtime fan myself. Mhhhh I will think about it 𝓛𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓣𝓗𝓔 (talk) 23:25, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

In fairness, there is precedent. The issue is separating sources for the anime and manga from sources specifically for the card game. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^MUSHROOM 01:36, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Seems it's a source thing.., it always is. 𝓛𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓣𝓗𝓔 (talk) 02:22, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

page

i cant find a page Mew.org33 (talk) 23:29, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Which page? 𝓛𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓣𝓗𝓔 (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Dr. Ramashish Singh (COI)

Hi everyone,

Thank you so much for your suggestions on my Teahouse post from last week. You may recall that I'm trying to create my first Wikipedia article for Dr. Ramashish Singh. I have a COI because I'm a family member of Dr. Singh.

I've made an updated draft for my article - I made it more accurate, made the tone more Wikipedia-like, and changed the wording. We would like some more advice and answers to these questions.

• What final improvements can we make and what suggestions do you have for our draft? (User:Novel-shostakovich/sandbox)
• What steps do we need to take after finalizing this draft? We think the AfC process is best.
• How can we impact the article after it is posted on the main website?

Thanks again!
-Novel-shostakovich and family Novel-shostakovich (talk) 01:06, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Novel-shostakovich. Your draft relies heavily on coverage of Ramashish Singh in the Indian newspaper Dainik Jagran. Please read the Wikipedia article about that newspaper and also Paid news in India. Dainik Jagran is not a reliable source for use on Wikipedia and therefore your draft has major problems. Cullen328 (talk) 02:35, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Novel-shostakovich. You keep talking about "we". Who is "we"? Mathglot (talk) 06:41, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Sorry if the language was unclear. "We" was referring to our family, but I'm the editor mainly working on this draft. Novel-shostakovich (talk) 13:14, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

UPDATE: Thank you @Cullen328 for your feedback. An updated draft with more diverse sources is in the sandbox. I'd like feedback on the new draft, as well as answers to our remaining questions above. Novel-shostakovich (talk) 13:13, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Lowercase sigmabot III archiving

Hello! I’ve placed an archiving template on my talk page calling lowercase sigmabot III, but it hasn’t been archived. Can someone help me? Thanks, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} -⃝⃤ (they/he) 02:42, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi Shadestar474. Looking at the page-history, you added the archiving tag at 02:31:41 and then wrote this comment here 11 minutes later. The bot does not act instantenously, neither "as soon as the tag is added" nor "as soon as the talk-page crosses the threshold to trigger archiving". Instead, it acts on some set schedule, checking all pages that are tagged. Patience! Check back in a day or so. DMacks (talk) 04:40, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Wait, does it have to be at the top of the page to archive correctly? Because I added it at the bottom of the page a few days before and it hadn’t archived; I just moved to the top of the page after realizing that was the correct formatting, and then made this comment here while I was already thinking about my talk page archiving. Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} -⃝⃤ (they/he) 04:44, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

User:MiszaBot/config documentation says it needs to be "before the first ==second level header== on the page". DMacks (talk) 05:58, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I understand now. Thanks for the help! Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} -⃝⃤ (they/he) 07:48, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Draft:Moonjuice — how to cite print-only sources from 2003

Hello, I have a draft at Draft:Moonjuice about a Brisbane rock band. It has been declined for lack of sources. I have independent press coverage from The Courier-Mail (21 March 2003, Pulse section), TimeOff Magazine (two reviews, June and July 2003) and The Oracle (February 2003) but these are print publications with no online archive. Steven Bishop's Wikipedia article directly names the band. The German Wikipedia article on Daniel Jones (musician) also independently names them. Could someone advise how to properly format print-only citations and whether these sources satisfy WP:NBAND? Thank you. BrisbaneRock99 (talk) 06:25, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

BrisbaneRock99, you can use {{cite newspaper}}, and just don't use the 'url' param. Mathglot (talk) 06:34, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

BrisbaneRock99, when citing paper sources that are not available online, it is a good idea to include a one or two sentence direct quotation. The 'quote' parameter can be used with any citation template. Cullen328 (talk) 06:46, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

How to find proper sources

Hello!

I'm aware that all information I add to an article must be cited, however I'm not sure where to find the material to cite! I've read through the reliability article but exact places on the internet to find what I'm looking for are slim.

I want to work on an article about the comedian Ify Nwadiwe as it's a requested article on the internet and tech culture article, but I'm struggling with sourcing basic facts.

Like his birthday, I can't find any reputable articles that list it but he recently made an Instagram post celebrating it on the 26th of February and in the description stated he was turning 38. This gives me a birthday, but I'm unsure if this would be a proper source?

Any tips on how to source references (where, how, and the best places to look) would be great, as well as letting me know if the above post would be proper for citation would be amazing. Plasticponies (talk) 06:56, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Plasticponies!

If you're struggling to find sources, go to the Wikipedia:Reference desk and ask there. Usually, social media sources are not reliable, like Instagram.

Also, have you checked if Ify Nwadiwe is a notable topic or passes WP:42? ★ Campssitie (msg) (contribs) 🧋🏖 09:39, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

When looking for sources about people, Google News can be a good place to start, as well as just a plain regular google search. You're looking for the kind of coverage that meets the golden rule. If nothing like that jumps out right away, it's highly likely the person simply isn't notable enough for inclusion, as stated above. Athanelar (talk) 10:18, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Help:Find sources also has some good tips. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:05, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

My IP address is blocked for nothing until 2027

The IP address has been blocked by ‪Barkeep49‬ Bobybobby (talk) 07:17, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

If this is intended as a question, Bobybobby, then what are you asking? -- Hoary (talk) 09:15, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Can use Wikipedia to download music and movies

Can use Wikipedia to download music and movies ~2026-26443-81 (talk) 07:24, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia has only little snippets of music and movies. But what there is, you can download. -- Hoary (talk) 09:15, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Some, but there are more on the related Wikimedia Commons. See:

• c:Category:Films
• c:Category:Music

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:02, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Also WikiFlix. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:42, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello im currently temporary editing something cool in Wikipedia (Real apology)

but before i edit some pages im worried that my temporary account and if i click submit once i finished editing i will encounter a ip address block with red stop hands and im here to respect Wikipedia in sorry for the damage that i had done in some Wikipedia pages when i was in my Wikipedia account and it got indefinitely banned but please don't unblock "HelloIMEditingSometimes2026" (my main account) instead unblock my currently running temporary account my full apology is in talk page ~2026-26717-69 (talk) 08:34, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

You need to stop block evasion and return to your regular account to request to be unblocked. 331dot (talk) 08:38, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

About translating a page and notability

Hello, I'd like to ask a question. I want to create article '2016 MERNIS scandal' from translating the respective article in Turkish wikipedia, but I couldn't decide it would be notable enough or violate WP:N or not. So could you help me with deciding about its notabilitiness? Birthay boy (talk) 08:42, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Birthay boy, now that you have read WP:N, what do you think are the three best sources for 2016 MERNİS scandal? Its viability can probably be estimated from these three. -- Hoary (talk) 09:24, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

I think those are the best three ones:

• Sozeri, Efe Kerem (21 Şubat 2016). "Major 'Turkish police data dump' reveals an even bigger scandal". The Daily Dot (İngilizce). 7 Ekim 2020 tarihinde kaynağından arşivlendi. Erişim tarihi: 25 Ocak 2024.
• Brinded, Lianna. "The entire Turkish citizenship database has allegedly been leaked online". Business Insider (İngilizce). 8 Kasım 2020 tarihinde kaynağından arşivlendi. Erişim tarihi: 25 Ocak 2024.
• "Turkish authorities 'probing huge ID data leak'". BBC News (İngilizce). 6 Nisan 2016. 25 Kasım 2020 tarihinde kaynağından arşivlendi. Erişim tarihi: 25 Ocak 2024.

Birthay boy (talk) 13:17, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

How to provide links for articles? Should I even be writing this article?

I'm writing an article about a board game and can't find out how to put in a link to any other articles about board games. Also, I don't know if I should even publish this article because it's about a game that someone I know made, even if I'm writing it without bias. TheQuickBrownFox14!🏳‍🌈 (talk) 11:17, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia, and the Teahouse.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source.

It is not likely that a game somebody you know made meets our threshold for notability, unless you have multiple sources where people completely unaffiliated with your friend or their game have reviewed or discussed the game in some depth. Athanelar (talk) 12:03, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks log

You could create an automatic list consisting solely of thank-you logs, since the concept of temporary accounts already exists here. In internet sites. Bad jovian (talk) 11:50, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

If, Bad jovian, you have a new idea for Wikipedia, can express it coherently, and can argue for it persuasively, then Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) is the place. -- Hoary (talk) 12:11, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

@Bad jovian, did you mean something like this? — DVRTed (Talk) 12:51, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Writing Article in Eng. Wikipedia that Exists in German Wikipedia

I am considering writing a biographical article about a late musician who was a long-time member of the band that backed a well-known composer and lead singer. (The musician's name is David Brown and the composer and lead singer is Billy Joel.) I believe he is notable, and I found sources that are about him.

There is already an article in German Wikipedia, though. I read the English Information Page about translation. It says that a translated article must credit the source article. There are also cautions about using an LLM to translate.

Would it be a problem were I to create an article in English Wikipedia without trying to translate from the German first? Thank you. – Kekki1978 ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 12:15, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

@Kekki1978 Yes. that would be fine. Often the main problem is finding good sources, not how to summarise them. So you could look at the sources in German and use them in your own words, or just find your own sources. Beware that en:Wikipedia has stricter rules about people who are members of a band, even when the band itself is notable. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:39, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance. The German article doesn't have any sources, so I'd start from scratch. I appreciate the advice and the links. – Kekki1978 ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 13:18, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Is there a way to find easily specific words on a page in Wikipedia, like Microsoft Word's word-finding function?

I have to read fast, so when there is too much text I need to find key words in order to do my research faster. Can you help, please ? ~2026-26750-99 (talk) 13:13, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Not a WP:EXTENDED here but CTRL + F is the thing you're looking for. Birthay boy (talk) 13:19, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

It's a browser feature, not a Wikipedia feature. All the Web browsers I've ever seen had a standard Contr-F feature, which I used a few minutes ago in Catholic Monarchs of Spain to find "reyes". For phone browsers that don't have a keyboard, the ... menu at upper right has a text finder. Jim.henderson (talk) 13:35, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Does userspace draft submitted via AfC replace (overwrite) draftspace draft of same name?

Hello, I created a draft BLP in userspace. I later discovered that someone else had created a draft in draftspace. I then submitted my userspace draft through AfC. It looks like the AfC process moved it to draftspace and replaced the original article that was in draftspace. Is my understanding correct, or is the original draftspace draft still accessible? Thanks. – Kekki1978 ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 13:15, 2 May 2026 (UTC)