Sample Page

abundant sourcing in established publications, mostly offline print. Need experienced eyes.

Hi, I’m hoping to find an experienced editor willing to help shepherd a draft article through the AfC process.

The article is about Dirty Pictures, a Czech punk rock band formed in Prague in 1992. The draft was submitted recently and declined on notability grounds, but the sourcing is genuinely strong — the band received coverage in major Czech national newspapers (Lidové Noviny, Blesk, Český Deník), cover stories and features in Czech music magazines Bang! and Rock & Pop, as well as coverage outside the ČR: Badische Zeitung, NME (a 1994 piece covering Joe Strummer’s appearance at a benefit concert the band organized in Prague), and MTV.

The core challenge is that most of these sources are pre-internet print publications with no online presence. The sources are all cited in the draft & I have scans of every clipping but the initial reviewer appears to have been unfamiliar with the Czech music press of the era.

Would any experienced editor be willing to take a look at the draft and advise, or potentially help with resubmission? Happy to provide all source material.

Full disclosure: I created this draft on behalf of a founding member of the band, who provided all the sources.

Draft:Dirty Pictures. Griffinbunny (talk) 01:21, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hellom I fixed your link to the draft, the whole url is not needed.

Please review the conflict of interest rules to learn how to formally disclose your conflict of interest.

Sources do not need to be online, as long as they are reliable sources and they are publicly available; books or magazines available in a library are fine. Documents purely in private hands, however, are not. 331dot (talk) 01:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response and for fixing the link and for the guidance on sources. Regarding verifiability, these are all published journalism from established Czech publications including major national newspapers and the leading music magazines of the era. I would expect all of them to be available in Czech library archives, though I haven’t personally confirmed this. Griffinbunny (talk) 23:55, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That’s fine, sources do not need to be free or easy to access. Any reader is free to travel to Czechia to go to a library there to verify information.. 331dot (talk) 00:11, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Griffinbunny. To add to what 331dot says: the sources also have to be independent of the subject. I have not attempted to look at your sources, but very often newspaper pieces on bands turn out to be mostly based on an interview with the band or their associates, and such sources do not contribute to establishing notability.

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 09:08, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Noted on source independence. The vast majority of citations are reviews, news coverage, and feature journalism, not interview-based pieces. The sources speak about the band independently rather than quoting the band about themselves. Griffinbunny (talk) 23:57, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Griffinbunny To help reviewers verify your sources, you could complete the citations, add translated titles, and try to find links (at the very least) for the sig cov sources that you want to rely on, refer WP:42. Is there an article for this band on Czech Wikipedia? MmeMaigret (talk) 13:39, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much — this is very helpful. I can add translated titles to the citations. Regarding links, whatever links exist are already built into the citations. Almost all sources are pre-internet print — I have access to the actual clippings for all of them, and they are all published journalism from established publications but they do not, to my knowledge, exist online (maybe they’re on microfilm at a library somewhere?). Re Czech Wikipedia — no article exists yet, though the band is referenced on the Lukáš Vincour and Joe Strummer pages. I feel like a big part of the problem is that I am a 100% newbie here on Wikipedia. I am hoping to find an experienced editor to help shepherd the re-submission. Griffinbunny (talk) 23:49, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Griffinbunny You might find it hard to find an editor to help you because everyones has got their own list of articles they want to write. Plus you’re looking for someone who speaks Czech, has an interest in music etc. I would suggest:

1. Pause and try to create the page on Czech Wikipedia first. Their criteria for inclusion are likely to be different from English Wikpedia but a lot more people will assist you and/or edit the page.
2. Meanwhile on English Wikipedia:
   • you can try asking your mentor;
   • you might ask someone in your local WP Embassy for help.

cc:@Itsyoungrapper @Mormegil

– Mme Maigret (talk) 13:56, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! This is exactly the kind of guidance I was hoping for. I’ll look into Czech Wikipedia seriously and also explore the Embassy route. I’m also going to check on the mentor option for my account. I really appreciate you taking the time to engage with this so carefully, it means a lot. I see you tagged a couple of people — should I reach out to them? Griffinbunny (talk) 17:06, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Griffinbunny:

• Itsyoungrapper is the Czech ambassador on English Wikipedia; and
• Mormegil is an ambassador on Czech Wikipedia (who also edits on English Wikipedia).

Mme Maigret (talk) 09:15, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, once again. I will reach out to both and circle back if needed 🙏 Griffinbunny (talk) 18:09, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe if you added a chart of album releases (if you can find any), then put them in, usually if some music hasn’t put in on the charts, I usually look on Spotify, but if they don’t have it, then I don’t know. I do think that this article looks good but could use more words in the beginning part. TexasOutlawsSoccerFan (talk) 12:34, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!! Griffinbunny (talk) 21:03, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! @Shoot for the Stars seems to have a habit of uploading very low quality images of celebrities to replace reasonably high-quality infobox pictures, and then edit warring to make sure that their version stays on the page. See:

• Talk:Trippie_Redd#Photo
• Eric Trump
• Cardi B
• Talk:Jason Bateman

Their favorite technique seems to be to upload a new, low quality image, and then force other people to “start an RFC” if they want to change it back. I am not familiar with every nook and cranny of Wikipedia’s consensus policy, but I don’t think this is how things work.

They also make unnecessarily threatening comments to random people who bring up that the pictures are bad (“If you change the photo one more time without a consensus then I will report you for starting an edit war.”), and also have a history of extreme incivility/edit warring on other topics (for example Talk:Elliot_Rodger/Archive_1#Images).

What is the best move here? I am not clear on whether WP:ANI is appropriate here, but it would be nice for someone to gently tell this person that this is not how things work. Thanks! ~2026-16034-49 (talk) 16:25, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have to second what @~2026-16034-49 says, and incur my chat with a noted admin (User talk:Black Kite#Appealing to you for advice). Also, @Shoot for the Stars is attempting to delete the other (which is unlikely to succeed for reasons provided on the previously cited chat also), better, Trippie Redd photo in order to upload their low-quality one. Scientelensia (talk) 17:47, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add this has been a problem on more pages, including Karen Fukuhara. Scientelensia (talk) 18:03, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How bizzare. I would say this is appropriate for WP:ANI since it’s happening over many pages and wont get resolved on any one article’s talk page. — D’n’B–📞 — 19:02, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also forcing other people to start an RFC sounds like gaming the system. Mme Maigret (talk) 11:28, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is very strange and seems like basic trolling to me. Sentimental Dork (talk) 05:21, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

photos upload by me are taken by my friend and shared in WhatsApp how it ll get copyright violation ~2026-22837-71 (talk) 19:28, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What photos do you mean? 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 19:59, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you have permission from your friend, you can upload them locally if you’re able to give proof that your friend let you upload them.—DollarStoreBa’al^Converse 20:40, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@DollarStoreBaal44 I think you are wrong; the copyright owner (who is usually the person who took the picture) can email someone (VTRS??) to allow the picture to be used. I hope that a more experienced editor will come along and help. David10244 (talk) 00:23, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn’t seem like you uploaded any photos from this device. What photos are you talking about? 🍅 fx (talk) 20:48, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(1) Are you saying that a friend of yours uploaded and shared photos on Whatsapp that you took and now you’re being accused of copyright violation but you took the photos? (2) Where are you being accused of this, on Wikipedia? Mme Maigret (talk) 09:25, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mmemaigret No, it sounds like the friend took the photos, and @~2026-22837-71 uploaded them. Which is not the right procedure, especially if (I’m guessing) they were uploaded as “own work” which would incorrectly indicate that 2026 took the photos. All of this supposes they were used in Wikipedia; 2026 just says they were shared in WhatsApp, which of course is not relevant here. David10244 (talk) 13:28, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, it seems a copyvio was warranted. Mme Maigret (talk) 03:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

hello I’m trying to make a page on the subject that I’m researching that I basically hold the most information on in the world. It’s a very niche subject about a man who created this gallery of art and a canyon in Southeastern Colorado I’ve been researching him for 9 months now I have a plethora of articles I have US census I’ve immigration records I have ancestry records I don’t know how to make my page not be declined. They said I need more secondary resources I don’t know what secondary resources mean. I really need help doing this can somebody please help me? I have level three autism and I’m dyslexic and I am completely frustrated with this process but I gave a dead man an oath but I would bring him to the world and I am desperately trying to do so. Also I tried to take articles that I had found and take the words and rearrange them so that I wasn’t plagiarizing the article and it says I’m using AI while I did use AI on some of it I spent hours writing these paragraphs and I don’t know how to rearrange them to be acceptable. This is a really important subject to me and to the world I believe if somebody needs to find information on Martin Bowden I’m the one that has it. How do I get it into Wikipedia? Thank you in advance to anybody that can help me I really appreciate it TheBluflame (talk) 08:56, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TheBluflame and thanks for asking at The Teahouse.

This is explained in more detail at WP:PSTS but in short, a primary source is created by the subject (it would include his marriage record, draft registration his own writings, posters for his shows). A secondary source is created about the subject by someone else. (it would include newspaper articles, journal articles, books). I can see that a couple of newspaper articles have already been suggested on your talk page. Remember that Wikipedia is not the place for original research, we only document what other people have already said. — D’n’B–📞 — 09:14, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. I must disappoint you- I don’t think Wikipedia is the place to do what it is that you are trying to do. That’s best done on a personal website or social media. Wikipedia is not a place to memorialize someone.

Things like census records and draft cards are primary sources that don’t establish that someone is a notable person or notable artist. That requires significant coverage in independent reliable sources. “Significant coverage” is critical analysis and commentary as to what is viewed as important/significant/influential about the topic.

Mr. Bowden passed in 1958, surely your oath was not specifically to create a Wikipedia article? If you have a condition that affects how you perceive or use Wikipedia, perhaps you could work with someone on your end(who would need their own account) to help you? 331dot (talk) 09:15, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

my oath includes getting him his rightful place in history. It’s strange how things are picked and choose to be remembered and put into print. I believe that there was enough coverage about this man enough people visited him and his artwork affected a time period so greatly that he deserves to be rightfully written about. The problem of the location of Trinidad Colorado is a lot of records were lost between fires and floods because I’m the one that tracked everything down gum shoe detective style. Sometimes people really do just get lost and they need somebody to pick up the torch and move forward to get them their spot he’s dead he can’t speak for himself and I’m not the first person to try to get this done. I’m just doing it in a more modern age which includes being able to make him a Facebook page and use Wikipedia so that more people can learn about him at lightning speed so yes. The answer to your question is yes my oath includes Wikipedia. It’s called doing the most that I can do. I’ve also written to the governor of Colorado I’ve gone to multiple historical societies and set in their meetings trying to figure out how to get his work preserved and I’m working with history Colorado trying to update their records because they’re very sparse to say the least compared to what I’ve collected in the Bowden Bible.

I don’t really know anybody where I live I recently moved to a small town in New Mexico there’s nobody to help me I’m a 48-year-old widow that homeschools my 12 year old daughter. That’s how this whole thing started as I just wanted to teach her about interesting history around where we lived and it really confused me that in the age of information there was no information about Martin Bowden so we made it our project to go seek out the information and now I need something to do with that information to bring it to the world.

Thank you for listening. TheBluflame (talk) 15:34, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

one of my strong traits of my condition is that I don’t let things go. And tell everything is filed in its place properly and everything has been discovered about it and this is one of those fixations to Martin Bowden’s betterment. In other words I might not have anybody to help me and I’ll be asking a lot of questions but what am I strong traits is that I’m very persistent and I will continue to be so in this case. I’ll just keep asking questions and submitting drafts until something finally goes through because there’s nobody else to do it but me. TheBluflame (talk) 15:36, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheBluflame The first thing you need to establish is whether he is “Wikipedia notable”. There are two ways to qualify: “presumed notability” or two or more pieces of significant coverage in reliable sources (which has its own Wikipedia definition). If you don’t have two pieces of sig cov, you should write about him somewhere else, like Medium or Substack or Linkedin. Have a look at WP:42 and WP:GNG. (ps neurodivergents are more likely to be accused of writing like AI; don’t worry about it.) Mme Maigret (talk) 09:21, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot and Mmemaigret: I think TheBluflame is saying that they do have a number of newspaper articles already collected – but they didn’t realise they have to cite them. Based on things like this I think there probably is a case for notability. — D’n’B–📞 — 09:31, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Martin Bowden. I was the decliner here and suggested the editor come to the Teahouse. I agree there is potential notability, but the Denver Gazette is geolocked to me and I didn’t think of looking for an archive – thanks, DandelionAndBurdock. Tacyarg (talk) 10:08, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @DandelionAndBurdock. I agree, it seems like there’s sig cov.

@TheBluflame I’ve cleaned up your article. You just need to insert more sources now. Mme Maigret (talk) 10:53, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe someone at WP:ART or WP:BIOG would be willing to co-edit here and get this draft into shape. Athanelar (talk) 12:56, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

okay

First off a big thank you to all of you people for helping me because this is overwhelming and hard for me to carry by myself and I’m just doing my best. Second off yes I have 22 articles that have been published in newspapers or magazines or books that were written about this man starting from the 50s all the way up until 2013. I’m going to just keep trying to edit this and get it into shape because this man deserves his spot in history. It also said something about secondary sources I have US census records of ancestry records that I’ve dug up I have local records from libraries which ones are the strongest how can I do this the best?

I want to take just a minute to deeply thank you for cleaning up my article this is so overwhelming for me that I can only do it in sports because it causes me to emotionally short out because it’s so much and he’s an important figure so thank you thank you thank you TheBluflame (talk) 14:21, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m going to spend the next couple of hours citing all the sources I have I want everybody in the world to know about this man he deserves to be known he was known at one time and somehow history has chosen to overlook or forget him and I have spent the past 7 months on an autistic fixation of finding everything I can about him he is worthy I will work on that right now I will be back with more questions no doubt because this is incredibly confusing for me but also I just can’t stop I can’t let it go it has to be done.

I’m literally almost in tears thank you all so much for helping me with this!!! TheBluflame (talk) 14:23, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Post Empire Magazine (1954)

Detroit News Pictorial Magazine (Feb 27, 1955)

Sunday News – “Mountain Art” (March 13, 1955)

Cleveland Plain Dealer (1955)

Richmond Times-Dispatch (1955)

Inez Hunt “To Colorados Restless Ghost” (1960)

Pueblo Star Journal (1964)

La Junta Tribune-Democrat (1965)

The Denver Post (1966)

Security Advertiser & Fountain Valley News (1967)

Pueblo Chieftain (1970)

Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph (1972)

The Denver Post Magazine (1981 – Bob Leasure)

The Denver Post Empire Magazine (1983)

RockArtBlog (2015)

Denver Gazette (2026)

I just want to explain myself that with my autism I tend to over explain things and so I’ve learned to try to hold back because I scare people off. Unfortunately that did not work for me in this situation because y’all needed to see all the things that I had up front. I’m still learning what’s considered a strong source and acceptable I guess the rock art blog wouldn’t be but that’s okay because what I have right now is nationally dispersed media documenting multiple decades, including posthumous recognition.

I’m going to get back to working on my draft I just wanted to thank you all for your patience life is difficult navigating the rules sometimes especially in something like this.

I’m doing this for Martin.

Because he’s dead and he can’t do it for himself and he deserves it. TheBluflame (talk) 15:30, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

thank you a thousand times over! TheBluflame (talk) 15:40, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

yes thank you

That’s exactly what I was trying to say

I’m trying to get them listed and update my draft

Thank you for being able to translate what I was saying TheBluflame (talk) 15:39, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there – looking for some assistance formulating an edit request for Rathbones Investment Bank wiki page. Full disclosure that I am being paid to provide this edit (laid out on my own talk page), and therefore I am going through all appropriate channels (of which my next step is to submit an edit request!). This edits purpose is to provide a significant increase in breadth of current information and also to ensure that everything is ‘up to date’.

Usually, as a volunteer editor, would go directly onto the “Edit source” page, however this edit is lengthy, and of course paid! I had a few questions which the Edit Requests page didn’t explicitly clear up for me, so wanted to ask them here. Firstly, can I submit the entire edit in one edit request? I could potentially also upload it section by section but am aware that this would increase the feedback timeframe. Secondly, for my updated ‘historical’ section, I have primarily used two books (unavailable online, but available in libraries) that were written about the Rathbones history. I would assume that this is fine to reference as a legitimate secondary source. Moreover, the updated ‘governance’ section is not readily available with secondary references – but with primary (neutral) references. Would this also be acceptable?

Lastly, I would be very grateful if anyone could provide some feedback on my edit request before I submit it, primarily to ensure that I stick to all laid-out guidelines, or perhaps to idiot check my work! If not, then an answer to my questions above would be much appreciated.

Thanks. Kranken145 (talk) 10:51, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To your first question; you can, but you’re more likely to have success by submitting multiple smaller requests. The COI edit request process ia, like everything else, entirely voluntary; and to be frank, the number of people who actually work on COI edit requests is quite small, because those of us who work on this for free out of passion are not eager to help paid editors make sure corporate articles are up to date so they can cash a paycheck. Smaller requests are easier for a volunteer to verify before implementation, so they’re more likely to get done in a reasonable timeframe.

It is still entirely possible that your edit request could languish in the queue for weeks or months; both you and your employer should be aware of this.

For your second question; yes, offline sources are just fine, provided you give enough information in your citation that a person could theoretically locate the source to verify the information.

Also, please be aware that when people ask questions like this I have a tendency to double-check these articles for notability. Most companies in the world do not meet our criteria for inclusion, and a great many corporate articles on Wikipedia are based on routine business activity reporting which does not substantiate an article here. If my check comes up lacking, I may create a deletion discussion about the article. If that happens, please don’t hold a grudge, nor take it as some kind of retaliatory action. of Athanelar (talk) 12:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’d like to note right away that notability does seem to be present here; but all of the best sources for that are languishing in the “Further reading” section rather than actually being used to provide material to the article. Either way, disregard the point about deletion as it doesn’t seem like it’ll go that way. Athanelar (talk) 12:49, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments, I will keep that all in mind. Glad to know that it does meet notability guidelines, and I do recognise how reviewers may be less willing to look at those edit requests that paid editors do, so quickly. Kranken145 (talk) 11:09, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gonna be honest, having never submitted an edit request before I’m not exactly sure how to help (it seems like Athanelar above has you covered). I just want to compliment you: most COI editors think they can just directly edit the page to turn it into an advertisement without any sources and expect it to be kept. They then get confused when the edit is inevitably reverted. Thanks for taking the time to go through all the procedures and do things the right way! If everybody did that, Wikipedia would be a much easier thing to moderate (you would not believe the amount of COI edits people make on here). —DollarStoreBa’al^Converse 14:39, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

FYI the best thing to do is suggest they use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard, which has COI request and paid edit request options. Blue Sonnet (talk) 02:56, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for suggesting this. I have had a look at the page – and at the paid edit request option. However, the paid edit request option is for if the page ‘does not currently exist’, and my page already does! However, above, it states that ” Instead, these editors are encouraged to submit an edit request on the article’s talk page using the designated form below.”

So, should I be submitting a form in the ‘article does not exist’ category or not – I am a little confused. Alternatively, I can go straight to the article’s talk page, but I am worried that this will not get through. Kranken145 (talk) 11:07, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That section expands to give different instructions for non-existent pages (click on “show” to see it), you can continue to use the wizard if the page does already exist. Blue Sonnet (talk) 02:15, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I truly believe that if we all followed guidelines, it would indeed be a far more efficient process! Kranken145 (talk) 11:10, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Im fairly new to being an editor. I added a request in the page for “Chola empire” that they should change the language mentioned in a picture of a coin from tamil to sanskrit. I also added a proper citation. Yet, nothing has happened and the incorrect information remains. Can someone with a sufficient level of clearance fix this issue? It’s been annoying me. TarvastOfParneth (talk) 12:40, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You didn’t submit your edit request correctly, so nobody patrolling the edit request queue would see it. Use the Edit request wizard to help you. Athanelar (talk) 12:52, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

really? But I received a reply from a mod (I think) who said I needed to provide a source. I then provided an appropriate source. (This is all in the talk page of chola Empire) I also made another talk topic wherein I provided the source directly, using the format they asked me to. Can someone please check what I have already written and see if I had gone wrong? TarvastOfParneth (talk) 14:32, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tbh, I kinda feel like the coin shows Sanskrit and not Tamil. But the source claims that its Tamil. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:40, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

im pretty sure the source might be wrong on that detail TarvastOfParneth (talk) 13:09, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia can only report what reliable sources state; if you think that source is wrong then you need to find a source that says something different. Athanelar (talk) 14:18, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn’t see your comment earlier TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:28, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How is the sourcei provided unreliable? It’s the Chennai Egmore museum, numismatics division. TarvastOfParneth (talk) 15:39, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I haven’t said anything about the source you provided. Athanelar (talk) 16:15, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you meant this, the link does not say anything about the particular coin. All it says is that “The legend on most of the coin types is in Sanskrit.” which does not prove that the particular coin is in Sanskrit as it uses the word “most” and not “all”. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 16:19, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve found another source. https://www.scribd.com/document/729307203/TVA-BOK-0013144-Coins-of-the-Chola (page 16) “Coins of the Cholas” by C.H. Biddulph. TarvastOfParneth (talk) 11:35, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

But Scribd is a self publishing platform, not a WP:Reliable source. Please see WP:RSPSOURCES. – Arjayay (talk) 12:08, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry, but I can’t find the book pdf online anywhere other than scribd. Can I just provide the book title and page, without the scribd link? The book itself as a source is from 1968. TarvastOfParneth (talk) 12:48, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I too feel like the source is wrong but you can only edit if there is source that proves the statement. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:26, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the only people who can see your request are those who specifically go looking for it, because you did not submit it correctly, so people checking the edit request queue will not see it. Use the WP:Edit request wizard. Athanelar (talk) 16:14, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am editing the wikipedia page for First Unitarian Congregation of Toronto – First Unitarian Congregation of Toronto. We have recently moved to a new location. I have successfully uploaded a picture of our new building, but the map below the picture is for the old location. How do I get a map of the new location. Naciap (talk) 20:00, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The map is generated based on coordinates that are stored in the entry on our sibling project Wikidata. If you have the new building’s coordinates, the entry can be updated. DS (talk) 20:08, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for your quick response! I have the building’s coordinates, but I don’t understand where I would find where the old ones are stored. Naciap (talk) 20:27, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I think I found it – just trying to format the coordinates correctly. Naciap (talk) 20:58, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Naciap: I’ve emended the coordinates both in the article and on Wikidata. You may want to replace the photo on Wikidata with one of the new building. Deor (talk) 23:30, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikidata item is about the building, not the congregation (albeit some of its statements may conflate the two). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 14:50, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Pigsonthewing: It seems to me that the Wikidata item should be changed to be about the congregation, not the building, simply by changing the “instance of” statement. There’s doesn’t seem to be anything particularly significant about the building you want the item to be about, which is likely to be torn down soon in any event. (The “OpenStreetMap way ID” statement would also need to be changed to indicate the new location, but all the other statements seem OK—particlarly the “inception” of 1845, which certainly doesn’t apply to either building.) Deor (talk) 23:42, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata items should never (a few caveats may apply, but not in this case) have their subject changed. If necessary, a new item should be created, and the Wikipedia link moved to that.

Not least because other Wikimedia projects and external partners may be using the QID to uniquely identify the subject in their data (as, no doubt, OSM are doing in this case).

When a Wikipedia article covers two related topics (such as a building and its occupier) Wikidata refers to this as the “Bonnie and Clyde phenomenon.

The fact that a building is about to be torn down is irrelevant; Wikidata records what was as well as what is. And its measure of significance (“notability”) is markedly different to this Wikipedia’s. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 10:54, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I recently created Lyadh, a word/concept in Bengali that roughly translates to the act of lazing around and doing nothing. According to WP:ITALICTITLE, non-English words and phrases should be italicized both in ordinary text and in article titles. However, I’m unable to italicize the title of my article. How should I do it? Any help would be appreciated! Thanks, Dissoxciate (talk) 20:22, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Italic title 🙂 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 20:27, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That helped, thank you so much! Dissoxciate (talk) 21:02, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dissoxciate, the title may be okay, but the WP:LEADSENTENCE and the whole focus of the article may not be. Generally speaking, Wikipedia is not a dictionary and does not have articles about words, although there are some exceptions for words that actually become objects of intense news coverage and other secondary coverage outside of dictionaries to the point where the word itself becomes a subject suitable for an encyclopedia. An example is TERF (acronym). The essence of the problem can be seen in the part in strikeout type from the lead sentence:

Lyadh (Bengali: ল্যাদ) is a word in [[Bengali language|Bengali]] that describes the act of doing nothing, being relaxed, and lazing around.

Very, very few words are notable enough to have an article about them at Wikipedia (much less Bengali words), and it is not at all clear that Lyadh is one of them. This would lead to this article being nominated for deletion. On the other hand, if you refocused the entire article away from the word itself and towards the concept, then most likely the article will be okay, assuming the sources demonstrate WP:Notability of the concept. What if you started out the article this way (assuming this is accurate):

Lyadh (Bengali: ল্যাদ) is the [[Bengali culture|Bengali]] art or pastime of doing nothing, being relaxed, and lazing around.

and drop everything about the term (see MOS:REFERS), drop details about related expressions, synonyms, anything that is about *words* (lexical gaps, untranslatable words and the like), and stick to the *thing itself*, describing it as a matter of Bengali culture. Once you have completely refocused the article on the concept, you may add back (just a few of) the most important details about the word, perhaps in a section on ==Terminology==, or in small, explanatory notes inline. Make sense? I think you risk deletion keeping it about the word. Mathglot (talk) 01:59, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Draft:Lyadh for further development. Mathglot (talk) 07:33, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I was looking at pages in Category:Proposed deletions needing attention and I left a note on the page of a user who directly used {{proposed deletion/dated}} instead of subst’ing {{prod}}. The user then replied to me asking how to do this, and I realized that I have not used the visual editor and have no idea how to subst a template myself. How does one do that? Thanks! Casablanca 🪨^(T) 20:36, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Some templates are auto-substituted, for example {{THYFA}}, but others can be substitutes by prefixing subst: before the name of the template. See Wikipedia:Substitution ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:39, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Casablanca Rock pinging for visibility ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:39, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Casablanca Rock: Help:VisualEditor#Substituting templates has an alleged method but it doesn’t work for me. File:VisualEditor – Template editing 7.png is from 2015. I see no “Add template” button now and I haven’t found a way to subst in VisualEditor. subst: disappears without substituting when I try. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:16, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all. Thanks for your help. I was unable to do subst in the visual editor. It works fine in the source editor, but it doesn’t seem to work in the visual editor for me. I have been experiencing exactly what PrimeHunter is mentioning. I primarily use the source editor, but it seems that this could be an issue because it essentially precludes visual editor users from using {{prod}} in the way listed in the documentation. Is it worth opening up a phabricator ticket? Casablanca 🪨^(T) 14:04, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1290#Reliable Source Inquiry

Given the issue in the previous thread needs resolution, see the respective page in question: Josie Valeri. What are some ways to provide a citation when the University does not currently have a reliable source to support the claim? RealRobRossi (talk) 02:11, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How about an earlier, subsequently deleted, page on the university’s website? (Have you tried using the Wayback Machine?) — Hoary (talk) 02:40, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is now resolved with an up-to-date, reliable source. RealRobRossi (talk) 03:02, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

on this section of the article Avro keyboard. It says “The software was certified as 100% clean from spyware/adware/virus on Softpedia”

While this is a claim and not a statement, and the statement itself is true (i know that because i’ve used the software many times and it’s literally built into Bengali Wikipedia), It sounds like a marketing headline. Should i rewrite the sentence, keep it or even get rid of it? Nextrin (talk) 03:37, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Make it attributive? “Softpedia deemed that the software doesn’t contain any spyware/adware/virus.” HyperAnd [talk] 05:27, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would remove it, I don’t think it’s an encyclopedically appropriate claim to include. We’re not a tech blog, we don’t care that a piece of software has been certified virus-free; because we’re not trying to get people to download it. Athanelar (talk) 14:10, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Nextrin That statement also refers to the version of the software that was available at a given point in time; the statement might not be true in the future (if and when a new version is avaliable). As @Athanelar says, an encyclopedia is not the place to make that statement. David10244 (talk) 13:42, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to change the statement to make it more neutral, if you request more then i can remove it.

The problem wasnt about weather its true or not since Avro is a respected software (even used by wikipedia) although it’s true that can change.

Most niche articles about bangladesh are very low quality, when i first saw this page there was atleast 10-11 grammar problems and some of the sentences were pretty hard to understand. You can check the article and relating articles to this and i bet you you’ll find MANY mistakes and issues that wouldn’t be allowed on a normal article. Nextrin (talk) 15:13, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am wondering if anyone would be willing to take a look at my first published article and provide any feedback or editing. This would be much appreciated, thanks so much! Dressing by body type in women. Handumont (talk) 04:59, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Handumont congrats on your published article! At the moment, no article links to Dressing by body type in women which you can change by searching other articles or templates and adding them there, for example in William Herbert Sheldon psychology article. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:36, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, will do! Thank you so much for the feedback 🙂 Handumont (talk) 22:15, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I recently started watching Sangamarmar and became a huge admirer of Saurabh Raj Jain and Sheen Dass. They are really beautiful actors and I checked the profile of Sheen Dass and she has been the main lead actress in notable shows like Piyaa Albela, Indiawaali Maa, Aami Dakini and now Sangamarmar. So she is notable according to WP:NACTOR so why is that I am not able to create her article? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 13:03, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the article is protected against creation. You can request the page be unprotected, but I would recommend creating a draft article at Draft:Sheen Dass and submitting it for review. BSH (talk) – (they/them) 13:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I don’t want to create a draft because sometimes just simply decline the drafts without reviewing it properly. How do I request the page to be unprotected? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 13:37, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you create a proper draft, that won’t be an issue. If a draft is reviewed improperly, you can pursue a community discussion to overturn an improper review that did not follow process. That a review does not provide a desired result does not mean that the review was improper.

You are free to request unprotection at WP:RFPP– but I don’t think it’s likely to be granted. I would note that you have one article you created outside of the draft process up for deletion, you created one article over a redirect, and have not yet had a draft accepted when you did use the draft process- all of these are about Indian actors. Do you have an interest in these actors? 331dot (talk) 13:44, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly speaking, yes I am an addict of Indian television shows, actors and actresses and I would love to create articles on new television shows and actors so if you ask if I have an interest yes I do have an interest in indian tv actors and tv shows but I am not paid for anything. ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 13:56, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Abhishek Kumar has been declined by 2 separate reviewers. Draft:Priyanshi Yadav has been declined by a third separate reviewer. I would really suggest you not create articles directly in mainspace until you successfully get a draft or two published. I understand that it’s frustrating to have drafts repeatedly declined, but trying to bypass that process and publish things directly will not make your articles more likely to remain in mainspace, it just means more effort is necessary to clean them up if need be. Athanelar (talk) 16:56, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I will not create anything now ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 17:05, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ITVStoryWeaver Acting in “notable” shows does not make an actress notable. Please see WP:NACTOR. David10244 (talk) 13:51, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

NACTOR literally says Such a person may be considered notable if: The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, notable television shows, stage performances, or other notable productions… Athanelar (talk) 14:50, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hoping someone can help me with this. This morning (NZ time) I did some editing on the Wairarapa article. Part of my work involved removing paragraph that had been cut and pasted from https://teara.govt.nz/en/wairarapa-region and replacing it with a paragraph I wrote myself. Almost immediately after publishing my last edit, another editor reverted the article right back to before I started. They claimed to disagree with “my edit”, however, I couldn’t see why they reverted everything I had done when their comment focussed on one issue. Shortly afterwards they posted on my talk page, accusing me of copyright violation. I asked them to identify the text they objected to. They offered no explanation so I reverted my edits, with some changes to address the issue they had raised. They reverted my edits again. This time they explained that they objected to a sentence which I had not touched. (Someone had cut and pasted it from https://teara.govt.nz/en/wairarapa-region) I am not happy about having an unjustified accusation of copyright violation on my talk page. Should I ask an admin to delete it? How do I go about doing that? Kbwc56 (talk) 14:03, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Kbwc56: you’re free to remove the notification from your talk page yourself, there’s no need to involve an admin. In fact, you can remove most things, per WP:UOWN. — DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:40, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks DoubleGrazing my concern is that the accusation remains in the talk history. Although unsubstantiated it feels like an inappropriate blot on my record. I’m the first to admit I’m not perfect, however, I’ve been able to maintain a high standard of work on Wikipedia and this bugs me. That written I’ve decided to take your advice and delete the comment. Kbwc56 (talk) 20:47, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You did readd copyvio into the article after it was removed and revdel’d, so they were right. Please make sure that you aren’t doing that. Tenshi! (Talk page) 21:00, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This would not be feasible. They did not edit the article, they reverted all changes including my edits and made no attempt to identify the copyright material (one very small paragraph). I initially thought the copy vio related to the paragraph I removed. Had they explained their action (in a comment) there would have been no problem Kbwc56 (talk) 21:24, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They initially made two edits with edit summaries, first reverting your edits for Manual of Style reasons, the second being copyvio. You were able to check the second revert’s diff before it was revdel’d, however that’s no longer an option since it has been revdel’d now. Tenshi! (Talk page) 21:37, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Their “manual of style reasons” were questionable at best. The article’s introduction was poor. i suspect most editors would prefer my intro, which follows a structure established in numerous Wikipedia articles: I identified the region, and then very briefly described its boundaries. One could perhaps add another sentence to the intro as it currently stands. I’ll admit the other editor’s repeated nuclear reversion made it difficult to work. Checking the diff did not help. The text they later identified was not something I had ever worked on. I did not realise it was cut and pasted until they identified the sentence. I think it’s bad form to revert edits with no or inadequate explanation as to why those edits are being reverted. For example, when reverting Wairarapa the other editor reverted a whole lot of essential structural work. Kbwc56 (talk) 21:51, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have been trying to ensure the content for my draft loveholidays page is written in an encyclopedic style that matches Wikipedia’s guidelines, and have redrafted it a couple of times but it is still being flagged as being too promotional.

Please could someone help me, perhaps with some specific examples of how I’m falling foul of these guidelines in the latest version of my draft?

I have also tried to stick to summarising what is included in the cited sources – so if there are any examples where I am not following the right approach here please could you let me know.

I added coverage of the criticism loveholidays received for leaving ABTA, disputes over Covid refunds and the issues experienced by loveholidays customers following the collapse of the FTI Group (all of which received quite widespread media coverage) – when I had similar feedback on a previous draft – do these not provide sufficient balance? Or is the issue here that I’m not meeting the notability threshold for each citation?

Finally, it has also been flagged for a COI, but I have added this notice re COI:

In accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation’s Terms of Use, I disclose that I have been paid by my employer for my contributions to this article.

I appreciate there are a few different issues here, but I would really appreciate any help with this. Thank you.

Martinlane86 (talk) 15:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong left a pretty comprehensive comment earlier today which states this tells us everything the company would like us to know about them. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about them, showing how it meets Wikipedia’s special definition of a notable company. Essentially their contention is you don’t have enough golden rule-compliant sources to demonstrate notability. Athanelar (talk) 16:40, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I read your draft. I can clearly say that I felt like reading about why I should book loveholidays for a tour rather than what loveholidays is. The draft is written in an non-encyclopedic tone. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 16:46, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You might feel that your draft is neutral because you wrote about the criticisms faced by the company during the pandemic, but that does not make the whole draft neutral.

The statement i felt like promotional was

• loveholidays operates as an online travel agency, which allows customers to combine flights and accommodation into a single booking.

TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 16:58, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Martinlane86, we sometimes suggest that new editors who’ve been asked to create an article for their employer take a moment to read an essay was written by some of our experienced editors – you can find it at WP:BOSS.

It’s an essay rather than policy, but it will give you valuable information, tips and links to other pages that you might find useful. Blue Sonnet (talk) 23:25, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The above comments are super helpful, and I agree with @Blue-Sonnet that reading the essay might help you gain a better understanding of what we mean when we say the tone of your article is not encyclopedic yet. When I read your article, I noticed in certain areas it reads as if it were just a string of headlines put together. And quite a few times, what was written matched the headline of the source you used. If you can avoid this it may help with the tone of your article. I hope this helps! FiddleheadLady (talk) 01:05, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Martinlane86 (1) The page is full of WP:CORPTRIV and (2) Wikipedia is not a directory. Mme Maigret (talk) 12:56, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please check if this article is okay for mainspace: Draft:Ali Jihami (Marketing Executive) ~2026-23248-37 (talk) 15:42, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-23248-37 Added AFC submission template for your draft. Please wait for review. nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 15:52, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, @Athanelar left a comment that said that the draft’s references did not show that the person meets Wikipedia’s criteria for inclusion for people. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that provide significant coverage and discusses the person in detail, and not just brief mentions. The sources should also be independent (not connected to the subject like interviews, this own website, etc) and reliable.

Also, You can only place Wikipedia articles in the See also section, not pdf’s or any other websites. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:19, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

btw, I removed the section. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:20, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It’s also AI-generated & I have a suspicion of COI/UPE, so I added a warning to the authors Talk page. Blue Sonnet (talk) 23:10, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheGreatEditor024 Web sites can be placed in See Also sections. David10244 (talk) 13:58, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Okay. Thank you. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:02, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) No, TheGreatEditor024 you should not place external links there, as per MOS:NOTSEEALSO “The “See also” section should not include red links, links to disambiguation pages …. , or external links” – Arjayay (talk) 14:06, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I know that, btw I am the one that said “Also, You can only place Wikipedia articles in the See also section, not pdf’s or any other websites.”

Secondly, I am not the one that added websites in the original article. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:15, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We literally have a separate == External links == section for that what r u on nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 14:06, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to know how to add cast in the episode table for example the episode table in my Draft:Jabb Zodiacs Met? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 17:07, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ITVStoryWeaver: I have used aux2 from the documentation of {{Episode table}} and {{Episode list}} to add a Cast column.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thank you so much ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 02:32, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone! I have recently been working on the Scottish Folklore page and added a significant amount. My primary purpose for working on this page was for a class. I was wondering if there were any suggested improvements that could be made to the article regarding tone, information, or if anything needs to be added to it. Thank you! Matheson.emma (talk) 17:12, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your edit! I hope you find improving our encyclopedia enjoyable, whether it is for a class or not. A majority of your additions to the Scottish Folklore article were great, but I noticed you added a small amount of original research, which is disallowed on Wikipedia and should be avoided whenever possible. I added a citation needed tag to the sentences that need citations; please add citations to them. Happy editing! Mikeycdiamond (talk) 21:51, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your help! I’ve added the needed citations! Matheson.emma (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, fellows of the Teahouse. This is my first time paying a visit.

I’ve only recently rewritten the opening section for the U.S. Route 101 in California article in the hopes that it would meet the GA criteria. But there is an editor, whose name I can’t reveal, who is removing wikilinks for the U.S. states in the opener. I thought perhaps they were simply uninformed and undid their edits, but they removed the wikilinks again, pushing the dilemma to the brink of edit warring. The user explained that they are just trying to avoid overlinking, but I’ve seen state names wikilinked on other highway-related articles, such as U.S. 23 in Michigan and U.S. Route 131, and those two examples are featured articles. I feel the necessity to do the same in the US 101 article. How should I explain this to the user? Is there a rule requiring this, or even a guideline on Wikipedia in such regards? I look forward to anyone’s reply. Nebulous2357 (talk) 17:15, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have a similar vaguely related problem. I wrote a section “Left behind. Forgotten. Invisible.” If as described there, you slowly go further back to see how it started, you might find some vague resemblance to the problem described here in this section. A lot of my contributions were getting removed. I’m already doing my one tiny little part. I can’d anymore like take in and make sense of the underlying rules behind your claim. I’m trying to get the system changed eventually. We each have our tiny little seed. Then slowly, problems combine into one. People need to be able to break in and compete. They need to be able to squeeze in their tiny little bit that are are a good hard worker for. Sometimes, their strategy will turn out highly successful. It stops just short of an edit war being like “I’ve got to have that.” Some people might be like that. We need a very secure system. Those who know how to organize it have something to look forward to 1000 years in advance and never give up and will do their small part that looks at what’s been getting attacked and guards it and not how we got there. Blackbombchu (talk) 18:45, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nebulous2357, welcome to the Teahouse!

Sometimes editors have differing opinions on how to improve an article. For a matter like this, I think you should go to the user’s talk page and start a section explaining why you think that having the links on that particular article is a good idea. Though, try to have an open mind; they might have a good reason why they think the version without the links is better.

Best of luck! MEN KISSING (she/they) Talk to me, I don’t bite! – See my edits 19:03, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t make any sense of that. Those who know how to organize it have something to look forward to 1000 years in advance and never give up and will get it done and do their small part that looks at what’s been getting attacked and guards it with their very secure system and not how we got there. Blackbombchu (talk) 21:53, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Blackbombchu, your recent contributions to the Teahouse have been confusing and incoherent. This response especially so.

If you have a concrete question about how to contribute to Wikipedia, you may ask it here, but otherwise I’d like to suggest you take this matter elsewhere besides Wikipedia. MEN KISSING (she/they) Talk to me, I don’t bite! – See my edits 22:14, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nebulous2357,

As a professional writer I learned many years ago the importance of introducing the subject of an article. Your readers can only understand the article if they understand the things you have written about. I see big value in wikilinking the introduction. Take U.S._Route_23_in_Michigan for example. The introduction mentions Lambertville. I’ve never heard of that place. Mousing over the wikilink I see a brief description. If there’s something in the introduction I really NEED to understand, I can click the wikilink, prepare myself, then return to the article I wanted to read. So, I reckon you’re on the right track wikilinking your introduction. I agree with User:MEN_KISSING‘s advice. Kbwc56 (talk) 03:52, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nebulous2357, in a recent edit summary, you wrote it’s obligatory to wikilink California and say that it’s a U.S. state, rather than a nation. I am sorry but that is not obligatory. The vast majority of literate English language readers are aware that California is one of the states in the United States, and California is so well known that it is not at all obvious let alone mandatory to wikilink it. It is well established that we do not routinely wikilink world famous cities such as London, Tokyo, Rome and Cairo. California seems to have a similar level of fame. As for whether or not to explicitly mention that California is a state, contrast California in this regard to Mississippi, Ohio and Missouri, which are also the names of rivers, or New York, which is both a state and a city. California is so well known, it is rarely necessary to mention that it is a state, with the obvious exception of the article California itself. In the end, this is a matter of style decided though consensus among interested editors rather than a matter of policy or anything obligatory. Cullen328 (talk) 05:49, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kbwc56. Your statement has given me an idea on how to justify my wikilinks, and, per MEN KISSING‘s advice, I’ll write to the user on their talk page. I’ll keep everyone posted as to what their perception of the matter is. I might even consider inviting them to the Teahouse. Nebulous2357 (talk) 17:24, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You’re very welcome. I’ve learned that guidelines, flexibly applied, are almost always superior to hard and fast rules. (Almost always, usually) Kbwc56 (talk) 21:34, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m back, @Kbwc56.

I just wrote to the editor, and was unable to convince them. They were unconditionally devoted to the Manual of Style, which they believe discourages wikilinking of well-known geographical locations like California. I was hoping that, as a professional writer, you could chime in and help us settle the matter. I’m also coming to the belief that the issue has exposed a gray area in MOS:GEOLINK which might be resolved through a vote. Nebulous2357 (talk) 16:58, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Coincidentally I have been having a “discussion” with another editor who takes a very narrow view of Wikipedia guidelines. People don’t change simply because they are presented with rational arguments. Looking at the article, I think it may be more interesting to people who don’t know that particular highway. I think many of your readers do not live in California. I live in New Zealand. Not long ago I recall pointing out to someone that there is a Washington State, and it’s a very long way from Washington DC. How does this relate to your introduction? I would definitely wikilink “Oregon” (I know people who probably think “Oregon” is a company that makes chainsaw parts.) California? Washington? You have wikilinked Los Angeles and Tumwater. I suspect it’s not the end of the world if some people prevent you from wikilinking California and Washington. Readers can find out about those states by clicking the links you already have. Do you really want to make an issue out of all three states? Perhaps it would be better to insist on wikilinking Oregon because the paragraph has no wikilink to anywhere in Oregon. I can see you’ve improved readability a lot. (I’d like to see more citations, multiple sources if poss). You can be proud of what you’ve achieved. I’ll support your position. I do think you’ll get wider agreement to a compromise position: Go for wikilinking Oregon. If you can acheive that, pat yourself on the back and do something IRL that brings you joy. I have your back Kbwc56 (talk) 20:08, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I greatly appreciate your support, Kbwc56. It just brings a smile to my face. The compromise seems to be the wisest course of action to take. Yet I’m worried that the editor will just undo my changes again, thus fomenting the scenario I seek to eschew.

To any Teahouse hosts reading this, can you show me how to vote on the matter? Drop me a link and a suggestion or two, and I’ll take it from here. Oh, and I’ll have that herbal tea, please. Nebulous2357 (talk) 02:35, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how to get a vote going I’m afraid. I feel very much like a newbie here. One tip, however. One of the articles I’m currently editing sometimes gets reverted by another editor. They might disagree with one word, or one citation, but their response is always to revert the work. That can be quite soul-destroying. I regularly copy the wikitext into notepad. If the work gets reverted, I can try to figure out how what that editor disagrees with, make what is usually a tiny change, and paste from notepad. Time-wasting but I lose nothing and try very hard to keep my serenity. Kbwc56 (talk) 05:28, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen this on YouTube. Can this be used in any articles presentations such as articles on Magic, other articles? One “prank” has a guy approaching a Hamburger Ad on a local resteraunt, then he puts his hands on it, and a real hamburger appears in his hands. Input YouTube, then Telekinesis Prank. You would NOT believe what is going on. Thought I bring this here instead of being reverted by someone who may object to this if I placed it myself. ~2026-16963-29 (talk) 17:51, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @~2026-16963-29, the page you’ve linked to is a disambiguation page, which lists all the different articles that the term “magic” might be used for.

At Wikipedia, articles summarise what reliable sources say about a subject rather than listing examples of the subject itself. If an article is missing important information about a specific trick, and you can find a reliable source that talks about that particular magic trick and it’s impact/effect on the medium of magic, then you could probably include the reliable source in an article.

If you look at the Magic (illusion) article, you’ll see that it doesn’t list every possible type of magic trick – the article would be far too long for anyone to read if we did that!

So for this trick to be included when others aren’t, it would have to be very, very important to the history of illusion magic and have affected the way that magicians perform their tricks. I don’t think that’s the case with the hamburger illusion trick, so it probably shouldn’t be included.

That’s also the question of copyright, since images and videos on Wikipedia need to be added with the consent of the copyright holder on a specific free-use license.

If you want to learn more about what should be included in articles and how to update them yourself, please give The Wikipedia Adventure a try! Blue Sonnet (talk) 22:59, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-16963-29: There is a section at Telekinesis#Magic and special effects. “Prank” magic on YouTube sounds like a combination of Street magic#Guerrilla magic and Hidden camera#In media, but some of it is probably staged with “random spectators” being in on it to give entertaining reactions. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:58, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hello Teahouse. I filed a COI-disclosed edit request on Talk:Anyma#Edit request: Expand coverage of visual creative team per reliable sources on 17 February 2026 using the {{edit COI}} template. It has been in Category:Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests for 8 weeks without review. I added supplementary sources on 4 April 2026. Disclosure: I am Alessio De Vecchi, Visual Co-Creative Director of Anyma. I have declared COI on the talk page and have not edited the article directly. The request uses only WP:RS sources, several already cited in the article (Variety is ref #18). The proposed changes are three specific before/after edits that bring the article in line with what its own cited sources say about the visual creative team. Additional context: Anyma’s AEDEN World Tour launches at Coachella on 17 April 2026, which will drive significant traffic to this article. Accurate attribution of the visual creative team before a major public performance is in the spirit of WP:BLP’s “get it right” principle. Question: given the COI-request queue has a substantial backlog (~12,000 pending requests), is there an appropriate way to ask for review of a specific well-formed request that has been pending 8 weeks? I don’t want to be seen as pressuring any editor. I’ve also posted at WikiProject Electronic music and intend to post at BLPN — standard multi-venue outreach, disclosed here per WP:CANVASSING. Thank you for any guidance. AlessioDeVecchi (talk) 18:36, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve accepted the edit request at Talk:Anyma#Edit request: Expand coverage of visual creative team per reliable sources. BSH (talk) – (they/them) 18:56, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@AlessioDeVecchi: Also, as an aside, it is highly recommended not to use LLMs to communicate on Wikipedia talk pages; we want to hear from you in your own words, not from your pet chatbot. Please do not continue to use LLMs in this way. Thanks! Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} -⃝⃤ (they/he) 19:42, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I want to follow MOS:GENDERID in the Moi Renée article.

When I wrote it, I followed the model of a Village Voice article about Renée, written during Renée’s life, and it used he/him pronouns (excerpted here):

“a loudmouthed Jamaican androgyne named Moi Renée is swinging his head to and fro, cocking his ass and twisting his hips with the grace of a Yoruban priestess possessed by an Orisha. He is wearing a body-fitted Emilio Pucci dress, black lace stockings held in place by garters, and Calvin Klein black suede pumps.” (emphasis added)

Since creating the article, 2 sources, both of which use she/her pronouns, have been on my mind:

• The trailer for Miss Honey: The Catsuit in which designer Douglas Says, who knew Renée, uses she/her pronouns when referring to Renée: “She was really, really, really a character. She was fresh, young.”
• The song “Curtains for You”, a tribute to Renée, which includes the line, “To those of you who knew her, she’d always say, ‘I’m Jamaican, y’know?'”

I want to follow the policy, and, more importantly, I want to do right by the article’s subject. The Village Voice is a RS; a movie trailer and song lyrics are not. For all the digging I’ve done, I’ve never found Renée saying anything that answers this one way or the other.

What is the proper path here?

– RosePickfair 🌹 (talk) 21:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would leave it as is. The note that is currently on the page should be sufficient. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 21:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @RosePickfair,

For this, I think it wouldn’t hurt to ask the folks over at WT:LGBTQ+. MEN KISSING (she/they) Talk to me, I don’t bite! – See my edits 22:27, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I’ll do that now. – RosePickfair 🌹 (talk) 22:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. @Graham87 suggested I reach out with questions. This page is titled “Central School” but the info box says “High School” and the body copy refers to the high school, middle school and elementary school. I’m thinking this page should be titled Sherburne-Earlville Central School District and cover that. But I don’t want to rework the opening unless you guys agree. ChrisH7006 (talk) 21:57, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Sherburne-Earlville Central School.

‘ . . . Central School’ is the name of the overall establishment that contains an Elementary School in one building, and a Middle and a High School in another building. The Infobox shows the location and address (13 School St.) of that second building. It may be that the Elementary school has a different street address (say, 11 School St., just as the Offices are said to be at 15 School St.), and a slightly different map location.

Personally, I don’t have a problem with the very minor discrepancy, but if the Article is to be renamed and repurposed as being about the School District, someone is going to have to find and insert material about the District (and I note that three references linked to the District’s website are not working properly).

I think a more obvious question is whether this School (or District) is actually Notable (per Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Schools). Apart from its involvement in the Odyssey of the Mind program (which takes up 6 of the article’s 13 references), I can see nothing that would distinguish the School from many thousands of other equivalent establishments nation- and world-wide, and information from the School’s website (which cannot contribute to Notability) makes up a good deal of the rest of the article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 01:56, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I generally agree with this. Re its notability: unfortunately that ship has long since sailed and I’d say it’d be difficult/impossible to get that page deleted now. See WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES; I’m not aware of much movement in this area in the last little while, despite the 2017 RFC noted at that link. Graham87 (talk) 04:33, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I’ll see if I can clean up some of the references and out of date info. thanks. ChrisH7006 (talk) 18:06, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Teahouse, I am currently writing my first article on Wikipedia(although i am not new), and I got rejected 4 times, so I would appreciate you to help edit my article to make it “less advertising”, thank you very much!! Please send me feedback through my talk page if you can:)

Draft:Eliot K-8 Innovation School thanks again Welovecontributors! [talk] [contribs] 23:57, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: You should keep the features you’d expect in a school self-promo to parents out of the article, for example, The school is an innovation and technology based school, having access to digital learning tools, including Chromebooks and tablets, beginning in the early grades, and has received local recognition for its innovative and the new and innovative type of teaching. It’s location as the site of the Eliot School Shooting is notable on it’s own nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 00:38, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I mean the Eliot School rebellion. nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 11:03, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I second the above comment about removing sections that are self-promo for the school. Another section that stands out is: Following the appointment of Principal Traci Walker Griffith, the school implemented administrative and academic changes, including adjustments to staffing and increased community engagement efforts. In the following years, student performance improved, and the school developed a focus on innovation and technology. If this information is notable enough to keep then it should be more specific. Currently it is too vague and reads as promotional, which won’t be accepted in AfC. If you are able to replace some of the sources that come directly from the school that will help too. FiddleheadLady (talk) 00:50, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion! Welovecontributors! [talk] [contribs] 09:39, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone, I need help. I was trying to add references in the section where it has the “sources needed” tag, but whenever I try to open the section, it shows a template and I get confused about where to add references. On other pages, it was easy to add citations and simple, but I’m stuck here and need your help. This is the page I was talking about. (Miss Venezuela 1962) Joshuafrandi (talk) 00:46, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In this section i was trying to add sources – (Contestants) Joshuafrandi (talk) 00:47, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To add references, go to the top and you will see this icon: click it and it will give you this reference tag: <ref></ref>. After that you can put the URL between it.

Here is an example

The Ctenocella pectinata is classified as a octocorallia^[1]

if you want more information, you can read this article. Budew1234 (talk) 01:07, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Joshuafrandi, references consisting of a bare URL are better than nothing, but they are suboptimal. High quality references will not openly display a URL and will instead contain bibliographic information such as the name of a book, publication or website, title of article or webpage, publication date, author names, page numbers, ISBNs and so on. This type of reference format is much more professional and helpful to our readers. Please see WP:Citation templates for a variety of templates that can be used for different types of sources, in a “fill in the blanks” fashion. Cullen328 (talk) 04:56, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WP:REFB can also be a useful guide when it comes to dealing with references! Meadowlark (talk) 07:59, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know who wrote this ( To add references, go to the top and you will see this icon:  click it and it will give you this reference tag: <ref></ref>. After that you can put the URL between it. Here is an examplevThe Ctenocella pectinata is classified as a octocorallia)

But this works for me thank you i was trying for hours to add refence. Joshuafrandi (talk) 21:35, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Teahouse!

I tried to link the official website using {{URL}} on this page (Chad Christensen (Idaho politician) – Wikipedia) and the link would not appear. The text is replaced to something like “Template: (unlinked URL)” and in red color. The link is correct though as I’ve tested it out. Could someone please tell me what went wrong? Saenryl (talk) 02:45, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Saenryl, you forgot the template name, try {{URL|www.whatever.com}}… – Adolphus79 (talk) 03:02, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Saenryl: Maybe you saw Template:Infobox officeholder#Sub-templates which says: “To include a URL, use {{URL}}“. I can see how a new editor may think it means to place the URL of the website inside {{...}}, but “URL” in {{URL}} is blue which indicates a link to more information. The link goes to Template:URL which explains how to use the template like {{URL|example.com}} at Template:URL#Usage. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:37, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Saenryl, the doc page at Template:Infobox officeholder#Sub-templates was definitely confusing. I changed it, hopefully for the better. Please go see if it makes more sense to you now. (Thanks to PrimeHunter for linking it, and please adjust as needed.) Mathglot (talk) 23:14, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:The first Romanian trans-African expedition

Hello, I would appreciate if an experienced editor could review this draft and give support to be moved to the mainspace.

This draft is based on a translation of ro:Prima expediție românească transafricană

I also expanded the content with additional information and a new reference. Thank you ! MihaTeod (talk) 06:33, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MihaTeod, I have submitted it for review on your behalf. The summary of the very first edit should have described it as a translation of ro:Prima expediție românească transafricană, but no summary has yet done this. As soon as possible, you should edit the article and use the summary to describe the draft as a translation. (E.g. “This draft started as a translation of ro:Prima expediție românească transafricană; now doing some minor rewording”.) — Hoary (talk) 07:56, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help, I really appreciate it! MihaTeod (talk) 09:38, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MihaTeod, the exact wording to use in your first translation edit (in case you translate another article) is given at WP:TFOLWP, and links both the original Romanian Wikipedia article and the original English version. If you forget, as here, it is a case of “missing attribution”; in this case, the wording to use is given at WP:RIA. Mathglot (talk) 22:58, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks!!! MihaTeod (talk) 05:45, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please add more references TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 08:56, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help, I really appreciate it! MihaTeod (talk) 09:39, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I added the references section, and will add more improvements to the draft — Versions111 (talk • contribs) 14:35, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I really appreciate your help! MihaTeod (talk) 05:31, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I would like to request the creation of a Wikipedia article for Komal Waghmare, an Indian deaf sports shooter and 2× bronze medalist at the 2025 Summer Deaflympics. I have reliable sources and a draft ready. Could someone please review or help create the article?

Shooting at the 2025 Summer Deaflympics

Komal M Waghmare (talk) 10:38, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:Requested articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 12:18, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You can add the request to Wikipedia:WikiProject Olympics/Deaflympics#Deaflympians TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:39, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Komal M Waghmare, are you the sports shooter in question? If not, you need to change your username urgently: see WP:REALNAME for more information. Meadowlark (talk) 10:03, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, how to move the target of an existing redirect in visual editor? Is it possible at all? Cause I want to change where one article redirects to. Thanks. Brickguy276 (talk) 12:52, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See the tutorial at Help:Redirect#Using VisualEditor ^^ nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 12:57, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article page for Operation Safed Sagar contains several issues as well as beign a curtailed view and has a relativly limited scope. However, content can be shifted from the page of the Kargil War as well as older varaints of the the Page Kargil Air war (that was merged into the articl with signifiant data loss) to build a more comprehensive and more robust page.

ref oldid is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kargil_Air_War&oldid=1257421301

I would like to know if It is possible for me to do so, and if not, should i consider other alternatives such as merging Safed sagar into Kargill? 4-RΔ𝚉🌑R-01𝕏 (talk) 15:39, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My recommendation is ask on the article’s talk page. I would say you could, just remember to never merge without a discussion. Cheers! Robloxguest3 (talk) 16:12, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

thanks ! 4-RΔ𝚉🌑R-01𝕏 (talk) 16:18, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

np!Robloxguest3 (talk) 16:24, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

thank you. ᱠᱩᱸᱫᱨᱩᱞᱟᱴᱟ (talk) 15:39, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How do I format a reques using edit request wizard on a protected page? I’d like detailed instructions, please, as I am confused on every step asked of me. TarvastOfParneth (talk) 15:56, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Go to WP:Edit request wizard and click the blue “The page is protected” button. From there it should walk you through the whole process. Athanelar (talk) 17:44, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

is there no specific format I need to follow in there? I can type my request in regular language? TarvastOfParneth (talk) 01:43, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

When you push the blue button and enter the name of the page you want to make a request for, you should be greeted by a source editor window containing something like this;

'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000035-QINU`"'<table class="box-Warning plainlinks ombox ombox-content" role="presentation"><tr><td class="mbox-image">[[File:Ambox important.svg|40x40px|link=|alt=]]</td><td class="mbox-text" style="text-align: left;">'''This article isn't protected, so you should be able to edit it yourself. If you are still having problems editing it, please ask for advice at [[WP:TEAHOUSE]].'''</td></tr></table>
:::
:::* '''What I think should be changed (format using <span class="nowrap">&#123;&#123;</span>[[Template:textdiff|textdiff]]<span class="nowrap">&#125;&#125;</span>)''':
:::* '''Why it should be changed''':
:::* '''References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button)''':
:::[[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 03:19, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
:::
:::'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000037-QINU`"'<div class="reflist-talk" >
<p class="reflist-talk-title">References</p>
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-00000039-QINU`"'<div>
'"`UNIQ--references-0000003B-QINU`"'</div>
</div>
:::

You can see that there are three bullet points; “What I think should be changed (format using {{textdiff}})”, “Why it should be changed” and “References supporting the possible change”

Under the first bullet point, you use the {{textdiff}} template to show what change you think should be made. That template works like this;

{{textdiff|This is the old text|This is the new text}}

produces

−

This is the old text

+

This is the new text

This template shows anyone viewing what changes you’re requesting in a clear manner.

Under the second bullet point, put your justification for the change (i.e., I think the old source is unreliable because X, Y, Z, and I think I have a better source)

Under the third bullet point, put whatever links you think support the change. Athanelar (talk) 03:19, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

what I want to change is a picture caption. Do I have to specify it is a caption, or can I just paste the text? Thanks. TarvastOfParneth (talk) 11:06, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Athanelar What you also see in the source edit window is “This article isn’t protected…” which can be confusing for newcomers. And there aren’t three bullet points there; there is Wiki markup that generates bullets. What a newcomer sees is a bunch of random characters (colons, asterisks, weird back-quotes, regular quote marks, angle brackets, something about quinoa…)

I know what you mean, but you have to admit, this is not exactly newcomer-friendly! David10244 (talk) 22:53, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That’s only because the page I put in to get that example was Example but yes, I see your point.

Ultimately, my (perhaps cop out) answer is that when we say WP:CIR that also means some ability to muddle one’s way through the editing window. Obviously we don’t expect people to know exactly how to use everything from the start, but the ability to be able to figure it out from the information you do have available is important both here and, more broadly, in life.

(plus, the sandbox exists pretty much expressly for people to fuck around with these things to their heart’s content to figure out what it all does) Athanelar (talk) 23:06, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! So this is the first time I have asked here. I am not a new user but I have a question. Lowercase sigma bot stopped archiving my user talk in mid-March. It left 2-3 discussions there. Those discussions sat there for 2 weeks until I manually archived. Any tips? Robloxguest3 (talk) 16:06, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Robloxguest3 Check User:MiszaBot/config#Causes of no archiving to see if any of the possible causes mentioned there apply to your talk page. Nthep (talk) 19:22, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

thanks! Robloxguest3 (talk) 19:37, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t use archiving, but how is your archiving set? From the Page history the bot was archiving 2 or three discussions at intervals of only a few days, but since its last one only one unarchived discussion has been made (you also made a manual one). Perhaps the rate of new discussions has recently slowed and didn’t reach the ‘trigger value’, whatever that is.

I notice also that your archives are not (or no longer) accessible from the usual panel at top right. Is this deliberate, or a new problem? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 19:27, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Robloxguest3, the reason is because your Miszabot/config lacks param |minthreadsleft=, and the bot is using the default value, which I believe is four. If you want the bot to clean out your talk page entirely, you have to set it to zero, thus:

|minthreadsleft = 0

I have edited your Miszabot config and set it to 4 between <!– hidden text delimiters –> so you can see where it is. Just remove the delimiters, and set the value to 0 or whatever value you like, as described at § Parameters explained. Mathglot (talk) 22:49, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

thank you. Robloxguest3 (talk) 14:56, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Robloxguest3, @Mathglot The talk page still doesn’t have any archives that are accessible… David10244 (talk) 22:55, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m seeking help to improve writing clarity, tone and structure of Draft:Mukesh Mishra. I would appreciate feedback. Thank you for your time and guidance. Yogiin (talk) 17:11, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Yogiin once again, the draft will be reviewed in due course, and you will get feedback then; just cool your engines until then. And it’s not about clarity, tone and structure, it’s whether this person is notable or not. That we will find out sooner or later. — DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:58, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Yogiin Did you use AI, such as ChatGPT, to write this question here? David10244 (talk) 22:57, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, but sometimes i use to fix the spelling mistakes @David10244 Yogiin (talk) 06:37, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can’t out of my head remember where tech related help place exists, but could someone take a look at this diff [3] and tell me why editing through the VE suddenly broke the structure of the whole table? Respublik (talk) 17:24, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Respublik, that looks like a possible VE bug that needs to be reported. As you suspected, the Teahouse is not the right place for this. You were probably thinking of WP:VPT, and you might get a response there, but imho a better place to start to draw the attention of the right people is to post your question at mw:VisualEditor/Feedback. An even better place is directly at our bug-tracking platform, Phabricator. If you are comfortable with that, you can do that by Creating a new VE bug report there. (If you do, please add me by typing @Mathglot somewhere in your message; e.g., ‘Adding @Mathglot per request.‘) Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:36, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I’ve been using semi-automated tools to warn users (eg. redwarn)

unfortunately, this watchlists the users talk page without providing an opt-out feature

this means that when other users also warn the same user (eg. a repeat vandal) this comes up in my messages and momentarily sends my heart rate through the roof as these messages very much look like they’re being sent to you when they appear on your notifications

is there any way to disable this or alter the way they appear ?

kind regards and thanks in advance,

TiredKitty 19:43, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to turn off notifications, turn off the “Automatically subscribe to topics” option in preferences. To turn off watchlisting entirely, use the “Watch Time” option in RedWarn preferences (probably similar options in other tools). I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 20:51, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

yay, fixed… thank you very much ^^

TiredKitty 21:13, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

TiredKitty, I believe the response from I am bad at usernames was based on a misunderstanding of what you are seeking. What you want (correct me if I am wrong) is to be notified if someone (like the user in question) responds to the warning that you yourself placed on their page using redwarn, but *not* when somebody responds to some other discussion already on the page or creates a new one; you want a notification *only* when they respond to your message, right?

You can do this by turning ON “Automatically subscribe to topics” option in preferences (not ‘off’), and turning off “Add pages and files I edit to my watchlist”. Here’s how to do this.

1. Go to your Watchlist preferences, scroll down to heading Watched pages, and set options like this:

   Add pages and files I edit to my watchlist

2. Then go to the Editing tab, scroll down to heading Discussion pages, and set your options like this:

   Enable topic subscription

   Automatically subscribe to topics

3. click the blue Save button.

That will set you up the way you want. Mathglot (talk) 21:20, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much, I’ll look into this further later… I had assumed based on I am bad at usernames’ response, that it was just a limitation that what I was hoping for wasn’t possible beyond what they were suggesting

thank you TiredKitty 21:40, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I’m wondering whether YouTube videos can be considered reliable sources. I’m thinking about linking to videos—such as tutorials, podcasts, and news reports—provided they come from credible, reputable creators or organizations. Tryingtobeneutral (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:RSPYT. In short; yes, provided they come from a channel which is verifiably associated with an outlet that we would otherwise consider to be a reliable source. Athanelar (talk) 20:15, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you User:Athanelar. Tryingtobeneutral (talk) 03:52, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tryingtobeneutral, kudos for the care you are taking. I agree with Athanelar, while pointing out at the same time that 99.9% of YT vids are unreliable because they are not in that category. But basically, yes; your original proposition is fine, although I would add ‘peer-reviewed’ to your list. FamousReporter at BBC is reliable; FamousReporter’s YT channel may not necessarily be, and may require intext attribution when cited, whereas FR@BBC only requires a citation. See WP:BIASED and WP:RSOPINION. Mathglot (talk) 21:03, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Very helpful. Thank you User:Mathglot. Tryingtobeneutral (talk) 03:53, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tryingtobeneutral, one more thing: when citing a video, {{cite web}} is okay, but {{cite AV media}} is a lot better; please use an in-source location parameter like |time= or |minutes=, unless the video is only a few seconds long. Some video platforms (including YouTube) provide you with na url with a location down to the second; if you know how to access that, you can place it in the |url= param. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 05:00, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1276#Publishing an Article to Wikipedia

 Courtesy link: Draft:Walters Group

How do we get this page published

Hi there, this draft has been in development since July 2025, and revisions have been made in accordance with reviewers/mentors feedback. Does this content meet Wikipedia’s notability guideline standards or if any critical elements remain outstanding let us know what in particular. thank you. SteelBuilder1956 (talk) 20:08, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed (and declined) your draft; it seems you did not heed the advice given to you back in August to read WP:CORPTRIV.

In short, in order for a company to be considered notable (i.e., meeting our criteria for inclusion) you need to provide sources which show in-depth coverage of the company. Sources which merely report on the company’s day-to-day business activities do not count for this. As an example, one of your sources is headlined; Amid tariffs and to avoid layoffs, Hamilton steel fabricator pivots from mostly U.S. to Canadian projects. This is textbook CORPTRIV. Please note that the vast majority of companies in the world simply do not cross the threshold necessary to have an article here. We are an encyclopedia, not a directory of companies; as a result, a company needs to be fairly extraordinary in order to have received the sort of coverage necessary to make it worth including here. Athanelar (talk) 20:19, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@SteelBuilder1956 please consider the possibility that you may be trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

This is an encyclopedia first and foremost, so there can’t be an article on every business that exists – Wikipedia isn’t a business directory.

You can’t force a business to qualify for a Wikipedia article if it doesn’t meet the criteria for inclusion in this encyclopedia in the first place.

The fact that you’ve spent almost an entire year trying to get this draft accepted is a strong indication that it might have four corners.

The editor-written essay Wikipedia:BOSS may give you some useful context. Blue Sonnet (talk) 01:56, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have a unique situation. I’m the most recent editor of recent Instawork draft, which is a significant update from the prior version. I specifically wrote my draft to correct issues with COI that were left by the prior editor. I removed biased content, increased independent/reliable sources, etc. — it was a major rewrite.

A few days later, the prior editor wants my draft deleted and files Miscellany for Deletion (read more). The prior editor (Claytonmarshall) claims they wrote their draft for an internship and they can delete my draft. Suddenly, my new draft, which was specifically written to avoid COI, gets a UPE added to it because of the intern’s affiliation with Instawork.

Thankfully, the result of the Miscellany for Deletion was keep, so my draft was not removed. However, the UPE template is still on my draft. I posted about this in the page Talk. I tried to remove the UPE template but my action what undone and I was told “Seems at least two editors disagree that this needs to be here.” From my understanding, while in good faith, this reasoning is in direct violation of WP:CONSENSUS (“The quality of an argument is more important than whether it represents a minority or a majority view”). My feedback was not taken into account and instead the decision went to majority rule.

I’m trying to get someone to pay attention to what is clearly a misunderstanding. I fear this incorrect UPE template will affect the ability of my draft to get published. Not sure what is left I can do.

Liyauthor (talk) 21:52, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Liyauthor. When you are trying to improve a rejected draft created by an undeclared paid editor, it is really important that you remove all traces of promotional editing and do not introduce any new hallmarks of promotional editing. Please read and study Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), especially the sections called “Examples of trivial coverage” and “Examples of dependent coverage”. The draft currently has references to many examples of such trivial and dependent coverage, which is inherently promotional because the result is to create an illusion of notablity. Those “funding” sources from Forbes, VentureBeat and San Francisco Business Times are trivial coverage. Other sources like The Economic Times, AP, YCombinator, Business Insider, Wall Street Journal and Yahoo Finance appear to be based on company PR and statements by company executives and are therefore not independent sources. The Eater piece is about Pared much more than Instawork, and is therefore not significant coverage. So, the misunderstanding in this case is yours. You need to ruthlessly and rigorously strip every single reference to a poor quality source from the draft and every single claim referenced to such bad sources. Leave only fully independent reliable sources that devote significant, in-depth coverage to this company. Will much of anything be left at that point? Cullen328 (talk) 23:21, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, I understand what you mean. I really appreciate your answer, that was insightful. Liyauthor (talk) 00:07, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Liyauthor. May I ask what is your affiliation with Instawork? Are you an intern, like the creator of the draft? WP:BOSS may prove useful to you depending on the situation. This draft has been rejected, a much harsher fate than being declined, as it means there is no option to resubmit. It is very unlikely that this company qualifies for an article on Wikipedia. MediaKyle (talk) 23:08, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, good question. I’m not an intern for Instawork. I wasn’t paid by them to write my draft and I’m not employed by them. And I believe my draft hasn’t been rejected yet actually, it was the prior drafts that were rejected. That being said, thanks for the extra context there! Liyauthor (talk) 23:41, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I created a new article, and i need to add new categories that don’t exist, can editors add categories? And if so, how do I do that? Happypenguins82 (talk) 22:33, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Happypenguins82. WP:Categorization should answer your questions. Cullen328 (talk) 23:27, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ill do that Happypenguins82 (talk) 23:32, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have been trying to get my draft Draft:McCulloch Intermediate School accepted but it wont get accepted please help me understand why and help me fix it. TimCheeseGlazer (talk) 23:19, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TimCheeseGlazer. This is about Draft:McCulloch Intermediate School (Texas). Your draft fails to make any convincing claim that this particular school is notable, as Wikipedia defines that term. There is no evidence in your draft that this school is of historic or architectural significance. It appears to be a lot like most of the other 130,000 schools in the US. We do not accept articles about any school but rather only truly notable schools. Please read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#Schools for some relevant discussion. Cullen328 (talk) 23:38, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

so I made a article about toxins ruining the air and he/they/she thought i was young Rachelwillings (talk) 23:32, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rachelwillings. Age 19 is an adult but still very young. If you want to be treated as an adult, submit mature, adult quality work instead of childish nonsense like User:Rachelwillings/sandbox. Cullen328 (talk) 23:42, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping: Realtent 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 23:53, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Rachelwillings I apologize for thinking you were young, and condolences on your loss. I realize nobody has welcomed you, self included, so I have done that just now. Welcome to Wikipedia! Realtent (talk) 23:56, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Rachelwillings Your information about toxins is sitting in your talk page and is unreferenced. There is already an article on Pollution which covers the same ground. You might to add to it, but make sure every fact is referenced correctly. Welcome to Wikipedia. ~2026-20856-07 (talk) 00:16, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is being young an issue. I am 17, not even an adult??? TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 03:56, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Age is absolutely not an issue as long as you converse and edit maturely. According to WP:Wikipedians, 13% of editors are under 17. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 04:14, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Thank you. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 04:19, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We have plenty of “adult” editors who don’t act like it, we only care about what you do here and not who you are 🙂 Blue Sonnet (talk) 07:42, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

tbh, I was a bit worried after I saw this message that @Rachelwillings was called young despite being 19. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 07:47, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve had people in my office in their early twenties say that my age group is middle aged, whilst I’m sat there with sparkles glued to my face, trying very hard not to throw the mouse at them. I’m in complete denial over my age so I really don’t mind about others! There are plenty of respected, experienced editors who feel the same way as I do.

I only use the Wikipedia:YOUNG page for someone under 16, for example, who’s also running into trouble due to social inexperience

Otherwise, we have plenty of younger editors who are doing just as well as people two or three times their age!

It can be a really helpful essay when you’re speaking to a 13yr old and trying to encourage them to look at this as a way to be a “grown-up” – that feeling of responsibility can be very powerful if it’s channeled in the right way. I think you’re both in a really good place to learn so much about Wikipedia, then perhaps even mentor younger editors in the future – I don’t think we’ve got anyone who currently does that & it could be a really great project! Blue Sonnet (talk) 09:59, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 10:25, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I turned 18 this past year. Experience is the great filter here, not age 🙂 Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 15:45, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Rachelwillings You wrote the draft in your Talk page, and then you submitted a nearly empty sandbox to be considered asxan article. That might be why people are thinking that you are very young… But we all make mistakes. David10244 (talk) 23:07, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

okay, sorry. i try to differentiate my personal conversations on the site by typing in all lowercase. an article i’ve been watching (and editing) for a bit has an excessive amount of detail that i don’t know how to comb through it all. the band’s page describes the show in depth, which i think isn’t the right place for it.

it’s a little daunting, i guess? that’s what i’m having trouble with; i can’t differentiate between what’s required and what isn’t. Yeowoobi (talk) 23:47, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reading all-lowercase, Yeowoobi, is much less tiresome than reading all-uppercase. But it’s more tiresome than reading the conventional case mixture (arbitrary though the convention is). The fact that you start by apologizing for all-lowercase suggests that you know it annoys. ¶ If there’s an excess of anything, it should be cut. (If it shouldn’t, it wouldn’t be excessive.) So you’re asking about the distinction between “information” (to be kept) and what’s sometimes called “cruft” (to be deleted). Winner (band) is about a South Korean “boy band”; I have no idea of what is significant about these and hope that somebody who knows can help you. — Hoary (talk) 00:43, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I suppose I’ll stick to conventions, then.

I guess I’m worried about making the “wrong” edit? Then again, I’d learn something from it. I think I answered my own question. Thank you. Yeowoobi (talk) 05:05, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the orthographic hint, Yeowoobi. ¶ You’re under no obligation to warn the world that you’re about to cut this or that kind of flab from the article; but all the same it may be a good idea to announce your intention on the talk page a week earlier. — Hoary (talk) 05:59, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How do I enter a title with line breaks? Should I use a colon or a comma? Lax monads: Indexed monoidal monads. See also “WP:RD/MA#Is there a standard definition of lax monad?“. Also, the bot only entered “Lax monad“. Should I report this as a bug?–SilverMatsu (talk) 00:35, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

With a colon. — Hoary (talk) 00:43, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for teaching me.–SilverMatsu (talk) 00:58, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you’re translating an article from another wiki into English, do you just copy and paste after making sure everything else is right? I read some of the guides and I didn’t find anything on it. OliviaRigby (talk) 01:37, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@OliviaRigby You can must link to the article after you are done in the WP:EDITSUMMARY. You can also add the {{Translated page}} template, with a link to the original, onto the talk page of the article. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 03:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

OliviaRigby, no, you don’t. For one thing, each Wikipedia sets its own rules for inclusion of articles, and something that is perfectly fine in French or Spanish Wikipedia, might not pass the threshold of WP:Notability here. The result would be, that after you translated it and created the article here, it would get deleted as non-notable. There are plenty of other things to watch out for as well. For example, English Wikipedia has generally stricter requirements for citing sources than other Wikipedias. Thirdly, just because some Chinese or Russian Wikipedia article asserts some fact does not mean it is true, and if you *just* translate it without checking, then you could be held responsible for adding incorrect information to Wikipedia; for biographies of living persons this can be serious. Everything you place into an article is your responsibility, even if someone wrote the foreign original and you merely translated it; once the content is saved, it is as if you originated it. There are many other things, but these are some of the most important. Wikipedia:Translation has some information which may help. Mathglot (talk) 04:36, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m sorry that I didn’t mention this, but this article (Pietro de’ Medici) is already here. I just wanted to expand it with the Russian version. Would the advice at WP:Translation still apply here? OliviaRigby (talk) 04:59, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. For each edit in which you add material, provide a summary saying something like: Content added in this edit is translated from the existing Russian Wikipedia article at [[:ru:Exact title of Russian article]]; see its history for attribution. — Hoary (talk) 05:08, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

OliviaRigby, section WP:Translation § Content still applies. Make sure to follow WP:TFOLWP when you add translated content. Mathglot (talk) 05:09, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying. By the way, would that mean I just paste the translated text and just fix it up before I publish? Sorry if somebody already said that, there are just so many answers here right now. OliviaRigby (talk) 05:31, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

OliviaRigby, One more thing first: Я злыбa тяeб српоить: мжөеьш ли ты тевотъит на вдa сдюелщиx впоpoca: по кшaлe от онгдоо до дятеци, гдe «онди» оанчзаeт уоврнеь нчвоика, а «дтяцеь» — уеврноь нслотиея яызка, нлксаьоко хшооpо ты 1) чтиеаьш oп-сcуpки и 2) шипшеь op-сcупки? What say you; thanks! Mathglot (talk) 05:42, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@OliviaRigby You have to verify that what you translate and paste matches the meaning of the original (which means that you need to be able to read the original–machine translation can change the meaning sometimes), and you have to verify that the references in the original actually support the text you have translated. I believe you are supposed to copy the references to the English article, but I could be wrong about that. Some other language Wikipedias do not require as many sources, or as in-depth sources as English WP does. You should not translate and paste any info that is not sourced in the original and also verified by you. Hope this helps. David10244 (talk) 23:19, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is well sourced in the other language version except for one bit (which lists IMDb as a source), so I will not translate that part. And most of the sources are freely available, so it wouldn’t be hard to verify. Also, am I allowed to rearrange some of the info already stated there? Thank you for your explanation, OliviaRigby (talk) 03:34, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you think it’s best, go ahead. nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 04:08, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! OliviaRigby (talk) 04:40, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

“You can link to the article after you are done” is correct but possibly misleading. “Translating from other language Wikimedia projects” tells us that “attribution must be given to satisfy licensing requirements” (note the “must”), and that “The preferred way to do this is in an edit summary in the translated page, ideally in its first edit”. And the page gives an example (from French): Content in this edit is translated from the existing French Wikipedia article at [[:fr:Exact name of French article]]; see its history for attribution. — Hoary (talk) 04:35, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There are extremely few “musts” in Wikipedia, but this is one of them, per the Terms of Use. Mathglot (talk) 05:55, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Additionally consider Template:Translated, which places the attribution into the talk page. nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead) 14:09, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the template is helpful to other editors (I use it) but is optional. The edit summary attribution *must* be given. Mathglot (talk) 23:48, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I came across this article: Pencil extender, which I don’t think suits Wikipedia’s notability policies due to its limited number of sources. Does anybody else think it should be nominated for deletion?

I’ve never nominated an article, and I don’t how it should be done. Thanks! Paolo Roland Self (talk) 02:07, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Paolo Roland Self, reasons for deletion don’t include “too few sources cited in the article”. They do include “Articles for which thorough attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed”. Have you made a thorough attempt? — Hoary (talk) 02:26, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Paolo Roland Self. The article currently has references to two book sources. Notability guidelines indicate that there should be sources in the plural, but do not specify a minimum number. Many editors advocate for three as a minimum but this is a personal opinion, rather than any official policy or guideline. As my colleague Hoary points out, an attempt to find additional sources should precede any deletion nomination. I spent one minute on Google Books and discovered at least six books that discuss pencil extenders in various levels of detail. It is therefore unlikely that the article would be deleted. Accordingly, I suggest that you review some of these sources, select the best of them, and add them as references to the article. Cullen328 (talk) 07:38, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your responses!

You’re right, I very much should have searched for other sources before jumping to the conclusion – partly based off the fact that the French Wikipedia has deleted the article because of inactivity on the page, which I know means nothing on the English Wikipedia that has different rules – that this article should no longer exist.

Sorry! Paolo Roland Self (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

French Wikipedia gets it wrong (by our rules) coming and going; they delete stuff that is notable and should remain, and they include stuff that is non-notable and should be deleted. Presumably, they are compliant by their own rules, but it is hardly worth your time noting what they do in an individual case; it just isn’t helpful here. Mathglot (talk) 00:03, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

im doing a redirect link of JAT Flight 367 registration and code pls help me Runematthew (talk) 05:55, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Runematthew, and welcome to the teahouse! If you want to request a redirect, please follow the step-by-step WP:Article wizard/Redirects, which will submit these for you. nil ^nz 06:00, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I got a notification here to say I’ve received an email however I can’t see it. It hasn’t appeared in my email inbox (I checked spam). Any idea where I can find it? Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 08:05, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Salmon Of Ignorance Check Special:Preferences to see which address the system has on record for you. Lots of people got mail today inviting them to take a survey. I wouldn’t worry if it is lost! Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It turns out it was just in a different folder. Thanks for the response. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 10:16, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I submitted this draft a while ago and would appreciate any feedback or review when possible. Thank you! Vardan Azatyan (talk) 09:01, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I assume you refer to Draft:Vardan Azatyan; your draft is pending. As noted on the draft, there are thousands of drafts awaiting review, so a review could take some time. Please be patient.

Please read the autobiography policy; while not forbidden, writing about yourself is discouraged. 331dot (talk) 09:08, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Vardan Azatyan Two of your sources are to other-language versions of Wikipedia but WP:Wikipedia is not a reliable source. One web source is not enough, you need three or so which meet these criteria, showing in what way you are a notable academic. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:12, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I have found 3 links where you are mentioned.

https://dutchartinstitute.eu/page/1380/vardan-azatyan

https://www.atamianhovsepian.art/essay/vardanazatyan

https://artmargins.com/art-history-and-the-challenge-of-apprehending-the-familiar-a-conversation-with-vardan-azatyan/ TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 10:30, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why don’t you collect sources from your article in hy (I dont know what language is that.)

hy:Վարդան Ազատյան. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 10:34, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note:Use the links in the reference section as a source, not the wikipedia article. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 10:34, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If only there was a free inline encyclopedia where you could look that up: Hy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 11:03, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is the Armenian Wikipedia. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 12:27, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 12:37, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Review Dil Sher Brohi a new article Page thank you. Kashif123m (talk) 10:48, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Articles are automatically placed in the NPP queue when the article is created. There is a extremely large backlog of up to 7 years at the moment. That doesn’t mean your article will take 7 years to be reviewed, but it might take a few months. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 11:02, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikeycdiamond Thank you, okay, I thought you had to apply, you’ve added to my knowledge that you automatically get added to the queue list. Come on, it doesn’t matter how long it takes. Kashif123m (talk) 11:36, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve cleaned up a couple of little issues; the rest is mostly just grammar. There’s no egregious flaws; the standards for articles about settlements are quite low, the criteria for inclusion basically just require that the settlement be both populated and legally recognised, which certainly seems to be the case here. Athanelar (talk) 16:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar errors have been cleared and population has also been included as a reference. Kashif123m (talk) 07:18, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@‪‪Kudpung‬ dear sir Review This page Dil Sher Brohi. thank you sir. Kashif123m (talk) 11:39, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi can somebody help me edit my wiki page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Samrath_“Sami”_singh Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:02, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, There is no source that proves you notability. I can say that it is great for a LinkedIn profile but not a Wikipedia article. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 15:05, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheGreatEditor024So like I should add a news article about me will that work? Thanks for your help! Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:09, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, You have to provide sources that you are notable. Please read WP:Notability (people) TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 15:11, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,@TheGreatEditor024I added stuff i worked on that I didn’t make

Like helped to make

“The Warden – Repository.” GitHub.https://github.com/sebashtioon/the-warden

“Grook – LLM Integration.” GitHub.https://github.com/2wiceUponATime/grook

and other

Does that count as notability? Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:18, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We need more than just documentation that you worked on something; we need independent reliable sources with significant coverage of you; “significant coverage” meaning unsolicited critical analysis and commentary of you. 331dot (talk) 15:20, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @331dot Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

But they do not mention that you are the one that worked on them TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 15:23, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheGreatEditor024@331dot I’m marked as a contributor https://github.com/2wiceUponATime/grook/graphs/contributors

https://github.com/sebashtioon/the-warden/graphs/contributors

I’m sami9889 Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:34, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please read @331dot‘s comment TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 15:36, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

https://github.com/sebashtioon/the-warden/blob/master/README.md Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:36, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please provide independent sources that provide significant coverage on you. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 15:37, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! Thanks Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheGreatEditor024There is a book getting made by (https://www.linkedin.com/in/gregsudderth) it has not been released yet thu Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:43, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Then that means it is too soon for an article about you. You should also read about how an article is not necessarily something to desire. 331dot (talk) 15:44, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Samisingh9889, I think it’s really very important for you to read the page Wikipedia:Autobiographies (especially the Creating articles about yourself section). It doesn’t look like you’re currently considered notable enough for an encyclopedia article, as you’d need several reliable, independent sources to write in-depth reports/articles about you as a person first. If you’re having trouble finding any, it’s a sign that it’s not time for you to have an encyclopedia entry. If your book does well and has plenty of reliable, third party reviews, that may warrant an article about the book itself in future.

Also, please be very aware that scammers will latch onto the fact that you want an article about yourself and almost certainly try to contact you – anyone who contacts you to ask for payment to make/protect an article is a scammer and should be 100% avoided at all costs. Don’t trust anyone that says they can get an article published for you – they are lying.

Wikipedia is run by volunteers, so legitimate paid editors are extremely rare (I’ve only come across a couple recently, they’re not very good at editing Wikipedia because of their conflict of interest always gets in the way & they can’t write neutrally about their customers). No paid editors are administrators, nor are they in high or powerful positions here. They will tell you they are, and may even steal an admins page & pretend it’s theirs.

See Wikipedia:Scam warning for an idea of what to look out for. Blue Sonnet (talk) 01:03, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There are so many unreliable sources and so much of junk written in this article. Who created this article? Why can’t some editor volunteer to clean this article? It’s such a mess! ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 15:35, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As to who created it, you can look at the edit history. In terms of cleaning it up, see WP:SOFIXIT. 331dot (talk) 15:38, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources&action=history Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:39, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly speaking, I don’t know much about Ayesha Singh. I just came across her article because I was trying to gain experience by editing ITV actors’ pages. So today, I was editing Ghum Hai Kisikey Pyaar Meiin actors pages like Neil Bhatt, Aishwarya Sharma, and will be editing Bhavika Sharma, Hitesh Bharadwaj etc. So how can I fix the article when I don’t know much about her? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 15:44, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that depends what the problems with the article are. Apparently the problems are so severe and obvious that you thought to come here and make a post about them, so what are they? If you tell us specifically what the problems are, we might be able to give you some pointers on how to fix it.

Most Wikipedia editors are not experts in the subjects that they edit, and you normally don’t have to be a subject matter expert in order to create a good article or maintain an article in a good state. Athanelar (talk) 16:19, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I can see a lot of unreliable sources like Tellychakkar TVGuide and few others. Then there is so much weird statements. I don’t know if they are true or not ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 16:28, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dubiously-sourced statements in biographies of living people should always be removed without question until a better source is found. We’re very protective about those sorts of articles, see WP:BLP. If you believe certain information comes from an unreliable source, or if it isn’t sourced at all, remove it. Athanelar (talk) 16:40, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I will try my best to improve the article. ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 02:03, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Athanelar@331dot I have tried and improved as much as I can in the article of Ayesha Singh. I have removed the templates too. Can you both check if I did something wrong? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 06:46, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here look at this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources&action=history Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:38, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My bad! Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:39, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sent it 2 times Samisingh9889 (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

watching vintage antiques roadshow. The had 18th Century bat and trap made of oak show is in Nottingham. Wikipedia you say bat and trap invented in 1922 which cant be right? ~2026-23685-88 (talk) 16:03, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As it turns out, the Wikipedia article is in fact wrong. Its supposed source (EB) says that it was much older as well. I have added a Factual Accuracy Disputed tag but you are more than welcome to help fix the article yourself. After all, Wikipedia is a community endeavour! Thanks, Chorchapu (talk | edits) 17:02, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Bat and trap

@~2026-23685-88 and @Chorchapu

“1922” is still in the intro of the article, what is the best way to fix it? Maresa63 ^Talk 11:36, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I have created my userpage according to @Niaki101‘s userpage. Can an experienced editor tell me if I have to make any changes? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as it turns out Niaki101 has been blocked as a sockpuppet, but this shouldn’t have anything to do with you, so no worries. It could be nice to give them credit for the design however. Thanks, Chorchapu (talk | edits) 16:58, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How can I give them credit for the design? Can you please tell me how to do it? ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 02:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

However you like – you can either do it in an edit summary or leave a small note (choose the small font in visual editor) at the top/bottom of your user page. It’s totally up to you. Blue Sonnet (talk) 03:35, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okk. Thank you so much ITVStoryWeaver (talk) 03:43, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I came across the Guild of Copy Editors where I’ve been helping out quite a bit lately with the backlogged/tagged articles. I was wondering how people typically join or get involved. Is there anything I should do first, or any requirements I should be aware of? Thanks! Tioaeu8943 (talk) 17:29, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Tioaeu8943 Welcome to the Teahouse. All your questions should be answered by reading WP:GOCE. If not, come back here with specifics or post on one of their Talk Pages. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:48, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On a second look, I found the “Participants” tab on the page, and it answered my question about joining. Thanks for pointing me there. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 19:23, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Copy editing can be a little daunting at first, so if you want a break or to try something easier, you can take a peek at the Wikipedia:Typo Team too. They do a lot of work with weasel/promotional wording, typos (obvs) and other quick & easy fixes. They don’t get enough love for the work they do TBH, especially since it’s a task group that’s good for newer editors to try out. Blue Sonnet (talk) 00:51, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m looking into the Typo Team page now, and I appreciate the suggestion. It looks like a helpful way to mix things up a bit. Thank you, @Blue-Sonnet. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to help! Blue Sonnet (talk) 21:11, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What is it? ~2026-23664-45 (talk) 19:01, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Recommend reading this article WikiLeaks. Chattenoir (talk) 19:23, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please note, it has no connection to Wikipedia, other than using the same software – like many different people use Microsoft Word. – Arjayay (talk) 19:30, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See more at Wikipedia:WikiLeaks is not part of Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:20, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think I already know the answer (“no”), but was wondering if there is a way to search for articles that are a part of two wikiprojects at the same time, for instance if I wanted to find articles within Wikiproject United States of America that are also in wikiproject Engineering. Chattenoir (talk) 19:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Chattenoir You should be able to do that using WP:Petscan, by looking for the intersection of categories, e.g Category:WikiProject Engineering articles and Category:United States. There is no absolute guarantee that the articles you want will have been fully categorised. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:30, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! I will check out this tool, thanks. Chattenoir (talk) 21:44, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Search for incategory:”WikiProject United States articles” incategory:”WikiProject Engineering articles” in “Talk” namespace — see H:INCATEGORY for more information. OutsideNormality (talk) 22:16, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I”m trying to update this article about Markdown by adding a paragraph on how Markdown has now become very much used for AI prompting, with secondary sources. Where should I put this edit? I’m not sure it makes sense to include in the current sections (history, rise and divergence, versions) and I don’t know how I can create a new section? Thank you! CathEsther (talk) 19:54, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@CathEsther Assuming you are using the visual editor, place your cursor where you want the new section to appear (presumably at the end, before the “See also” section) and use keys Ctrl-2 which will insert a level one subheading. Give it a title like “Use in Ai prompting” and then move down to add your paragraph(s). That article could do with more secondary sources, so I hope what you have are good ones. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot Michael, this is very helpful and I’ll cite only secondary sources. CathEsther (talk) 22:31, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @CathEsther! Whenever you have time, try out Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure or our Help:Tutorial pages, they’re really good places for you to start learning the basics of editing & understand where to go next. Blue Sonnet (talk) 00:48, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Can’t say the actual articles because of filter) Can someone please do a move request to change the Wikipedia articles name from N*gga to N*gga (term), and N*gger to N*gger (term), because there’s movies called like that, and there could be confusion for people trying to search the movies, request the moves for me. ~2026-23730-66 (talk) 21:34, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To my understanding disambiguation is only done when there is a genuine need, the slur has been used for centuries and is well known, I doubt any significant number of people are confusing the term for a movie, so there probably isn’t any need for disambiguation. Regardless, this is something better discussed on the talk page for that article. Chattenoir (talk) 21:43, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-23730-66: We don’t have articles about those films and then we don’t base our article titles on their existence. Even if we had these film articles, the terms would probably be considered the primary topics and have the base names. PrimeHunter (talk)

I am a member of the band Skinflint. Our page is out of date and I would like to request these factual updates:

• Lineup: Chris Baillie (Bass) and Cosmos Modisaemang (Drums) are the current members alongside Giuseppe Sbrana.
• Albums: Please add the two most recent albums: Hate Spell (2023) and Baloi (2024).
• Photo: I have a new high-res band photo. How do I get a volunteer to help me swap the old one for this new one?

I am disclosing my Conflict of Interest as a band member. Thank you!1. Lineup Update: The current bassist is Chris Baillie (joined 2025) and the drummer is Cosmos Modisaemang (joined 2019). Former members are Kebonye Nkoloso and Alessandra Sbrana. Chris Baillie 88 (talk) 23:20, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello; please use the edit request wizard to propose your edits. It will place them on the talk page related to the article about your band. Please also disclose your COI on your user page(click your username above). 331dot (talk) 23:30, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, photos need to be freely licensed to be usable on Wikipedia; see the instructions at Wikipedia:A picture of you for how to release said photo under a free license. ScalarFactor (talk) 23:34, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Skinflint Band Photo 2026.jpg Chris Baillie 88 (talk) 23:47, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Chris Baillie 88 be aware that this photo could probably soon be deleted because legally we need permission of whoever took the photo to have it on Wikipedia.

Since you are in that photo, that means someone else likely took it. That means the photographer owns the copyright, and only they can allow the photo to be published, unless you have signed a written copyright transfer document. 🍅 fx (talk) 13:38, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

i didn’t realise how hard this was.

I just wanted a page updated Chris Baillie 88 (talk) 23:48, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Everything on Wikipedia needs to be attributed to a reliable source, which ensures that the information’s validity can be verified. The edit request system stops people from introducing bias into articles, whether they realize they are or not. The strict image policy stops people from suing us for hosting copyrighted non-fair use images. While it seems overly complex, it isn’t. To get the article updated first go to Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard/COI and enter your band’s name. Once you get there, find a reliable source with the information. Maybe it is a news article discussing your new band members or your new album. Once you do write a sentence or two with the information in the source. After that enter the reason for the request—you can say something like, updating the article—, hit publish and you are done. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 02:27, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced the current image with the image you have provided. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 04:46, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

thank you. ~2026-23770-54 (talk) 05:34, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The extra steps are to protect article subjects from impersonation and copyright holders from misuse of their work, and the Wikipedia from biased or promotional editing.

For those reasons, we are going to need you to follow the steps outlined at c:COM:THIRD regarding the licence of the image, as it has been previously published online (you also say it is your own work, but also that you are one of the people depicted in it).

We will also ask you to confirm by email that you are indeed Chris Baillie, and not an imposter. Please look out for a message on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 13:30, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

asking this question again, it appears that it’s actually gone this time ~2026-51002-1 (talk) 01:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It was removed from the codebase.^[1] TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 02:30, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-51002-1 Baby globe’s surprise visits to the sidebar were always meant to be a short stay, but you might be interested in this proposal to keep them around in some form as an opt-in feature. Note that if it is approved, this option might require a real user account. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 06:39, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is my first time asking something here, but is there a way to add a photo to both Paul Fusco and Paul Fusco (photographer)? Currently these pages don’t have a photo to represent either men and I’m worried that the photos I want to use a copyrighted. Can someone go through the process with me and see if any of their photos are under a non copyrighted domain? Thank you and have a good day/night. ~2026-23849-89 (talk) 02:46, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @~2026-23849-89, it might be easiest to go onto our sister project, Wikimedia Commons, to see if anyone has uploaded photos there.

Their front page also has a link to a page where you can request files from their editors, if you can’t find one yourself. A lot of the photos you see on here are linked from Commons.

Just go to commons.wikimedia.org. Blue Sonnet (talk) 03:31, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reply, @Blue-Sonnet. I checked on Wikimedia Commons before asking my question on here. Sadly the site currently doesn’t have a portrait photo of Paul Fusco and Paul Fusco (photographer) and the ones I found online are from sites like Getty Image and Fandom. Is there a way to add my own images without breaking Wikipedia’s guidelines like a temporary photo or one that’s allowed on the site? ~2026-23849-89 (talk) 00:15, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The image would have to be free use, or you’d have to be the copyright holder (e.g. taken the photo yourself) – images on Wikipedia need to be released under the Creative Commons license if they’re not already free-use. Copyright law is really strict, so we have to be careful in order to avoid being sued. Blue Sonnet (talk) 05:09, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That is not necessarily the case, as I explained below. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 12:49, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Commons has a great number of photographs by Fusco. Promisingly, it also has a category titled “Paul Fusco”, for material related to the non-photographer — but this category is empty. ¶ Assume that any photograph you find is conventionally copyright (“all rights reserved”), whether or not there is a declaration saying this (or similar, in any language). Now look for clear evidence to the contrary. If there is no such evidence, then the file is conventionally copyright (“all rights reserved”): Wikipedia may not use it, and you may not upload it. If the evidence is ambiguous, ask about it at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. (I believe that you’ll need to be logged in in order to do this.) If the person or organization that owned the copyright has explicitly waived this copyright, then the photograph is “in the public domain” and you can upload it to Commons. If the file is described as “Creative Commons” something-something, then check the acceptability of the specific Creative Commons license at c:Commons:Copyright tags/Free Creative Commons licenses. If it’s something else, or if there’s some other problem, ask at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Make a note of the evidence on which you’re basing your decision, and precisely where you found it. — Hoary (talk) 04:28, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention in Paul Fusco (photographer) of him having worked for the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, for whom the 90 images now in c:Category:Photographs by Paul Fusco (USDA photographer) were taken, mostly in 2011.

Are they the same person? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 12:58, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your photographer is dead, so WP:NFCC probably applies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 13:22, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I added more information to the NK-9 page at Draft:NK-9 by cribbing info from the French Wikipedia page on it. Is it worth resubmitting for review yet? AZenit3 (talk) 07:31, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, I still needs more information and references. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 07:43, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Information doesn’t matter (it might be a stub page) Versions111 (talk • contribs) 13:34, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I know but, I asked him to add more information so he might find more sources. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 13:38, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The NK-9 draft on the English Wikipedia is nearly twice as long as the one on the French Wikipedia, yet there, it’s not marked as a stub. [4] AZenit3 (talk) 07:32, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, The draft mainly needs more reliable, independent sources. The length of the article isn’t very important. I just said that it needs more information after reading the French and Russian articles.

Secondly, The English draft does not appear to be nearly twice as long as the French article. The French article contains 2858 bytes while the English draft has 2,461 bytes (including the afc template). TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 07:42, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: It is 2,629 bytes.

Without the AfC templates, it is 2,422 bytes. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 11:17, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 11:56, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I fixed wikitext and moved one reference to the External links section. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 13:35, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone, I could really use some independent advice. I am an editor on the West-Flemish Wikipedia, but I completely messed up regarding the strict COI rules here on the English wiki. I directly published an article about myself: Quinten Delaere (its a translation). The page has now been PROD’ed for Conflict of Interest. The NPP reviewer (Boynamedsue) who reviewed it kindly noted on my talk page that the article itself isn’t bad and that the sources (like Kotaku, Diario AS, and my Guinness World Record) do establish notability. However, because of my COI, it shouldn’t have been published directly by me. I want to 100% respect the rules and I will not edit the article or touch the PROD tag myself. Could an independent editor take a look at it? If it needs improvements, cleanup, or if it should be handled differently, I would be very grateful for your neutral eyes and advice. Thank you! Kannotlogin (talk) 08:45, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t recall seeing “COI” as a reason to delete an article even via PROD; I’m going to move it to draft space so it can be worked on by you, you may then submit it for a review. Please know that the English Wikipedia has stricter policies than most other Wikipedias; please review the autobiography policy. In short, while it is not absolutely forbidden for someone to write about themselves, it is highly discouraged. It is permitted for people to submit drafts about themselves- if they can focus less on what they want to say about themselves and more on what independent reliable sources choose on their own to say about them. That’s usually very challenging, and few succeed, but it is possible. 331dot (talk) 09:10, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it’s already there. Draft:Quinten Delaere. I will delete the article as duplicating the draft. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! So yea I did use the Draft but the user Boynamedsue said the article itself was good. What problems are there? Because Boynamedsue said “Undid revision 1349146511 by MailJail (talk)The Spanish and Flemish sources establish notability”. Could you help me out? Kannotlogin (talk) 09:14, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If Boynamedsue is willing to accept the draft, please ask them to move the draft into article space(instead of just copy and pasting it). You shouldn’t be the one to do so. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So I just need to ask Boynamedsue to bring it back? Why am I not allowed to move it? Is it because of the COI? Kannotlogin (talk) 09:23, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct. You shouldn’t directly edit about or create articles about yourself, but you may indirectly do so by using the review processes that we have(the draft submission process, or the edit request process once the article is in the encyclopedia). This may be different from other Wikipedias like the West Flemish Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 09:28, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah okey. Thank you for the information. I went ahead and asked Boynamedsue. Thanks for your time. Kannotlogin (talk) 09:34, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Kannotlogin, a number of AfC reviewers have declined the draft at this point, including one reviewing your most recent update. If Boynamedsue does agree to move it into mainspace, you should probably be ready for it to be sent to Articles for Deletion. Should it be deleted there, recreating it will be much harder. In your shoes I would probably tell Boynamedsue I’d changed my mind, improve it based on reviewer comments, and resubmit through AfC again. It is, however, entirely your choice.

I also think no one has linked you to WP:ABOUTME yet, and I’d urge you to read that before doing anything further. Meadowlark (talk) 08:45, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Meadowlark, I’m stuck at “improving” it. There is an issue on Wikipedia with articles that get accepted (I have seen some which also have WP:BLP1E but they don’t get deleted). I’ve just red the WP:ABOUTME and I don’t mind. I think it’s fair that people know who you really are. If someone writes something bad about me, that’s ok. I was in the wrong and its my fault. And why would people still nominate it for Deletion? The article is neutral, is notable because of WP:GNG. Kannotlogin (talk) 08:58, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please see other stuff exists. We judge each article or draft individually on their own merits and not based on the presence of other articles that themselves may or may not be inapporpriate. There are many ways inappropriate content can exist, this cannot justify adding more inappropriate content. That other articles exist does not mean that they have been accepted by anyone, maybe they need to be removed too and no one has done so yet.

If you want people to “know who you really are”, you should tell the world about yourself on social media, not here. Wikipedia is interested in what others who don’t know you say about you, not what you say about yourself. 331dot (talk) 09:01, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I know about the other stuff exists. And I don’t think some of those articles will get deleted because they are old.

Also, if you have done something bad, you won’t go a post it on social media. Social media is so fake. And everything in the text is created using sources. I could say a lot more about myself but there aren’t sources to confirm that. So how can I improve it. There are people who would say that the article should be accepted and there are people who would disagree. That’s always going to happen. So I don’t get it… Kannotlogin (talk) 09:08, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An article being old is not a reason to keep it, if it does not meet current standards, it should be nominated for deletion if it is incapable of being improved. You are free to nominate articles for deletion if you feel they do not meet standards and cannot be improved. We rely on volunteers, doing what they can, when they can, to carry out all functions here. This means that we only get things done when people choose to do them- but that cannot justify keeping additional content that does not meet standards.

I don’t see anyone who says they would accept the article. One said it’s not bad, but they aren’t willing to accept it because it’s an autobiography. If you have someone that would accept the draft, you should ask them to do so. However, as has been pointed out to you, it could be nominated for a deletion discussion and deleted, which would make it harder to recreate later. This is why the review process is highly recommended, so you can solve any problems first. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How can I solve the problems? Make the article super long to make it sound notable cuz I could prob do that but its kinda stupid… And Boynamedsue said it’s good for WP:GNG so it should be accepted. And no, he didn’t say he wouldn’t accept it because it is an “autobiography” he wouldn’t accept it because of the COI which isn’t a 100% correct. And why would keep nominate it? Because the WP:GNG counts… Editors keep finding ways to like “bypass” that rule… I think it should get a change. In my opinion it can be edited a lot. The article can be long, short, saying bad things about me, etc… I just want the truth to be out there. And I want this to be fair. Kannotlogin (talk) 09:20, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The COI is that you are writing about yourself- that is what is called an autobiography.

As for solving the problems- would you expect someone in the future to read about someone who detected people cheating at a video game in a global encyclopedia? If so, you need more sources than what you have presently, like news reports or other critical analysis written without any involvement from you like being interviewed.

I am wondering why you are focusing on the English Wikipedia; if your content is deemed acceptable on the Flemish Wikipedia, that’s where you should focus your efforts. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article isn’t just about the cheating. The EN wiki doesn’t have that many articles about Belgian people, I do more than “speedrunning” and I haven’t added those to the article because I think I shouldn’t add those things. Also note that I mostly wasn’t involved in the news reports. I say mostly because I was involved in KW.be

Also I’m focusing on the English Wikipedia because most of the sources are English. Guinness and Roblox are best know in English. And I’ve seen Belgian actors on here. Kannotlogin (talk) 09:36, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sources do not need to be in English, or more generally the language of the sources does not need to match the language of the Wikipedia you are writing for.

Topics are not limited by language either. The issue is not that you are Belgian. Different language Wikipedias have different policies, and if your content is deemed by those that edit the Flemish Wikipedia to be acceptable for the Flemish Wikipedia, that’s where you should focus instead of here, where you are struggling to have your content accepted. 331dot (talk) 09:46, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I get it. But how can I get it accepted? There has been said that it meets WP:GNG so I don’t get it why there is a problem? I thought I would get help with my article. Instead, it got moved to the Draft because of “duplicate” and an issue with COI which wasn’t a 100% correct. Like the article has been declined for WP:BLP1E which I don’t get because the article talks about the roblox event and the acting. Then WP:NACTOR has aslo been used but the article is about the combination so WP:GNG so I don’t get those arguments. Kannotlogin (talk) 09:51, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Notability does not work that way- a little notability as a gamer plus a little notability as an actor does not equal full notability. You do not seem to meet our definition of a notable actor; you have not had multiple significant roles, either as a lead/star or significant supporting roles, nor have you been recognized for your contributions to acting as an art form or any field of entertainment. That leaves your gaming aspect- which is just a single occurrence. If you build a history as some sort of game cheater detector or investigator across multiple games, then maybe. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

But WP:GNG is that (if I’m correct because it reads like it and has been told that way to me (to this article)). But ok so there is a casting call for a role in Belgians soap series Familie the role is for a new person (Not sure for how many episodes but important for the story) let’s say I get that role. Would the article then get accepted? Kannotlogin (talk) 10:36, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You would need to have had multiple significant roles, and independent sources would need to have critically analyzed your acting work, ideally by professional critics. 331dot (talk) 11:22, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Kannotlogin, it would be nominated for deletion by one of the people who believe it’s BLP1E – the deletion discussion would probably focus on that, and as you can see the general agreement among the reviewers is that BLP1E applies. It’s possible that the draft cannot currently be improved further, and honestly that’s the case with most drafts. Very few become articles.

Unless I’ve missed something, all your sources are about the Roblox situation – could you tell me what you believe makes BLP1E not apply? We look at the sources more than anything. Were there more sources that you removed? Meadowlark (talk) 09:59, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok so, WP:BLP1E is for one event and that event would be the Roblox Guinness World Record. But I say that my acting is a second event. I also have a Roblox extension that has +300 users and got the featured badge (there is one source mentioning the extension). So the acting has been in multiple projects and 2 of Belgians largest soap series. And I do have more sources but they are mostly about Roblox (except the KW.be one which also talks about me and my projects (this is a paid source)). So I think this falls under WP:GNG. Also these sources are from all over the world: Belgian, Spain, France, UK, VS, etc… but I removed those sources because I thought it would be to many. So I have around 8 more sources. Kannotlogin (talk) 10:33, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you could try adding your acting roles – but if you do that, I’d suggest removing all the Roblox stuff, because it’s better to have a solid draft that clearly shows notability (by Wikipedia standards) rather than cluttering it up with sources that won’t help you. It sounds like we are in agreement that the Roblox stuff is BLP1E. So now your goal is to show notability according to WP:NACTOR. 331dot has laid out what you need, and I’ll mention here that 331dot is an administrator and extremely knowledgable about our notability policies so I personally would trust their opinion and follow their guidance.

It could just be that the draft is WP:TOOSOON. Like I said, most drafts are never accepted, and probably 99.5% of people are not notable to Wikipedia standards even if they’re very notable to a particular community. If you’re likely to pick up some more prominent acting roles, maybe it’s worthwhile waiting until those have been released and reviews have been written. I know that’s not what you want to hear right now, but I don’t want you to go through the pain of a deletion discussion. Editors don’t hold back on their opinions in those and in fact are required to analyse articles and compare them to our policies and guidelines, which can be very disheartening and distressing for new editors. I would really recommend either waiting for more acting roles, or doing other gaming-related things that might give you more notability in that space. It’s up to you though, and I wish you luck whatever you choose to do next. Meadowlark (talk) 11:58, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

idk Bencefo (talk) 12:33, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Your first article, but we strongly; recommend that you get experience by making smaller edits to existing articles first. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 12:39, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, you can create a draft page. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 13:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

“WP:Your first article” includes a section on “Writing your draft”. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 14:00, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m interested in joining WikiProject Psychology, and wanted to place my name as a participant. I saw that there’s a way to put your name and talk page there, but I noticed there was timestamps associated with each entry. When I placed my name with my signature involved, I realised there was no timestamp. Is the timestamp automatically added? Yeowoobi (talk) 14:53, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You have to type ~~~~ for your signature and the timestamp. If you type 3 tildes (~), it generates your signature. If you type 5 tildes, it generates the timestamp. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

4 tildes actually generates your sig and the timestamp

Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) (3 tildes)

Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 17:57, 18 April 2026 (UTC)(4 tildes)[reply]

17:57, 18 April 2026 (UTC)(5 tildes)

Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 17:57, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I was working through the list of CS1 errors and found, in reference 107, on the Robbie Williams discography page an error caused by the {{Cite certification}} template. As far as I can tell it’s implemented correctly, please could someone tell me how to fix this. Thanks Freddieh9 (talk) 15:31, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The current markup is {{cite web | certification|region=Australia|certyear=2009|type=single|access-date=2 June 2013}}

That is not {{Cite certification}}. As the error message says, {{cite web}} requires a URL parameter-value pair.

The string certification in that context is junk. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 15:42, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, my brain must have just skipped over it Freddieh9 (talk) 15:46, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nature’s way of telling you to go outside and smell the roses. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 16:01, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I want to add an image of Robert A. Wood to March 2009 Yemen bombings because of his mention in the response section. Generally I understand that images of a certain thing or person in an article should correspond with the timeframe. However, I’m not sure if a line should be drawn when one image from 2009 (here) is timeframe-appropriate but low quality, while another image from 2022 (here) is essentially the opposite. Which would be better for the article? Hsnkn (talk) 16:32, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I was reading a wikipedia page about an author and I noticed that the bibliography category of their page featured a book dated to “2027.” The book was on the list and did not include any notation that it was an upcoming project.

Can future books be included on a bibliography, or do they have to be actually released to be listed? Random IP User (talk) 16:47, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell us the name of the article so that we can also sneak to the future world for a moment.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 17:39, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article is on Jason F. Brennan. Random IP User (talk) 17:53, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Only @Rooves 13 can tell us why does they added this futiristic book. The closest search result of that book title led to an url which would form following citation:
Lester, J.C. (2016), “Libertarianism: An Extremely Short Introduction”, Arguments for Liberty: A Libertarian Miscellany, Buckingham: The University of Buckingham Press: 1-6, SSRN 3475122
Which is published in 2016, not in ’27.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 18:07, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As stated in the edit comments, this book is listed on Brennan’s Georgetown faculty page, in the bibliography section. That citation can be found here: https://gufaculty360.georgetown.edu/s/faculty-publications?id=00336000014RXIUAA4. If @KEmel49 or another editor would like to add some sort of “forthcoming” or wait until Oxford University Press releases something regarding the book’s publication, go ahead. I would advise @KEmel49 to ensure future replies contain slightly less snark, and slightly more usage of spellcheck. Rooves 13 (talk | edits) 18:42, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, the publisher is so reputable (and the scheduled publication therefore reasonably secure) that I think it fair to include the work: however, I would procede 2027 with “forthcoming”, if only to reassure that it’s not a typo: I would also like to see it cited to an Oxford University Press notice of some kind. Others may differ.

It does not seem to me remarkable that Brennan has re-used the title of his short piece in a work edited by Lester (a reputable philosopher although we don’t have an article on him) for a new full length study. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 18:09, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Random IP User (talk) 18:16, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

hello I recently got a page created for Martin Bowden. I tried to add pictures to wizard and all I’m seeing when I look on the page now is the inserted text and the pictures didn’t go through. Somebody advised me how to get the three pictures of Martin about it as a Young Man old man and performing work out of one of the newspaper articles into this Wikipedia page correctly? Thank you TheBluflame (talk) 17:28, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @TheBluflame. I have fixed the issue for you. The problem was that the code for the images were wrapped in nowiki tags that converted them to plain text. I think this was caused by some mishap on your part when using the visual editor. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 17:37, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. I deeply appreciate your help. TheBluflame (talk) 17:49, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage:GotBM i think GotBM (talk) 20:27, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GotBM. You used VisualEditor which has its own way of doing things instead of the user writing code. See Help:VisualEditor#Editing templates. Most of our documentation is written for the source editor. See Help:VisualEditor#Opening VisualEditor for a way to switch. I fixed it in the source editor by removing code added by VisualEditor.[5] If you try to write code in VisualEditor then it may try to display the code instead of making it active. PrimeHunter (talk)

Or even her grindr profile picture either way its iconic Alice Nicole Smith (talk) 21:15, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, because we (1) do not allow fair-use images of living people and (2) do not assume that she owns the copyright to her own image (which almost always lies with the person who took it). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^MUSHROOM 21:19, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

oh… but what do you mean “dont assume that she owns the copyright to her own image”… it’s her… and she literally took the photo herself how can she not have copyright over herself Alice Nicole Smith (talk) 21:24, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Images on Wikipedia have to be used with a specific free copyright license – only the original copyright holder for the image can agree to that license.

Since you aren’t the copyright holder for that image, you can’t release it under licence for use on Wikipedia. Blue Sonnet (talk) 21:29, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So if Ayesha Erotica personally went on wikipedia and uploaded the image under license we could use it?? Omg that’s hot Alice Nicole Smith (talk) 21:32, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. She’d have to contact the Volunteer Response Team to donate the image. —C.Fred (talk) 21:34, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell theres so much extra steps on this website omg im moving to Myspace for my biography. Alice Nicole Smith (talk) 21:41, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Because copyright is very complicated and the penalty for getting it wrong is hideously disproportionate for any contributors or platforms that breach it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^MUSHROOM 21:50, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Did i mention mushrooms are really delicious? Alice Nicole Smith (talk) 22:10, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, basically Wikipedia doesn’t want to get sued, or risk any of its users getting sued at the same time. This isn’t something that’s unique to Wikipedia, it’s the same for any website – although some may care about it more than others, or be based in countries with very lenient/different copyright laws.

Wikipedia is broadly subject to Californian law (Wikimedia’s headquarters are there), so copyright has to be taken really seriously because that’s just how the law works in California. Blue Sonnet (talk) 22:09, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

<33 that clears it up a ton thank you!! Alice Nicole Smith (talk) 22:10, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Can someone please help remove the redirect? I do not edit in English wikipedia, and just came here to translate the page. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=R%C4%83c%C4%83ria_(commune)&redirect=no

It is for – Răcăria. I wanted to rename this page to Răcăria (commune). There is a village with the same name, that the commune is named after. I could not do it because of the redirect. It says that I need to delete the redirect first.

Here is the page of the village- Răcăria, Rîșcani. Please, see page that explains what a “commune” is, and provides full list of all communes in the country. There are 913 in total and all of them have separate pages: https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comunele_Republicii_Moldova

Similar example, commune Recea, located nearby the topic in question: Comuna Recea, Rîșcani (wiki ro) & Recea, Rîșcani (wiki en).

It contains 3 different villages, such as: Recea (reședința), Slobozia-Recea and Sverdiac.

Thank you. Willywilly1111 (talk) 22:30, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There’s no need to rename Răcăria to Răcăria (commune). We use parentheses to disambiguate on English Wikipedia only if there are multiple topics with the same name. Since the commune is the only article which has the name Răcăria, it can keep the name. Athanelar (talk) 13:37, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I’m trying to figure out how to take the picture that I finally got posted on my Martin Bowden Wikipedia page and make it his lead photo so when somebody searching his name the photo comes up. Also I need somebody to help me fix my references on my page they look wrong and I can’t figure out what I’m doing wrong thank you in advance TheBluflame (talk) 00:15, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TheBluflame. File:Martin Bowden young cowboy.jpeg is non-free. Search suggestions don’t allow that for copyright reasons. Fair use doesn’t apply when it’s displayed next to an article link without the text of the actual article Martin Bowden. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:35, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheBluflame Your continued edits to that page are really not helping at this point. Refer WP:SPA. Mme Maigret (talk) 11:47, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So you might know I’m an experienced editor, but I have to.

So I was attempting to improve a page when I noticed some spice was missing, so I wanted to figure out this myself by finding the reliable sources. The second I opened the Google tab, the official Mastercard website showed up first, and without the “-wikipedia”, better reliable, self-published sources showed up, and I was only able to find two. Mastercard is not a secondary source, so I was wondering how Wikipedia could mess this up so bad. – SimpleObjects-9ei 🌸/🌻/🌞 02:54, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

three secondary sources for a short article isnt terrible. — D’n’B–📞 — 03:41, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

the answer to “how could Wikipedia mess this up so bad” is usually “Wikipedia is the result of millions of volunteers who do it as a hobby”. DS (talk) 05:22, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to assume that only freely-available, online sources are acceptable. That is false.

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). Help:Find sources also has some good tips. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 10:53, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

for some reason on the article 1991 Bangladesh cyclone, the infobox seems to only be inside one section, and because of this all the other sections get pushed way down to the bottom. When i first saw this page i thought it was only 1 section long. Nextrin (talk) 05:18, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody added a {{clear}} tag to make the next section not push up against the infobox. I assume they did this so that the image in the next section wouldn’t create a very thin text section if next to the infobox – I don’t have an opinion on if that’s the best way to do it, myself. ScalarFactor (talk) 05:32, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why cant we just move the picture to the right and fix the infobox? Nextrin (talk) 06:11, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 10:50, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I saw a image of the encyclopedia on the English page that has been protected by the copyright. Does that mean there are no copyright restrictions on English site of Wikipedia?

I don’t have good English, I’m Taiwanese. I had to translate. 空嗎洞本龍 (嗨) 07:14, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Could you provide which article? Usually, copyrighted images are not supposed to be here. Most rules apply for all languages of Wikipedia. TheEpicEgg56, Good day. ^{Us Ta Co} 07:35, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I exited out of it, so I don’t remember, Sorry. 空嗎洞本龍 (嗨) 07:44, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if your English is so bad that you need to translate in order to understand a page, then you should be editing on the Chinese Wikipedia, not here. ozmoozmo@enwiki (talk:contribs) 07:37, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank. I have been editing on the Chinese Encyclopaedia so I’ll do that now. 空嗎洞本龍 (嗨) 07:41, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@OzmoOzmo There’s nothing wrong with this editor pointing out a potential copyright issue to us; in fact, that’s a great thing for them to do. Athanelar (talk) 13:33, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The OP has not edited articles here (though they are not prohibited from doing so); only commented on discussion pages, including this one, which is supposed to be welcoming. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy’s edits 14:27, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So whilst I was trying to find the page for the Victorian Railways, I accidentally came across the page for History of rail transport in Great Britain 1830–1922. Not what I was looking for, but I noticed the redirect flag. Turns out I forgot one capital letter in Victorian Railways, causing me to be redirected to that article.

For those wondering, this here is the redirect.

I don’t know what to do, as I couldn’t find any information useful to this issue. What should I do? TheEpicEgg56, Good day. ^{Us Ta Co} 07:32, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheEpicEgg56, there’s two options. One is to leave it as-is, assuming that people searching for Victorian railways mean ‘railways in the Victorian era’; the other is to boldly change the redirect, assuming that they are actually looking for ‘the company Victorian Railways’ like you were. I’m going to take a leap of faith and suggest that the latter is more likely, and so I’ll go ahead and change the redirect. It may be changed back, in which case I’ll talk to the reverting editor and we’ll decide on a solution that sounds correct to us both (and you and everyone else will be welcome to join in, of course!). Meadowlark (talk) 08:56, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve also added the History page as part of the hatnote, just in case that is in fact what someone was looking for. We’ll see if anyone disagrees with that as well! Meadowlark (talk) 08:59, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. i added some links into the automatic citation tool. It cuts the path behind the domain name.

• https://www.wizzair.com/en-gb/information-and-services/investor-relations/general-information -> https://www.wizzair.com/
• https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/CM.MKT.LCAP.CD -> https://data.worldbank.org/

Where can I escalate this bug? WikiPate (talk) 09:43, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know why those webpages are being cut but I’m not convinced it’s a bug. The work around is to open the citation after it’s created and replace the URL. Mme Maigret (talk) 12:42, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Several “executive order” articles I created were redirected in bulk by one editor, without prior discussion or consistent use of AfD. Some articles were nominated for deletion, while others were simply blanked and redirected. All articles have independent coverage (Reuters, Bloomberg, WSJ), so notability is at least arguable and usually handled through discussion. Almost all articles had been reviewed and accepted via AfC.

I’m raising this to ask whether this kind of mass redirection without talk page consensus is appropriate, and how best to proceed.

Thanks, Sam (Lion(n)) 𝓛𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓣𝓗𝓔 (talk) 13:12, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at WP:BRD, and WP:BLAR. In short, yes; anybody doing anything one time is usually appropriate, that’s the ‘being bold’ part of the cycle. If you take issue with what they’ve done, then revert them, and then if they still want to go ahead and do what they did, then they should start a discussion with you about it.

It certainly would’ve been better for them to do some due diligence beforehand, but they aren’t necessarily breaking any rules by doing what they did. Athanelar (talk) 13:29, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to specify that the flag used in the infobox of Yorubaland is not an official flag by changing the text beneath the image to read “unofficial flag of the Yoruba people” instead of simply “Flag”. I know that this is possible in Infobox-country, but the page uses the Infobox-settlement type instead. Is there any way to easily alter the text or would I have to change the entire infobox type and copy over everything in it? VeryGoodMint (talk) 14:13, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]