Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1243

Archive 1240

Archive 1241

Archive 1242

Archive 1243

Help publishing a translation

I come from the spanish Wikipedia, where I've been publishing articles for some time. I wanted to translate one of the articles I had published to english, after doing so, it didn't allow me to publish it, arguing that I wasn't experienced enough and only allowing me to publish it as a draft in my user page. How could I publish it myself or find someone to revise and publish the article?

Thanks Mateo MD (talk) 15:38, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello. You may use the Article Wizard to create and submit your draft. Accounts that are new to the English Wikipedia cannot directly create articles. Be aware that the Spanish Wikipedia has different policies and guidelines, and what is acceptable there is not necessarily acceptable here. You need to ensure that the translation meets the guidelines here. 331dot (talk) 15:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I only have one question left: After submiting the draft to Article Wizard, what will happen?. Will it be reviewed and considered for being published? Excuse me if I'm making stupid questions, but I'm kinda lost since I haven't worked at all in the english Wikipedia Mateo MD (talk) 19:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

@Mateo MD: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1243. Once your draft is submitted, it will be put in a backlog (not a queue) for a real-life reviewer to look at. You can still edit it during that time, and once a reviewer has taken a look at it, it'll either be accepted (article moves to mainspace), declined (article stays in draftspace, but reviewer sees potential for it to be improved), or rejected (article is unsuitable for Wikipedia and the author should work on other subjects). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:11, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Mateo MD There are no stupid questions here, ask anything you wish. 331dot (talk) 23:14, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you v Mateo MD (talk) 15:06, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I added a button to User:Mateo MD/Holy Week in Segovia, so when ready, you can submit it as 331dot and Tenryuu have described. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:47, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Mateo MD (talk) 15:07, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

No articles from "Linking"

I want to do editing so I am using suggestions. I wanted to find articles that needs links to be added, but it says 0 articles. Why? Taymallah Belkadri (talk) 18:32, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for wanting to help out. The "add links" suggested edits feature probably picks from articles that have the tag Template:Underlinked, but no articles currently are in that category. Anytime someone tags an article as underlinked, it gets flooded with new editors adding links, because it's usually only one or two articles that have that tag at a given time, and soon someone removes the tag because the problem is solved or simply to stop the surge. WP:Overlinking is probably a more common problem than underlinking. If you select the Copyedit task, it will probably suggest more articles to you. Or you can go to the "Help Out" section of the WP:Community portal, which is where I prefer to go when looking for articles to copyedit. Perception312 (talk) 19:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

The algorithm-based links Newcomer Task has begun phased rollout. Teahouse hosts may be interested in dipping into relevant RCP to help assess the value of such added links. Folly Mox (talk) 12:01, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Perception312! I finally found 2 articles that need linking. Taymallah Belkadri (talk) 16:58, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Draft article is getting declined

Every time when iam trying to submit my draft, it is getting declined and iam getting this reply, which i have shared below.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject

but how can i give multiple references to the subject to which i have already gave reference, can anyone please guide me.

your support will be really helpful. Congo1211 (talk) 15:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

What is the name of the draft? Perhaps I can take a look and help you out! Ali Beary; (talk) 14:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Congo1211 Whoops, forgot to tag you. Read the above! Ali Beary; (talk) 14:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Assuming this is about Draft:1211 Medium Regiment (Congo), the main problem is the obscure and probably unreliable sources being used. Also, the draft makes assertions like [the regiment] has extraordinary & glorious history: extraordinary claims like that need extraordinary sources but I see none. The draft has a section on many notable campaigns that the unit has participated in, most of which have Wikipedia articles. I suggest, Congo1211, that you look a these linked articles and see if you can use any of the citations there that mention this unit in depth. You may be able to get assistance from editors at WP:MILHIST, which is a very active project. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:03, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

how do I begin my journey to create articles

I have no idea how to start my career of making edits and articles for Wikipedia please help Jackman111914 (talk) 15:09, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Welcome. If you are going to draft articles, make sure that you have enough reliable sources about the subject you see. Read WP:RS and WP:NOTABILITY. Ahri Boy (talk) 15:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Jackman111914 Welcome to the Teahouse. Your userpage (currently a redlink but you can create it by clicking on your username) should have a "Homepage" tab which will give you suggestions for easy edits to get you started. Or begin by reading articles on topics that interest you and see if you can improve them, using reliable sources. I don't advise jumping straight in to create a new draft article as Wikipedia is a big project and you need to start small and build up your experience. The WP:Task Center may also give you some ideas. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:24, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Concur with recommendation to gain experience improving existing articles before attenpting to create a new article. David notMD (talk) 17:06, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Is anyone willing to offer suggestions on how I can get an article published?

From the messages I've received on denial, the issue seems to be citations. I've included citations from legitimate sources such as The Sun Sentinel, Orlando Sentinel, Fox 13 Tampa, and Tampa International Airport's official website, but I'm still getting declined. I'm a first time wiki contributor and I'm wondering if there's a certain amount of citations needed? Or is it completely up to the discretion of the person who reviews my article?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kevin_Flynn_(Content_Creator) Yanhut (talk) 15:59, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Yanhut, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid the experience you're having is common for new editors who plunge straight into the challenging task of creating a new article before spending time learning how Wikipedia works. (I realise that you created your account a year ago, but the first edits you ever made were yesterday). Would you expect to enter a major sport tournament when you have never played a game before? And if you did, would you expect to understand the feedback you got?

And it's even more difficult when you have a Conflict of Interest (thank you for disclosing that).

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.

To answer your question directly: what mattes is not quantity of sources, but quality; and while reliability is a crucial matter for sources, independence is only a little less important. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

Sources to establish notability must meet all three of the criteria of reliability, independence, and having substantial coverage of the subject. We're not interested in what Flynn says, or even seeing memes he has spread: we need articles where people wholly unconnected with him have chosen to write at some length about the person called Kevin Flynn. Do any of your sources meet that condition? ColinFine (talk) 16:36, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Also, remove all hyperlinks. Some may be repurposed as references. David notMD (talk) 17:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

owner of wikipedia name

OP blocked as sockpuppet

whats the owner of wikipedia name on here TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 15:28, 5 December 2024 (UTC) Hello, @TheSmartWikiOne. I don't understand your question. Please make it clearer what you are askin.g ("Wikipedia name" doesn't mean anything to me). ColinFine (talk) 15:37, 5 December 2024 (UTC) like the user name TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 17:51, 5 December 2024 (UTC) Jimbo Wales ☩ (Babysharkboss2) 17:56, 5 December 2024 (UTC) @TheSmartWikiOne I suggest you read our article about Wikipedia. If you want to edit, see also our articles about punctuation, apostrophes and proper nouns. Shantavira|feed me 15:40, 5 December 2024 (UTC) I know about grammar TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 17:53, 5 December 2024 (UTC) Wikimedia Foundation. A ton of bricks 15:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC) I'm not sure what this means... care to elaborate? If you're asking what the username of the owner of Wikipedia is, then I do not know, nor do I believe I can provide it anyways. Questions do not need to go to the owner himself, as the community is willing to help! Ali Beary; (talk) 14:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC) It has become increasingly obvious to me that @TheSmartWikiOne is only interested in wasting our time, asking questions that initially seem to make sense, but not entirely, and reply to clarification requests in an equally vague manner. See their thread "Wikipedia User" Above. Shovel Shenanigans (talk) 16:19, 5 December 2024 (UTC) why do you guys think your so bossy am trying to learn you think i have the god damn time to sit back and relax and edit wikipedia NO who the hell has and wants to do that every minute someone is editing or griefing wikipedia makeing a difference and your coming at me saying damn this kid is not helping out! TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 17:49, 5 December 2024 (UTC) Pardon? ☩ (Babysharkboss2) 17:51, 5 December 2024 (UTC) ? TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 17:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC) You are simply proving my point, mein freund. Such hostility is not required. Shovel Shenanigans (talk) 17:57, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

how do i copy edit

OP blocked as sockpuppet

I don't know how to copy edtit on here its confusing and my brain it fried TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 15:32, 5 December 2024 (UTC) Take some time off from here and come back when you feel better. --Malerooster (talk) 15:39, 5 December 2024 (UTC) wdym TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 17:46, 5 December 2024 (UTC) WDYM FEEL BETTER AM TRYING TO GET HELP FROM YOU GUYS TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 17:50, 5 December 2024 (UTC) What @Malerooster is trying to say is, if your brain is fried, it is a good idea to take a break. Throwing yourself further into Wikipedia is no way of fixing a brain-fry. And please, this aggression is absolutely not necessary. Shovel Shenanigans (talk) 17:58, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Regarding usage of "Glossary of Tribes in Punjab" book as references.

Hi, Can we use "Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province" book as referencing in a wikipedia article. Tizzythewhale (talk) 17:27, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province by Horace Arthur Rose. Per WP:RAJ, it's not a good idea. Try to find some more recent scholarship. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:06, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

okay, thanks! Tizzythewhale (talk) 18:33, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Should bias of a source be noted in an article

If I were working on an article about an issue or person that both sides of the political spectrum are interested in, can I declare a source's bias? For example, let's say I am writing about Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, and I have articles from FOX (a right-wing news source) and MSNBC (a left-wing news source). Can I say something like "One left-wing news source said X (citing MSNBC) while a right-wing news source said Y (citing FOX)". I know Wikipedia is all about neutrality, but in today's world of biased news that often omits and distorts information to push an agenda, I think having both sides' opinions clearly displayed on a neutral middle ground like Wikipedia would be nice. ApteryxRainWing | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 12:49, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

You can certainly offer what differing sources say(but see WP:FALSEBALANCE) but you shouldn't characterize them in that manner. Wikipedia is about neutral point of view, but that doesn't mean sources cannot have bias, as all sources have biases. Sources are presented to readers so they can judge them for themselves. 331dot (talk) 12:51, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@331dot That last part is actually exactly why I asked this question. People have terrible judgement, and would rather stay in their safe little echo chambers and get fed lies and fearmongering. Both sides are guilty of this, so why can't we force them to see the other side's viewpoint? Polarization is already horrible where I am from, and I don't want to contribute to it by allowing people to be ignorant. I myself was once stuck in a left-wing echo chamber that talked about right-wingers like they're the second coming of Satan himself, but once I finally started to talk to people with different beliefs than me, I realized we had a lot more in common than I was told. I want other people to have that experience too, no matter how uncomfortable it is, and Wikipedia is the perfect place to start breaking down that wall that has divided us for so long. ApteryxRainWing | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 13:01, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

As I said, you should certainly offer sources with differing views/content. You just need to take care in how you characterize them. 331dot (talk) 13:04, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. ApteryxRainWing | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 13:06, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@User:ApteryxRainWing One suggestion would be to look at a few featured articles on people who have provoked strong views, e.g. Vladimir Lenin, to see how these views have been described in a neutral way. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:42, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I respect what you are trying to do, but I'd recommend reading WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS before you begin. Also keep in mind that the definition of "Left-wing" and "Right-wing" can be different depending on what country you are from. Industrial Insect (talk) 16:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Industrial Insect yeah that makes sense. I didn't know that there were different versions of the political spectrum in other places, though. I thought they just prioritized certain issues like foreign/economic policy. ApteryxRainWing | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 16:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

For instance, outside of the United States, I doubt anybody would perceive MSNBC as "left wing". Simonm223 (talk) 20:23, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Simonm223 that's pretty interesting. I just looked at the homepage of the MSNBC website and even I as a hardcore leftist am able to notice a pretty clear left-wing bias just skimming article titles. At the very least, we can agree that they love making fun of Donald Trump and pretty much anything even marginally related to him. I wonder what someone outside of america would think of that ApteryxRainWing | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 20:29, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I would suggest that treating the rubric of leftism as being "doesn't like Trump" is a very specifically American, and, even then, not particularly nuanced, perspective on political alignment. Simonm223 (talk) 20:31, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Include a new subheading on a wikipedia page

The Wikipedia page on Jaquira Díaz does not have a section describing her work and scholarship about it. How can I and my classmates add some description of the memoir and cite scholarship about it? Pinno516 (talk) 19:34, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Already asked by class instructor at User talk:Brianda (Wiki Ed)#contact Scr124 Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:33, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Missing wikipedia page

Hello, I saw that a Wikipedia page is missing it is called list of Korean Names of Native Origin. 130.212.95.174 (talk) 22:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello. In what sense it is "missing"? I haven't found any evidence that it has existed in the past. ColinFine (talk) 23:05, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

We have List of Korean surnames. Is that what you are looking for? CodeTalker (talk) 01:19, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Process times for info-en-q@wikipedia.org

sock; blocked.

I have 4 queries as a legal professional who is considering editing at Wikipedia and wishes to ascertain his potential consequential liabilities in law,:- What are the indicative process times (turnaround times) for complaints of on-wiki defamation//libels sent to email ID <info-en-q@wikipedia.org> which is mentioned on policy page WP:LBL ? Are the volunteers on that helpline legal professionals and empowered to remove/amend content independently ? Does Wikipedia/WMF acknowledge that "defamation/libel" is defined variously in different jurisdictions, and the legal definitions / torts / offences in the country of the "victim" are also applicable. In the event the Foundation claims intermediary status on being sued in the home jurisdiction of the victim, are they legally obliged to disclose the details of the concerned editors who inserted those statements for them to be sued/prosecuted in turn ? T3fg72zp (talk) 00:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC) Hello, T3fg72zp. Your questions are beyond the expertise of volunteers here at the Teahouse. I suggest that you contact the Legal department at the Wikimedia Foundation. Their contact information can be found here. Cullen328 (talk) 01:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC) @T3fg72zp: Seconding the above advice, also making sure you are aware of WP:No legal threats. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:54, 4 December 2024 (UTC) @T3fg72zp For #4, you may like to read the current edition of the in-house magazine WP:Wikipedia Signpost, which has extensive coverage of that issue in relation to an ongoing case in India. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:02, 4 December 2024 (UTC) @Mike Turnbull Yes I am aware of that case. It has been covered in the law websites/journals I am subscribed to. Since 2021 the new media and intermediary laws of India now make it very easy to sue Wikipedia in India. The earlier case was of Tuhin Amar Sinha versus Wikipedia Foundation in 2022, where WMF had to restore the plaintiff's bio page deleted by Wikipedia administrators, and now they are going into quantum of compensation to be paid to plaintiff. T3fg72zp (talk) 00:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC) I took a look at the Tuhin Sinha page and I couldn't find anything of the sort. It was recreated by @Jayen466, not by WMF. KoA (talk) 05:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

May I speak to a member or two of staff

I have been spotting numerous edits of valuable information being taken out by a user. I'd like to be assisted by a member or two of staff to resolve this, please. If you'd like more information, check my recent contributions to Haldraper's talj page, Cambridgeshire, and Peterborough. 94.10.105.239 (talk) 21:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Haldraper's talk page* 94.10.105.239 (talk) 21:36, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I looked at it, and there read "I will also be contacting moderators and administration". I suppose that administrators can collectively be called "administration"; but their services would not be required here. Wikipedia has no moderators, unless you mean its "arbitrators", whose services are only required for [what are alleged to be] the most serious problems. -- Hoary (talk) 02:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

There are no members of staff: we are all volunteers.

Furthermore, there is nobody who has the authority to step in and resolve disputes, except in certain tightly defined contexts. If you have a disagreement with another editor, you should open a discussion on either the talk page of the article, or the editor's user talk page, and try and reach consensus. (I see you have opened a discussion).

If you cannot reach consensus, (eg the other editor does not respond - but give them at least a couple of days: some editors have lives outside Wikipedia) - then dispute resolution gives steps to take.

Admins will only get involved if there is a behavioural issue, in which case you may raise a report at (eg WP:AIV for vandalism, WP:ANEW for edit warring, or WP:ANI for other serious behavioural issues. But do not go to those pages without carefully reading what it says at the top of them. ColinFine (talk) 22:12, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine: given the pattern of behavior outlined by messages at User talk:Haldraper, I am wondering if this should go to ANI—that is, if Haldraper fails to respond. Would that be too drastic too fast? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 22:16, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Looking at their edits, I don't see anything egregious. ColinFine (talk) 23:10, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Neither do I; they are simple copyedits aimed strictly at economy of English usage, devoid of any change to factual content in the article. Editors can disagree about the best wording to use, and this kind of simple disagreement should be worked out on the Talk page of the article, or on their Talk page. Administrators would certainly decline to step in in a case like this, and taking it to AIV, ANEW, or ANI would be futile and a waste of time, imho. Mathglot (talk) 07:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Asking for explanation what I did wrong.

@Yamla has Issued me a warning. }i wanted to ask for explanation on his talk page but i cant so I am asking here what I have done wrong when requesting a change in a name of an article? 109.67.4.18 (talk) 11:45, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

You are an IP who apparently wants to change the name of an article that falls under the contentious topic area, where you need to have an account and be extended confirmed before you can make any suggestions except simple edit requests via the article's Talk Page. You may not make such a name change proposal. Please edit only in other areas of Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:54, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey Mike, thanks for the replay,

What I have done was simple edit requests in the article's Talk Page, I am a bit confused what was the reason that you are stating right after saying that I am allowed to make Simple edit request that "You may not make such a name change proposal", it seams contradicting to me. 109.67.4.18 (talk) 12:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

The change you propose is not a simple edit request. It will require discussion to establish a consensus- and you cannot participate in such a discussion due to the restrictions around this topic. "Simple edit request" in this context is limited to spelling and grammar fixes, not changing how a topic is described by its title, which as I'm sure you're aware has strong feelings on each side. 331dot (talk) 12:40, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Please see your user talk page. As a user without an extended-confirmed account(an account that is 30 days old with 500 edits) you are not permitted to make edits about the Israeli-Arab/Palestinian conflict. It is a formally designated contentious topic. You are only permitted to make completely uncontroversial edit requests- and your proposal would certainly be controversial. 331dot (talk) 11:55, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

hello @331dot, thanks for the replay.

could you please help to redirect me to the policy that states what is "controversial"?

Looking for guidance to so i could contribute and make sure I am complicit with the site rules. 109.67.4.18 (talk) 12:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Please click the words "contentious topic" in my above message, this should answer your questions. I'm sure you understand that the Israeli-Palestinian/Arab conflict has strong feelings on each side, these make the restrictions necessary to ensure participants can discuss these articles as dispassionately as possible while trying to figure out how to best summarize what independent reliable sources say about it. 331dot (talk) 12:43, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

109.67.4.18, you can find a list of contentious topics at Wikipedia:Contentious topics#List of contentious topics. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Page Gone

moved from the talk page '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 08:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello, There is a wiki page that is gone called List of Korean Names of native origin. Can you check why it was gone? Derdaniel636 (talk) 06:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

It looks like you already asked about this at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Missing wikipedia page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:35, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Was it an article, Derdaniel636, or a draft? When did you see it? -- Hoary (talk) 08:43, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I saw it around March and it was a article. Derdaniel636 (talk) 08:50, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

None of List of Korean Names of native origin, List of Korean Names of Native Origin, and List of Korean names of native origin seems to have ever existed. If an article with this or a similar title had existed, it presumably would have been linked to from Lists of Korean names. But since 2012, no such article has ever been linked to from Lists of Korean names. -- Hoary (talk) 09:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

May the called something related to Sino-Korean names Derdaniel636 (talk) 09:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

How did you first find this page back in March? Why have you been looking for it? It's like looking for a restaurant: if you don't know the address, you might be able to find it by directions from a known location. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 10:37, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

well I was just looking for Korean Names and stumbled across a page called that Derdaniel636 (talk) 11:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Have you looked in your browser history? Cordless Larry (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

it is so long ago that the browser history from March is gone. Derdaniel636 (talk) 11:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

or not there anymore not sure Derdaniel636 (talk) 11:26, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

wikipedias user

whats Wikipedias user TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 16:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello @TheSmartWikiOne, and welcome to Wikipedia. It's unclear what exactly you're asking; can you please rephrase? CoconutOctopus talk 16:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

TheSmartWikiOne, you have used up a lot of the time of other editors but haven't made any improvement to Wikipedia. Please consider abandoning Wikipedia and taking up some alternative pursuit. -- Hoary (talk) 22:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

xtools counter. I recommend to be mindful of WP:NOTHERE. In the past, I've seen over-enthusiastic editors getting blocked for similar editing. You should spend more time on help building Wikipedia, and less time on user/user talk pages, or doing some other irrelevant activity. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:16, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

But its time consuming am busy looking at houses TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 18:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

If it is "time consuming" according to you, why did you register for Wikipedia! It is great to ask questions, but your questions, as said by Hoary have used up a lot of the time of other editors but haven't made any improvement to Wikipedia. Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 12:23, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

TO LEARN WHAT DO YOU THINK I DO ZJUST TALK TO RANDOM PEOPLE AM LEARNING MEDICAL STUFF HOW 0 IQ CAN YOU PEOPLE BE TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 16:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

read wp:npa to see why referring to people as "0 iq" is not considered very pogchamp 'round these parts. the kids still say that, right? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

No, it was a very cringe L take. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:31, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

You’re not funny. 66.74.137.209 (talk) 22:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Practice your mewing, rizzler :) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:24, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

i think my lifespan was cut by 75% from reading that, thank you cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 01:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

haiyaa TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 15:27, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

... TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 15:27, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Its ok to have a wikipedia account purely to only read, but please abide by WP:NPA please! Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 16:38, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

plus am busy wikipedia has millons of people here TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 16:14, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

no TheSmartWikiOne (talk) 18:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

I believe it would be in everyone's best interest to simply stop this thread. It is becoming increasingly apparent that @TheSmartWikiOne is only looking to waste our time. Shovel Shenanigans (talk) 02:15, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 12:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

• user blocked, TPA revoked. —usernamekiran (talk) 23:15, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you! Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 12:14, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Article issues

Hello! I'm an admin from SqWiki. Recently I got contacted by user Lenti2026 about some issues they were having with their articles, one of which was deleted and they weren't really sure about the procedures at hand that they would need to take to handle such a situation. I usually work on the technical side myself so I'm not the best in handling article issues so can someone help guide them around in regard to this? (Also pinging Leutrim.P which is another admin who has been involved a bit more closely to the situation.) - Klein Muçi (talk) 10:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Klein Muçi. It appears that User: Lenti2026 has no edits on the English Wikipedia. The Teahouse only deals with English Wikipedia issues, and problems on other language versions need to be dealt with on those autonomous language versions. The English Wikipedia is not the "boss Wikipedia" or the "dominant Wikipedia". We deal only with questions about the English Wikipedia here. Cullen328 (talk) 10:50, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Cullen328, hello! Yes, that's right. The problem is that their initial account got blocked, as far as I could understand, in which the said articles were created. So this is a fresh start and they are trying to not repeat the same mistakes as the first time. This is about the English Wikipedia specifically, though they need to provide more info such as the articles and accounts involved the first time as I can only go this far in explanations unfortunately. — Klein Muçi (talk) 11:01, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

There's not much information to go on here, but this related to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ledja Liku (October 2024)? Admins may be able to check the deleted article's contribution history to confirm possible block details.

Anyone planning on an attempted recreation of that article will have to meet enwiki's notability and sourcing requirements. They may be able to get a copy of the deleted article restored into their userspace if requested at WP:REFUND, but if their account is blocked they'll need to follow the instructions at Appealing a block first. They can't just start a new account: this is block evasion. (If they are not blocked, then using the Lenti2026 account is not likely a problem.) Folly Mox (talk) 11:55, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Where to appeal or request for undeletion of article? becouse ''Ledja Liku'' is notable person in Albania,in her profession. Lenti2026 (talk) 18:03, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

It seems you should unblock your former account before being able to discuss the recreation of the article at hand. File a compaint here Wikipedia:Appealing a block, then when your account is unblocked you can request the undeletion of that article.. Leutrim.P (talk) 18:59, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

The problem is that I can’t log in there to make the appeal, because my account has been globally locked due to being misunderstood as spam, when it was not intended for spam or sockpuppet purposes, just creating an article for a notable person in Albania based on Wikipedia-s rules and guideliness. Lenti2026 (talk) 19:26, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

You can try with your current account to file the complaint there. And mention all the relevant information of the topic. Leutrim.P (talk) 19:42, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate your help and suggestions, thank you all Lenti2026 (talk) 19:55, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Lenti2026 and Leutrim.P: per meta:Steward requests/Global, global locks should be appealed through email to stewards-appealswikimedia.org. As far as I'm aware, a local unblock will have no effect on a globally locked account. Folly Mox (talk) 12:19, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Change the article name from the sandbox default

Hello, i would like to get some assistance in changing the name of a sandbox article (User:Cotorobai Vasile/sandbox - Wikipedia) to The "Holy Trinity" Church in Grătiesti. Also i would like some help regarding an article that was supposed to be a translation (The "Holy Trinity" Church in Grătiesti - Wikipedia) of the Biserica „Sfânta Treime” din Grătiești - Wikipedia article, but it was published to the ro / romanian wikipedia instead of the en / english wikipedia. Cotorobai Vasile (talk) 10:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Cotorobai Vasile I'm not sure if you mean you want to make this an article now, or if you'd just like to change the name of the draft while it remains a draft. I note that none of the weblinks in your references go to a page with relevant info, they all go to some sort of startpage. If you can fix that, you should. I also wonder if part of the name should really be in quotemarks, see for example Holy Trinity Church, but I don't know this church. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:01, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. I have the church's archive on papers but couldn't find a copy of these on the official government archive so i linked the references to the gov archive start page. Should i scan the archive papers and upload them somewhere to then reference them or is there something else is should do? Cotorobai Vasile (talk) 12:59, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Also, you need to follow the directions at Help:Translation#Licensing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:05, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I added the missing attribution (diff). Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 11:10, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Your English article you published at the Romanian-language Wikipedia has been deleted there by an admin. You should submit your sandbox article for consideration by the articles for creation reviewers. There is a big blue button at the top of your sandbox for you to do that. If accepted, the reviewer will move the article into mainspace. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:37, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I will try that, thanks! Cotorobai Vasile (talk) 12:59, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Templates

Hi, I've opened a couple of templates but can't figure out how to remove/close them - can anyone help me? Rendham (talk) 12:35, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Rendham Assuming this is about recent edits at John the Baptist, you can most easily remove the templates from the top of the article using the source editor (see Help:Introduction if you are not familiar with editing that way). They will be near the top of the source code. Alternatively, if you find this difficult, ask again here and someone else will remove them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Michael

It is about the editing of the John the Baptist article. I saw the source editor page but I'm afraid I do not know how to remove the templates there. Would you mind asking someone to remove them for me?

It's my first attempt at editing and I'm sure I'll do better next time.

Regards Rendham (talk) 13:18, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Rendham I've removed the templates here. Jolly1253 (talk) 13:28, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks. Rendham (talk) 13:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

on blocking

not on the useful side of questions because it's something that won't even impact me if i'm on the receiving side, as i have no interest in being an admin

but assuming the function works at all, how does blocking work without twinkle? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

You go to Special:Block and enter the username (note I'm not an admin here, but I am on other projects). More info is at mw:Manual:Block and unblock. —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {u - t? - _uselessc} 21:07, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Cogsan: Admins also have a block link in the interface in userspace. It goes to a page like Special:Block/Cogsan which is just Special:Block with a prefilled username field in a form similar to File:Special-Block how to create a past block for IPInfo.png from 2021. The English Wikipedia has added a long text at top with MediaWiki:Blockiptext which replaces the MediaWiki default at MediaWiki:Blockiptext/qqx. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:26, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

(And then you have to go find the block template and manually add it to the user's talk page.) -- asilvering (talk) 21:34, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

figured it'd take like 3 more steps than "press twinkle's 'do the thing' button lol"

thanks. guess that's why literally every single block i've ever checked (which isn't that many, now that i think about it) has been done with twinkle cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 21:46, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Literally every single block I've ever made (and there've been quite a few) has been executed without Twinkle. -- Hoary (talk) 23:12, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

this can only mean one thing... i'm really bad at conveniently bumping into accounts you specifically have blocked cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 23:21, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Doing it manually is not difficult, the interface is very straightforward, but twinkle does the tagging for you, which is nice as the names of the various blocking templates are a lot to recall. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:36, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

By complete coincidence, this happens to be the moment in time when I have blocked 11,111 accounts. I have never used Twinkle. I do it manually on my smartphone, and it is a very simple process. Cullen328 (talk) 01:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

What a lazy fellow I must be, Cullen328. I don't know where I'd find my total total, but my total for the eleven months plus a few days of 2024 stands at a measly 13. -- Hoary (talk) 02:35, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

According to your xtools, you've blocked 669 people, @Hoary. Have the both of you considered retiring the block button and taking on some other task? Those are excellent numbers to hold on. Maybe you could get really into revision deletion instead. -- asilvering (talk) 04:02, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Admins find their niche. And sometimes it changes over time. I've done a lot of revision deletion but it's because editors have come to me requesting it, you don't go out looking for edits to rev-delete. At least, not that I know. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Liz, CAT:RD1 gets backlogged every so often. It was pretty dire when I became admin, but these days I don't usually see it get higher than 5 items. It's at 15 now. -- asilvering (talk) 08:35, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I too do my share of revision deletion including one in recent hours. My block count is relatively high because I frequently patrol Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention, which I consider one of our bulwarks against spam and corporate propaganda. If I see that someone has registered an overtly promotional username and then made overtly promotional edits, I will block them. Trolls, vandals and dedicated POV pushers get listed there. I block them too. So, no, Asilvering, I get to decide what I want to focus on as an administrator, plus I do a lot of non-adminstrative work as well, including writing significant new content, and answering questions at the Teahouse and the Help Desk. Cullen328 (talk) 08:43, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

nice cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

At least one person understood the comment in the spirit it was intended... asilvering (talk) 13:45, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Unsure if I Should Continue to Try…

Hello there! I like a band I discovered via Spotify. They are called Six Impala. They have 47.8k listeners so they’re not tiny but I feel they should be better known. One of their members is called underscores and they have 361.8k listeners. I do not know them personally and live on the other side of the planet. They have not been written about much so maybe that means they are not worthy of entry? Please advise! (Also, my draft was rejected because the tone is inappropriate so I will work to fix that if they are allowed to be included.) Here is the URL: Draft:Six Impala Vaudeville Duo (talk) 11:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Vaudeville Duo That's the thing on WP, if there are no good independent sources, you can't make an article about it. It seems WP:TOOSOON applies here. See also WP:BAND Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:11, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Ah okay. Thank you. Vaudeville Duo (talk) 14:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Vaudeville Duo. The way to think of it is: Wikipedia is not intended to help make a band or any other thing well-known; it's intended to summarise what is published about the thing once it has become well known. For the policy, follow the link WP:NOPROMO. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.211.243 (talk) 13:28, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. I guess I was thinking of Wikipedia as somewhat of a reference for music nerds like me rather than a promotional tool but I can see how that would leave it open to all kinds of meaningless information. Thanks very much! Vaudeville Duo (talk) 14:43, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Restoration of an Article

Hey there, I was wondering if there's an article deleted by a WP:AfD, which is nominated by a banned user, can I restore it through any such policy cause in the first place it is nominated by a user who was banned subsequently after nominating it to WP:AfD? 182.182.10.109 (talk) 13:04, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Sorry no. On the other hand an article created by a user who is subsequently topic-banned should not be deleted just because of the editor's comportment either. AfDs are consensus discussions - the decision doesn't belong to the nominator. If you feel an article that was deleted was actually notable and that sources were missed you could try building a draft and putting it through AfC - but if topic bans are in play and the article is about a contentious topic you might want to check and see if extended confirmed restrictions are at play as, in that case, an AfC from an ip or a new user will likely not be accepted. Simonm223 (talk) 13:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Noted. What about a redirect, can I revert the edit if done by a banned user? 182.182.17.160 (talk) 14:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I would really want more detail about the specifics before I hazard a response. To be clear: there is no blanket Wikipedia policy allowing for reversions or changes on the basis that the editor who made them was topic banned, blocked or had some other administrative or arbitration action taken against them. This does not mean those edits are fixed in stone either - only that any given edit must be considered on its own merits and not on the basis of who made it. Simonm223 (talk) 14:45, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Sir John Fitzpatrick

This entry has been deleted again, I used teahouse to try and resolve the issue but don't understand how to use it. could you please restore it again so I can finally get it published? Sir John Fitzpatrick was an RAF colleague and still a friend of David Craig, Baron Craig of Radley, is it possible to show me on his page what is required on Sir John Fitzpatrick's? I notice in the References numerous links to the London Gazette that cite evidence of awards, is this the sort of thing you need? Sorry to be a pain. Shepreth (talk) 12:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Sir John Fitzpatrick has been deleted three times being abandoned for lack of activity, undeleted twice. Do you believe that if it is undeleted again, progress can be made? Your Talk page shows that at one point in time the AfC was declined because the draft had no references. David notMD (talk) 14:13, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I found out that he was Royal Air Force 39 years, retird as Air Marshal, Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire, Companion of the Order of the Bath, but have no idea whether that would qualify him for an article. David notMD (talk) 14:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Sounds like there's a good chance, but my brief search only gets lists/mentions. Someone will have to dig out the books/old newspapers. The entry at everybodywiki.com might be a clue what to search for. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:51, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Did I do the right thing?

I was editing the page for Nancy Mace, specifically concerning the trans bathroom bill thing and I removed a citation from the Washington Post because of a paywall, and expanded on information from a CNN article that had direct quotes from Mace about her stances on LGBTQ people. Was it the right thing to do? I know paywalls don't automatically disqualify a source but the CNN article that was cited already provided a lot of information without a paywall. ApteryxRainWing | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 15:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

No you did not. It's fine to add another source but, when an editor cannot review a source due to a paywall, the generally accepted course of action would be to leave it alone, go to article talk, note the technical reason you could not verify the source and ask for another editor to do it. Simonm223 (talk) 15:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Simonm223 Both the CNN article and Washington Post article were already there (I just expanded on some information from the CNN article), and the CNN article was pretty detailed and a lot easier to access, that's why I removed the WP citation. All the information that was there before my edit could be found in the CNN article, so I simply expanded upon it and removed the paywalled article. ApteryxRainWing | Roar with me!!! | My contributions 15:59, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes and you should not have removed the article for being paywalled. I suggest you restore the deleted reference. Simonm223 (talk) 16:01, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Removing warning labels

Many articles in Wikipedia have warnings about issues that seem to be outdated. The case I am looking at currently is this article: List of people pardoned by Bill Clinton

It appears that the problems flagged in 2017 have long been fixed but the warning labels remain. I've done a lot of small edits to wikipedia articles over the years but very little admin-type tasks. I've posted on the talk page that I plan to remove those labels and my basis for doing so. But since it is the first time I would be doing something like that I figured I'd check in here, too.

In general, the warning labels are useful but there value is lessened when many remain when they are no longer valid. Jreiss17 (talk) 16:42, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

If they are outdated, I would say they are safe to remove, but it is good to proceed with caution.Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 16:48, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

@Jreiss17 Many of the people in the list have neither separate articles, nor, more importantly, citations to show what offense it was they were originally found guilty of. That seems to me to be a violation of our biography policy and well justifies the cleanup tag. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Looking at this further, there is a citation that lists what offense each person was pardoned for, though it could be cited more prominently. The first reference is to a Dept. of Justice web site that lists all of the pardons and the offenses. That is cited early in the article but not in each section or at each persons' mention. I could make the citation more prominent by adding it to the top of each section (or conceivable, cite it separately for each line in the table).

I would like advice from people in this teahouse as to what would be best.

There is another citation (reference 4) that links to another DoJ web page that also has comprehensive information. [note: that page is no longer valid and I've added reference to the archive.org archive of it. However, as that also provides comprehensive information, I'm inclined to treat it the same way as the other link as it provides additional information.

In any event, the entry does contain a reliable and independent source regarding the crimes the people were convicted (or in some cases, just charged) with. So, it think it does satisfy the biography policy. Please let me know if there is anything that needs to be addressed before removing the tags.Jreiss17 (talk) 17:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@User talk:Cooldudeseven7 Thank you for the response. @Mike Turnbull. Thanks a lot for checking. I'll see how many and tackle them if I have time but leave the tags as they are. Glad that I checked.Jreiss17 (talk) 20:46, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

HELP please ..

who could I ask to write a wikipedia about my innovative work across music and entertainment ?? Saskhiamenendez01 (talk) 14:45, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Who has written about you before? Wikipedia is not a promotional space and our rubric for determining if a person is appropriate as a subject is contained within WP:GNG and WP:BLP. If there are reliable sources that indicate you have made "innovative works across music and entertainment" then these might be used by any Wikipedia editor who is not associated with your enterprise as the basis of an article. However absent adherence to notability guidelines and reliable sources nobody is going to successfully create an article about you. Simonm223 (talk) 14:49, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Saskhiamenendez01 Please see the messages on your talk page and note that an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:58, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

There are websites that offer to create articles for payment. Most of those are scams (either no actual attempt, or an effort so flawed that it fails). Also, any attempt at paid editing requires the creator to declare paid on their User page. If a friend tries, they have to declare a conflict of interest. If you are truely famous enough, in time a person who has no personal connection to you might submit a draft about you (probably after you are dead). Meanwhile, use social media to promote yourself. David notMD (talk) 16:27, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

.... slightly harsh. We have plenty of articles on living people, even musicians and entertainers ;-) Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Writing a first Wikipedia page for Klothild de Baar Author

How does one go about getting a wikipedia page published for an author of 91 books (including translations) Thank you. Katharina Lyon-Villiger (talk) 05:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

If anyone does it, that person will probably have to be you, Katharina Lyon-Villiger. With this username, you've so far made a total of one (1) edit to Wikipedia: the one immediately above. So, start by making a hundred or more constructive, referenced-based edits to existing Wikipedia articles. Once you've done that, check whether Klothild de Baar is notable (with notability as defined not by you or me but instead by Wikipedia's criteria. Then read H:YFA and the pages to which it links. Once you're ready, create a draft. -- Hoary (talk) 06:19, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Katharina Lyon-Villiger On WP, number of books doesn't matter, what matters is if reliable sources (WP:RS), independent of the author, has written about her/her books. This rarely happens if the books are self-published (createspace etc), but it does happen. Joy of Cooking was self-published.

Your first hurdle to make an article "stick" is sources. See WP:GNG and WP:BACKWARD. If you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!", move on to WP:YFA. If not, write about something else.

I'll add also that trying to make an acceptable WP-article without having done any WP-editing makes your task even harder, so it's recommended that you "just edit" for awhile, to try to get a hang of this place. WP:TUTORIAL is a good start. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:07, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Well, Katharina Lyon-Villiger, it seems that the comments above were a waste of time, as you created a draft on your user page (an improper place for it). I have moved it to User:Katharina Lyon-Villiger/sandbox; you're welcome to work on it there. -- Hoary (talk) 07:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

For a living person, all content must be verified by references (see WP:42). Your draft has none. Rather than list all publications, consider a much shorter list titled Selected publications. Be aware that listing books she has authored does not contribute to confirming Wikipedia-notability. Instead, what is essential is to have text and references for what people have written about her. Do not submit the draft for review until all of this has been remedied. David notMD (talk) 09:02, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Katharina Lyon-Villiger, and welcome to the Teahouse. The reason that so many replies above advised you to get some significant editing experience before even thinking about creating a new article, is that you have done what nearly all beginners do when they try to create an article: you have written your draft BACKWARDS.

• First, find the sources about de Baar, each of which meets all three of the criteria in 42.
• Then, assuming you can find at least three such sources, forget everything you know about her, and write a summary of what those sources say.
• If that produces a reasonable encyclopaedia article, you can then add some uncontroversial information from non-independent sources (eg places, dates), and you can add a limited bibliography - but preferably containing works which have themselves been the subject of secondary commentary.

If you can't find three such sources, then she is almost certainly not notable in Wikipedia's sense, and there is no point in continuing. ColinFine (talk) 17:27, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Two famous persons without Wiki page

Two persons from West Bengal, the Chief host of ABP Ananda, Suman De and the Bengali nationalist leader Garga Chatterjee of Bangla Pokkho do deserve Wiki pages. People of much less popularity and importance than these two have Wiki pages. Any interested user should create those two pages immediately. জয় বাঙালি। 2409:40E1:10CC:FDE3:9B71:F8D2:36E9:561B (talk) 22:55, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello IP user. "Any interested user" might create those (assuming they meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability). But you probably won't find any sufficiently interested user here. There's a chance you might find somebody interested if you post at WT:Wikiproject India, but maybe not.

Wikipedia is a volunteer project, and people work on what they choose. ColinFine (talk) 23:09, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I see, I don't know much about Wiki. Pls take my request to Wiki project India and West Bengal. 2409:40E1:10CC:FDE3:9B71:F8D2:36E9:561B (talk) 23:18, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

You can post here. (You've already done so.) And therefore you can post at WT:WikiProject India. But before you do so, think hard. Wikipedia articles aren't awarded for merit. These two people may be very meritorious but nevertheless not qualify for articles, which can be, and are, created about people who aren't meritorious at all. (Are they meritorous? Do they qualify? I've no idea: I haven't attempted to find out.) The first question to ask yourself is whether there are reliable sources that go into detail about each of these two people. -- Hoary (talk) 23:57, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Sort of sounds like an example of WP:Pokemon test to me. I'm sure though, someone will eventually make these pages.

Hey, brainstorm. Just spitballing, but what if you did it? Shovel Shenanigans (talk) 18:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Time for Google to Index Article

I created an article almost a month ago and it still hasn't been indexed into google. Does anyone know how much longer this will take? Thanks, Ali Beary (talk) 12:54, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Ali Beary Please see WP:INDEXING, that'll tell you everything you need to know. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:56, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

It would help to know which article you are referring to- to check and see if it has been patrolled. We have no control over how quickly Google indexes articles. Do you have a particular need for it to appear in search engines quickly? 331dot (talk) 12:56, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Which article? If it is still a draft it will not be indeed by Google. However Google's processes are quite opaque, I've seen them index an article within minutes or even take a week or more. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Thayne Jasperson. It's not a draft and it's been rated on the content assessment scale, 331dot & Dodger67. Ali Beary (talk) 13:11, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Ali Beary: this article hasn't been patrolled yet, that's the likely reason it hasn't been indexed by search engines. (The 'content assessment' has no bearing on this, AFAIK.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:56, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Google doesn't know there exists a new page in the Web waiting to be indexed. In a quite simplified view: their crawler visits all known pages from time to time and collects links from them. If it finds an unknown link, it adds it to the collection and some day it visits that new page, too. And there are only two links from the normally indexed main Wikipedia space coming into the artice (Special:WhatLinksHere/Thayne Jasperson). Additionally, those two (Samuel Seabury & Jon Rua) are not modified too often, so they may be scanned in some longer intervals than average, so Google may have just not discovered the new page yet... --CiaPan (talk) 14:06, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

CiaPan, partly right, but you missed the essential reason it is not indexed. That is because all search engines are blocked from indexing the page, from line 29 of the page Html:

• <meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow,max-image-preview:standard">

and the reason that line is there, is as described by others above, and is due to a new user having created a page that hasn't been patrolled yet. After it has been, that line will disappear, the page will become indexable, and Google will pick it up very quickly. See Meta element#The robots attribute. Mathglot (talk) 18:50, 6 December 2024 (UTC)