Wikipedia:Teahouse

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

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

Help Wikipedia

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

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

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

There are currently 0 user(s) asking for help via the {{Help me}} template.

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

Draft:Pavel_Kizhuk

 Courtesy link: Draft:Pavel Kizhuk

Hello everyone! How glad I am to be at the tea house! Sorry, I received a comment about the article, and it mentions spelling errors. I checked everything and it seems correct. How can I be sure the spelling matches the encyclopedia? I'm sure this is a stupid question, but I would be glad to receive any help.

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 10:21, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Your browser probably lets you choose among languages, Jamescopperfieldd. Tell it that you're writing in English and it will probably avoid what aren't words in English. (There are minor complications, such as whether you want to write according to US, according to UK, or according to other convention.) But there are larger problems than spelling. Here's a photo caption: Pavel Kizhuk shoot in western this Alex Carlin.2023. I cannot parse this. -- Hoary (talk) 10:33, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Oh, thank you! Yes, he's filming in western. Okay, I get it, I'll try to correct that. "Shoot" is film slang for "to act in."

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 12:00, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

While not necessarily spelling, I do see many grammatical and punctuation errors. To me it reads like it was translated poorly from a language that has difference syntax. I recommend running it through a basic spelling and grammar checker in a program such as Word. Please note that some of these programs have added AI elements, and AI content is not allowed in articles - you should not let it replace chunks of words for you; review each suggestion and only approve simple minor corrections. (There may be ways to disable the AI tools, but I don't have any experience with them.) ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 10:34, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks so much for watching! I read that articles don't work when translated through AI. Well, I'll think about what to do. I doubt anyone can help me with this! Thanks again!

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 12:02, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey!)

Sorry to bother you, but after researching this issue and reviewing numerous well-known articles that are written with errors and are publicly available, I understand that Wikipedia is no better or worse than any other database,like IMDB.The main factor.A user with extensive editing experience, and that's it? Well...

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 08:34, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

More or less. The biggest difference is that Wikipedia is collaborative, so anyone can fix errors (or outright misinformation) posted by someone else. Popular articles are closely monitored, so they're less likely to have issues than niche subjects.

There's a general preference for fixing things when possible rather than outright deletion - but it requires someone interested enough to do the fixing. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 08:46, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

I don't quite agree. I can cite numerous articles with a single source, lack of significance, etc. Interest in the individual in the capitalist world, you yourself understand only why...Okay, this is all philosophy, but at least we are in a tea house))I'll be working on the article's grammar. Is there any other way I can offer some advice regarding the article?

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 08:57, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm sorry "You can offer some advice regarding the article?"

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 08:59, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Do you know anyone who's more fluent in English that might be able to help proofread? That will probably give you better results than direct translations. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 09:17, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm confident in Your theory. Perhaps You could skim through it? It's a short article. I just don't know how I can thank You for it.

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 09:24, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

@Jamescopperfieldd@ChompyTheGogoat

It's poorly written and unreferenced. I don't think it belongs in mainspace. ~2026-84942-3 (talk) 01:25, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Regarding the text, I checked everything according to your instructions, correcting punctuation and grammar errors. The links for this article, taken together, are more than significant. The person's age must be taken into account.Regular databases provide much more truthful information than paid articles in well-known publications.This is information for you. Thanks for your help with grammar and punctuation.

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 06:13, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

There are plenty of young people with ample coverage and no question that they qualify as notable. Wikipedia has strong guidelines on which sources are considered reliable, with accuracy being a major factor. Sometimes it can be difficult to find or judge sources on foreign subjects for English Wikipedia, but leaning on sources you've been told are unreliable aren't a solution, and dodging the AfC process isn't either. Reviewers know what they're doing, and you disagreeing with guidelines won't change them. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 07:02, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm not breaking the rules in any way. Regarding the significance of sources, it's actually a very philosophical question, based more on personal beliefs. When all the factors are taken together, it's clear that the person has made a significant achievement.Yes, this isn't supported by the BBC or any government website. But why would the government talk about this man? He's not a politician, just a personality, and the state, as a rule, doesn't need personalities.

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 07:12, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

It might be "philosophical" in a general sense, but on Wikipedia it's a matter of established guidelines and consensus. If you don't agree with them you're free to post on other platforms with no such restrictions. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 07:41, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, right? So what kind of freedom are we talking about when it possibly dictates the criteria for the significance of sources?

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 07:56, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

One in which "free" refers to not costing money, and where validity matters. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 08:07, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this is how the world is currently, but as you can see, big changes are taking place. And as a rule, "idea" wins out over "material value".You are a very good conversationalist and I am very glad to meet you in the teahouse.I promise to improve the article. Deleting it would be cruel.

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 08:20, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

I can find many articles with one source, or which are based even on a local statement, not to mention an international one.I'm just defending article, not questioning Wikipedia.

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 08:00, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia has something called WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS which I recommend you read. Each article is expected to stand or fail on its own merits. The existence of other sub-standard articles does not mean new articles can also be sub-standard. Madam Fatal (talk) 20:51, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh yes, you're absolutely right. I'm actually getting familiar with Wikipedia's rules.Could you please suggest how I can save this article from being deleted? Maybe make it shorter? Remove facts that require more reliable sources?

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 06:00, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I would start with removing any primary sources that you are currently using on the page. It looks like you have press releases as well as Pinterest listed as a source multiple times, those should be removed - if you cannot replace them, then the corresponding content should be removed.

There is also a great deal of storytelling and promotional material that does not read as encyclopedic (i.e. Kizhuk's work has yielded some good results in relations between Greece and Russia. And Pavel himself, through a requiem of fate, gained profound experience without any particular purpose and also brought benefits.) The article should read as strictly factual.

This is a start, but it also seems like there is a lack of significant coverage, which is necessary for a page to stay. You can check out WP:SIGCOV for more information about this. FiddleheadLady (talk) 02:17, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh, thank you so much for the detailed answer! I'll work on the page and follow your recommendations.

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 05:31, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

You still don't seem to be hearing people. If there aren't enough reliable references available to prove that someone is considered notable according to WP:NOTABILITY, then they don't qualify for an article on Wikipedia. It doesn't matter who it's written by or how good it is. We follow the sources first and foremost, and if they don't exist they don't exist. That doesn't mean that the person isn't interesting or popular, or that they'll never qualify, but that they don't at this time, which is common early in their career when there hasn't been much coverage. Editors don't !vote to delete if they think an article just needs to be written better - typically they recommend draftication instead so that you CAN continue working on it. A !vote for deletion means that the subject is not currently considered notable, and I think if you continue working on it you're just going to be even more frustrated when it does get deleted (as everyone who's responded agrees it should be). My recommendation would be to walk away from it for now and accept this as a learning experience, study Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and practice making small edits to existing articles. You can keep an eye out for anything that's written about him and consider rewriting the article in the future if you think there has been enough coverage. That doesn't mean try to come back next week with a single new source, but likely a matter of months or even years as his career goes on. These things take time. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 07:33, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, you're absolutely right! The man is alive, and sources could emerge soon—it's not out of the question. Therefore, I'm revising the article based on the editors' comments, and I hope it gets sent to draft.

With regads, Jamescopperfieldd (talk) 07:42, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

"Globe Mascot"

Recently on a couple pages such as 79th British Academy Film Awards, a little globe guy appears in a righthand column, scrolling on a Wikipedia branded phone. I've figured out that there's a fun animation when you switch from light mode to dark mode, and I assume this is related to Wikipedia's anniversary, but who is this? I'm curious to know more and why they show up on certain pages. – OdinintheNorth (talk) 23:56, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

That's Baby globe.

Added for the 25th anniversary, you probably have Birthday mode on.

I found it(?) kinda cute. Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) ([[User:Starlet147/Sandbox|Sandbox]) 00:22, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

(DOn't mind my broken sig) Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) ([[User:Starlet147/Sandbox|Sandbox]) 00:25, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! – OdinintheNorth (talk) 04:38, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

No problem.(Hey I fixed my sig)

Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 16:26, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

See Le Petit Prince, London, Book, Wikipedia, and Music. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 12:21, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I love the Le Petit Prince once. It's so adorable. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 14:37, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

It's on most space articles. It is cute. Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 15:09, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

How many variations of Baby Globe exist and how can I find them. He's so cute OMG. Please tell me he's permanent he's too cute to go away. ~2026-14085-32 (talk) 16:40, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, he/she/they are cute. Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 20:27, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I don’t think they are permanent (i wish they are permanent). Versions111 (talk • contribs) 07:24, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

noooooo Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 12:35, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I can't edit anymore

Hi dear Teahouse

I am a new member of Wikipedia, and have made one page. I tried to add links to this page to other pages that were relevant to its subject, but couldn't publish the changes. I also tried to adjust the text in the page I created and again couldn't publish the changes.

Could you let me know how to adjust this? Or advise?

Thanks a lot!!!!

Andrushka Fairfabric (talk) 07:23, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

What error message did you receive, and on what article? It's possible it's protected due to past issues, in which case you'll need to file a request for the change. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 07:28, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I suppose that you're asking about some problem that arose in Draft:Mitchell Faircloth. Could you give us an example of a link that you can't add to it, and tell us just what error message you get on attempting to add the link? -- Hoary (talk) 10:53, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Apparently I misread this the first time, but looking again it appears they were attempting to crosslink to their draft within live articles on related topics. I suspect the edit history on the draft might have something to do with it, but I don't see any direct action. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 11:28, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

@Andrushka Fairfabric MOS:DRAFTNOLINK advises against trying to link from mainspace articles to drafts and there may a technical block to doing so (I haven't checked). Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I was trying to link from my main space published article (not a draft) to another published article. I think maybe I can't publish edits because I haven't practiced editing enough to have been recognised as an editor? Thanks for your help!!! Andrushka Fairfabric (talk) 01:13, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

You don't have a mainspace article anymore. It was moved to drafts by another editor because it has multiple issues and is not ready to publish. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 03:39, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Ok! Thanks for your help. Andrushka Fairfabric (talk) 04:03, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

It looks like you've been able to make more edits to your draft, so I take it things are working fine on that page? The error probably was related to the links then. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 06:57, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

The Lobster

I am curious why this article was ambushed and deleted? It went through AFC and is the definition of notable since it is at the biggest tourist attraction in LA, is 100 years old and has been in several movies. Plenty of press as well.

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lobster (restaurant)

Can someone tell me how this article was ambushed and then deleted within 3 days in WP:AfC? The comments made in the discussion to justify the deletion, just are not true at all. Seems like this group has a problem with the restaurant that sits at the front of the Santa Monica Pier for 100 years.. Also, the one participant Mer-C was already suspended for being a sock, suspicious deletions and editing...

Does this look odd to you? Most deletion discussion must go at least a week and most go 2-3 weeks.. I hate to accuse people but this seems to be some sort of paid attack on an article that was submitted through afc. Just because someone who was accused of paid editing 3-4 years ago made a version which you have no idea if he was paid to do?

The World Cup, Women's World Cup and the Olympics are coming to the area and we are trying to clean up the Wikipedia for the city for these events. Is there a problem with that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 20:46, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I would not say that the article was 'ambushed'. I think it was rightfully deleted after either a self-promotion to article status or a false approval by the AfC reviewer. Do you have any proof at all that this was a "paid attack"?

I will also say that, if you are trying to clean up the city's Wikipedia pages for the Olympics, creating new articles would not be a good idea. It would be wiser to clean up any tagged articles relating to the city. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 21:53, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lobster (restaurant)

Here is an article stating its one of the top 10 most instagrammed places in the world

https://smmirror.com/2012/12/santa-monica-pier-makes-top-10-most-instagrammed-places-in-world-in-2012/

~2026-66804-1 (talk) 20:32, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Would you mind telling us what the article is? aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 20:36, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I apologize, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lobster (restaurant). ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 20:39, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/most-instagrammed-places_n_5679aee6e4b014efe0d720d3 ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 20:44, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

@MER-C @Star Mississippi Might want to take a look at this temp account. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 20:45, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @Aesurias

They also came to my Talk. GIven the concerns here and at my Talk about using this article for promotion and the multiple deletions and paid promotion and sock puppetry as well as bad faith assumptions that we have an issue with the restaurant itself, I decline to restore this article @~2026-66804-1. You're welcome to file a Deletion Review if you believe my close was incorrect, but I would not recommend that based on the case you've made here. WP:NOTTHEM is also helpful reading. Star Mississippi 02:31, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I will discuss it with a few others in the office and consider the options. I feel the press the restaurant has over 75 years in more than enough to be included. The article went through AFC and independent review, it has plenty of coverage. The photos were already on Wikipedia from different users over quite a long period.

We've submitted a request to Grokopedia for an article as well. Hopefully that will go better! ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 08:16, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

We have been going through a tough time in the downtown area and working to improve the areas image has been a goal for the current city administration.

https://www.smdp.com/city-manager-outlines-brazen-plan-to-reshape-santa-monicas-culture-economy-government-and-landscape-as-he-says-the-city-stands-at-a-crossroads-between-ruin-and-revitalization/ ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 08:17, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

There are outlets for this @~2026-66804-1, but neither Wikipedia nor Grokipedia are the best options. I tink you have a misunderstanding of AfC which does not guarantee retention, just that it has a chance of being kept if someone files for deletion. If you're going to pursue this, which I don't recommend as a new editor as it's one of the hardest things to do, please gain an understanding of how the policies apply. WP:SIRS WP:CORP are helpful. Star Mississippi 13:53, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

"The World Cup, Women's World Cup and the Olympics are coming to the area and we are trying to clean up the Wikipedia for the city for these events. Is there a problem with that?" Several problems, actually. You say "we", is this account used by anyone other than yourself? Or are you saying that there are multiple people editing in coordination? Also, you seem to be saying that you are editing articles here to drive up business for this restaurant. That is at least an admission that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. It also makes me think that you are somehow connected to this restaurant, creating a conflict of interest. You say it is at a large tourist attraction, but there are many things at or near tourist attractions that are completely unknown to the world. There was a local restaurant in my own home town that was open for 75 years, but I would not expect it to have an article here. What makes your 100 year old restaurant any different? "It has been in several movies". Really? To what extent? Lots of things can be seen in the background of movies. That doesn't make them notable. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:07, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I mean the employees of the city of Santa Monica... nothing specific to this restaurant except this is one of the properties deemed to be worthy because of the reasons stated..There was plenty of press from the LA Times to the NY Times and many more. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:12, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Are you saying that you are a city employee? And that you are doing this to increase business to things in your city? That still sounds like a conflict of interest to me. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:28, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

PS -- that "most instagrammed places" list is 14 years old. Instagram itself was only a couple years old at the time. Is this really as impressive as you think it is?--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:12, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

It is in the top 10 every year.. according to this and the other articles it was top 10 in the world for 2012, 2015, and 2016 so far.. I've heard its there every year but, with a quick search thats what I came up with. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:18, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

https://www.timeout.com/los-angeles/blog/2016s-most-instagrammed-places-in-l-a-120716 ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:19, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

That link you just posted is for most Instagrammed places in LA. That is not the same thing as most Instagrammed places in the world. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:26, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

The Santa Monica Pier was ranked in the top 10 most Instagrammed places in the world in 2012 (#10), 2015 (#8), and 2016 (#8). Ask the AI's, like Grok or ChatGPT. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:35, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

That's the pier. Not the restaurant. And why would I ask the AIs? --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:49, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

What is the point of arguing the validity of the instrgram lists as opposed to something like notability? There is plenty of press, you can use the AI's to ask them for a detailed history on The Lobster restaurant in Santa Monica and to cite each source after each sentence. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:38, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Again, why would we ask AI? Also, is that press all from the local media? There were articles about the local restaurant I mentioned, too. Doesn't mean it was notable. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:52, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

The LA Times is a reputable internationally recognized press source with editorial oversight. The restaurant is in Santa Monica, CA. Claiming the LA Times is local is like claiming the NY Times is local coverage to NY. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 22:17, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

When the location is that close by, it is local coverage no matter what paper it is in. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 23:54, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

No place in any of the notability requirements that i have reviewed is local coverage not acceptable. WP:SIRS. Virtually every article about subjects in Los Angeles use the LA Times. I am not sure why you are trying to bring the articles validation to an inconsequential article? ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 01:10, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Does any source outside the LA region say anything sbout this restaurant? No. I'm surecthere are hundreds of restsurants in Paris, London, Tokyo, NY, etc that get lots of reviews from local media. To the world at large those restaurants are of no more notability than the lost dog coveres on the local 6 o'clock news.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:34, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Why would anyone be using AI to prove that a topic is notable ? AI hallucination existsToarin (talk) 21:41, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

People use AI for the weirdest things. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 21:42, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

That is why you ask them to cite each source.. It can source relevant articles faster than going through google. ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:43, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

It can also source relevant articles much less reliably than going through google, or any search engine for that matter. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 21:44, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I know the person requesting help is also under scrutiny but i was under the impression that the business only needed 2 in depth articles to meet the notability requirements. This place has articles I could find going back to the 50's if i remember.. https://latimes.newspapers.com/search/results/?_gl=1*qr48o9*_up*MQ..*_gs*MQ..&gbraid=0AAAAADtl_1DhEExDb3cEDxRIDCnpOeeYN&gclid=CjwKCAiAh5XNBhAAEiwA_Bu8FbNGK9X_cNsiTYHKFayBDxtMm5N6uyV0JDQQ3I3T2EyW_jFrD-Xf0RoCuKAQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds&keyword=1602+lobster ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 21:53, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

The notability requirements for corporations and organisations can be found at WP:NCORP if you wish to read it. Athanelar (talk) 02:15, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Attempts to create an article about this restaurant have been highly disruptive for years. Advertising is contrary to policy. Undisclosed paid editing is contrary to policy. Sockpuppetry is contrary to policy. Those who have attempted to create an article about this restaurant have resorted to all of those dishonest tactics. I am certainly not opposed to articles about tourist oriented seafood restaurants. I am, after all, the #1 contributor to both Joe's Stone Crab and Nick's Cove, California. I have no connection to either restaurant other than eating at each one once. It is all about the quality of the in-depth significant coverage of the restaurant (not the pier) in reliable independent sources, and neutrally summarizing those sources. The same is true of this Santa Monica restaurant. I express no opinion about its notability but I can say that coming in hot and heavy with promotional language and dark accusations of some sort of conspiracy against this restaurant is exactly the wrong way to go about it. "Ambushed"? "Some sort of paid attack"? Give me a break. Calm, competent editing in compliance with policies and guidelines is the correct course of action. That is what gets results. Cullen328 (talk) 05:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Barely any of this is true.. Looks like someone tried to create a page 3 years ago and then it was created again 5 days later.. There is no ongoing conspiracy to create a page for this restaurant that i can see but closing a deletion discussion within 3 days is out of policy unless it was listed as speedy deletion. The article also went through AFC and was approved.. Isn't that the policy for submitting articles that had issues previously? ~2026-66804-1 (talk) 18:54, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

The Lobster (restaurant) was:

• Draftified on 4 September 2023 for being 'covert advertising'
• Deleted on 9 September 2023 under WP:CSD#G5 (created in violation of a ban/block)
• Deleted on 23 February 2026 after an AfD

Draft:The Lobster (restaurant) was:

• Deleted on 5 September 2023 under CSD G5
• This means that it was deleted a day after it was draftified per above, and then seemingly recreated directly in mainspace to be deleted again on September 9.

Draft:The Lobster (Santa Monica) was:

• Moved to mainspace on 8 September 2025; the different name was almost certainly a (successful) attempt to evade scrutiny over the previous history of the draft.

So the chronology seems to be;

1. First created as The Lobster (restaurant) some time prior to 4 Sep 23, whereafter it was draftified.

2. First deleted at Draft:The Lobster (restaurant) a day later.

3. Created for the second time as TL (r) in mainspace some time between 5 and 9 September 2023

4. Deleted for the second time at TL (r)

5. Created for the third time at Draft:TL (SM) some time before 8 September 2025

6. Deleted for the third time at TL (r) on the 23 Feb 26

I wouldn't say it's a 'conspiracy,' but the page is certainly a target of persistent recreation. Athanelar (talk) 19:08, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-66804-1 I'm not sure why you keep repeating three days, the discussion was opened on 16 February and closed on 23 February. The community has decided The Lobster is not notable. You're welcome to pursue a draft and AfC, but I think promotion of your city manager's goals is probably best achieved elsewhere. Star Mississippi 01:50, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-66804-1 Do you have a conflict of interest with the topic of this article?Toarin (talk) 08:17, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Just noting for the record that the accusation "Mer-C was already suspended for being a sock, suspicious deletions and editing..." is false. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:33, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Huh, I didn't notice that they accused an Admin of English Wikipedia. Toarin (talk) 17:45, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Me neither, there goes the last shred of good faith. Star Mississippi 17:53, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

• Noting there is a block impacting 2026-66804-1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)~2026-66804-1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) per their Talk. For that and myriad reasons, we're likely done here. Star Mississippi 17:53, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

  "No matching items in log"; talk page link is red. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:59, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

  apologies, it's ~2026-66804-1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Star Mississippi 18:35, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

A user who is constantly reverting everything on a page they created?

Hi, I've been adding a piece of info to a page and it got reverted by a user (who created the page, apparently). So I tried to revise it and make it better, but the same user just keeps reverting it (no big deal - but I thought it was a valid addition and I cited it). Anyway, then I looked at the user's contributions and noticed that ALL they ever do is revert and rollback edits on that page and lots of other pages on Wiki. Surely not all of these edits are bad and need to be reverted? It's like they won't let anyone else add anything new, ever? If you create a page, do you own it? I don't know if that's cool as I'm new here, but I thought old pages could still be added to. Or maybe we're only meant to update new pages? Anyway, I'm not looking to shake up anything - here's the user if you want to check it out? If it's okay, then sorry for bringing it up. DisneyFanatic25 (talk) 21:47, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

@DisneyFanatic25 This does not look seem okay, even just from reading your description. I'll check it out, but it sounds like they're violating WP:OWNBEHAVIOR. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 21:58, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

@DisneyFanatic25 Having looked, it appears that the above stands, as well as WP:DRNE. It seems to me that they are not here to build an encyclopedia, they're here to build their encyclopedia. However, this is just my opinion. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 22:04, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for checking it out! I thought it must be a violation. What do we do? Is there a Wiki admin in the Teahouse who will read this post and handle it? DisneyFanatic25 (talk) 22:16, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I've already messaged User:Bearcat, who is a well-known and active admin. Hopefully, he will respond soon. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 22:17, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Sounds good, I appreciate it! DisneyFanatic25 (talk) 22:25, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Happy 6th march my bro ~2026-14464-61 (talk) 13:27, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Have you tried discussing with Amaury? This is appears to be a content dispute, and the first step of those is to discuss on the talk page. A user mostly reverting also isn't that uncommon; they could just primarily be a counter vandalism patroller. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 22:29, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Amaury would be well advised to use edit summaries to communicate better about why they revert so much, but their edit history actually isn't as problematic as it might appear to a newbie — bad-faith editors often add unsourced or inappropriate material to our articles, which has to be removed, and by and large that's what Amaury has been doing. They're a long-established editor who's been around here for well over a decade, although they aren't typically around as much as they used to be.

The issue, it would seem, is that the content you were trying to add to articles was sourced to things like X/Twitter tweets and YouTube videos, which are not reliable sources for Wikipedia content. So, again, I'd suggest that Amaury might be better off communicating a bit more, but their basic behaviour isn't nearly as problematic as a newbie might think, because we have to be regularly on guard for the addition of improperly sourced and/or entirely inappropriate material to our articles. Bearcat (talk) 22:32, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for checking - I wasn't sure if it was okay as I didn't want to step on their toes as they created the page. I was using an Instagram post with a direct quote from the series creator, but maybe that is not reliable either on Wiki. No worries I won't add it again, just wasn't sure if it was allowed or not. Thanks all for answering me! DisneyFanatic25 (talk) 22:38, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @DisneyFanatic25. Just replying to your last point (I haven't looked at any of the content). It's not clear from what you said whether the quote is posted by the series creator themselves or by somebody else.

A social media post from somebody involved, on their own channel/account, would be a reliable but self-published source, and usable only within the limitations of such a source. A quote on a random social media account is not a reliable source. ColinFine (talk) 10:06, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Greenpeace bankrupted?!....

I have found a article from the New York Times claiming that a US Federal judge has accepted a settlement from Greenpeace in regards to some protests of a pipeline in Dakota. The article showed up, according to Google 2 days ago on 3-2-2026. Can this material presented here be used in the Greenpeace article?I would have put it there myself, only to be possibly reverted due to the controversial nature of this matter. The article claims the settlement could literally bankrupt the environmental group. ~2026-11445-80 (talk) 22:09, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

While the settlement could bankrupt Greenpeace, it doesn't mean that it will. I recommend waiting until something is confirmed. However, if you want to cover the settlement itself in the article, and it's well sourced (it's an NYT article, so it seems to be), then I would say to put that in if you wish. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 22:19, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

That case has been going on for years too, so it's hardly new - just finally closed (I assume, having not read said article). There's likely additional sources available. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 07:05, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Is there a way to make editors aware with awareness templates for CTOP in Twinkle?

Is there? Iljhgtn (they/them · talk) 23:30, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't believe so. There is an open issue on twinkle's github for adding support for CTOP alerts, but it appears no one has coded and implemented the request. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 03:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes; with CT-Helper.js. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:57, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @Andy Iljhgtn (they/them · talk) 20:33, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Email on account - worth it?

Hi all,

Would you recommend adding an email address to your Editor account? Is it better to connect a private email, create a separate one just for WP, or skip it entirely?

Thinking mainly about security, password recovery, and whether it actually helps with communication between editors.

Curious what your experiences are.

Thanks! LionmerterTHE (talk) 07:30, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I recommend it, so you can occasionally provide private feedback to someone, or ask them something privately. Your use cases are another good reason. I created an email just for Wikipedia-related activities, and have never received spam on it; I find it useful. If you want to try it out, you can email me a 'Hello' if you want, by going to my User page or Talk page, and clicking, 'Email this user'. (On my skin, that link is in the left sidebar under the heading 'Tools', but it might be different for you.) If you do, lmk in your message whether you want an email you a reply or not. I can also just respond here or on your Talk page to tell you I got it. Mathglot (talk) 09:32, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Missing ping: LionmerterTHE. Mathglot (talk) 09:33, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! Tell me if it worked LionmerterTHE (talk) 08:07, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@LionmerterTHE To add to Mathglot's answer: if you have added and verified an email address to your Wikipedia/Wikimedia account, and subsequently lose your Wikipedia password, having a registered email address will help you reset your wiki password. (I don't think that's possible without the email address. Also, everyone should use password managers.)

Most wiki-related communications should take place on-wiki, but two use cases for email are when there might be private or sensitive information involved, or for sending file attachments, such as through the Resource exchange. To initiate an email conversation from Wikipedia, both parties need to have registered email addresses, and the first email is sent from a generic Wikipedia address so the recipient's address is not revealed to the sender unless they reply to the email. My Wikipedia address is an alias for my primary email account, which I filter into a dedicated Wikipedia folder. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 09:44, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

LionmerterTHE, I just (@08:07 UTC) got a notification (i.e., a Wikimedia alert) that you sent me an email, but the actual email hasn't arrived yet in my email (i.e., *not* part of Wikimedia) inbox. There's probably a queue for sending them out from Wikimedia, or maybe my email provider is slow to update my inbox. But anyway, it worked! Mathglot (talk) 08:12, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Thats interesting - thank you again LionmerterTHE (talk) 08:15, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

LionmerterTHE, my mistake; the email came through at the same time as the notification; I was looking in the wrong place. You should have the response, or soon. Mathglot (talk) 09:49, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Formatting Question

Good Morning Teahouse,

I'm new to WikiText and HTML-style systems in general, Is there any way to force a section (Multimedia, Userboxes or Other) to display a specific distance from the top or bottom of the page without altering anything else?

The WikiText cheatsheet doesn't give any information about that.

Edit: Is there a way to force a New Line as well?

I-like-Arm64 (talk) 07:32, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I-like-Arm64, in HTML, yes (but that is off-topic for the Teahouse; if you are curious about HTML, try the Wikipedia:Reference desk or any of the many good tutorials and references online). For Wikitext, that would generally be unadvisable; do you have a real-world problem in mind? To force a new line, do what you did above: add two blank lines in your text. Mathglot (talk) 09:24, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip! I-like-Arm64 (talk) 10:22, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@I-like-Arm64: if you're talking about articles (although the same probably goes for non-article pages as well), then by and large it's not a good idea to 'force' anything. Bear in mind that we get huge numbers of users accessing Wikipedia on a multitude of different devices, screen sizes, operating systems, skins, etc., some of whom may also have special access needs, and what may look good to you could cause problems for others. We sometimes see users increase the font size in an article, or blow up the infobox image to 1000px width, or whatever, and while that may be fine on your 32" super duper hi-rez monitor, someone else working on an old mobile device might not feel the same. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:49, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing Thanks for the reply!

What I was trying to say was:

How do you set margins around an Infobox?

One of my headings were clipping behind the Babel userbox on my userpage, the only solution I could find was making the text around the userbox longer than the userbox itself. This doesn't work you change text size through appearance options on the sidebar

Also, I was talking about forcing a single newline character to appear rather than needing to put 2 newline characters back-to-back. since doing it like that adds more spacing than the standard text wraparound. Is there any way to do this without needing to use the poem plugin?

Thanks in advance! I-like-Arm64 (talk) 10:38, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I-like-Arm64, regarding, 'How do you set margins around an Infobox?' the answer is, you don't. You allow the mediawiki settings to do that for you. Please provide a link to the version of your user page (or any page) that shows the problem, and then I or someone can look at it. If there is a legitimate bug, it can be raised and tracked, but we have to see it, first. Mathglot (talk) 11:09, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

"'How do you set margins around an Infobox?' the answer is, you don't." Really? That sounds counterintuitive.

Here's the example in my sandbox (Here)

The line on the text formatted as 'Heading' passes into the info/userbox. The text on the other hand wraps properly. I-like-Arm64 (talk) 13:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, really. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia with a home stylesheet to enforce a certain level of consistency across articles. This should not be surprising. It is not a blank slate where you can style an article any which way you want, as you can in pure HTML. To an extent, you can modify how things look *only for you*, i.e., without affecting how the page looks to anybody else, so if you want extra space around Infoboxes in articles you browse, you can do that. Read Wikipedia:Common.css for details how to do this.

Otherwise, if you really need to, Wikimedia accepts most (but not all) HTML tags, and one of the ones they do is <div>, so if you must, add a div above the Infobox (or nest the box within it), and include your margin in it. Mathglot (talk) 08:27, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Timočani

This article Timočani is a falsification of history. Timoceni are a Romanian group, partially came from Romania, partially the Romanians who lived and still lived on both sides of Danube river and in vicinity of Timoc river. No connection with Slavs. There is a Cultural Genocide of Serbian administration against Romanians. The Romanian language is forbidden in schools, also a recent cyrillic alphabet was invented for Romanians in order to assimilate them. And the most chauvinistic action was the separation of Romanians in two groups: Romanians and the "Vlachs". The "Vlachs" are a part of Romanians who accepted the Serbian authority. In this way Serbs started an oppression against Romanians. The question of Romanians of Timoc was discussed in the European Parliament, mainly about the false division of Romanian minority by Serbs in Romanians and "Vlachs". The Timocani article is full of propaganda promoted by some Bulgarian editors! Dellhom (talk) 09:51, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Dellhom, and welcome to the Teahouse. A Wikipedia article is (or should be) a summary of what the major reliable sources say about a subject, and nothing else.

If you think that an article could be improved, please open up a discussion on the article's talk page. Be ready to support your position with reliable published sources.

And I strongly suggest that you drop the battleground approach: we are all here to build an encyclopaedia collaboratively. Sometimes people have strong views about what should and shouldn't go into an article: often other people have equally strong contrary views. Wikipedia does its best not to favour one view or the other, but to document the competing views without choosing between them. ColinFine (talk) 10:18, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Topics surrounding the Balkans and Eastern Europe is among some of the most controversial in all of English Wikipedia. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Active sanctions. Toarin (talk) 10:20, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I would add that Bulgarians have as much a right to be here as Romanians or any group. If your strong views on this topic prevent you from working collaboratively with people regardless of who they are, you need to find another topic to edit about, one that strikes less passion in you. Eastern Europe is a formally designated contentious topic. 331dot (talk) 10:22, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Luckily, you can improve, flesh-out, and add sources to any article on wikipedia. It will be better to have a less aggressive attitude when you do so, and make sure what you add is verifiable and rigorous, especially in a contentious topic like that. I'll add that Bulgarians on here have been nothing but wonderful to me to date as someone who edits Bulgarian articles. Just WP:be kind to people. Remember, they are all human-beings just like you :). Pietrus1 (talk) 11:10, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@Dellhom "The Timocani article is full of propaganda promoted by some Bulgarian editors!" How do you know that any of the content was created bt Bulgarian editors? Do you know which editors are Bulgarian? David10244 (talk) 06:12, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Need sandbox help

Hey! I need some help clearing my sandbox so I can make another article. I made an article on my personal sandbox (User:Jacobthenerd/sandbox) but because it has been published to the main page it just redirects to the actual article now. How can I clear the sandbox so I can start on another article while still keeping my first published article up? Thank you! Jacobthenerd (talk) 12:30, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I cleared the redirect; this can be done yourself by, once you get to where the redirect takes you, to click the link to the original page(usually) in the upper left corner.

It's best to use the Article Wizard to create drafts, or otherwise create them under an actual title.(like [[User:331dot/Article title]]). 331dot (talk) 12:36, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Happy 6th march bro ~2026-14464-61 (talk) 13:28, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Where did the plushie go?

In january, I checked the store to see the 25th B-day merch, and there was this adorable plushie. I checked a couple weeks ago and I can't find it anywhere. It's like it never existed. Can anyone help? --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 14:38, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @DollarStoreBaal44. The Teahouse is for questions about editing and contributing to Wikipedia. Your question seems to be about store merchandise, so you may want to contact the store directly for help. Thanks! TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 15:13, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Aight. Sorry, thought this would be a good place to ask. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 15:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

It’s totally fine. Many contributors post things in the wrong place at first. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 15:18, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Have a tea

~2026-14464-61 (talk) 13:29, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Sold out perhaps? The Grenadian Historian (Aka. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a) (talk) 15:31, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

You may be talking about the Baby Globe plushie! The bottom of this page mentions it. Unfortunately, pre-orders are not available anymore, but it tells us to "check back for more updates in March". LightNightLights (talk • contribs) 15:36, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Comments

Why have my comments on Talk:2026 Minab school airstrike been removed. Who if not the US and Zionist entity are responsible for the bombing? Aliens? Is this an encyclopaedia or zionist/fascist/pro-Trump propaganda? Piccionaia (talk) 15:13, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Because you wanted to have the content changed, but did not follow the modus operandi for edit requests; also see the comment in the edit summary when you were reverted. Lectonar (talk) 15:19, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

It is not. Your 'edit request' was in no way helpful to make the article better, which is what the talk pages are for. I do agree with you about the fact that the US is at fault in this case, but no reliable sources are going to make such brazen claims. Since wikipedia articles are just summaries of what reliable, secondary sources say about the subject, I'm afraid you're out of luck. There is no propaganda or censorship here, your comment was simply not following proper talk page etiquette. See WP:TALKPURPOSE. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 15:19, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Sean.hoyland (talk · contribs), who reverted your edit, left the following edit summary; that is not an edit request. read WP:EDITXY for how to write them. I.e, they reverted you because your comment was not a properly formatted edit request, not because of "zionist/fascist/pro-Trump propaganda." Athanelar (talk) 15:19, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@Athanelar: Sean.hoyland could have been more helpful in their rejection. Notwithstanding the request not being in the right format, using the edit summary is not the right place to answer it. Placing the rejection in the discussion (with a {{not done}} for highlighting) would allow everyone to see what the request was originally, and why it has not been done. Bazza 7 (talk) 15:24, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Sure, but when reverted the appropriate course of action if in doubt would be to check if the reverting editor left an edit summary, not run to another forum to accuse them of being a zionist/fascist/pro-Trump propagandist. Athanelar (talk) 15:41, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Normally, for a registered account, I would leave the appropriate topic area welcome templates on their talk page, but I'm a bit busy updating things at the moment. I have posted the messages now. As for being more helpful, I'm afraid that would require some kind of personality transplant, and we just don't have that technology yet. Piccionaia, it's nothing personal. The answer to the question "Is this an encyclopaedia or zionist/fascist/pro-Trump propaganda?" is that it is a bit of both, or possibly a pro-Hamas/Iranian operation, it's hard to keep up with all the social media experts, but mostly it's a rules-based encyclopedia. So, if you follow the rules, it will be fine. Sean.hoyland (talk) 16:17, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Fair enough. Piccionaia (talk) 15:20, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

~2026-14464-61 (talk) has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!

Spread the awesomeness of bubble teas by adding {{subst:Bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

~2026-14464-61 (talk) 13:30, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Awwwww thanks! --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 14:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Templated warnings

Hi,

When I patrol recent changes looking for unconstructive edits, I often find some users engaging in the talk page with the intention to reach the subject of the article...be it an organization, a person etc. I want to be able to send a templated message saying something to the effect of "the talk page of an article does not establish communication with the subject itself but to engage in conversations regarding the article". However, I am unfamiliar with the process of creating templated messages/warnings. An option to include this either in Redwarn or Antivandal would be most appreciated. Thank you! _signed, Kvinnen (talk) 16:01, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

If you want to create templates for your personal use, the best way is to create them in a subpage of your userspace, and then you can invoke the template with curly brackets, like {{User:Kvinnen/example}} would transclude the contents of the page User:Kvinnen/example Athanelar (talk) 16:45, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I will attempt to do this. Thank you very much! _signed, Kvinnen (talk) 16:49, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

If you create a template you think could be useful more broadly, you're also completely able to create a new template in the Template: namespace. Athanelar (talk) 16:50, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Is there any issue with creating them in userspace and then moving them to Templates? ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 14:18, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

No, that's also fine. You can create it in userspace, make sure it works properly etc and then move it to Template space if you want. Athanelar (talk) 15:10, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

The Template:Uw-chat2 series probably covers many of these situations; you may (or may not) want to take a look, a copy, or consider proposing a tweak. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 16:52, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I will take a look a this too. Thanks! _signed, Kvinnen (talk) 17:02, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

You can use WP:Twinkle to easily locate and use such templated messages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:01, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

If the problem is repeated by serval editors on one talk page, you can add {{Talkheader}} to the top of that page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:35, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Need help on 2 articles Raffey Cassidy and Alessandro Nivola

hi, so the film High End by Antonia Campbell-Hughes stars Eva Green, Raffey Cassidy, and Alessandro Nivola! Look look, I know ya gonna say "provide a source 🙄", well my source is go to Eva Green's Filmography, it says she will be in the High End movie, and if you click the sources, it takes you to the site and it says Cassidy and Nivola will also be in the film! Can someone add that for me, pretty please? ~2026-13784-94 (talk) 17:38, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I mean, can someone add High End to the Filmography of Raffey Cassidy and Alessandro Nivola pretty please? ~2026-13784-94 (talk) 17:50, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

As far as I can make out from the web and IMDb, this project is still "in development" and/or pre-production (I may be mistaken about this) and does not yet have even a vague release date. A significant proportion of films in this stage of development fall through and are never completed or released: it is far too soon to start adding details to Wikipedia about it, whether in its own article (see WP:Too soon and WP:Crystal) or in others. I suggest you wait until the film has actually been (or at least is just about to be) released. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 22:46, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I believe the standard for films/TV is that articles can be created once filming starts, since the vast majority do make it to release once that happens, but there has to be significant coverage. That mostly applies to sequels or subsequent seasons of projects that are already successful, since there's rarely enough detail on entirely new works that far out to prove notability. There may or may not be enough as it ramps up to the release, since larger projects often do media tours after filming wraps. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 14:15, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

How do I edit here

Its been 3 days, I try to expand articles I have passion on, I feel like a confused alien here and it doesn't feel very good, I want to improve stuff but I don't know how, I needed a teacher :( Tactical15 (talk) 18:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I just left some introductory links on your talk page; I'm sorry nobody thought to do so sooner.

You may also be interested in Wikipedia:Mentorship. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:49, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Alr,No probs. Im kinda hard to get as a teen but thanks for understanding. Tactical15 (talk) 19:05, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Should varieties of something in a subsection be sorted alphabetically?

Hello all, I tried to look it up in the WP:MOS but there's no mention of alphabetical sorting and there's no Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Food. I'm wondering if varieties of Donburi should be sorted alphabetically, and if this is the norm, or if the order is decided by something else. (If there is a resource that discusses this, I would be very grateful!) Acinonyxjubatusrex (talk) 19:42, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I think the only time I've seen subsections in a specific order is when they're chronological. Aside from that I don't think it really matters. Putting more popular/prominent towards the top and rare or niche ones to the bottom seems to be fairly common. MOS:JAPAN would apply to the article in general, and there is MOS:LIST, but subsections aren't really a list, the way List of lists of lists is, for example - just simple text without going into detail. True lists like that can also be sorted various ways including but not limited to alphabetically per said MOS.

If you're so inclined, it would probably help that article more to add references. I bet you could find plenty that are usable in the main articles for the more popular varieties like unagi don. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 13:43, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Advice to clear/archive discussions on Talk Page

I was browsing my watchlist, and came across Talk:Jaiden Animations which is full of discussions that are NOTAFOURM or not relevant in general. However, they're old and long enough that I hesitated to delete them, and I see that there's an archive for that talk page, so should I try to archive them or just delete them outright? Or just leave them? (Or if something happens before I get an answer, what should I have done?)

Pinging @LaffyTaffer because they've been active on the page and might have some insight as well. Realtent (talk) 19:48, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@Realtent While I think that talk page can be a mess sometimes, I'm not sure I agree that there's any WP:NOTFORUM messages, all of the existing discussions are about potential improvements to the article as far as I can tell. NOTFORUM would apply to posts like "I'm trying to find a specific Jaiden Animations video" or "I thought it was really funny when Jaiden did [x] on stream yesterday", messages that aren't relevant to improving the Jaiden Animations article. ᴸᵃᶠᶠʸTaffer💬(they/she) 20:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess I suggested there were more than a handful when it's not a huge problem. "How can we ask Jaiden for permission" "How about this one" and "Does Jaiden live in Washington" I don't find much value in but I guess could be potential improvements. Realtent (talk) 20:22, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

1+1?

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

---

whay is 1+1 ~2026-13901-75 (talk) 19:57, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello. This page is to ask questions about using Wikipedia. If you have such a question, please pose it. 331dot (talk) 20:13, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-13901-75 1+1, speaking mathematically, equals 2. However, there are many jokes surrounding it, each with their own answer. My personal favorite is 1+1=Window. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 20:51, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

1+1 is still one, but also 2, and also 3. And also 0. ~2026-13977-34 (talk) 18:41, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Why are minnie and mickey always sad? ~2026-13977-34 (talk) 18:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Because their existence revolves around a corporation who is keeping them held hostage under copyright, and their TV show is just them pandering to nonexistent children and they're told what to say by decrepit old white men who think WWII was recent. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 18:54, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

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

hello! i'm looking for some help on improving a draft

hello! i need help editing a rejected draft of mine. the reason for rejection is source-related, so any help would be greatly appreciated (im very new to this)

Draft:Kets4eki - Wikipedia 404.seikoko (talk) 20:01, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello. The good news is that your draft was only declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted.

You need to show that this musician meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician, through significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 20:12, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Five different entries in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/ that redirect to the same page?

Hello all, I have a few more questions....

Q1: On Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/, there are five different entries that redirect to the same page, i.e. Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/China-_and_Chinese-related_articles:

• Manual of Style/China
• Manual of Style/China- and Chinese-related articles
• Manual of Style/China-related articles
• Manual of Style/China and Chinese-related articles
• Manual of Style/Chinese

I went to "edit source" on Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/ but realised the entries are automated, but I'm not sure how. Anyway, it would be great if the page could get cleaned up so there's just one entry and not five. Could someone point me in the right direction?

Q2: would teahouse staff prefer that I put multiple questions in one Teahouse question and just bullet point them, or submit an individual question for each query? I've been combing through the MOS and various but realise I still have a lot of questions... Acinonyxjubatusrex (talk) 20:41, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Acinonyxjubatusrex, and welcome to the Teahouse.

As you say, that page is automatically generated from all the pages that exist as subpages of WP:Manual of Style.

Some of these (indicated by being in italics) are to redirection pages - pages which simply redirect to another place, often because there is an alternative name or an alternative spelling under which people might look for that page or article.

That is the explanation for the multiple entries pointing to the same place, and there is nothing to be cleaned up: they are not intended for people looking at the list you found, but to help people who try searching for WP:Manual of Style/(something about China) to get to the right place. ColinFine (talk) 21:44, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Ohhh ok, that explains a lot. Thank you! Acinonyxjubatusrex (talk) 21:48, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanking on desktop?

How do I thank someone for a comment on desktop? When I'm on mobile there's a link to do so on every one, and that doesn't seem to exist on desktop. I feel like I'm missing something obvious. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 20:43, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

if you go to the 'view history' button, you should see a button that says 'thank' next to each edit, just after the edit summary. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 20:48, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Well, that seems unnecessarily complicated. For once mobile handles it better. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 21:02, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

You an switch to mobile view on desktop (and back; and vice versa) using the link at the foot of each page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:43, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Well, yeah, but that kind of defeats the purpose of being on desktop. I don't think sending thanks should be something that requires much effort, let alone a workaround. The whole point is to have something simpler than adding a comment, right? ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 21:48, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

You can propose a change on WP:Phabricator. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:04, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

For me, no, that's not the point. "Thanking" already requires little effort, and I say that as a lazy person. If it required even less, thanks might proliferate and become as vapid as Facebook "likes". -- Hoary (talk) 23:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Well, since they aren't displayed publicly and don't factor into either monetization or reach algorithms, they don't NEED to mean anything more than the word itself does. I use them when I appreciate someone's input and don't have anything else to add. What is the point if not that? I assumed it was to avoid clogging things up with a bunch of people just saying thanks. When I'm in the middle of reading a discussion (often on long pages like this with frequent edits) I'm not interested in digging back in the history to try to find a particular comment just to send one. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 00:41, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

As they aren't displayed publicly and don't factor into either monetization or reach algorithms they do seem innocuous. So I retract my earlier moan on the subject. -- Hoary (talk) 01:55, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

They are displayed publicly though. You can see the thanks anyone has sent or received with Special:Log, using the 'thanks log' option. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 02:21, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

That's not the same as displaying them on the comment like it's a popularity contest. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 02:27, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't actually think this is a mobile vs desktop difference. Other wikis have this feature on desktop, such as simple (See Simple:Wikipedia:Simple talk) and Wikitionary (see wiktionary:Wiktionary:Information desk). 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 22:38, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Presumably because someone coded them that way. I'm only active here and I have it on mobile but not on desktop 🤷‍♀️ I do wonder what the point is of having the elipses menu button with that as the only option, but whatever. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 00:44, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Interesting - apparently there are some venues where that menu option doesn't exist, and mobile doesn't have any options in history view either so I have to swap INTO desktop mode to do it on those (and remember that the internal modes are different from my browser function, which basically just rearranges the layout but doesn't affect features). *Sigh*

I know this is minor in the grand scheme; it's just one of those things that niggles at me. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 11:23, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@ChompyTheGogoat I don't know if this is some personal preference setting, but for me, in a thread like this, every Reply is followed by 3 horizontal dots, which can be clicked to thank. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:44, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

That's what I'm referring to. I don't have it on desktop at all, and I ran across an area that didn't show it on mobile either. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 14:49, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@ChompyTheGogoat, @Gråbergs Gråa Sång To see that "3 horizontal dots" feature on desktop, you have to have the "Discussion tools" activated via your Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. See last part of this mediawiki page Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:42, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Yesss, that did it! Winner winner chicken dinner! ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 20:49, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I would like to find out how i can help someone get a page in wikipedia...

Hello, I am seeking guidance on the appropriate steps to establish a Wikipedia page for a business professional. My employer is the founder of his own company and the author of a book that details his personal journey, including the challenges and processes involved in building his business from the ground up. The book not only shares his professional experiences but also provides practical guidance for aspiring entrepreneurs. It offers comprehensive, step-by-step insights—from launching a business to understanding and calculating key financial figures. In addition to being an author, he owns and operates an equity funding company specializing in the acquisition of owner-financed properties. Could you please advise on the requirements, guidelines, and best practices for creating a Wikipedia page in compliance with Wikipedia’s standards? Thank you for your time and assistance. Best regards ~2026-13820-85 (talk) 21:07, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello. Others will have better worded advice than I, but I will say that you should be aware that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable for a person.(click the link for more information) There are good reasons to not want one. It won't necessarily say what the subject might want it to say, and could potentially contain embarrassing information as long as is properly cited and accurate. Wikipedia is not a place to showcase someone- that's what social media is for. Wikipedia articles summarize what independent sources say about a topic, not what they might say about themselves and not mere documentation of their work and accomplishments. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 21:15, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Please see WP:BOSS, WP:PAID and WP:COI. If writing about your employer, compliance with the latter pair is mandatory. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:41, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Also WP:NEWLLM. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 21:51, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

hello world

Is this the world? ~2026-82500-9 (talk) 22:01, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

No, it's Wikipedia. Have you a question about using or editing Wikipedia? ColinFine (talk) 22:32, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

This is not the world, but you have access to most of the world's knowledge here. You can get a pretty good picture of what the world is like. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 18:56, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

a smaller version of it TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 05:15, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Articles that still need additional copyediting after I'm finished with a copyedit?

Hi there!

I've been working on doing copyedits on some articles that look like they haven't been copyedited for a while. If I've copyedited a section, but feel it (or a smaller section within it) could still use additional copyediting, is there a different tag I should add? Could I change the date of the template that says it needs copyediting to the date of my recent copyedit? Or would asking the talk page if it's appropriate to remove the template be more appropriate? Thanks so much! Mikankiwis (talk) 22:23, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

If you think the copyediting has been done, you can just remove the maintenance template right away; there's no need to ask anybody.

If you still think it needs further work that you can't/don't want to do yourself, then yes; change the date of the copyediting tag to reflect the current date, to show that the article needs copyediting as of x date. Athanelar (talk) 22:32, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

(also, be aware that there are three templates; {{copyedit}} {{copyedit section}} and {{copyedit inline}} to flag articles, sections/subsections and individual lines, respectively. Same goes for most maintenance tags.) Athanelar (talk) 22:33, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

That makes sense, thanks for your help : ) Mikankiwis (talk) 22:41, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

User agent

Do temporary account IP viewers see user agents? ~2026-13911-71 (talk) 22:25, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I believe that is restricted to CheckUsers proper. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 22:27, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

TAIV does what it says on the tin; it allows people with that permission to see the underlying IP address below a temporary account. It's basically just like how on the old Wikipedia your IP address would be shown directly; you just need a special permission to see that now instead. Athanelar (talk) 22:31, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Zoominfo

Hi. I think this article might need some help to keep it neutral - and that I'm not the appropriate one to do it, because my editing there is tainted by my extreme personal bias against its subject, to the point where I'm being repeatedly incivil for mere content disputes (in talk and edit summaries). I'm sorry. And I know I should refrain from that article from now.

I'm still concerned that the article might be under stress from PR efforts, I invite fellow WPdians to watchlist it in place of me - anyone would be better guards than me.

Again, I'm sorry. No need to hesitate if you want to highlight instances where my behaviour is bad; I'm so emotional I don't even know where exactly did I went off the line.

Thank you, and have a productive day! :) iris 7:26a (+8) 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk} 23:26, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I would. Except I am like you, in the fact that I think databrokers are the scum of the earth that need to be enveloped by Jell-o and suffocated. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 18:57, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Help with Draft: Ramila Meghwal (District President, Jalore)

Hello! I have been working on a draft for Ramila Meghwal, a political leader from Rajasthan. I would appreciate it if an experienced editor could review the draft for "Mainspace" readiness.

She currently serves as the President of the Jalore District Congress Committee (DCC), having been appointed by the All India Congress Committee (AICC) in August 2023. She was also a candidate in the 2023 Rajasthan Legislative Assembly election for the Jalore (SC) seat, where she secured over 64,000 votes (approx. 35% of the vote share).

I have included the following reliable sources in the draft:

• AICC Official Appointment: The formal press release from August 2023 confirming her leadership role.
• Election Commission of India (ECI): Official candidate affidavit and detailed 2023 election results.
• Media Coverage: News links from The Hindu, Dainik Bhaskar, and First India regarding her nomination and organizational role.

I have aimed for a neutral, encyclopedic tone and followed the guidelines for political notability in India. Could someone please review the citations and layout to see if it's ready to be published?

Thank you for your time and help! Nishant208 (talk) 02:44, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Can you please give us the link to your draft. It seems like you don't have a draft in the given name

Draft:Ramila Meghwal, The name of the draft is shown in red. So, is there really a draft in that name. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 04:11, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

You can check now I have moved draft to Ramila Meghwal Nishant208 (talk) 04:41, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

It's at User:Nishant208/sandbox, Nishant208. At its head, I read: Are you ready to request review of it by an experienced editor for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Submit your draft for review. So if you're ready for the request, then submit. -- Hoary (talk) 04:17, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @Hoary TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 04:30, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Is it good to go. Any suggestions Nishant208 (talk) 04:47, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Well, add more citations to Media coverage and public image TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 04:51, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I have added more citations to media coverage and public image.

Any thing else for improvement. Nishant208 (talk) 05:00, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Also add her Haryanvi name like this Ramila Meghwal (Haryanvi: idk, you write) TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 05:04, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Why would I write hrayanvi name Nishant208 (talk) 05:08, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Look at these articles

Girogi Jincharzarie

Hala Al-Qadi

Moon Jeong-hee

Moon Jae-in,etc TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 05:12, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Nishant208, and welcome to the Teahouse.

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

Official election results and press releases are primary sources, and of very limited use for a Wikipedia article, and no use at all for establishing that the subject meets the criteria for notability.

Sources from major newspapers may be more useful, but only if they are secondary sources with significant coverage of the subject: see golden rule. ColinFine (talk) 10:43, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Is it good to go. Nishant208 (talk) 10:45, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Nishant208 please do NOT add her name in Haryanvi (as you say, why Haryanvi?), Rajasthani, Hindi or any other non-latin script, as that would contravene WP:NOINDICSCRIPT.
The four points you have listed in the references section need to be added in the appropriate place in the article, the social media removed from the External links and infobox and the image moved into the infobox.
However, as she appears to be just a regional party official, not an elected representative (losing doesn't count), I suspect she may not meet the notability criteria at WP:POLITICIAN, so she would need to meet the General notability guideline. I think you should submit the draft through the Articles for creation process where this could be assessed, so I have added the appropriate "Submit for review" button to the draft. Best wishes. - Arjayay (talk) 10:50, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot about the WP:NOINDICSCRIPT. Thanks for telling. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 11:10, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

now I have improved. Nishant208 (talk) 11:45, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

should I submit for review Nishant208 (talk) 13:14, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Rewrite or Edit?

Hello! I have been doing the suggested edits for awhile, and have come across two articles for football/soccer players that are written with extremely bias for the player, most likely written by a fan. Micheal Galea is the example I found today (unfortunately I cant seem to dig up the one I found earlier :( ). I personally don't feel like the right person to fix these fully, as I don't have an interest in the sport and don't know any of the terms, but for future reference, would it be better to try and reword what is already there, or try to build a new page from the ground up for pages like this? I would love to hear others opinions on this! Gordonthefreedman (talk) 04:14, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Micheal Galea looks more like a fandom page than a WIkipedia page, due to words like "Michael lived up to his class" , "In a highly disappointing 2006–2007 season" and "He managed to score no less than 14 goals in the 1997–1998 season: TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 04:34, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Gordonthefreedman, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Thank you for bringing this up.

When you find a problem in an article, the best think to do for Wikipedia's benefit is to fix it; but often we don't have the time, or the interest, or the knowledge to do so. One approach is to add a suitable maintenance template (for example {{POV}}) - that at least warns other readers and editors that there may be a problem.

There is no requirement on you to do anything at all to it; but if you wish to, you are perfectly entitled to simply remove the most egregious POV material from it.

Probably the most useful thing you could do is to look for sources that meet the golden rule. If you can find some, you can add them to the article ; if you can't, that's a very good indication that the subject is not notable and you could take it to articles for deletion. But that certainly takes some work.

If you haven't already got Twinkle installed, you will find that installing and using it helps with some of those steps (though not with searching for sources!). ColinFine (talk) 10:52, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Woah, thank you! I haven't heard of Twinkle before, I will be sure to download it! I was considering taking it to deletion, but again I know so little about the sport that I have no clue if someone is well known or not lol. Again, thank you so much, this will definitely be helpful for me (and I hope others)! Gordonthefreedman (talk) 22:16, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Merge requests

Hey, so I recently start a merge proposal. Despite adding a message on the wikiprojects there doesn't seem to be much response.

Also as a side note is there a closing process like WP:RM or can it be closed at any time?

I could get some input here maybe? Discussion: Talk:London (disambiguation)

Thanks, Jacksonvil (talk|contribs) 05:16, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@Jacksonvil You seem to be getting plenty of support now, possibly because people saw your post here. WP:MERGECLOSE suggests you should wait about a week before closing. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:03, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Article Improvement Help Request

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Mary%27s_Forane_Church,_Thankey - please someone help in improving the article, by giving necessary corrections and edits. Please Tellmethetruth555 (talk) 06:20, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Tellmethetruth555, you have an invitation on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LAWRENCE PRAVEEN THOMAS to present reasons for other editors to disbelieve a claim that you're merely another name of the block evader LAWRENCE PRAVEEN THOMAS. So far, you haven't responded. Better attend to that first. Though if you'd prefer to skip that chore, then one of us could block you and "draftify" or delete the article whose improvement you're asking for. -- Hoary (talk) 06:33, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, [REDACTED], This user page is definitely a sock-puppet. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 07:17, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

TheGreatEditor024, I've redacted your comment out of an abundance of caution because I suspect it constitutes WP:OUTING. If you have off-wiki evidence of sockpuppetry, it should not be shared publicly on-wiki, particularly where it might reveal an editor's real identity. Athanelar (talk) 12:38, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

i know, thats why I just said that i am ready to share only if the administrators ask me because I didn't know if it was a violation or not. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 13:31, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Your original comment here stated this editor's real, full name in public. It's in another thread where you said you were willing to share it privately. Athanelar (talk) 13:32, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Ohhh okay, I said his name because the above message did reveal his name. I mean the message by Hoary. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 13:48, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

The above message speculates that the account is linked to another account which has a particular username. That is not the same thing as stating outright that you can confirm a user account is linked to an email address with a particular real person's name.

Please do have a read through WP:OUTING. In general, you should never publicly confirm on-wiki a link between somebody's Wikipedia account and any off-wiki information about that person, such as their real name or email address.

Posting another editor's personal information is unacceptable, unless that person has voluntarily posted their own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia. Emphasis from the original source. Athanelar (talk) 13:51, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Okay, Thank you for the link. I am gonna read that now. I am really sorry for messing up, TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:00, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

It happens. The editor has now confirmed their connection to that account and name on their talk page anyway. Athanelar (talk) 14:03, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@Athanelar the blocked user sent me a mail, telling that he didn't know anything related to Wikipedia and he actually wanted a mentor. He is sending mails to me because I helped him in one of his drafts. What should I say. I really don't know. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 13:50, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

You can encourage them to submit an unblock request following the instructions which have been posted on their talk page, though it seems they've already pledged to undergo the WP:STANDARDOFFER and wait 6 months. Athanelar (talk) 13:52, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Should I mail him or reply in his talk page. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 13:54, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Either's fine. Athanelar (talk) 14:00, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Done, I sent a reply to his mail. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:00, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Btw Thank you so much TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 13:31, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

The ongoing conflict in the middle east with Iran

Would it be possible to include in the main Wikipedia page the subject of the conflict with Iran in the Ongoing section? (This is the part which includes the war in Ukraine and the Sudanese civil war)~2026-12178-57 (talk) 07:35, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-12178-57 Hello! You certainly can nominate the topic/related topics at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates, although the conflict would not be listed under "ongoing" since it is already featured under the In the news section. If the conflict continues and more events get covered with short blurbs under In the news, then it would likely be added under Ongoing. GGOTCC 08:18, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, it won't be put in ongoing until the blurb rolls off the ITN box. 331dot (talk) 09:02, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

What's the correct template for attributing a claim to multiple sources?

In the Iron Lung (film)#Critical response, {{efn}} is used {{efn|Multiple references:<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" /><ref name=":3" /><ref name=":4" /><ref name=":5" /><ref name="IndieWire" /><ref name="Variety" /><ref name="HorrorPress" />}} but in the article Myers–Briggs Type Indicator, {{refn}} is used instead. {{refn|Attributed to multiple sources:<ref name=v512/><ref name="Schweiger"/>{{sfn|Stein|Swan|2019}}{{sfn|Thyer|Pignotti|2015}}{{sfn|Lilienfeld|Lynn|Lohr|2014}}}} Which is the correct one? Toarin (talk) 08:05, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Efn is for footnotes. I don't believe that's a proper way to insert citations, even though the note itself does contain the refs. Refn added a "master" reference containing the rest, so it shows as a correct inline citation.

Open to correction if there's a guideline that says otherwise. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 08:18, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with just having multiple inline citations one after the other if a claim is attributed to multiple sources. Obviously you don't want to chain like 4 citations in a row, but 2 or even 3 is fine and I have seen used. Athanelar (talk) 12:35, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Both of those have a significant number - likely because the statements being supported are controversial opinions, so they're wanting to show that numerous reputable sources have all said it. Particularly for MBTI given there have already been disputes over neutrality on that article. Leaving them inline would look like refbombing, but I can see why they wanted to show more proof than normal, so used this route to condense them. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 12:43, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@Toarin There is some guidance at WP:CITEBUNDLE. I haven't checked whether this would be appropriate in the case you have in mind. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:56, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

BILLIONAIRES

I was just watching Bloomburg at3:30am. What else does a 77-year-old Hippie listen to without going crazy. I do watch BBC WORLD NEWS. I looked up how many billionaires per country there were. I'M GLAD I GIVE TO WIKIPEDIA! ~2026-13856-79 (talk) 08:30, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:53, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

How does one deal with inappropriate behaviour?

Following disagreements regarding edits on a page, I would like to flag the behaviour of @GenoV84 who has been making unwelcome comments on my talk page. I do not think this rises to the level of harassment at this point, but this feels abusive, including with personal accusations. Having been around a little, I think I know better than to directly respond and escalate; however, it feels like a behaviour that should be addressed. I would welcome some recommendations to this effect. Tagging @Cambial Yellowing who was involved in these messages (in a supportive way). Julius Schwarz (talk) 09:31, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@Julius Schwarz Discussion on your talk page is already over. Don't cry for help elsewhere and take responsibility for your own mistakes. Move on. GenoV84 (talk) 09:36, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate you making my point for me. Julius Schwarz (talk) 09:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment - From reading this entire situation as an uninvolved editor, both of you probably need to read WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL and WP:KETTLE. ★ Campssitie (msg) (contribs) 🧋🏖 10:27, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Campssitie, thanks for chipping in. And, yes, there are probably two sides to this situation, not just my own. From my perspective, I admit that my reverts can, as always, be disputed -- although I believe I have sufficient experience with people going around changing ideologies/positions without adequate sources or discussion; but then the article's talk page is the place for this. This is what I encouraged in my reply. Instead, my issue is the immediate name-calling, accusations of ganging up (while @Cambial Yellowing responded even before I saw @GenoV84's posts), etc. Good faith is admittedly a little hard to assume there, and it seems like a bit of a pattern. Julius Schwarz (talk) 10:37, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

You might start with WP:DRN for the article in question, plus a request that they avoid your user page. If that doesn't suffice WP:ANI might be necessary. Just tread cautiously, as they have a tendency to WP:BOOMERANG. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 11:35, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Or rather - try to address it on the article TP before DRN, if that hasn't happened yet, but do be cautious about not escalating outside of the content dispute itself. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 11:37, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, @ChompyTheGogoat. I think I will wait and see what steps the user takes, if any. If that behaviour continues, then I will consider further action. All the best. Julius Schwarz (talk) 12:23, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment: Context missed The good faith efforts to read the entire situation are welcome, but uninvolved editors have apparently missed relevant context. The version to which Julius reverted is the consensus version, as pointed out by Julius to GenoV84 here. That consensus was reached with a reasonably lengthy discussion involving at least eight editors and reference to ~30 sources. The notion Julius was "disruptive" in doing so does not bear the tiniest scrutiny. Moreover, given the existing agreed consensus, the burden is on GenoV84 to demonstrate consensus has changed. Cambial — foliar❧ 17:27, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Legit Wikipedia

I have been working on a Wikipedia draft and received an email from someone saying they can help me with writing the draft. It was signed by someone named Asher. It landed as a known spam in my email so I thought I had better check this out . I went to safari to do a search on the email address and when I returned to the suspect email to record the sender and source of the email it had vanished. I did not delete or trash the email. Very strange. Is Wikipedia aware of fraudsters offering help services. Mouse1948 (talk) 13:16, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, this is a very common scam. No legitimate Wikipedia editor or anybody affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation will ever reach out to you to offer editing services in exchange for payment. Wikipedia editing is done strictly by volunteers who do so with no expectation of or desire for compensation in return. If anybody contacts you like this again, please report the exchange to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org. Athanelar (talk) 13:40, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I went to the spam section of my email and managed resurrect the email. It was signed " Asher Consultant Wiki Submissions"

I just received a reply while writing this confirming my suspicions. Thanks Mouse1948 (talk) 13:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@Mouse1948 Do not reply to this 'consultant,' simply forward the entire email exchange to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org and let them handle it. Athanelar (talk) 13:44, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Sent copy of scam email to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org Mouse1948 (talk) 14:22, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Weird account

I found an account called 'AzoraSkybound'.

Has no edits to any page except the userpage.

Completely new but the user page is formatted pretty well which is unusual for a new user. SomnambulantFish _talk ∫ ^contribs 13:19, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

There's nothing particularly unusual about that. They're probably copying what they've seen on other userpages. Athanelar (talk) 13:38, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Deletion of an example Barnstar section seems to support that. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 13:48, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

SomnambulantFish, I have been editing on Wikipedia for over 20 years without ever feeling the need to open an account. If I ever do, I will obviously not look like a new user. Doubtless out of the 100,000+ other regular editors, some are in a similar situation and would present the same 'unusual' appearance. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 14:20, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Lol guys I'm just doing the user page first before editing. How'd you find my account tho? AzoraSkybound (talk) 15:50, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Probably via recent changes.   Metal Breaks And Bends   (talk) (contribs) 15:55, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Lol why you watching that? AzoraSkybound (talk) 17:14, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

WP:RCPATROL is a very common method of vandalism prevention. Athanelar (talk) 17:36, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

So you think I'm vandalising? AzoraSkybound (talk) 17:39, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

No, RC captures all edits, and some types of vandalism or other indicators of poor behavior require going through large volumes of good edits.   Metal Breaks And Bends   (talk) (contribs) 17:43, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Ok. AzoraSkybound (talk) 17:45, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

someone is using my accont

someone is making edits under my account on another Divice Julie Crowell (Ask me a question) 13:29, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I have reported your account as compromised, which may lead to your account being blocked until the situation is resolved. See WP:HACKED for further guidance. Namely, you should probably change your password and set up 2-factor authentication. Athanelar (talk) 13:36, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

thanks Julie Crowell (Ask me a question) 13:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Article about an artist was declined

Hey guys,

My passion is contemporary art (even though it has nothing to do with my profession) and I wanted to contribute to the recognition of a larger group of young French artists, especially from the Occitanie region. I closely follow articles in regional cultural magazines and see interesting exhibitions of young art. I'm impressed by the work of artists from our region like Kader Benchamma, Jimmy Richer, Kate Wyrembelska and others... I started writing an article about the latter (link: [1], but it was rejected, even though she had a large solo exhibition at the Centre for Contemporary Art in Montpellier: Espace Saint-Ravy; and she has participated in many other prestigious group exhibitions. She recently created a beautiful work of art in a public space for the GGL development group/Helenis. She is now nominated for the "Outstanding Pole Abroad" competition organized by the Polish Embassy in Lyon in the Culture category. I don't know well the Wikipedia codes, and I'm wondering what exactly was the reason for the rejection: my poor writing style? Or rather, the topic itself? Can I somehow modify the article, simplify it, to make it acceptable, or is that pointless? Is it a good idea to commission someone with more experience to write it? Could someone help me? Thanks in advance for your help! Loic, sci fantaisie Scifantaisie (talk) 14:52, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

The reason your draft was declined is outlined in the large reddish decline notice at the top of the page, as well as the reviewer comments just below. Read those and look at the pages linked therein, and it will probably clarify some of your confusion.

Is it a good idea to commission someone with more experience to write it? No, and you should be aware of scams that target editors like you. Athanelar (talk) 15:25, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

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

The fact that you have a particular topic area that you want to contribute to is great; but please note that "to contribute to the recognition" of anything or anybody is exactly what we mean on Wikipedia by promotion, and it is forbidden.

If there is enough independent, reliable information published about one of the artists in question, you are certainly welcome to create a draft about them (though see my last paragraph below). But if there happens not to be, then you will be wasting your time trying to do so.

If you do create a draft and it is accepted, then the article might indeed contribute to their recognition: but there is no guarantee. Suppose, for example, that one of your artists had been involved in something dreadful, nothing to do with their art, and the news reports on them were mostly about that not about their art: then an article about them would be mostly about that, and not about their art - even if you wrote it about their art, others would in time edit it to match the sources better, and you could not stop them.

This is not a likely scenario, I know; but it is a reason not to create an article about somebody for their benefit. (See also an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing.)

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 16:15, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Repost because I didn't get any replies

My post here got archived without any replies, so I'm trying again. Here's my original post. I'll copy-paste it below: (side-note, why didn't I get any replies? It seems like every other post has. Did I do something wrong?)

Hi all! I've attempted an "overhaul" of the List of Irish mammals page. It's on my sandbox. Here's what I've done:

1. Made the whole page be mostly reliant on 2 primary sources (for consistency, and to clean up the ref list)
2. Made the IUCN ratings be specifically the global ratings, instead of a mish-mash between global and local (the Irish ratings are all just LC, so they're kind of pointless to include)
3. Updated pictures to be either from Ireland, the UK, or to just be higher-quality in general
4. General polish and formatting changes that IMO make it a little easier to read

Note that I'm not looking for technical feedback about Wiki formatting etc, I've edited Wikipedia a little before (I only registered an account now), so I'm familiar with how it all works. I'm more so looking for general feedback to make sure everyone likes what I've done, before I go ahead and change the actual page. Thanks in advance! Let Me Edit It (talk) 15:08, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Be bold! There's no need to ask permission before you make improvements to a page. Do it, and if somebody takes issue with it, then they can revert it and you can start a discussion with them. Athanelar (talk) 15:23, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Ok! I've gone ahead and done it :) Let Me Edit It (talk) 18:14, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

AI in an article

I recently came across this article in the wikilink editing list. It has multiple issues (most of which are marked by templates on the page), many of which are characteristic of AI-generated content. Some factors: a lack of wikilinks, a lack of inbound links, a need for additional citations and vague, disjointed topics. It also ranks 82% AI-generated on GPTZero. I know this is not a surefire way to determine AI content, but combined with all of the other factors, it does make this article more likely to not conform to the rules of Wikipedia.

One other oddity that I noticed is the fact that all of the references were accessed on the same day, which would be strange for a human writer.

I came to the Teahouse to see what others thought about this. Thanks! Paolo Roland Self (talk) 15:33, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't know if it's AI, but it's definitely... shall we say 'really, really bad'? It's in desperate need of a rewrite for sure. I'll see what I can do. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 19:05, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I saw that you nominated the article for deletion. Thanks! Paolo Roland Self (talk) 03:48, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Paolo, welcome to the Teahouse!

After a good look at the text in article itself, it seems to me it does emphasize some characteristics of the AI-generated language that you have pointed out, and with my observation, It additionally seems to frequently present information in sets of three, which is a quirk shared by many LLMs.

But, as the other commenter stated, It may not actually be LLM-generated, but definitely needs some kind of heavy rewriting, since it has an abundance of issues.

If you think this is a possible misuse of AI, I recommend sending this over to the AI cleanup noticeboard, but for a last resort. Best regards! ★ Campssitie (msg) (contribs) 🧋🏖 19:15, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the warm welcome! An other commenter nominated it for deletion, which is appropriate, I think. Paolo Roland Self (talk) 03:50, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

The surest sign it was AI generated is the fact that the very first edit has a pre-declined {{AFC submission}} tag already there. It was declined before being submitted. AIs do this a lot. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 19:35, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

That does make sense. Thanks! Paolo Roland Self (talk) 03:50, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

helpme

how to edit hindu yuva vahini details as hindu yuva vahini is registered and trademarked. need your support in this content Vikram1712 (talk) 15:57, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Hindu Yuva Vahini. Looking at the talk page, users need to be extended-confirmed before they can edit that article. This means that your account needs to have existed for 30 days, and you need to have made 500 edits whilst logged in. Does that help? You can also request a change to the article on its Talk page using Template:Edit extended-protected. You will need to supply citations for any information you want to add. Tacyarg (talk) 16:21, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

"registered and trademarked" is irrelevant to Wikipedia.

If your position is that being "registered and trademarked" means we can't write about it, or affects what we write about it, please read WP:No legal threats, before you edit or comment further. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:39, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Vikram1712. If your concern is that a trademark is being used in a Wikipedia article without an icon to show this, then please read MOS:TRADEMARK. We do not use symbols such as ™ or ® in Wikipedia articles. ColinFine (talk) 18:25, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

User trying to make userpage seem like a wikipedia page

Hello, I found a user with a userpage that was written to appear like a regular wikipedia article on a living person. I'm pretty sure this is not allowed? Where would be the best place to report this / inform them? 🐟sea cat :3 (talk) 16:51, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@Walking-sea-cat I took a look around, and it seems like they are violating WP:FAKEARTICLE. Consider pinging them on their talk page to let them know and give them time to fix it. If they are deliberately making a hoax, it might be more serious. Consider pinging an admin if it comes to that or if they are refusing to change the content of their page. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 17:59, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@Walking-sea-cat Could you please link this page when you get the chance? --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 18:49, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Akhtarkarate

i left a message on the talk page 🐟sea cat :3 (talk) 18:53, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

If it is a genuine attempt to write an article, then it should be in a draft or sandbox, to avoid confusing people that come across the user page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:25, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

It is 'unambiguous advertising or promotion' and I've tagged it for speedy deletion per WP:G11. Mathglot (talk) 21:18, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Third opinion

I made a report on ANI less than an hour ago[2] on another editor's disruptive behavior and was told to file a Wikipedia:3O or WP:DRN instead. However, the discussion so far has been scattered across edit comments, user talk page, and ANI, Should I recap all those discussions for the purpose of 3O, or is linking to them enough? Thanks! PetéWarrior (talk) 16:51, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

There's no need to recap all of the external discussion about the conflict itself, just provide the details of the content dispute so it can be resolved. Athanelar (talk) 18:00, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Names

Off topic The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

How many names does it take to resurrect the dead? ~2026-13977-34 (talk) 17:25, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-13977-34 From my calculations, it looks like around 5,200, give or take a few hundred depending on the size and amount of people you're resurrecting. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 17:55, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I heard its 215. ~2026-13977-34 (talk) 18:37, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

You probably made a mistake in the calculations. They're quite complex. I'm Ba'al. I'd know. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 18:49, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Live counter

Hey, is there a template or tool I can place on my user page that automatically lists the drafts or articles I created? Live counter kind of LionmerterTHE (talk) 18:08, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

No, because the computation requirements of providing a templste that will constantly live call an editor's edit/article/draft count would be huge if a lot of people used it. Athanelar (talk) 18:19, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Well, there is a template that lists all subpages of a page. For example, on your user page you could have

{{PrefixIndex|User:LionmerterTHE/|stripprefix=1|hideredirects=1|colwidth=20em}}

Which currently shows as:

• sandbox

...because that's the only subpage you have on User:LionmerterTHE.

But using it to list your drafts would be unnecessarily complicated; it's simpler simply to list the articles you've created on your user page, like everyone else does. See my user page for example. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 19:30, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

LionmerterTHE, you could add a statement like this one to your User page:

Here are lists of all my articles and all my drafts.

and that will get you what you want, but you have to click the links to see the lists; you can't embed them in your page afaik. Mathglot (talk) 20:53, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

you can't embed them in your page You actually can transclude Special:Contributions pages. For example, your "all my articles" link (for LionmerterTHE), transcluded here:

Extended content

3 March 2026

• 06:2906:29, 3 March 2026 diff hist +2,674 N Magion 1 -- Draft creation using the WP:Article wizard -- Magion 1 Tag: Visual edit
• 06:2106:21, 3 March 2026 diff hist +3,127 N PearlAfricaSat-1 -- Draft creation using the WP:Article wizard -- PearlAfricaSat-1 Tag: Visual edit

2 March 2026

• 08:0008:00, 2 March 2026 diff hist +3,105 N BOTSAT‑1 -- Draft creation using the WP:Article wizard -- BOTSAT‑1 Tag: Visual edit
• 05:4405:44, 2 March 2026 diff hist +3,419 N Tyche (satellite) -- Draft creation using the WP:Article wizard --Tyche (satellite) Tag: Visual edit

26 February 2026

• 03:1503:15, 26 February 2026 diff hist +15,254 N Corporate Transparency Act reporting requirements -- Draft creation using the WP:Article wizard -- Corporate Transparency Act reporting requirements Tag: Visual edit

24 February 2026

• 07:0807:08, 24 February 2026 diff hist +7,296 N Carbon Mapper -- Draft creation using the WP:Article wizard -- Carbon Mapper Tag: Visual edit
• 06:2006:20, 24 February 2026 diff hist +6,799 N Tanager-1 -- Draft creation using the WP:Article wizard -- TANAGER-1 Tag: Visual edit
• 02:3602:36, 24 February 2026 diff hist +3,612 N Global Biodiversity Framework Fund -- Draft creation using the WP:Article wizard -- Global Biodiversity Framework Fund Tag: Visual edit

The code: {{Special:Contributions/LionmerterTHE|namespace=0|tagfilter=|newOnly=1|start=|end=|limit=50}} OutsideNormality (talk) 06:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Creating a Wiki item

I have long wished to create a page detailing the newspaper for whom I worked over 20 years, the South Yorkshire Times. It was staple diet in its readership area, and still commands a reduced readership.I have copies of pre-WW2 pages detailing the family paper's 'ancestry'. But every time I start, I get bogged down in attempting to create links, and generally format the page. Writing is no problem. Formatting is a nightmare. WikiTramp 1942 (talk) 18:18, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Before you even think about writing or formatting the article, you will need to find sources that demonstrate the article meets our inclusion criteria for organisations and companies. The article which you then create needs to be a summary of the information available in those sources. You must not write the article based on what you know and then find sources to confirm it, that's called writing an article backwards and inevitably results in disaster. For a full guide, Help:Your first article is a good resource. Athanelar (talk) 18:27, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @WikiTramp 1942, and welcome to the Teahouse.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. (I know your account has been around for a long time, but with only nine edits in your history, I think still applies!) ColinFine (talk) 18:29, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Ramadan and Lent

I've noticed that Wikipedia occasionally features site-wide banners to acknowledge cultural and religious observances like Ramadan. Given Wikipedia's commitment to global neutrality, I’m curious about the specific criteria used to determine which observances receive this level of visibility—for instance, why a banner might be implemented for Ramadan but not for a period like Lent? Is this based on geographic readership metrics, editor community proposals, or a specific set of cultural inclusion guidelines? ~2026-14052-57 (talk) 18:35, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

It's based on the criterion of "users being arsed to do it". —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 18:48, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

meta:Wiki Loves X campaigns have the details on these banners and their associated campaigns.

Namely, Anyone can start a Wiki Loves X campaign at any time. If you want Wiki Loves Lent campaign, then you're welcome to do it. Athanelar (talk) 19:16, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

The banner wasn't acknowledging Ramadan, but inviting editors to participate in an editing contest related to it (Wiki Loves Ramadan). We are currently holding a similar editing contest (Feminism and Folklore), which also received a banner. We typically hold editing contests for topics that have a low amount of coverage or a large amount of low quality articles on Wikipedia. Considering lent is Christian (thus being a large part of the Western world), it has received a lot of coverage on Wikipedia. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 19:20, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

sources for yuhihai draft

Hi,

I'm trying to publish a draft for a Wikipedia page for Yuhihai, which is UCLA's Annual Intercollegiate Invitational Kendo Tournament, however it keeps getting declined. I noticed that Harvard's Shoryuhai got a page with less sources than what we have. I was wondering what kinds of articles/sources do you guys want from us in order to get approved, and what did Harvard do that we didn't? Itslaaadoorman (talk) 19:43, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Itslaaadoorman, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Wikipedia has tens of thousands of articles which if they were submitted for review today would not get accepted. Unfortunately, not many editors are keen to spend the considerable amount of time working on them to either improve them or delete them. (see WP:Other stuff exists).

Shoryuhai has been tagged for two years as needing additional citations. I very much suspect that it does not meet the requirements for notability, and should be deleted, but I haven't the interest to do the work required.

We review a draft article on its own merits, not against existing articles.

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

Unless you can find at least three sources each of which satisfies all the criteria in WP:42 - being reliably published, completely unconnected with Yuhihai and UCLA, and containing significant coverage of the competition - there will be no point in spending any more time on this endeavour. ColinFine (talk) 20:00, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

help with improving an article

hello! i'm a bit new to editing wikipedia (i have done some reading about the policies and stuff though) and i noticed an article that seemed to use a lot of not neutral sounding words like "he was an unusually talented musician" and I wanted to improve it but I just wasn't really sure how to go about doing so. I would like some advice or maybe help with it

Alexei Stanchinsky <-- this was the article ImageWizard (talk) 21:23, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

ImageWizard, you're right to be suspicious. But on "he was an unusually talented musician", what the article actually says is: "At the age of six, it was apparent that Alexei was an unusually talented musician as he was already performing piano works of the masters." Within that, "the masters" is vague; and even if we take them to be those then rated highest among composers for the piano, perhaps we need to say whether we are or aren't including the works they may have written expressly for neophyte pianists. Still, even with these ambiguities, I wouldn't call this an intolerably promotional description.

The prose is unsuitably dramatic in places. Sample: "However, after one major event all his work would come crashing down before him."

A problem is that quite a bit of the content doesn't seem to be referenced. Another is some of this is attributed to a master's thesis. A link to the thesis is provided, but the link doesn't work (or anyway didn't work for me, a few minutes ago).

Other cited sources are described fairly helpfully, but not as helpfully as they could/should be. (ISBNs? DOIs? ...)

This is an article that would merit critical (but sympathetic) attention. If you haven't yet done this kind of work on an article, I suggest putting Stanchinsky aside till you've gained experience with other articles for which more sources are -- or anyway are claimed to be -- available on the web. But after that, do please return to it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:12, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

thank you :] i will keep that in mind ImageWizard (talk) 00:41, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Internet Archive

Hello! I recently found a citation () with an original URL that goes to a 404 and an archived URL which goes to an endless loading screen. I did a new search on Wayback for the page, and found that the blue snapshots take me to a redirect. Is there any other way to access this webpage? Are there other web archives which we are still allowed to use for WP? OrdinaryOtter (talk) 22:28, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@OrdinaryOtter Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! I have found working URLs from April 30, 2007 to August 4, 2009, so maybe you would like to look through and replace the current archive URL. As for your second question, see Wikipedia:List of web archives on Wikipedia. Jolly1253 (talk) 04:17, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

References

Trying to make a article for Bomellida but it keeps getting deleted falsely

I keep trying to make an article for the holiday Bomellida, if you do not know what that is, you can search on Google and easily find it, but I'm starting to think I'm getting stalked by this same moderator, every time I make an article, even if it fully complies in the Wikipedia guidelines, oops, your article just got deleted by the same moderator! Anyways, I think I'm getting stalked, and since they're a moderator, you can't do anything because they're a "trusted" user. Not trying to be on purpose rude, but do better, Wikipedia, I know you can. Cooliglazeddonutzer (talk) 22:44, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Did you create the article using AI? (Like ChatGPT, Gemini, Meta AI, Claude, etc.) If you did, the admin could have deleted it under G15 speedy deletion criteria; if not you could post it to drafftspace and work on it until posting it for revieew via AfC. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 23:16, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

No, i didn't. Cooliglazeddonutzer (talk) 12:58, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: DoubleGrazing. FYI, instead of moderators/mods we have administrators. It seems they deleted three pages you created, those being Draft:Media Posts Official, Bomellida, and your userpage. Bomellida was deleted for three reasons combined: A7 (no indication of importance), G11 (unambiguous advertising or promotion), and G15 (LLM/AI generated page). I can't speak for how the page looked as I am not an administrator, but G11-able pages tend to have not only promotional language, but their only sourcing tends to only be non-independent sources e.g. for an article on a company being G11ed the only source would be the company's website. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 23:24, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks (I think) for the ping. I won't waste my time on such nonsense, except to say that this user seems to be working hard on convincing us they're not here to help us build an encyclopaedia, and eventually they'll no doubt succeed. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:43, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

It's not even AI, I don't get why you labeled it that. Cooliglazeddonutzer (talk) 12:59, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@Cooliglazeddonutzer The screeds on your userpage and at Draft:Moderatrolling will not do you any favours. Athanelar (talk) 00:41, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm gonna ask for a suggestion of Wikipedia here, add a report button for these types of comments. Just the fact that there isn't one is genuinely insulting. Cooliglazeddonutzer (talk) 13:05, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Cooliglazeddonutzer, If you think there is genuinely an issue, you are free to bring it up at the Administrators' Noticeboard for Incidents. I would advise against doing so, but you can do it if you wish. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 14:29, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Advise against? It's rightful, there's no reason to say you shouldn't. Cooliglazeddonutzer (talk) 19:04, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't see it as rightful. Athanelar was giving quite good advice, though not necessarily in most kind way. Frankly, your editing history reflects poorly on your ability to contribute constructively. For instance, why exactly were you trying to redirect Naval Act of 1938 to Wikipedia:Deleted articles with freaky titles? Why redirect Montana-class battleship to Battleship? 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 20:17, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

That was sadly my little brother finding out I have a Wikipedia account, and you only now brought that to my attention, so thank you slightly. Cooliglazeddonutzer (talk) 23:32, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Also, Draft:Moderatrolling is clearly AI generated as well and cites an unreliable source. If you actually want to help Wikipedia by making a page on Bomedilla you can go through AfC and please don't try to create new pages from scratch using AI. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 17:16, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Just because it cites an "unreliable" source does not mean it is AI, and that is a very unreliable factor to "detect" if it is AI, and won't hold up, talking about the general topic. Also, I seen that grammatical error at "Bomedilla". Cooliglazeddonutzer (talk) 19:07, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

First of all, please don't use scare quotes. Also, I didn't use that as a factor to detect that it is AI, but that it's a bad article in general. I did suspect AI in the pattern of the writing in general and an AI detector returned 100% AI. Yes, AI detectors are not great, but several blatant Manual of Style and policy violations for someone who has already made several draft articles without AfC suggests AI writing. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 20:01, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Please remember to WP: be nice and please replace the information that is on your userpage now. I would recommend going through the WP:AfC process for this article to make sure all bases are covered. Pietrus1 (talk) 07:35, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Can someone fix the errors in this footnote

page is Overview of Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations. Thanks! Bhdshoes2 (talk) 23:41, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Fixed! SenshiSun (talk) 00:05, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

‘Quiet Please’ good article review

Is there anyone who can review this article under the Film section? MailJail (talk) 01:41, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

If you've submitted the article for review, you simply need to wait for a volunteer to review the article. Posting here likely won't make it happen any sooner. There are around 700 nominations waiting to be reviewed in no particular order.

Check out the the getting started page for things you can do while you wait! SnowyRiver28 (talk) 02:17, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Follow the process here: Wikipedia:Good article nominations. Pietrus1 (talk) 03:38, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

article about m II

how can we write article about m II ~2026-14187-38 (talk) 03:40, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

What is m II? TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 05:21, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

See WP:Your first article.

Also, as you use the word "we", note that each account should be used by only one person. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:23, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I guess the IP only meant how do Wikipedia editors including him in general create such page.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 12:46, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

edit protected article/talk page

I'm trying to fill out the edit request form on WP:RFED for an edit-protected article whose talk page is also protected. FWIW the change I'm trying to make is probably not contentious relative to the subject matter but my submitted form entry won't even show up at all on the list of requests even after purging its cache, or on the relevant talk page.

I'm trying to update 2026 Iran War to change "It is still unknown how US and Israeli leadership were aware of their exact location" to "Israeli and US forces were able to pinpoint their exact location through extensive surveillance, including hacked traffic cameras, mobile phone networks, and information on the targets' security detail. Bofades (talk) 04:33, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

You should make this suggestion on the talk page of the 2026 Iran War. Pietrus1 (talk) 06:19, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

The talk page is also protected which is why i cited WP:RFED Bofades (talk) 06:24, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@Pietrus1: They can't do that per the page being extended-confirmed protected as Arbitration enforcement. Bofades does not meet the XC requirements.

@Bofades: This is not an uncontroversial edit request, and thus would require a discussion you cannot participate in at this time. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 06:26, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Got it, but is there a reason the form isn't working either? Bofades (talk) 06:30, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@Bofades: There shouldn't be. RFPP/E has been flooded with edit requests for that article for the past few days, particularly blow-by-blow updates that are generally a waste of time (as said updates or their sources are either already under discussion or waiting for things to calm down). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 06:50, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Digression

Ah, I thought those were piped into the talk pages. Seems I have more to learn as well. Pietrus1 (talk) 06:43, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of protecting the talk page? ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 09:20, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Probably. I'll mark this as a digression. Pietrus1 (talk) 09:26, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

References

Kindly Review

Hello everyone,

I recently resubmitted a biography draft after correction at Articles for Creation: Draft:Neel Hurerzahan for review.

Thank you very much for your time and guidance. Saafayat (talk) 05:40, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

You have submitted it for review. Now you wait for a review. One cannot speed it up by posting here, and we don't do pre-review reviews. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 07:39, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Got it! I won’t post about it elsewhere and will wait for the review. Saafayat (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@Saafayat saw your draft. I did not review it but I would suggest you to use as many references as possible. Try newspapers.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 12:59, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion.

In the draft, I have already added references from Six well-known Bangladeshi newspapers. These include Prothom Alo, Kaler Kantho, The Business Standard, New Age, The Daily Star, Daily Sun.

If there are any specific sources you would recommend adding or any improvements needed in the references, please let me know. I would be happy to improve the draft further.

Thank you. Saafayat (talk) 13:07, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

If possible, including references from international newspapers and channels. Also create some links (blue text) from the article so it looks more like a Wikipedia one. Take care that the article is not orphan, that is to say, at least some articles lead to the article you created through blue text. TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 13:22, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

That last is not a helpful suggestion @TrueMoriarty, because links from articles to drafts (or anywhere else outside article space) are forbidden. After the draft has been accepted is the time to worry about orphans.

@Saafayat. Merely being from a reputable newspaper is not enough: the source must also be independent and secondary - many newspaper articles are clearly based on interviews or press releases: those are not independent.

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) 17:22, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I disagree that "use as many references as possible" would necessarily be an improvement, unless those references meet all of the WP:Golden rule criteria. We decline a lot of drafts with a large number of low-quality citations. A draft that cites 20 trivial mentions and one good source isn't going to pass review, but a draft that cites three WP:Golden rule sources and nothing else can pass review. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 17:58, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

PII and COI

What's the correct procedure for identifying a COI via PII in someone's username? ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 08:19, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

ChompyTheGogoat, if my sudden interest in, and more or less discreet praise for, the works of the allegedly underappreciated author Hiram Orson Ary makes you wonder out loud whether I myself might be Ary, then you're "outing" me, or appearing/attempting to do so. Better keep shtum about my name and concentrate on my other missteps. -- Hoary (talk) 08:46, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

In this particular case it's easily verifiable via public external sources, and there is problematic behavior regarding the COI. I'm confident such an experienced editor as yourself would know to tread lightly on any articles regarding the aforementioned personage ;) ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 09:14, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

WP:COIN is the general destination for discussion about whether somebody has a COI. If the username connection is sufficiently obvious that the person is effectively outing themselves, then there's nothing wrong with making the report and letting others make the connection for themselves. It is very common for a COI editor to be editing the page Examplius Foobar with the username user:EFoobar. Athanelar (talk) 12:11, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

You must avoid WP:OUTING, but you can email information privately, as described at WP:COIN. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:17, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Also, make sure to leave a COI/ PAID (as appropriate) warning template on the user's talk page, ASAP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:18, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

They've disclosed in response now on their user page and the article TP. Should I withdraw the COIN in that case? ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 13:24, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:33, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Will do. Article and talk have had the appropriate templates added. Gracias! ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 13:38, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

The information itself is in their username - it's the proof of COI based on it that's off Wiki, but fully available to anyone with Google. Personal rather than paid - or I suppose they could also be paid, but there's no evidence for that, just their association with the subject. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 12:45, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Change Infobox Photo

I would like to request to update the current image in the infobox of Garhwali people because the existing photo is outdated, and a newer, more accurate image is available. Since the page is under extended confirmed protection, I am unable to make this change myself. The edit would only involve replacing the old photo with the updated one that better reflects the subject’s current appearance. I would appreciate it if an editor could either lower the protection level or update the image accordingly. Thank you. Lbfs (talk) 08:48, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Lbfs, images are stored at WikiCommons. You can find lots of images of Garhwali people in this search at WikiCommons. Do you see one there that you prefer? Mathglot (talk) 09:41, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

yes here is the image . Lbfs (talk) 10:20, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

File:A Garhwali Couple.jpg Lbfs (talk) 10:27, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I adjusted the image-link to make it clickable for convenience. Do you have the photographer's permission to upload it? I do not see a CC-BY mark on The Shooting Star's website. DMacks (talk) 10:44, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

they have given permission to use it personally Lbfs (talk) 10:48, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

c:COM:VRT has information about how they should email that permission directly to the commons licensing queue for verification. DMacks (talk) 10:50, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

ok how about this pic if that photo is not available

Sumitra_Devi,_a_Garhwali_shepherd_near_Lansdowne,_Uttarakhand_04. Lbfs (talk) 11:02, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Sumitra Devi, a Garhwali shepherd near Lansdowne, Uttarakhand 04.jpg Lbfs (talk) 11:04, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

"the photographer's permission to upload it" is not sufficient; we need a release under a compatible open licence, as described at c:COM:THIRD. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:13, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

This should be done via the article talk-page. @Lbfs: you have posted your request at multiple places: pleaase try to keep the discussion on one page if possible. Lectonar (talk) 12:16, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

That can't be done via the article's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:34, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Why not? The talk-page isn't protected...if a photo is provided and an edit-request used to ask to replace the photo? Lectonar (talk) 12:37, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

no one is giving replies in article talk page that's why i have requested here hope you will understand it Lbfs (talk) 12:42, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

The only relevant comment on the talk page appears to be this one: "Can anyone here change the image, please add a image which shows garhwali culture or garhwali people in there proper attire."

It's likely there was no response because no new image was suggested there.

Also, I have restored this section, which you deleted. Do not ever delete other people's comments like that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:54, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Who are you replying to here?

If you are replying to me, a third -party can't give clearance on the article talk page because it requires an email response.

If you are talking about something else, why did you do so in reply to my comment? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:50, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

The user uploaded it with the CC-BY-4.0 tag, so "permission to upload it" is just too-casual language...it includes the unstatated "...as you have uploaded it, with that license tag". That's why VRT filed by the actual license-holder is the way forward. DMacks (talk) 18:25, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Notability check and (re)creation Ergo Next Insurance?

Hello everybody, I need some advice on the topic of notability, in combination with the topic of conflict of interest.

I have been asked by a customer to check the possibility of (re)creating an article on the company Ergo Next Insurance. I understand that some years ago, somebody created an article that was apparently deleted for lack of notability. At that time, the company was still called Next Insurance; it was a start-up and rather small. In the meantime, the company has developed significantly. In 2025, it was bought for 2.6 billion $ by Ergo Group, a big German insurance company. The acquisition got coverage by media like Reuters, Financial Times and TechCrunch. In 2026, the company was in the spotlight when it took over sponsorship of Inter Miami (soccer). Reports appeared in major media outlets not only in the US, but also in countries such as Germany, France, Spain and Brazil. I imagine, this is quite notable, but I am not sure about practices in English Wikipedia. (There is an article in Hebrew Wikipedia, by the way.) Do you think there is a chance to have an article?

And the related question: What is the best way to initiate the creation of a new article if I have a conflict of interest (as I do)? Result KK (talk) 10:59, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@Result KK Neither company size nor routine reporting on finances, acquisitions etc confer notability. The full guidance is at WP:NCORP, you should read that.

As for COI article creation, you can submit a draft for review via the WP:Article creation wizard, but you should not do so unless you are first sure you have the necessary sources to demonstrate the company's notability per NCORP above. Athanelar (talk) 12:03, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

You will be required to comply with WP:PAID. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:09, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Draft: Adrian Rocca

Hello! I am working on a draft article and would appreciate feedback before submitting it for Articles for Creation review.

Draft:Adrian Rocca

I would especially appreciate feedback on neutrality, sourcing, and structure. Thank you! Wikieditor2020abc (talk) 11:17, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Wikieditor2020abc, I think your draft is good but i think it needs improvement before submission. Abdullah1099 (talk) 11:39, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Any suggestions on improvement? Wikieditor2020abc (talk) 02:26, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I do not think your draft currently demonstrates your subject is notable. I also suspect the draft is at least partially AI-generated. Athanelar (talk) 12:00, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

This page is of a similar subject and has been published - tried following the same structure: Moez Kassam Wikieditor2020abc (talk) 02:28, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

There are a great many articles on Wikipedia that would not meet our standards if they were placed under scrutiny; but for various reasons they simply haven't been as of yet. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not an argument for why your stuff should exist; it needs to meet our standards in itself. Athanelar (talk) 14:07, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Album covers at L. Subramaniam

Could someone point me to guidance on album covers in BLPs, or have a look at this article themselves and see what they think? L. Subramaniam has recently had a lot of images of albums added, and a couple are very large. I have not talked to the editor who has added these about the images, partly because I wanted to check here what the policy is and partly because I have asked them about conflict of interest and not had a response yet; may be a can't hear us issue. Tacyarg (talk) 11:30, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

They are all uploaded as "own work", which is clearly bogus. I'll tag them for deletion from Commons as copyright violations; and remove them from the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:41, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

All now deleted. Thank you for noticing this issue. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:36, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, Andy Mabbett. Tacyarg (talk) 13:39, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

"Your impact" page

I keep the Beginner Homepage enabled only because it has a nice widget which shows the total number of views on my edits in the past 2 months. Is there a way to see those stats somehow without having to use the beginner homepage? 🍅 fx (talk) 12:24, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Paste {{Special:Impact/Flexagoon}} to your userspace TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 12:45, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Flexagoon The above will display it to all viewers of your user page. You can also click Special:Impact/Flexagoon. User:PrimeHunter/Impact.js adds such a tools link saying "Impact" in the userspace of all users including yourself. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:58, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Special:Impact also works to show your own impact. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:11, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

How to add templates,what is extended protection , guide for a newbie

Can someone direct me to a guide on how to add templates,I know we need to do 500 edits to get access to locked pages also what is requested move I've been seeing in talk pages is there any guide like this for newbie like me Stanjik (talk) 13:04, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi Stanjik. See Help:A quick guide to templates (Help:VisualEditor#Editing templates for VisualEditor), Wikipedia:Protection policy#Extended confirmed protection, Wikipedia:Requested moves. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:18, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks :) Stanjik (talk) 13:23, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Mistake in article on Candoble

The page Candomblé begins with this line:

"Candomblé (Portuguese pronunciation: [kɐ̃dõˈblɛ]) is an African diasporic religion that developed in Brazil during the 40th century."

I suspect that end of the sentence, "40th century," is wrong. I hope someone who knows about this topic will fix it. Thanks. ~2026-14216-03 (talk) 14:40, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

That was childish vandalism..I have rolled back the edits. You actually can fix things like that yourself :). Lectonar (talk) 14:44, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Service Ribbons within Signature?

I realized that I have achieved Burba Level 2, and it came across my mind that it would be nice if I could append the ribbon to the end of my signature. Is there a way that I can do this? Thanks! --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 14:57, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

. {{flagicon image|Editorrib02-2.svg}} is the first thing I can think of. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 17:20, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @DollarStoreBaal44, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Please don't do this. WP:CUSTOMSIG/P says Do not use images, transcluded templates, Lua modules, parser functions, TemplateStyles or external links in your signature. ColinFine (talk) 17:29, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

It's not an image: It's a template using that image. I'm not sure though: I only have ever added colors and fonts to my signature. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 17:30, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I guess this would still be a transcluded template, though. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 17:42, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@DollarStoreBaal44:, per signature guidelines, you can't use an image. You could put an emoji or unicode symbol wikilinked to a section of your userpage, though. Fractal-Dreamz ✯ 17:39, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't think I have enough characters left to do that. Currently, I only have ~40 left before I hit the character limit. It's alright though. Thanks everybody for the advice! Also, anybody know what happened with the read-only thing earlier? --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 17:41, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh my. Fractal-Dreamz ✯ 17:44, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh my indeed. This is a perfect example of the phrase 'loose lips sink ships'. That script should never have been archived. That being said, I don't blame the person who archived it. Clearly, they didn't expect anybody to deliberately use it agian. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 17:50, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Basically, some Russian-Wikipedia vandals hacked into a sysop's account and released malicious code, prompting another admin to frantically shut down the wiki. I don't know what the script did but it was bad enough to shut down editing for an hour. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 17:49, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Seems to me from the thread that it was a simple vandalbot, but it worked by compromising thousands of accounts to do so. Probably most of the read-only time was finding and removing all instances of the script. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 17:51, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

User scripts are disabled, Wikipedia was in read-only mode

See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Meta-Wiki compromised. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:23, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

If it helps at all for anybody discovering this thread, gadgets like WP:TWINKLE still work and can be enabled in your preferences - which allows automating some tasks. ASUKITE 17:53, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Anti-vandalism gadget?

I used to edit wikipedia a long time ago, and am trying to remember how to use it now I am editing again. I used to monitor recent changes for vandalism and I recall there being a feature, perhaps a "gadget", where you could undo vandal changes in a more expatiated way, where it fills in the edit summary for you. I can't remember what it was called, does anyone know? Chattenoir (talk) 17:25, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, Chattenoir, and welcome to Wikipedia! There are several anti-vandalism gadgets you can use; one such is Twinkle, which you can enable in your Preferences. There are also a number of others which you can check out at Cleaning up vandalism/Tools, though some of them require rollback to use. Hope this helps, and happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 17:29, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks very much, it was Twinkle! Weirdly I don't see the option for it at all in my Gadgets prefs even after Ctrl-F searching, but maybe it has something to do with the current Wikimedia performance issues or something Chattenoir (talk) 18:03, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Odd, I see it in mine (Preferences > Gadgets > Browsing > thirteenth option), but maybe that's because I already had it enabled. Perfect4th (talk) 18:06, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

It could also be because this is a new account, maybe it doesn't show up until the account is more matured? I'll just wait and see if it appears when the performance issues are resolved. Many thanks for your help again Chattenoir (talk) 18:09, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh yep, you have to be autoconfirmed. Should be available in a few days. Perfect4th (talk) 18:12, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Talk page headers now all show by default?

Has someone changed the default setting? All the different projects etc in {{WikiProject banner shell}} such as {{WikiProject Biography}} now show by default, whereas they were collapsed previously. This seems to be a bad change, it wastes too much space. Ldm1954 (talk) 17:43, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Since when? There was an outage about two & half hours ago, which has resulted in some scripts being temporarily disabled. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:57, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

At least since the outage, I did not check before (I was out). Ldm1954 (talk) 18:12, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

It seems it is now fixed. Ldm1954 (talk) 20:26, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

A live-updating user statistics tool?

I edit on another wiki which has a thing called {{#cscore}}, which doesn't exist here. Basically, it tracks your number of edits and how many different pages you've edited. Is there something similar on Wikipedia? --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 18:06, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I wish. It would be great to have that as a userbox on my user page to not have to check contributions all the time. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 18:07, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

That's exactly what I'm trying to do. It would say something like 'This user has edited ____ times on ____ pages.' I wonder how hard the wikitext to make something like that would be. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 18:10, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @DollarStoreBaal44.

The issue is not the technical capability: it's the potential load on the servers if lots of users tried to put such things on their user pages. English Wikipedia currently has nearly 52 million registered editors! ColinFine (talk) 18:39, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

oof. dang. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 18:48, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@DollarStoreBaal44: It sounds like your wiki has installed mw:Extension:Contribution Scores. I suspect it would perform poorly here. mw:Help:Magic words#Statistics has some sitewide statistics we can display but not individual edit counts. We install a lot of extensions at Special:Version#mw-version-ext but not this one. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:05, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Well, all the system has to do is keep a database of every user simply by their username, which is usually not too long, and every time an edit is made (roughly 23 per second) add one to their entry on the database! Wait, I just realised how stupid that sounds. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 20:18, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

The database of usernames should already exist, right? How else would MediaWiki be able to keep track of accounts? --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 20:20, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

That's true, and it should just be able to append a number to that. I don't think anyome has more than 10^32 edits. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 20:25, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@DollarStoreBaal44 and VidanaliK: There have been feature requests like phab:T213110 and phab:T113169 but it has been declined. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:03, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

DollarStoreBaal44, yes. Your stats are here. Mathglot (talk) 20:44, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

File Upload Wizard broken?

Hi, I am seeing weird behaviour with the File Upload Wizard. Clicking on "Upload a non-free file" the page just refreshes, and does nothing else. Observed with Chrome and Firefox on MacOS (no ad blocker etc). Cheers! Tobyhoward (talk) 18:35, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Tobyhoward. I would guess that this is a consequence of #User scripts are disabled, Wikipedia was in read-only mode a few hours ago. ColinFine (talk) 18:40, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Tobyhoward (talk) 19:10, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Behavioural psychology should be categorized as Pseudoscience

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

---

Behavioural psychology disregards or reduces conscious response as mere "behaviour". Whether free will or conscious decisions are just an illusion with a deterministic mechanism - is a different debate. I do not accept the notion that a "thought" is a "behaviour". Thoughts and feelings are causes of "behaviour" (better to say "response". "Response" is a more dignified term than "behaviour"), but by labelling thoughts and feelings as mere behaviour or output, we make 2 fundamental errors.

1. Disregard for the process: We mistake the "process" itself as an output.
2. Potential misapplication: Once thought and feelings are labelled as "behaviours", they become an industrial raw material for shaping and moulding.

We should not be oversimplifying human mind. We shouldn't ignore its internal process and mechanism. May be many part of mind's workings are still invisible in scans or imaging. Maybe there are neural encryptions and mechanisms still not known. Maybe things like qualia or perception still remain in the domain of unfalsifiability. Still as a part of scientific methodology we should acknowledge there are things we do not know, rather than drumming onto people's head about oversimplified stuff.

I would refer to Robert Sapolsky's classroom lectures on ethology (Widely available in youtube) and also I would refer to "The Pseudo-Science of BF Skinner : Robert W Proctor, Daniel J Weeks The American Journal of Psychology 103 (2), 265-274, 1990"

I wish to bring it to the attention of the Wikipedia editors, that: although Behaviourist psychology helds a high regard, partly due to its historical influences, partly due to its resemblance with colonial era reductionism/skepticism/rationalism; it is fundamentally pseudoscientific in nature. It basically oversimplifies human mind to the level of a oversimplified physics system (like a gas enclosed by a piston (PV=nRT), or a spring with a bob (F=kX)), disregarding the internal computational architecture. This way, behaviorist psychology does not meet the standards of other psychology disciplines, such as Cognitive psychology, Gestalt psychology, and non-psychologists' works on mind and cognition (Esp. Alan Turing, Erwin Schrödinger). Addition: It worth mentioning that "Applied behaviour analysis", a "gold standard" therapy based on behaviourist / operant conditioning principles, has been criticized by many of its recipients, especially those are in the neurodivergent spectrum. MindMatterQualia (talk) 18:39, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

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

--ColinFine (talk) 19:30, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Citations Vs. Links Help

Hello experts of the Wikipedia, I am a relatively new user, having made my account just a few weeks ago. I've made many edits (as in only like 20 lol) but reasonably understand how a lot of editing and article creation works. I am a contributer to the Shotgun article, and need some help. Throughout the article there are not many citations (~40, but it is a long article). However, there are a ton of links to already existing wikipedia aricles that do have citations and are trustworthy. Are these sufficient, or should I go throughout said article and find a ton sources and links to information, to help it and remove the citation needed tag?

Thank you for your time,

AG00se55 AG00se55 (talk) 20:11, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@AG00se55 Each article should stand alone, with verification being the key policy that applies. While the WP:LEAD doesn't need citations as it should summarise what is in the body, the Shotgun article is clearly deficient at present. If you can find reliable sources, then please add them. Even one per paragraph would be a great improvement on what is currently there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:19, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Okay, thank you so much! :) AG00se55 (talk) 20:24, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Draftify for NPP broken?

Probably another victim of the read-mode issue; the "Draftify" option seems to have vanished from the NPP tags. (It can probably be done by hand, but I am lazy...) Ldm1954 (talk) 20:44, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

All userscripts are temporarily disabled. For anyone else unaware, see the thread at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Today's outage for info. Zeibgeist (talk) 21:23, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Tools not showing up

I use a variety of tools (see here) but today, when editing, I could not find them. None of them are usable, right now, because they are not in any of my menus. I haven't added any new scripts recently (unless you count Baby Globe) and I am unsure of the cause. This happened to me before, but for that I removed a script and it fixed itself. That trick did not work. Any help would be great. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 21:46, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Welcome, Organhaver! There was an outage today, and all userscripts have since been temporarily disabled as a security measure. Some discussion is happening at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Today's_outage for the curious. Perfect4th (talk) 21:48, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh, wow, I never knew! Really thought it was just me. Thank you so much! 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 22:14, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

BLOOKET Clone?

Hello can I make a Wikipedia page on Blacket the open source Blooket knockoff made by Xotic? ~2026-13584-47 (talk) 22:46, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, but only if you can find several sources that each meet all the criteria in WP:42: each one is a reliable source (published by somebody with a reputation for responsible editing and fact checking, not social media, a wiki or somebody's blog), each one is wholly independent of the developers, not published or written by them, and not based on an interview or press release; and each one contains significant coverage of the software, not just a passing mention. In short, there must be sources to show that it meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Unless you are sure you have several sources that meet all these requirements, don't try it, as you will not succeed.

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

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 23:32, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Article Help: OR & NPOV

The 4B Movement article seems to have multiple issues with original/synthesized research and unneutral POV. It appears to be a contested topic that's difficult to edit or improve based on past discussions in the talk page and I want to avoid an edit war as a new user learning Wikipedia. Could someone review this article and offer some help/guidance on how to navigate editing it and what steps I can take to resolve the issues?

Thank you! (VisualEditor)

StructuredFlorescence (talk) 22:50, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Interview with a longtime Wikipedian

Hi there, I'm a senior writer with CBC News in Canada and I'm interested in chatting with a longtime Wikipedian about the future of Wikipedia alongside the rise in AI. Ideally, you'd also be Canadian. If this sounds interesting, please send me an email via Wikipedia and we can connect! Lauralein215 (talk) 23:20, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

@Lauralein215 You may want to talk to User:Bearcat, who is an active admin currently living in Toronto. He is one of the better people to interview (don't even consider me, I'm fairly new). --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 23:48, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I second this -- Bearcat is the guy you want, if you can get ahold of him. I noticed you already reached out to Moxy who would've been the ideal choice but I suppose he hasn't gotten back to you... Don't forget to mention WikiProject Canada while you're at it! We need more contributors. Cheers, MediaKyle (talk) 23:54, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I'm hoping to still hear from Moxy, but I'd love to connect with BearCat. I'll get in touch now. Thanks again. Lauralein215 (talk) 02:36, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Lauralein215, You could also post your request at WT:LLM. Mathglot (talk) 03:13, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

If you're particularly looking to talk about Wikipedia's relation to AI, any of us over at the AI cleanup WikiProject would work, too. I might personally suggest User:Gurkubondinn. Not Canadian, but very experienced, and active in the subject of AI. Athanelar (talk) 14:45, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! ~2026-14632-45 (talk) 14:58, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Wikiquote

hi: can I trouble you to tell me how to submit a possible Wikiquote: “The present is perfect, and sometimes there’s something funny waiting to be noticed and shared”. Writing is easy (talk) 23:21, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Writing is easy. Wikiquote is a separate project from Wikipedia. Try asking at q:WQ:VP ColinFine (talk) 23:35, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Remembering the status of menus in sidebars

Ever since the new temporary account feature has been added, I've started seeing "Main menu" and "Tools" menus in the sidebars of every page, which push the "Contents" and "Appearance" menu off the bottom of the screen. As I almost never use those top menus, I keep pressing the "hide" buttons, but that preference is seemingly not stored anywhere, so I have to press them on every article I visit. Is this how pages are supposed to work, or might it be a problem with my account (a setting I'm overlooking?) or browser? Is there a bug open about this somewhere that I can watch for progress on? Thanks for any information people can share about this. ~2026-13668-13 (talk) 00:16, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I believe to get persistent appearance of those menus you need to register for an account. Mathglot (talk) 03:11, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

That's interesting, thanks. So you're saying that with your registered account, the menus just stay open or stay closed (across multiple different page visits) based on what you last set them to (e.g. clicking the "hide" button), without you having to find some extra secret setting somewhere? ~2026-13668-13 (talk) 04:04, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes. But there was also a incident on the servers today that lasted a few hours and interrupted some services, and I have no idea if what you are reporting might have been affected by that. Mathglot (talk) 04:25, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

This has been a problem for weeks now, so I don't think a service outage could explain it. It sounds like what I want is for people with temporary accounts to have the same "menu toggle state" persistence (cookie?) as people with registered accounts. Maybe that difference is an unnoticed consequence of some deliberate decision that was made about how to implement temporary accounts, but I'm hoping it's not too much to ask of the engineers that both types of account behave in the same way for this use case. Do you know where the correct place is to file this bug? I'm assuming it counts as a bug since registered users don't have this problem. Ideally this can be filed without me needing to create an account, as it would be ironic if that was a requirement. ~2026-13668-13 (talk) 04:39, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't think it necessarily counts as a bug. There are many features not available to temp accounts by design; see WP:REGISTER#Summary of benefits. I guess I don't see the irony. Mathglot (talk) 04:43, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I just can't imagine that the person who came up with the design for how the "hide" button works was thinking to themselves "We want the hide state to be remembered across pages, so that the user isn't annoyed by having to click it on every page... except for temporary users, who we deliberately want it to behave differently for, in order to annoy them".

More likely, they might have come up with a design that included persistence, and the engineers who had to implement it found that it was really difficult to support with temporary accounts, so they settled for only making it work on registered accounts. If so, I'd like the team to re-evaluate the cost-benefit analysis they did there, based on my experience of having to live with this unwanted user experience change for weeks. (There may also have been changes that they've made to temporary accounts since the initial implementation, which might make it easier to maintain feature parity now.)

But even more likely, they just didn't realize that their implementation didn't work with temporary accounts, because they only tested using registered accounts. In which case I would be bringing this discrepancy to their attention for the first time.

The irony is that if I have to create an account to report the bug, then it would be simpler for me to just create the account and then not report the bug, because with that account I would no longer experience the bug any more. That wouldn't be very socially minded of me, though, so that's why I'm trying to find the right way to bring this to the attention of the engineers.

Sorry for the long reply, and I do appreciate you taking the time to assist me. ~2026-13668-13 (talk) 05:08, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Catch-22 applies. Mathglot (talk) 05:14, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Right, you got it. ~2026-13668-13 (talk) 05:46, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Question about adding well-known but currently unsourced TV rating information

Hello, I would appreciate some guidance regarding sourcing and content addition.

I am working on expanding a section about television content rating systems in multiple countries. Some of the information I would like to add concerns official rating categories that are widely known and publicly used, but for certain countries I have not yet been able to locate easily accessible, verifiable secondary sources.

In some cases, similar information existed in the article for many years before being removed due to lack of citations. I understand that per WP:V and WP:BURDEN, the responsibility to provide reliable sources lies with the editor adding the content.

My question is: in situations where information appears to be factual and non-controversial (e.g., official rating categories), but reliable sources are difficult to locate, what would be the best approach?

Would it be preferable to:

• wait until reliable sources are found before adding anything,
• discuss the proposed addition on the article talk page (which I have done),
• or seek assistance in locating appropriate sources through a WikiProject or noticeboard?

I want to make sure I proceed in a way that respects policy while also contributing constructively. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks! Upset New Bird (talk) 02:49, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Upset New Bird, do not include information you are unable to source. As far as waiting or asking for help sourcing it, that's up to you and how much effort you wish to expend on it. See also: WP:NODEADLINE. Mathglot (talk) 03:08, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

@Mathglot: Thanks for the clarification. I fully agree that information should not be added without reliable sources, and I do not intend to include anything in the article unless it is properly sourced.

My concern is more practical: in some cases, the information relates to official rating categories that are known to exist, but locating reliable, verifiable sources has proven difficult for me alone. I recognize that the burden is on the editor adding the material, but I also understand that Wikipedia is a collaborative project.

With that in mind, I will refrain from adding the material for now and continue searching. If other editors happen to know of suitable sources, I would certainly appreciate any guidance. Thanks again. Upset New Bird (talk) 03:17, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Upset New Bird and welcome to the Teahouse!

As the other commenter noted, definitely don't add information that can't be reliably backed.

To find more information, you could use a deep search engine to find other reliable sources, if you'd like to. My recommendation would be a tool like Perplexity, as long as you verify the information provided in the AI response by visiting the referenced pages. I've found it to be a useful way to find information on under-documented topics.

All the best! Paolo Roland Self (talk) 03:18, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Using the Kokuyo Website as a source

Hello! I wanted to see if the Japanese stationery company Kokuyo had the notability for an article. I found lots of reviews on its products, from Yahoo, WIRED, and Forbes. I also found a book on the Japanese Economy, and it mentioned Kokuyo once about how it was the leading producer of stationery in Japan. Would these be good sources? But for the history of the company, all I could find was Kokuyo's website. The other stationery articles (Pentel and Zebra) both use the company's website as a source, so would it be fine to use a primary source for the article? Bulbatian (talk) 04:15, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Bulbatian, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid the answer is No.

Unless there are multiple sources which meet all of the requirements of WP:golden rule (independent, secondary, reliably published, and significant coverage) then no article is possible. See WP:CORPDEPTH.

As for the other articles: Wikipedia unfortunately has tens of thousands of articles which if they were submitted for review today would not be accepted; but not many editors are willing to do the substantial work of finding suitable sources for them or else deleting them. See other stuff exists. ColinFine (talk) 11:52, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

how can i insert an image into my sandbox page?

creating a new wiki pae abot 5th Commando Batalion Rekhamoni Duari (talk) 04:34, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

If you use this (source editor): [[File:Sparrow.jpg|thumb|Caption goes here]]

Caption goes here

Then you get this image on the right. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 06:49, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Rekhamoni Duari, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Please don't ask the same question in multiple places.

As somebody has said on the Help desk, User:Rekhamoni Duari/sandbox has no chance of being accepted as an article in its current form. Images play no part in the review process for new drafts, and you would be better to spend your time getting the draft in a suitable form for a Wikipedia article.

I have added a header to your sandbox so that when it is ready you can submit it for review.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 11:59, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Multiple authors website citation

Hi all, on the (please forgive me if I use the incorrect terms) visual editor, when I press the 'cite' icon, I need to add another author to a citation (see here Tangier Exportation Free Zone) I just made. When you select Website after pressing Cite, it shows Last name, for example, with the guide reading: "The surname of the author; don't wikilink, use 'author-link'; can suffix with a numeral to add additional authors". I have tried all manner of numerals (including Roman) after their names and I still couldn't get it to display correctly. Am I missing something incredibly obvious? Thank you so much! Itsaclarinet (talk) 04:46, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

If I understood your issue correctly, the number goes in the parameter name, not after the author’s name.

Example:

|last=Smith |first=John |last2=Jones |first2=Mary

So you add last2, first2, last3, etc. for additional authors LionmerterTHE (talk) 07:27, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Second opinion on declined satellite draft

My draft on Thaicom 1 was declined because most of the sources were seen as primary (& do not establish notability per WP:GNG. Since it’s the first Thai communications satellite, I’m just trying to figure out if it’s worth digging into it - so far, it was kind of frustrating to search for any better sources and to work on notability.

Would appreciate any feedback if worth trying or move on. LionmerterTHE (talk) 07:23, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

@LionmerterTHE I think you might get better advice from the topic specialists at WikiProject Space. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:43, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

A relevant article from the New York Times (substantially about Shinawatra Satellite Co, but news-worthy because of the satellite launch):

Michael Richardson (December 17, 1993). "A Thai High-Flier Launches Satellite, Stirs Controversy". New York Times.

Andrew Jameson (talk) 13:09, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

This is great help. Thank you so much LionmerterTHE (talk) 13:16, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Cover of a translated novel

Should the cover of a translated novel be the original language cover or the English cover?

Hello all, I've looked at MOS:Novel but the MOS:Novel#Infobox section doesn't specify, only stating that "The image displayed at the top of the article should be the most significant cover historically for that book; often this is the first edition cover, but occasionally it is not, if a later edition is better known". I was wondering what the general opinion is. Acinonyxjubatusrex (talk) 07:36, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Presumably the "general opinion" is that Wikipedia articles should adhere to WP:MOS. If I am misunderstanding your question please clarify it. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:38, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Acinonyxjubatusrex, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Part of the non-free content criteria is Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. Which would meet this criterion better?

If the book is well-known in English translation, I suggest that cover would be better; but if for some reason the fact that it is a translation is important, then perhaps the original cover. This is an editorial decision.

You might get some further ideas from Wikipedia:WikiProject Books/Images. ColinFine (talk) 12:05, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. Acinonyxjubatusrex (talk) 16:18, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Side menu collapse state

After the introduction of temporary accounts, I now see two extra menus on the sides of the page: "Main menu" and "Tools". Every time I see them, I collapse them with the "hide" buttons, since leaving them visible causes the more useful menus below them to disappear off the bottom of the screen. I've heard that people with permanent accounts don't have to do this, as the website normally persists the visible/collapsed state of these menus between page visits. Is there a way I can file a bug about this, without having to register an account (which would defeat the point of reporting it)? ~2026-13668-13 (talk) 12:02, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

This has been answered above at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Remembering the status of menus in sidebars. I don't think you'll get any better answer than you did there. MediaKyle (talk) 13:56, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Generally, you may file bugs using WP:Phabricator. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:14, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

{{sfn}} vs {{harvnb}} vs <ref>s

Hello all. Having observed that the more decent articles on Wikipedia eschew regular ref tags in favor of specialized formats, I am trying to make sure my additions align with higher bibliographic standards. I have noted a discrepancy between the use of {{sfn}} and {{harvnb}} templates. Could the community please clarify which references style is considered Best Practice? Tobias Schäfer 87 (talk) 14:18, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

None of the various citation schemes described in Citing sources is preferred over the others. What is preferred, however, is that once an article is created with a scheme, subsequent edits maintain that scheme.

So if your additions are new articles, you're welcome to choose one of those schemes, but if you are editing an existing article, you should use whichever scheme the article uses. ColinFine (talk) 17:34, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Apologies, @Tobias Schäfer 87: I forgot to welcome you to the Teahouse! ColinFine (talk) 17:34, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Signatures

I have a signature with a very small image in it, is this allowed or will i have to remove the image? Thanks! FrostbornSage - The "Barnstar Awarder" (talk) 15:16, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

No, sorry. WP:CUSTOMSIG/P states "Do not use images, transcluded templates, Lua modules, parser functions, TemplateStyles or external links in your signature." --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 15:38, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for responding, I have removed it now. Have a wonderful rest of your day! FrostbornSage (talk) 15:41, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

@FrostbornSage: Unicode characters like ★ ✭ ✮ ✯ ☆ ⭐ are allowed and can be enlarged and colored like ★. It's not quite a barnstar but maybe good enough at low resolution. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Maybe make it smaller so it doesn't interfere with line spacing. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 16:24, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Or set line-height:0 on the star like ★. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:49, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you all! I’ll have a look into this :) FrostbornSage (talk) 17:14, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Please review my article.

Hello

I’ve been improving the article "India at the Deaflympics" and added more information and citations. The article is currently rated C-class. Could someone please take a look and advise whether it might qualify for B-class, or suggest improvements so that I can reach that level? TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 16:41, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

My goal is to make this article my first Good Article. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 16:43, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

It relies largely on primary sources namely Deaflympics and also The Times of India is not a reliable source so it would not meet the criteria of C class yet, let alone B. Theroadislong (talk) 16:58, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Now, i have added more secondary reliable information. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 16:59, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Can you recheck my article. I am adding more citations. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:02, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Theroadislong, I have replaced some of the primary sources with reliable secondary sources that provides significant coverage to the subject. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:15, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

There are still 41 uses of deaflympics.com, which is a primary source, a press release (not independent), and a number of Times of India sources (Not reliable). Theroadislong (talk) 17:29, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Times of India is not a reliable source.???? TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:36, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

See WP:TIMESOFINDIA. Theroadislong (talk) 17:43, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

But all the times of india sources i used are vaild.and there are other sources along with the times of india source.

Btw, I can't remove all deaflympics.com citations as the Deaflympics was not a popular multi-sport event in India and it started to become popular after the 2021 edition. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:45, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Now, I have used the deaflympics.com link only 10 times. Now can the article become a c class article. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 18:09, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

We have zero interest in what their own website says, if there are no independent sources for that content, then remove the content. Theroadislong (talk) 18:15, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

So, I cant use primary sources. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 18:19, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I thought we can use a little primary source.Sorry. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 18:20, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I am slowly removing the deaflympics.com links by finding other citations. btw should i remove all. because the only source of some editions is the official website. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:37, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

btw, i reduced 41( idk) to 14. please check. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:38, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

The press release was used to prove India's best ever performance was 2025. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:39, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Press releases are not independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 19:08, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Okay but, now can you review my article. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 19:11, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I removed it TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 19:12, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Weird question about template parameters

I am trying to create a template which is turning out to be a lot more complex than I thought. What I want to have happen is, in the info section, have a yes/no parameter which, when enabled, replaces the normal text with "This user edits at [[school]], and is most active between {{{School start time}}} and {{{School end time}}}." I want {{{School start time}}} and {{{School end time}}} to display in the viewer's local time so they don't have to convert to UTC/GMT. Can I get some help with this wikitext if what I'm trying to achieve is even possible? Thanks! --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 17:26, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

The default would be "This user edits at [[school]]" --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 17:27, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @DollarStoreBaal44, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Note that Guidance for younger editors advises Never give out any personal information (e.g., name, age, location, school...) on the Internet, even to people that you think you know in real life.

That is an essay, not Wikipedia policy, but I think it is good advice. ColinFine (talk) 17:50, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Ah. Thanks, I'll remove that parameter. But I'm still curious about how to do the whole 'yes/no parameter to replace text with something else that also includes parameters' thing. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 18:02, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

@DollarStoreBaal44: Wikitext cannot produce local time for users. There are performance reasons for that. Wiki pages are cached after processing the wikitext on saving so the same content can be displayed to everybody without reprocessing on each page view. Other things like page histories and user contributions are generated on each page view anyway so local time can be displayed there without significant cost. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:35, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

DANGIT! Sigh. I'll just make sure that users put in UTC and NOT local time. Anybody have any advice about the whole 'yes/no parameter which itself contains parameters'? --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 19:09, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Is your question about {{yesno}}, and if so, what is your question? Mathglot (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I...don't know? Some templates have an option in the visual editor where, instead of a normal text box, it's a drop-down menu with specific options. I think it's yesno, but not sure. --DollarStoreBa'al^Converse 20:13, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

A glitch with a map in an article

Hi everyone, another editor (@Wikieditor662) has encountered issues where the map on this article 2026 Iran war continues to randomly be deleted due to unrelated edits, but the key remains on the article, it appears to be some kind of glitch and I thought I might as well bring it up here as it’s a current issue of which the original question at the Help Desk seems to be somewhat stagnating and diverged from the original issue, I’ll also bring up the issue on the individual talk page, so if anyone has any technical knowledge of why this glitch might be happening then that will be great.

Wikipedia:Help desk#Map keeps on getting accidentally removed for some reason Here is the original discussion with the new map at the bottom. The Grenadian Historian (Aka. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a) (talk) 17:30, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Gaza genocide removed off ongoing

Could someone provide me the discussion to the removal of the Gaza genocide on the Ongoing tab? I can't find it, thanks RoyalSilver 19:04, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Question about my own Wiki page

My wikipedia entry needs both edits and additions. I am wondering if this is something I do or someone else and

who that someone would be. Thanks so much, Alice Aliceattie (talk) 19:48, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Strings (rapper) deletion

Hi all, I noticed that Strings (rapper) was nominated for deletion and reached consensus to delete in 2018. Is there a reason why it still hasn't been deleted? The source that's been added since then doesn't appear notable. Mikankiwis (talk) 19:55, 6 March 2026 (UTC)