Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cullen328, 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.]

Vandalism

How do people here fight vandalism, and how do I detect if there is vandalism on a page immediately? Pooongus- (talk) 19:35, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

The recent changes filter can help. You can use different filters to sort out which edits are most likely to be in bad faith.

I wrote a short essay on fighting vandalism if you'd like to read it: User:JohnLaurens333/Vandalism reverting for beginners. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 19:56, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! Pooongus- (talk) 19:58, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Just adding that if you are looking for vandalisms on a specific page, you can also add it to your watchlist. LkL-70547 (talk) 00:02, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Some of us have tools like twinkle and cvpi Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 01:17, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Us Wikipedians fight vandals by getting them AIV'ed. This includes warning them and bringing this up to admins as soon as possible and getting them blocked if it's repeated.

We can differentiate between real vandalism and constructive edits just by looking at it.

Vandalism typically involves removing and altering content to make the article seem confusing for people and prevent them from being curious about info. Constructive editing deepens the article's topic, gives more helpful info and does the total opposite of (or reverts) the vandalism.

If you're asking about the detection of vandalism, I think the dashboard feature will help. It unlocks when you make at least 100 edits to the English Wikipedia. There you can find various active discussions and recent changes. You can review them, and respond to them. Even thanking will help. I'm sure they want to thank you for your hard work at building an encyclopedia! SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 10:39, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

I suspect an article is paid promotion

I don't have a Wikipedia account, but this article seems to be highly formatted in a way that reads of paid promotion, and clearly does not follow editing guidelines for real people. I know this is highly frowned upon on Wikipedia and not to mention unethical, so I wanna note it here. Don't know where else to put it. Coran Capshaw. ~2026-48558-66 (talk) 19:11, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Which article is this? SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 13:29, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I take that back. I'll read the article now. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 13:29, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I've added formatting to the article. Putting it on my watchlist now. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 13:41, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

2-8-2

hi me again I found some documents and it proves that the Queensland 8d15 class tanks became 2-8-0s so on the page for the Whyte notation, 2-8-2, can someone edit the first known tank engine variant instead of 2-8-4 it should say 2-8-2. Dubs123456 (talk) 03:24, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

I am definitely not an expert in the subject, but whatever change you want to make, you'll need a reliable source to support it. See WP:RS. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)}

Hi Dubs123456. You can either be WP:BOLD or be WP:CAUTIOUS. If you quite sure that the sources/documents you found meet Wikipedia's definition of a reliable source, then you boldly change the article yourself and cite in the source in response. Please note, though, that official documents tend to often be seen as WP:PRIMARY sources, and there are limits as to how they may be used as citations for the content of Wikipedia articles. If you're not sure how to format a citation, take a look at Help:Referencing for beginners for some basics.

If you're not sure about the relibability of the source, worried you might make a mess if you try to make the changes yourself, or are worried for some other reason, you can be cautious and propose the changes you feel need to be made by starting a discussion about them at Talk:2-8-2. You could also seek assistance at Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains since that's where you're likely to find other Wikipedians who know about or are interested in trains.

Finally, if you're bold and do make the changes yourself, you must understand that another user can disagree with them and undo them. If that happens you should follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and use the article's talk page to discuss things with the other person. Don't simply keep trying to force the changes into the article because this will almost certainly be seen as Wikipedia:Edit warring no matter how right you think you are. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:16, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

well according to photos and looking at the rebuilt 8d15 class locos I can confirm that they evolved into 2-8-0s thanks for the info Dubs123456 (talk) 05:36, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

@Dubs123456: Unless you're condidered by other reliable sources to be also be a reliable source on the 2-8-2 and have published on the matter, what you see in the photos is likely going to be considered Wikipedia:Original research and not something that should be cited as a source per Wikipedia:Verifiability. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:06, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

i looked on the Wikipedia article for 8d15 no mention of it being a 2-8-4 according to steamlocomotive.com it says evolved into 2-8-0 Dubs123456 (talk) 08:30, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are not reliable as sources for other Wikipedia articles. You'll need evidence that comes from published reporters. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 14:44, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

bud read the second half Dubs123456 (talk) 20:00, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

@Dubs123456: Teahouse hosts are, for the most part, able to answer general questions about Wikipedia editing or Wikipedia's various policies/guidelines; they can, for example, try to explain how a particular policy/guideline tends to be applied in a certain situation. If you're looking for more specific input regarding a particular type of train/locomotive like the 2-8-2, then your best bet is likely going to be asking for help at WikiProject like Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains. Whether a website like steamlocomotive.com is even considered a reliable source for trains for Wikipedia's purposes is probably something a member of WikiProject Trains could better assess. Wikipedia articles in and of themselves aren't considered a reliable source for any purpose; this is pretty much because Wikipedia articles are user-generated content that can be change at anytime by anyone who wants to. I'm not a content expert on the 8d15 and can't say what's right or what's wrong. If you're looking for someone knowlegable about such things, WikiProject Trains is, once again, probably your best bet. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:41, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

thanks Dubs123456 (talk) 01:40, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

i was dumb. Dubs123456 (talk) 01:19, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Adding relevant indigenous history to Canadian Cities and Towns

Hey folks this is perhaps a touchy question! I will start off with that have an interest in indigenous history in Canada and their connection to modern Canadian settlements. I just wanted to get advice on how to proceed on adding local indigenous history to articles on Canadian cities and towns. Based on my limited experience, I understand the conventions on Wikipedia are this:

1. Mentioning relevant local traditional indigenous land claims (in any section of the article) is generally inappropriate even if the local town in question acknowledges them. It is a political statement and not "neutral". (this is not my opinion, just an observation based conversations I have read about (I am thinking of the conversation specifically in this talk page: RfC about First Nations land acknowledgement)
2. Adding local is indigenous history (in the "history" section) is ok so long as there is relevant and notable sources that relate indigenous history to that specific town or city (e.g. reputable articles on local historical indigenous-European relations or articles on local indigenous archaeology)

I am passionate about local history, however I just want to clarify the ground rules and conventions before I about editing articles on this topic. Let me know if I am missing anything or if I am totally wrong about these. Thank you for all your thoughtful responses in advance! Gogerr (talk) 14:03, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Just in case you don't know, there is a Wikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas; it is semi-active, but there are some interesting essays and guidelines on there as well.

As for your questions, I think Q2 kinda folds into Q1, because reliable sources are always what we go for. If there has been significant academic or journalistic discourse about a specific land claim or Land acknowledgement (Which as a side note, aren't they quite different? Most land acks I have seen don't mention 'claim' at all), then that should be included. If most of the discussions are regarding historical indigenous activity in general, then that would be more appropriate to include.

You probably already know this, but that is governed by WP:DUE. What myself, yourself, or the local town PR agency considers important is not relevant, we only consider what independent sources discuss, which I believe is also the consensus of the RfC you linked to - that most independent sources simply doesn't cover the land acknowledgement when discussing the town.

LkL-70547 (talk) 15:44, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

To be only roughly correct, in Canada "land claim" is used to mean a formal legal proceeding by Indigenous people against a government, regarding an area that they believe the government historically took control of in a way that was not legally justified, and a "land acknowledgement" is a type of voluntary public statement that may be made by a non-Indigenous group or institution, to the general effect that they are aware of and respect the Indigenous [claims/heritage/tradition/whatever-is-appropriate] in the place they are at. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:18, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. That is an important distinction to keep in mind, I will be aware of my terminology when writing. Gogerr (talk) 17:35, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

I guess to clarify your point 2, according to what I considered a quite relevant point among the sometimes vehement arguments in that RFC, I don't think it would really have to relate to "that specific town or city" named as such, but something less restrictive: making sure that the older sources really are referring to something within literally the same piece of land as the town or city (or some part of it), rather than just being maybe in a nearby location. For an area-specific example relating to Coquitlam, being able to be certain from the evidence in the sources that the event or location being reported was not something that only happened in what is now Burnaby or Port Moody or New Westminster, but really did happen in what is now Coquitlam - regardless of whether it was being called Coquitlam at the time. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 15:48, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Ok that's good to know. I just added a bunch of information and sources on Fort Erie, Ontario and tried to keep the sources as local as possible. I think that is useful boundary in order to keep the information relevant and focused. I think I accomplished that with the history section of the Fort Erie, Ontario article. Gogerr (talk) 17:39, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Do keep in mind that you also want to make sure to keep in mind the issue of weight. While I'm not saying it's a clear problem here, you want to avoid situations where you have as much about a town from before there even was a town as prose that is actually about the town. On a fundamental level, this is an article about the town of Fort Erie, not the fort, or the land that the town of Fort Erie is currently on. So background information is useful and valuable, but you want to pay care to the proportion. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 03:03, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I agree with CoffeeCrumbs 100% on this point. I'll add that while it's arguably a weakness of Wikipedia, our bias strongly in favour of recorded history - and the corresponding non-favour or even disregard of oral history - is in practical terms not going away any time soon. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:28, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I'd say we treat it the same way we do with written historical documents: we don't do our own research on the primary sources, we just summarize what the secondary sources have said about them, i.e. historians who have engaged with the oral history and written up their analysis on what it all means. ;; Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 11:10, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I like how enthusiastic you are into editing articles about them. You should go to the WikiProject that @LkL-70547 linked for you. There you can get in touch with other users. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 11:28, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Quickly adding that I probably linked to the wrong one, the more appropriate one should be Wikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which also seems more active. LkL-70547 (talk) 14:13, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Vulnerabilities

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.

---

Terrible things could happen. Terrible things! (Vulnerabilities)

tl;dr: Where to report a vulnerability in IABot?

Excuse the melodramatic title, please, but now I have at least one reader. I rarely do this because code written by others is usually so tedious to read, but recently I made my own little Wikipedia bot, which motivated me to start doing research about what's out there and I was surprised to then find a bot funded by the Internet Archive itself. A great platform in my opinion, and its bot, the "InternetArchiveBot," had been operating for over 10 years!

Well, I did get curious enough to briefly browse through the bot's source, specifically the server-side application security. I was, and still am, pleasantly surprised by what I've seen. It is mostly good code, but as always, the larger the codebase, the more potential vulnerabilities can be found. That's not surprising, and I wouldn't have expected otherwise.

Before I go on, I want to emphasize that "brief browse" means partial and brief; that I haven't even seen the whole thing yet, and I can't be certain about my findings without abusing them, thus damaging the project. So take it with a grain of salt, please.

An authorization flaw I classified as CWE-863 could allow an attacker to acquire another account's permissions without any victim interaction. Depending on the permissions associated with the victim's account, this could make severe privilege escalation possible. Here you can see what the roles, or usergroups, admin or root can do.

But to summarize it; the hypothetical attacker with inherited admin privileges could, for example, replace the archive associated with a citation and bypass the check that it corresponds to the original source, and then queue the bot against up to 50,000 affected articles, essentially causing widespread incorrect citations.

The hypothetical attacker with "root" could, naturally, go much further. "invokebot", for example, allows them to make edits from the bot. "changeglobalpermissions" could allow them to grant additional accounts privileges to the panel, such as admin, across all wikis. They could also use "botsubmitlimitnolimit" to remove limits, and with that, instruct the bot to process and potentially edit more than 50,000 Wikipedia articles in a single operation. If said attacker first poisoned IABot's citation data, this could, naturally, cause those incorrect changes to be propagated across tens of thousands of articles. Obviously in that case, I do hope and assume it would be blocked rather quickly.

Not simply disabled for the wiki, but ideally blocked, as "togglerunpage" ("permission grants users the ability to switch the bot on and off on their respective wikis.") and "overridelockout" ("permission grants users the ability to access the interface despite being disabled.") would make it rather hard to keep the hypothetical attacker "down". I think the point is clear. In any case, it definitely wouldn't be nice.

My theory is that this may work more reliably for victims with "root" permissions (over admin) on the panel, for reasons I obviously can't disclose here.

Besides the privileges, the attacker would also inherit the preferences and settings and whatnot. The preference page displays the user's saved email address and stuff like their email-notification choices, preferred wiki and language, appearance…

I'd provisionally assess it lower-critical per CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N.

Another little CWE-79 I found, though it's a bit less alarming, so I won't get into detail. Under the right circumstances, it could achieve essentially the same privilege escalation described above, except through a perfectly ordinary-looking IABot URL. The victim would still have to be logged in and open it, and I doubt it works reliably in every case.

Unfortunately, an intelligent attacker wouldn't have to stop there. Say I, the hypothetical attacker, inherited root because my victim was someone in the root user group. Instead of "merely" vandalizing pages and causing chaos, I could potentially interfere with other users' sessions via "definewiki" — though that doesn't always have to work! That is, obviously, not intended and nothing IABot offers purposefully to its highly privileged users.

There is, in fact, missing protection to make sure that root user, with access to definewiki, cannot do what I won't explain. It isn't really something you can hold against the devs, considering root is very privileged anyway and all of the people in the root usergroup are very trusted. That is obviously not the case for the attacker.

Now you may think, "What's the point, Feng? They escalated their privileges to root anyway. Why would they even want that?"

Well, good question. First of all, the attacker does not necessarily need to care about vandalism. The attacker can, via user preferences, possibly also see the victim's e-mail address. You may not want that, considering an e-mail is a very underrated and underestimated privacy vulnerability, especially if you do not use relay. What makes it bad is that what I'm describing is somewhat broad. The attacker doesn't target one specific person, but they'd affect everyone who interacts with the attacker's "compromised" interface element. Quite a lot of potential e-mails to collect there.

There's also another problem here. Suppose the attacker doesn't care about e-mails because they can't decide what to put in the subject line — maybe they are particularly shy.

This takeover isn't limited to victims below the attacker in the hierarchy. The attacker could, entirely plausibly, compromise the account of another root user, then use their account to vandalize and whatnot. I don't think it would be possible for outsiders to conclude that rootuser1 isn't the one who did it, but actually rootuser2 who took them over, let alone any outsider that escalated their privileges to become rootuser1. My confidence in this vulnerability is slightly less compared to the others. I wouldn't bet my head. Oh, I forgot to say: this is also a CWE-79.

That's as far as account takeover and privilege escalation goes.

The first vulnerability that I found is one I haven't even mentioned yet. A CWE-89, one of the vulnerabilities I'm most confident in. It's a high per CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N.

The hypothetical attacker here wouldn't even need to take over anybody's account for this one. Nor would they need anybody else to click anything. The same underlying mistake appears in quite a few places, but the most interesting ones are public. ;D

Well, it could allow the attacker to read non-public information stored by IABot. That COULD include saved e-mail addresses, so yes, back to those. The attacker interested in collecting them may not need to bother with becoming root and interfering with other users' sessions after all. I do have to qualify that a little, though, because what they actually get depends on the database configuration. The bot, naturally, stores sensitive information, but that doesn't have to mean that the attacker could get those. Still, unauthenticated database disclosure strikes me as rather bad on its own...

As always, this doesn't mean IABot is "sloppy" nor does it say anything about its capable team. Also, this is a bot operating for over 10 years, this isn't obvious to most eyes. Which is how I justify posting this here, it's simply not detailed enough for anyone... but me. ;D

In any case, I want to make it clear that no one is currently at risk.

Now, why did I post this here. Maybe security@archive.org? That's too general, no? GitHub issues — for bugs maybe, but I doubt I'll be appreciated for detailed public disclosure of vulnerabilities... GitHub Security Advisory? IABot doesn't seem to have this enabled. Pull request? Quite intrusive. Wikimedia Phabricator? I don't even know whether that is monitored by the right people, and it's public, too! Wikimedia HackerOne — way too broad. Bot or operator talk page? Obviously not.

So yes, I don't know where else and as a new member of the Wikipedia, I know the Teahouse is my go-to. This should probably be the best way to get some attention and this and potentially in contact with the right people. Especially because the people reading this are rather knowledgable, I think.

Thank you! (Please excuse the rough wording, I'm in a hurry...) Fengrímur (talk) 14:34, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Why is the bot/operator talk page "obviously not"? That is where I would expect a bug report for a bot to go. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:37, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Well… it could plausibly go there if this were a bug report. But this is a security vulnerability report, and those aren’t meant to be public. As I said above: “for bugs maybe, but I doubt I'll be appreciated for detailed public disclosure of vulnerabilities.”

What I posted above isn’t the vulnerability report either. It’s more of a request for a suitable point of contact. I’m wouldn't put technical details on a public talk page and hope someone notices them quickly enough. ;D

For ordinary bugs, sure, but for vulnerabilities, there’s no clear report-here-path. Fengrímur (talk) 18:45, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

If you feel it's important, post on their talk page, asking how to get in touch privately. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:43, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

@Cyberpower678 and Harej: FYI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 07:42, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! I've propagated it there already. Fengrímur (talk) 08:37, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Fengrímur. On the Teahouse: tl;dr.

I suggest WP:VPT as your first port of call. ColinFine (talk) 20:41, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

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

Need something there

they put unconfirmed source on Tony Duvert, but I don't know wherever is that true or not, they tell us to see the talk page, and also heavily updated, can you check on that? Thanks! Itsjuenyin (talk) 17:07, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

I don't know who said which things in that discussion, but if the sources don't call him "philosopher", we won't either - regardless of what definitions he may fit. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:12, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Source assessment for proposed biography

I am Kyle Newsom, the subject of a proposed biography, and I am disclosing that conflict of interest. I own KAMBER, co-founded VISPERIO Performance, and serve as COO of Bald Business LLC, Vic Keller's umbrella company. Before a human editor considers writing an article, could someone assess whether these sources provide sufficient independent secondary coverage?

• ASOTU biographical interview, June 16, 2025
• Dealer OMG interview and transcript, August 25, 2025
• On The Drive interview, February 4, 2025
• AutoSuccess academy partnership item, May 29, 2025

Most of this material is interview content. The AutoSuccess item closely follows an earlier UpdatePromise release, so I am not claiming it provides separate in-depth coverage of my career. My company biographies are primary sources.

Is there enough independent secondary material here to consider a biography, or is additional independently reported coverage necessary?

AI assistance was used to collect and organize these links and prepare this question. No AI-generated article text is being proposed for publication.

Kyle Newsom KANKT (talk) 19:04, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi @KANKT. No, none of those sources are of any use to a Wikipedia article. If these are the best you have, then you do not meet our criteria for inclusion at this time. qcne (talk) 19:07, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

I'll be more detailed than qcne.

• https://www.asotu.com/podcast/sold-the-house-started-the-mission-betting-it-all-on-fixed-ops doesn't help for eligibility (connexion to subject). Interview. (Interviews are unusable for eligibility regardless of interviewer and outlet because they're the subject speaking about themselves.)
• https://dealeromg.com/fixing-fixed-ops-training-retention-profitability-with-kyle-newsom/ doesn't help for eligibility (connexion to subject). Interview.
• https://www.buzzsprout.com/2317691/episodes/16546124-ep-47-telling-ain-t-training-how-to-make-learning-stick-get-managers-engaged doesn't help for eligibility (connexion to subject). Interview.
• https://www.autosuccessonline.com/dealership-service-training-program-updatepromise/ doesn't help for eligibility for Newsom (wrong subject) and wouldn't help for eligibility for VISPERIO (routine coverage). Service news, with Newsom merely name-dropped once in the text.

What we're mainly looking for is independent discussion of an article's subject. (We CANNOT accept anything less.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Look out it's Jimothy!} 21:02, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Chemistry or Pharmacology WikiProjects

Hi, does anyone know where I can find WikiProjects that relate to chemistry or pharmacology? Thank you! Also, I have been away for over five years, and I need a mentor. Wikipedia isn't what it used to be. Nepaxt (talk) 00:23, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

@Nepaxt: Welcome to The Teahouse. You may want to go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory and take a look to see which WikiProjects are still active. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:48, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, @Tenryuu. Have a great day. Nepaxt (talk) 02:15, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

• WP:WikiProject Chemistry
• WP:WikiProject Pharmacology
• WP:Mentorship

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 07:37, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Help with sourcing for draft

I am seeking guidance regarding Draft:Rose Nono-Lin. The draft was previously declined because the references were considered insufficient to establish notability. The draft has since been revised and includes independent coverage from GMA News, Manila Bulletin, INQUIRER.net, ABS-CBN News, Philstar, and other sources. Could someone please advise whether the current independent sources sufficiently address the previous concern, and which sections, if any, still require stronger secondary sourcing? Thank you.

Draft:Rose Nono-Lin. Belleecrivain05 (talk) 02:56, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Just from a quick glance, it doesn't look good at all. The reason as I see it is that these references are mostly about something else instead of being all about her like they need to be. Except for her own website, which counts for literally zero. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 03:52, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I know you asked about which specific sections, but that isn't really a very good question, because at this point any part of the article that doesn't have great sources needs to get deleted, not repaired (i.e. if the sources weren't great on a certain section, that section should never have been written). TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:00, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate you checking on it! Should I wait for the official review since its been pending for weeks now? Or should I change it now? Belleecrivain05 (talk) 04:05, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

You should try to fix it if you can, before they look. You would likely gain something by first finding every bit of the article that uses her website for source, and just delete all of those parts without trying to fix them. Whether we like to admit it or not, a person's own website is just them boasting about themselves, and nobody cares about it or values it - it's all trash. Having that gone will at least look more respectable. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:39, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Whether we like to admit it or not, a person's own website is just them boasting about themselves, and nobody cares about it or values it - it's all trash. Oh? I immediately think of various people who have their own websites with little or no boasting about themselves and with zero trash content. How deluded am I, TooManyFingers? -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 09:10, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

How to make a Cititation with easier?

I was confused because I search across all browsers (firefox, chrome, and microsoft edge) But found nothing. Can you help this? ZourgCW (talk) 07:28, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

ZourgCW, are you asking how finding material worth citing could be made easier, or how citing material that you know is worth citing could be made easier, or what? If what you're asking about might depend on the subject area, better tell us what that area is. (It's hard to infer from User:ZourgCW/sandbox what your encyclopedic area of interest is.) -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 09:05, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Have you read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 09:11, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! I understand now. ZourgCW (talk) 10:53, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Can I make a citation from google sites?

Previous discussion: WP:TEA#How to make a Cititation with easier?

Can I make a citation from google sites? Was It reliable or not? ZourgCW (talk) 11:04, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Google Sites is just a way to set up a website. Whether any particular website on there is reliable depends entirely on who is publishing it and what they publish there. Which particular website are you asking about? ;; Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 11:07, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I want to make the meaning of the word Injepstan. But I was afraid if Its not reliable ZourgCW (talk) 11:33, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

@ZourgCW please read WP:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day carefully. You are likely to be wasting your time with injepstan. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:54, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

User:ZourgCW/sandbox says: Injepstan Fictional Party is a Fictional Party that made by graduated student. But Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a publisher of fiction. If you want to write about a fictional Party (which you say is "like a micronation") then please do so elsewhere, e.g. your own blog. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 12:15, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

ok ZourgCW (talk) 12:50, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

התנהגות לא מכבדת

אני רוצה לדווח על משתמש שמדבר בצורה לא מכבדת ופוגעת אני מבקש שתבדקו את המקרה ותפלו בו בהתאם לכלךים של ויקיפדיה ~2026-49183-23 (talk) 12:42, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

[Google: "I would like to report a user who is speaking in a disrespectful and offensive manner. I ask that you investigate the matter and handle it in accordance with Wikipedia's rules."]

If that occurred on this, the English-language Wikipedia, please follow the process described at WP:DR

If it was on the Hebrew-language Wikipedia, you will need to raise the matter there; you may do so on he:ויקיפדיה:דלפק ייעוץ. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 12:56, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I know how to handle this. Give me a second. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 13:48, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I should note that this TA has not made any edits on the Hebrew Wikipedia at all, and they also haven't made any edits here except for the one above. Not sure if the same TA can be seen editing multiple wikis or if it would show differently, but without additional information I'm not sure how best to help them other than by directing them to the Hebrew Wikipedia. In solidarity, Gommeh ^{(talk 🎮 sign)} 14:08, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Yep, very strange. They haven't made any edits on the Hebrew Wikipedia as I checked yesterday. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 23:27, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

זוהי הגרסה האמריקאית הראשית של ויקיפדיה. אני חושב שעליך לעשות זאת בעמוד שהרגע הראינו לך. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 13:50, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

@SlapstickHumor360!, I would like to point out that this is not the "American" version of Wikipedia, it is the English (language) version. ColinFine (talk) 15:09, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I used Google Translate for this matter. I thought Wikipedia originated from the US, so I just said "main US Wikipedia". SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 23:25, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Hmm... maybe someone might come along and offer to give us all $5,000 if it gets renamed "Wikipedia of America"? --Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 11:15, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

LOL! I can't waste another second laughing at that. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 12:53, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Make Wikipedia Great Again should be a slogan for someone who wants to become admin here. (joking) In solidarity, Gommeh ^{(talk 🎮 sign)} 14:26, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

I want to write a page about my cat, is my word a viable source?

I'm trying to write a page about my dear Raúl, but I do not know if I, or my mom, count as a good source for it. Can anyone help me with this dilemma? Mumush (talk) 14:23, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi, Mumush, welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately, no, your word does not count as a reliable source; reliable sources must be publsihed. Moreover, topics for Wikipedia articles must need the Wikipedia threshold of "notability" before an article can be written, so your cat almost certainly doesn't qualify--even though I'm quite convinced he's one of the best cats there is. Cheers, Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:25, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

aw man,,, Mumush (talk) 14:42, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Mumush. Please note that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a blogging platform or social media. Pleas write about your cat on another more suitable website :) qcne (talk) 14:48, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

but what if I want to archive my cat into an encyclopedia? Mumush (talk) 15:13, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Then you'll have to find a different encyclopaedia that is not Wikipedia to do that! qcne (talk) 15:15, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but Wikipedia just isn't that encyclopedia. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:15, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Check out Everything2, perhaps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:14, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

@Mumush Yes, you can do so here. Just keep in mind that normal userspace guidelines still apply. ;) Fengrímur (talk) 07:25, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Technically correct, but it would get deleted per WP:UPNOT and be a waste of peoples time, so it's a bad idea. Better to write off-WP somewhere. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:40, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Awh. Sorry @Mumush – as you can see – you shouldn't do that. Unless... it becomes some sort of sandbox formatting test-page and whatnot to make it "directly related to Wikipedia's goals". Well, probably better to search for some sort of cat-pedia. Fengrímur (talk) 07:50, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

I have written a page in Sandbox, but cannot seem to upload to Wikipedia

I have written a new page in Sandbox, but cannot seem to upload to Wikipedia Pedronob (talk) 14:29, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello. New accounts cannot directly create articles, and need to submit them for review. I will move your draft to draft space, the preferred location for submissions, and enable you to submit it. However, please see Referencing for beginners first. 331dot (talk) 14:34, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

The draft is now at Draft:Peter Wellesley. 331dot (talk) 14:37, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Pedronob, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I have moved the draft (which has already been declined) to Draft:Peter Noble. I think 331dot must have misread the text.

I'm afraid that you appear to be trying to do something which is effectively impossible.

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

It follows that writing about yourself (which, judging from your username, you are trying to do) is so insanely difficult that very few people, if any, have ever done so successfully. For this reason, trying to do so is strongly discouraged: see WP:autobiography.

Assuming you can find the necessary sources that are wholly independent of you (see WP:42), you would then need to effectively forget everything you know about yourself, and write a summary of what those sources said. Even if they miss things out. Even if they are wrong. Even if they are nasty about you.

Even if you weren't trying to write about yourself, 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) 15:22, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for catching that; I thought "noble" was part of the honorific MBE. 331dot (talk) 15:24, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Template talk: Rivers of Germany

Hello, I need help. It concerns the "Rivers of Germany" talk page (the template). I need someone to read through the entire discussion there and provide an objective opinion on it. Furthermore, that person should closely examine the template itself and the changes that have been made to it. I am being prevented from improving the template and drawn into discussions that seem designed to eventually lead to me being blocked. Si9mon (talk) 21:10, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Template talk:Rivers of Germany I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 22:21, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Si9mon, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a content dispute (the fact that it relates to a template rather than an article does not alter that). dispute resolution explains the steps to take if it cannot be resolved by discussion. ColinFine (talk) 22:25, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Talk-page discussion is ongoing; I would try to get a third opinion as well. Lectonar (talk) 08:40, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your replies. I have one more quick question: what do I need to type to alert a user that I’ve written something concerning them? The user's name is: FromCzech Si9mon (talk) 10:43, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Pinging-..there are multiple ways to do it...see Help:Notifications. Lectonar (talk) 11:00, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

I have a major problem: I want to expand and improve the "Rivers of Germany" template. Apart from me, there is only one other user interested in the template, yet this user blocks any changes I make that don't suit him, citing "no consensus." It is impossible to work this way. The user only became aware of the template in the first place because I added it to a few pages for rivers that also flow through the Czech Republic. Since then, he has constantly interfered with my attempts to expand it, even though he has neither an interest in nor any knowledge of German rivers. How am I ever supposed to make changes when a single user can simply undo anything he dislikes, regardless of whether the changes were objectively good or bad? Si9mon (talk) 10:51, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

That's why I mentioned the 3rd opinion...not everyone around is river-savvy. Lectonar (talk) 11:00, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

And we actually have Wikipedia:WikiProject Rivers...don't know how active they are, though. Lectonar (talk) 11:04, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. The instructions say: "and signing the edit using four tildes." Do I need to insert the four tildes again right after the highlighted username, or is it enough if the four tildes appear at the end of the message anyway? Si9mon (talk) 11:30, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

At the end is enough. Lectonar (talk) 12:04, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

@Si9mon I have read much of the disussion, including the previous Teahouse thread at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1303#river_templates. My view is that the extra information you wish to include would be best placed within List of rivers of Germany. Accordng to WP:NAV, navigation templates are intentionally relatively simple and, importantly, are not visible to users of the mobile version of Wikipedia. (There is a long-standing wish to make them so.) Note that it would be acceptable to include a link to the list article within the template. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:49, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

It hasn't been about sorting the template by river length or including length figures—as I originally intended—for a long time now. By this point, the real issue is that it’s impossible for me to make *any* changes to the template (which is still full of gaps and errors) because there is only one other user besides me who takes an interest in it. And that user can block any and all changes simply by claiming there is no consensus. I have to discuss and get approval from this other user for every single minor tweak. But he has no desire to add new rivers to the template or change the format, so the template is forced to remain as poor as it currently is. Just look at the French template by comparison. The situation is ridiculous :-) Si9mon (talk) 19:43, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

how to change what the username looks like

not exactly the greatest title, but I have been noticing other people having their own custom-styled username

could it be some paid subscription that gives you access to customize your username somehow? I hope not, cuz I genuinely want to customize my username sometime in the future

even if it is free, is there truly a way to customize what your username looks and appears? TuffMangoPhonk6741 (talk) 21:15, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I know what you're talking about, and it's free, in the user profile tab in preferences, there's a section called signature, where you can put whatever as your custom signature. I made mine using wikitext, in case you're curious, the code is just {{SUBST:Keypress|[[User: Thx56|Thx56]]}} | [[User talk:Thx56|Talk to me!]] to give you an idea of what you can do. I'm not sure how to create the more advanced usernames I've seen, you might have to do more research into wikitext, or just ask whoever you see with a cool username. Good luck customizing! Thx56 | Talk to me! 21:26, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

isn't there an article about this? I strive for customization... TuffMangoPhonk6741 (talk) 21:43, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @TuffMangoPhonk6741, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Please see WP:Signatures (which also links to WP:Signature tutorial). ColinFine (talk) 22:27, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

k thanks for the link, my signature looks better now TuffMangoPhonk6741🥭🥭 (those who talk 💀) 19:15, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Go to your "preferences" and go to the signature section. There you can customize your signature however you like. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 01:33, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

No, this site does not have anything paywalled, thankfully.

Sigs also must abide to certain things regarding to color, which I had to deal with. Starlet! (Need to talk?) (Library) (Sandbox) 14:34, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

The basic rule is that it has to be readable in both light mode and dark mode, even to elderly Wikipedians like me whose eyes aren't too good. A quick mode switch should let you know if it works both ways. M kuhner (talk) 06:02, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Request for thought partnership around standardization of members of Congress in the U.S. and support on templatizing

I apologize if this isn't the correct forum for this but I just discovered the Teahouse and would appreciate any input. I have recently been trying to determine a clear standard for the structure and content of articles about U.S. members of Congress. Beyond the core Manual of Style elements, these articles tend to vary in section order, template use, and overall content. I created a proposal for standard section order and for standardizing the layout of electoral history at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Congress/Members, though the WikiProject is pretty quiet and I have not had much input there. So the first thing I would appreciate is just general feedback and input, as well as any pointers about whether I am duplicating work that already exists elsewhere. I do have some specific questions though:

• In most cases, articles have a specific section called "U.S. House of Representatives" and/or "U.S. Senate", but many members of Congress also held previous electoral roles at city and state levels. Some articles have a separate section dedicated to each tier of government eg. "California State Assembly" and "California State Senate" would each be separate sections. This is my preference. However, on some articles, like Kevin Kiley (politician) or Mike Thompson, these are grouped together under a "State Legislature" or "Early Political Career." When there is enough information to do so, is it ok to break these up into separate sections? Is there any kind of standard for what warrants its own section?
• Some politicians have held nonconsecutive terms in the same office, with something else in between. I have come across articles, like John Garamendi, where each term has its own section in order to maintain chronology of the article. Would it be ok to merge these and note the separate terms as subsections? Or should they stay separate?

Some more technical things:

• Is there a way to define a color at the top of an article so that I don't have to use "style=..." every time and can shorthand it? Something like CNone is easy to remember and type and I use it often, and I'd like to define another color in the same way.
• Not a specific question but I would like to templatize the electoral history table to make things easier for other editors, but I've never created a template before and have already run into a lot of roadblocks. Would anyone be up for assisting and/or answering a lot of questions? For that I'd prefer to sidebar on my talk page or at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Congress

Thank you in advance! 0113j (talk) 23:27, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

1. When there's enough information, check if the article is too long. If it is, then it's against summary style; break it into new articles if you're even allowed (leave a message on the talk page of the articles and wait for a response). If it's not, then I guess you're free to break them up into sections.
2. I don't think so. Editors usually call out for the splitting of articles when it's like 15,000 words long, so your assertion raises up my eyebrows a bit. But you can, however, if you deem the articles relatively short.
3. I don't understand what you mean by "color at the top of an article". Could you clarify? Maybe some other experienced editor will attend to you.
4. Templates are created and edited by template editors. I guess you have to contact one to guide you if that's even possible.

SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 00:19, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

1+2. I’m not referring to splitting articles, I’m referring to splitting sections within articles. It is not at all to do with the length of the article but more so about what should have its own section vs what should be a subsection. I understand that length is a factor, but it is not the only factor. What assertion did I make that raised your eyebrows?

3. I edit the source rather than using the visual editor, and in wikitext it is possible to define certain elements for use across a page or across the site. For example, CNone (when typed inside curly brackets) is a common color that is defined for use across the site. Within an article, it is possible to define a citation with a specific name the first time it is used, and then refer to it with that short name in later uses in the article to avoid having to put the whole citation every time. I am wondering if the same is possible for a color that is frequently used within an article.

4. That is simply not true. Help:Template and other pages about template creation make it clear that anyone can create a template. I am just struggling with some of the specifics. 0113j (talk) 01:10, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

1+2. Well in that case, splitting sections within articles is a good idea actually. "These" is a bit vague, so I assumed that you were merging articles.

3+4. I don't think that's possible at all. I think you're supposed to repeat yourself with the color. Sometimes I do "template in a template", which you put an existing template code into a new template page, and modify some things. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 01:32, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Where can i find assistance for my draft

Im trying to find people to help me with Draft:Tribal Wars 2 and make it better and stuff, im trying to find dedicated people who can help me find sources, and info, and make it be able to be submitted for draft and stuff. I am new to wikipedia so i want people to work with. Ty EzYop (talk) 00:12, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

You should know about the history of Tribal Wars 2 and add a section to it. The Tribal Wars 1 article also has a dedicated "game mechanics" section, and it can also be in the Tribal Wars 2 article. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 01:00, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

@EzYop The first problem is that you're writing your article backwards. You need to find sources first.

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. Athanelar (talk) 06:33, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Except, Athanelar, that EzYop has merely changed one word within a sorry little stub created by somebody else. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 08:22, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

the someone else was my old account EzYop (talk) 17:18, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Ancient Egypt + vector graphics?

Hey all - really out of the blue and kinda broad question here. I've been troweling around various articles about Ancient Egypt here on Wikipedia, and I've noticed that most of the artwork I see (e.g., of Egyptian deities) is rendered as vector graphics. Why is this the case? I haven't noticed that kind of consistency with artwork related to other topics, and am really curious about how/why this is... (The image quality is great and very appreciated. It's helped me appreciate Ancient Egyptian aesthetics in a new way.) ~2026-49286-73 (talk) 01:44, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Presumably someone with an interest in ancient Egypt also had an interest in vector graphics. Wikipedia is volunteer based, so the work usually reflects the interests and abilities of volunteers. CMD (talk) 03:02, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-49286-73: I clicked images in articles in Category:Egyptian deities and found many uploads by User:PharaohCrab. See User:PharaohCrab/modern drawings of ancient Egyptian deities, User:PharaohCrab/my egyptian god vectors, User:PharaohCrab/Eternal Space Ancient Egyptian deities. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:37, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks to you and @CMD for your answers! Very cool to see that just a few people can have such a big impact on my experience of this site. (Also shouts out to @PharaohCrab and @Eternal Space) ~2026-49286-73 (talk) 04:47, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 10:09, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

How to get a page removed

I host a site that corresponds with this valid page - Golden Valley County, North Dakota

How can this bad page for a non-existant place be removed from Wikipedia: National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_in_Golden_Valley_County,_Nevada ? Foghorn1989 (talk) 09:07, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Foghorn1989. I don't understand your question. The article you linked, National Register of Historic Places listings in Golden Valley County, Nevada does not exist and has never existed as far as I can tell. So, there's nothing to be removed? Could you clarify? qcne (talk) 09:11, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

I think this is meant: National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_in_North_Dakota#Golden_Valley_County...but still don't understand what they want us to do. Lectonar (talk) 09:19, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Are you suggesting Sentinel Butte Public School should be deleted? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:06, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

It is already under "former listings", though, which seems to be the usual way of dealing with delistings from the national register. Lectonar (talk) 12:21, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

I thought the picture sort of hints the school has been demolished, but idk. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:24, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Well, it's in Category:Demolished buildings and structures in North Dakota, so that's another hint. Deor (talk) 13:04, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

It is, but it's also a clear WP:CATVER fail. By which I mean that if so, the article should be arsed to actually mention it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:35, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Indeed...but even doing so won't remove the article, and as long as the article is there it ought to be mentioned as a former listing in the national register I guess. Lectonar (talk) 13:54, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Title change

How do you change an article's title? I noticed this article seems to have a typo in the name. Or is this intentional? Eh-st-har (talk) 11:59, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

@Eh-st-har I think you're right, see WP:MOVE on how to do it. Possibly that article should be deleted as well, but that's another question. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:08, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

I agree, and I've PRODded the article because it's an obvious WP:NOTNEWS vio. Athanelar (talk) 12:44, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Attention please!

Someone educate me on why the deputy Governor of Bank of Ghana, Zakari Mumuni has a Wikipedia page but not showing on Google and what can be done about it. ~2026-49213-30 (talk) 12:10, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

To appear in Google search results, an article must first be marked as patrolled by a New Pages Patroller; or 90 days have passed since creation. 331dot (talk) 12:15, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. How do we contact a New Pages Patroller for this? The class don’t have 90 days to complete the assignment. I digged deep to even come up with this. It could have been easier seeing it on Google. ~2026-49213-30 (talk) 14:00, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Who is we? Lectonar (talk) 14:02, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

My class I mean ~2026-49213-30 (talk) 14:03, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

The New Pages queue has 27,600 unpatrolled pages. Why should this article jump that queue? I am sure all the article authors would like an on-demand patrol. qcne (talk) 14:06, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Note that we cannot accommodate any deadlines you might be under. If you have been asked to do this as part of a class assignment, that is extremely unfair to you, and feel free to show your teacher/instructor this message. Your teacher/instructor should review the Wikipedia Education Program materials to design lessons that don't involve processes outside of the control of the students. 331dot (talk) 14:45, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

There are several ways people can see the article even if it is not yet indexed by search engines. Wikipedia's internal search should work. Or you can copy the URL of the article and share that with people who need to see it. M kuhner (talk) 05:59, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Review requested: J. Williams Thorne article expansion

I am a relatively new editor and a descendant of the subject of J. Williams Thorne. I have disclosed the COI and prepared a sourced sandbox rewrite rather than editing the article directly. There is already a COI edit request, but the queue is large. Are there any additional appropriate WikiProjects or review venues where I should neutrally request an uninvolved historical editor to review the draft? User:Banker1983/J._Williams_Thorne_draft Banker1983 (talk) 13:31, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

You could try posting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government. I see you've already also posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject North Carolina. In solidarity, Gommeh ^{(talk 🎮 sign)} 14:43, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. I’ll post the review request there as well. I appreciate the guidance. Banker1983 (talk) 15:43, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

@Banker1983 Both your proposed rewrite and youe comment here seem to be AI generated. AI generated content isn't allowed in Wikipedia articles, so if that's the case your proposal cannot be accepted. Athanelar (talk) 21:25, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

WikEd

Hi, in another WP language I have a Wikied button: "Automatic adjust". Here I do not have it, but different buttons. Which button removes extra (redundant) spaces? Thank you, _Dgw|Talk 14:47, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi Dorian Gray Wild. Which language, and is "Automatic adjust" the exact text when you hover over the button? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:23, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi, the lower buttons in the pt WP editing Wikied interface are in this order from left to right: Publish changes (blue), Show preview (white), Show changes (white), Ajustes automáticos (white), Cancel (a word in red).

In the en WP editing Wikied interface I have only these lower buttons from left to right: Publish changes (blue), Show preview (white), Show changes (white), Cancel (a word in red). _Dgw|Talk 07:13, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@Dorian Gray Wild: Thanks for revealing the language and actual text so I can find the feature your refer to. "Wikied" usually refers to wikEd but not in your post. In pt:Usuário:Dorian Gray Wild/common.js you load a Portuguese user script which adds the button. You can try adding the same code in your common JavaScript here at the English Wikipedia. I don't know the script or whether it does something useful here but the load command specifies pt. in the url and does load the script. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:07, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you PrimeHunter. I inserted it, then removed. Ajustes automáticos replaced "cite web" to "citar web". Not useful for English. Is there a similar script (or wikEd command) in English which removes extra spaces? _Dgw|Talk 19:01, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Why is Self-published not allowed?

I am creating an Article Draft: Kumardungi. DoubleGrazing, the reviewer has rejected my article for:

" Citypopulation.de is a self-published source, can you find something more reliable? ".

Why Self-published sources are not allowed? Rajdhani Fan Person (talk) 15:16, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

The content of self-published sources is often unreliable or incorrect. See WP:Self-published sources for the official policy on them. I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 15:54, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Self-published sources are disallowed because it implies that the content did not go through rigourous fact-checking and editorial processes. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Look out it's Jimothy!} 16:25, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Jharkhand state emblem

I want to upload the seal/logo of the Government of Jharkhand and it's related ministries from the official Chief Minister's portal (https://cm.jharkhand.gov.in/). The website says its material may be reproduced free of charge, subject to certain conditions. Is this sufficient to upload the logo to Wikimedia Commons and if so, under what licence? Please help! Flashthomsom (talk) 15:52, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

@Flashthomsom This is a question best asked at Commons: see c:Commons:Village_pump/Copyright. The answer may depend on the "certain conditions" and state governments in India are more restrictive than the national government, for which see details at c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/India#Copyright_tags Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:10, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

User deleteing edits which are correct.

Please can you do something with (Alibene567) He keeps deleting edited pages. Like he is doing it for fun. ~2026-48833-90 (talk) 16:15, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

According to his edit history he doesn't. - Walter Ego 16:20, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-48833-90 I note that User:Alibene567 has made over 69.000 edits in the four+ years they have been editing Wikipedia, so you are going to have to be much more specific if you have a genuine complaint. If you have a content dispute, take it up on the talk page of the article in question. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:14, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

I should also say — when we talk about 'deleting' a page, we mean that the entire page stops existing (or, rather, becomes inaccessible to anyone who's not a Wikipedia admin).

Alibene567 is not a Wikipedia admin. They do not have page-deletion privileges. They can remove content from a page, but the page itself is not deleted, and if the removal is inappropriate, it can be reversed. DS (talk) 02:27, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Adding Photos from Wikicommons

Hi, I'm an inexperienced editor who just got my first article published. I have two photos in Wikicommons that I want to add to the article Ted Leland. I'm struggling to figure out that process. Thanks. Dougmcilhagga (talk) 18:40, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

I looked at your account and I don't see any photos you've uploaded to Commons. If you haven't uploaded them there already, and they meet the Commons rules and guidelines, can you please do so? Once you have that done, add your file name to the image section of the infobox on the Ted Leland article, or put the text [[File:Your filename.png|thumb|Your caption]] where you want the picture in the article if you don't want it in an infobox. If you need more assistance, there's a guide available at Help:Pictures. I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 19:09, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Interesting! I had the photos in the article twice in the early stages of development, and they disappeared. I'll attempt to upload again, thanks! Dougmcilhagga (talk) 19:29, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

If the images were deleted by a Commons admin, please don't reupload them without significant changes or without contacting the deleting admin. I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 19:31, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

The images are now here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 18:58, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

See WP:Images for beginners. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 19:01, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

literature on the Indigenous community

TLDR What if the academic literature on the Indigenous community is still very racist? And factually incorrect. Like " 'The language is dead' but 'we literally know a guy who speaks it'"-type statements?

I've been editing the Muisca article for over a decade (not always on the same account), mostly correcting claims that don't hold up against more recent academic sources (for example, that Chibcha is a dead language, when it's documented as being maintained through family and community networks and is now undergoing formal revitalization).

The article's cleanup banner asks for serious academic research rather than news or blog sources, which I understand and support. My question is about sourcing in cases where:

Older academic literature reflects outdated or colonial-era framing that more recent scholarship has revised or rejected Some of the most current, directly relevant information comes from primary sources like statements or documentation from the community's own governing councils (Suba, Bosa, Cota, Chía, Sesquilé), rather than from published academic journals and even violate principles on engaging with Indigenous knowledge that are aligned with UN resolutions like The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

What's the right way to handle sourcing hierarchy in this situation? Is there guidance on weighing newer academic sources against older ones when they conflict, and is there a path for incorporating documented community/council statements as supplementary sources even though they wouldn't meet WP:RS on their own? ~2026-49272-70 (talk) 19:40, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

The relevant section you are thinking about is probably WP:AGE MATTERS, so it is perfectly legitimate for Wikipedia to disregard sources based on age. However, given WP:V is not negotiable, the logical conclusion to me is that those statements should just be removed altogether, until secondary reliable sources start mentioning them.

Also, I assume you are aware of guidelines like WP:PRIMARY and WP:SELFPUB which do allow blogs (especially of experts) and primary sources in limited cases. LkL-70547 (talk) 19:58, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

It is often appropriate to put older sources into context, rather than removing them completely. "Topic A was described as ABC in the 18th century but by the 21st it was described as ABC", for example. It does depend on the topic. 331dot (talk) 20:00, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

My deleted Wikipedia page

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.

---

To whom it may concern:

       A Chinese editor posted a completely accurate page about my career as an historian of Japan.  Within 6 weeks it was unfairly deleted.
       I have written 7 monographs on Japanese history, including one that won a prize.  I have held 2 endowed chairs, including the prestigious Sen Chair at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.  I have appeared on NHK in Japan, KBS in South Korea, and on TV in the US.  I was a Visiting Professor at Harvard.
       Why was my page deleted?  I am mentioned under several topics for Wikipedia, including Japan-Korea relations, Japanese population, Epidemics, etc.
       I ask you most humbly to repost my page.

Sincerely, William Wayne Farris Wwfarris 33 (talk) 00:34, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@Wwfarris 33: The article William Farris was deleted per Wikipedia:Speedy deletion#G5 because it was created by a banned or blocked user. See Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Lounghuang Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Lounghuang. The user keeps creating accounts and edit against our policies, probably undisclosed paid editing. I suspect you paid them after getting false promises. See Wikipedia:Scam warning. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:02, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Hey PrimeHunter, Wwfarris 33 disclosed to me on my talk page that they did in fact pay the author. Bennett Li11 (talk) 01:34, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter, Wwfarris told me on my talk page that he DID PAY someone to write the article. Bennett Li11 (talk) 02:45, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@Wwfarris 33 I'm afraid you've been scammed by the person who contacted you. It's a very common scam; in this case, they have clearly been blocked for the same thing before.

Furthermore, Wikipedia is not a record of achievement. It is not a place to promote yourself or to enshrine your work for posterity. All we are is an encyclopedia which has articles about subjects that have been robustly reported on in other secondary sources. If you want to see the kind of requirements you'd need to meet to deserve an article here, you can take a look at WP:NACADEMIC.

My genuine advice, though, would be to forget all about the whole thing. We are sorry for the money you wasted in paying the scammer. Please ignore any such requests in the future, and do not concern yourself with getting a Wikipedia article. It is not some trophy to aspire to. Athanelar (talk) 11:34, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

My well-deserved Wikipedia page was deleted without thought!

To who it may concern:

     I am a distinguished historian of Japan.  A Wikipedia page was posted for me, but I did not realize that the one who posted it was banned.
     Despite this unfortunate circumstance, I deserve a Wikipedia page.  I have published 7 monographs on Japanese history, one of which won a prize.  I have held 2 endowed chairs, including the prestigious Sen Chair at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.  I have appeared on both NHK in Japan and KBS in South Korea.  I have appeared on US TV.  My work is cited in several Wikipedia entries, including the samurai, Japanese population, Japan-Korean ancient ties, epidemics, etc.
     Surely you can post a page like the one that was deleted.
     Please advise.

Sincerely, William Wayne Farris Wwfarris 33 (talk) 01:30, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I should say, nobody "deserves" a Wikipedia page. It's not a reward or a punishment. We have articles on terrible people. Murderers. Legislators. DS (talk) 02:14, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I deserve it b/c of my contributions to the study of Japanese and world history.

Wayne Farris Wwfarris 33 (talk) 02:32, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@Wwfarris 33, Maybe you ask someone who has a neutral perspective of view, the person who posted did not disclose that they were paid. Bennett Li11 (talk) 02:49, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@Izno: - pinging admin who deleted the page on 22 Aug 2026. Relevant here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lounghuang/Archive.--Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 03:07, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

From skimming through your discussion in the help desk, I saw that you said the previous article was deleted for being in violation of G5. That just means a banned user created the article in violation of their ban. Despite that, after a cursory look at Google, I am unsure if you meet Wikipedia:Notability (academics). If you don't meet NACADEMIC, a Wikipedia article about you cannot exist until you meet the criteria. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 03:09, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

All I can say is that if an eminent historian of Japan with my record of accomplishment and contribution to the field of Japanese history is not entitled to his own Wikipedia page, then ther is something disingenuous about Wikipedia.

William Wayne Farris, Sen Chair Emeritus Wwfarris 33 (talk) 08:15, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

We do not need your word that you are an eminent historian, we need independent reliable sources wholly unconnected with you that describe you that way and show how you meet WP:NACADEMIC.

You could also try writing on the Japanese Wikipedia, which likely has looser standards for inclusion than we do. 331dot (talk) 08:23, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

My book reviews and the prize I won, 2 endowed chairs. so on and so on.

Wayne Farris Wwfarris 33 (talk) 12:26, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Could you list some reliable and independent sources that proves your notability? It might have been a problem on my end, but I do not see any. If you truly are notable, I would be happy to write an article on you. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 12:44, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Here is my CV. I have received 3 Fulbrights, NEH Grant, 2 Japan Foundation Grants, SSRC, etc. Wwfarris 33 (talk) 15:58, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

☁How do I attach my CV? I see no need to repeat all that information.

Wayne Farris Wwfarris 33 (talk) 16:04, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Don't bother. We don't accept curricula vitae as a source (connexion to subject, too sparse). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Look out it's Jimothy!} 16:18, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

To add on to what Jeske said, a Wikipedia article is a summary of what reliable and independent sources have to say about you. We don't care what positions you held, grants you recived, or books you wrote unless a reliable and independent source covered it. What I asked before was for you to list some of the sources about you that are independent of you. You said earlier that others have reviewed you book. That might be a good place to start. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 16:30, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

To whom it may concern:

You exhaust me! I am notable in several respects:

For starters, check the review of Japan's Medieval Population in CHOICE, which made JMP an Outstanding Academic Book. All reviews of JMP were outstanding including the Journal of Japanese Studies, the Harvard Journal of Asian Studies.

I no longer have all the book reviews for my seven books.

William Wayne Farris, Sen Distinguished Chair, Emeritus, University of Hawaii at Manoa Wwfarris 33 (talk) 17:06, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Nobody is "entitled" to a Wikipedia article about themself, alhough some people may meet the relevant required criteria, which in your case would be those at Wikipedia:Notability#Academic: all material in it would also have to comply with WP:BLP. Note that "you having" a Wikipedia article is a misconception; it would be Wikipedia having an article about you.

Note also that you yourself could have no control in what such an article might contain, provided that all the contents are properly cited to published Reliable sources, even if those sources are actually incorrect, and neither you nor anyone connected to you would be allowed to edit the article directly (except by removing demonstrable errors and falsehoods, which would be checked by disinterested editors and reversed if they disagreed).

There can be downsides to there being a Wikipedia article about you. I suggest you read Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-43920-01 (talk) 11:03, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Please no. To say that somebody has an article on Wikipedia is idiomatic, and the meaning it most obviously expresses is in line with that by which Wikipedia has an article on that person. (Yes, yes, one possible meaning is that the person has authority over the content of an article that Wikipedia has about them; but I doubt that this interpretation, which of course is contradicted by Wikipedia policy, is a common one.) -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 11:24, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I think it's fairly common, and that quite a lot of people who come here to "get" an article think that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:42, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

GGS is right here. We get plenty of requests at help fora attempting to take control of an article about them, generally due to the person in question assuming Wikipedia is closer to Facebook or Xitter. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Look out it's Jimothy!} 16:10, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

And I added that advice because it seemed to me that this is what was likely happening, or had the potential to be an issue, in the case of this OP. I am well able to distinguish between signs of the misconception and mere colloquial uses of the term, and in the case of the latter would not bother raising the issue, not being a pedant. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-43920-01 (talk) 17:06, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

You are insulting me when I was making an enquiry and trying to work with you.

Wayne Wwfarris 33 (talk) 17:09, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I recommend you calm down and spend some time actually reading what everyone in this thread is trying to tell you. Aggressively demanding we legitimise the actions of a blackguard who was only looking to rip you off isn't a winning argument, and we generally take a very dim view of people who do not seem to be paying attention. Mikeycdiamond gave you instructions on how to move forward. Read them, and then think about what may be available other than an unusable-as-a-source CV. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Look out it's Jimothy!} 17:19, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

How do I attach my CV?

Wayne Farris

I was told that mickey diamond would write an entry for me. Please help me! Wwfarris 33 (talk) 16:09, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I really think WP:NOTCV would be useful for you to read. Wikipedia is not a platform for publicising yourself. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:16, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

This user has apparently been scammed by an UPE, and was already informed that unfortunately we cannot help them and will not restore the deleted page. ChompyTheGogoat [ Bleat | Munched ] 16:26, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@Wwfarris 33: As you have been told in the previous thread, people who solicit money from you in exchange for writing an article typically turn out to be scams. You have been told that Wikipedia articles are only written on subjects that have demonstrated wikinotability. No CV can help you here, as your own is a non-independent source.

If by some chance reliable, independent sources write about you in significant detail, an article might be considered. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:08, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I'm exhausted by your emails.

I will accept what little Wikipedia has on me and ask you to leave me alone.

Wikipedia is a fraud! You don't promote the pursuit of knowledge, but stifle it!

William Wayne Farris Wwfarris 33 (talk) 17:13, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

You can disable email notifications in your account settings. ChompyTheGogoat [ Bleat | Munched ] 17:15, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

We have a lot of academics here that are editors. We strongly discourage writing about yourself but you can write about topics that you are interested in and topics that you have studied. You will need to cite WP:Reliable sources for any statements that might get challenged. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:20, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

With all due respect, I don't see how an article about you would pursue any knowledge. Wikipedia has standards in what subjects to cover, as if there weren't, this site would be drowned in slop.

If you're having trouble finding where to disable notifications, simply go to Preferences → Notifications and uncheck all the checkboxes under Email, specifically on the one that intersects with Talk page subscription. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:23, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

To whom it mat concern:

I am a distinguished scholar and find you all sad and embarrassing.

Wayne

Pls do not contact me again. Wwfarris 33 (talk) 17:46, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Threats to "leave and never come back" inevitably invite the response: don't let the door hit you on the way out.

- Wikipedia:Don't be high-maintenance 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk / Uploads} 18:02, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

"I was told that mickey diamond would write an entry for me"—You were not; you were told (empahsis added) "If you truly are notable, I would be happy to write an article on you". That notability—in the Wikipedia sense—must first be demonstrated, by the existence of reliable and independent sources about you which have been requested and which you have not provided. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 18:35, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Please stop trying to use Wikipedia to promote yourself.🔥Jothefiredragon🐲talk🐉contrib(s)✨log🌟mail🎉global🎊 16:41, 12 September 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.

Apology

Previous discussion: WP:TEA#My deleted Wikipedia page

To all editors with whom I corresponded:

I offer an apology for my intemperate words. Wikipedia is a handy site and it is a source of some pain to me that I flew off the handle. Please let me know that you accept my apology.

Best wishes,

William Wayne Farris Wwfarris 33 (talk) 19:18, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure I can accept an apology on behalf of Wikipedia, but I accept it for myself. Your feelings were completely understandable. I can say we are sorry that you appear to have been scammed. 331dot (talk) 20:02, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Dear sir:

Thank you. I did not wish to anger or antagonize anyone at Wikipedia.

With best regards,

William Wayne Farris Wwfarris 33 (talk) 20:06, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

My offer still stands. If you can find the sources to prove that you meet Wikipedia:Notability (academics), I will write an article about you. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 20:46, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Dear sir:

Thank you for your kind offer. Can you give me an idea what would constitute appropriate sources?

I still have the blurb written by the scammers. Would their sources be OK?

Wayne Farris Wwfarris 33 (talk) 21:19, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I mean, I could take a look at their sources. You can list them here or paste what they gave you into User:Wwfarris 33/sandbox. A sandbox is your own personal page that you can experiment with without effecting an article in the mainspace. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 21:23, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Dear sir:

I cut and pasted the entire scammed article to my sandbox. It has many precise references.

Please advise

Sincerely,

Wayne Farris Wwfarris 33 (talk) 21:30, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

It looks as though you forgot to "Publish" the sandbox. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 21:32, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello:

I realized my mistake and have published in the sandbox.

It lacks paragraphing and indentations, but you will get the general idea. It has many specific references. Thank you for your kindness, no matter how this turns out.

Wayne Farris Wwfarris 33 (talk) 21:37, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@Wwfarris 33, how did you send money to the scammers? Bennett Li11 (talk) 01:48, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation page for deletion?

I want to have a discussion about this disambiguation page that is already covered more broadly somewhere else, but I don't know where to do that, and I'm unsure if Articles of Deletion would be the right place. OliviaRigby (talk) OliviaRigby (talk) 03:36, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Where is the "somewhere else"? SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 04:43, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi OliviaRigby. You can, in principle, discuss any Wikipedia page by posting a message on its corresponding talk page; so, if you've got concerns or suggestions regarding the "Catherine of Brunswick-Wolfenbütte" page, you can open a discussion at Talk:Catherine of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel. Since there's probably not many Wikipedians watching that particular page, you might also want to notify relevant WikiProjects or others major contributors to the page by posting a Template:Please see on their project/user talk pages. If you've got general questions about disambiguation, the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation can probably help. I believe (if I'm wrong someone will correct me) disambiguation pages can be discussed at WP:AFD since they're in the WP:MAINSPACE, but AFD isn't really a place to discuss cleanup. So, you might want to try some of the other things mentioned above before going to AFD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:46, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I've done one AfD before. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 10:19, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! OliviaRigby (talk) 17:49, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Opium in Iran comment issue

Hello, I was wondering if the comment from four months ago is a valid comment for a talk page. Talk:Opium in Iran. I don't believe it follows what a talk page is for. In my opinion, if there is sufficient evidence for the claims in the comment, it can become a new section examining the different point of view. The comment, however, is written by someone who is apparently unaware of how a Wikipedia article is written so I am compelled to doubt the claims made in the comment. What is the appropriate response here?  Aperture LENS (talk) 07:08, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@Aperture LENS I suggest you just ignore it, based on WP:NOTFORUM. There would be more concern if the TA had made inappropriate changes to the actual article but they didn't. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:52, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@Aperture LENS: The TA violated WP:NOTFORUM for ranting about the comparison between illicit substances and alcohol, WP:HOAX for using some Hollywood thriller as some sort of evidence of historical safety standards, and WP:SOAP for making a bizarre opinion about opium restriction's effects to Iran.

@Michael D. Turnbull: This is already kind of concerning in my opinion. Someone might remove this comment when they see something like that. Since the TA already expired, it seems like we can do nothing about it. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 11:02, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull@SlapstickHumor360! Thank you both! Much appreciated. Aperture LENS (talk) 16:54, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 23:40, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

My NGC 4562 page got cancelled

for a while i wondered why NGC 4562 and IC 3571 did not have any english pages, so i made one for NGC 4562, the reason it got declined is that i need a lot of information and confirmation, the problem with that is that NGC 4562 really did not have any useful info and i did my best to not include any info that might be fake.

thank you for reading this, i hope you have a great day. AyanPluh (talk) 07:54, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, @AyanPluh. Yes, that's exactly how Wikipedia works: we only allow topics to have an article if they are notable as we define that word, based on really good sources. That said, there are some sources at NGC 4565 which may be relevant to your draft, if you want to try to expand it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:45, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

okay but the problem is that NGC 4562 is very overshadowed by NGC 4565 in terms of information about it, if you want can you try to find sources and info that might be helpful for expanding the draft? i only got 8 days left of my free time so yeah... AyanPluh (talk) 11:46, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Can't install Twinkle

Im using my phone with Google Chrome, but it difficult to install for me do I need to copy the code or how? Itsjuenyin (talk) 12:51, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Turn it on in your preferences. Cabayi (talk) 14:11, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

it worked thanks! Itsjuenyin (talk) 14:27, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Are external links allowed or not?

I have drafted articles that were rejected with links to external sites flagged for removal -- only wikilinks allowed in the text. I am now looking into editing this article Temporal interference brain stimulation, in which there are external links within the text -- how was this acceptable for publication? Should I change the external links as I edit? Thanks for clarifying! GoneDutch (talk) 13:36, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I removed the external links in the text per Wikipedia:ELBODY. Thanks for pointing them out! Not all articles have gone through AFC review and policy violations can be introduced over time. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 14:05, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

adding references to template content

It is not clear to me how to add full bibliographical info for a publication when the article has all such info together at the end, rather than giving the full info in the note that follows a particular statement. I just get "template content" for that long list and after I click "edit" I am unable to arrive at a place where the new info could be added. I would be grateful if anyone could help me sort out my confusion, thank you in advance for that Buddhist Peter (talk) 15:04, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

@Buddhist Peter: Please link pages you want help with. I guess it's Mahākāśyapa#References. You use VisualEditor which has its own way of doing things and they don't work well with all types of code but here is a tip for that specific section:

1. After starting an edit, switch to the source editor on a pencil icon at the top right.
2. Remove {{refbegin |30em}} at the start of the references section (it gets in the way of VisualEditor).
3. Switch back to VisualEditor on the pencil icon.
4. Edit the citations as usual in VisualEditor.
5. Switch to the source editor again.
6. Restore {{refbegin |30em}}
7. Publish.

You can also just edit the citations in the source editor. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:37, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Original research or not

adding my comment on WT:WikiProject Military history to here

Extended content

While editing the article Otvet, I came across this source. (archive link, easier for me to view). Aside from the fact that y'all hate TASS, don't worry I have used due weight and not put is up as fact blah blah blah. However, back to my point. It states, in English (Google Translate, I can read Russian though)
July 23, 22:07 Corvette *Gremyashchiy* destroys simulated enemy submarine with missile during Navy drills Ships and vessels of the Northeast Russia forces secured the firing range area MOSCOW, July 24. /TASS/. The crew of the Pacific Fleet corvette *Gremyashchiy* destroyed a simulated enemy submarine using an anti-submarine missile during the Navy’s "July Storm" operational exercises. This was announced by the fleet's press service.

"During the Navy's 'July Storm' operational exercise, the Pacific Fleet corvette *Gremyashchiy* launched a missile from its anti-submarine system at an underwater training target in the Pacific Ocean. As part of drills to counter simulated enemy submarines, the crew practiced searching for and tracking the submarine. At the designated time, the anti-submarine missile's warhead successfully struck the training target," the press service stated.

They added that ships and vessels of the forces stationed in Russia's Northeast secured the area where the live-fire exercise took place.

The fleet explained that the shipborne anti-submarine missile system is designed to engage submarines. Universal launchers are used to fire the anti-submarine missiles; these launchers also accommodate the use of *Oniks* and *Kalibr* cruise missiles. From July 23 to 27, the "July Storm" operational naval exercise is taking place under the overall command of Navy Commander-in-Chief Admiral Alexander Moiseyev. The drills are being conducted in the waters of the Pacific and Arctic Oceans, as well as the Baltic and Caspian Seas, involving forces from the Northern, Pacific, and Baltic Fleets and the Caspian Flotilla.

The exercise involves more than 150 warships and support vessels, 120 aircraft, 10 coastal missile systems, 950 units of military and specialized hardware, and over 15,000 military personnel.
the source establishes the missile having been launched from universal launchers, and establishes the launchers as being the ones used for Oniks and Kalibr -- 3S-14. So, that clearly means that the missile was Otvet as it is, until further notice, the only anti-submarine missile launched from 3S-14 launchers, yet it is still original research as the missile type was not explicitly stated. I am trying to push the article to GA, so I'm trying to fix every possible little gripe or nitpick, including small ones like this (would love advice on other issues you see). How to go about this? EDIT: I will also post this to WP:TEA

Thanks -- NotRealShady7 7 7 (customer service) 19:03, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

WP:FORUMSHOPPING in multiple places until you get the result you want isn't going to work. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 00:21, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Proper name for concert list article

A little over a year ago, a user created the page AJR Festival shows (2023), and it has subsequently been moved to AJR festival shows, List of AJR festival shows, and currently List of 2023 AJR festival shows. I learned of its existence a few days ago and began revising it, but noticed that the list has never been exclusively festivals and instead the whole year's concerts. In such, I am curious what would be a proper name for the article. It is currently in Category:Lists of concerts and performances of American artists, which primarily contains list pages that span an artist's entire career rather than one year. The only exceptions are the List of shows played by Fugazi (1987–1988) and the List of Santana live performances (1960s–1970s) and (1980s). I feel that List of AJR live performances (2023) would be a good destination, but I first wanted a second opinion to see if this was correct. Popturtle (talk) 22:43, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi Popturtle. Probably the best place for you to discuss this would be at Talk:List of 2023 AJR festival shows; you can let others and WikiProjects know about the discussion per WP:APPNOTE. Given that the article has been moved several times already, a WP:BOLD page move yet again might not be the best course of action per WP:BOLDMOVE. Try seeing whether your concerns can be addressed through regular article talk page discussion first; if not, you may need to start a formal WP:RM request to establish a consensus either way. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:22, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

P versus NP

where to post questions about? ~2026-49370-53 (talk) 23:12, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi ~2026-49370-53. If you're question has to do with something related to (English) Wikipedia, then you can post it here. If you're asking about something not related to Wikipedia, though, you could try Wikipedia:Reference desk or an Internet search because the Teahouse is really only just intended for questions related to Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:15, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

If you have question about how to improve the article P versus NP problem, you can use its talk page. However, Wikipedia would not be the place if you wanted to discuss the topic in general, as I see you have done with the talk page (edits which are subsequented deleted). LkL-70547 (talk) 23:31, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Using already uploaded images in other articles

I added a song's main infobox art to the article of its B-side, but it was removed a few hours later, the explanation being the article didn't have non free use rationale for that image. Any idea how I could make that work? Dylanfan62 (talk) 01:13, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

What is the filename of the image, Dylanfan62, and what's the title of the article to which you want to add it? -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 03:34, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi Dylanfan62. Since you didn't specifically mention either the song or the file you're asking about, my response is going to be fairly general. Unless the cover art in question is specifically for the B-side itself, you probably shouldn't add it to the B-side's infobox for the reasons given here. If the bot that removed the file just did so because it didn't have a separate, specific non-free use rationale for that use as required by non-free content use criterion #10c, then providing the missing rationale should stop the bot from removing the file again. However, a rationale is only valid when it satisfies all ten non-free content use criteria, and providing the rationale is WP:JUSTONE (actually more like just part of one) of those criteria. Sometimes the cover art of a single specifically is for both sides and in such cases you might be able to make an argument in favor of an anditional non-free use of the file, but the cover art for the A-side of a single shouldn't really just being used in an article about its correponding B-side just because there's no cover art specific to the B-side itself.

Finally, a B-side of a single would still need to meet WP:NSONG in and of its own accord for a stand-alone article to be written about it; a B-side isn't automatically Wikipedia notable just because the A-side is Wikipedia notable. I imagine that in the case of many B-sides, simply mentioning it in the article about the Wikipedia notable A-side is going to be more appropriate than creating a stand-alone article about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:01, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Unnecessary revert

Hello guys. I recently stubled upon an article about Grok AI. In that article it says grok-4.7 (a new model) was released (stable release) on 12th of September. This is straight up false. Elon Musk gave an estimate, not an actual release date. And according to his new tweet, that release is once again postponed. So I removed that. A user named @Ow0cast reverted my edit and brought back the false release date. I reverted that back. What should I do now? Thanks :) ~2026-49471-48 (talk) 03:43, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

add it back, didnt realize it was postponed. sorry <3 /usr/bin/owuh $ (💬 | she/they) 03:46, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Taxonomy system priority

Which taxonomic library system takes the highest priority? I'm working on expanding the article for the Schistocerca lineata (I know, not an important article, but I'm having fun with it), and have recently acquired the leading book with information on the species, which can be found under the pages "further reading" section. On the Wikipedia page, S. lineata is stated to be a species from the genus Schistocerca. However, according to this book, S. lineata is actually considered a subspecies of the species Schistocerca alutacea, which is in turn a species from the genus Schistocerca. But, no taxonomical library online shares this view. Should I change the article to reflect the book, or should I keep it as is agreed upon by most taxonomical libraries?

Schistocerca lineata LabraxPetasius (talk) 04:17, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

LabraxPetasius, I suggest that you post this question to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Insects. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 04:42, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Okie LabraxPetasius (talk) 04:48, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Extreme anti-Semitism on Wikipedia

How come Jews get banned and their comments on article talk pages get removed as "vandalism" or "not constructive" for criticizing the extreme anti-Semitic bias of certain articles and asking that those articles be improved in accordance with WP:NPOV? Is it not allowed anymore to ask that an article adhere to NPOV and for it to not have an anti-Semitic bias? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-49535-42 (talk) 04:33, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Surname for a Wikipedia article

Hello, I'm a new editor and I'm learning how to properly cite reliable sources and maintain a neutral point of view. I am also interested in eventually creating a surname article. What are the best practices for determining whether a surname is notable enough for a Wikipedia article? Tonyphoenic (talk) 04:56, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Why are these arrows everywhere?

images of articles with these arrows: https://ibb.co/nqxwGRSt ("Later success" and "Evolution" sections)

https://ibb.co/DgPQhxxJ ("The Laud Troy Book")

https://ibb.co/TM1BMkgg (marked with blue lines and that tone suggestion)

There are many more articles with these arrows just randomly coming up. I understand the Troilus one, but what about the others? Can this be considered minor vandalism? What is the purpose of all these arrows? Please help! Forgive me if I'm being dumb, I'm new here.

Thanks!

Lxnnio (talk) 05:08, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

That is the character for a hard return. You won't see it once you save the edit (it will just make a new line). In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 05:58, 13 September 2026 (UTC)