Wikipedia:Teahouse

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

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

Can't edit this page? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk 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.

To read the newest questions, skip to bottom
About the Teahouse

Most recent archives
1245, 1246, 1247, 1248, 1249, 1250, 1251, 1252, 1253, 1254, 1255, 1256, 1257, 1258, 1259, 1260, 1261, 1262, 1263, 1264

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived.

The Teahouse is frequently semi-protected, meaning the Teahouse pages cannot be edited by unregistered users (users with IP addresses), 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. Use this link to ask for help; a volunteer will reply to you there shortly.

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

Opening RfCs

I started this discussion which involves BLPCRIME considerations. Only two other editors are involved and it is yet a young conversation, but indications are it will be robustly contested, as was a previous RfC over issues having parallel concerns. Due to the high profile of the subject and their criminal trial and conviction, I think an RfC is desirable. My specific questions are:

Is it too soon to call an RfC in this specific case?
Is it generally ok to apply an RfC tag to an ongoing discussion or better to start a new one?

@Cambial Yellowing and Meters: Courtesy ping involved editors. Xan747 (talk) 17:55, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Third question: when opening an RfC on an issue with parallel concerns to an RfC on the same subject, is it generally acceptable to ping the editors involved in the prior discussion? Xan747 (talk) 18:03, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Xan747: Have you read the directions at WP:RFC? In particular, have you exhausted the suggestions at WP:RFCBEFORE? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:47, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did read the suggested directions. There is a short but stalled discussion between three editors, including myself, so a 3O is not an option. This isn't WP:DR territory. My remaining thought is to ping editors involved in the previous (never closed) RfC on a semi-related issue, and some editors in the article history directly related to the issue, to try to restart the conversation, but I worry about WP:CANVAS. Xan747 (talk) 16:44, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first bullet at RFCBEFORE states Asking for input or assistance at one or more relevant WikiProjects, which are often listed at the top of the article's talk page. I see that Talk:Danny_Masterson lists three WikiProjects, together with some taskforces (subprojects), so which WikiProjects did you inform? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:12, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow I missed that. I have put in a request at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Biography#Danny_Masterson_infobox_image. Thanks for the help. Xan747 (talk) 22:06, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Created a page

Hello,

I have created a page for one of most renowed nadi astrologers. User:Vishnubhavanadi - Wikipedia

Want to know what are the next steps or how do get it published ?

Thanks in advance

Deepak

Vishnubhavanadi (talk) 06:08, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vishnubhavanadi Hello! You put the draft on your WP:USERPAGE; I moved it for you to User:Vishnubhavanadi/draft. You would need to show that Ram Krishan Goel meets WP:GNG by providing reliable sources about him. Polygnotus (talk) 06:22, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

Thanks for responding. All links are available on the page I created which shows his stature. I will keep adding more as it happens.

Regards Vishnubhavanadi (talk) 07:07, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid your draft has little chance of being accepted, it shows zero evidence of passing WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 07:12, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. HQIQ (talk) 07:55, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Vishnubhavanadi.

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

What the subject has published is almost irrelevant, except where independent sources have discussed those publications; and then it is what those indpendent sources have said about them and about the subject in relation to them that should go into the article.

You appear to be trying to write an article about yourself. This is an extremely bad idea, as it is almost never successful, so we strongly discourage it: see autobiography. ColinFine (talk) 13:56, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine They ended their message above with Thanks in advance Deepak so it is likely they are not writing about themselves. Polygnotus (talk) 14:19, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, right. Thanks @Polygnotus.

@Vishnubhavanadi, if you are not Vishnu Bhavanadi, then you should change your username immediately to something which is not the name of somebody else. (You don't have to use your real name - I do, but most editors do not). ColinFine (talk) 16:59, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine

Hi ColinFine,

I’m not writing this article about myself, nor has anyone paid or asked me to do so. I chose to write about someone who is well-known and highly respected in his field.

Also, vishnubhavanadi is not a name of any person it's just a username. I picked it randomly.

Thanks

Deepak Vishnubhavanadi (talk) 06:12, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies @Vishnubhavanadi: I misread something, and though you were writing about a person called Vishnu Bhavanadi. ColinFine (talk) 15:34, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine 131.226.113.191 (talk) 21:42, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Waiting on Response from Admin for page Jainism

I have suggested improvements on Talk:Jainism (Section: Mathematical Contributions) but have not heard back from the editor to my responses in August 17, 2025. Who else can I reach out to? Buddhimatta (talk) 21:27, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can recommend drafting your proposed changes in your Sandbox so their merit is easier to evaluate. Additionally, you should find the respective guidelines for the type of article you are trying to write or modify in support of your proposed task, or even a similar article which has the same motifs. 🌊 oceanloop 22:06, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

noted Buddhimatta (talk) 22:04, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Buddhimatta That article has over 1,300 page watchers, so I would have expected others to chip in by now if they were interested. You could point to the discussion at one of the relevant Project talk pages and ask for comments, or you could follow the processes at dispute resolution. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:05, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thanks Buddhimatta (talk) 22:05, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

how do i make a article

how do i make a article SonomaJSC (talk) 14:36, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Your first article, but we strongly advise that you get much more experience by editing existing articles first. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:39, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Click a red link (This is a example), or see here. Versions111 (talk) 14:28, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

iarchive wikilink

What is the use of [[iarchive:XYZ]]? I have seen it used in the text of pages, but based on searching it looks like it is mainly intended to be used in refs. I could not find anything that elucidated how to use this. Thanks Metallurgist (talk) 16:54, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Metallurgist See Special:Interwiki. So if you link to iarchive:bub_gb_ePJWAAAAMAAJ the link target is https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_ePJWAAAAMAAJ. Polygnotus (talk) 17:03, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah that is useful. But I am wondering where it is appropriate to use this feature. Metallurgist (talk) 17:12, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Metallurgist Whenever you are too lazy to type out the full URL.

Polygnotus (talk) 17:14, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should it be used in page text in lieu of an internal wiki link? That is the issue I am seeing. It was used in a bibliography and looked like a wikilink, when it was offsite. It does seem appropriate for use in refs. Metallurgist (talk) 17:47, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pigsonthewing What say you? Polygnotus (talk) 19:23, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:51, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Metallurgist, there are pro's and cons; pro: saves you some typing; cons: doesn't save you that much, plus you have to go look it up in the table; also, doesn't generate an external link pointer icon like one would expect. My take: more cons than pros for the most part. Maybe using it is a good idea when you have a long table of stuff, where using it 87 times would actually be easier for someone reading the wikicode to follow what was going on (perhaps with a view to altering the table) and where having the external link icon 87 times in the table would just be annoying. In a table with several columns, having it would also mean some wikicode lines would remain visible on one editor line, instead of wrapping, making it slightly easier to edit the line with the source editor. For the majority of cases where it only occurs once or twice on a page, use the full url instead. Mathglot (talk) 23:06, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Interwiki linking#Interwiki links versus external links. One of the problems with interwiki links in articles is that they look to the reader like conventional wikilinks but they end up when clicked by sometimes taking them to external non-Wikipedia sites. As a result, there is an agreement not to allow such links to IMDb, for example. See WT:WikiProject Film/Archive 79#Masking imdb links as wikilinks and WP:ELBODY. These sort of links are, however, very useful on talk pages, as they can be used to link to digital object identifiers directly, e.g. doi:10.1002/047084289X.rp280. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:17, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is exactly the concern I had because I saw links I thought were to articles and were actually to Internet Archive links. Metallurgist (talk) 16:56, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why are a lot of collapsible lists set to not display?

Why do a lot of lists have "list_style = display:none"? I've been seeing a lot of collapsible lists recently that can't open. An example is on Guerrero. I really don't understand why anyone would do that. 23.24.240.109 (talk) 19:04, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How many is a lot, can you list them? That indicator display:none at Guerrero was added in 2011 (diff) by Hpav7 (talk · contribs) (who hasn't edited since 2016). In that edit, they added the display:none to two different parts, the area codes, and the list of federal deputies. You may remove both of them, if you wish. If there are too many other examples to handle manually, perhaps a bot could be requested to delete all of them, but a list of other examples would help. Mathglot (talk) 22:49, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot I don't have a list of them, I've just been seeing them a lot when I read articles. Another example is Des Moines, Iowa. 23.24.240.109 (talk) 22:05, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That one was added in tis edit in 2008 by Miles530 (talk · contribs), for a hidden list of representatives. It's interesting that both of them are quite old; too soon to know if that's a pattern, but worth keeping an eye on. Mathglot (talk) 23:19, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And the Winter Soldier

What to do-or how to handle-likely sockpuppets or ban-worthy accounts that haven't done anything yet? Looking at the recent changes, multiple accounts that are similarly named; (Period6Group9Person2, Period6Group4Person3, etc), but I don't think I can technically report them for sockpuppeting since without one edit, there's not really "evidence". Similarly, if someone made an account called "F*ck/Jane/Doe", as an example. Clearly an offensive name, but action can't be taken until they edit, right? I just want to know how to handle accounts without edits. I know to WP:AGF, but also WP:SPADE? ☩ ^{(Babysharkboss2)} 19:13, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think they are useraccounts for students at a school? Polygnotus (talk) 19:55, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hm there are a bunch of them. I asked an admin to take a look. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ListUsers?username=Period6&group=&wpsubmit=&wpFormIdentifier=mw-listusers-form&limit=50 Also period 4 and period 3. Polygnotus (talk) 19:56, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Babysharkboss2, I'm not sure why you think the first set are socks? The names indicate that they are multiple people. For someone with an obviously offensive username, you can report them at WP:UAA. -- asilvering (talk) 20:14, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, I think the usernames don't suggest that multiple people use each account. Rather, they identify specific people. Period6Group9Person2, for example, seems to be an example of a username chosen for a group project in school. That is, they're in sixth period, group 9, and they're person 2. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:35, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But what if they haven't edited? For example, a fresh account (which has likely been glocked as of writing) titled "The Chinese embassy goes up and down and up and down" has been made. It's without a doubt another cog in the LTA machine. But they haven't made any edits. What if someone made a "JaneDoeOnWheelsBMX" account? Should I report them before they edit and cause harm, or do I assume good faith that maybe somehow they unknowingly picked a really unfortunate username? ☩ ^{(Babysharkboss2)} 16:00, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Babysharkboss2, I don't understand what's wrong with JaneDoeOnWheelsBMX? -- asilvering (talk) 16:22, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering It is a reference to the LTA Willy on Wheels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dcoetzee/Willy_on_Wheels:A_Case_Study WAID recently wrote about it. Polygnotus (talk) 16:36, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah there is even https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/BMX_On_WheeIs Polygnotus (talk) 16:37, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, in the case of obvious LTA sock usernames, you can just go straight to meta with those reports. -- asilvering (talk) 17:26, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the period/group accounts, I suggest you report it to the education noticeboard. If they are affiliated with a college/university in the U.S. or Canada, they may be able to help. wizzito | say hello! 20:15, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just did my first page submission

How did I do? Draft:Heath Miller (promoter) Noparking9 (talk) 22:44, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Someone will review the draft in due course. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:25, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How'd you do? Over 2/3 of it appears to be AI-generated. Rewrite using your own words. AI-generated material cannot be accepted, and may be a candidate for speedy deletion (see WP:CSD#G15) if there's evidence you didn't review what the AI generated. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:17, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the claim "AI-generated material cannot be accepted" is not true. LLM material is considered acceptable when reviewed and cleaned up by a human editor. however, G15 still applies if there is sufficient evidence to the contrary. Waning Star (talk) 02:36, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Creative Commons license used by Wikipedia requires attribution to someone, and this is impossible with AI generated text, because it isn't traceable, especially to a Wikipedian. Such text violates the license used here. Therefore, when I review a draft that's AI generated, I do not accept it. Perhaps this is erring on the side of caution, but until I see a statement about this from the WMF legal team I will continue to reject AI-generated text. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:11, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

that's a whole other legal thing that I didn't consider. maybe this is something that should be raised at VPWMF? oh well, so it goes. – Waning Star (talk) 04:24, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought AI output, at least in the US, wasn't deemed copyrightable? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:57, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whether it is or is not isn't the point. Text that has no provenance violates the terms of our license here. If you didn't create it, it cannot be attributable to you. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:50, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We include plenty of other PD text, including much that is anonymous, such as old encyclopedia entries. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:01, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unquestionably PD text is a legal status that doesn't exist with AI-generated text. Text from old encyclopedia entries are typically attributed properly. OpenAI has never said that ChatGTP's output is PD although they do grant you broad rights on the use of its output. In any case, I'm going to continue playing it safe by assuming that AI-generated text violates "attribution" clauses of the Wikimedia CC-BY-SA license until I see a statement from the legal team indicating otherwise. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:24, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anachronist If we can get such a statement from WMF legal, it needs to be added to the oft-quoted WP:LLM. Given the history of that page's creation, I would have thought that WMF would already have chipped in if the legal position were clear-cut. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:31, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"OpenAI has never said that ChatGTP's output is PD" Nor have I claimed that they did.

I have said that it is my understanding that AI output, at least in the US, is deemed uncopyrightable. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:16, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is unappreciated?

I would love some guidance on common things that are needed on Wikipedia but aren't "cool" - I know with any project big or small there are always necessities that aren't attractive or flashy - and that is the sort of work I am interested in. Any pointers, ideas how to go about this?

Thank you, one and all! Cairnesteak (talk) 03:42, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, gosh. I love this question, but have little idea how to answer it. Honestly, there's very little that is "cool" around here. The stuff that goes undone is less often the "uncool" stuff and more the "difficult and bothersome" stuff. My advice would be to pick a backlog that looks large and gross and dive in to see if you like handling it, or at least find it tolerable. As far as particularly difficult and bothersome ones, CAT:COIREQ is one I avoid, personally. More power to the people who can handle that queue, but I sure don't want to touch it. You might want to start with some article maintenance category (you can get a list of these by wikiproject, if you're interested) if you don't want to jump right into handling something quite that hairy. -- asilvering (talk) 03:57, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering: Apparently many editors don't want to touch it. That's why the queue is over 200 requests long. That's a backlog. It needs help, but only from experienced editors. Once in a while I dive in. Some are easy, some are not. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:17, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anachronist, indeed. I'm easily guilt-tripped by a large and intractable backlog (there's a reason I've ended up at CAT:RFU and WP:SPI), but I just can't stomach that one. -- asilvering (talk) 12:25, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look at those CATs (meow), but it will be awhile until I get to that point: thank you for the answer! Difficult and bothersome are categories I will eventually tackle - and understanding/parsing backlogs and how to tackle them will be something I will go read about so I have a clearer understanding. As Anachronist says, only from experienced editors, which I ain't (yet). Cairnesteak (talk) 19:25, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cairnesteak, I wouldn't be too worried about needing experience before having a look at the COI category. The most important thing is that you have the sense to know when you don't know what to do with a request, and to leave those alone. You'll find many of them are very simple to respond to - for example, someone will submit an edit request without any sources provided. Easy decline, virtually no experience needed. For others, I recommend hitting the "subscribe" button on the individual request if you don't know what to do with it and are curious to see how it turns out. By watching experienced editors doing this kind of thing, you can get a sense for how it works quite quickly. -- asilvering (talk) 21:01, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cairnesteak: Asilvering gives good advice. I would also add that several requests are simple things that the requester could do uncontroversially, but are reluctant to do so, like correcting dates, numbers, names, spelling, reverting obvious vandalism, or providing a source for something that needed a citation. The thing to be most wary of is edit requests that whitewash negative information or seek to promote the subject. Wikipedia isn't to be used as a publicity platform. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:36, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cairnesteak Typofixing? If that is something you are interested in, hit me up. Polygnotus (talk) 04:01, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I occasionally work on cleaning up articles tagged as promotional. It isn't "cool," but you learn a lot and it's interesting seeing how these articles got to where they are now. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 04:06, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer!

I have done some stuff that Wikipedia serves up based on my indicated interests, and promotional is one that comes up - learning is definitely something I still need, so a task that will induce it is good. Cairnesteak (talk) 19:27, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i really think the most grueling work is regarding copyrights. places like WikiProject Copyright Cleanup and WP:Contributor copyright investigations are some of the most annoying and repetitive places to work at, and gets especially annoying when the line between acceptable and copyright-violating is blurred. kudos to those guys, and glory to the CCP. Waning Star (talk) 04:31, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cairnesteak, people posting here are often warned not to write articles backward. Excellent advice. But, for one reason or another, plenty of articles of the second rank include unreferenced material that looks at least moderately plausible and, if it were only well referenced, would be worthwhile. Unreferenced assertions may have "citations needed" or similar flags. But many do not. Look for unreferenced assertions. Supply references for them. The search for these is unlikely to be easy, if even possible. Note that a reference mustn't merely say something that's compatible with what the article says; it must instead confirm veracity of what the article says. So you may find what you think are references, decide that they're mediocre or worse, and look for better alternatives; you may have to adjust what the article says so that it does match the reference you're supplying for it; you may have to remove an assertion that seems unreferenceable. You'll have to make a lot of use of your head, and all of this is hard work. Is it appreciated? Perhaps, when it's noticed; but don't expect a high ratio of appreciation received to effort expended. -- Hoary (talk) 07:17, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is something I noticed a bunch - and yeah, it is daunting. I saw an article that, in the opening paragraph, made a pretty big assertion and it wasn't substantiated at all - after some quick searching I found a source and was able to get it some backing: so this is definitely something I will start to work at. It just takes some time, is all. I expect no appreciation, and I appreciate you pointing that out - I view it from the stand point of "if I do this now, someone won't have to do it later, or will be able to build off of it". Cairnesteak (talk) 19:32, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cairnesteak Here's a link to WikiProject Cleanup Listings. These are split into various groups, so you can choose to do cleanups in areas that are of interest to you. Overall, there are endless amounts of work! See also the Task Center Mike Turnbull (talk) 08:53, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you thank you!

Those are some handy links! Cairnesteak (talk) 19:29, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cairnesteak: if you are competent in other languages, WP:PNT has a backlog going back literally years. Lectonar (talk) 09:28, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I am not competent in other languages, but thanks for the idea! I hope at least one or two other folks see this and can use my question to get an answer for themselves, it can be hard to know what to do or where to start. Cairnesteak (talk) 19:28, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Love your thought, @Cairnesteak, about how perhaps your question could serve others to get an answer for themselves! Speaking from experience, I think “sitting in” on some of the discussions here in the Teahouse is one of the best places for new and still-newish editors to pick up all sorts of helpful tips. I wonder if it’s one of Wikipedia’s best-kept secrets. Augnablik (talk) 08:40, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Phones

Why is Wikipedia always blocked on mobile data? Minehollow (talk) 04:41, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What error message(s) do you get, Minehollow? -- Hoary (talk) 05:23, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some IP ranges by mobile internet providers are blocked because they are often used for vandalism, and at some point the bad outweighed the good by such a margin that blocking them was the best option. Polygnotus (talk) 05:31, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By "Wikipedia always blocked", do you an that you cannot read it, or cannot edit it? The latter is explained above by Polygnotus; the former would be down to your device or your service provider. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:00, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(not content farm) page request:

list of media used in content farms 91.234.25.26 (talk) 11:52, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your post doesn't make sense; do you have a question about how to use or contribute to Wikipedia? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:59, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The OP wants an article called List of media used in content farms, apparently. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:38, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

and also sprunki 91.234.25.26 (talk) 15:03, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

because there will be in wikipedia the first time there have been sprunki in a non-draft and not a content farm 91.234.25.26 (talk) 15:04, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Sprunki is a Incredibox-inspired game, and there’s no article for ‘sprunki’, so you can make it.

Also, I or we can’t help with your article, because that’s how it works in Wikipedia. Versions111 (talk) 14:47, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wallace Alexander Smart

Courtesy link: pl:Wallace Alexander Smart

Wallace alexander smart was a British flying ace,he is on Polish Wikipedia, but not on British. Not sure why .....Is there a way we can put him on UK Wikipedia please ? Thank you. Dnlala (talk) 13:21, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He would need to meet the criteria at WP:GNG. As an ace, he most likely will, but the sources in the Polish article do not meet that bar; and any article here needs reliable sources that show he does.

You might mention this to the folk at WT:MILHIST. If you would like to translate and expand on the article from Polish, see WP:TRANSLATE, then follow the process at WP:AFC for getting the results reviewed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:38, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your constructive reply. I know very little about criteria and wikipedia. There are 2 ace sources on Wikipedia-US apparently. Other sources are flyingdiary.co.uk and theaerodrome.com.

Many thanks. Dnlala (talk) 16:01, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a "UK Wikipedia"? Or did you mean "English Wikipedia", which was started in, and hosted in, the United States? ~Anachronist (talk) 14:39, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an expert, which is obviously why I am asking for help. Constructive help. Dnlala (talk) 16:03, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the best approach is first to look at the sources cited in the Polish article and pick out the ones that seem reliable (not blogs, not self-published, not forum discussions, etc.). Try to find other sources. While I don't recommend using an AI to write articles (that usually ends badly for whoever tries to do that), an AI can help finding sources for you. Once you have the sources, start writing the article. Don't let the AI write it for you; this is easily detected and will be rejected here.

You can use a translation of the Polish article as a guide for organization and content if it makes sense, but generally you should make sure that everything in your new article cites a source, regardless of what the Polish version does. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:33, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Dnlala. This may not be what you wanted to hear, but: 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) 19:30, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help Dealing with AI Slop

Hey y'all,

I have recently come across two editors, @StoryWritter1 and @HistoryRiderIndia, who have contributed nothing but AI-generated slop over the past year across a variety of articles. I first discovered this on the article for Rajarajeshwara Temple which I stumbled across while cleaning reference tags, and after 30 minutes attempting to see if I could salvage anything, I made the choice to revert. I have now come to realize that this LLM-generated content, complete with fake citations and accidentally included ChatGPT headers, is not just limited to the earlier article but also to articles such as Madayi Kavu and Kottiyoor Vysakha Mahotsavam. Before I reverted those, I thought it might be best to ask for help from somebody more experienced than I am. What are the next steps towards cleaning up these articles?

3602kiva (talk) 18:07, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, 3602kiva! I would start by reading the main page of and putting a notice on the talk page of the AI Cleanup Wikiproject, where other editors who have worked on cleaning up LLM issues can give more advice or lend a hand. Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 18:28, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It appears from their talk pages that neither editor has been advised that this is not acceptable. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:20, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the talk page of one of the articles, one of the editors has written an AI-generated essay contesting the quality of their AI-generated work. It's all a bunch of BS - some stuff about double standards.

In any case, I'll drop in those toothless AI warning messages to the two of them.

3602kiva (talk) 21:37, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you think our current AI warning message templates are "toothless ", you are free to write your own bespoke messages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:31, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Archive box not visible

Does anyone know why the links to the archive (and search bar) are not showing on Talk:Bariatric surgery? It has the "User:MiszaBot/config" like other talk pages. 96.95.142.29 (talk) 18:48, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:08, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pigsonthewing Ok, why don't the archives appear centered with all the other talk headers, such as on Talk:Justice? 96.95.142.29 (talk) 19:10, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because I used {{Archives}}, not {{Talk header}}.

You're welcome. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:23, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I got it. 96.95.142.29 (talk) 19:31, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Link does not work

Why does the link for [[3D-printed firearms]] not appear to work in the article Halle synagogue shooting, it is redlinked, but that page is a real page and should work. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iljhgtn the article is 3D-printed firearm, not the plural - I have changed it - Arjayay (talk) 18:59, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought even the plural was a redirect at least. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:26, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can create it as a redirect if you wish, @Iljhgtn ColinFine (talk) 19:32, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

3D printed firearms already does redirect to 3D-printed firearm and was created back in December 2020. So I am confused with why it would not have worked. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:45, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because 3D printed firearms doesn't have a hyphen in it, and 3D-printed firearms with a hyphen does not exist. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:55, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The hyphen strikes again. Thanks for that. Very good attention to detail.

I made it just now as a cheap redirect to prevent this from happening to someone else again. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:57, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Iljhgtn (A comment on wikilinks) The code [[3D-printed firearm]]s, with the "s" outside the final square bracket, renders as 3D-printed firearms as if the "s" were inside the bracket. Hence there should never be a need for a redirect merely to cover the plural. See Help:Link#Display text agglutination. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:11, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unexpected Treasures (2025) movie page waiting for review

Hello! I have created a draft article at User:NotPhillipN/sandbox about the upcoming film *Unexpected Treasures*. The draft includes multiple reliable sources (Deadline, Screen Rant, Soap Net, ComingSoon.net) covering its Comic-Con premiere, production, and cast. The poster has been uploaded under non-free use, and citations are in place.

I would like this draft moved to mainspace at Unexpected Treasures. I do not yet have permission to move pages myself. Could an experienced editor please review and move it?

Thank you very much for your help! NotPhillipN (talk) 20:15, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @NotPhillipN, and welcome to the Teahouse. The draft has been submitted for review, and in time a reviewer will look at it.

In my opinion, it is too soon. Your sources are all either not independent (based on press releases or interviews) or are speculation. Wait until there are solid independent reviews - probably after the film goes on general release.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. (I know your account was created four years ago, but with only seven edits in your history, you are a new editor). ColinFine (talk) 20:53, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Colin Fine, it's too soon. Wait until it gets reported on after its release, then you'll likely have better sources to cite, and you can remove those junk sources about screening preview announcements.

In the meantime, you should at least wikilink the names of actors who have Wikipedia articles.

Also, move it to Draft space. That way if someone tries to create an article on that film, the wiki software will detect that there's already a draft about it. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:49, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing an AFC

Sorry, I have one more question, separate from the above: Is it possible to withdraw an AFC? The more I think about it the more I don't think there's currently enough for Draft:Cyber fashion to be a mainspace article yet and I'm not really that fond of it compared to my other two AFC drafts. ⋆˚꩜｡ serilly! (he/him) (talk) 21:27, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can simply remove the "Review waiting" template at the top. Or you can review it yourself and decline it, which makes sense in an odd sort of way, but still seems weird, like me as an admin blocking myself. Or I can decline it for you if you want. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:41, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think Qianball doesn't exist in China; it may only exist in Denmark. Does anyone know the Chinese name of Qianball?

I searched Qianball on both the international internet and the Chinese internet in different languages. However, none of the websites revealed their origin. Qianlong is the name of the Qianlong Emperor, and China 100% don't have the sport named 乾隆球. I can't find any Chinese sources with talk about Qianball.

the thing I searched using Chinese

Chinese has 312 words called "Qian", which are those below.

乹
乾
亁
仟
仱
伣
佥
俔
倩
偂
傔
僉
儙
兛
凵
刋
前
勥
千
厱
呛
唊
唴
啌
嗆
嗛
嗴
圱
圲
堑
塹
墏
墘
墙
墻
壍
奷
婜
媊
嫱
嬙
嬱
孅
孯
岍
岒
嵌
嵰
嶈
廧
強
强
彊
忴
悓
悭
愆
慊
慳
戕
戗
戧
扦
扲
抢
拑
拪
挳
掅
掔
掮
揵
搴
搶
摤
摪
摼
撁
撍
攐
攑
攓
斨
朁
杄
枪
棈
椌
椠
榩
槍
槏
槧
樯
橬
檣
檶
櫏
欠
欦
欿
歉
歬
汘
汧
浅
淺
溬
漒
潛
潜
濳
灊
炝
炶
煔
熗
爿
牄
牆
牵
牽
犍
猐
獇
玪
玱
瑲
瓩
疆
皘
矼
磏
竏
签
箝
篏
篟
篬
簽
籖
籤
粁
綪
縴
繈
繦
繾
纤
缱
羌
羗
羟
羥
羫
羬
羻
肷
腔
膁
臤
艢
芊
芡
茜
茾
荨
葥
蒨
蔃
蔳
蔷
蕁
薔
蘠
虔
蚈
蚙
蜣
蜸
褰
襁
諐
謒
謙
譴
谦
谴
谸
跄
蹌
蹡
軡
輤
迁
遣
遷
釺
鈆
鈐
鉗
鉛
銭
錢
鍂
鎆
鎗
鏘
鏲
鏹
鑓
钎
钤
钱
钳
铅
锖
锵
镪
阡
韆
顅
騚
騝
騫
骞
鬜
鬝
鰬
鳽
鵮
鶬
鹐
黔
黚
㐸
㗔
㛨
㜞
㟻
㡊
㡨
㥞
㦮
㧄
㨜
㩃
㩖
㩮
㪠
㯠
㸫
㹂
䁮
䃛
䅐
䅚
䅾
䆂
䇂
䈤
䈴
䊴
䋮
䍉
䑶
䔔
䕭
䖍
䙺
䞿
䢪
䤘
䥅
䦲
䨿
䪈
䫡
䭑
䭠
䭤
䯡
䵁
䵖
𠀼
𠄃
𠄋
𠎝
𠒌
𠳋
𠼢
𡓜
𡸤
𢋾
𢍱
𤕭
𥮒
𧢞
𧽐
𨄚
𨓲
𨜻
𨟦
𨺩
𩝽
𪑙
𪠧
𪪺
𫑍
𫖶
𫗳
𫝐

And I added 球(ball, In Chinese, football is called 足球 which is foot-ball, Handball is called 手球 which is hand-ball) after each word and search.

乹球
乾球
亁球
仟球
仱球
伣球
佥球
俔球
倩球
偂球
傔球
僉球
儙球
兛球
凵球
刋球
前球
勥球
千球
厱球
呛球
唊球
唴球
啌球
嗆球
嗛球
嗴球
圱球
圲球
堑球
塹球
墏球
墘球
墙球
墻球
壍球
奷球
婜球
媊球
嫱球
嬙球
嬱球
孅球
孯球
岍球
岒球
嵌球
嵰球
嶈球
廧球
強球
强球
彊球
忴球
悓球
悭球
愆球
慊球
慳球
戕球
戗球
戧球
扦球
扲球
抢球
拑球
拪球
挳球
掅球
掔球
掮球
揵球
搴球
搶球
摤球
摪球
摼球
撁球
撍球
攐球
攑球
攓球
斨球
朁球
杄球
枪球
棈球
椌球
椠球
榩球
槍球
槏球
槧球
樯球
橬球
檣球
檶球
櫏球
欠球
欦球
欿球
歉球
歬球
汘球
汧球
浅球
淺球
溬球
漒球
潛球
潜球
濳球
灊球
炝球
炶球
煔球
熗球
爿球
牄球
牆球
牵球
牽球
犍球
猐球
獇球
玪球
玱球
瑲球
瓩球
疆球
皘球
矼球
磏球
竏球
签球
箝球
篏球
篟球
篬球
簽球
籖球
籤球
粁球
綪球
縴球
繈球
繦球
繾球
纤球
缱球
羌球
羗球
羟球
羥球
羫球
羬球
羻球
肷球
腔球
膁球
臤球
艢球
芊球
芡球
茜球
茾球
荨球
葥球
蒨球
蔃球
蔳球
薔球
蕁球
薔球
蘠球
虔球
蚈球
蚙球
蜣球
蜸球
褰球
襁球
諐球
謒球
謙球
譴球
谦球
谴球
谸球
跄球
蹌球
蹡球
軡球
輤球
迁球
遣球
遷球
釺球
鈆球
鈐球
鉗球
鉛球
銭球
錢球
鍂球
鎆球
鎗球
鏘球
鏲球
鏹球
鑓球
钎球
钤球
钱球
钳球
铅球
锖球
锵球
镪球
阡球
韆球
顅球
騚球
騝球
騫球
骞球
鬜球
鬝球
鰬球
鳽球
鵮球
鶬球
鹐球
黔球
黚球
㐸球
㗔球
㛨球
㜞球
㟻球
㡊球
㡨球
㥞球
㦮球
㧄球
㨜球
㩃球
㩖球
㩮球
㪠球
㯠球
㸫球
㹂球
䁮球
䃛球
䅐球
䅚球
䅾球
䆂球
䇂球
䈤球
䈴球
䊴球
䋮球
䍉球
䑶球
䔔球
䕭球
䖍球
䙺球
䞿球
䢪球
䤘球
䥅球
䦲球
䨿球
䪈球
䫡球
䭑球
䭠球
䭤球
䯡球
䵁球
䵖球
𠀼球
𠄃球
𠄋球
𠎝球
𠒌球
𠳋球
𠼢球
𡓜球
𡸤球
𢋾球
𢍱球
𤕭球
𥮒球
𧢞球
𧽐球
𨄚球
𨓲球
𨜻球
𨟦球
𨺩球
𩝽球
𪑙球
𪠧球
𪪺球
𫑍球
𫖶球
𫗳球
𫝐球

I can't search anything close to Qianball.

The closest thing that has a ball is the 九轉乾坤鼎 Nine-Turn Qiánkūn Cauldron, which is a home decorative gold ball cauldron, or 金嵌珍珠天球儀 Gold-inlaid pearl celestial globe, which was crafted by the Imperial Household Department at Qianlong.

🤔 223.122.220.239 (talk) 22:28, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So what? HQIQ (talk) 22:29, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sent to AfD. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 02:38, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Qianball in chinese is probably 錢球 (qiánqiú), which literally means coin ball. Versions111 (talk) 11:53, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I had searched "錢球" and listed "錢球" as one of the 312 qians I searched. I can’t find any relevant. Only peoples’ names, plants’ names, products’ names, Moneyball, Ballon d'Or, and books. 223.122.208.105 (talk) 14:10, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did more research, it could be 前球 (front ball) Versions111 (talk) 14:23, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I find information about the 前球? I couldn't find any relevant information now or before. 223.122.208.105 (talk) 18:34, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can search on Google, Blibli (if your chinese), Youtube. Versions111 (talk) 22:53, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions for / Assistance with article

Hello all,

As I've worked on the 2025 Malian protests page, I've realized that constraining the article to the crackdown on political participation and free expression in the country is failing to capture the whole picture of what's currently happening, particularly in regards to the country's recent difficulties with JNIM and other jihadist groups, as well as infighting within the military junta (though I've added context on that situation regardless, the reasoning for which can be found here), which is necessarily constraining accurate reporting, as all of these elements are heavily interlinked. I'd appreciate any assistance or insight that anyone could provide on how to improve upon this. Perhaps moving the page to a different namesake to ease constraints on its subject matter? Regardless, I'm unfortunately not in a particularly good position to be researching and reporting on this topic entirely on my own. Any help that others of similar academic interest could provide would be greatly appreciated. A quick review of grammar/wordiness would also be appreciated. I'll look forward to seeing your edits on the page!

Thanks in advance, CSGinger14 (talk) 00:56, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CSGinger14 While Wikipedia:WikiProject Mali is defunct, one of the people on the list is the evil genius known as @Dr. Blofeld:. Maybe you can convince them to collaborate, if you tell them it is a devious scheme that leads to world domination. But be careful, they are dangerously insane and insanely dangerous! Polygnotus (talk) 02:20, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting a soft review of draft article

Hello, I would appreciate a quick “soft review” of Draft:Gerald P. Curatola before I resubmit it at AfC.

The draft has been revised to ensure neutral tone, all claims are cited to independent sources (Forbes, Miami Herald, Vogue, New York Post, Purist, Yahoo), and institutional recognition is supported with NYU Nexus PDFs and the ICD directory.

Does the sourcing and style now look sufficient to meet AfC standards? Thank you for your guidance.

GCNYdentist (talk) 05:44, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The draft needs all of its claims sourced if it is to be accepedt at AfC. Sushidude21! (talk) 06:48, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @GCNYdentist,

After a quick review of the article, I have several thoughts. Firstly, you need to be able to cite material within the article itself, not simply provide a section that essentially serves as a way of justifying the page's creation. Information must be taken from the articles and referenced within the content of the page. Information on how to go about this can be found here. Additionally, though it requires far more investment and effort to explore the consensus reached by the site's users on matters of reliable sourcing, I would not imagine that many of the references used here would meet most editors definition of reputability. Vogue, Southhampton Press, Forbes, and the Miami Herald certainly do, but most others did not inspire confidence in me after a quick google search. Goop sits in the middle, but I suspect many editors would view it in a similar manner to the reputability of publications such as The Daily Mail.

The mere fact of keeping the article balanced and encyclopedic doesn't discount the fact that it may not qualify under the English Wikipedia's notability guidelines, see Notability in the English Wikipedia for more details on this. A good (but, importantly, incomprehensive) rule of thumb is that if the source you're citing doesn't have a Wikipedia page of its own, it would not generally qualify as a reliable source. This might not necessarily apply in the case of highly esoteric journals or industry specific releases, but I'm not sure that this can really be said of several of the websites you've cited within the article. This is obviously made harder by the fact that there's a serious conflict of interest present. Without going into much further detail in an effort to respect WP:OPCAD, I imagine that it is harder for you to view criticism of the subject's appearance in various publications from a neutral perspective; please see WP:PROUD for further explanation of this point. I've left several biographies of various persons in the medical field (both living and dead) to assist you in understanding how best to go about writing in a style more suitable to Wikipedia and its protocols. I wish you all the best, but I suspect you may want to consider whether or not it's best to publish the page at this point in time.

Jessica Rickert / Ambroise Paré / Philipp Bozzini

All the best, CSGinger14 (talk) 06:54, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like LLM, which is inappropriate. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 08:20, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the detailed feedback. I understand the concerns raised about sourcing and style. To address them:

I am revising the draft so that every claim is supported by an inline citation within the text, not just in a list at the end.
I will limit references to independent, reliable publications such as Forbes, the Miami Herald, Vogue, the New York Post, The Purist, and Yahoo News, while removing lower-quality or non-independent sources.
I acknowledge the conflict of interest and will continue to follow WP:COI and WP:BLP by proposing changes on the Talk page for review by uninvolved editors.
The draft has been restructured into standard sections (Lead, Early life, Career, Publications, Patents, Media appearances) and rewritten in neutral encyclopedic tone.

I appreciate the examples provided of medical biographies and will use them as models. The focus will be on verifiable, independent coverage that addresses notability under WP:GNG.

Respectfully,

GCNYdentist (talk) 01:36, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for the feedback. While I understand the concerns raised, I will address them:

Inline citations – I am revising so that every claim is supported directly in the text.
Source quality – I will keep references to independent, reliable publications (Forbes, Miami Herald, Vogue, New York Post, The Purist, Yahoo News) and remove lower-quality or non-independent sources.
Neutral style – I have rewritten the draft into standard sections (Lead, Early life, Career, Publications, Patents, Media appearances) in an encyclopedic tone.
Patents and academic role – These are cited to official USPTO/Google Patents and the NYU faculty profile.
Conflict of interest – I acknowledge the COI and will continue to propose changes on the article’s Talk page for review by uninvolved editors.
LLM concerns – I understand the caution. To avoid any appearance of LLM-style text, I am rewriting with verifiable sources only and focusing on neutral, fact-based prose.

My goal is to improve the existing live article Gerry Curatola with a neutral, verifiable version. A complete draft will be available in User:GCNYdentist/Curatola-rewrite for review on the Talk page.

Respectfully,

GCNYdentist (talk) 02:49, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't start a second draft; make improvements to the existing version. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:35, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help with a new submission

Hi, I submitted a new article on V K Palanisamy Gounder (Draft:V. K. Palanisamy Gounder) but it was rejected. The two references I submitted are well researched. Murugavelms (talk) 10:27, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Murugavelms Your Draft:V. K. Palanisamy Gounder had only two sources, so large part of the content, including his philanthropy and his date of death, had nothing to allow readers to WP:verify what was written. You would need to fix this and attend to the comments of the reviewer before the draft could be accepted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind comments. This page on the forgotten V K Palanisamy Gounder is the first attempt to get additional valid references to him by crowd sourcing. His primary project the Parambikulam Aliyar Project (well represented in Tamil YouTube videos) is an engineering marvel. I have addressed some of the issues and resubmitted. Murugavelms (talk) 06:48, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's certainly far too much detail about the dam in an article about Gounder, @Murugavelms. The way the section on the Dam is laid out is one reason for me thinking that this is LLM generated. ColinFine (talk) 12:12, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind response. His primary project the Parambikulam Aliyar Project (well represented in Tamil YouTube videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuzzXTIaQZI , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-ZAiAYnAyg) is an engineering marvel - but everything is in Tamil. I have addressed some of the issues and resubmitted. The idea is to get a stub approved and more information crowdsourced. My first submission on Jamal Ara was initially rejected (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_Ara ) as there was very little I could gather - but once the stub was approved a lot of material has been added. Murugavelms (talk) 06:53, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Murugavelms According to Jamal Ara's revision history your version was declined and it remained in draft form until several other editors worked on it and it was moved to mainspace more than a year later. You could take the same approach now, leaving the current draft where it is and maybe asking others in relevant Wikiprojects to expand it. Drafts are only deleted if not edited for 6 months. One thing is sure: articles for creation reviewers will not accept drafts unless they clearly demonstrate how the subject is notable based on what is actually written, not what might be later "crowdsourced". Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:27, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for describing how Jamal Ara's page got approved. I have provided several references from Govt and *Major Indian English* newspaper sites on the individual's notability - statues and memorial halls recognizing Palanisamy's contribution have been inaugurated by the Govt. Please see below (Like Jamal Ara, he was forgotten) :

1) https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/tamil-nadu/2025/Aug/12/cm-stalin-inaugurates-statues-memorial-halls-in-pollachi

2) https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Coimbatore/projects-to-honour-stalwarts-of-parambikulam-aliyar-project/article36442924.ece

3) https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/coimbatore/oct-7-will-be-observed-as-parambikulam-aliyar-project-day-says-stalin/articleshow/94716510.cms

4) The Indian Govt. maintained website gives a clear, brief biography : https://amritkaal.nic.in/district-reopsitory-detail.htm?19794

Most are in the local language (Tamil) - which is kind of difficult to locate.

All I'm hoping is to get the stub online with these. Thanks again. Murugavelms (talk) 16:06, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Times of India is not a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 17:40, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On this specific point of a reliable source - I concur with @Theroadislong assessment. I will try to get more evidence of this forgotten man who envisioned the concept by hiking/riding elephants deep into the dense forests, planned and with political maneuvering got this engineering marvel completed (Please see & visit if visiting India : https://leelamusings.blogspot.com/2017/11/parambikulam-aliyar-project-eigth.html). Murugavelms (talk) 02:05, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Search visual

Is there a way for the letters to go from black to grey when searching? For example, putting "Wi" in the search bar would make "Wikipedia", but grey. I've looked through Preferences but can't find anything. dom 11:12, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Autocomplete: that happens for me (in the form of a drop-down list), in the desktop view on my laptop. Are you using mobile web, or an app? What device? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:04, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile web on a Macbook dom 14:45, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a page for an artist

How do I create a new page for an established artist with whom I have a COI? I have been doing the link gathering. I'd prefer not write the page give my conflict and I also want it to be a real reference page because I did not get my library degree for nothing :)

Many thanks in advance. AllysonDombey (talk) 17:38, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

A COI does not prevent you from creating a draft and submitting it for review via the Articles for creation process, as long as you declare your COI; and frankly, that's the only way you are likely to get such an article created.

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

If you do decide to go ahead with this, whether now or after getting some experience with editing Wikipedia, remember that:

Absolutely nothing you know about the artist is relevant to an article about them unless it is verifiable from a reliable published source; and
Very little that the artist says or wants to say about themselves, or that their associates or institutions say about them, is relevant unless it is verifiable from a source wholly unconnected with them.

It follows that by far the most efficient way of creating an article is to find some sources and verify that most of them meet all the criteria in WP:42, before even creating a draft, let alone writing any text.

You may notice as well, that I have not referred to a "page" but an "article". While an article is one kind of page, I recommend thinking of it as an article about the artist, not a page for them, as this may help you to keep to a neutral point of view. ColinFine (talk) 17:55, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I totally get the spending time on the platform but I have a typing disability so my time is quite limited, so Ill do what I can.

Is there a place I submit a list of links and draft article and look for an editor who would be interested in taking it forward? AllysonDombey (talk) 18:02, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are most unlikely to find anyone to do this work for you, you will need to submit a draft using the WP:AFC process. Theroadislong (talk) 18:09, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ok great. that's all I need to know. AllysonDombey (talk) 18:12, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

you can place them down at my talk page, and i'll see what I can do. Waning Star (talk) 18:09, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Top and bottom arrows

I do not think these were always there, but maybe I just did not notice them before. There is a top and bottom arrow which floats around on my screen on this teahouse page, but not all pages. Is there a way that I can turn that off? Iljhgtn (talk) 20:20, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

yes as an editor of 19 years here, I'd like to know how to be rid of them too, they always partially obscure the last entry. Theroadislong (talk) 20:49, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. Would be great if you learn something new (if it is possible to remove them at all), after almost two decades! Iljhgtn (talk) 21:12, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Iljhgtn: Add this to your CSS

#skip-to-top-button, #skip-to-bottom-button {display: none;}

PrimeHunter (talk) 21:14, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I think that worked. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:17, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong try it. I think this was a quick and easy fix. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:17, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they used to obscure the last entry, until a week or two ago. ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did not notice this being a problem until just recently. But they did in fact obscure the last entry, partially, for me until I implemented @PrimeHunter's solution which worked. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:51, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Iljhgtn: @Theroadislong: @PrimeHunter: @ColinFine: For those who half-like the buttons, try

#skip-to-top-button, #skip-to-bottom-button {opacity: 0.5;}

in your CSS. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:03, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting "soft review"

I'm probably not going to go through the AFC process for Draft:Toontown Rewritten since the subject very obviously passes WP:GNG and WP:NGAME, but I'd really appreciate it if anyone wouldn't mind looking over the draft at the moment, as I'm still unsure on my wording, particularly in the tone environment. Thanks! ⋆˚꩜｡ serilly! (he/him) (talk) 01:15, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Really nice job. I found the writing compelling and engaging without feeling like anything was being promoted to me. I would have liked to see more on Disney's reaction but it looks like the sources say there isn't really any. Sources are good. If you submitted it for review, I'd give it more than a "soft review" but I'm quite sure I'd approve it rather than decline it. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:35, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I might have to go through AFC either way since it turns out Toontown Rewritten is a redirect lol. ⋆˚꩜｡ serilly! (he/him) (talk) 12:05, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Serilly. Not necessarily - you can request it at WP:RM. ColinFine (talk) 16:13, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, well, I did anyways but this is good to know for the future, thanks! It can be hard to navigate Wikipedia sometimes haha ⋆˚꩜｡ serilly! (he/him) (talk) 16:15, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Social media as a source for articles

Hello users, could social media be cited as sources in these articles? If not, then can you please explain on why is social media not a reliable source? Additionally, are there any examples of social media not being a reliable source, and what are the appropriate usage? Thank you. 75.39.165.140 (talk) 04:44, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simply put, we don't cite user generated content because there is no assurance of fact checking and accuracy. Wikipedia:Reliable sources explains what a reliable source is, and Wikipedia:Golden Rule provides a brief overview of what kind of sources are preferred. We can cite social media only to verify what someone writes on social media. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:14, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, social media is not reliable, but there may be exceptions, such as tweets by government agencies(e.g. NTSB, RAIB etc). Forums are not reliable sources, but may be useful as sources of reliable sources (e.g. news stories). Mjroots (talk) 07:52, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ساعدوني انا في خطر بسبب عائلتي

انا اتعرض للتعنيف من عائلتي واخواني الكبار اتعرض للضرب والتحرش منهم عمري 18 لا يمكنني فعل اي شي لا امتلك حتى مال اقرر الهروب ان علمو ربما يقتلوني اتمنى ان يساعدني احد اسكن في بغداد هم عائلة مسلمة بكن انا اريد ان امون مسيحية ان علمو ربما يقتلوني اتمنى احد ان ينقذني اتعرض للتعنيف! 5.62.146.103 (talk) 05:18, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

أنا آسف جدًا لسماع أنك تمر بهذه الظروف الصعبة. ويكيبيديا ليست المكان المناسب للحصول على مساعدة طبية أو طارئة، ولكن من المهم جدًا أن تتواصل مع أشخاص يمكنهم مساعدتك فورًا. إذا كنت في خطر مباشر، الرجاء الاتصال بخدمات الطوارئ في بلدك. يمكنك أيضًا زيارة https://findahelpline.com للعثور على خط مساعدة في العراق أو قريب منك. من فضلك اعتني بنفسك وأبحث عن دعم آمن خارج ويكيبيديا. Thilio^{R O B O T🤖 talk} 05:26, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why speak in other languages? Is it Farsi or Arabic? FatCatInTheMemeHat (talk) 10:48, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@FatCatInTheMemeHat Welcome to Teahouse....... I replied in Arabic because the editor posted their message in Arabic and may not understand English well. I wanted to make sure they understood the safety resources provided.... and yes is Arabic not Farsi. Thilio^{R O B O T🤖 talk} 11:10, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Thilio oh. I speak Farsi, FatCatInTheMemeHat (talk) 11:10, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional Tune

Hi, Everytime I posted about this company and It got rejected that Its promotional while other same like companies have used same tune. Rollno007 (talk) 06:36, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:General Petroleum GmbH

Hi @Rollno007: firstly, your draft has been declined, not rejected; decline means you're allowed to resubmit after addressing the decline reasons, whereas rejection would mean the end of the road.

Secondly, my decline was not for "promotional tune" (or even tone), it was for complete lack of evidence that this subject is in any way notable per WP:NCORP.

The earlier decline was because the reviewer felt that the draft had been composed using AI. It is true that one of the hallmarks of AI-generated text is 'promotional tone', but there are many others (as explained in the decline notice), and this draft wasn't specifically declined for promotional tone.

As for any other articles that may be out there, this is the so-called WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, which is a fallacy. A common, and perhaps even understandable one, but a fallacy all the same. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:19, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aggressive IPs

Can someone please help. I am being aggressively vandalized by IP's on my TP and otherwise. I have already reported them, but just see my talk page. It was literally spinning. Iljhgtn (talk) 07:50, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it might have stopped... Iljhgtn (talk) 07:51, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, it has most definitely NOT stopped. Iljhgtn (talk) 07:55, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Report this at WP:AIV. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:29, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion

When proded pages have expired, deleted, then undeleted, are they undeleted or moved to draftspace? Logoshimpo (talk) 10:19, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In which context? FatCatInTheMemeHat (talk) 10:49, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering about the policy. Logoshimpo (talk) 11:17, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The default policy is to restore to article space. Someone may consider the page is unsuitable as an article and move to draft space, but that is not default expectation. Another common outcome after a prod reversal is that someone will nominate the page for WP:AFD. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:44, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To follow up on FatCatInTheMemeHat's question: [1] was undeleted into draftspace. Does this answer your question: User:FatCatInTheMemeHat? Logoshimpo (talk) 11:57, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More citiation needed deletion

Hi everyone,

I’ve been working on improving the article Big Ass Lake (Nova Scotia). The article currently has the {{More citiation needed}} tag at the top, but I believe it may now be outdated.

The article has:

21 reliable citations across 8 sections (Excluding See also, Reference, External links) and 747 words (Including infobox, see also, reference, etc..)

Every section has at least one reliable inline citation, and all major claims are verifiable.

Would it be reasonable to remove the {{More citiations needed}} template now, or do editors feel it should remain until further improvements are made? Versions111 (talk) 11:38, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If "all major claims are verifiable" does that mean some other claims are not? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:56, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Andy—what i meant is that all claims in the article are backed by inline citations, and every section has at least one reliable source. None of the statements are unsourced; i just wanted to emphasize that the key information (history, geography, wildlife, etc.) is fully verifiable. Versions111 (talk) 12:10, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then yes, you can remove it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:57, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mixup in article associations

Hello there, I noticed today that some articles have been associated with my username, even though I didn't write them or know anything about them. See [2] and [3]. Both comments are about the same page called "Diffusion Fundamentals".

I wonder if this is connected with my account being renamed from "Martin Geisler" to "MrtnGslr"? Any help would be appreciated, thanks! MrtnGslr (talk) 11:54, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Explicit See above. I can't see the deleted article. Polygnotus (talk) 14:05, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't figure it out either. It might have something to do with the script WP:AFCH, as the notices came from AFC reviewers. The deletion notice by FireflyBot correctly went to Martin Geisler only. ✗plicit 14:50, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MrtnGslr: The draft was created by User:Martin Geisler who hasn't created a user page so it still shows the old move from your first rename. That may have confused the script which was used to post the messages. MediaWiki:Gadget-afchelper.js/core.js#L-1337 says "Notifies a user. Follows redirects". There is no redirect here but the user page says it was moved without leaving a redirect so the script may have thought that was good enough. I haven't looked into the implementation. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:31, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all for investigating! I will go clean up the confusing posts. MrtnGslr (talk) 21:26, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[[File:Example.jpg]]

Is this intentional behaviour? Is linking to an image in the title of a talk page topic allowed when the image is being discussed? I created a talk page comment about a particular file and was surprised to discover that it was displayed as the title of the section. Stockhausenfan (talk) 14:08, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what pages exactly mention this, but what I know is that, I did not know this was possible till now, because nobody does it due to how it makes talk pages harder to navigate. One time, someone used a template as a title, which hurt my eyes. Basically, please avoid doing that. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 14:41, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The error was using [[File:Example.jpg]], which shows a full-sized image and not [[File:Example.jpg|thumb]], which shows a "thumbnail".

You said "for [an image] to be used on Wikipedia it needs to be public domain" This is incorrect, See WP:Image use policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:56, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Stockhausenfan: The error in [4] was that you didn't add a colon in front. [[File:E175 Landing at John Wayne.jpg]] is the syntax to display a file and it does so everywhere including section headings. [[:File:E175 Landing at John Wayne.jpg]] with a colon in front produces the link File:E175 Landing at John Wayne.jpg. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:39, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Stockhausenfan It may be worth mentioning that it isn't a good idea to Wikilink any section heading, whether to a file or an article. The problem is that readers using mobile devices have to click on your section heading to open it for reading and can end up at the link rather than within the section. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:22, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

article for Espacio Gallery

Hello, I’m working on the draft article for Espacio Gallery (Draft:Espacio Gallery). It was declined for tone and sourcing, and I’d appreciate any advice or help from experienced editors on how to improve it. Could someone assist in rewriting or guiding me to make it more suitable for Wikipedia? Thank you! Artcuratorgh (talk) 14:13, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, if you are working for or on behalf of the gallery, you must comply with WP:PAID.

Your article can only be published if it meets the criteria set out in WP:NCORP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:51, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Artcuratorgh, and welcome to the Teahouse. Just looking at the titles and publishers of your sources, it does not look to me as if even one of them will meet the triple criteria of being reliably published (most blogs aren't), independent of the Gallery, and containing significant coverage of the gallery, not just of particular exhibitions. Unless you can find several sources that meet all the criteria in WP:42, you will not be able to establish that it meets Wikipeia's criteria for notability.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 16:21, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TacticalGramma Article

I'm seeking an experienced editor to help create a draft article about gaming celebrity TacticalGramma AKA Michelle Statham. Borderrite (talk) 16:28, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Borderrite I found a couple of usable sources but I've no interested in creating the draft. I recommend you read Help:Your first article and WP:BACKWARDS but really you need to build some experience by editing existing articles before you tackle the much harder task of writing one from scratch. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:37, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Computer History

Could anyone tell me if its allowed to write an article about the evolution of computers based on my own experience, from the time of punchcards (1965 ca) to .modern day pc's and servers. Ofcourse backedup with original veryfiable data? Comments highly welcome. Harold Foppele (talk) 17:53, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Harold Foppele Welcome to the Teahouse. Articles should be based on what reliable sources say, not on personal experience. Also we already have extensive articles on the History of computing. I suggest you focus on improving those. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:04, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Harold Foppele. I'm not completely sure what you have in mind when you mention original verifiable data, but articles should be based on published sources, not an editor's interpretation of original data (which would be original research). Your own experience of a topic can be a good guide when you're looking for reliable, published sources to base article content on, but articles shouldn't contain anything that can't be fully verified with references to published sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:26, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you can do that since you mentioned "Ofcourse backedup with original veryfiable data?" I'm not sure what you mean by that but if you have the original Verifiable data what you need is to know some of these important guidelines like Notability, Verifiability, [Neutral Point of View (NPOV) let me add also No original research et cetera. And your article must rely on published verifiable information not just solely your personal experience. We have huge articles about computers history like History of supercomputing, History of computing, et cetera et cetera. I suggest you to go have fun improving them.Thilio^{R O B O T🤖 talk} 18:41, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may find it better to use an alternative outlet. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:39, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

sad :(

Courtesy link: Draft:Dr. George Washington Galloway

Hello everyone, i've created a wiki page for my grandfather for my dad's birthday, and it's been marked for speedy deletion. Can someone help sooner than later? JLG2029 (talk) 19:26, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We take an objective view as to whether a subject warrants a Wikipedia article. Your grandfather may meet those requirements, but your draft does not show this. You need more sources that do, and every statement in the article needs to be cited.

Some of the text in your draft is either copied or closely paraphrased from the one source you do cite; that is not allowed.

You also must comply with our CoI policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:32, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have you looked at the website WikiTree? That may be a better place to write about a family member than here on Wikipedia, which has strict notability standards. wizzito | say hello! 20:03, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page

I accidentally removed all photos on the Main Page a couple of days ago. My fault, but I can't figure out how I did it so that I can fix it. I meant to hide a photo that I was tired of seeing on the main page, but all photos are gone on Main Page. How do I fix it? Thank you so much. I'll never try that again!! I apologize! I hope this is the right place to ask such a question.

Cindy Thomas Ctterminator (talk) 21:20, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ctterminator. You probably used a general feature in your own browser and not a Wikipedia feature so Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing may be more suited but we can try here. Which browser or device are you using? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:14, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be more clear: you didn't alter the Main Page. You only altered how the Main Page is viewed on your own machine. Only admins have edit access for the Main Page, and we know how to avoid that sort of mistake (or, worst case scenario, how to fix it in seconds). So.., don't worry, you did nothing that would require an apology. DS (talk) 00:16, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am using Chrome on a Dell laptop. And I find that all photos have been removed, not just the main page. I right clicked on a photo and chose something on the list that appeared, maybe it was "hide". When I right click now, I don't see an option like "unhide". Ctterminator (talk) 00:52, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Options to hide an image may be useful - both in understanding what you did, and how to undo it. Good luck. DS (talk) 01:27, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate References on page templates

Hello, I was working on this page and I noticed in this edit that I tried to re use citations that were based on the template at the bottom of the page but I couldn’t so I just re pasted the links and put in new citations because I didn’t know what to do. The problem is that created duplicate references because I couldn’t re-use citations from the bottom of the page template. I was also using visual editor, what do I do? 8bit12man (talk) 21:24, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@8bit12man Welcome to Teahouse & thank you for your contribution to Draft:Russian occupation of Dnipropetrovsk Oblast. For you to avoid adding duplicate references in the future please use “Show preview” or “Show changes” before publishing so you can review your edits. Since the page is currently in Draft space feel free to continue working on it remove the duplicates etc. Once you addressed all the issues you can simply resubmit it or move it back to the mainspace. Happy editing! Thilio^{R O B O T🤖 talk} 23:47, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do I solve the issue of duplicate references it won’t let me reuse the citations on the template 8bit12man (talk) 01:20, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsing Comments Claiming LLM

Just wondering if anyone has any advice on what to do if people are collapsing comments claiming LLM in an active RFC? Sombodystolemyname (talk) 01:50, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsing them is per the WP:AITALK guideline. What (conceptually) do you want to do? For example, do you object to their collapsing it? Do you wish to make a comment in the discussion that is a response to part of the collapsed comment? Do you think the comment should be deleted altogether? DMacks (talk) 02:49, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe that they are LLM and that they are collapsing them to effectively remove things they don't like from the discussion. Sombodystolemyname (talk) 03:49, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They are obviously AI, do you think people can’t tell?

Part of collapsing them is to get you all to stop using the hallucination machine to misquote policies, and read them for yourselves. That will help stop wasting everyone’s time. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 04:01, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the relevant policy. Perhaps it would be worth reading?

Comments that are obviously generated by a large language model (LLM) or similar AI technology may be struck or collapsed with

Text generated by a large language model (LLM) or similar tool has been collapsed per relevant Wikipedia guidelines. LLM-generated arguments should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

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

.Please see Wikipedia:Large language models for why we do this. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 04:03, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 United States–Venezuela conflict

Hello everyone! I’m not sure if this is the perfect place to bring this up, but before creating an article about the conflict between the United States and Venezuela, I’d love to get the community’s thoughts. From what I’ve seen, there seems to be enough verifiable information to treat this as a significant conflict, considering troop movements, deploying of military equipment, and other key background details that help understand the situation as it develops. This isn’t a one-off event; it’s drawing sustained attention from global media. My plan would be to structure the article similarly to other ongoing conflicts, such as the 2025 India–Pakistan conflict. Does this topic seem appropriate for a new article, and would you have any advice for approaching it? Thanks in advance. Igallards7 (talk) 01:54, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much about the topic but since a search within Wikipedia turns up nothing I think you can create such page. 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 02:08, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]