Wikipedia:Teahouse

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 1 user(s) asking for help via the {{Help me}} template

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthropology/Participants

Neutrality of terms like "liberated"

Recently I was reading the article about the city of Niš in Serbia, and in the introduction I came across the following text:

After about 400 years of Ottoman rule, the city was liberated in 1878 and became part of the Principality of Serbia, though not without great bloodshed—remnants of which can be found throughout the city.

Specifically, the word "liberated" caught my eye. In a historical context, the term "liberated" carries a value judgment, doesn't it? It implies that the previous rulers of the cith were inherently oppressive and unjust and that subsequent control was inherently freeing or positive. While I'm sure that is indeed how some view it in this specific example, I'm unsure whether it’s a neutral description of what happened: it feels kind of subjective rather than objective. Would it not be more appropriate to phrase it like this:

After about 400 years of Ottoman rule, the city became part of the Principality of Serbia in 1878, though not without great bloodshed—remnants of which can be found throughout the city.

Decided to ask here in Teahouse before I consult the talk page, to see if there is even merit in my question. Curious to hear your thoughts as someone who isn't well-versed with Wikipedia's editing guidelines, cheers Havzali (talk) 02:53, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

I don't want to say that liberated is never proper--it might be okay in other articles if that's what most reliable sources use, and I can see it being appropriate in a case where a city was originally part of Nation A, was taken over by Nation B, and then was shortly thereafter returned to Nation A--that return from being taken over could be described as "liberating" the city. But in this example, I think your rewording is better. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 03:01, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

@SomeoneDreaming I agree 100%, I can definitely see there being appropriate uses of the word, especially in the circumstances you describe. In this case, 400 years is a long time and I'm sure there's more neutral words like reconquest to signify change in ownership. Havzali (talk) 03:09, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Yeah. I think in this case you can be WP:BOLD and go ahead and make the edit you suggested! SomeoneDreaming (talk) 03:17, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

I think your proposed change is better, I concur with the other editor here that you should be bold and change it. Athanelar (talk) 12:19, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

The source uses "liberated", altho it is a Serbian source. I would suggest looking for sources that have a different wording before doing that. I am taking an educated guess that you are Turkish and can bet that a Serb editor would take issue with that. Balkans issues are on the Contentious topics list and requires more delicate handling. Perhaps propose it on the talk page and do some research to see if other sources dont use that term. This is a good manual of style question tho. Looking at other examples, there is Liberation of France as a whole article. And a number of concentration camps are recorded as being liberated. Metallurgist (talk) 23:10, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

AI / Rollbacker

Hey, I've been using AI on Wikipedia for about 4 something months now. I love using AI on Wikipedia. It makes long edits feel easy. Of course, I always fact check the information, and add links. And, I just let a bot fix the disambiguation links I add sometimes. I want to ask: is anyone fine if I partially use AI in my articles. It is kind of to late because I have already worked it hundreds of times. I want rollback rights to. Do I have the experience in undoing edits to get the rights? If so, how many edits will I need to get rollback, and submit my case for the third time? CostalCal (talk) 16:34, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

I would strongly suggest you stop using AI, I have reverted two of your recent edits which added AI "summaries". Theroadislong (talk) 20:54, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello @CostalCal. Artificial intelligence should not be used to edit Wikipedia, as it is known to hallucinate and make up sources as well as information. We have an essay on LLMs if you are curious.

I am sure your edits have been in good faith, and you have not meant any harm, but I strongly advise you to write yourself and not use AI in editing. If you are concerned about your edits needing to be reverted, I took a glance at a few of them and they seem to be largely alright. If you have any major concerns still, you could post somewhere like the AI Cleanup noticeboard to let others know and allow them to help revert, if you so wish. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 21:23, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

I second this, AI should not be used for Wikipedia, considering it has and can make ideas up, or agree with what the user asks even if it is factually incorrect. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a (talk) 10:26, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

On the question of rollback; please review the instructions given at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback. Rollback is primarily for editors who participate in counter vandalism. Your edits show no use of Twinkle, Redwarn, or Ultraviolet. I would recommend you first focus on cleaning up your contributions however, to ensure they are free of the various problems using AI/LLMs cause. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 23:59, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

The amount of work you put into verifying LLM nonsense could just be put into writing it. We are here to write articles for fun, not use automated pattern simulators do things. A lot of the fun of this SI writing those long grueling articles. Ive spent hours researching and writing new articles and improving others. What would be the point of using a generator to do that? Metallurgist (talk) 22:59, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

I agree, it loses the charm and human aspect. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a (talk) 10:43, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

It may lose the charm, I don't know. Yes it loses the human aspect. But you didn't mention the important part: AI can never tell the truth, because it has no idea what that is. I guess I'm in a small minority when I say I think anyone using AI for anything on Wikipedia - even drafts, even discussions - should be permanently banned after their second offence, and anyone twenty times merely suspected of using AI should be banned too, but an encyclopedia full of lies is bad, even if the lies are arguably accidental. TooManyFingers (talk) 03:49, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

I 100% agree with you, I’ve asked AI simple questions to test it and it got it wrong, it is u reliable and should only be used for calculations and data collection, nothing creative or anything about humans, for AI isn’t a human and therefore does not understand us and our immense history. I think they should be banned as well, it would be horrible if this site was filled with AI photos and text. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a (talk) 11:18, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Inviting editors?

How do I flag a new starter article to the greater Wikipedia community as something that could use additional editorial eyes and input? Is that done here or at another board? Started this page: 2025 Pentagon press pass forfeiture and would love to get more people interacting and also would like to start a 2025 Wikipedia Culture Wars article to discuss investigations aimed at Wikipedia. Xkeylimepie (talk) 05:55, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

You can post a neutral notice on the relevant WikiProjects and or editors if they are interested. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:07, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

@Xkeylimepie Some guidance at WP:APPNOTE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:07, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Xkeylimepie (talk) 05:55, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Help on Transfeminism article

Hi there! I'm pretty new to wiki, but I noticed that the article on transfeminism has some serious shortcomings. I tried to put in some summaries of some recent developments in the theory, but a lot what I want to include comes from a self-published source, the substack and essay collections of Talia Bhatt (https://taliabhattwrites.substack.com/p/the-third-sex, https://www.google.com/books/edition/Trans_Rad_Fem/ItUi0QEACAAJ?hl=en). However, her works are cited positively in academic sources that would be considered reliable (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00497878.2025.2565492, https://www.proquest.com/openview/df481a7d1f9fb07c2a1c37f561419b9a/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y). Does being cited by reliable academic sources, make these essays themselves reliable? Flockofsparrows420 (talk) 23:00, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

The short answer is no. If her self-published works are cited by reliable sources, then maybe, but this would have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. It's better to report what secondary sources say. Her own self-published work hasn't undergone peer review, so it would be considered less than reliable for verifying statements of fact, but could be used to attribute quotations to her. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 00:19, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

If this is the case, then the rules around reliability strike me as overly limiting here, when it comes to topics of political theory. If Bhatt is the one coming up with these theories and putting them out there, and these theories are being accepted into the the reliable discourse on the topic, and cited by reliable sources, shouldn't wiki be able to source directly from the horse's mouth, so to speak? I understand the need to stick to more robust verification on topics that have a less subjective nature, but if Bhatt is influencing the theory, then shouldn't the wiki article on the theory reflect that? Flockofsparrows420 (talk) 00:29, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I second this. This is a political ideology, after all, and Bhatt is a political theorist. Her works and writings have been praised by authorities within the field, too. Shes quite influential, as sparrows outlined. I don’t think it would be violating Wikipedia’s neutrality rules or anything to take directly from her writings. She is, after all, the one coming up with this stuff. Missmonstergirl (talk) 00:41, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

No, that isn't how Wikipedia works. Self-published material that has been referenced in secondary sources is fair game to cite. Self-published material that hasn't gone through peer review, however, is just original research on her part, and can be mentioned only with attribution, not as statements of fact that imply the consensus among the community of her peers. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 03:08, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

So I'm a little confused here. what would qualify material for being "referenced in secondary sources"? and how is that different then the situation with the essays I want to cite? Flockofsparrows420 (talk) 03:25, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

If a secondary source reports something that Talia Bhatt wrote, then that could be cited to report something that she wrote, because it's a secondary source. If you are citing Bhatt directly, then you cannot state her assertions as fact in Wikipedia's narrative voice, you must attribute the assertion to her. However, I have difficulty seeing where this would be necessary, because determine what assertions are important enough to include in an article (other than mundane things like age and birth date for the purpose of verification) cannot be made by the personal whims of any Wikipedia editor, they should be based on secondary sources. If the essays you want to cite are noted by other sources, then cite them. Otherwise, why would you cite an essay? ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 05:04, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Maybe it would help if you offered an example to evaluate, and the context in which you plan to use it. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 05:05, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

@Flockofsparrows420 You're basically questioning how WP works. From the horse's mouth is a "primary" source. You must cite a[n] independent reliable "secondary" source. MmeMaigret (talk) 09:38, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

The easy solution is to just cite the secondary sources where possible.

If I say "X is true" and you cite that, that's WP:OR and doesn't meet wikipedia standards.

If a number of reliable secondary sources conclude that "X is true" and part of their evidence is citing my initial work, then it makes much more sense to just cut out the middle-man and cite those secondary sources rather than citing my initial assertion with the asterisk that it was affirmed by secondary sources.

If the information you want to include is described in reliable secondary sources which cite Bhatt's work, just cite those rather than Bhatt directly. Athanelar (talk) 05:16, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Sorry to be a pedant, but wouldn't this be putting the middle-man in?

Anyways, yeah, that's what I've found too, although now there's another whole dispute on the talk page because the article is talking abt both trans studies in feminism (trans feminism) and transfeminism, which have similar titles but are different things, and have overlapping areas of concern but do not share opinions. Missmonstergirl (talk) 06:38, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

The point of putting in the middle-man (or -woman), by deliberate policy, is that the middle-person in question should have no personal or professional connection to the originator of the information (eliminating any Conflict of interest), and what they say has been published by a Reliable source, i.e. one that exercises fact checking and editorial control, so that the information is not WP:Original research, which Wikipedia does not host. Such sources are Secondary sources, and Wikipedia is, by design, a Tertiary source that is based mainly on summaries of independent secondary sources.

This is, in Wikipedia's collective view and experience, the best way to prevent bias, imbalance and outright false information appearing and persisting in its articles. Sometimes this may exclude valuable information presented by a Primary source until others qualified to assess it have published about it, but that is the price of maintaining the reliability of the material that Wikipedia contains. I hope this clarifies things. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.208.246 (talk) 03:56, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Request for help with article

Hi! Earlier, I asked here about where I could get help or suggestions on an essay I wrote WP:OAFA. Someone suggested I try WP:VILLAGEPUMP, but I’m not sure which section would be best. I also noticed a link to WP:PEERREVIEW, but most of the requests I checked there seem to be unanswered. Any guidance would be appreciated. Thanks! Wikieditor662 (talk) 18:06, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I would recommend sticking it in your userspace. It doesn't appear developed enough for the Wikipedia namespace. The best essays develop very very slowly over time. They are an idea you have in the back of your head for years, and you can't get rid of it. Polygnotus (talk) 19:48, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Heh, I don't even think I've been on here for years... Do you think the article has potential though? Wikieditor662 (talk) 13:09, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

The essay? No, because it is 2 distinct ideas, neither fully fleshed out:

• Solve problems once and for all, which is too hopeful, people will keep arguing even if they agreed to having a 3rd party or consensus make a 'binding' decision. There are few truly binding decisions in the longterm on Wikipedia, because the world is fluid.
• Occam's razor for solutions for problem, which can be a good idea, but that isn't an iron law. In some cases picking the most minor solution will ensure the conflict keeps festering, and you need bigger guns.

So I would recommend sticking it in your userspace and keep it in the back of your head for a few years. Then rewrite it. Polygnotus (talk) 13:20, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

people will keep arguing even if they agreed to having a 3rd party or consensus make a 'binding' decision. There are few truly binding decisions in the longterm on Wikipedia, because the world is fluid. But the point is that it will decrease the amount of debate that will happen after something such as a closed RfC, not eliminate all debate entirely. But yeah, I'll move WP:OAFA to my user page and delete the mainspace one. Thanks! Wikieditor662 (talk) 15:16, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

You will need to contact Seawolf35 as they were the person who rejected your draft. 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 02:15, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Jothefiredragon Was this comment in the right section? Polygnotus (talk) 02:18, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

It's meant for the section below (Wikipedia:Teahouse#Draft:Dargah_Ustad_E_Zaman_Trust) I apologize. 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 02:21, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

The title "once and for all" conflicts with WP:CCC; RfCs can be overturned, and moratoriums are never indefinite. The rest of the essay is redundant with WP:DR. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 13:33, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I probably should've clarified it better in the article. As I explained to someone else in this page, But the point is that it will decrease the amount of debate that will happen after something such as a closed RfC, not eliminate all debate entirely. Wikieditor662 (talk) 15:17, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Aloha! I am the information manager for USINDOPACOM's Pacific Multi Domain Training and Experimentation Capability (PMTEC). Given our activities and mission, as codified in the U.S. Pacific Deterrence Initiative, I believe PMTEC warrants a Wikipedia page. After reading Wikipedia guidelines, I believe I should not be the one to create it.

Is that correct? Any advice on how to get a page established, and if it is established would it still be a conflict of interest to edit it? Mahalo for your input and guidance. Tai Indo (talk) 19:19, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Tai Indo, welcome to the Teahouse!

Thank you for being proactive regarding your conflict of interest. It’s true that COI editors are strongly discouraged from contributing to articles.

For the subject to qualify for a Wikipedia article, it must meet either the general notability guideline or the corporation notability guideline.

The subject warrants an article only if it meets one of these criteria.

You may submit an article request, but other than that there’s not much else to do except wait until the article is created organically.

If you wish to create the article yourself, you can go to WP:AFC and submit it there, where it will be thoroughly reviewed by an experienced editor for common problems with COI editing before it’s published live. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 19:39, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. I will check out both of the notability links you provided, and if warranted, submit an article request for now. Appreciate your response! 199.211.150.27 (talk) 21:12, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

As I assume you are an employee of the US military or serving in the military, you would be a paid editor under our rules. 331dot (talk) 19:52, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. 199.211.150.27 (talk) 21:12, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

And whatever information you write in a draft or article must be based on previously published sources. So something that you know, that is not published, should not be included. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:20, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

If you want to write the article yourself:

1. Make sure you disclose your COI on your user page. See WP:COI and WP:PAID for guidance on COIs and how to disclose COIs and paid editing (which yours would be considered as)

2. Create the article as a draft first. (something like Draft:Pacific Multi Domain Training and Experimentation Capability Follow all the guidance in WP:YFA regarding article standards, notability, verifiability etc.

3. Once you feel your draft is fully-formed, submit it at WP:AFC for review. Again, make sure you note your COI. The article will be reviewed for both normal wiki standards as well as any issues arising from your COI, and if the article is suitable for Wikipedia it will be approved and created as a main article.

Alternatively, you might consider instead getting the info about PMTEC added to the already existing USINDOPACOM article as a section there. If you want to do that, then discuss your proposed addition/edits at Talk:United States Indo-Pacific Command first as is expected of COI editors. Athanelar (talk) 05:03, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for that guidance. Adding to the USINDOPACOM article is a great idea. Tai Indo (talk) 23:16, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Tai Indo, and welcome to the Teahouse. I echo all that other editors have said in reply - including, particularly, acknowledging you for disclosing your connection with the subject.

But I would add something a little stronger about experience: 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) 12:49, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Very wise advice, as I am learning through this process. I definitely need to spend time on Wikipedia before attempting this. I appreciate the thoughtful guidance. Mahalo! Tai Indo (talk) 23:17, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Unusual airport codes?

Since we have a Wikipedia:Unusual place names page, which contains an airport code itself (Sioux Gateway Airport, SUX), should we have an Unusual airport codes article? FlagNerd1010101 (talk) 15:20, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

There's only going to be so many airports with unusual codes. IMO I think it should stay in WP:Unusual place names. But, on that note, I've added another - so now at least 2 airports with rather strange codes! jolielover♥talk 15:29, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Note that Wikipedia:Unusual place names is not an encyclopedia article, but a page in the "Wikipedia:" namespace.

I've made Wikipedia:Unusual airport codes redirect to that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:45, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Since all IATA airport codes have to be a unique combination of exactly three letters, I'm not sure how any of them can be "unusual". Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:15, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

They can be unusual if the 3 letters are a three letter word, like Perm International Airport, Russia being PEE. FlagNerd1010101 (talk) 17:21, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

I gotta be honest, I'm not sure its unusual, just kinda silly. I don't think there's a need for a page "airport codes that form three letter words that makes first graders giggle." CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 20:01, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

If you look up "funny airport codes", there's really a lot of them that I feel wouldn't satisfy the Unusual place names page. FlagNerd1010101 (talk) 19:37, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting they should be listed as part of unusual place names, I'm suggesting they shouldn't be here at all. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 13:26, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

@FlagNerd1010101 Three letter words are not unusual. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:58, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Need help at Commons

Hello editors! I'm trying to move two categories at Wikimedia Commons (this one and this one) but I have no idea how to proceed. I am seeking your guidance (of course in a simple and understandable way). And yeah, don't forget to ping me so I can read your reply. – 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™ ^🗿 16:32, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@Akshadev: Commons has a help desk at c:Commons:Help desk. Please ask there, and specify what names you want to move each category to. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:28, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: I have asked for help but no one has responded yet. – 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™ ^🗿 11:30, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Please be more patient. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:36, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Updating out of date figures

Hi there, I'm new to this so apologies for what may be a duh question... If I notice that some figures are out of date (and there are more up to date figures on the webpages cited), is it ok for me to just update them and publish? Like the number of students at a college dating back to 2020-2021, for example. I'm not yet clear on when I should be making suggestions on the Talk page vs just going ahead and publishing edits. I want to make sure I follow proper etiquette. Similarly, if a cited webpage no longer provides updated figures for numbers that are mentioned in the article, can I just remove that sentence? Stephcard7155 (talk) 20:07, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Stephcard7155! You can be bold and update articles, as long as you include a citation on your addition to a reliable, published source. Make sure to also write in an edit summary explaining what you are updating and why. As for sources that no longer verify the information: yes, either remove the information, find a new source, or check for archived copies of the source that still verify it. qcne (talk) 20:32, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Tabs on Top Menu

Hello, helpful Teahouse hosts,

I have run into a problem and I don't know where to go to get an explanation or solution. I use a laptop and at the top of the screen there is a pulldown menu with tabs like "Page", "User", "More", "Edit" and "TW". For some reason today, the tabs moved around from the order they are normally in (left to right). When you edit as much as I do, you can get used to all of these tools being in the same places all of the time. So, is there any device or page that has information on how to reorder the tabs to where they usually are? I've tried dragging them around (no good) and looking into Preferences. If anyone has a clue, that would be very helpful. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:35, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@Liz Hm, that is difficult to diagnose without a screenshot. Is it possible you zoomed in too much, which thanks to responsive design can turn a horizontal list into a vertical one.

Try pressing Ctrl-0, this should reset the zoom level to the default. Holding down Ctrl and pressing the plus sign zooms in, and minus zooms out. Hope that helps. If not, maybe you can upload a screenshot somewhere? Polygnotus (talk) 00:30, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

I suspect Liz used incorrect terminology and isn't actually seeing a vertical pulldown menu with tabs but is just seeing normal horizontal tabs, some of which activate a vertical drop-down menu when clicked. The reported problem is only the horizontal order of the tabs. Some of the mentioned tabs are made by gadgets which run JavaScript in your own browser after the page has loaded. It varies in which order scripts are run and this can effect in which order the tabs are displayed. It varies for me between reloads of the same page. I don't know a way to fix the tabs in a specific order. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:22, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for using inaccurate terminology in my initial post. What PrimeHunter described is what is happening to me. Over 12 years though, I have dozens and dozens of scripts installed so figuring out which one might be causing this would be a very big challenge.

I have noted two things today that might be pertinent in solving this problem and that is, I've noticed in some screens, the tabs have a different order so it's not a static change. Also, on some of these screens, the order of the tab has gone back to what I'm used to. The main glitch which prompted this note here is that I'm used to the TW/Twinkle tab at the far right. I use Twinkle for so many activities throughout the day, it's just a hassle to go looking for it rather than moving the cursor directly to the same place. I also have had the same order of tabs now for years and years so I was wondering what would suddenly cause them to move around.

But given your advice, I'll see if there is a script that has been recently installed. Thanks for giving me your best guess of what the problem might be. Much appreciated. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:48, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

You might want to experiment with the order in which the scripts are listed, on your .js page(s). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:27, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Need help with POV pushers

Two longstanding editors just changing the lead to whatever they feel like https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Women%27s_Declaration_International&action=history 2A00:FBC:EE98:E96F:E994:EA7D:92A0:7DEF (talk) 20:43, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

If users are persistently edit-warring, first issue a warning on the user[s'] talk page[s], then escalate to WP:ANI if the disruptive editing continues. Athanelar (talk) 00:09, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Athanelar It is four against one, and the IP is on the losing side. @2A00 etc. Sorry bud the WP:CONSENSUS is against you. Polygnotus (talk) 00:32, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Read upon consensus, as meant on Wikipedia; and follow our dispute resolution process if you still think you have a case once you have done so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:38, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Love dart has links to images under copyright

Hi all,

I'm interested in bringing Love dart back to GA status and noticed at least two instances of external links leading to images which are under copyright (e.g., here (I can only assume) and here). I imagine that's not an accepted practice? Barbalalaika (talk) 20:55, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

This is definitely not used that often, but under my interpretation (disclaimer: I could be wrong) of WP:ELYES, external links can be made to "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues". Since the copyrighted work cannot be viewed on Wikipedia, it can then be linked externally per that guideline. However, it cannot be linked if it violates another individual/website's copyright.

In terms of GA, it might be addressed, but I personally have not been involved with the process so I cannot speak on that. Other editors with more a better understanding may be able to clarify, but I figured that I could respond in the mean time since it's been 6 hours. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 02:43, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Procedural closes in RMs #2

When can requested moves be procedurally closed, and is there a template you should use? I don't think you have to wait at all to close them, right? --pro-anti-air ––>(talk)<–– 20:57, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

SPI questions

I suspect that there are two accounts which have extremely close ties to one another, I want to open an SPI, but I am not sure how to do this as I have never done one before. I believe that there is historic evidence of one of the accounts being run by now a new account opened and then not disclosed. I know you are allowed to have more than one account, but you must disclose all ties to which accounts you have, right? Anyway, I was not sure if this is the appropriate venue to ask about this as well. Sorry in advance if it is not. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:36, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn Hello! I would recommend asking my brother Asilvering or Izno. Polygnotus (talk) 00:24, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Asilvering is your brother? Iljhgtn (talk) 00:51, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn Spiritually/metaphysically. Like a comrade. Polygnotus (talk) 00:52, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Gotcha. Iljhgtn (talk) 00:54, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Iljhgtn, I would recommend using Twinkle for opening the investigation; in a person's contributions, you can open a sockpuppet investigation in the ARV button. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Guide to filing cases might have useful information to consider; but basically, just present evidence in a simple way, using diffs. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 01:42, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Naga Sudharsanarao Chinchili

Why this Naga Sudharsanarao Chinchili draft rejected? Chnsrao (talk) 21:52, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Chnsrao, Draft:Naga Sudharsanarao Chinchili was not rejected; it was declined. Qcne pointed out that This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). A number of the words in that may be unfamiliar to you. As posted on the draft, they are linked. If you click on a link, you'll find an explanation. If something that you read is hard to understand, you may ask here. Incidentally, your username Chnsrao resembles the subject's name, Naga Sudharsanarao Chinchili; are you perhaps related? -- Hoary (talk) 22:44, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

In particular, Chnsrao, a reference that reads [citation to reliable source, print or e, goes here] -- and I've quoted that verbatim -- is of no help to the reader and does nothing either to verify what's said or to demonstrate notability. -- Hoary (talk) 05:40, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Chnsrao The "Works" listed at that draft are:

• Famous work here singer, srirama album
• Another famous work here Telangana separate state work
• Another famous work here advocate, he fighting for cancel accused bail for POSCO cases And rape cases

These bullet points don't make sense; apparently you were not done working on this draft. David10244 (talk) 02:58, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Optic Nerve Hyperplasia

Advice for adding image of my own Optic Nerve Hyperplasia for either the article on ONH or the other on Strabismus

I have ONH, and was born with a turned-in left eye (Which was quickly corrected). I've managed to take a photo of my eyes, showing the difference between the 'healthy' right eye and the affected left eye, which is slightly off-center. As the title suggests, I don't know which Article to add. I'm still kind of new to editing and stuff, so I don't know if i can add the image. I'd like to have some advice on what to do, as I don't want to add/edit anything without permission Raine Foll (talk) 23:07, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

It looks like optic nerve hypoplasia doesn't have an image, so yours could be great! To add it, I would recommend starting by uploading the image to Commons. Once you've done that, you'll add the image to the infobox by putting the file name under "image" and adding alt text under "alt" and caption under "caption." Or if you'd like, tag me and post the Commons link, and I can add it to the article for you.

Thanks for your help! SomeoneDreaming (talk) 00:14, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

It's really great that you did that; thank you.

Could you also please upload a version without the text captions? That way, it can be used in articles about ONH in Wikipedias in other languages than English. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:49, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Cypher System 1 million Kickstarter

Hello.

A few months ago (?) I was working on a Wikipedia article about the Cypher System RPG by Monte Cook Games. Consensus was that the game is not encyclopedic enough for the creation of such article.

Not long time ago MCG ran a Kickstarter crowdfunding campaign for the new edition of the game. It reached a level of 1 million dollars. Does that make the Cypher System encyclopedic? Or maybe it is meaningless in the big picture?

Best wishes! Kaworu1992 (talk) 05:14, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Does that make the Cypher System encyclopedic? I don't see how it would do so directly, Kaworu1992. But it could well make the game newsworthy. If it did, then I suppose much of the "news" would be little more than recycled PR junk and interviews with the people behind Monte Cook Games. Very little of this would be usable in any way. But reaching a million might also lead to publication of intelligent material from reliable sources; and if so, then this might might be informatively and helpfully summarizable and might propel the game to encyclopediaworthiness. -- Hoary (talk) 05:35, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Kaworu1992, what makes something notable isn't what primary sources like Kickstarter say, it's entirely based on significant coverage in independent, reliable sources say about a subject. If multiple publications (like those at WP:RSVG) critically report on it, then it has a good chance at meeting our inclusion criteria. Nil🥝 05:35, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

World camel day

 Courtesy link: Draft:World Camel Day

Hello Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing),

Thank you for your message and for bringing the paid editing disclosure policy to my attention. I want to state unequivocally that I have no financial stake of any kind in promoting World Camel Day or any related topics. I am not being paid, nor have I ever been paid, for my edits on Wikipedia.

My motivation is purely academic and advocacy-driven. I am a researcher and advocate focused on sustainable agriculture. My work centers on promoting the camel's role as a key animal for food security and adaptation to climate change in arid regions. I saw Wikipedia as a platform to share this important, factual information with a global audience to raise awareness, not for any personal or financial gain.

I apologize if my edits appeared promotional; I am still learning Wikipedia's complex policies on neutrality and notability. I understand now that I must demonstrate the topic's importance through independent, reliable sources rather than personal advocacy.

I would be grateful for your guidance on how to properly develop the Draft:World Camel Day article to meet Wikipedia's standards. I am committed to learning the correct process and contributing constructively.

Thank you for your understanding. Raziq2007 (talk) 06:04, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Pinging @Pigsonthewing:. jolielover♥talk 06:15, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Raziq2007 Hello! "Advocacy-driven" is also a potential problem from the WP-pov, and the results can be very similar to WP:COI related editing. Please take the time to digest WP:ADVOCACY. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:32, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Previous discussion at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1263#article_about_myself_has_been_dropped, draft at Draft:World Camel Day. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:39, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Raziq2007 Your draft has no citations whatever. You appear to have written your draft WP:BACKWARDS. Please read that essay. All article content must be based on reliable sources, not on what you know. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:53, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

There's no need to address your comments to me - anyone can respond here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:21, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

The draft was AI-generated, with hallucinated references (all but one). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:03, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

My User Page

Hello everyone.

I was googling myself just now (Yeah, I'm that guy) and the A.I. assistant was saying that Wikipedia informed it that I don't have an active user page. I appear in categories - African Wikipedians, Nigerian Wikipedians and the like - but it seems as though my user page itself is blacked out... Why is this the case?

O.ominirabluejack (talk) 09:51, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@O.ominirabluejack Welcome! The AI tool was unable to fetch the page. Not sure which AI assistant you were using, but in the case of Claude, Wikipedia is marked as a "cache-only" domain in the web_fetch tool. With OpenAI's ChatGPT it does work. Polygnotus (talk) 09:55, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Polygnotus, thank you... I was using the A.I. functionality of the Google Chrome browser... I'm glad to hear that it isn't a bug with my page in particular, though.

O.ominirabluejack (talk) 18:16, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Never trust the AI functionality of a browser. DS (talk) 21:11, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Never trust the AI functionality of a browser. Polygnotus (talk) 07:58, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Assistance in Article creation

I need to to create my Article Richard Agi (talk) 10:01, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Richard Agi What are the 2 WP:GNG-best sources about you you know about? If there are no such sources, there is no chance an article about you will "stick." You should also consider Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. If such an article is accepted, you'll have no control over it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:21, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

If you refer to the page you drafted at User:Richard Agi/Sample page, please see our page on writing about yourself.

As written , the page is wholly unsuited for publication on Wikipedia, not least because it lacks the required inline citations, but also because it is written like a hagiography. There is no evidence that the subject meets our basic requirements for inclusion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:43, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

There's no need to create an article on Wikipedia. Please see WP:FAMOUS. 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 11:47, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

What makes you need to move an article to a draft?

I tried checking articles such as Wikipedia:Moving a page, but I'm still not sure about when an article should be moved to draft because it's incomplete. For example, the article Death and state funeral of Fatima Jinnah does not cite any sources, and has other problems. Should that be moved to a WP:DRAFT because of that? What explicit error means you should move it there? Wikieditor662 (talk) 15:07, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Wikieditor662: as you can see from its history, the article has been created and then edited several times within just ten minutes, and by one user only - its creator. I guess nobody simply noticed it, neither at the time of creation or later, and so it slipped in and stayed here. But now, when you brought it into public attention, it will likely get deleted. --CiaPan (talk) 15:22, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Why deleted though? And should I request deletion? And are you sure I shouldn't move it to a draft incase the author plans on adding citations? Wikieditor662 (talk) 15:28, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @CiaPan. I think there's a better way of going about this without being needlessly critical, and which allows @Wikieditor662 to help the user correct their mistakes. I can imagine that an event like this would be covered by a number of publications, the majority of which would be in Pakistan but a number of which I suspect could be found abroad. They need to provide sourcing to support the information you've written here, that's the principal issue. There's otherwise nothing to support the notion that this event is extraneously relevant and deserving of a separate article; as to the draft space requirement, it's not yet credibly sourced and thus doesn't meet the criteria for inclusion in the public space. To Cia, I think it would be best to explain this to the user (@BritPak4709) in question, but if it nonetheless fails to meet the criteria for a separate article, that it be merged to the Fatima Jinnah page. Additionally, though the tag was added by another user, this doesn't look AI generated to me, it's just not perfect standard English. I think a number of editors are too quickly conflating vague wording or sentences that lack an argument with AI, which is frankly a bit rude to those who have put in the time to contribute, even if they didn't do so entirely properly. I'll add my piece to the deletion discussion, but wish you all the best otherwise.

Best,

CSGinger14 (talk) 16:41, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

I removed the message about the AI thing.

What do you personally suggest? That it be deleted? Moved? Or remain but with just a citation needed template? Or something else maybe? Wikieditor662 (talk) 16:49, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Wikieditor662. My thinking is that it be noted as having no sources with Template:Unreferenced until they have a chance to defend their claims. If another editor has even a half-decent argument for moving it to draft space I'd be inclined to agree with them.

Best,

CSGinger14 (talk) 16:56, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Actually, I've just had a conversation with an administrator about it, it went like this:

The article is brand new; give the author some time to work on it. If the article is clearly not ready for the mainspace but likely notable, then if it remains unsourced and is no longer actively being edited it can be draftified. If the article isn't notable after a thourough search for sources then AfD is the venue to go to. CoconutOctopus talk 16:45, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Shouldn't the author first have it sourced before putting it into the mainspace? Should I draftify it now or only after it's been a few days where the author hasn't edited anything? Wikieditor662 (talk) 16:52, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

They should have, but there you go. Any time after an hour of no edits is acceptable per WP:DRAFTIFY. CoconutOctopus talk 16:54, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

From what they said, draftifying it sounds like a better idea. Wikieditor662 (talk) 16:59, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Table formatting issues

I am creating a very large table in a small wiki. However, I am unable to get the table in a small enough area, and I don't understand what to do in order to regulate the size of tables. How do I fix this? Thanks! --DollarStoreBa'al^ConverseMy life choices 20:02, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Where is it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:32, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@DollarStoreBaal44 General guidance at Help:Table and if that doesn't solve it then as Andy said, you need to save your work somewhere we can look at it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:34, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

How to update citations

page Manchester Airport Announces New PIA route from Manchester to Islamabad from the 25th of October 2025. Ive updates references to official announcements on the new flight route by PIA. I just want to update the page as cleanly as possible. Rashadali100 (talk) 20:54, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Rashadali100, this seems to be about List of Pakistan International Airlines destinations and more specifically this set of edits. A hurried glance makes it look pretty good, though use of Template:Cite web really should specify "website=" (with the title of the website, which usually isn't its domain name). (Incidentally, where your user page says "I love debunked mis conceptions", don't you want to say debunking them?) -- Hoary (talk) 23:50, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Welcome @Rashadali100! I would recommend Help:Referencing for beginners. Polygnotus (talk) 23:49, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Signatures?

And how do I make one? Rupert likes music (talk) 22:09, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Rupert likes music See WP:CUSTOMSIG. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:28, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Rupert likes music Hello! Just visited your UP: I don't think it's appropriate to "advertise" Spotify links on your userpage! Maresa63 ^Talk 10:55, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok, I'll get on it now, I can still recommend them though, yes? I will admit ta full link to them was a bit much. Sorry! Rupert likes music (talk) 11:26, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

A question about canvassing

If I got one of my off-wiki friends (who is a minor) to join Wikipedia, and I end up editing the same articles as them because I'm helping them learn to use Wikipedia, but we avoid involving each other off-wiki in disputes/controversial areas, do I need to disclose knowing them in real life? I'm concerned that then by extension I would need to follow WP:GFYE to preserve their privacy. lp0 on fire () 22:14, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Lp0 on fire No, I don't think that you do. Just be aware of WP:MEATPUPPET and avoid ganging up on other editors from the two accounts. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:30, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! lp0 on fire () 22:36, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Qualifier for a speedy deletion

Hello,

I have had a draft about a Brandon Flowers song pending in the AfC submissions category for over two weeks now. I am able to create my own articles, and I would create this article if I could, as it is a single and meets WP:NSONG, but due to the fact that a redirect to the album already exists. My question is, who is allowed to nominate articles for speedy deletion, specifically WP:G6. Would I be able to add the tag and then have an admin delete the page so I can move the article?

Thanks, SassafrassAlabass (talk) 22:58, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Anyone is allowed to tag pages for speedy deletion, and in general I would encourage you to add {{db-move}}. However, since this redirect used to be an article and you are the only contributor to the draft (ignoring the bots), I think the simplest approach would be for you to copy it over: copy everything from the draft below <!-- Important, do not remove anything above this line before article has been created. -->, edit the redirect, and paste it there (replacing the redirect). This is one of the few situations where a copy-and-paste move is appropriate, since there's no other editors that need to be attributed. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:39, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @SassafrassAlabass. You can request the move over the redirect at WP:RM. ColinFine (talk) 09:05, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Correctness on Drafting an AfC Article

Hi people,

As a scholar and international professional soccer player, I am now working on a draft of an Articles for Creation (AfC) submission about myself, Josie Valeri. I am conscious of my conflict of interest as the subject, but I need and want to make sure the page satisfies Wikipedia's requirements for notability, neutrality, and sourcing.

I currently have a sandbox draft that summarizes my background, expertise, and professional career. Although some of my references are from social media or team websites (which I acknowledge cannot demonstrate notability), the majority of my sources are independent news coverage, league announcements, and scholarly publications.

I would like advice regarding:

• Whether the draft satisfies Wikipedia's requirements for notability at this time.
• Ideas for content rewording or reorganization that adheres to an encyclopedic tone.
• Advice on how to safely submit with my COI.

Any suggestions on how to improve independent verification and which sources are appropriate is appreciated and exciting! Josie.Valeri (talk) 23:00, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

You linked to your sandbox, but there's nothing there. If you thought you created a draft, you didn't. You need to click "publish changes"(which should be understood to mean "save"). It's actually best to use the Article Wizard to create and submit a draft.

Please see the autobiography policy. While not forbidden, writing about yourself is ill advised. 331dot (talk) 23:21, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much, 331dot! Josie.Valeri (talk) 20:13, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Josie.Valeri, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Remember that, once you have found adequate independent sources you will need to effectively forget absolutely everything you know about yourself, and write based only on what those sources say. They don't mention something important? Tough. They get it wrong? Tough - depending on how important the matter is in an article about you (which is an editorial decision, which should ideally be made by somebody other than you), it should either say what the sources say, or leave it out altogether. This might seem unreasonable to you; but an article should ideally contain nothing at all that cannot be verified from reliable published sources; and with a few exceptions (see WP:PRIMARY) from sources wholly independent from you. See WP:Verifiability. ColinFine (talk) 09:12, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks ColinFine. :) Josie.Valeri (talk) 20:14, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Nonsense article

Hello, i found an article with no context and references. (link)

Thanks. Versions111 (talk) 23:45, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

@Versions111 Thank you! I have changed it to a WP:DRAFT so that the author can still work on it. It appears to be about a Spongebob Squarepants song. Polygnotus (talk) 23:51, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

New submission - I sound like an LLM!

Hi, I recently submitted a draft article on the Reticulum Network Stack but it got flagged as likely LLM slop.

I definitely didn't use an LLM, but I also definitely kinda just Sound Like That and after looking at the criteria that flagged it, I get why the article may have come off that way. I'm doing a pass for words to watch now and trying to look for any areas I may have editorialized - would anyone here be willing to help point me in the right direction on what else I should fix here? Mayamar Edits (talk) 00:35, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

@Mayamar Edits: Welcome to Wikipedia! You can read our list of AI tells for some other things to watch out for in terms of sounding like an AI. If you have any further questions after reading that page, feel free to ask. Thanks, QuicoleJR (talk) 00:58, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

The reviewer might have noticed that your external link Documentation wasn't working, which is normally a sign of AI, but since removing the trailing slash produces a working link, I think it was likely just human error. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:22, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not seeing any typical LLM signs and think this was a misjudge on part of the reviewer. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 22:22, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

How to request rollback of resized image?

This is both a general question (to gain knowledge for future use) and a request to rollback a specific image to its original upload size.

The specific image is DESQview_2.8_screenshot.png, which has a) been rendered rather illegible by the ""helpful"" automated downsizing "courtesy" of DatBot, and b) probably does not need to be downsized anyways, as it consists of DOS box-drawing characters (not copyrightable), and text, most of which doesn't look copyrightable, except for ~maybe~ the "Sample Document". I.e. the original image might actually very well be in the Public Domain. But PD or not, the current (re)size is absolutely god-awful and makes wikipedia look ridiculous and unprofessional, and the image is not as helpful as it would otherwise be to readers of the DESQview article.

I'm also curious where I should bring up objections/concerns like this in the future, since although I could've left a comment on the image's talk page, such comments (any comments, really) seem unlikely to gather any attention there (and indeed someone raised the same concern/objection that I did on that talk page 4½ years ago to no effect!)

continually and perpetually frustrated by copyright-"concerned" image-resizing bots that resize badly and with reckless abandon,
yet yours truly, ~99.146.242.37 (talk) 07:46, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

@99.146 etc The maker of that bot probably knows, I'll WP:PING them: @DatGuy: See above. Polygnotus (talk) 09:44, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

You can add the {{Non-free no reduce}} template to the image file page (after the full resolution image is restored), as described on DatBot's user talk page, to prevent it being resized again. Xzkdeng (talk) 09:47, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

You can ask at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content for the original image to be restored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:57, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

• If one believes the Commons:Threshold of originality is not met, they should move it to the Commons as explained in Wikipedia:Moving files to Commons. Note that this was attempted and deleted in October 2015
• The image resolution guideline is linked in the template, which then says You also may wish to add the {{non-free no reduce}} template to the image rationale page to indicate that your image resolution purposely exceeds the 0.1 megapixels guideline, though this still requires you to include a valid rationale that explains this reasoning

In the future, if one of the factors in the resizing process was made by an administrator, contact them. Obviously this is not the case with Ron, sadly. If not and the revision has already been deleted, ask on WP:AN. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 02:51, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

essay

how i write an essay. 146.196.39.167 (talk) 08:44, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! See Wikipedia:Essays for some information. But my advice is that familiarize yourself about contributing to Wikipedia before you create any articles (or essays). Also consider creating an account. Xzkdeng (talk) 10:02, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Making an article

I was wondering if it would be a good idea to make a page on a middle school I live by because it isn’t already on Wikipedia but idk how much info to put and what to make it about Mookscade (talk) 17:28, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey there! Please read Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. If this middle school has received significant coverage that is not routine, feel free to create the page! Please note that primary sources, such as from the school's website or someone associated with it, do not establish notability. What you should put in it depends on the subject, but you can check out some other school articles to get an idea of the general information and structure schools have. A good place to start is this category of good school articles. Thanks for contributing! jolielover♥talk 17:34, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Where should I get the sources then if you said that sources with the school website doesn’t establish notablility? Mookscade (talk) 19:25, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

@Mookscade Books, news websites, magazines - anything which has editorial independence, is reliable (not social media), and is not from the school itself. I will note that schools rarely meet our criteria for inclusion unless they have been written about in independent sources. qcne (talk) 19:38, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

And that doesn't usually happen unless the school is a historic structure, or architecturally significant, or maybe extensive independent coverage of its academics(like a high ranking by a government agency or high test scores). 331dot (talk) 19:41, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

The middle school is called Marcus Whitman middle school and is located in port orchard and it’s been built since like the 80s or something Mookscade (talk) 20:38, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

I meant it was built in the ‘80s and has been there since Mookscade (talk) 20:39, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

@Mookscade A quick search led me only to this overview of the school. I'm afraid that's unlikely to be enough: see this guidance for previous discussions about middle schools in general. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:35, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbell then how come the south kitsap high school has an article…? Mookscade (talk) 16:54, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

@Mookscade Wikipedia has, unfortunately, hundreds of thousands of bad articles. The South Kitsap High School has some very average sources, and I probably wouldn't have accepted it if it was submitted for review. The article was also first created in 2006 when our standards were much more lax. qcne (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

IMDb page for Daniel Naroditsky

 Courtesy link: Daniel Naroditsky

Hi, everytime I tried to add the IMDb page (*{{IMDb name|16276851}} for the deceased above but it keeps getting removed. Bare in mind, im not here to give out but just im just wondering if it can be added to the page at all as it is his exact page? Vlove1 (talk) 19:45, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

@Vlove1: IMDb is user-generated and so not reliable. Read WP:IMDB. Bazza 7 (talk) 20:07, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

You can add it as an external link, but not as a citation.

If you have done the former and another editor has removed it, follow the process described at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:46, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Help approving translation

I would like to have the Dutch Wikipedia page for Nick Hemmers translated in English. I'm not able top publish it so I was hoping somebody would be able to do that for me.

Draft:Nick Hemmers

Please let me know what you need from me to publish it. Mandyvt (talk) 21:18, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Mandyvt, will Draft:Nick Hemmers satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (sports)? -- Hoary (talk) 22:51, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. The translation is based of his Dutch wikipedia page. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Hemmers

I just wanted the Dutch wiki page in English as well.

I'll try and fix the citations you flagged on the draft. Thanks again Mandyvt (talk) 18:31, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Mandyvt. Before the Draft can be approved, you'll need to provide citations for the information I flagged on your draft. I or another editor would be happy to publish it for you if you can find the appropriate sourcing to back up your claims, and to prove that the article falls within WP:NOTE guidelines.

Best,

CSGinger14 (talk) 22:52, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

@Mandyvt Hemmers main claim to fame seems to be that he trained others who have articles. However, notability is not inherited. You need independent, reliable sources with significant coverage of Hemmers himself: interviews won't do as they are not independent. They can sometimes be used for aboutself information. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:27, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

I provided the translation based of his Dutch wiki page. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Hemmers Do you suggest changing the text even if it's not a clean translation from his original Dutch wiki? Mandyvt (talk) 18:33, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

There is no need and no expectation for articles about the same subject in two different-language Wikipedias to be translations (in either direction). Translating from one to another is one way of initiating an article in the second, but (a) it is not the only way and (b) thereafter the two will almost certainly diverge as each is separately further edited.

Furthermore, each language's Wikipedia is a separate project, independent from any other, and probably no two Wikipedias have the same rules. The English-language Wikipedia is generally considered to have stricter rules than most or all of the others.

In this case, the article will need to conform to both Wikipedia:Notability (people) (or . . Wikipedia:Notability (sports) and the even stricter Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. I don't think the Dutch article or a straight translation of it would meet English Wikipedia's minimum standards of demonstrating Hemmers' Notability (as others have already said), or of providing sufficient citations to provide verifiability for many of its statements.

By all means continue working on the draft, but it needs more and better references to independent Reliable sources to confirm Notability, and more cited references to verify much of its text. Hope this clarifies. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.208.246 (talk) 23:06, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Can I use files on the commons as a source for articles that need citations?

This question is brought to you by Karl Ernst von Baer's statue. There is a citation needed for his statue at the Leningrad Museum. Looking around I spotted an image of the statue on the Commons. Now I'm wondering if I can use that as source, or if that would be too self referential.

MMichkov (talk) 21:30, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

I suspect that @Pigsonthewing would be able to answer this question, though I'm not entirely sure. Apologies to Andy if I bothered him for nothing!

CSGinger14 (talk) 22:54, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:41, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

You can't simply cite the image on Commons.

What you could do is add the image to the article with a caption stating its location; then remove the 'citation needed' tag.

Only if you are reverted (or not) will you know what other editors think. I certainly would not revert such an edit. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:40, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

@MMichkov That image has been in the article Zoological Museum (Saint Petersburg) since before 2010, so I think you'll be justified in using it again now. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:15, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Got my Draft flagged as ChatGpt

Hello, My article was flagged as chatgpt although I didn't use it. I wrote the article based on other articles. But before coming here I asked Copilot to format it to Wikipedia... is that why? It didn't change it that much. I don't know why the reviewer says it is vague as it has a lot of facts and info. Maybe the subject is not relevant to wikipedia... need some more precise advice. Kind regards William Wathelstane (talk) 22:06, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Please see guidance on LLM/AI use. We much prefer drafts be written with mostly human involvement. 331dot (talk) 22:09, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Wathelstane. To add on to @331dot's reply, I'd suggest that you take a look at these pages to get some context on how best to go about writing for this website in the future: (WP:MOS, Manual of Style; WP:CITE, Citation Guidelines; WP:AI, Artificial Intelligence General Infoguide; WP:NOT, What Wikipedia is Not; WP:NOTE, Wikipedia Notability Policy, WP:TWA, a program designed to help you learn how to write for Wikipedia). I suspect these will answer most of your questions, but please let us know at any point if you run into any further difficulties. Please avoid using artificial intelligence to write anything for this website moving forward unless you have thoroughly vetted and amended the material yourself to check for errors and compliance with the above stated guidelines. There are a number of tools you can use to familiarize yourself with website protocols and editor style preferences. There are also a number of people who (like it or not :D) will correct and seek to advise you along the way. Many of them will be happy to assist you; some, not so much. In the event of the latter, I suggest you reach out to other editors here at the Teahouse for assistance, where I'm certain someone will help you along your way.

All the best,

CSGinger14 (talk) 22:45, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

This is about Draft:Vacminel. This has quite a lot of text, followed by quite a lot of references. Wathelstane, why not use what we, here, commonly call references, in order to indicate which part of the text derives from which source? -- Hoary (talk) 00:34, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

@Wathelstane You currently have several pieces of uncited text like Vacminel is considered a rare gem among antique toy collectors. That sounds like original research, which is not allowed in Wikipedia. Who made that judgement and has it been published in a reliable source? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:08, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your note.

Vacminel was mentioned as highly technological quality for sometnhing built at that time and by a sole trader, this recognition is in one of the articles and came from a german Marklin representative. It is regarded as such "a rare gem among antique toy collectors" and this comes from two of the article but specifically the spanish article that says:

"Today, VACMINEL trains are considered rare relics and highly prized by both national and international collectors." This paraphrasing but I am happy to correct the gem prhase and replace it by this one with a refence to the article. Thank you so much for everyones time and patience spent with this. Wathelstane (talk) 15:31, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Wathelstane. I think it's an excellent choice of topic. Our main concern is the quality of the article itself, rather than its importance, if, as the references you listed at the bottom of Draft:Vacminel suggest, it does in fact fill within WP:NOTE standards. I'm going to leave an example text below that will provide some context on going about creating citations, the function for which can easily located in the visual editing interface as a quotation symbol. I forget how to do so but if another editor could fix the reference so that it appears within a box rather than at the bottom of the page, it would be appreciated.

Vacminel

Here I am introducing the topic. In most articles, this section does not require extensive referencing as it is supported by information and citations included later in the article. If the claim being made is exceptional or not supported anywhere else in the text, this would be the time to cite it.^[1]

===Example Section 1===

This is the beginning of the body of your text. Here I am listing general information on the topic, generally related to its history, design, or function.^[2]. General information not pertaining to the topic doesn't tend to require a citation, such as a note that, at the time your subject was created, Portugal was under the rule of the First Portuguese Republic, so long as its dating is supported by referencing elsewhere in the text. Expanding on this to make obvious conclusions would not generally require a citation either, unless the claim is opinionated or acts as a synthesis of the material to make a non-generalized claim.

===Example Section 2===

Here I am expounding on information found earlier in the text, going into further detail than I did previously.^[3] Here, the claims you're making are going to be more esoteric, and thus fall under a far greater burden of proof than they might otherwise.^[4]

I noticed in your draft that you failed to provide a citation for the 'station' produced by the company (no citation needed for my claim about having found this, as its easily reproducible if I provided proper linkage). This claim would generally require referencing.^[5] Most of the time, primary sourcing is discouraged, though this is not a hard and fast rule, and there exists a fair degree of discourse on the matter between editors in different fields (See WP:USEPRIMARY).^[6]

===References===

Here I am listing my sourcing. Sources can be used more than once, as I've shown above and below, but it's generally discouraged to rely upon one source for more than a few claims, as this may violate copyright law in certain cases. If you have any additional questions, feel free to reach out to me on my talk page; I'd love to help!

Best,

CSGinger14 (talk) 18:45, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Finding free images of living persons

Hi howdy! I originally put this question on my mentor's talk page but I realized belatedly it might be better to put here. I've been updating Post Animal (a currently active indie rock band)'s page and I'm having trouble finding a free image that'll show all or most of the members (six in total, though one member is more famous and has his own page so it's okay if he can't be in it). I've found press-released images (such as this one) and ones taken by the band that would be great, but I understand that since they're a living and active band that we shouldn't use non-free images, so I'm a little stuck figuring out how to get good images for their page. Is there a way to know if an image is free other than a "this image is free/cc" statement on the page it's used? I have read through a good few of Wikipedia's instructional pages for it, but it's still very possible that I just don't know where to look. Any insight would be very appreciated, thank you!! Devonias (talk) 00:48, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

1. Take one yourself
2. find a fan or someone else who has taken one and ask them to release it under a compatible license as described at c:COM:THIRD
3. Ask the band or their management to arrange for one to be released as described at WP:A picture of you.

-- Good luck! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 01:09, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Those links are incredibly helpful, thank you so much!! Devonias (talk) 02:06, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

@Devonias Sometimes, you can get lucky searching Youtube with the "Creative Commons" filter, uploaders can add a WP/Commons usable license if they want. It will likely not be a great pic, File:Young Sheldon cast at KCAs 2024.jpg is a bit typical, but it can be usable. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:29, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

@Devonias A fourth option is to use a search engine like Google image search and then its "Tools" option to limit the output to creative commons licenses. Unfortunately, in this case I couldn't find a usable image. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:03, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

airprot destinations

 Courtesy link: Indira Gandhi International Airport

Hello someone has just deleted half of airline destinations of multiple airlines in the delhi airprot page,is there any way to report Shrey avation (talk) 07:30, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

As the edit summary says:

Danners430 Reverted 1 edit by DOTCOMsun: Aeroroutes isn’t a reliable source per WP:AEROROUTES

If you disagree, please follow the process described at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 07:43, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

For transparency, the edit in question is here where I stripped out the unsourced routes (of which there were a lot) and removed three sources (aside from Aeroroutes) which didn’t verify the content. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 08:16, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

is there no way to revert the changes?As a lot of stuff has been deleted by this person. Shrey avation (talk) 10:52, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

There is, if you can find a reliable source for it you can add it back yourself. If you think what was removed is a reliable source, follow the process described at dispute resolution. Ultraodan (talk) 11:00, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Making a table in source editor

How to make a table in source editor, please help me. Godzilla12491 (talk) 11:46, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Godzilla12491, have you digested Help:Table? And if so, then what help do you need? -- Hoary (talk) 12:26, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

@Godzilla12491 This is a good use for a personal sandbox (e.g. at User:Godzilla12491/sandbox) so you can practice and show us your progress if things go wrong. Click on the currently red link to make your sandbox page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:59, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

This one:

File:Screenshot 20251026 210439 Chrome.jpg Godzilla12491 (talk) 15:38, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Oops Godzilla12491 (talk) 15:39, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Tournament points table Godzilla12491 (talk) 15:39, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

This one, check in the points table section, im kinda new Godzilla12491 (talk) 15:41, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Just edit that article and copy out its source code and paste it into your sandbox. Then you can experiment with changes for that or any other article where you need a similar table. Make sure you don't change the existing table by editing it and save/publishing the result in its current location. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:52, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate your help. Godzilla12491 (talk) 15:53, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

day one

how do i start submitting a biography of living people? deceased? thanks 2600:2B00:7D65:C200:B18B:3DD3:99C8:A495 (talk) 12:27, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Please see Your First Article. You may submit a draft via the Article Wizard; but it is highly recommended that you first get some experience by editing existing articles.

You should first gather independent reliable sources that give the subject significant coverage; you will then summarize those in the draft. Make sure that the person is a notable person broadly or one of the more narrow criteria like a notable musician. 331dot (talk) 12:58, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Asking for advice

Hello!

Do you think that it will be neccessary if the article Prusa get merged with the Bursa article? I think that the Prusa's content can be contained within the Bursa history section. Also, I don't think Prusa was a subject independent enough to have its own article, unlike Cius, considering that Bursa History section already covered a large part of the city's history from the reign of King Prusias I to the Ottoman Conquest, which is when the city is considered to have been named "Prusa" or "Prusias".

Another point, the article is expanded from a former name redirect. So maybe we can consider changing it to a redirect to Bursa.

What do you think? I might send this to Prusa talk page if you guys agree that what I am proposed here is not a nonsense.

Sincerely, - MahmoudAbbasAlDilfti (talk) 13:16, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

@MahmoudAbbasAlDilfti The Bursa article has over 130 page watchers, most of whom won't be watching the Teahouse. Hence I think that your best approach would be to proceed as described at WP:MERGE, with the discussion directed to the Bursa talk page. The merge banner at Prusa will notify anyone who is interested in that topic. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:54, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Film poster adds for movie/film articles missing film poster's

Is there a category of movie or film articles which are missing an image in their infobox of a film poster? I upload book cover images, but I am running out (have added thousands!) and now might work on movies next. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:17, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Similar to this Category:Books with missing cover. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:17, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

I don't have an answer to your question, but thanks for the work you do!! jolielover♥talk 15:49, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you @Jolielover. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:54, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn I couldn't find such a category but I went to category:2024 films and hovered over each title. As I have navigation popups in my preferences, I was able to quickly find an example like Adult Swim Yule Log 2: Branchin' Out which has no image in its infobox. That article has no "missing image"-type category set. Maybe someone will be able to think of a faster way to do what you want. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:03, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

So just go by year? Would it be possible to create such a category? I've never created categories before. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:32, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Sean Combs infobox image change

Making an article

I know you guys have seen my other question and you guys have answered that so I was wondering what I should make an article about because I’ve edited about 10 times in a month… Sincerely, @Mookscade Mookscade (talk) 17:11, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

We really suggest you gain experience by making smaller edits to improve existing articles, before you attempt your first full article, You will have a much more satisfying time if you do that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:23, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Mookscade, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I wonder, why are you so keen to create an article? That's not the only way to make a contribution to Wikipedia. I have made almost 28000 edits over twenty years, but I've only ever created a handful of articles.

If you had a subject in mind that you knew you wanted to write an article about, that would be different; but since you've indicated you haven't, why worry about creating an article? Find some articles that interest you that you think you can improve - especially articles that are tagged as needing {{more references}}.

If you're determined that creating an article is the way you want to contribute, you could look at requested articles and see if there is a request that speaks to you. But with only 22 edits in your history, I echo Andy in saying, don't try it yet. 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) 18:15, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

So your saying I should make more edits and to existing articles rather then making an article? Mookscade (talk) 18:42, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm saying that we very strongly recommend that you don't try creating an article until you've done a good deal more editing, and learnt about thos policies and procedures. I'm also asking why you are so keen on creating an article, and suggesting that that is not the only way to contribute to Wikipedia.

In fact, if more people worked on improving articles rather than creating new ones, we might have a lot fewer rubbish articles (see other stuff exists. I'm talking to myself here as well: I don't create many articles, but I also don't go back and fix existing ones very often). ColinFine (talk) 21:09, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Page update or edit

Hi, usually when you go to a celebrity's page it has a drop-down menu to their filmography, or a link that takes you to another page altogether with a whole list of all their movies/tv shows. However I noticed that Cameron Diaz's page doesn't offer that. I'm trying to get in to see all her different movies and their years, but it isn't on her Wikipedia page. Is there someone that can add that to her page? 2600:1015:B00A:F85B:0:3D:3879:F301 (talk) 17:24, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

That is because it has its own article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:27, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Cameron Diaz filmography is linked in a section of the main article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:32, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Is gore allowed on Wikipedia?

For example, would it be allowed to upload an image of someone's corpse? 2A04:CEC0:F04B:6A1:71EA:A9C4:DD08:AE67 (talk) 17:29, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Assuming there was an encyclopaedic reason to do so and the images available thru Wikimedia Commons wouldn't suffice, yes. Uploading gore for the sake of gore, though, isn't going to fly. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:32, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

We already have many images of corpses, for example Category:Corpses of war victims - Wikimedia Commons. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:35, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Europe map with Azerbaijan map on top right

On the 2026 Women's European Volleyball Championship page, the Europe map doesn't include Baku so I added the city on the top right like the way Kairat is displayed in the Champions League map. However, adding the map unnecessarily adds a bunch of grey space below the map. Is there a way to have the Azerbaijan map without adding unnecessarily grey space.  ILoveSport2006 (talk) 20:13, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @ILoveSport2006, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I have no idea about this, but if you go to WP:Graphics Lab/Map workshop you'll probably find somebody who can help you. ColinFine (talk) 21:13, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

First-time logo upload; verifying proper fair-use rationale

Hello, I recently uploaded the school logo at File:Castle Park High School logo.png, and as this is my first time uploading a non-free file, I wanted to confirm that I followed policy correctly. I based my upload on the guidance at WP:WPSCH/AG#IB (specifically the “Do include” section) and on WP:NFCI, particularly point 7. : (Paintings and other works of visual art: For critical commentary, including images illustrative of a particular technique or school). I selected “This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use” and “This is a logo of an organization.” I provided the source — Sweetwater Union High School District – School Logos. Could someone please review the file and confirm that it meets Wikipedia’s non-free content policy and fair-use requirements? I simply want to make sure that I have done everything properly. And have not mistakenly violated Wikipedia's copyright policies. Thank you kindly, Issac I Navarro (talk) 21:43, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Issac I Navarro, and welcome to the Teahouse.

It looks to me as if you've done everything right with the logo. (NFCI:7 is not relevant: the meaning of "school" there is sense 5 of wikt:school, which has nothing to do with educational establishments. But NFCI:2 applies.)

I think that the article has a lot of material in it which is not encyclopaedic and should be removed. I haven't looked closely enough at the references to decide whether or not it appears to meet the criteria for notability. ColinFine (talk) 21:52, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. And yes, I am looking over the page now, I have added Template: Generated from: Under construction, as of now to the page Castle Park High School, I plan on doing as you suggest and trimming not encyclopaedical substance. Also work on it's layout per WP:WPSCH/AG#OS. Issac I Navarro (talk) 21:58, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

approval

My draft ‘Globex Call Center Solution’ was declined for notability. Could someone review it and tell me which additional sources would make it acceptable?”

Experienced volunteers often reply within a day. GlobalWriter2025 (talk) 23:23, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @GlobalWriter2025, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a confusing question because you added that decline notice yourself. Go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation and follow the instructions there to be actually reviewed. The important thing is quality of sources - you must have several that show the topic is already well-known as shown by published sources that are reliable, in-depth, and independent of the company. Medium is not an appropriate source. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:43, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Bold or Italics?

Hello everyone! I recently edited African & Eastern Trade Corporation and I was wondering if anyone could check my usage of the italics, cause I was not sure if i had to use them, or bold markup, or nothing at all... Thank you so much! 😇 ChairsAreFlying! (talk) 23:26, 26 October 2025 (UTC)