Wikipedia:Teahouse

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

How do i make pages

i dont know how but i wann try it Yurifusion (talk) 12:33, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Yurifusion I would first caution you that creating a new article on Wikipedia is the hardest task a new editor can do! I would really recommend spending a few weeks or months improving existing articles first, so you learn our policies and guidelines. Then, you could submit a draft article via Wikipedia:Articles for creation to be reviewed by an experienced editor. qcne (talk) 12:36, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! Yurifusion (talk) 17:43, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Sup @Yurifusion! I havent been here awhile, but I do know you can search the name of the article that you want to make and there will be something like: The page "My New Article Example" does not exist. You can click on "My New Article Example" to create the page directly, or you may create a draft and submit it for review, but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered.

However, you must be a confirmed/autoconfirmed user. Even though creating a new article on Wikipedia is the hardest task a new editor can do, I would practice in your sandbox. Remember to keep it informal and include lots of reliable citations! Good luck! Wikiwiz910 (talk) 18:37, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

"informal"? Autocorrect strikes again. General Defense Enthusiast (talk) 18:17, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

I would like to note that even I, a editor at 300 or so edits, has created 1 and only 1 article, and that is only a translation

but don't be discouraged

If you can find a notable topic, give it a shot

The worst thing that can happen is a fail, which isn't even a fail if you think about it as learning @Yurifusion

Terry625972 (talk) 14:26, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, what is the article you made? I would like to read it. General Defense Enthusiast (talk) 16:14, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

This is the article he made: Wo Hop Shek Branch Wikiwiz910 (talk) 16:31, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

its a WIP... it is a MEGA-stub rn and I still need to prove its notability

but its there

for now Terry625972 (talk) 19:36, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

What to do if I'm super busy with life but want to help Wikipedia?

Hello, I'm a relatively new editor who is SUPER busy with "life" things, such as transitioning to be an adult (I am currently 18), learning about life itself, and struggling with autism and disabilities. What can I do to help Wikipedia, even if I'm super busy with a transitions program in my state? Should I edit periodically? Should I not edit at all? I truly want to help Wikipedia, but I'm always scared to mess up and be reverted, and can't access many sites used for sourcing. The main thing I'm doing is reviewing and familiarizing myself with the guidelines and policies. Thank you for taking the time to help me, and wish you a great day. 🩷Thatg1rlAv3ry🩷 (Talk to me!!) 21:48, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Welcome, and thank you for your generous offer, Thatg1rl Av3ry. Putting aside worries about guidelines and policies for a moment, what kind(s) of activity and/or subject area do you think you'd find worthwhile and enjoyable? Then we can consider it (or them). -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 22:33, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Alternatively, Thatg1rl Av3ry, please point to two or three articles that are about subjects that are very different from each other and that aren't very long. Then let's take a look at these. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 22:58, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

@Thatg1rl Av3ry: To address one of your concerns: we'll take any help you're willing to give. Many editors are busy in real life, and you're definitely not expected to devote all your free time to Wikipedia. You can edit whenever you feel like it; no one will discourage you from editing just because you're busy. Happy editing! ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Not a chatbot • Contribs)} 23:15, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

If you're scared of being reverted, remember: if you aren't getting reverted every now and then you probably aren't being bold enough (see also: Wikipedia:Bold, revert, discuss). Editors should assume good faith, so messing up infrequently won't get you banned. If you get something wrong, nobody should make it personal. If you get in a dispute, check out Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

Wikipedia is overall fairly friendly, as long as you make a good faith effort. — IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 00:41, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

If you're looking for small, easy edits to make when you have a moment, check out the Wikipedia:Typo Team for some ideas and guides. You can do more as you learn! In solidarity, Blue-Sonnet (I'm listening) 04:44, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

I would consider contributing once in a while, such as replying to a comment or fixing grammar issues. Do not take Wikipedia too seriously, because you most likely have other matters to deal with. General Defense Enthusiast (talk) 16:13, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Other language editions & notability

How do I know if a topic that has an article in other language editions of Wikipedia is notable enough for an article in English Wikipedia?

Like what the title says, I found some articles on Thai Wikipedia that could be useful to have an article entry on English Wikipedia. Problem is that I don't know how to properly assess its notability by English Wikipedia's standard. 🔥Jothefiredragon🐲talk🐉contrib(s)✨log🌟mail🎉global🎊 22:30, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Jothefiredragon, the standards for notability of a subject don't vary according to whether or not the subject happens to be written up at Thai-language Wikipedia. See WP:N and pages that it links to. (If I misunderstand, please explain.) -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 22:55, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

@Hoary Thank you very much for your response.🔥Jothefiredragon🐲talk🐉contrib(s)✨log🌟mail🎉global🎊 18:03, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Basically, no matter if the subject of the article is from Thailand or Australia, it's exactly the same notability standards for English Wikipedia. Sources do not have to be in English, though they still must be reliable. Different-language Wikipedia's have their own notability standards (and other guidelines/policies), so just because an article exists on another language doesn't mean it's notable for English Wikipedia standards. (see WP:OSE) JuniperChill (talk) 20:24, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Editorial guidance for a non-native speaker.

Hello everyone, I am not a native speaker and have written my articles based mainly on analogue sources that are not available in the digital domain. I would like to kindly ask for some help with my articles and recurring issues of AI tagging (categorized as “oddly phrased paragraphs”). I will be grateful if someone could help me with editing my contributions, how to remove the tags and how to get my articles out of the draft slot. Phasenvoid; Talk:Phasenvoid; Draft:Neo-Krautrock Thank you very much, Repevox (talk) 20:20, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

@Repevox, please see WP:ESLAI. Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 21:43, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, I understand. That is why I am here asking for help. Thanks again and have a great weekend. Repevox (talk) 02:30, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

@Repevox Your article would be improved if you used the first sentence to tell the reader what neo krautrock is, not just who invented it. Imagine you are a reader who has never heard of it. ~2026-57795-42 (talk) 00:20, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

Honestly, after reading the article, I'm not sure at all what specifically differentiates Neo-Krautrock. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 00:35, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

@CoffeeCrumbs Thank you very much, your critique is highly appreciated. I have already extended the introduction. Maybe it helps to make the distinction clearer. If you like, please have a look. Thank you very much for helping to improve the article. Repevox (talk) 03:01, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much, your help is highly appreciated and I see your point, I have already reworked the introduction. I will be very grateful if you like to have a look. Again, thank you so much I am happy to find some advice. Repevox (talk) 02:44, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

@Repevox Describing it as a sociocultural phenomenon doesn't help the reader. Isn't it a style of music? That's what the first sentence should say. ~2026-57795-42 (talk) 08:47, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-57795-42

Hi, thank you very much.

It was not just a musical style, it was a cultural attitude (from using the term Kraut Rock, fashion, vinyl records, etc.) – comparable to the original Kraut Rock in the 1970s.

What do you think of something like: a musical style shaped by a continued countercultural attitude?

Repevox (talk) 16:08, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

@Repevox You might be better to add to the existing Krautrock article rather than trying to create a new one. There's a lot of shared information. ~2026-57795-42 (talk) 19:50, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-57795-42

Thank you very much, I really appreciate your feedback.

I think a separate article would prevent an incorrect historical classification, since Neo-Kraut Rock is a distinct phenomenon. Kraut Rock is encompassed to a specific period, zeitgeist and post-war generation. Comparable to Psychedelia and Neo-Psychedelia that have separate articles as they refer to different contexts. Neo-Kraut Rock (as well as Neo-Psychedelia) is Post-Punk generation and today has become a self-referring simulacrum in metamodernity unlike the original Kraut Rock.

I think I should try the separate article – what do you think? Repevox (talk) 00:56, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

@Repevox @CoffeeCrumbs also had a similar view, above. Given the issues that have been identified with your draft, I think you would be better to add to the krautrock page in the first instance. Also, other editors who are watching that page may be able to help & advise. ~2026-57795-42 (talk) 01:40, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-57795-42

Thank you very much. I agree this is a good idea. I would like to suggest, since I see an actual value in a separate article for example for journalists who otherwise can find only misinformation on the genre, that I aim for a separate article (and try to improve it), in case it does not work, we can even incorporate a much better article into the Kraut Rock article. I have already started, let´s see what I can do. What do you think?

and of course if you have suggestions on how to improve my English, please let me know, I will be very grateful. Thank you again.Repevox (talk) 19:13, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

@Repevox, you could create a section in the Krautrock article discussing Neo-Krautrock. I agree with others who have replied here that having a whole other article for this really isn’t the best idea. This is the second time you’ve asked ‘What do you think?’ about creating a separate article; what we think is that you should not. Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) 07:37, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

@Shadestar474

I am sorry. My second "what do you think?" was about the workflow of improving the article and does not ignore the suggestion to incorporate it into the Krautrock article. Maybe I have not expressed myself correctly. Repevox (talk) 13:01, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

I’m sorry, I didn’t understand you correctly :) But now that I do, I like your suggestion to improve on your article so that you’ll have a better section to work into the original article. Apologies for accidentally wasting your time! Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) 21:37, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Incorrectly licensed files

What should I do if I see a file put under the wrong licence, or if it's submitted as 'own work' incorrectly? There's no Commons "Teahouse", so I'm asking here. Pixel Reindeer (Talk) 17:27, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

Check out Wikipedia:Image use policy § Deleting images — IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 17:38, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll check that out later. Pixel Reindeer (Talk) 18:15, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @PixelReindeer, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm not sure if those instructions apply directly to files in Commons: what I do when challenging a file that is on Commons, is go to the Commons file description page, and pick "Nominate for deletion" from the Tools menu. That lets you give a reason.

If you think it would be better to discuss it first, post at C:COM:VP/C. ColinFine (talk) 20:13, 8 November 2026 (UTC)

@PixelReindeer: You can always ask about a Commons file at c:Commons:Help desk or, as ColinFine posted above, c:Commons:Village pump/copyright. Moreover, a Commons file doesn't necessarily need to be deleted just because the uploader might've incorrectly claimed it as their "own work". People often upload files to Commons as "own work" simply because they don't know better, but the actual file itself might no longer be or never was eligible for copyright protection for some reason or might be something actually released under an acceptable free license by its copyright holder. So, unless your fairly certain the file's description or licensing can't be fixed, you might want to seek other opinions about it before tagging/nominating it for deletion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:43, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Article expansion Hinrich Kaiser

Hinrich Kaiser

Hi everyone, I am more generally known for editing etc at Wikispecies and also some higher roles I have. However, I have been approached by a colleague whose sone has written an expansion to his biography. But he realises he cannot make this update himself. He asked me. As I am not really a regular editor or EN WP and I also technically have NPoV issues here I am hoping someone would be willing to expand this article. I can provide the text file they sent me which is effectively the wikimarkup. Curently the article in question just just a link to his Wikispecies page, so this would be an expansion of a page that already exists. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 01:40, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

@Faendalimas, if the colleague's son you are discussing is Hinrich Kaiser, there is no biography for him on English Wikipedia. That opens two possibilities.

1. If this is related to updating his entry on Wikispecies, as far as I know they don't share the same COI rules as en-wiki. You could ask at the Wikispecies Village Pump.

2. If this is related to creating a new article here on the English Wikipedia, you can refer your colleague or his son to the general notability guideline, the policy on conflict-of-interest editing, and the rules on autobiographical articles. Theoretically, you could ask at WP:RA, but it's so backlogged that it's basically useless.

An important closing note: now that you've asked here, beware of scams. If anyone approches you offering to create, guarantee acceptance of or undelete your article, they are most likely a scammer. Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 02:44, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

Um no it has nothing to do with Wikispecies, where I am a crat. Its ENWP and the article already exists. I linked it above. The son of the subject of that article has written an expansion of it. But the subject of the biography sent it to me as we are long term colleagues. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 03:41, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

@Faendalimas, fair enough. But click on the link you provided, and you'll see a page that says: "Wikipedia does not have an encyclopedic article for Hinrich Kaiser (search results).

You may want to read the Wikispecies entry on "Hinrich Kaiser" instead." Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 04:04, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

I think they're asking whether someone would create the article here on their behalf.

@Faendalimas You've got a couple of options - the son could absolutely write and submit this as a COI draft with the relevant tags. It would definitely need to be compliant with English Wikipedia policies etc., so I'd strongly encourage them to read through all the help guides and so on first. It won't be easy, as the Wikispecies page is barely the skeleton of a Wikipedia article and writing with a COI is hard, especially for a new editor. It'll depend on how much effort they would like to put into seeing this through. Honestly, this isn't a great idea, but it's possible.

You could also write and submit the draft yourself; I think you're far enough removed that there wouldn't be a COI, but you might prefer to COI tag anyway or at least disclose it when you submit the draft for approval via WP:AFC.

Otherwise, articles aren't written on request so it's unlikely that you'd come across a volunteer who'd create it for you (especially on the Newcomer Teahouse) - that's one reason why WP:Requested articles is currently inactive. We're more of a "get your hands dirty and dig in" project. In solidarity, Blue-Sonnet (I'm listening) 05:50, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Faendalimas, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Frankly, unless the son is an experienced Wikipedia editor, it is unlikely that he understands enough of Wikipedia's policies to even determine whether his father meets the criteria for notability, let alone to write an acceptable article about him. It is likely that his draft was written WP:BACKWARDS, in other words, from what he knows, rather than from what the independent sources say.

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.

We very often get people posting here who want an article about themselves or their close colleagues or relations, and I'm afraid the stock answer is usually "only if you write it yourself, but you are very unlikely to be successful in doing so". This is partly because of their inexperience in Wikipedia's policies, but usually also because most people in the world do not actually meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. ColinFine (talk) 15:52, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

Please ask the son to paste the mark-up into Draft:Hinrich Kaiser. You should not do that for them, because it would be a breach of their copyright; and false of you to claim to be the author.

Once we see proposed content, we can advise further. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 20:17, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Multiple moves creating a new primary target

I am looking for advice. I was planning to be bold and 1) move Logan's Run to a new article Logan's Run (novel), then 2) move the current Logan's Run (film) over to Logan's Run, changing the primary target from the 1967 novel to the 1976 film.

• I do not believe that there would be any dispute over changing the primary topic. Page information shows 24,502 views for the film article to 5,905 views for the novel article, and the film article's views are north of 70% of total combined views including other related topics (e.g. the DAB, a short-lived TV spin-off, etc.) Clearly the film is primary. Twenty years ago, the novel and film were a single article. In 2006, the film was split off into a new article and the novel was left at Logan's Run on the grounds that the novel predated the film based on it; I can find no talk page discussion since 2008 regarding primary topic or article names.
• However, I have not previously done a series of article moves that effectively replace a primary target. I don't know the technical issues that might be involved, and wanted to avoid creating a mess in terms of redirects, existing links from other articles, etc. that might require clean up.

So, question: Should just doing the two moves that I am proposing myself work without undue mess? Should I go to Wikipedia:Requested moves (and I am mindful that there is an admin backlog there)? Should I go to Wikipedia:Requested_moves#TR? Something else? I'm trying to be respectful of fellow editors, and any advice is appreciated. Thanks. CAVincent (talk) 04:15, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

Just an observer. I think you should talk on the page's talk page before discussing move. Also, if there are more than one name for a page (like multiple pages), you can create a disambiguation page. But, I would talk on the talk page of the page first. Have a great day. And, thank you for your question! Nepaxt (talk) 05:23, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

I'm afraid that this does not help. I'm not asking how to obtain consensus for the page moves, but how to make them happen from a technical standpoint. CAVincent (talk) 16:33, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

When in doubt about a complicated move you can ask for an experienced page mover to handle it here. You'll also have to make sure incoming links point to the right articles, because a redirect can't immediately handle it. I can do stuff! (talk) I can do stuff! (talk) 16:33, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Background

Can you alter your background to bloody red, so I can actually enjoy my articles. Pretty please; with a cherry on top!

~2026-59715-08 (talk) 14:42, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

We can't alter our background, but I'm sure there's a way to get the desired effect with a common.css page. Unfortunately, I can't really help you, but I'm sure there's somebody who knows CSS and is willing to help. DollarStoreBa'al _(Converse) 14:59, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-59715-08, you could create an account and add this to your global.css page. But you'll notice that a blood-red background is requires quite a few changes. This is a just a very basic attempt, I would not recommend using it.

html, body,
.mw-page-container,
.mw-body,
.vector-body,
#content {
    background-color: #880808 !important;
    color: #ffffff !important;
}
/* Optional: make links readable on dark red */
.mw-body a,
.vector-body a {
    color: #ffd27f !important;
}

Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 03:13, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Quick question as I find this idea intriguing and might want to implement it for myself with some other color but know absolutely nothing about CSS—why shouldn’t you use it? If it has an undesired effect, couldn’t you just delete that part of the .css page? (Sorry if that’s a stupid question, lol) Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) 07:25, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

It only "requires" changes in the sense that some text colors are hard to read on a dark red background. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:08, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

@Shadestar474, as Primehunter said, text and link colors are chosen to work on a white background. Changing said background forces you to choose new colors for basically every component. Many things also depend on color, such as redlinks, disambiguation links, etc. So I wouldn't recommend just copying and pasting the code above to a new user who may not be familiar with color-related concepts. Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 14:45, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

I get it now; thanks. Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) 21:42, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Article creation/translation

I would like to translate https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%92%8C%E5%90%88%E7%9F%B3%E6%94%AF%E7%B7%9A into english but do not have extended confimed

what does I do? Terry625972 (talk) 15:46, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

also does a article have to have passed the notability guidelines for the Wikipedia it is being translated to in order for it to be translated Terry625972 (talk) 15:59, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Terry625972, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Please look at Translation.

In answer to your second question: the notability guidelines for the source Wikipedia are not relevant. I believe that English Wikipedia has the strictest requirements, so the answer is probably Yes; but all that matters is whether the subject meets the English criteria for notability. (Note that it is the subject that must meet these criteria: the article should demonstrate this by citing appropriate sources, but it can happen that an existing article covers a notable subject without actually establishing that it is notable).

As for your first question: I'm guessing that you are using the content translation tool: because of the need for review by experienced editors, this requires ECR to use it to main-space. You may however use it to generate a user-space draft (eg User:Terry625972/Wo Hop Shek branch) review it to check the translation and that it does meet English Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and then submit it for review by pasting {{subst:submit}} (including the double curly brackets) at the top. ColinFine (talk) 16:13, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

sorry for asking, but how do I use it to generate a user space draft? Terry625972 (talk) 13:51, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Terry625972, I'll just add that based on a quick scan through the sources, the article definitely passes WP:GNG on the English Wikipedia. I haven't read something so interesting in a while :) Good luck on your effort! LkL-70547 (talk) 17:18, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

There is a little bit about the Wo Hop Shek Branch Line already in the article for Wo Hop Shek, so should I just make Wo Hop Shek Branch Line just link to Wo Hop Shek? Terry625972 (talk) 13:58, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

if so, should I expand the paragraph? Terry625972 (talk) 13:59, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I think WP:SPLIT makes more sense in this case, given the original article (and paragraph) is in pretty bad shape, if you just expand that you would end up with an article that's just 75% railway section, and the rest still unsourced. LkL-70547 (talk) 15:40, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

alright so I should leave the section and add something more, or should I move the section to the new split article Terry625972 (talk) 15:45, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

can I just rewrite the article given citations from the Chinese version, or do I need to translate it from chinese

I have realized my limited Chinese (about CEFR B1) is NOT gonna take me many places

(pun intended) Terry625972 (talk) 15:54, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

@Terry625972 I don't entirely understand what you mean. If you just mean whether you have to translate the sources cited, you definitely don't. Non-English cites are fine per WP:NONENGLISH.

As for the Wo Hop Shek article, just leaving a link should be fine. We can always improve it when we have the time, but that's a separate project.

Let me know if you have any other question. LkL-70547 (talk) 18:52, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

I realized that I am not good enough in Chinese to translate the article. I will use the chinese version as possible, but I need to work on it in english Terry625972 (talk) 20:08, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

@Terry625972 not quite sure what you mean here. Do you plan to write parts of the article with English sources? That would be fine, even though I think finding those sources in the first place would be tricky. If you still plan to use the Chinese sources, those are usually harder to read compared to the zhwiki article itself, so I'm at a loss as to what you plan to do. Sorry if I misunderstood you. LkL-70547 (talk) 21:45, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

I'm essentially rewriting the article and not translating it. I am too ungood at mandarin andor cantonese to read the chinese article in the first place Terry625972 (talk) 22:22, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

So, what sources are you basing your re-writing on? I haven't found any good English sources, but you might have better luck :)

WP:Translate have some more guidelines, but in general you shouldn't go for a verbatim translation anyways. For example, there is a paragraph in the zhwiki article that's sourced to HK Maps, which is a dead link and almost certainly a failed verification (I pointed that out on the Chinese talk page), so we should leave it out of the English version. Overall, don't be afraid of writing it in your own words, as long as it fits the standard of the English Wikipedia. LkL-70547 (talk) 22:35, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

@LkL-70547

the article has been given a {{Organizations}}

notability question

is it not notable enough

or have I just not proven it Terry625972 (talk) 19:29, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@Terry625972 Thanks you for making the page! I'll reply on Talk:Wo Hop Shek Branch for better visibility. LkL-70547 (talk) 19:56, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Table and paragraph spacing

I have created a table (with margin-left) followed by one or two blank lines and then a paragraph of text, but on output the paragraph appears next to the table (to its right). I expected the blank line to force the paragraph to be set below the table, which is my intention. I've tried unsuccesfully to force this. What should I be doing? Johsebb (talk) 17:39, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi Johsebb. Please always post a link or the code when you ask for help with broken code. We have to see what's wrong to fix it. If you refer to then it doesn't have margin-left but float:left which explicitly asks the browser to display the following content to the right if there is room. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:43, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

{| class="wikitable" style="float:left;margin-left: 5mm;"
::|+  align="bottom" style="caption-side: bottom" | ''AB''<sup>2</sup> <br>''t''+ 2''u''
::|| 0
::|| 2
::|| 1
::|-
::|| 1
::|| 0
::|| 2
::|-
::|| 2
::|| 1
::|| 0
::|}<br>
|}
::Here's some text.  It needs to go '''under''' the table. 

Johsebb (talk) 17:33, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

@Johsebb: It's caused by float:left as I suspected so it's behaving as the code asks for. Just remove it if you dont actually want it to float left with other content to the right. You can also cancel out float by adding {{clear}} below the table but that seems pointless if you can just remove float. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:01, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. I tried this, but it creates other problems. Below is the actual text. As you'll see, there are four tables. The bullet point that starts "the contrast vectors" should be below the four tables. (Please look at the actual code in this reply. The first line of code is not being executed in the output of this reply.)

For simplicity, the blocking functions are expressed in terms of t and u rather than t₁ and t₂. In each table, the 9 cells are filled with the values of its blocking function. For example, in the table for AB, cell 12 has the value 0, which is the value of the blocking function t+u when (t,u) = (1,2) since 1 + 2 = 0 (mod) 3.

• the contrast vectors. Compare table in Factorial_experiment#Examples giving a set of 4 contrast vectors for interaction that doesn't separate into the two components.

Johsebb (talk) 19:09, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@Johsebb: Your edit had a large number of unwanted colons. It appears you used the "reply" link and copy-pasted table code into the reply box. That doesn't work properly. The reply tool is meant for indented discussion posts. Use the "edit" link at the section heading instead if you post tables or other special wikitext. Another editor tried to clean up your post but I'm still not sure what you want. I guess you don't want a collapsible box. Do you want the "For simplicity" line to the right of the tables and only "the contrast vectors" below them?" {{clear}} on the line before * the contrast vectors should do that. I suggested to remove float when I assumed there was only one table and you only wanted text below it as your first code indicated. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:48, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Table formatting

In the following table:

the cells of the top row and of the left-hand column do not need to be enclosed in boxes. How do I do that?

Alternatively, I could keep this table but thicken (or double) the horizontal line after the top row and the vertical line after the first column. How do I do that? Johsebb (talk) 18:47, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

Help:Table § Individual cell borders may help you IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 19:03, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

@Johsebb: I'm guessing that the numbers in your table are column- and row-headers. If so, keep things simple and mark them as such:

	0	1	2
0	x	x	x
1	x	x	x
2	x	x	x

If I'm wrong, perhaps you could give more details about what you're trying to achieve, including the page or draft you're working on. Bazza 7 (talk) 20:48, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

This works fine. Thanks. Johsebb (talk) 19:58, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

No specifics for declined drafts

I'm tempted to push Draft:Paul Guay (screenwriter) and Draft:Kambra Potter through to mainspace, but I would like further opinions. The same reviewer at WP:AFC declined both very quickly after I submitted but I'm not getting exact reasons for why they don't meet WP:GNG. Some sources aren't as significant or independent as others, so that could be the issue. I've piped the best citations to the lead on each. –Filmforme (talk) 19:59, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Filmforme, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Which of your sources each meet all the conditions in WP:42 - that is, they are published in reliable sources, they are wholly independent of Guay/Potter, and they contain significant coverage of the subject i.e. of Guay or Potter, not just of a particular film or pageant?

That is the only kind of source which is relevant for determining notability. Looking through the list of sources, it doesn't look to me as if many of them meet those criteria (though I may be wrong, as I haven't looked at the sources). ColinFine (talk) 20:21, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Filmforme, I haven't thoroughly inspected all of your sources but I have first impressions that might be of use. The majority of the sources you're using for Guay are interviews with him; being information directly from the subject, interviews are generally unhelpful for notability purposes because they're not independent. Remember that a suitable source meets all three criteria in WP:42!

Most of the sources for Potter are from a single publication, Elk City Daily News, which is a small and very local newspaper. I can't immediately find the policy, but I'm confident in saying that we usually require the subject to be getting attention at least in their home country and ideally globally. Someone else will probably know it by heart, but I'll keep looking and link it here if I find it before another editor jumps in to save the day. Meadowlark (talk) 20:26, 9 November 2026 (UTC)

WP:AUD is something similar, but technically only applies to WP:NCORP. Even if it's not written down anywhere, I agree with you that it's a good benchmark. Athanelar (talk) 20:45, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

A piece of pragmatic advice: It is better to get declined at Articles for Creation, which allows you to fix the article and try again, than to push it to mainspace and end up at Articles for Deletion, where a deletion outcome tends to be the end of the road. M kuhner (talk) 14:06, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Webster groves

Is there a way to add Large student protests against ICE as School students walk out of campus? We made sure that WGHS stuff was removed because the editor said “It’s only town article, not school article and I don’t want any edit wars.” Carrotbrick (talk) 03:26, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi Carrotbrick,

Wikipedia has a guideline about general notability: A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

If there is significant coverage of student walkouts, it certainly could be an article. It's a little unclear what you're talking about regarding WGHS and another editor's comments. Trumpetrep (talk) 04:16, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

I think this is someone asking if student walkouts at WG (presumably Webster Groves) HS (presumably High School) are notable enough to warrant mention in the WGHS article (if it exists). A Texas high school I know of had walkouts discussed in a dedicated New York Times article, so I think it’s plausible there’s mention of WGHS student walkouts in reliable sources, though probably just local news sites for wherever Webster Grove is. As for the rest, I don’t understand what’s being asked and can’t help there. Carrotbrick, since you say “we”, I should mention this: each account is for one person and one person only. Shared accounts are not permitted. I’ll find the policy, guideline, or essay talking about this in a second. WhyNotZoidberg? ^{Woop-woop-woop!} 04:48, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

WP:SHAREDACCOUNT. PixelsRCool (talk • contribs) 14:31, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! I completely forgot about this, when I wrote the above it was rather late at night for me and I fell asleep before I could find that link. WhyNotZoidberg? ^{Woop-woop-woop!} 14:36, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

@Carrotbrick: If you're referring to this Webster Groves High School and there is a reliable source you can cite that reported on the protests (the Post-Dispatch?), then I think infomation about the protests could certainly be added to the "History" section of the high school's article. Deor (talk) 15:44, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

It has to be on the town’s article where The Mayor sees people marching on streets to Protest ICE in the city’s history Carrotbrick (talk) 22:19, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

No, it doesn’t “[have] to” be anything. Wikipedia does not follow external schedules, nor does Wikipedia promote things, advertise things, or anything in those lines of thought. This information will go where it fits best, which will probably be the WGHS page (if it exists), if reliable sources discuss it. WhyNotZoidberg? ^{Woop-woop-woop!} 22:44, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Is there a way to do this without SYNTH?

I was looking at Thomas_Mundy_Peterson#Legacy and it looked like a pretty big synth problem, as the claim that he was the first African American to vote in an election (supported by a few reasonable sources) was "debunked" by sources that only stated previous black voters, with no source refuting the previous sources. I l cleaned up most of the tone issues, but it feels wrong to just delete the debunking part since it is true by common sense^{[original research?]}, and keep the "he was claimed as the first African American to vote in any US election" as that part is supported by sources - and I know it's not OR to assess the reliability of sources. What's the balance here? LkL-70547 (talk) 05:33, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Fellow newbie here so take this with a pinch of salt :) I would look for sources that directly confirm the nuance of the situation directly, and themselves explain the "wrongness", if you will, of the other sources. For example, I would remove the citation number 21 and replace it with this one: https://www.kolumnmagazine.com/2026/03/31/the-first-vote-after-freedom/

Which states : That contingency has sometimes made Peterson’s story vulnerable to misunderstanding. Some accounts call him the first Black voter in American history. That is not accurate. Black men had voted in some northern jurisdictions before 1870, including in New Jersey itself under earlier property-based rules before those rights were stripped in 1807. Black political participation had also occurred during Reconstruction before Peterson’s ballot; the deeper point is that Peterson was the first African American known to cast a ballot under the newly operative authority of the Fifteenth Amendment. GreyZoneLife (talk) 14:44, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Girls called Henney

how many girls name of henney born in the 1950s on funen denmark ~2026-59545-36 (talk) 10:37, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-59545-36 That question has nothing to do with Wikipedia. The Teahouse is here to help users with editing and using this encyclopedia. Do you have a question within that scope? Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:10, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

You might want to go to the WP:reference desk for questions about encyclopedic topics. This is a hard decision (talk to me!, contribs) 12:56, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Draft:Roberto Forzoni – are these sources enough?

Hello. I am Roberto Forzoni, so I have a conflict of interest. My draft about my thirty years’ work in performance psychology has been declined several times for lack of notability. Before I try again, could someone tell me whether these three sources show better coverage of my work?

1. Ian Florance, “Careers – Mindsets, music and magic”, The Psychologist (BPS), 5 August 2014 – https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/careers-mindsets-music-and-magic
2. CRACK “Mental scars”, The Observer, 6 January 2008 – https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2008/jan/06/features.sport20
3. “And for my next trick”, Daily Mirror, 17 September 2007 – http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport-old/football/2007/09/17/west-ham-3-0-m-boro-115875-19801199/

Any guidance would be welcomed. Thank you.

Rforzoni (talk) 12:26, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Rforzoni. Genereally your sources need to meet our golden rule: be reliable, provide significant coverage, and be independent of you. Your sources, in order:

1. An interview with you. It meets our reliable and significant coverage criteria, but fails our independence criteria since the information is coming from you. There is a little bit of independent analysis from the interviewer, but not quite enough. I also wonder about the independence because it comes from bps, where you assumedly have a conflict of interest with?
2. This is an average source. It contains some choice quotes from you, and some basic analysis. The Guardian is certainly reliable but it doesn't meet the bar for significant coverage nor independence.
3. We generally say that The Mirror is not a very reliable source, being a tabloid. It provides a little bit of independent analysis, but not enough to meet our significant coverage criteria.

So, all the sources fail at least one of our golden rule criterias. Hope that helps. qcne (talk) 12:43, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Rforzoni, welcome to the Teahouse.

The issue with the three sources you've provided is none demonstrate WP:SIGCOV. They're all about other things and not you specifically. I'd also suggest reading the feedback provided by the reviewers who declined your previous drafts. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 12:44, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Thank you both for taking the time to reply. That helps, and I appreciate the clear feedback. I’ll leave the draft for now and come back if more independent coverage appears. Rforzoni (talk) 14:34, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Hyphenating "stepfather?"

As I've been copyediting articles, I've come across quite a few instances of "stepfather" being hyphenated, and I think this is a mistake. The most recent instance of this I came across was in Sharp Objects (2nd paragraph in "plot" section). I reviewed the Manual of Style, and couldn't find a clear guideline on this. According to this website it is not hyphenated per English conventions. What should I do? Can somebody point me to a part of Wikipedia:Manual of Style that dictates this? Am I missing something? Skyeteam (talk) 15:37, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

This is the first time I've seen that word hyphenated. Unless it's part of a quote or something, it looks like the hyphen should be removed.  Gommeh sign 🎮 talk 16:04, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Skyeteam (talk) 16:21, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

The hyphen is not wrong. Burchfield's New Fowler, for example, uses step-father, step-son, etc. DuncanHill (talk) 16:31, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea to amend WP:MOS to clarify this. I don't know how to do this/what the process is, but it might be good idea. Skyeteam (talk) 17:40, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Hyphenating stepfather would now be called outdated in almost all linguistic guides. Frankly, I thought it might be correct British English format, as hyphens are more often used in that English variant than US English—but an online search says otherwise. Augnablik (talk) 04:56, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

There are rather a lot of word pairings in English that at one point in time were hyphenated ("to-day", "to-morrow", "week-end", etc.) but for which the hyphen was gradually dropped over time to the point it's no longer considered common usage, and the pairing is instead treated as a single word. I'm not sure if it's necessary to update the MOS for something like this unless it's a major issue throughout the entire project. Since "step-father" isn't incorrect per se, it probably should be treated along the lines of MOS:ENGVAR and only changed if it needs to be changed (i.e., for in-article consistency). You could, if you want, start a discussion about this at WT:MOS, but project-wide changes tend to require a WP:RFC with lots of participants and a pressing need to make the change. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:12, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

@Marchjuly, I would disagree on this because in modern times it’s not an Engvar situation. Major authorities (I could make a list if asked, but Ikind of hope I won’t be) all seem to agree that common words describing relationships that start with step aren’t hyphenated unless they’re followed by something else denoting relationship, like step-grandfather … or perhaps if the relationship is less common and might cause confusion if they aren’t hyphenated, like step-uncle. Augnablik (talk) 08:59, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

@Marchjuly, @Augnablik: Looking at several prominent English online dictionaries (which record but do not dictate how words are written) I see:

• Cambridge: stepfather; no recognition of step-father (*)
• Collins: stepfather, "also step-father"; step-father redirects to stepfather (*)
• Longmans: stepfather; no recognition of step-father (*)
• OED: stepfather; no recognition of step-father
• My 1964 Concise Oxford English Dictionary: "step-, pref., ... ~′father...", so step-father; no entry for stepfather

Those marked (*) have entries for "step-" showing examples for step-son, step-granddaughter, etc, but not step-father or step-mother.

Were I from Clapham, I'd say it's now invariably "stepfather" in contemporary British English.

I don't think an MOS entry is needed, just common sense and the ability to use a dictionary; else we'd risk turning MOS into a spelling dictionary whenever someone came across a spelling from times past. Bazza 7 (talk) 10:39, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Chambers specifies that it is all one word, that is, no hyphenation. And the same for stepson, stepbrother, etc. It makes no distinction between British and American usage. Mike Marchmont (talk) 10:42, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Citing Albums

I got this article of Bill Evans tribute albums as a suggested edit (lacking citations). As a Bill Evans fan I would love to go through and add citations to this page but I have some questions and would love some resources as a new editor.

My first question is, are other user edited websites like “Discogs” considered reliable citations. Discogs likely includes entries for all of these albums and I wouldn’t mind adding citations to each one with further information.

Secondly, if Discogs is not considered ideal as a source is it possible to cite the albums themselves? I worry that’s almost a circular reference somehow to just cite, for example, the CD release, as a source on this page.

Lastly is it excessive to provide sources for every release? Or is there guidance on whether some releases require citations and others don’t?

thanks in advance!

G GrantMHawkins (talk) 16:44, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources tells you what is a reliable source. Specifically, Wikipedia:Reliable sources § User-generated content (which specifically mentions Discogs).

I'm not entirely sure whether or not the article you mention is even notable in the first place, though.

IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 18:37, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate the resources! I wasn’t familiar yet with the notability guidelines so that is helpful for a new editor. Thank you! GrantMHawkins (talk) 19:46, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello Grant!

This very issue is currently under discussion!

The albums themselves are sources that can be cited. They prove their own existence. No further citation is required. If there is supplemental information that would help the article, it should be added. There is a recommended style for discographies.

Discogs is a user-generated website. Wikipedia considers those unreliable sources. Trumpetrep (talk) 18:41, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the information! I had a feeling this may have been the case but wanted to check with more experienced editors. GrantMHawkins (talk) 19:44, 10 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Trumpetrep,

if you have time I have a follow-up question for you as I notice you’re an experienced music/arts editor.

I get various music articles recommended to me for potential edits and I find myself wanting to cite releases (typically albums) directly as a source. One page was to do with a track listing that had been flagged as requiring citations and another was for a record label that listed bands they had released records for. In the second case I feel as though it makes sense to cite the album itself as evidence that the label put that album out, but I am struggling to find any resources about citing albums which leads me to believe it’s not encouraged to do so. Similar to your point in the discussion about “lists of works” I feel that it’s a bit self evident to cite in this way, however in the example of a list of artists released by a label, I feel as though it may be more warranted to cite those releases.

thanks in advance,

G GrantMHawkins (talk) 13:45, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Hey Grant,

Yes, the album can absolutely be the source for track lists. There is a basic citation format for albums that you can see in this MLA guide. Citation styles vary, but the bottom line is that albums are primary sources that can be valuable references.

Liner notes can also be an important source to cite. They are frequently readable at Discogs or the Internet Archive, as well.

As for record labels, citing the album as a source might cause other editors to balk, but it obviously suffices. Any record label worth its salt will have generated some press for a release, and that would be a good secondary source to establish a release.

A lot of content doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability requirement. It's a helpful metric to use while editing. For a record label's article, I'd keep the notability guideline in mind. Is it important to name individual releases and artists in the article? If so, go for it. In a lot of cases, it might be trivial.

For the record, I agree that the Bill Evans tribute albums list does not seem notable enough for an article. I could be convinced otherwise though, given Evans' importance. Trumpetrep (talk) 16:31, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much! It definitely seems that I will have to familiarize myself much more with notability guidelines. GrantMHawkins (talk) 16:40, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Is the obelisk acceptable per WP:SPS

Hello!

I've been working on a handful of articles in the stoner rock/psych rock scene. I've found quite a few at this point that source https://theobelisk.net/obelisk/ as a source. The Obelisk is a self published website ran by JJ Koczan. Wikipedia WP:Verifiability#Self-published sources states that self published sources are generally unacceptable UNLESS the individual is particularly well versed in their field. Koczan has been running the website since 2009 so he has some stake in the scene. On the flip side, it is one person and runs a higher risk of poor sourcing.

Before I went on a frenzy reciting articles I wanted to get some confirmation on how I should approach articles utilizing The Obelisk as a source.

Cheers! EdnPld (talk) 04:20, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

An excellent question, EdnPld, for raising at either Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rock music or WP:RSN (but not both). (Meanwhile, I'd say that the recitation of articles may be impassioned, but not frenzied.) -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 04:43, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the direction and advice Hoary.

Edit - took me a second.. re-citing...haha!

Cheers! EdnPld (talk) 04:45, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguations regarding spelling

Searching “Notos” in the search bar will redirect the user to Notus which has Notus (disambiguation) linked in a hatbox at the top. However, I want to include, via either a disambiguation entry or a redirect page, the page for the album Notos by the Oh Hellos, which is named after Notus. However, the disambiguation page only includes terms spelled “notus”, and I’m unsure whether I should change the redirect page of the term “notos” from the Anemoi to the album. What should I do?

Cheers. 붉은혜성라이카/BlazingCometLaika 05:16, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

You can add a hatnote at the top of the page. For example, you can use the template {{redirect}}. Jacksonvil (talk|contribs) 05:23, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Thank you.

붉은혜성라이카/BlazingCometLaika 13:43, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

BLPPROD or Draft?

In the case of an unreferenced BLP, is it better to draftily or BLPPROD? (In fact, is it better to draftify instead of delete in other cases as well?) Jacksonvil (talk|contribs) 05:21, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi Jacksonvil. It's not really a case of which is better per se but rather whether you believe the subject of the article meets Wikipedia:Notability. If you do a little WP:BEFORE and find what you believe is significant coverage about the subject of the article, then neither draftify nor BLPPROD should really be done per WP:NEXIST. You can either try to improve the article yourself in such cases (adding a single source would mean BLPPROD would no longer apply) or you could add a maintenance template like {{BLP sources}} or {{BLP unreferenced}} to let others know about the problem. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:31, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

I don't think this is the best advice, WP:BLP is very specific in saying that Contentious material about living (or, in some cases, recently deceased) persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—must be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. (emphasis from the original) If you leave a maintenance template on it that template is likely to languish for months or years, as we well know, so I think if you aren't willing to seek out the sources yourself, then both draftification and BLPPROD would be a sensible response to an entirely unsourced BLP.

WP:BLPPROD even says that it's specifically designed for this case; the entry must be a biography of a living person and contain no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc., reliable or otherwise) supporting any statements made about the person in the biography. Athanelar (talk) 11:29, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Young Actuaries World Cup

Hello. I chair the International Actuarial Association’s Young Actuaries World Cup, so I have a conflict of interest. Before preparing an article, I would appreciate advice on whether the available sources could establish notability.

The competition held editions in 2023 and 2026. Sources include:

• A substantial feature in The European Actuary, June 2025, written by Henning Wergen and Martin Oymanns, who are involved in the competition: https://actuary.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/TEA-42-Young-Actuaries-World-Cup-2026.pdf
• An Actuarial Review announcement about the first edition: https://ar.casact.org/are-you-35-or-younger-compete-in-the-young-actuaries-world-cup/
• Canadian Institute of Actuaries coverage of the competition and its Canadian entrants: https://www.cia-ica.ca/news/canadian-talent-shines-in-the-young-actuaries-world-cup/

There are also official results and announcements, but I understand these do not by themselves establish notability.

Do these sources offer a reasonable basis for a standalone article, or would more substantial independent coverage be needed? I have not created a draft yet and would use Articles for Creation if I proceed. Thank you. Fredw1806 (talk) 14:23, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia editors do not normally carry out "notability assessments" about article subjects on request, nor assess the suitability of individual sources. If you want to write an article on Wikipedia, you are expected to familiarise yourself with the notability standard(s) which apply to your subject, and then demonstrate to us that your subject meets those requirements by finding suitable sources. The "notability assessment" is your job as the article creator to carry out. General information about notability can be found here. The golden rule is a handy rule of thumb; if you can find at least three sources about your subject which meet that golden rule, your subject is probably notable. If you want help determining whether or not a particular source is suitable, please give your own opinion (and I mean your own opinion, don't ask AI to do it for you) of whether you think it is or it isn't and why, so that we can see you've made a good faith effort to assess the sources yourself.

Please also be aware that the use of AI to talk to other editors is not allowed. Athanelar (talk) 15:54, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Sources on an article draft

Hi all,

I've just created my first article, Draft:Juda, about the Bikinian chief who saw his home bombed and his people displaced by American nuclear testing. I'd welcome any feedback, but there are a few specific areas that I'm hoping can be improved by editors with better research skills or resources than me:

• I've used what appears to be the only photo of Juda on Wikimedia Commons. I'm not sure if any of these would be available for Wikipedia use, but there's a color photo of him here from the University of Hawaii, as well as a black and white profile photo in the Weisgall source and a photo of him with his "first lady" in the Richard source.
• This article would definitely benefit from access to newspaper archives from the era, both to expand on certain events covered in the article, and for the sake of discussing the nature and tone of news coverage of Juda, as he seems to have been discussed in the papers fairly frequently. I think the most useful publications would be the New York Times, the Honolulu Star Bulletin, and the New Yorker, as well as the New York Herald Tribune, National Geographic, and Time.
• I haven't seen any sources on Juda's life before Crossroads. He was alive, and presumably chief, at the time of the Japanese occupation and US capture of Bikini, but nothing I've seen mentions any role he specifically played in those events - perhaps those details are discussed somewhere, although it's also possible nobody at the time bothered to mention him.
• The Weisgall and Richard sources differ as to whether Juda was present on the 1947 tour his alaps took. This seems like something that US government records could shed light on.
• The last few lines - his presence at the 1949 Majuro conference, his membership in the Marshall Islands Congress, and his death - are sourced mostly from the Bikini Project website, and I'd like to do better than that. The site seems reputable, but I don't have access to the books in its bibliography to hunt down the details. The 1949 conference seems to have been a sort of 'constitutional convention' setting up the Congress, but I don't have a good source for that. I did find two sources listing him as a member of Congress in certain years in the 50s and 60s, but I have no reason to think he didn't serve continuously from 1950 to his death, and I imagine there must be a record somewhere confirming that.

Once again, I'd appreciate any help tracking down any of this information, or with anything else you think could be improved! TheAngelEleleth (talk) 18:22, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Please do not use AI to talk to us. This may get your question ignored. And if you used AI on your draft, it is advised you start over with that as well. GreatWhiteEditor (talk) 19:54, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

I did not use AI at any point in the creation of the draft or this thread. TheAngelEleleth (talk) 20:02, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

If there are specific articles that you've identified and are looking for full text of, you could try asking at the Resource Exchange. You might be able to find someone with access to one of the books in the bibliography there as well.

For the photographs, I'd ask at the copyright village pump on Commons to see if someone can determine whether they're under copyright. If so, we wouldn't be able to use them since we already have one public domain image so I don't think they'd meet our fair use criteria. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 23:46, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

@TheAngelEleleth I have a newspapers.com account and, as you suspected, there are lots of hits for Juda + Bikini in the date range 1946 to 1970. I think you can sign up for temporary access on newspapers.com without a fee. Or you can wait until your article has been accepted (which I think it will be) and then seek help from other Wikipedia editors who are likely to be interested via Project talk pages. Maybe the Military History folk would want to help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:18, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

In addition to Mike Turnbull's reply, @TheAngelEleleth, once you have been editing for six months, and made 500 edits, you will be able to use The Wikipedia Library, which gives you access to many paywalled resources. ColinFine (talk) 11:15, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Pokemon Mewtwo returns

Hi , I added a article for 'Pokémon: Mewtwo Returns (Pokémon TV Special)' and is not going to that page, instead it send me to here List of Pokémon films#Television specials even though it has many other langauses for pages - samples:

• fr:Pokémon : Le Retour de Mewtwo
• es:Pokémon: Mewtwo Returns
• he:פוקימון: שובו של מיוטו

I do not see the page that I made? what happened to it? I'm very new to Wikipedia just so you know. Ketchupisgood (talk) 19:15, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

It was redirected because it didn't address the issues from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pokémon: Mewtwo Returns. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Thriller Night!} 19:21, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

I don't know what that mean, sir? Can you please fix it then? Ketchupisgood (talk) 19:36, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

I'll give as simple an explanation as I can.

In 2024, there was an article on this TV special, which was then sent to deletion debate, where there was a consensus that the article didn't have the sources to exist as a standalone article and the title should instead redirect to the list article. Because of this consensus, any new article on this special would need to address the issues raised in that debate, namely the lack of usable sources.

Your sources are Amazon (online storefront), Bulbapedia (no editorial oversight), and an Anime News Network profile for the film (too sparse). We would need professional reviews of the TV special in order for us to even consider an article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Thriller Night!} 20:32, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

yes, i have some ,

https://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/review/3228

https://blurayauthority.com/standard-dvd/pokemon-mewtwo-returns/

https://digipedia.db-destiny.net/reviews/mewtwo.htm

http://www.michaeldvd.com.au/Reviews/Reviews.asp?ReviewID=1584

https://www.dragonflycave.com/movie-reviews/mewtwo-returns/ Ketchupisgood (talk) 20:46, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Ketchupisgood, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Jeske said "professional reviews", but there is more to it than that. The review must have been published in a reliable source - somewhere with firm editorial control of what is published. I don't know about the others, but something called "Digipedia" is probably user-generated, and so not acceptable; I'm suspicious of something called "Blu-Ray authority"; and dvdtalk.com was not regarded as a reliable source in 2022.

If you want to make this argument, you need to show that you have several sources that each meet all the requirements in WP:42, otherwise the programme is not notable and no article is possible. (The conclusion of the Deletion discussion was that it was not notable). ColinFine (talk) 11:26, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Request for feedback on revised Draft:Alice Wang (artist)

Spacing with exponents

In B², the exponent is too close to the B. In B ² it's too far. What's needed is a half-space, but I can't find it via help pages. Is there a way to control spacing that finely?

An alternative is to use math mode. Is that my only choice? Johsebb (talk) 20:45, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

And this one: B²? Ruslik_Zero 20:53, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. The obvious search on "help for editing" doesn't seem to locate this. I guess template: is the key. Johsebb (talk) 18:07, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@Johsebb: Welcome to The Teahouse. Maybe something in the documentation for {{hair space}} is what you're looking for? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:00, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. The obvious search on "help for editing" doesn't seem to locate this. I guess template: is the key. Johsebb (talk) 18:08, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@Johsebb, @Ruslik0, @Tenryuu: There's often an easy way, in this case {{isup}}. So ''B''{{isup|2}} gives B². Bazza 7 (talk) 17:00, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. The obvious search on "help for editing" doesn't seem to locate this. I guess template: is the key. But your suggestion is the simplest. Johsebb (talk) 18:09, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@Johsebb: Rather than replying to everyone repeatedly, reply once. If you want to make absolute sure that everybody sees your message, use {{ping}}. IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 18:24, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

I wasn't sure. Thanks for pointing that out. Johsebb (talk) 15:29, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

@Johsebb: Thanks for thanking! It can be disheartening sometimes when people ask questions and get several answers but never bother to even acknowledge them, let alone say thanks. Bazza 7 (talk) 20:19, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

I think this organization's page is written by itself

I think the "History" section of International Bird Rescue has been written by the organization itself. (There's no COI mentioned in the talk page. And the original user only has a Talk page. ). There are only a couple times that it cites itself directly. However, it uses the same structure and wording from different parts of its own website. Old pages on their site like "Founder's Story" and "Our History" are central to the history, predating the page's inception and initial rejection. Most obviously, the history section looks A LOT like their site's "Our History" page today. (There are other sections where the references are to their own website, especially it's own blog).

(1) I'm not sure which rule best describes what's going on here (or the more common ones editors use). My noob impression is WP:SPONSORED or WP:COIEDIT.

(2) I don't know what to do about it, or who to direct this to. It seems like this page would need a whole overhaul, which I have no interest in.

Please advise. And, if you have the time/energy, please walk me through your thought process so I can get a better sense about how wikipedians approach stuff like this. Gmedinakim (talk) 23:02, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

About 72% of the page was written by User:Lnorlandh (talk - contribs), who has only ever edited that one page. Thirteen years ago, there were two declines of a draft for the page (see talkpage), and it looks like they moved it to mainspace anyways. I suspect undisclosed paid editing. The whole article almost certainly needs to be TNTed. IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 23:59, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

OK, so I wasn't tripping. I saw the two page declines in the history, but I wasn't good enough at reading the history to see when/where/how it was moved to the mainspace.

Sorry for the silly question @IlikecatsSDF. Are you recommending that it is TNT'ed in general, or are you recommending that I give a shot (i.e., follow that process outlined on the WP:TNT page)? Gmedinakim (talk) 01:18, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

About reading the history, I just hit "View history" and selected "oldest". About TNTing, I was just saying that it should be TNTed, by anyone. This may also require an admin to delete the copyrighted material. I'm just not interested or experienced enough to rewrite the article. You can take a shot at it if you want. — IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 02:29, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Auxiliary source for non-promotional, factual historical information

Is it acceptable to use an artist's gallery, estate, or website as a source when there is no other third-party source available and employ those auxiliary sources for a BLP and/or a biography artical of an artist who is no longer alive, solely for the purpose of giving historical information, such as birth or family background, and is not promotional in any way? Ache Erie (talk) 23:13, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

What you're describing is basically WP:ABOUTSELF which is fine, yes. Primary sources can be used to verify uncontroversial facts, so long as the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim; It does not involve claims about third parties; It does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source; There is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; and The article is not based primarily on such sources. Athanelar (talk) 23:18, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, that's what I was thinking, and it's helpful as this seems to be a problem for another editor PigeonChickenFish who's a stickler for third-party sources, which I always try to obtain. Ache Erie (talk) 23:33, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Ongoing event (2026 Flatbush building collapse)

 Courtesy link: 2026 New York City building collapse

Hello, I wrote a draft about an ongoing news event: Draft:2026 Flatbush building collapse. It is well sourced (ABC, CNN, AP, NY1, News 12) and neutral. Since the event is developing, could an experienced editor review it or move it to mainspace soon? Thank you! Kotemyolu (talk) 23:38, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a news site. We don't work to any deadline, and in any case it'd be better to wait a while and see if this event actually has any lasting significance beyond the next week or so. Big events like this attract a lot of coverage early on but typically don't end up being encyclopedically notable because the attention dies down shortly after the actual thing happens. Athanelar (talk) 23:41, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

Understood, thanks. I'll keep updating the draft. Kotemyolu (talk) 23:43, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

CSD U6 Bot tagging user sandboxes that is inactive after 6 months

Why does CSD U6 Bot tags user sandboxes that are inactive for 6 months, when users have never edited outside userspace and these subpages are eligible for deletion? Why was the bot account created recently in late 2025, with a backlog behind this? ~2026-59874-43 (talk) 23:59, 11 November 2026 (UTC)

See WP:U6 and Wikipedia:Replacement of CSD U5 FAQ — IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 00:05, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@IlikecatsSDF Do you wish that bot should never be created in the first place? ~2026-59874-43 (talk) 20:13, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Why can I not edit on my Chromebook?

I have tried to edit, upload, and even share something on the help desk on my Chromebook, but it is not working. My computer doesn’t have any problems or viruses and I am fully logged in. Can you please help me?

Rhubarbpie63 (talk) 00:39, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

What exactly is happening when you try to edit? Athanelar (talk) 00:53, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

It just does a loading screen similar to when you search up an image with lines flashing by Rhubarbpie63 (talk) 02:48, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Would you happen to be on a school-assigned chromebook? IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 02:55, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

No Rhubarbpie63 (talk) 03:07, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

But I do use it for school work Rhubarbpie63 (talk) 03:08, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

If you are signed into the school account, I'd guess it's a school internet filter extension messing it up. Make sure you're signed into your own Google account, and not the school account. Private windows might work too. IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 03:18, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Ok I am Rhubarbpie63 (talk) 03:20, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

... is it working? IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 03:41, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

They were able to edit Vanilla ice cream two minutes before responding to you, so it looks like it did work. Phoenix ‣ _Talk // ^{Contributions} 12:55, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

No that was on my Ipad Rhubarbpie63 (talk) 03:54, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Has your issue been resolved? PixelsRCool (talk • contribs) 14:36, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

James Robert Ford

There is a wikipedia page about me but the information is really outdated James Robert Ford

Is there anyway to get this updated somehow?

Thanks! ~2026-59858-26 (talk) 07:37, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello, James Robert Ford. Please read our policy Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, paying special attention to the subsection that can be found at WP:BLPSELF. We want to get the article right. Cullen328 (talk) 08:40, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

There is a simple guide at WP:About you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 12:45, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Seeking guidance on Wikipedia's notability and article creation guidelines

Not a new editor but talk page spam in unknown language?

User talk:EndTheWikiEditor

Hi!! I've been editing Wikipedia for a few years now, but more prolifically this year. Over the last few days, I have been receiving what appears to be, when translated, a copy paste of a news report in an unknown language, from both User:AHK MEDIA/sandbox and a TA. The linked sandbox contains part of the spam message. Has anyone had any experience with spam? Where can I go to stop this from happening? I'm completely down to keep deleting it, it's just a little annoying. Cheers, End (talk) 09:17, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

You can use identify language on google translate, in this case it appears to be Bengali, as for the talk page spam I would personally make a report on either WP:AN or WP:ANI, the latter is most likely the more suitable venue. ~2026-54957-04 (talk) 09:45, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Cheers! End (talk) 20:44, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

yeah i second taking this to ANI even when translated it is complete spam and also breaks advertising rules Goetia [She/Her] (talk) 21:13, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Actually on second thought, WP:AIV would be a better place to take this Goetia [She/Her] (talk) 21:16, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

I made an AIV report a few hours back; thanks! End (talk) 03:05, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

British or American English

on the article Working Holiday Visa that I am copyediting as a part of wp:GOCE,there is a discrepancy of using both british and American english. What should I do? There is no template on the article telling me to use either Terry625972 (talk) 14:20, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

there is both british and English punctuation and spelling Terry625972 (talk) 14:23, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@Terry625972: Then you go with the earliest version. As you will see, this uses spellings like "travellers" and "travelling", which are British (and Commonwealth) spellings. DuncanHill (talk) 14:27, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

alrighty then( NOPE CANT DO THIS I AINT BRITISH AND DONT KNOW BRITISH ENGLISH:( ) Terry625972 (talk) 15:18, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@Terry625972 Don't stress too much about it. Just make your edit in American English, somebody else can always correct it later. Athanelar (talk) 15:40, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

that wont help, that's just making more work for someone else, I'll just edit another one of the 1000+ articles that have {{copyedit}} on them Terry625972 (talk) 15:44, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

aw dammit didn't mean to actually use the template :( Terry625972 (talk) 15:46, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

If you want to reference a template without actually invoking it, you can use {{tl}}. Typing {{tl|copyedit}}, for example, produces {{copyedit}}, as I have done for your usage above. crtbob@talk:~$ ls contribs 16:47, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

mmm thanks

I will remember this Terry625972 (talk) 17:01, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

It's really very minor work. In general, we'd rather someone improve an article but leave behind some WP:ENGVAR issues in the process rather than the article be left with more glaring grammatical issues, for example. If your edit is going to be a net improvement, then just go for it. Athanelar (talk) 18:05, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@Terry625972, I’m not British either, but it was pretty easy—speaking as a fellow GOCE editor—to learn. If you do, you’ll have a very helpful new editing skill!

If an article doesn’t show the preferred “Engvar” (English variant) to use, then—after making all the format corrections needed—I place one of the templates below as a courtesy to other editors:

————————————-

• For American English: {{Use American English}}

• For British English: {{Use British English}}

Augnablik (talk) 05:37, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

It's a minor issue, and if you really feel bad about it, you can always note that in the edit summary. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:59, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Wiki markup

whats the code language in source edititing ~2026-60097-79 (talk) 14:38, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

It's called wikitext/wikicode. PixelsRCool (talk • contribs) 14:51, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

See Wiki#Editing and Wikitext editor. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:47, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Are instances of Twitter diplomacy grounds for use as reliable sources/references?

(I use Twitter diplomacy simply because it's a known term, but my question also applies to other platforms like YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, etc.)

Let's say that the official account of a government entity, such as a city, ministry, or other administration, announces something on their social media accounts. Said online announcement could be seen as useful or notable enough to use as a reference for an article on Wikipedia. Would it be permissible to use the direct link to the post as a source here? Or would it instead be preferred, if the announcement had its own article on its own website, to use that? What if the official social media post contains information that an external article omits, thus requiring the use of the post in regards to proof of something specific?

Thanks in advance. Zach1055 (talk) 15:28, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

We don't use social media as a reliable source, because it can be edited later, deleted, etc. Generally any kind of public statement like this tends to end up attracting some kind of press coverage; you should cite that press coverage instead of the social media post itself. Athanelar (talk) 15:39, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

You seem to come at this from a WP:PROPORTION perspective, which can be quite valid. However, such sources could have WP:ABOUTSELF use. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:47, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

{{Cite tweet}} alone has 49089 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 19:13, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@Zach1055 See for example WP:RSPYT. A government's official Facebook/whatever is as valid a WP:ABOUTSELF as a traditional .gov website. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:44, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the help. Zach1055 (talk) 16:00, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Feedback on Transection Section on Chenyu Page

Hello Everyone. I am a third-year college student and work on expanding the Chenyu Page. I added a section about translating Chinese idioms into English idioms. It is mainly focuses on how cultural background and expressions can be translated smoothly and naturally, making it easier for English readers to understand the meaning of the words.

I really appreciate and look forward to getting some feedback to help me improve my work, especially on content and structure.

Here is the link to the page: Chengyu. Linshuqing (talk) 16:35, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

This is very specialised. It might be better to ask for feedback on WT:WikiProject China or WT:WikiProject Languages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 19:22, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Edit request on Talk:Yosef Bittón waiting for review

Hello. I am Yosef Bittón, the subject of the article Yosef Bittón. Because of my conflict of interest I have not edited the article myself. On 25 October I posted an edit request on the article's talk page to correct outdated information: the article reverses my current and former positions, has a typo ("Chef Rabbinate"), and lists only the first of the two volumes of my book. Sources are included. It has not received a reply yet. Could someone take a look, or tell me if I should do anything differently? Thank you. ~2026-57239-97 (talk) 16:42, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

As it says on the template at the top of your request, The requested edits backlog is very high. Please be extremely patient. There are currently 1606 requests waiting for review. Please continue to be patient, someone will get to it when they get to it. Athanelar (talk) 17:26, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello Bittón, and welcome to the Teahouse. As Athanelar said, our backlog of COI edit requests is currently overloaded with about 1600 requests waiting for review, of which yours is only one. Because Wikipedia is a volunteer effort, more time may be needed to get through each of them than we'd like, so you might have to adjust your time frame for when you expect to receive a response.

I took a quick look at your specific request, however, and have decided to review it myself. All six of your requested changes have been implemented, four by me and two by Theroadislong, and they should be live on the article for you to see. Thanks for your patience and prudence regarding this matter; feel free to reach back out if you encounter any further issues. Salmon of Knowledge (talk) 22:31, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Which Pages Can I Request For Help While Making An Article?

So I currently created a page called April 2012 medicane (Natalie) but It is my first time making a medicane article so I don't know how should I do it and what should I avoid making. ⚡ StormL00ver ⚡ 17:37, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

For one thing, don't draft articles in mainspace. I have moved your article to Draft:April 2012 medicane (Natalie) where you can improve it at your leisure.

What you should never do on Wikipedia is use an AI as an author or even a co-author. If you have AI assistance, it should be only for gathering sources and suggesting the article outline.

When you have fleshed it out, you can click the "submit for review" button and wait for reviewers to look at it. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 17:53, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

vandalism on arknights page

Arknights

hi id like to report an issue on this page at the very bottom in the external links section, it looks vandalized and i dont know where to report this ~2026-59787-90 (talk) 18:20, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Looks like the offending edit was on {{Yostar}}, I reverted it and left a warning on the relevant TA's talk page. ExitTheWarrior (talk) 18:33, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Adding random content to Userspace pages

So, I'm trying to do a thing on my userpage and I can't seem to find anything out, hence why I ask here.

On my userpage, there is a little header before any other text, which I would like to display one of a set of strings every time the page is loaded. Is there a way to do this? DollarStoreBa'al _(Converse) 19:33, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @DollarStoreBa'al, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I don't believe this is possible, because Wikipedia and the demands on its servers are so huge that wherever possible pages are cached, so methods to change or update them on the fly are not usually provided. ColinFine (talk) 21:22, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure however that there are some ways to have something which updates every time the page cache is purged. WP:VPT is the best place to ask these sorts of specialist questions. Athanelar (talk) 21:29, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@DollarStoreBa'al: See Template:Random item. This won't change the header every time the page is loaded, but it will change it quite frequently. Editor115138 (talk) 22:07, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

The Teahouse itself displays a different host image in its header using {{Random subpage}}, which can be used on userpages. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:13, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Triaging an article

In suggested edits I came across an article about Maysara al-Matghari, which seems to have multiple issues. After skimming through it seems to have problems with phrasing, relevance of some sentences or paragraphs, unclear language, would that suggest an LLM involvement? How does one determine these sorts of things? What is the appropriate fate of this article? Thanks! Alfræðirit (talk) 23:10, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

A fairly randomly selected sample: "And the complaints were many. The Berbers had long resented the second-class status accorded to them by the ruling Umayyad-Arab military caste." Cf "Et les plaintes sont nombreuses. Les Berbères ont longtemps ressenti le statut de seconde classe qui leur est accordé par la caste militaire arabo-omeyyade au pouvoir." (fr:Maysara al-Matghari) Yes, this article is, at least in part, a translation from the French. (I haven't looked through its history for any acknowledgement of this.) Some of the phrasing is, though idiomatic English, odd (and unsuitable) for an en:WP article; consider the possibility that this results from slightly too literal a translation rather than from an LLM. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 23:55, 12 November 2026 (UTC)

@Alfræðirit A version for 2018 has many of the same problems. That's well before use of LLM started, so the issue is almost certainly a poor translation. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:03, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Newbie Problem

I am new here and every or any tip to writing or contributing would be very appreciated Philchris2trom (talk) 01:52, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Philchris2trom. I have left a welcome message on your talk page. It contains links to different aspects of editing Wikipedia. Hope this helps. Knitsey (talk) 01:57, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Philchris2trom, you have already created Draft:LynX Ride, which reads as if that company -- or perhaps I should say, that "digital mobility and logistics platform" -- wrote it. If your purpose is to broadcast a self-description of "LynX Ride", you're at the wrong website. But if I'm wrong and your interest in "LynX Ride" is a mere aberration, then start by looking at an existing article that interests you, and working on some aspect of the article, scrupulously basing your material on, and scrupulously citing, one or more reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 02:06, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Converting to a sortable table advice please (existing A-Z list)

Hello Teahouse,

May I please ask for help about changing a table to have sortable functions?

This newspaper list already has alphabetical divisions so uncertain how this impacts things?

List of newspapers in Victoria

I have read the help page but not really sure where to go from here. Help:Sortable tables#Creating sortable tables

Thank you! SunnyBoi (talk) 02:27, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello, SunnyBoi! What part of sorting it are you having trouble with? Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) 04:27, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

That enormous list has massive problems. Wikipedia lists are usually limited to notable subjects or a clearly defined complete set, and there should generally be references for entries without a linked Wikipedia article unless a single reference supports the whole list. But to your question: If you want the whole list to have sortable columns then you have to remove the section headings and make a single table. Such a long list should still have a table of contents with letters but you can make it with {{Compact TOC}} and add an id at the first row for each letter like in . PrimeHunter (talk) 05:53, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for the compact tip. This comprehensive list is important for research though - many of the Australian newspaper lists include defunct titles as well as the lists especially for this purpose. I understand that linking out is ideal but this also helps as an AfC option. I'm very concerned as I was not suggesting removing titles in the list at all. Thank you SunnyBoi (talk) 01:27, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

That article needs to be culled, or at least severely reduced. It lists 2760 defunct newspapers alone, but only has 143 cites, most of which appear to be self-references to the paper concerned and therefore not independent. I've not counted them, but how about deleting all entries except those pointing to an actual article? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 15:50, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

There are 115 entries that link to articles. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 15:55, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

@Kassigrace: Would you like to justify the notability of these list entries against my enthusiasm for deletion? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 16:05, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Verifiability of scientific publications on certain websites.

I know that websites like Scribd are unreliable, but what about websites like ScienceDirect and ReaseachGate? Dendronite (talk) 07:04, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

@Dendronite I think the answer has to be "it depends". Some researchers make their research papers available via those websites as a convenience to others. If the paper hasn't been peer reviewed, then it is the paper that isn't reliable, not the website. If you have a digital object identifier for the publication and it can be cited using {{cite journal}} as a final published version, then somethimes linking to copies of it on these sites is OK. Indeed, Google Scholar often gives these links if the paper is behind a paywall on the publisher's site. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:42, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Slow wikipedia?

I don't know if anyone else is having this problem but lately wikipedia is extremely slow. It doesn't effect normal source editing but only the reply and new topic functions. I could barely type this message. It worked well a few days ago. Jacksonvil (talk|contribs) 13:41, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

I've not seen any problems today but maybe all the people who can't reach their Microsoft email have decided to edit here instead! Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:20, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

There are general statistics on performance at https://www.wikimediastatus.net/ though those are global averages.

When you're talking about having trouble typing, though, as opposed to the time it takes once you submit, it makes me wonder if it's something your browser is doing to try to "help"? For instance, Microsoft Edge has some "Writing assistance" features turned on by default that send what you're writing to their servers to provide "suggestions". You might want to look through your browser settings to see if there's anything obvious that you want to turn off, or at least try turning off in order to see if it helps. PeterCooperJr (talk) 20:21, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Citation leading to a search page - meets WP:V?

Are citations that lead to search pages acceptable? I thought the link had to be directly to a location that verified the claim.

Context, if needed: I'm reviewing part of an article that claims "flavonoids are not authorised as prescription drugs in Europe or the US", and on of the citations to back this up leads to a search page which would require you to search for all types of flavonoids to verify yourself that no drugs are approved. GreyZoneLife (talk) 14:14, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

No, @GreyZoneLife, links to search pages are not acceptable as citations. Furthermore, from your description, the article seems to be requiring the reader to do original research in order to verify the claim, which is preposterous. The claim may be true, but should not be in the article unless it is specifically verified by a reliable published source. ColinFine (talk) 15:16, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Thank you @ColinFine. Is there a guideline that states that links to search pages aren't accepable? GreyZoneLife (talk) 15:20, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

I certainly hope so. If I do the same search as you, I may get different results. If you do the same search is a month's time, you may get different results. Maproom (talk) 15:57, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @GreyZoneLife. I haven't found a specific guideline to that effect, but under WP:CITEWEB it says:

URL of the specific web page where the referenced content can be found. When it is impossible to link to the individual document, instructions for performing a search might be given (see e.g. {{Cite DAT}}), or a link to an archived copy provided.

which indicates that the specified case is ecxeptional. ColinFine (talk) 16:31, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

While the above advice is generally correct, be aware that some sites use URLs with search parameters in them to link to specific pages which are valid for citations. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 18:59, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Help with creating a draft (COI)

I am Sam Tennyson, an independent music artist, and I have a conflict of interest with this topic. I want to submit a draft via Articles for Creation but need help with the process. Could someone please guide me? ~~~~ Sam tennyson (talk) 14:14, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

The first advice I will give you is to read the autobiography policy. The odds that you will successfully create an autobiography about yourself are close to zero. Almost no one succeeds at it; I personally have never seen someone do so, and the number of times it happened when I wasn't looking can be counted on one hand(in 15 years), out of tens of thousands of attempts. Are you the rare person who will succeed where everyone else fails? Possibly, but the odds are overwhelmingly against it.

My honest advice is that you go on about your career as if you had never heard of Wikipedia and allow an article about you to organically develop in the usual way, when an independent editor takes note of coverage of you in independent reliable sources and chooses to write about you, summarizing that coverage and showing how you are a notable person broadly or a notable musician narrowly.

If you wish to proceed anyway despite this advice(and I added the information needed to submit the draft when ready); I will tell you that your draft has no sources at all. We are not interested in what you know about yourself or mere documentation of your work, we want a summary of what others wholly unconnected with you say about you- critical analysis and commentary- in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 14:21, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Wait so is it wholely impossible to draft or request a draft of yourself? I've always got the impression that it is ofc harder to do and ill-advised because of NPOV issues, but I didn't know that drafts will be declined purely on the basis of who wrote them, I'm wholly unimportant and not notable myself so it doesn't matter much to me either way, but I am curious Goetia [She/Her] (talk) 18:42, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

It's not impossible, but neither is me winning a lottery jackpot and using all that money on green in roulette and winning. It can happen, but the likelihood is so low that doing it is a fools errand. Pyrrhic victor (what did I do) 19:48, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

No, @The Ars Goetia, drafts will not be declined purely because they were written by the subject. But most drafts are declined because they do not show that the subject is notable (most people in the world are not Wiki-notable, and inexperienced editors have generally not yet acquired the skill of determining whether there are adequate sources to establish notability), or because they are not written from a neutral point of view (again, a skill that many new editors have not yet acquired, and fiendishly difficult when writing about yourself or your own concerns) or because they are written promotionally (ditto: most new editors do not understand that if a draft is, or appears to be, what the subject wants people to know about them, then it is promotional). ColinFine (talk) 20:08, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the good answers both of y’all! I don’t know if it’s just cus I’m tired but I got real confused just then even though I know the rules Goetia [She/Her] (talk) 20:17, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Also, please read Wikipedia:Scam warning! IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 16:42, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

am I allowed to use primary sources

for Wo Hop Shek Branch. https://www.kcrc.com/en/about-kcrc/history.html#time1912 -- Terry625972 (talk) 15:38, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

See WP:PRIMARY — IlikecatsSDF (talk | contributions) 16:44, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Using the same citation in infobox and body

While working on the article Libaya, I found myself needing to use within the body of the text a citation that was already used in the infobox. I went to "re-use" the infobox's citation, but it wasn't listed. I ended up going into source editing view, copying the citation template from the infobox, and pasting that where I needed it in the body. However, this made it so that the same citation (Bertman's Handbook to Life in Ancient Mesopotamia) is listed twice under References. Is there a way to avoid that? TigrisGraduate (talk) 16:46, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

@TigrisGraduate You needed to use a WP:named reference. I've done the edit which I find much easier in the source editor than the visual editor. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:14, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

References used in the body only need to be repeated in the infobox (or lede) in exceptional circumstances. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 18:55, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Applicability of G10

WP:G10 is defined as "Pages that disparage, threaten, intimidate, or harass their subject or some other entity, and serve no other purpose," but also "libel, legal threats, material intended purely to harass or intimidate a person, or biographical material about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced," which feels more narrow to me. For instance, would a draft that contains no content other than a rephrasing of the title (which would qualify under WP:A3 if it was in mainspace) and some references fall under G10, if all the references are insulting or overwhelmingly negative in tone? ~2026-48129-52 (talk) 17:05, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

G10 is for attack pages (depending on what you mean by insulting or overwhelmingly negative it could be considered an attack page type of writing). Besides that, the page title and content matter in determining if it's an attack page, not how the sources view to the subject. Pyrrhic victor (what did I do) 17:24, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-48129-52, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Do you have an actual example, or are you just speculating theoretically? Questions here that are not specific tend not to get helpful answers. ColinFine (talk) 20:10, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

What are some major and minor Wikipedia rules i need to know before doing major edits?

while i already do edits, i do not know all of the rules yet, and will need some assistance on what to avoid, thank you N4tivefr0mgh4na (talk) 20:40, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

There are two main rules for editing: Wikipedia:NPOV and Wikipedia:Writing articles with large language models. Those are the basics. GreatWhiteEditor (talk) 21:12, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

WP:VERIFIABILITY is as important, if not more so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 22:32, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

I just added a post to your talk page with some links you might find helpful. ExitTheWarrior (talk) 21:16, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

@N4tivefr0mgh4na: you may find Wikipedia:Five pillars useful. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Not a chatbot • Contribs)} 22:40, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

I really recommend Wikipedia:Everything you need to know which outlines our most important policies and guidelines in an easy-to-understand way. qcne (talk) 15:35, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Чайный домик

А почему проект называется именно чайный домик? Или у меня неправильно перевод работает? ~2026-60262-18 (talk) 21:26, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Teahouse-somewhere to meet friendly people, and have a discussion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 22:34, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

This is the Teahouse for the English Wikipedia; it is called such as to evoke a place of open discussion and conversation. To ask questions in Russian, please go to Russian Wikipedia. 붉은혜성라이카/BlazingCometLaika 22:39, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

The Russian-language version of this page is at ru:Википедия:Форум/Помощь начинающим. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 22:41, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Substance use and recovery

I’m new

Um I’m new so how do I edit, Objectshowlover3 (talk) 22:34, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

See the messages I just left on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 22:39, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

See WP:TUTORIAL and WP:Pillars. One thing you shouldn't do is make personal attacks, as you did on your talk page. Always assume good faith. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Not a chatbot • Contribs)} 22:42, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Quick source check

I believe this has been covered before but just to verify: IMDB is not considered a reliable source, correct?

Cheers. 붉은혜성라이카/BlazingCometLaika 22:40, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

In most cases, that's correct. See WP:Citing IMDb for a full explanation. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Not a chatbot • Contribs)} 22:41, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

붉은혜성라이카, in future, for a quick source check, try WP:RSPSOURCES. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 22:45, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Whirlpool (1949 film)

Hello, the article Whirlpool (1949 film) was recently moved to this title, but the text still states that the film was released in 1950 instead of 1949. Could someone correct this error? Thanks. ~2026-60085-35 (talk) 23:39, 13 November 2026 (UTC)

Is there any reason you can't fix it yourself? PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 01:14, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

I can make a guess, PharaohCrab. The article twice says 1950, the first time with two what-appear-to-be-references, the second time with one. (I mean, they appear to be references for this factoid, but I haven't clicked on any of the three to ensure that it says what it's presented as saying.) The argument on the talk page for changing the title from "1950" to "1949" seems to owe less to the accuracy of the latter (earlier) year than to the failure of an earlier change from "1949" to "1950" to follow the correct procedure. Admittedly I haven't read the talk page with care (and am hazy about the relevant terminology), but my impression from a quick read is that even in the domestic market Joe and Jenny Q. Public weren't able to watch the film till early 1950, though there was at least one showing for potential exhibitors in late 1949. I hope that an experienced editor who's familiar with the intricacies of circa 1950 US movie marketing/distribution steps in and fixes the article correctly and informatively. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 03:56, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Italics and quotes

Hello!

I am fiddling with a footnote that currently reads:

Braun later joined Lost as the voice who says Previously, on Lost at the beginning of each episode.

For correct formatting, the italics should be replaced with quotes, like this:

Braun later joined Lost as the voice who says "Previously, on Lost" at the beginning of each episode.

But that version—ugh! The italics slam against the quote mark and it looks horrific. I used to use thin spaces or hair spaces in this situation to separate the final letter from the quote mark, but then I found that those types of small spaces can cause issues on some devices, and we are not supposed to use them.

Any thoughts about another solution? OrdinaryOtter (talk) 00:47, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

I would still go with the second as the t touching the quotes doesn't seem that distracting but if you really care one thing you could do it italicize the quotation marks as well so it reads.

Braun later joined Lost as the voice who says "Previously, on Lost" at the beginning of each episode.

PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 01:12, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi OrdinaryOtter. Don't italicize quotation marks. {{-"}} makes a little whitespace to the left of a quotation mark without inserting any space character:

Braun later joined Lost as the voice who says "Previously, on Lost" at the beginning of each episode.

PrimeHunter (talk) 01:15, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Hurrah! Thank you. I have been seeking this solution for my entire Wikipedia career. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 16:26, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

But Otter, to do what you were thinking to do would make grammar purists think that was “horrific” because as editors, we’re not supposed to change the format of quotation marks/inverted commas around quoted text.

I think the suggestion from @PrimeHunter is a great compromise—a trick I wasn’t aware of, so I’ll take this opportunity to say thanks for it! Augnablik (talk) 07:08, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Oh, believe me, I thought both options were awful! But now I am sitting on a cloud. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 16:28, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Referencing help

I want to help add new information to Wikipedia articles but I do not know how to find reliable sources. Does anyone have tips for finding sources? GasStation850 (talk) 01:21, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

That would depend on the subject area, GasStation850. Which subject area(s) do you have in mind? -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 03:38, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

@GasStation850 Try the template {{Find sources}}, which you can place in your User sandbox, with the topic you want to search as the parameter. See the linked template page for details. See also the reliable sources page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:11, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

See WP:LIBRARY for places where you can find, or get help finding, sources. You may also get help at your local public library (or your school or college library, if you are a student). Remember that paper sources, as well as those found online, can be used. Help:Find sources also has some good tips.

You might also find WP:Referencing for beginners useful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 11:18, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

I found some sources for Tonic DNA

The animation studios in Montreal, I have found.

Motionographer® STUDIO STORIES: Tonic DNA, The Studio That Refused to Be One Thing

Tonic DNA And Filmmaker Malcolm Sutherland Launch AI-Powered Animated Game Concept '10th Life'

The leading animation studio executive | News - Concordia University

Tonic DNA Animates Powerful Down Syndrome Story 'Freebird' - Animation Magazine

Meet Tonic DNA, The New Montreal Studio With A 35-Year-Old Legacy

Studio Pascal Blais Turns 35 with Rebrand as TONIC DNA ~2026-47317-39 (talk) 01:25, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Is this a question about an article, or a request for an article, or what? -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 03:36, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

@Hoary Request for an article. ~2026-47317-39 (talk) 04:06, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Then which article is the request for, and what are you requesting for it? (If you're requesting that somebody read each of these six and evaluate its suitability as a reference for this or that, sorry, no.) -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 04:14, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-47317-39 That's a Canadian studio and there is already a pretty decent article in French, so you could start there for sources and text to translate. However, like most things in Wikipedia, you will need to do most of the drafting yourself. See Help:Your first article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:18, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

"I want to put my personal profile on Wikipedia, but"

Greetings

I want to put my personal profile on Wikipedia, but

(1) there are several people with similar names (Barry Gordon Muir is my name) already on line. How do I label a Wiki page to make it distinctive in a search? (I am an ecologist)

(2) Do I need an editor to review my profile and then they put it on line for me? Explanation does not seem to be clear on this. ~2026-60362-65 (talk) 03:53, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Barry, your premise is that Wikipedia publishes people's "personal profiles", written by themselves. It's mistaken: Wikipedia publishes encyclopedia entries about people, articles that are clearly based on what other people, independent of the subject, have written and had published via reliable sources. Please read and digest WP:YOURSELF. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 04:08, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-60362-65 Now that you have posted this message, you will get scammers who will try to contact you directly promising they can make a Wikipedia article about you in exchange for money. Please very carefully read Wikipedia:Scam warning and ignore all such messages. qcne (talk) 15:33, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Linking Latin Phrases

I've seen certain latin phrases unlinked but others linked.

Is there a list of which phrases (like in situ) should be linked? Dendronite (talk) 06:10, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

As far as I know, there’s not a strict rhyme or reason to it; sometimes things are linked to in articles, and sometimes they aren’t (for example, an article that just uses the word the probably doesn’t need to link to Definite article, but for a page explicitly discussing English grammar, that might be a good idea). The general rule of thumb is that if linking to something would probably improve the reader’s comprehension of the article the link is in, then add it, but if it wouldn’t, then don’t. The same goes for Latin phrases. For more info, see WP:LINK. Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) 06:35, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Multiple reverts without substantiated basis

Good evening everyone, I'm looking for guidance regarding some edits I've made. I've been accused of using AI a number of times by two users. Gnomingstuff and IrisChronomia have accused me across multiple articles, without giving a substantiated reason why, even though I've attempted to start multiple discussion on the pages they have disputed. I've also attempted to resolve this on my own talk page. I've clarified a number of times that I don't use AI beyond source discovery across any of my revisions, as allowed by WP:NOLLM.

Many of these reverts have been largely based on AI accusations, without substantive evidence, and without considering the underlying content. Even when trying to learn why they think this, I'm met with no reasonable response. Although I have never utilized such technology for my prose. I was issued a level 4 warning by IrisChronomia, even after wide spread attempts to resolve the issue, with no significant response.

I'm mainly seeking advice on how best to resolve these issues. I understand I may speak in a way that seems robotic, especially for a new editor, but that's not relevant to Wikipedias AI policy, I don't believe. May6man (talk) 06:38, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Another question, does the unnamed accusation under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Gnomingstuff#LLMs substantiate review?

I'm also curious when does criticism across multiple articles become WP:HOUNDING rather than legitimate scrutiny? This seems to be an alleged issue these editors are collaborating on, and although not named, you can see they have both reverted my edits without substantiated reasoning, giving reasons for my reversions discussed with a clear bias. I've been accused of being paid with no reason, amongst the other things mentioned. May6man (talk) 07:01, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

@May6man I have not looked into the details of your case but would suggest that the Teahouse is not the place to pursue it. If you can't resolve the issue by discussion with the other editors involved, then you should use the Administrators' noticeboard. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:32, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Actors - Conserve versus delete for filmography?

While recent change patrolling a few days ago, I can across a temporary account user who made 20 edits, all of which related to one film - A Simple Wish. The first three were removals of the film from lists, for example removing it from the List of American films of 1997. The other 17 were deletions of the mention of the film from actors' and other contributors' articles, citing "No reference", "Need a better reference" or "for a living person this needs a reference" (which was true).

I was unsure of the approach to take because on the one hand, per WP:BLP, we should "Be very firm about the use of high-quality, reliable sources." On the other hand, 1) The involvement of these individuals in the films is not contentious, 2) It's easily verifiable, so perhaps WP:preserve should be applied, and 3) the user targetted only this film; for example not a single film in the Filmography of Martin Short was sourced, and the user deleted only A Simple Wish.

Ultimately I added sources for everything. Another temporary account popped up today and (rightly) challenged a couple of sources. I'm still fairly new so coming to grips with RS.

So, I'm wondering, with such an editing pattern, bearing in mind the context of both the generally unsourced Filmography sections and the WP:BLP policy, what is the ideal approach for a case like this? GreyZoneLife (talk) 13:20, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Page creation

Hello, I want to create an Armenian Wikipedia page for a person but wiki says I should message an admin, what do I do? Լևոն Երկանյան (talk) 14:20, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Please do that on the Armenian Wikipedia. Pristome (talk) 14:22, 14 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi Լևոն Երկանյան, welcome to the English Wikipedia Teahouse. Each Wikipedia language is administrated separately. I don't know exacly which message you saw but there are Armenian administrators at hy:Վիքիպեդիա:Ադմինիստրատորների տեղեկատախտակ. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:42, 14 November 2026 (UTC)