Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 973

Looking for advice as to what else to add to an article and what needs referencing, etc.
✅ Hi. I'm not a "new" editor, as such, but I don't do very much writing for the main English Wikipedia as my first language isn't English. I've recently prepared the base of an article about an Australian radio station, Kinderling Kids Radio. The thing is, this article at the moment is the very bare bones of what I believe it should be, but since I don't edit much, I am unsure as to what else to add, what needs references and citations, and so on. Any help with this or ideas as to what I can do would be appreciated. Thanks. Dane &#124; Geld 15:50, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi The article on verifiability helps to explain what needs a reference. The one on reliable sources explains how you should weigh the credibility of those references.  Finally, this article on referencing shows you how to go about citing your sources.  Orville1974 talk 16:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks . I'll get to reading those now and see if I can figure out what else I need to do!  Dane &#124; Geld  16:35, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

KALERGI ---non-encyclopedic sources, and historical errors easy to find even on google images! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalergi_plan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalergi_plan

The article is part (1) and not encyclopedic (2). There are historically demonstrable errors. (3)

(1) refers to 2 Italian newspapers that are not independent, at all. But they are politically deployed newspapers. "LINKIESTA" is an online newspaper, of very low circulation, and editing made by freelance journalists, from the extreme left. "Il Foglio" is a paper-based, newspaper of little circulation, and financed by Silvio Berlusconi's wife, and which has always favored pro-immigration policies. Therefore they are not independent newspapers. (!) They have never carried out an inquiry into the Kalergis but only brief dogmatic articles, (!) brief on Kalergi that have no encyclopedic value. (!)

(2) Political opinions (LINKIESTA ad IL FOGLIO) are not encyclopedic sources. (!)

(3) historically demonstrable ERRORS: you assert here that the theory would have been made by Gerd Honsik in 2004. But this is FALSE. The theory was absolutely not invented by Gerd Honsik. Is simple. Just put in google images: "Arthur Rogers Warbug Kalergi Plan" and many photos appear, of a work by Arthur Rogers of 1955 printed in London. Rogers was certainly not a Nazi. But not even Arthur Rogers is the first in 1955 to speak of PIANO KALERGI. The first was in 1927 in a book by Hans Friedrich Karl Günther "Der nordiche Gedanke" ... Then, a long journalistic article appeared in 1994, in the Germanic magazine U.N. specially dedicated to Kalergi article, from which Gerd Honsik was inspired. Therefore the theory that the KALERGI PLAN would have been invented by Gerd Honsik is a historical "fake" shown in the book by Micheli Luca.

Book of Micheli Luca, on Kalergi, 311 pages with almost 300 photos very many taken from the State Archives of Switzerland (Lausanne) and the Czech Republic (Plzen). On Amazon. Title: THE CASTEL RONSPERG MODEL THE PLAN KALERGI LABORATORY.(Italian title: IL MODELLO CASTEL RONSPERG IL LABORATORIO DEL PIANO KALERGI) Other books on Kalergi and Kalergi plan:

-Matteo Simonetti, (2015 edition) : "The truth about the Kalergi plan" First edition.(italian title. LA VERITA' SUL PIANO KALERGI) 130 pages

-Carlo Arrigo Pedretti (2018) title: The practical idealism of Richard N. Coudenhove-Kalergi. The ideological foundations of his plan: (Italian title: L'idealismo pratico di Richard Kalergi. Il fondamento ideologico del suo piano) 310 pages

-Luca Micheli (2019) : "THE MODEL CASTEL RONSPERG THE LABORATORY OF THE KALERGI PLAN." The most complete and with everything demonstrated with documents and photos. (Italian title: IL MODELLO CASTEL RONSPERG IL LABORATORIO DEL PIANO KALERGI) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.101.0.30 (talk) 15:24, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi! I see you've already added this to the article's talk page.  That is the best place to discuss content related to a particular article.  Orville1974 talk 16:48, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Added a link that worked but wasn't highlighted in blue
I just joined and did my first piece of editing. I added a link to another Wikipedia article by putting double square brackets around the word like this. The link works, but the word in the original article is not blue, as the existing links in the article are. Any suggestions? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mountaindeathcamas (talk • contribs) 16:39, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome. It sometimes takes time for the links to appear blue. 331dot (talk) 16:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It's blue now. Happy editing! -A la d insane  (Channel 2)  16:52, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Typo in article "Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution"
"Lucretia Mott spend the summer of 1948 Should be ...summer of 1848 to be consistent with article

✅ Martin of Sheffield (talk) 17:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks to WorldBruce for clarifying that I needed to issue a disclosure statement (and how to do it). JaneStroup (talk) 17:51, 24 June 2019 (UTC)JaneStroup
 * Thank you for adding the notice to your user page.  Orville1974 talk 18:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

How do I align text in a table?
I'm trying to make a new table and I need the text to be in the center of the content cell. Right now it looks like this.

DolphinCat (talk) 19:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, Is this what you want?

Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 20:10, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

" plumb stems counter sterns" look to manx steamship lines for best eg of both
look to manx steamship lines for best examples of 'plumb-straight stems and counter sterns' manxman steamship histories  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.129.65.66 (talk) 22:07, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Did you have a question or suggestion for one of Wikipedia articles? You can discuss it on that article's talk page, or go ahead and make the edits yourself. RudolfRed (talk) 22:38, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Is the article for Hainuwele too off-topic?
I am a newbie Wiki editor and stumbled upon Hainuwele through the Random Article feature.

Reading through this page, which ostensibly is about the origin/creation myth of several Indonesian tribes, I realized that far more of the article is dedicated to the various trading relationships and contact with outside society these tribes have had than is dedicated to the actual Hainuwele myth.

The rub is that the argument being presented posits that the Hainuwele myth either explains or is affected by these outside contacts. I am too new to this process to be able to make the determination, but would someone mind reading through this article and defining whether it is on-topic or not?

NawtAGoodNinja (talk) 17:06, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi My personal opinion (for what it's worth) is that the analysis following the myth does relate to the topic since it attempts to put the myth in context and interpret its meaning.  Since we draw content from what third-party sources say about the subject, I suspect the majority of them analyse the myth, rather than just present it, which is why those sections in the article are so robust.  Orville1974  (talk) 18:08, 21 June 2019 (UTC)


 * I concur. This seems to be a good example of Euhemerism done correctly. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.177.55 (talk) 00:25, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * My suggestion regarding the analysis part is to rephrase it because the section currently reads as if the author of the article is making his own assumptions and is the one doing the analysis and interpretation using sources such as Jensen to support his arguments. Darwin Naz (talk) 23:54, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

American Farm Bureau Page
✅ Hey all,

I haven't really done much wikipedia editing before, maybe a sentence here or there. However, this is so outrageous that I feel like i have to do something.

It seems like the page for the American Farm Bureau was changed in 2007 to be propaganda for the organization. This is pretty well-documented on the discussion page for the article, with someone saying that the entire article "consist[s] of text from the organization's official site." Furthermore, it seems like the changes were made by an employee of the organization, who later attempted to blank the talk page, which documented the article's incorrect statements.

Can the page be restored to its pre-propaganda state? Is that something that I can/should do? If I do that, will I be flagged for vandalism? Or should I report this somehow?

Thanks for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.15.24.60 (talk) 00:55, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi! I'm removing the copied content now. We would definitely appreciate your help in editing the remaining contents.  Orville1974 talk 01:02, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Help with two infoboxes on one wiki page
Hi all, I appreciate your help on this. I've never seen a wiki page that has two separate infoboxes like this one for Dennis Zine and I'd like to streamline it into one infobox. I assume it's more appropriate for there to be just one infobox, no? Can someone advise me about how to do that? Thanks! Beachlifedreamin (talk) 07:26, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know if piling on is allowed, but I'd never seen an article on a police officer or city council member with no other claim to notability before. Are we sure this person is notable? Also, I'm thinking the non-redundant content in the second infobox is not properly sourced/verified. May be, it could be deleted? Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 07:39, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * , I'm nearly certain this guy's notable. Being a city councilman for the second largest city (Los Angeles) in the country (US) is almost guaranteed to pass WP:NPOL., if it were me I'd just BOLDly remove the police infobox. If that gets reverted, go to the talk page and continue to follow WP:BRD. John from Idegon (talk) 07:55, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * John from Idegon, it says holding local office is not enough to pass notability. But needs additional coverage. So far, I'm not seeing it. But I'll leave it to editors more closely involved to decide. Thank you for taking the time. Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 08:05, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I hear your suggestion and appreciate your input. I just wondered if there is a way to incorporate one into the other because it is nice to see the rank he had as a police officer and the award he won - but there isn't anywhere within the officeholder template to include that. I will take the second one out if no one else suggests something else...Beachlifedreamin (talk) 08:10, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * You can call one infobox from within another with the module= parameter. See Ronald dela Rosa for an example where this is used with officeholder and police officer infoboxes. Regards So  Why  08:13, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * This was so helpful except that I really followed the code and I obviously did something not quite right...we are getting there but it's not right yet if anyone else wants to help me with Dennis Zine! I can't figure out what I did wrong in teh code but I'm sure one of you will. Beachlifedreamin (talk) 08:39, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * *Fixed. Not your fault. That template needs a disambiguation comment, LOL! Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 09:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It was missing in the documentation. I have added it.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Infobox_police_officer/doc&diff=next&oldid=903210525] PrimeHunter (talk) 09:09, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I just added that part to the documentation and forgot the child-part. Thanks PrimeHunter for fixing it. Regards So  Why  09:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah! I feel so much better that it wasn't my fault. I could not figure out what to do! Thanks everyone for teaching me about this feature and being so helpful. Beachlifedreamin (talk) 06:04, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Article Declined
My first article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:GlobalLinker was declined stating topic not suitable for wikipedia. To tell about the page 'GlobalLinker',it networking SME networking platform operating in different countries. It has tie ups with countries top trade bodies and national government to promote SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises)business growth.

Additionally the references and citations are from leading newspapers of respective countries. With all these it was declined saying these are not reliable sources.

Can I challenge this deletion ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aksndls (talk • contribs) 05:41, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . Nothing has been deleted. Your draft has been declined but you are welcome to improve it and resubmit it, if the improvements are substantial. Your references are of poor quality and seem to be based on press releases issued by the company. To show that this company is notable, we need references to significant coverage in fully independent, reliable sources, and you have not yet provided that. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  05:51, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I see that you have your conflict of interest. Just a suggestion, directly copy and paste this code  to your user page using source editor as the userbox box seems to be placed incorrectly. Masum Reza 📞  06:05, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Featured Articles
Hello, who chooses the featured article for the day? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by AgnesNeale (talk • contribs) 06:24, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, it's not that simple. I think you will find your answers here. Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 07:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

for EUROSTATTER 11:09, 24 June 2019‎ Eurostatter →‎Origins and development: Kalergi plan
Hi Eurostatter, I read your contribution written on:  White_genocide_conspiracy_theory, from yesterday. "11:09, 24 June 2019‎ Eurostatter →‎Origins and development: Kalergi plan"

in:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_genocide_conspiracy_theory

1970s propaganda by Austrian neo-nazi Gerd Honsik, which distorted the writings of Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, was used over the course of decades to begin a myth called the Kalergi plan. A 1925 book by Coudenhove-Kalergi entitled Praktischer Idealismus (practical idealism) has been widely cited by proponents of the Kalergi plan conspiracy theory and wider white genocide narrative throughout the 20th century.[39]

i have read you [39] https://henryjacksonsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Out-of-the-Shadows-Conspiracy-thinking-on-immigration.pdf

BAT!!!

The document (.pdf) you mention [39] does not contain the word "Gerd Honsik" and not even the 70s. I checked it all 5 minutes ago. So find a valid encyclopedic document. (!) No propaganda. There are also 2 errors, both an error in attribution to the person, and of dates. In the new book on Kalergi (-2019 Luca Micheli- THE CASTEL RONSPERG MODEL THE PIANO KALERGI LABORATORY, 311 pages, with more than 200 photos and documents - on Amazon-) is all demonstrated with documents, photos, dates and names. The "Kalergi Plan" is attributed to Gerd Honsik, but he is not the first. Both the 70s date is false! Honsik wrote the book on Kalergi Plan, in 2004 not in the 70s. Then he is not the first to write on "Kalergi Plan" using the word "PLAN". Any boy can find images in google: photos of a text written in 1955 by Arthur Rogers in London. It's called "Warburg and the Kalergi Plan", so it's not Honsik. (!) But Arthur Rogers is not the first to write about Kalergi Plan. In the book it is shown, that the first to write about Piano Kalergi was already in 1927, in the book "Der nordiche Gedanke" by Hans Friedriche, Karl Gunther, Germanic doctor and university professor. Then before Gerd Honsik wrote of "Piano Kalergi" in 1984 Wolfgang Seeger. And many others before Honsik. Honsik arrives very very late, perhaps the 7th in order of dates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.101.0.30 (talk) 07:37, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello 62.101.0.30, This is a place to ask experienced editors for advice. I don't think that's what you had in mind. I think what you were looking for was the talk page of the article or more likely User talk page of one specific editor. Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 07:45, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * , may be, you are the one who could possibly have something to say here. Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 07:47, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Need Experience Editors to compose an Unique Wiki entry about a first Digital Color solution company
Hello fellow editors,

I am a freelance content writer & blogger with few of edits on wikipedia. Few months back, I got an opportunity to work with Florida based company 'zenColor', similar like 'Pantone', 'Adobe', 'X-Rite' based on Color communication, Color model, and ColorChecker. The special thing about this company, It's first ever company in this entire universe, providing Digital Color solutions using a proper Color space, especially for RGB color model, CMYK color model. Company asked me to create a Wikipedia page for them and provided their description to me. As they are providing something unique or useful for all the wikipedia readers, so I didn't refuse. I tried it first with my Sandbox for the testing purpose. After the complete editings, I submitted it for a review from the experienced editors. But, my draft got rejected due to ton of weasel words and self promotional activity.
 * Draft Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:ZenColor_Corporation
 * They also have the patents assigned by Justia : https://patents.justia.com/assignee/zencolor-corporation
 * Company also listed on Owler : https://www.owler.com/company/zencolor

As, I have no previous experience in creating any of the wikipedia page. Please help me to edit or, create or, approve this wiki entry! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vivekjain9024 (talk • contribs) 06:56, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, weasel words are a problem but not a fatal one. The fatal problem is the not meeting WP:NCORP part. You should click that link and read the page carefully. Is the company covered by city/state/country/world level newspapers/magazines/news websites? Have they been mentioned by scientific papers for their "groundbreaking" technology/patents/services? Have they been reviewed by trusted magazines/websites that cover emerging technologies/companies? If you can't dig up 4/5 such sources from among what I've mentioned, it's probably too soon for them to have an article. If you find such sources, add them there and cite them properly, then you can ping me to edit it to make its language neutral. I don't think anyone else can do more than I have promised. Hope this helps! Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 07:42, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello, thank you so much for your quick help. I will surely get back to you soon with the following mentioned things/sources. Thank you so much for your kind help.Vivekjain9024 (talk) 08:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * You should probably take a very close look at this page before you put too much time/effort into that article. Good luck! Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 08:06, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Notability, how many sources are needed
Hey guys! Can anyone give me some more guidelines regarding how many sources are required to submit an article? I read the notability page, and know it has to be multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources. But how many are we actually talking? Is there a baseline? Also, are industry relevant magazines good enough? Like Nimdzi, Multilingual Magazine, CSA Research, or GALA Global? My article has been deleted before and I'm trying to make sure I have enough quality sources before submitting again. Thanks in advance!TMFalkner (talk) 08:05, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, . Like many questions on Wikipedia, this does not have a fixed answer. It depends partly on the depth and quality of the sources; but two will not usually be enough. Industry relevant magazines are usually good, but it is important to be clear that the coverage is truly independent, and not based on an interview or rehashed from a press release. Wikipedia is just not interested in what a subject says about themselves: it wants to know what people unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about it. --ColinFine (talk) 09:51, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Pandita Ramabai Mukit Mission
Link: Draft:Pandita Ramabai Mukti Mission. --CiaPan (talk) 10:28, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi I want to know why my draft was declined — Preceding unsigned comment added by Revival1991 (talk • contribs) 09:57, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The reason for the decline is given at the top of the draft.  If you have further questions about it, you may ask the person who declined it directly on their user talk page. I can say that the main reason is that there are no independent reliable sources with significant coverage to support its content(or any sources at all).  Successfully writing a new article is the most difficult task on Wikipedia, so don't be too discouraged.  You may find it helpful to use the new user tutorial and read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Can you please help me with what wikipedia means when they say "significant coverage to support its content"? What is considered as significant coverage ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Revival1991 (talk • contribs) 10:14, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Commonly at least three reliable independent sources. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:21, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Just as a tip, pings only work if you sign your post with ~ (without the nowiki tags seen in the edit window). All your talk page and forum posts should be signed so we know you wrote them.  Regarding your question, if you review the links I indicated above, they will help you to understand what is being looked for in new articles.  "Significant coverage" simply means coverage that goes beyond brief mentions. 331dot (talk) 10:22, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Draft in question is currently 60 words long, plus an info box, no references. There is an article about the founder Pandita Ramabai. Perhaps more information about the Mission can be added to that. OR, there may be content and references there that could be copied into an article about the mission. Re-using content should have an Edit summary comment on where the content was taken from. David notMD (talk) 10:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Thankyou   Also one more query, there is one person who deletes the content I am updating to wikipedia, since yesterday he is visiting my history/contri and deletes my updates. what should be done. its annoying Revival1991 (talk) 09:53, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Shading in Contributions?
I thought I'd ask this here, since I'm not sure where to check on changes like this.

So, when I looked at my Contributions list, I noticed that many of the entries were shaded in yellow - not all, but maybe a little more than half. I can't figure out any sort of pattern to the colouring at a glance.

Was this a recent change? What does the shading indicate? Just wanted to know. Gimubrc (talk) 15:09, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * , I just noticed that this morning too. In my list, it looks like the following are not highlighted: user, user talk, article talk, drafts, files. Articles and WP pages are highlighted. No idea what this is for. Schazjmd   (Talk)  15:30, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * , looks like it's been reverted. For future reference - is there some sort of changelog or something like that where interface updates and changes are discussed? Gimubrc (talk) 15:43, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * , odd, somebody must have been testing something. Hopefully one of the more experienced editors can answer the changelog question. I don't know of one but I'm not familiar with the backend intricacies of wikipedia. Schazjmd   (Talk)  15:57, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Gimubrc and I can't tell you exactly what the change was (maybe it was to be able to view the namespace percentages of someone at a glance?) but I think I know why it was reverted: there's a gadget that allows people to have possibly disruptive edits highlighted in deepening shades of yellow and orange (so maybe disruptive is yellow, probably disruptive is light orange, and HOLY COW THAT'S DISRUPTIVE is blood orange) and it sounds like the two may have interfered with each other.  -A la d insane  (Channel 2)  16:51, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It was discussed at Village pump (technical). There is no single place to track interface changes. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:17, 25 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Please see this image. Is this what you're asking about? User contributions list part en wiki.png --CiaPan (talk) 08:37, 25 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes, that's what it looked like. Gimubrc (talk) 13:16, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, such edits are marked with r in the recent changes listing. This is explained in the frame: 'Edit flagged by ORES'. And the linked page ORES review tool describes the mark as 'This edits may be damaging and should be reviewed'. Which means some specific change (possibly some special words, or unusual pattern of insertions/deletions etc.) triggered the spam or vandalism filter. This does not mean the edit was bad, just it's somewhat similar to some suspicious pattern. The change will be patrolled and either reverted or marked as good (and then it will loose its alerting coloring). --CiaPan (talk) 14:29, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

New page for "Fairbnb"
Greetings y'all

I am new around here and was trying to create a page for a new vacation rental platform called Fairbnb that I recently stumbled across, but my submission was declined. The reason noted is that the sources I added don't reveal "significant" coverage of the topic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fairbnb

Would appreciate some guidance on how many sources need to directly address the subject. I believe two of the sources I listed took on the topic directly, not just in passing.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vagabond09 (talk • contribs) 07:51, 25 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Hello, . I haven't looked at all the references in Draft:Fairbnb, but the two I looked at, while substantial, are clearly based on interviews. Basically, in an article about Fairbnb, Wikipedia is not interested in what Fairbnb say (or want to say), whether on their own materials, or quoted from an interview or press release. Wikpiedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with them have chosen to publish about them, in reliable places, and any article should be close to 100% based on such independent sources. For a new business, it is likely that such sources do not yet exist (see WP:TOOSOON) and that it is currently impossible to write an acceptable article on it. Another way of saying this is that the subject is not yet notable.
 * One more point: I see that one of your references is to Wikipedia. This is not permitted, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source (see CIRCULAR) - since you have already Wikilinked Airbnb, this achieves nothing (except making it look as if your draft has one more reference than it has). --ColinFine (talk) 09:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * another attempt to start an article on Fairbnb was heading for deletion some months ago, with a rationale of WP:TOOSOON. Sources are about the company's launch, and there is not enough significant coverage about the company's merits to warrant a page. The stub was eventually moved into user space: it's here. Your sources seem to be an improvement on what is present in that draft, but you might want to take this into consideration. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:04, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Page too promotional
I recently posted a new page about the Association of Master Trainers. I am a member of the Association. It was immediately removed by someone as written in a promotional style. Can you please provide some examples of pages for member driven organization that our within Wikipedia guidelines. I want to make the wiki world aware of the organization, but certainly within the guidelines.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patonge1963 (talk • contribs) 16:17, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hiya! Wikipedia probably fits the description. Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 16:23, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You state that you "want to make the wiki world aware of the organization". That is a promotional purpose and reflects a misunderstanding as to the purpose of Wikipedia.  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a forum to merely tell the world about something. This is an encyclopedia, where article subjects must be shown with independent reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability.  Wikipedia has no interest in what the subject wants to say about yourself.  In your now-deleted draft, (which I can view as an admin) you engaged in blatant promotion, telling the benefits of the subject as if it were an advertisement.  That is not appropriate Wikipedia content.  Unless this is discussed in independent sources like the news, the subject unfortunately would not merit an article at this time.
 * You also have what we call a conflict of interest about that subject, which means that you should avoid directly editing about it here. You will need to review that policy and make the appropriate declarations. 331dot (talk) 16:24, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Changing text color on Navbox?
Hello, so I'm currently building a new article in my sandbox and I was playing around with the Navbox, I changed the color with (|basestyle = background: #nnnnnn;). I want to use a dark color (dark green) but when I change it the black color of the text doesn't automatically change to white, I tried searching around on the template page but I couldn't find anything about coloring text. If anyone could help me out that'd be great! NightBag10 (talk) 19:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi NightBag10, welcome to the Teahouse. I see you have now made a navbox with white title at User:NightBag10/sandbox so I guess the issue is resolved. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:13, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I found a solution, yes. Thanks anyway NightBag10 (talk) 17:36, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

making updates to wiki pages as an employee
Picard091488 (talk) 18:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Corporation

I'd like to make the following changes, but want to make sure how to do this all correctly (being that I'm an employee of the company) because I don't wan't the changes to be reverted.

I'd like to make the following changes:

Currently: Quantum Corporation is a manufacturer of data storage devices and systems, including tape drive and disk-based systems. The company's headquarters is in San Jose, California. From its founding in 1980 until 2001, it was also a major disk storage manufacturer (usually second-place in market share behind Seagate), and was based in Milpitas, California. Quantum sold its hard disk drive business to Maxtor in 2001 and now focuses on integrated storage systems.

Suggested: Quantum Corporation provides integrated storage technology and services designed to enable customers to capture, create and share digital content. Quantum’s storage platforms are used to preserve and protect high-resolution video, imagery, industrial IoT and other types of unstructured data. The company’s headquarters is in San Jose, California.

From its founding in 1980 until 2001, it was also a major disk storage manufacturer (usually second-place in market share behind Seagate), and was based in Milpitas, California. Quantum sold its hard disk drive business to Maxtor in 2001 and now focuses on integrated storage systems.

I’m also suggesting that we add a notation about securing financing, preceding the delisting item:

2018 - Quantum Corp. announced the successful completion of a refinance of its current debt facilities.

Citations: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/quantum-secures-210-million-long-term-financing-to-repay-existing-indebtedness-and-provide-foundation-for-growth-300771196.html

https://www.sportsvideo.org/2018/12/14/svg-on-demand-quantums-jamie-lerner-and-eric-bassier-discuss-future-of-storage-technology-for-me/

what is the best way to initate this changes? How do I properly express my employment at Quantum in order to follow Wiki's best practices?
 * Hello, you are required to declare conflict of interest and then suggest edits on the talk page instead of making them yourself. Conflict of interest has information on how to manage your conflict of interest. I'd suggest you look at Talk:Axios (website) to find out exactly how professional paid editors request for edits to specific pages. Hope this helps! Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 18:12, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * This question was cross-posted to the help desk by the OP.  Orville1974 talk 18:21, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

is it possible that people forget to review an article?
Hi, dear people, my newest article is online since 06/22 - and i haven't received an info yet that it has been reviewed. Normally it gets reviewed within two days or so, so i wonder... Please, excuse me if I'm just too impatient. --Gyanda (talk) 10:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi There are many articles awaiting review, and more are added each day.  As long as your submission template is on the draft, an editor will eventually review it. It may take a month, or maybe even longer, as we're all volunteers. We appreciate your patience.  Orville1974 talk 11:44, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The OP may be talking not about AFC review of a draft but about NPP patrol of a newly created article which was created outside the AFC process. Special:NewPagesFeed shows that there are over 7300 articles awaiting patrol, many of which have been waiting more than 3 months. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh my god, i didn't knew that so many article are waiting. Please excuse my question! I'm really sorry. --Gyanda (talk) 13:59, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there any certain reason you want it reviewed quickly? 331dot (talk) 14:27, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I think it is pretty natural for people to feel ambitious about their new article. I guess the user was just making sure there was nothing wrong. William2001(talk) 16:36, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, William2001 - that was it :-). Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * , three months is actually the maximum wait time, as an article will be automatically removed from the queue after that. Articles older than three months have not spent three months in the queue––they were originally created more than three months ago, but have been moved to mainspace (or converted from a redirect) more recently. signed,Rosguill talk 20:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Inline Citations? Isn't that what I did?
Hello! First of all, thank you for reaching out to me to let me know that this group exists!

I've recently received news that my article was not accepted because"... does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes." Yet, when I look at my draft, I do see that I used footnotes, so where did I go wrong? Should it be more like an AP inline citation? I used the citation tool when I wrote the draft and assumed that was it needed. Any feedback or guidance would be greatly appreciated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Trystan_Reese is the draft. Thanks so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Randomgalwa (talk • contribs) 19:12, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi. Minimum standard for inline citations tells us about what kind of claims need to be cited, not whether the citing was done right. You can click the link on that declination notice and read all about it. For example, when I read the sentence "As a child he was heavily engaged in community theater, acting, and singing, often starring in the local theater productions throughout his childhood", I was really interested to know whether the subject was that good ever since childhood or it was just made up by someone who liked him or even himself. The only way to know for sure would have been to have a citation there, so I could click it, open it, read the referenced source and decide whether it was credible. But, citation isn't there. So, your citation skill is fine, except it has to be throughout the whole article not just in one section. Hope this helps. Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 19:27, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi I just added inline citation needed tags to the draft to show you where you still need to cite references to the content in the article.  If you can't find independent, third-party reliable sources for that particular piece of information, it should be removed from the article.  I'll keep an eye on the article, so if you have any questions, you can post them to the article's talk page here Draft talk:Trystan Reese.  Orville1974 talk 19:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi - I was surprised to read this draft and find out that a man was pregnant.  That itself would have made the subject quite notable.  After a more careful reading of the sources, unfortunately as it may be for the subject's gender identity wishes, it turns out he was legally and biologically a female growing up and when getting pregnant. Since this is an encyclopedia and not a biographical essay, if this article is accepted (and I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be), please do not be surprised to see others correct the pronouns and unroll the story, to make the pregnancy narrative less jarring.  TimTempleton (talk)  (cont)  20:03, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Woah, are you suggesting that we should misgender the article subject, or am I just reading this wrong‽ TheAwesome  Hwyh  20:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * See: MOS:GENDERID TheAwesome  Hwyh  20:32, 25 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that was completely ridiculous from TimTempleton. All that draft needs is to say that the subject is a transgender male (and optionally,"who hasn't gone through surgery"), before it says he's an transgender equality activist. The sources are also headlined and contented with pronoun "he", unsurprisingly, while discussing the pregnancy. Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 20:37, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Frankly, I'm disappointed, its 2019, not 1950. TheAwesome  Hwyh  20:40, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * You are misunderstanding me - I didn't phrase my comment correctly. I'm not saying the CURRENT gender identity is wrong and needs to be changed - I support it 100%.  I'm as liberal as they come.  It's just that I found it a bit jarring to read about a male that was pregnant, with no notification up to that point that there was any gender issue.  I'm sure others can clear the prose up more elegantly, and provide more background about the change, which is what I meant by unroll.  Because at the Teahouse we often politely alert others that they need to be prepared that the articles they write may be modified in ways they don't like, but which follow proper rules and guidelines, I wanted to prepare the author for the possibility. No harm no foul. Thanks for helping the editor everyone. TimTempleton</b> <sup style="color:#800080">(talk)  <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  21:25, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Odd behavior by an editor
There is some odd behavior and comments (see ESs at & ) by user:Qwirkle at the Russian interference in the 2016 Brexit referendum page. I have attempted to clear their apparent confusion as to who I am (see my ES). Maybe Template:Admin help? What is the most appropriate next step? X1\ (talk) 21:08, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Try the WP:ANI perhaps? At the very least, it lists issues and where to get help. So, you can decide which one matches your needs precisely. Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 21:24, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The ping system doesn't work that way. You need to sign your post every time you try to ping someone. You will get a notification every time your mention is sent except when pinging via edit summary. <u style="color:#087643;font-face:arial;text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Masum Reza <sup style="color:orange;">📞 21:35, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Wow, really? Guess I never had an opportunity to find out before. Thanks for the info. Greatly appreciated. Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 22:08, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

cv
I wish to start by adding my cv, but do not know how — Preceding unsigned comment added by Widadrabie (talk • contribs) 22:43, 25 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not the place for a CV; see WP:Autobiography. David Biddulph (talk) 22:46, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello Widadrabie, welcome to Wikipedia. If you meant an actual Curriculum vitae, Wikipedia doesn't have a place where an editor can add that to. You are suggested to try  linkedIn instead. If you meant an introduction about yourself, there is your userpage User:Widadrabie where you can write a little about yourself but see WP:User pages to find out what you can have there. If you put in a lot of material not related to editing Wikipedia, the whole page might get deleted, even though it is "your" userpage. Hope this helps!  Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 23:04, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

can you help me to write the above articles in correct manner that wiki can accept. thanks
Maha Rana Pratab Singh Puran was awarded by Excellent Business by IPLC Italy, Roma. After long years in business and as legal advisor in the sector of business and diplomacy, he have made along way with his hard work, born in an Indian Ocean Island and have several Masters and Degrees from reputated Universities,born in the date of 12/11.He has been living in europe since childhood, married.His sucess is due of hard working and straight professional,he have been founder of several business companies and have network turn above of millions of euro.The main he believe in humanity, with his hard work in business he have help several communities.Natural and always a smile on his face he believe on good work and corporation, even he has past thus several obstacles which include his health which is suffering and complaints by others, which most of them were fake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.R.P.S PURAN (talk • contribs) 21:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * , welcome to Wikipedia! You are strongly discouraged from writing article about yourself, because it is hard for you to be neutral about yourself as you can only think of good things, but wikipedia needs to take all sides, or no sides. Having said that, if you must, you should declare your conflict of interest as per WP:COI and then collect a list of sources which the article is to be based on. If you show that you have enough sources to establish notability (see WP:GNG), then you might find some editors to write the article for you. If you expect the helping editor to do all the heavy-lifting, including finding the sources, it's better to just wait for someone to think of writing that article themselves, because if the subject is notable, someone will come around to writing a wikipedia article about them eventually. Hope this helps! Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 21:20, 25 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. From what you have written about yourself above, and in your sandbox, I do not think Wikipedia would accept an article about you. It's not that you don't sound like a nice or interesting person, it's just that you haven't indicated that 'the world at large has taken notice of you'. (Don't worry, it hasn't taken much notice of me, either!). Our criteria for inclusion is whether a person meets our notability criteria - usually based on major nationally-recognised honours or awards, or multiple newspaper or book articles talking about that person. If you think you could demonstrate reliable sources that talk about you in detail, then maybe Wikipedia might accept such an article. All I could find about you online is a business entry in companies house. (But I should also point out that you do have a conflict of interest in wanting to write an article about yourself here, and we never advise people to do this, and recommend LinkedIn as a good place to start.) I'm sorry to be the bearer of likely bad news. Do let me know if you think I've misread the situation. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:37, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * NOTE: This user account has been reported to WP:UAA, and a 'softblock' recommended because the user has unfortunately made the error of creating an account in the name of one person (the one they want to write about), but has clearly signed their userpage and talk page with a completely different name. This is not acceptable, per our username policy at WP:MISLEADNAME. In addition the sandbox content has been copied to their userpage, so that content now also merits removal per WP:FAKEARTICLE. These and other points have been further explained on their talk page. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:23, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Normal user moving others' articles to draftspace
✅ Hi there. I've come across a user - a regular user, not an admin or AFC reviewer (their account is only 11 days old) - who has been moving other users' articles from mainspace to draftspace without discussion. The articles probably deserved it, but I was under the impression that you needed certain qualifications to draftify articles. So is this kosher, and if not what should be done about it? Thanks, SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 02:11, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi With the concept of WP:BRD, it's not uncommon for unassessed articles that obviously don't meet Wikipedia requirements. But it's customary to leave a thorough edit summary with the rationale of why it's being done so fellow editors have some idea of what the mover thinks the article needs.  In addition, notes on the article talk page can go into even more detail. Otherwise, it might get moved right back out to mainspace. The move also needs to be followed up with a speedy delete on the redirect page that is left behind in the mainspace, since that redirect points from the mainspace to draftspace (which we don't want).  Orville1974 talk 02:38, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * In addition, templates identifying its areas needing improvement (like no references, reads like an advertisement, etc.) can be added.  Orville1974 talk 02:49, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply, . I'll link to the articles in question:, , (in the last case it looks like the user accidentally moved the page to Draft talk: instead). Is this in line with guidelines? Thanks, SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 02:46, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * One was created in the mainspace, the move was to change the capitalisation (renames are accomplished by moves) but was quickly proposed for deletion, the second's edit summary explains that there were no references,and the third was moved out to mainspace by an the author editor then moved right back to draftspace by the same editor author (which is probably why they didn't bother with an edit summary--that's the talk page one that's now fixed). Uncontroversial moves are done regularly; WP:RMNOT and WP:RMUM list what are considered routine moves.  On the same page WP:RM defines the process for controversial moves.  I know that's a lot of information, but I hope it helps.  Orville1974 talk 03:14, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem, I appreciate all the information. I didn't catch what was going on with the third page - that makes sense. Thanks for clearing this up. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 03:21, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

My recent post about Company profile has been deleted. why?
Hii I'm trying to create a Company Profile page for this organization Uniflit (https://www.uniflit.com/) I did create one before but that post is deleted with below note ''This page has been deleted. The deletion, protection, and move log for the page are provided below for reference. 21:14, 19 June 2019 RHaworth talk contribs deleted page User:Shubhamcse2018/sandbox (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.facebook.com/pg/uniflit/about/)(thank)''

can somebody please help me with this. I'm new here.

Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shubhamcse2018 (talk • contribs) 07:28, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * , the article was deleted because you copied its content from a source that is not public domain, which in this case is that Facebook page. signed,Rosguill talk 07:39, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The copyright violations were only the most urgent reason to delete your draft, . Wikipedia is not a platform for advertising and promotion. Wikipedia does not contain "profiles". We publish neutral, well-referenced encylopedia articles. Use social media websites if you want to publish "profiles". <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  07:44, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello, We don't create profiles of companies, etc. on Wikipedia. We write articles about subjects that are notable. So, make sure the company you want to write about meets Wikipedia's notability criteria first. As mentioned already, you can not copy-paste things other people wrote into Wikipedia. You have to write it in your own words. But, note that even if you resolve that issue, your page might get deleted again for other issues. So, you'd best check out Your first article before you proceed any further, since it's very disheartening to have your hard-work completely obliterated with the click of a button by someone else. Also, check out WP:COI if you have any relation with that company. Usedtobecool  ✉️ ✨ 07:51, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Adding an info box
Hi,

I was making some updates to the Sophie Dahl wiki page a few months ago. She is a former model, now author and granddaughter to Roald Dahl.

I added an info box which included her nationality, name, occupation, parents, relatives, known for etc, all of which I feel was useful information to have an when looking at comparative authors of less note, many of them have info boxes.

Unfortunately @chroCat removed this for no consensus and suggested using Talk to discuss. A different user tried adding the infobox a short while after and it was removed again.

So, I just wanted to confirm how it is we get consensus to add an info box to someone's page?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plestan (talk • contribs) 07:48, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi . It sounds like you're involved in a content dispute, which means you should follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and discuss things at Talk:Sophie Dahl. Not every article requires an infobox and in some cases one can actually be more of a WP:DISINFOBOX with very little encyclopedic value. However in this particular case, you'll find this has come up for discussion before at Talk:Sophie Dahl which is probably what SchroCat meant by "no consensus"; you're welcome to contribute to that discussion and perhaps you'll be able to present some new arguments in favor of adding an infobox that will convince others that it should be done. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:58, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Making company profile
Hi ,

can we make any company profile in wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prabuddh1 (talk • contribs) 13:12, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Successfully creating a new article (not just "profile") is one of the most difficult tasks on Wikipedia. Newer users often end up disappointed when their hard work is removed for not meeting Wikipedia notability guidelines.  In your case, Notability for organizations outlines the criteria the article will need to meet. Before you spend a lot of time writing an article, research the company from third-party reliable sources to see if it meets those guidelines.  As a new user, I recommend waiting to create the articles until you've gained some experience editing existing articles. This new user tutorial is a great way to get you started. If you're still determined to create an article immediately, you should follow the instructions at Your First Article and use Articles for Creation.  Orville1974 talk 13:24, 26 June 2019 (UTC)