Wikipedia:Teahouse

Jéské Couriano, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

Can't edit this page? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2–3 days.

Help Wikipedia

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

The Teahouse is occasionally semi-protected, meaning the Teahouse pages cannot be edited by unregistered users (users with temporary accounts), as well as accounts that are not confirmed or autoconfirmed (accounts that are at least 4 days old with at least 10 edits on English Wikipedia).

However, you can still get direct assistance on your talk page. ; a volunteer will reply to you there shortly.

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

[Teahouse volunteers: If you have helped such a person, please don't forget to deactivate the request template.]

Wiki

Wikipedia sucks; they shut down everyone and don't help new people. Instead they send them to pages with rules using nonunderstandable terms. Clint O'Shea (talk) 22:13, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

What help are you seeking that you are not getting? What is it that you do not understand? 331dot (talk) 22:25, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

i try to rewrite my articles and then cite them; they get denied, so i try again and again but never get advise or help, just more denials Clint O'Shea (talk) 23:19, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Plain English advice:

After you write an article, but before you submit it, click on every single link in "References." Does it work? Does it go where you meant it to go?

This will not solve all your problems but it really, really helps! Article reviewers hate to see links on a new article that don't connect to anything, or connect to the wrong thing.

Second piece of advice: Writing a new article is one of the hardest jobs here. Try something else first. Find an article you like, look for additional sources and add one good piece of information, with its source.

M kuhner (talk) 00:38, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

@Clint O'Shea: When citing an online source, I suggest using a citation template that creates a link for reviewers to see the source. I added a {{cite journal}} for you at Draft:Candidatus Desulforudis audaxviator Subterranean Lineage B. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:03, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Clint, according to your User page you joined Wikipedia just yesterday. Although you packed a lot into that one day, it’s still only one day’s worth of experience.

Have you reached out to your mentor about some of your concerns and asked for his or her insights and advice? Mentors are one of Wikipedia’s most valuable — and often overlooked — available resources. They can really help in wading through all the jargon and procedures that can often overwhelm fledgling editors. Augnablik (talk) 05:20, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

@Clint O'Shea Here's a very simple rule you've already been made aware of; you must stop using AI to generate articles or edit articles, as you have obviously done at Draft:Candidatus Desulforudis audaxviator Subterranean Lineage B, Draft:Eaglercraft (Minecraft recreation) and at NHL 23

There are lots of people here who would like to help you join the community here at Wikipedia, but if you continue to break this rule after yoi've specifically been previously informed about it on your talk page, it is not going to bring you any success. Personally, I would suggest you start by reading this guide, which Is specifically designed to avoid any of those difficult to understand terms. Athanelar (talk) 05:56, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

I have done all of such; also, I would not like to talk to you because I feel like I'm being harassed by you. I would like to speak to a higher person above you. Clint O'Shea (talk) 23:40, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia's not hierarchical like that. There's nobody "above" me, and I'm not "above" you. I'm a more experienced editor offering you some advice for success, because as it stands you seem to be clashing with Wikipedia's rules and culture rather than embracing them. It's your choice whether to listen to anything I'm saying, Athanelar (talk) 05:03, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Look... I'm 14, autistic, and have ADHD. I cant help how i am, and this is how I am. If you help me by showing me, I'll understand, but i only understand things by seeing them Clint O'Shea (talk) 15:48, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Have you tried WP:The Wikipedia Adventure? That's meant for learning by doing.

Do you have a mentor? If not, would you consider applying for one? A mentor could walk you through some beginner work one-on-one and that might help.

People with autism and ADHD have successfully become editors on Wikipedia. It can be done! But jumping in at the deep end of the pool is a tough way to learn to swim. M kuhner (talk) 15:55, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a magnet for neurodiverse people, the very nature of being a Wikipedia editor pretty effectively self-selects for neurodivergence, and it can often be a benefit to Wikipedia editors more than it's a hinderance.

That said, there are some things that some neurodiverse people are averse to which might be a problem here, and by wanting to be part of this community, you accept that you're going to have to take on those challenges.

The first and foremost is that this is a collaborative project. Working together with other editors, being civil, understanding that you don't control any of your work,following the community's policies, guidelines, standards, and norms, receiving (friendly, constructive) feedback and criticism from other editors; all of these things are non-optional. Some people aren't compatible with that sort of environment and that's fine. I've seen a lot of younger, neurodiverse editors hit a wall when they realise that Wikipedia isn't a Fandom wiki and they don't have total freedom to write anything about whatever takes their interest. This is, ultimately, a very serious project aimed at building the world's largest repository of human knowledge. If that atmosphere ends up feeling too stuffy or strict for you, that's perfectly fine. It's not for everybody.

Secondly, there's a lot of reading. You've already stated that pages with rules using nonunderstandable terms can be an issue with you. That is, ultimately, something you'll have to overcome in order to be here. Learning through doing is great, but one of the core competencies required to contribute significantly to Wikipedia is the ability to read, digest and apply policies, guidelines and the manual of style; and that's going to involve a lot of reading and learning jargon. It's one thing if you're just a WikiGnome who goes around fixing typos, but you've already shown you have an interest in writing new articles; if you want to be successful in that, then learning about things like notability, verifiability, reliable sources, original research, synthesis etc is going to be non-optional.

I say all this not to scare you off, but because you should absolutely be aware of the kind of things expected of you. Again, our guidance for younger editors is a good place to start. It's deliberately written in a style hopefully easier to understand than most of our PAGs. Athanelar (talk) 16:20, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

PAGs = policies and guidelines? 🙂 Augnablik (talk) 03:31, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Adding third party/independent candidates to election info boxes

Currently the info box style for election articles features the post-primary R and D nominees only. Can we can instead include all candidates on a general election ballot? I think the 2024 presidential race was a good template for covering all general election candidates. Wikipedia could improve that by changing the info box standard from showing the R and D nominees only, to including nominees of other party primaries and independents as well. Looking forward to the feedback on this idea. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 12:27, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @ProfessorKaiFlai, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Assuming you're talking about Template:Infobox election, it supports up to 9 candidates, but note that the documentation says (in section "Notes"): In 2013, the Request for Comment (RFC) process established a consensus that third party candidates must poll over 5% to be included in an infobox, at least for elections in the United States. This was re-affirmed in 2017. ColinFine (talk) 20:48, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

OK - that's a good start to this discussion! Any consensus on what kind of polling is acceptable? Can it be polling conducted by the candidate's campaign or must it be independent, conducted by major polling organizations? ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 10:05, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Draft Review Help

Hello. I am a new editor and I have created Draft:Abdul Rauf Janjua. I have tried my absolute best to follow all Wikipedia guidelines. I worked very hard to search, find, and verify reliable direct third-party sources (like ISPR, Radio Pakistan, and news networks) and added them properly. I have also cleaned up the text to make it completely neutral and factual. I have done my best, but if I am still making any mistakes, please guide and help me correct them. Can a friendly editor please review my draft and help me move it to the main article space? Thank you so much for your support.BB Janjua (talk) 13:27, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Are you related to the subject of this article? Amatmilen (talk) 14:13, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Amatmilen No, I am not personally, professionally, or financially related to the subject of this article. I am from the same regional area (Hill Surang) and wanted to document his recognition out of personal interest after seeing the "Heroes of Pakistan" feature. I am trying my best to remain completely neutral and objective in my edits. Thank you for checking! BB Janjua (talk) 18:08, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

You uploaded a photo of the subject of the article and released it under a creative commons license as your "own work." Did you take this photo? Amatmilen (talk) 18:14, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello Amatmilen. Thank you for asking. To be precise, I did not click this photograph myself. It was an original digital photograph taken back during the 2016 AJK election campaign when he was a backup candidate of JI, and it has been publicly available on campaign posters. Since the file was saved in my phone gallery for a long long time, I mistakenly thought I could upload it as "own work" due to my lack of experience with licensing.

I realize my mistake now, and I have already removed the photo from the draft myself. Since I do not hold the personal copyright, please feel free to nominate the image for permanent deletion from Wikimedia Commons as well. I apologize for this misunderstanding.

Could you also please guide me on what is the correct license category or copyright tag to use if I want to upload a publicly available political/campaign photo under Wikipedia's non-free content or fair-use guidelines?

BB Janjua (talk) 05:46, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @BB Janjua, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid that WP:NFCC #1, "No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose" means that it is almost never permissible to use a non-free photo of a living person.

Note, though, that the presence or absence of a photo plays no part in whether a draft is accepted or not. ColinFine (talk) 20:52, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Why "No object shows image" page deleted

This is a strange character! Regular object shows like Battle for Dream Island (BFDI) or Inanimate Insanity (II) usually don't feature a puzzle piece character like the Wikipedia logo. But I want that picture too! No object show.svg is an image of Object show character example.svg + Anti.svg. A crossed-out Wikipedia puzzle piece character in the object show style. Please make that picture! And don't delete this text. Can you respond today? Don't delete it, and create this image.

BFNIF/B.F.N.I.F is a bad object show, worse than Wikipedia. There are brand logos as characters in the object show, for example: Tumblr, Pinterest, Spotify, and others. Bad show. What if they used it without copyright? And for some reason, some people value it, and that's strange. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-34009-52 (talk) 15:58, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

What exactly is the question here? -Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 17:09, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Can you add a picture today, not tonight? No objects shows.png ~2026-34009-52 (talk) 09:00, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

That is, not No object shows.png, but No object shows.svg ~2026-34009-52 (talk) 09:01, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Ad the image to what page? Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 13:56, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Add to Wikimedia Commons. What if I make a Wikipedia page: No object show! And tell us about B.F.N.I.F. ~2026-34009-52 (talk) 10:03, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

You can tell about B.F.N.I.F and add such a picture But the add No object shows.svg (Object show character example.svg + Anti.svg) ~2026-34009-52 (talk) 19:04, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Right today ~2026-34009-52 (talk) 19:05, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

It's next to impossible to grok what you're saying because it comes across a stream-of-consciousness logorrheoea. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Object Class: Drygioni} 19:13, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

It reminds m of Gertrude Stein's rejection letter... Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 23:59, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Check out WP:Requested articles and File requests; they might be able to help you out. Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 23:54, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Tornado hits Unionville, MO

For some reason, I cannot place the FACT that Unionville, Missouri just got hit by a tornado on 6-10-2026 in that article. This thing was reported by the US Weather Service during a outbreak that may still be going on. They reported damage and someone shot and uploaded a video of the tornado. I tried to edit the article, only to have a BOX appear over the pencil icon and everything quit functioning. Is that article protected? I also nearly got hit by one as well in the Milan, MO area.~2026-34311-81 (talk) 03:30, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

It doesn't appear to be protected. What exactly happens when you try to edit the article? ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 03:34, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

I tried to place the factoid into the article by clicking on the pencil shaped icon, only to have a square form over the icon, then all editing and other actions cease to function. ~2026-34311-81 (talk) 03:42, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

That's strange. You could make an edit request? ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 06:10, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-34311-81 The edit is there at the end of the "History" section but has no citation. Please add a reliable source. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:57, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Is the National Weather Service a reliable source? Tried to place it as one, but it would NOT accept it. ~2026-34374-43 (talk) 18:43, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

It sounds like your end might be glitching; Wikipedia doesn't block you from adding unreliable sources (even though you should not) unless they're blacklisted. Can you link to the source you want to cite? ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 18:46, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Can someone place the National Weather Service website and info on here? Where I am at, we are expecting more severe weather, including tornadoes as of the sign in time here.~2026-34374-43 (talk) 20:19, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

If you want to cite the National Weather Service, you'll need to link the report that includes the information about the tornado. I'm not sure what the weather where you are has to do with the source?^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 20:26, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

I was trying to place the sources, but the server on my end has been screwing up due to the weather (explains some glitches) and is still at it. Another website is KTVO, a TV station in Kirksville, MO and it also has videos of the Unionville Tornado, it also has videos of other tornadoes as well. Go to KTVO, then go to where they have the tornado videos. It is www.ktvo.com I googled BOTH sites for the info and sources. Google Unionville, MO gets hit by tornadoes to get the sources. There are several of these.~2026-34374-43 (talk) 22:08, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Help on deleted content

Kylie Bob (talk) 07:15, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Heelo, Cross checking about the deleted article Martin Luther Nyanzi from mainspace shows there was a misunderstanding with the context of the page, the information was deleted under G5 and also claiming to be a hoax but the content is not a hoax if you're to crosscheck with reliable sources such as The Daily Monitor, New Vision, The Observer etc. The subject passes WP:GNG and WP:BIO as it passed the AFC. I think it needs to be undelete as it had got substantial edits from various editors on Wikipedia.

You can crosscheck with New Vision and Observer here

https://www.newvision.co.ug/category/news/16-year-old-seeks-legislation-on-cbos-state-f-NV_229139_052026

https://observerug.com/en/national/story/nyanzi-martin-luther-ugandas-youngest-parliamentary-petitioner/ Kylie Bob (talk) 07:20, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

I think we need a Wikipedia editor from Uganda to assess the sources for credibility. @MichealKal @spartaz Kylie Bob (talk) 07:25, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Have cross checked the sources but most of them are about the petition and a few biography about him. ~2026-34434-59 (talk) 10:24, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

This article went through Articles for Deletion at WP:Articles for deletion#Martin Luther Nyanzi and the decision was delete. The Teahouse can't overturn an AfD decision. The correct way to try to do so would be to open a case at WP:Deletion review. In my opinion this is guaranteed to fail and may lead to your account being blocked, due to the history of this article, but you do have the right to try. Don't post any more about this in the Teahouse, please. M kuhner (talk) 15:34, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

The correct link for the AfD is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Luther Nyanzi. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:24, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Bob, the two sources shared are notable and independent. However, a few months ago, some IP reached out to me several times asking me to create an article about the same which deems this suspicious. MichealKal (talk) 06:02, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Unfortunately it appears that many news sources in Uganda don't do checks. Over the last couple of years this kid has got there fictional life published in better and better looking formats and any lazy news editor just doing a quick search will see enough to believe it's true. https://observerug.com/en/national/story/nyanzi-martin-luther-ugandas-youngest-parliamentary-petitioner/ is AI Slop with an AI fake image. If any followed up "He founded Apex Media Services, which operates platforms such as Block FM 103.2" they would find it's just a kids YouTube channel mostly re-posting other people content. They started with sources like https://nyanzimartinluther.com.free claiming they were worth $1.8 billion, now these latest attempts look real but are still nothing but self perpetuating claims of greatness. KylieTastic (talk) 09:04, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

• Both main and TA blocked as sock as LTA. KylieTastic (talk) 08:22, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Submission declined - not written from a neutral point of view

Hello, my draft entry has been rejected on the basis that it is not written from a neutral point of view. I don't know what to change. Can you help please? The draft is Draft:EPI-USE Labs. I'm unsure which piece of the article has language considered non-neutral. Any help would be greatly appreciated! GetToHeaven (talk) 09:39, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Your draft is promotional, i.e. the draft is written in an unencyclopedic style. Also, your draft can be used in the company's website if they have one, but not in Wikipedia as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a place where you can advertise. Please take a look at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:58, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @GetToHeaven, and welcome to the Teahouse

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.

If a draft is, or reads as if it is, what the subject wants people to know, rather than as what people unconnected with the subject have published about it, then it is promotional. ColinFine (talk) 21:00, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

What links here ? (P-8)

Whilst following a trail of breadcrumbs and disappearing down the inevitable rabbit-hole, I found myself at the Boeing P-8 Poseidon page viewing What links here. The Boeing P-8 is a popular article with around 800 backlinks, most of which are either obvious, or fairly easily confirmed (e.g. Svalbard), but some of them caught my eye. For instance, what on earth is the connection between numerous WWII fighter aircraft and this modern-era Boeing 737 derived reconnaissance aircraft? I pulled up three examples (Hawker Hurricane, Gloster Meteor, and de Havilland Mosquito), but could find no evidence of why they would be backlinked to the Boeing Poseidon. I have looked at Help:What_links_here but I confess I am thoroughly confused.

Is it because all these types might be indirectly linked through reconnaissance or possibly reconnaissance aircraft? i.e. two degrees of separation. If so, how would I confirm this is the case?

WendlingCrusader (talk) 17:41, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi WendlingCrusader. It's linked on the second "A47" in {{ADF aircraft prefixes}} which is transcluded in many articles. You may prefer User:PrimeHunter/Source links.js which produces Source links on Boeing P-8 Poseidon. It omits links made by transcluded templates. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:44, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated.

So, RAAF A47-29 was a B-25 Mitchell bomber back in 1945 (#29 in a larger series I guess), whilst A47-001 is a Boeing P-8A in current service (wef 2017), the first of 14. That is certainly a connection I wouldn't have made in a thousand years.

Is there any chance you could satisfy my curiosity regarding the Gloster Meteor connection (A77- in RAAF service) and Mosquito (A52-). It must be something other than RAAF serial prefixes. I used the link you kindly provided, although in this case the resulting list is still quite long, with no obvious connection to the other aircraft types mentioned above. Again, I don't even know where to start.

WendlingCrusader (talk) 20:23, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

@WendlingCrusader: Hawker Hurricane, Gloster Meteor, and de Havilland Mosquito all display {{ADF aircraft prefixes}} at the bottom of the articles, so all three articles link to Boeing P-8 Poseidon. That's why those articles appear at Special:WhatLinksHere/Boeing P-8 Poseidon. It's irrelevant to WhatLinksHere that the template also has a first "A47". I only mentioned it's the second A47 to explain where in the template to find the relevant link. The Source links made by my script does not list the three articles. It only lists articles which have the link in their own source text. I suggested the script as a helpful alternative to WhatLinksHere for many purposes. Editors using WhatLinksHere are often uninterested in articles which merely have a link in a widely used navigation template at the bottom. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:51, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Can someone help me determine if an individual meets the notability requirements?

I was googling around, and it seems like Ashwyn Singh, a Desi comedian, has enough external media coverage to meet the GNG for entertainers/living people, but as I am very new, before I take this to AfC, could someone double-check this? I don't want to waste anyone's time with helping me create an article if he does not meet the guidelines properly. Thank you! }} Kimakishi (talk) 19:16, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Are there at least three independent reliable sources with significant coverage of them- which usually means critical analysis and commentary about them? In the case of a comedian, that might be something like reviews of his work/material by professional critics, or has received a notable award(an award that itself has an article, like Academy Award). Not just the fact that he might have performed somewhere. 331dot (talk) 19:56, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

These are the sources I found; he's been mentioned in an academic publication as well, although that admittedly is a student submission as part of a master's degree program, so I don't know if it counts. I'm just not certain as to whether these meet the standards, because I don't normally look for critics/reviews of entertainers/entertainment that are provided by people other than my friends. While if I do, in fact, try to write this article, I am not committed to using all of these sources, these are the ones I've found that seem to be from reputable sources

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

(The turbotax link I would specifically be using for age/year of birth data, not income or anything) Kimakishi (talk) 20:10, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

@Kimakishi I would, personally, recommend trying a WP:DRAFT article before attempting to move it onto mainspace, at least in your case. From there, editors can review it and not only deem whether the sourcing is up to par, but also the overall quality of the article. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:09, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Hi, I was just fixing this page.. noticed that this user continuously altering info. including an award segment.. where that is backed by a verified source. I've informed the user but, denied. Please restore it.. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 20:19, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto Just rv'd the reversion and added a warning on the talk page. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:07, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Perfectodefecto, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm not clear why you are claiming there is a conflict of interest. What is your evidence for that?

The other point is that verifiability is a necessary condition for including information, but it is not a sufficient condition - or, in other words, just because the information is supported by a source does not necessarily mean that it should go in an article.

@Aniqr reverted your edit, which they are entitled to do, under WP:BRD. Your next move should not be reinstating the edit (which is edit warring) but discussing it with the other editor - (preferably on the article talk page, so that other editors interest in the subject will see it; but the other editor's user talk page is the next best thing).

You did open a discussion on User talk:Aniqr after you reverted. I find Aniqr's language a little hard to understand, but I don't think they are arguing about whether the information is supported by sources, but about whether it is appropriate to include in the article, but you have not heard them and answered that point, but just kept repeating that it is verifiable.

Your job at that point (both of you) is to reach consensus about your difference of opinion, not keep stating your own position and ignoring what the other says. If you cannot come to an agreement, then dispute resolution tells you some possible steps.

I'm not sure why @Fakescientist8000 has just come in and reverted again, rather than joining the discussion - perhaps they've seen something I'm missing. ColinFine (talk) 21:18, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

@ColinFine ahoy! The reasons given for the reversions from the aforementioned user are...contentious, at best. The user believes it is okay to remove various (and here's the key word) sourced awards because..other awards aren't mentioned. From an outsider's perspective, it just looks like random removal of content without good reason. Apologies if it appeared like I was barging in! Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:22, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Fakescientist8000 (and @Perfectodefecto). If the other reasons are contentious - then contend them! Just ignoring another editor's (apparently good faith) argument and reapplying the change is not collaboration or consensus. Again, see WP:DR.

I have no particular knowledge or interest in this subject, and will not be commenting further on this. ColinFine (talk) 07:09, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks @ColinFine for projecting this side.. However, I feel WP:3 should be applied here to resolve it. If it looks right, so be it.. otherwise, let it be.. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 07:57, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

@ColinFine Apologies. if there's any inconveniences... The award isn't that much important, as it has no wiki page for it. However, it has some verified sources which was inserted there.. that's it.

they argued about why the other awards aren't there from the same category.. I replied, it has no such sources to back them. If you've any .. then add them. I had no intention of otherway around... If it's ok. Keep it.. otherwise revert it. I've no problem either.. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 21:40, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

The wikipedia embassy

Hello,

I have a few questions regarding the Wikipedia embassy:

1.How exactly does the wikipedia embassy work?

2.How can I help the wikipedia embassy?How do I offer my help to them? (I speak 2 languages other than English)

3.How do I ask the wikipedia embassy for help?

Thank you! A Nerdy Hedgehog (talk) 21:11, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

WP:Local embassy talks about this. Wikipedia Embassies are groups of volunteers who speak a particular language and are willing to help with queries involving that language. For example, I was investigating a page and needed to know whether a Chinese source actually supported what was said in the article. I could contact one of the volunteers from the Chinese local embassy (scroll halfway down the page to reach the volunteer lists) and ask them for help by putting a message on their Talk page, or sending them an email if it is available. The same page section says If you are bilingual and have the desire to volunteer, feel free to add your name in your language section. M kuhner (talk) 06:40, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! A Nerdy Hedgehog (talk) 23:30, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Re: Creating an article/page for a renowned artist

Hi! I 've been making a draft for a reggae artist called Daddy Rings. He is mentioned in carious place son wikipedia but has no page for himself. However, I'm a complete noob at this. If some can please help me with inline citations, references, or any other thing taht can improve the draft, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE reach out. Jademakeda (talk) 21:28, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Please see Referencing for beginners. I will say that writing a new article is the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia, and it is not recommended as one of the first tasks a new user performs. Do you have a connection to this artist? 331dot (talk) 21:37, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes, he is a family member ~2026-34399-70 (talk) 21:37, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Remember to log in when posting.

You will need to disclose this as a conflict of interest on your user page. It's even harder to write a new article with a conflict of interest, as you must set aside what you know about this family member amd strictly limit yourself to summarizing independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 21:41, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Do you have a case for notability? I can't find much on this artist that is not a music listing, otherwise I'd be happy to lend a hand IRT referencing.

Warmly

Momonowa (talk) 15:44, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Pornographic Citation

Hello, After looking at the revision history of Bishop Fernando Arêas Rifan, a temp account attempted to remove a citation that now links to a pornographic website... Ref 2 & Ref 4 as of this revision. (17:26, 1 June 2026 Zackmann08), their edit was reverted by @Tessaract2 If someone presses, archived... from the original, it takes them straight to an innapropriate website. What do I do? 2x2x2x2x2 (talk) 21:46, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

@2x2x2x2x2: Hello! I have added the parameter "|url-status=usurped" to the {{cite web}} template so that the original website is not linked. ObserveOwl (talk) 22:01, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

CSD for jokes?

As an AfC reviewer, I've noticed a lot of drafts that were clearly made as a joke, but there doesn't seem to be a specific CSD for joke pages. Should I tag them for speedy deletion as vandalism or a hoax, or just leave them be? Thanks. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 22:22, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

If you are talking about pages that are obvious hoaxes or pages made purely for vandalism, I would Wikipedia:G3 it. If the joke page could also be considered an attack page, I would Wikipedia:G10 it. If it is neither of those things, I would leave it alone until it gets deleted for Wikipedia:G13. Considering they will never see the light of day, most joke pages do no harm. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 22:53, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

I see, thank you. For a page like Draft:Golengaaa, what would be the best course of action? ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 22:59, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

That is a textbook case of Wikipedia:G3. The page is purely vandalism. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 23:02, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Got it; thank you so much! ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 23:04, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

It's an obvious case of what en:Wikipedia classes as "silly vandalism". -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 00:38, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

For some reason my brain was like "But maybe it should stay", I see that it's just vandalism now. Thank you! ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 04:05, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Article

My article said it had a notability issue, and I put in a few more sources and asked if it was enough. I need someone to help me. Link. J121233 (talk) 01:15, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Help me as in taking down the notice if I'm allowed to. J121233 (talk) 01:15, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

You should not be taking down a notice until you have fixed the problem connected to the notice. This article consists of a single sentence that simply says that this governing body exists, and the sources do not have any significant, independent coverage of this governing body. This is probably an WP:AFD candidate if more sources aren't found. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 02:08, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

The key, J121233, is improvement of the article. We read that Federação Portuguesa de Badminton has been running for over seventy years. In all that time, has no organization or person independent of the federation written anything of substance about the federation? No description of what it does, how it works, or fails to work? No praise, no criticism? No comparison with the/a parallel organization (if there is one) in Spain, etc? -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 01:52, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

In their defence, they may not realise that offline sources are acceptable. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Object Class: Drygioni} 03:14, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes, J121233, as Jéské Couriano points out, you're free to summarize what's in newspaper articles, magazine articles, book chapters, etc. ¶ I have to say, as I look in Category:National members of the Badminton World Federation and from it sample German Badminton Association, French Badminton Federation, Badminton Association of India and USA Badminton, I'm unimpressed. (Indeed, I'm depressed.) Perhaps the first author of each looked at the precedents for other countries and thought "Ah, so that's all I have to do". But surely badminton deserves better. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 03:45, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Remove page history: moved sandbox page

I recently created a new article for Sasha Reed. I had been working on the informtion in my sandbox and made a mistake in that I moved the sandbox document to the page for Sasha Reed. This means that all prior pages that I had drafted up in my sandbox are now in the history for Sasha Reed's article. I know this would be uncommon, but is there a way to request that history of the sandbox page (going back to 2021) be removed from the article on Reed? Thanks for any thoughts on this. DaffodilOcean (talk) 04:51, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

@DaffodilOcean: This is not too uncommon. Admins can easily do a 'history split'. See Template:History split; further details might be found near WP:HISTSPLIT and Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. There are really two questions to answer: 1) from which revision should the article start? Maybe this one, or this one, or some other, and 2) What should happen to the previous revisions. The choice will usually be to delete them or move them back whence they came (which I'd probably recommend here). If you want to specify your preferred starting revision, we can probably just crack on with it without the extra paperwork. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 05:37, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

@Zzuuzz - thank you for the clear description. I will aim to not do this again, but now I see the path to tidy up in the event I make this mistake again.

1. The revision that makes the most sense to start with is this one:

2. The previous revisions can go back to where they came from.

Thanks for the help. DaffodilOcean (talk) 13:43, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

That's now done. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:23, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! DaffodilOcean (talk) 19:48, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Please explain conflict resolution on Wikipedia.

I may need to use it going forward, right now I have for the first time bumped into an editor who seems driven by political motives. We are working on an article in the Palestine Israel topic. So far it has been polite, and they are communicative, yet they keep making the article very subjective and seem to use terms that are neither NPOV or consider due weight. In a nutshell, the writing stile seems to be promotional and very much partisan. Before it becomes a conflict over if we stick to the facts and keep it neutral, do you have tips for me? I have only been a Wiki editor for 6 months, should I just give up on making the article all about the facts written as objectively as possible? LumenArchivorum (talk) 08:08, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

@LumenArchivorum have you seen WP:Dispute resolution already? 🍅 fx (talk) 08:55, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Not sure why Lumen decided it was necessary to come here, rather than continue the discussion at Talk:Languages of Palestine. They announced their intention to edit the article to discuss the history of languages in Palestine and I thought that was a good idea and encouraged them to do so, posting relevant sources on the talk. When they began editing the article without using the sources I provided, and because they encouraged me to edit as well, I did. What their specific objection to my edits is, is not articulated on the talk page. Wondering why they did not reply to my latest reply to them, I checked their contribs and found them making these insinuations. Rather off-putting I have to say. Tiamut (talk) 09:17, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

This is not personal, and I appreciate that you have been communicative and have not used any unacceptable language. However, I am concerned that the consensus reached on the talk page is not being followed, and some of the writing appears partisan. Given how sensitive this topic is, it is especially important that we proceed with care and adhere closely to consensus and neutral point of view (NPOV). LumenArchivorum (talk) 10:11, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

It appears that we have different interpretations of how to implement the consensus reached on the talk page, which sometimes happens, and is not a problem in of and itself. It is a problem to assume what my motives are though, and to characterize them as "political", rather than engaging in discussing the content specifically that you find to be problematic.

Also WP:NPOV urges us to include all significant viewpoints represented in scholarship. I have presented several. If there are any I have missed that you feel need inclusion, you are welcome to add them. If there are none, the article is not POV just because it faithfully represents the scholarship on a given subject. Tiamut (talk) 10:30, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

It is inappropriate for you to jump in while I ask for advice on information about conflict resolution like this. Let me seek council, I haven't been an editor as long as you. LumenArchivorum (talk) 10:34, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

I am sorry you feel that way. Tiamut (talk) 10:38, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

@LumenArchivorum, calling others’ behavior inappropriate like this is itself inappropriate; discussions you open are not limited to you only, and anyone is welcome to chime in as they like. Tiamut has done absolutely nothing wrong by doing so, and is well within their permissions to respond here as they have done. Electricmemory (talk) In solidarity 11:54, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

I am not alleging that any specific rules were broken when they entered the teahouse discussion, but I do find the behavior inappropriate. In particular, responding in a combative manner at the Teahouse when someone is seeking advice on conflict resolution involving that same editor does not seem socially appropriate.

While differences in point of view are expected, I am concerned that this reflects a broader pattern of behavior in Tiamut’s interactions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Tiamut LumenArchivorum (talk) 16:18, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello,

Thank you I will have a good read. LumenArchivorum (talk) 10:08, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguration links

Hi!

I just worked on an article, and I see now in the contributions list that it turned out "Disambiguration links" on it. I checked them all out, and even if they might be somewhat similar, they are correct. What am I to do? Leave as is? Singer80 (talk) 08:43, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Singer80. I don't know what you checked out but click "Disabiguation links" in the tag or my post to see the meaning: Links to disambiguation pages. We generally don't want that in articles except in hatnotes. Your edit said "musical consultations" with a link to a disambiguation page which doesn't even include that meaning although the doctor entry is similar. "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets can help identify the links. Consultant may be the best link target but it's not perfect. Maybe it shouldn't be linked at all. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:22, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Ok! Thanks for your response. I'll look in to it! Singer80 (talk) 10:33, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Need Help With Draft

Hello, my Draft:Uttar_Pradesh_Board_of_Madarsa_Education getting rejected again and again. I improved many things now and added reliable sources from Indian government website too but still rejected. Could you please check once and tell what still problem. BrownCanary61 (talk) 09:31, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello. The draft has been declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted.

You are just telling of the existence of this government body and its function. A Wikipedia article must do more, it must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it is notable in a Wikipedia sense, like a notable organization. You don't really have sources with significant coverage, they just report the activities of the organization. 331dot (talk) 09:35, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you 331dot for your quick response. BrownCanary61 (talk) 09:38, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest help: Verifying neutral tone for a technical software draft

Hello! I am an agency representative working on behalf of SciChart, and I have declared my Conflict of Interest (COI) on my user profile in compliance with WP:PAID. Our previous article drafts were declined by reviewers for being too promotional, which we realize happened because the text focused too heavily on the corporate entity rather than the technical utility.

I have completely overhauled the article draft inside my account's sandbox here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Edward_Echo/sandbox.

The new draft focuses strictly on the software's architecture (C++ core, WebAssembly compilation, and WebGL rendering) and includes independent, peer-reviewed medical and scientific citations (including Nature magazine).

Could a veteran editor please review my sandbox layout and let me know if the tone is now sufficiently neutral and compliant with WP:NPOV before we submit it to Articles for Creation? I appreciate any specific line-by-line feedback you can offer to ensure it meets community standards. Thank you! Edward Echo (talk) 12:27, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Skimming it quickly, it seems like you've used AI to write it. AI-written article are not allowed on Wikipedia, so you'll need to rewrite it from scratch by hand first. Seems you may have also used AI to ask this question, which is also not allowed.
Beyond those issues, the article is quite lacking in sources. You need to cite every single claim in Wikipedia articles, but currently most of the sections contain no citations. You also haven't provided enough sources to demonstrate notability. You usually need about three high-quality, independent sources. {{GearsDatapacks|talk|contribs|in solidarity}} 12:57, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

It’s not lacking in sources, it has no sources because both of the “sources” were completely nonexistent and probably generated by an AI. Electricmemory (talk) In solidarity 13:08, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

What do you mean? Both https://example-independent-source.gov/ and A. Author are held in very high regard at WP:RSP Amatmilen (talk) 14:20, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Holy WP:CIR, batman. Athanelar (talk) 14:31, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Edward Echo, and welcome to the Teahouse.

You say above Our previous article drafts were declined by reviewers for being too promotional, which we realize happened because the text focused too heavily on the corporate entity rather than the technical utility.

This is incoherent, and indicates either that you do not yet have an understing of how Wikipedia works, or possibly that you have used an AI for this post, which certainly does not understand anything (about Wikipedia or anything else).

Whether the text concentrates on the company or the product matters in respect of the article matching its title; but it has nothing to do with whether or not the text is promotional.

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

If the article is, or reads as if it might be, what the company wants people to know (whether about itself or its product) then it is promotional. ColinFine (talk) 19:26, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

How to make a Template:Sfn with just one of the authors of a work?

So I recently found out that if you have a reference for a work by two authors, as seen below

{{cite book |last1=Dunning |first1=John |last2=Brownstein | first2=Bill |date=2014 |title=You're Not Dead Until You're Forgotten: A Memoir |location=Montreal; Kingston |publisher=McGill–Queen's University Press |isbn=9780773544024}}

A Template:Sfn with just one of the authors won't work properly. As seen below

{{sfn|Dunning|2014|p=144–145}}

How can I signify that the Template:Sfn quotes one of the two authors specifically? In this case it is a biography, to which the living subject collaborated. The research and narrative are by Brownstein (the journalist), but it also features plenty of quotes directly attributable to Dunning (the subject). So I need to alternate between the two. Would Template:Anchor be the only way to do that? Thanks. Redacwiki (talk) 13:12, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

@Redacwiki sfn requires you to cite all authors of whatever book you intend the sfn to point to so that it avoids confusion (e.g. one book written by Alice and Bob, 2014, and another book written only by Bob, but also written in 2014). the above source sfn would be:

{{sfn|Dunning|Brownstein|2014|pp=114-145}}

nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead // in solidarity with the WWU) 15:13, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

You can use the "ref=" parameter to override this behaviour.

{{cite book |last1=Dunning |first1=John |last2=Brownstein | first2=Bill |date=2014 |title=You're Not Dead Until You're Forgotten: A Memoir |location=Montreal; Kingston |publisher=McGill–Queen's University Press |isbn=9780773544024|ref=CITEREFDunning2014}}

But this won't let you alternate between citing Brownstein and citing Dunning; for that I think you would need two different citations. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 16:00, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

As an alternate idea, I'd consider attributing the quote and not just citing it. I feel that if the book is "Alice and Bob (2026)" you cannot call it "Alice (2026)" even when you are repeating a direct quote from Alice. It would be clearer to say, "Alice said X (Alice and Bob 2026)". M kuhner (talk) 06:05, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Happy 10,000 watchers!

(non-question) The Teahouse has reached 10,000 watchers today!

Imagine 10,000 people having you on their watchlist at the same time nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead // in solidarity with the WWU) 13:18, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

I’m honestly surprised the number isn’t much higher. Electricmemory (talk) In solidarity 13:41, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

A useful tool

This is a promotion attempt by yours truly for a very useful tool called WikiNav that has remained somewhat obscure. Please see this post and the good explanation by Andrew Gray. I hope the regular editors here will use word of mouth (or word of keyboard) to promote this tool which has been eye opening for me, and do what they can to help improve it. I will not post about it any more anywhere, because I think I have done all I can. I will leave it in your hands. Good day. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 16:05, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

making a page for an actor

hi all! im looking to make pages for various stage (theatre) actors, and i was wondering if there were any requirements the actor must have met to get a page (such as winning an award or being nominated) 404.seikoko (talk) 16:20, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

@404.seikoko The requirements are set out at WP:NACTOR. But please note that Wikipedia articles are not "for" their subject. Promotion is strictly forbidden, and the articles must be based on reliable sources, which might not say what their subjects want them to say. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:49, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

are ai articles acsepted

sggxg Crazdude (talk) 18:23, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

No. See WP:LLM. 331dot (talk) 18:23, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Wikitable Citations

I wanted to update stats for the page on Catalan independence polling and found (including ones for earlier years) as source, but it also included statistics for earlier years, on page 75. Do I remove the previous references and instead add this one, or keep them and just add the citation on the new row? Svmsar (talk) 18:56, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

It's up to you really. There's no particular guidance on this, so do whatever you feel is easier for readers to use. {{GearsDatapacks|talk|contribs|in solidarity}} 20:35, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Reporting title vandalism

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

---

Someone has vandalized the title of Air India Flight 171 by moving it. ~2026-34642-78 (talk) 21:43, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Dealt with, thank you. CoconutOctopus talk 21:50, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

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

Is 2019 Toronto Raptors Championship Parade classified as a peaceful gathering?

I'm planning on making the 2019 Toronto Raptors Championship Parade wikipedia article, but I'm just wondering if it would be eligible for List of largest peaceful gatherings, can someone please research the topic a little and let me know? In my opinion I believe it is, although, there were incidents like stabbings and a shooting that happened during it. Cheromaniii (talk) 05:36, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

We're trying to avoid "in my opinion" decisions. I recommend you look for sources that talk about this event and its peacefulness (or otherwise). If a published, reliable source says that it was a peaceful gathering, and a published, reliable source gives a size estimate, then it can go into the list. If not, putting it there would be original research (Wikipedia editors deciding what kind of gathering it was) which is not allowed. You can read about this at WP:OR. Good luck with your article! M kuhner (talk) 05:56, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Sorry to bother, but John Tory, the mayor of Toronto at the time "applauded Raptors fans for a 'peaceful and orderly' day." (https://globalnews.ca/news/5403321/toronto-raptors-parade-route-plan/)

CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/17/americas/toronto-raptors-parade-shooting) said "Canadian officials urged the public to not let it undermine a mostly peaceful commemoration of a historic win."

Would that classify it as peaceful? I'm stuck with this, hate to be a bother. Cheromaniii (talk) 06:17, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

I think those sources make a reasonable case for peacefulness. So if you wish, you can incorporate them into your article, and BOLDly go ahead and add it to the list. If other editors disagree they can revert you, or start a discussion. (Be sure to source the size estimate too. You may need to look at multiple sources and give a range; my experience is that different estimates of an event's size can vary a lot.) M kuhner (talk) 06:31, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Got it, thanks for the advice and help! :)

Cheromaniii (talk) 06:43, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Should I remove a template

Hi I am Lutitium and I made an edit to the article Violence against robots trying to fix the tone, gramer, cohesion and what not in attempt to remove the following template:

This article may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling. You can assist by editing it. (January 2026) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

so should i remove it or does it need further edits?

anyways, bye:D Lutitium (talk) 09:58, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

You improved the article, Lutitium. (But when you changed "Brščić et al. define...." to "Brščić et al. defines....", you didn't.) A few infelicities remain. Better leave template removal to somebody else. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 11:15, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Edited it to "defines" as of now in this copyediting edit. ★ Campssitie (msg) (in solidarity, #943) 🧋🏖 13:03, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you :D Lutitium (talk) 13:52, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Need help with my draft

Hello, need a help with my draft Draft:Dargah Allama Hasan Raza. It got declined as duplicate of Bareilly Dargah article but actually this shrine is different. This draft is about Hassan Raza Khan and Naqi Ali Khan shrine. I added separate reliable sources too but maybe reviewer misunderstood. Can someone check once and tell what more needed. BrownCanary61 (talk) 12:55, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

The article could definitely use more content. What's the history of it? Why's it important? What does it look like? Etc. Currently it almost reads like a basic address for it. Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 14:52, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Request for deleted Wikicode

Hello. I created the deleted page "Gustavo Jiménez (fictional)".

I am not asking you to restore the page to the encyclopedia, but I would just like access to the deleted wikitext so I can continue working on it elsewhere.

The page was originally a subpage for my account. I wanted ChatGPT to tell me what I could improve, so I chose to make it an article. I was not aware that I would publicly publish it to everyone and thought that it would still be under my account. I tried tomove the page back to "User:" or "Draft:", but I didn't find the function.

Would you be willing to give back the Wikitext or restore the page to my userspace (User:3pleToast/Gustavo Jiménez (fictional)) or otherwise provide a copy?

Thank you. 3pleToast (talk) 12:58, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

I've emailed it to you. JBW (talk) 13:38, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Well thank you very much. 3pleToast (talk) 15:09, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Animal names in sister project link boxes

I have been working on a species article (diademed sifaka), and I have found differing examples of whether or not to use the binomial or common names for the Commons and Wikispecies sister project templates in the "external links" section. For example, the silky sifaka uses the binomial name for both links, whereas the bonobo uses the binomial name for the commons link and the singular common name for the Wikispecies link (which does not produce a correct result because other projects' redlinks do not appear as such in the box template; however, the red slender loris article does correctly link to the Wikispecies page, and is written in singular title case as "Red Slender Loris"). The example given on template:Commons category is for the polar bear, which is written as "Polar bears," pluralized with the first word of the common name capitalized while the template:Wikispecies example has both words in the common name capitalized; neither example uses the binomial name. I used the common name with the first word capitalized in both the Wikispecies and Commons links due to the inconsistencies in the templates' usages in other articles, as well as there being no recommendation given in the manual of style. Is this supposed to be standardized? Propithèque (talk) 17:19, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

@Propitheque: you should use whatever gives the correct link, but the display name is up to you. This is complicated by the fact that {{Commons category}} has been updated to get the correct link from Wikidata if no explicit link is given, but {{Wikispecies}} has not and will simply use pagename in that case. In Bonobo both templates are given without parameters: {{Commons category}}{{Wikispecies}}; Commons link works thanks to Wikidata but Wikispecies link tries to use the page name which is incorrect. In Red slender loris both templates are given with explicit parameters, and the Wikispecies template has an additional display text: {{Wikispecies|Loris tardigradus|Red Slender Loris}}. For Diademed sifaka I think the current "Diademed sifakas" is good. MKFI (talk) 21:14, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Quotes censored in source

I'm uncertain of how WP:NOTCENSORED applies when a quote is censored in the cited source. If a source censors a quote, do we use context and common sense interpretation to fill in the obscene words (the example I'm presently considering appears in the source as "Why don't you go f--- yourself?"), or do we recreate the quote as it appears in the source? Martin IIIa (talk) 17:51, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Recreate the quote as it appears in the source (see MOS:SIC). CMD (talk) 17:54, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I overlooked (or perhaps forgot) about that part of SIC policy. Martin IIIa (talk) 22:02, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Need Rights for Autoconfirmed

My account is old and I have done more than 10 edits but I still haven't received the autoconfirmed Amitnageswar11 (talk) 18:36, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

You should be autoconfirmed. What makes you think you're not? 331dot (talk) 19:18, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

I forgot, it was recently changed- the time requirement is now four days from your first edit, not four days after the account was created. 331dot (talk) 19:19, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

I have added the appropriate information to allow you to submit your draft for a review(I presume that's what you want autoconfirmed for); this is highly recommended until you get experience having drafts accepted. 331dot (talk) 19:26, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

How should I classify my first redirect?

I created a redirect request yesterday because I wanted to see how someone would classify my redirect or if it's even necessary. It was declined since that's not the purpose of AfC (fair enough). I was told to take it to the redirects talk page, but I figured this is a newb question, so I'm asking here instead.

I'm specifically wondering how an editor who has had experience would categorize this redirect? (Types of kite -> Kite types) I was thinking Template:R from related word and Template:R unprintworthy, but I'm especially confused by the printworthiness templates. I just want someone with more experience to check my work, thanks.
TheGrapeEscape (talk) 20:08, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

The {{R unprintworthy}} is a very niche redirect category. That said, I do think it is printworthy, as it is phrasing that a user might look up/find useful. I also agree with your assesment that {{R from related word}} is useful. It is something that both Wikipedia readers searching for a phrase might use, and also Google search engine results. ~ In solidarity 🦝 Shushugah (talk) 22:29, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I would think like this: anyone at all could right now want to use your new currently unmade redirect. I looked through my made redirects and I've never categorized any of them. It is more important to provide the service to our audience/customers/our species - at this moment to make an immediate assistance to some other. After this choice you could then think of the second problem=category. Alternatively - like in my situation, someone could arrive and categorize who knows the answer already - this saves you time and mental energy to use in some other task or something you could like more doing. As an answer: there are many different choices - I think if you looked through every one you could find the correct choice, if you're not sure then guess and someone could then correct it=I'll review to see how your choice looks. Cattenion (talk) 22:30, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Second opinion on fair use image

I found Cuna de lobos tagged as unreferenced since 2017. It happens to be a nostalgic topic for me and there's a landmark anniversary this year. I added a bit on an unaired reboot pilot titled Por derecho de sangre.

My mentor suggested I ask here about this publicity photo attributed to an agency. The upload form says not to use things like Getty. Well, it's easy enough to find the associated telecast; Hoy is a morning show on Las Estrellas. I believe there's a strong case in the article for the iconography of the character's eye patch and no infringement on commercial opportunities. Would either form of the image be advisable to use? Thanks! Cedarshadow (talk) 22:21, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

@Cedarshadow considering María Rubio is deceased, it is not possible to generate new photos of her, let alone with the eye-patch. But one of criteria of Wikipedia:Non-free content is that it is primary depiction of article. That is already served by File:Cuna de lobos DVD Póster.jpg. You need to justify any fair use image PER article. ~ In solidarity 🦝 Shushugah (talk) 22:26, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Right, but this is an image of Rebecca Jones depicting a very different version of the patch. Sorry if that was unclear. My rationale is that, per the article, they were making the version in this image very different from Rubio's portrayal with a different eye patch and costume. Cedarshadow (talk) 22:32, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

@Cedarshadow A number of things trouble me. In the last week, you have quadrupled the size of the article. But despite the fact that the article is still largely unsourced, the sources needed template has been deleted. You can't upload the Mezcalent image; it's someone else's image and I don't see how inventive arguments change that. I don't understand why you need to use "the iconography of the character's eye patch". The TV poster is sufficient. Mme Maigret (talk) 04:19, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Problem to creating Lovely Mimi

Hello everyone, i have a problem to create an Lovely Mimi article from redirect does anyone can create the article from redirect, there are many reliable sources to discuss an Lovely Mimi. Octaviyanti Dwi Wahyurini (talk) 00:38, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

I suggest you create the article as a draft (you can use the New Article Wizard) and then submit it to Articles for Creation. If it is accepted, the editor who accepts it can deal with replacing the redirect with the new article. This will also let you improve and proofread the article before submitting it. Good luck with your article! M kuhner (talk) 00:55, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Okay thank you Octaviyanti Dwi Wahyurini (talk) 00:58, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Reliable sources

First I found that peer reviewed academic sources are more reliable. This means only academic is not enough. Now then when I found sources from google books, google scholar, others said these sources are not reliable. Media sources are not relibale? But I see many articles using media sources.

And also how from google scholar I will know which can be used and which cannot be used? Some editors have higher education and they can find. ~2026-34828-54 (talk) 02:52, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

To respond to your query, a person has to accept your premise first. But your conclusions – that peer reviewed academic sources are more reliable and sources from google books and newspapers are not reliable – are incorrect. Suggest read WP:42 carefully and thoroughly. Mme Maigret (talk) 03:54, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

It seems that Template:merge to cannot link to AfD

See Wikipedia:Sandbox.--SilverMatsu (talk) 03:13, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Silvermatsu, if you remove Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ from the template and simply have Simplicial space in the |afd= parameter, it will link to the correct page. In the diff it is trying to link to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simplicial space rather than Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simplicial space. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 04:42, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. With Template:merge from, we can link to AfD in the way you pointed out. However, when I use Template:merge to in the same way, it links to the talk page of DestinationPage instead of AfD.--SilverMatsu (talk) 05:06, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

@Silvermatsu: The template and documentation have been edited without keeping them consistent. {{merge to}} currently has no afd parameter but has a currently undocumented discuss parameter: {{merge to|Simplicial space|discuss=Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simplicial space}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:17, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

I see, thank you for explaining. I will wait and see.--SilverMatsu (talk) 16:46, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Mainly used "other" sources?

I'm asking because I've started editing, but I don't know any primarily used source to site from. Does anyone have any ideas for what I can use without going down a really deep rabbit hole? Time is a Tool (talk) 05:20, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

It really depends on what you're writing about; newspapers and published books are a good place to start though. You can read Wikipedia:Reliable sources for a guide on which sources are considered reliable to cite. It may also help to look at which sources are used in articles on similar topics to what you are writing about. {{GearsDatapacks|talk|contribs|in solidarity}} 07:55, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Spelled "cite". I looked at User:Time is a Tool-Special:Contributions/Time is a Tool - your query/question - I'm not certain your problem: do you mean you personally don't know any source from your own memory/mind/personal library? In whatever direction you want to go in thought simply use Google Scholar/Google Books and type your interest in. Alternatively on an article with "Wikipedia:Citation needed" responding (Wikipedia:Citation needed#Help reduce the backlog) is an exercise (or any other similar expenditure of personal economic energy) to make an habitual principle based personal directive to find sources Cattenion (talk) 14:51, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

With regards to "Special:Contributions" I see your personal security is not jeopardized by any past choice of "input unsourced" making an unknowable causality (potential negative personal return via an inadvertent homo-stochastical problem) in humanity by someone reading your input but not possessing access to a cite=source as you have not transgressed the principle indicated above, this would indcate you are in entirety free to proceed without any prior moral obligation, other than the necessary cite principle. Cattenion (talk) 15:07, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

How well known does a music group need to be to merit an article?

i was wondering if Mariachi Arcoiris de Los Angeles is well known enough to merit inclusion on Wikipedia. They've published 3 albums, are historically significant (first mariachi dedicated to the queer community, first out trans mariachi musician in a major group, etc), and have received lots of media coverage and are a mainstay of the LA mariachi scene ~2026-34727-85 (talk) 06:27, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

See WP:BAND Meters (talk) 06:33, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

If the coverage is in independent, reliable sources, I'd say create the article.

Momonowa (talk) 07:13, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Brief searches show some articles like this which at least look promising. Make sure to only write things that show up on the sources you use. Sesquilinear (talk) 17:02, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Multiple rejection of my article on Bengali Playwright Chandan Sen

I have submitted the draft article Chandan Sen (Bengali Playwright) but it has been rejected twice. The last time I received the following message:

The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that: provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis; are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight; are independent: not connected to the person, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content. Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

I am bit confused. The man Chandan Sen is a regional playwright. So he doesn't have worldwide / national level coverage. Can you please guide me what else should I add? Prasun1519 (talk) 13:35, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

@Prasun1519 There is no requirement for "worldwide / national level coverage". The answer appears in your question. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:58, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Prasun1519 The draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted.

Interviews are not independent sources, because they are the person speaking about themselves. 331dot (talk) 15:00, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

The first source you give (which is about the play and just mentions him as the author) calls him "veteran playwright." That suggests there should be reviews and discussion of several plays going back in time. Regular Google Search is not good for this because it prefers recent material. I recommend trying Google News, or looking at the archives of newspapers in his geographic area. If you can find the titles of previous plays, you can more easily search for reviews of those. You should also try Google Scholar: someone may have written an article or essay about his plays or his politics. Finally, if he has a personal or fan website, while you can't use it as a source it may have pointers to material you can use, such as reviews, so take a look for that. Good luck with your search! M kuhner (talk) 16:44, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Seeking guidance on Draft:Suresh Kumar Mishra regarding reliable academic sources

Hello Teahouse Hosts,

I am writing this from the heart, seeking your empathetic guidance on Draft:Suresh Kumar Mishra. This draft is not a commercial endeavor or an attempt at self-promotion; it is the humble preservation of a life dedicated to public education, child literacy, and language synthesis in South India.

The subject has spent over two decades working on the ground in Telangana, bridging cultural spaces through education. As a State Resource Person selected by the government, he has silently coordinated and authored 55 official school and university textbooks for the state curriculum (TG-SCERT and Telugu Academy). His work directly impacts the daily learning, ethics, and voices of hundreds of thousands of young, non-native students learning Hindi in the southern region of India.

Beyond institutional duties, his heart beats for children’s imagination—manifested in recognized works of children's literature (Bal Sahitya) that have been honored by state academies. This is a journey of an educator who believes that textbooks are the quiet pillars of a society's future.

The draft was recently declined due to concerns regarding independent secondary sources. As a regional public servant and literary scholar, his primary milestones are preserved in official state government curriculum gazettes, school education department portals, and national literary databases (like ISBN registers and Kavita Kosh), rather than mainstream commercial PR media.

We recently pruned the draft by over 1,100 bytes to ensure it reads with absolute encyclopedic humility and neutrality. We do not seek acclaim, but we earnestly ask the experienced hosts here: How can an educator's deep, institutional, and state-level impact on child curriculum be best contextualized within Wikipedia’s notability frameworks when commercial news links are scarce but government footprints are indelible?

Thank you for listening to the story of an educator, and for your kind guidance.Kumaridivyathecliffnews (talk) 15:21, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Who is "we"? Only a single person should have access to your account. Your username seems to suggest you are part of a news organization?

Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about someone and the good work that they do. Wikipedia is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources say about a topic. In this case, we need to know what people wholly unconnected with Mr. Mishra have chosen to say about him and why he is important/significant/influential. If you don't have sources that do that, there's nothing that can be done; he would not meet the criteria to merit a Wikipedia article at this time. That doesn't mean forever, it only means based on what you have now.

Most of the sources seem to just document the existence of his work(he's cited as the author in 7 references). Interviews are not independent sources, being Mr. Mishra speaking about himself.

If you just want to tell the world about this person and their good work, you should use social media. 331dot (talk) 15:30, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Kumaridivyathecliffnews, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I think that you are assuming that "promotional" implies "for commercial reasons". That is usually a reasonable assumption, but we use the word more broadly in Wikipedia. Any text that is, or appears to be, what the subject (or the subject's associates) want people to know about the subject, that is promotional.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source. ColinFine (talk) 20:12, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Redirects

How do you make a redirect for a wikipedia article? Magic facewall (talk) 17:41, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Please see WP:REDIRECT, under "how to make a redirect". 331dot (talk) 17:44, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirect maker Cattenion (talk) 18:19, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Page link vandalism?

I reviewed the URLS that link to the page SkelBells and I noticed that one of the them link to KAP03's To Do list, but the thing is that KAP03's user page blatantly states that the user is semi-retired, indicating that it's highly unlikely that KAP03 or non-malicious software created that link. Should this be categorized as page link vandalism or something? How do I remove it? Why does it link to SkelBells anyway?

See also: WP:VANDALBOT Magic facewall (talk) 17:52, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Magic facewall, and welcome to the Teahouse

User:KAP03/ToDo transcludes the page User:AlexNewArtBot/VideogamesSearchResult, and has done so since 2017-02-23.

That transcluded page is updated daily, as far as I can see, by User:InceptionBot.

I haven't explored any further, but that doesn't seem to me to be any cause for concern.

(Note that when you look at the "What links here", it tags User:KAP03/ToDo as "(transclusion)": perhaps you didn't know what that meant? ColinFine (talk) 20:22, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Page link vandalism? Ummm, no, not the case at all. As ColinFine stated, there is no cause for concern. Lots of editors have scripts etc. that enable them to see new developments in their interests around Wikipedia. Magic facewall, there is literally nothing for you to do. - Shearonink (talk) 20:29, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

My editing removed from wikipedia

Why my edit on the wikipedia page named "List of players who have scored 2,000 or more runs in Women's Twenty20 International cricket" is being removed from view???

please let me know about it sooner in my email ID added in wikipedia server Soumyabnrj02 (talk) 18:22, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

This has been answered at the Help desk, please don't ask the same question at both venues. TSventon (talk) 19:11, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

What to do with lost acc

I lost my old account, Arenghtqru, because I forgot the password. Should I redirect it to my normal one Arenghtqru888 (talk) 18:49, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Arenghtqru888, and welcome to the Teahouse.

You appear to have put a note on each user page explaining the situation. That's all you really need to do. ColinFine (talk) 20:25, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

ok, thanks! Arenghtqru888 (talk) 20:29, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Unsure if article meets CSD?

I think the article Central Tiffin Room is written poorly and has a promotional tone, but I'm not sure it meets the Criteria for Speedy Deletion as it has some claims of notability? Sorry if this is formatted strangely, I accidentally pressed submit before I was finished writing the post and I'm not used to the syntax used in source editing. TanyaK94 (talk) 20:56, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Weirdly formatted drafts?

I'm an AfC reviewer and I've encountered several strangely formatted drafts that are numbered wrong like in Draft:Kryptic Esport. Is this a sign of AI? Or something else? Thanks. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 21:43, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

FWIW, it doesn't have the 'smell' of AI to me, but rather that of someone familiar with writing agendas, procedures and the like, or of someone who has used a standard word-processing template for such things. The text when translated is dry, matter-of-fact and non-promotional, not indicative of AI.

That said, the draft is a long way from acceptability because (a) it's written in German and (b) all the citations are to social media apps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-27434-43 (talk) 22:35, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Uncivil edit summaries

Another editor has made what I consider to be personal attacks against me in their edit summaries after I reverted their changes (despite offering and then starting a topic on the article's talk page). Are such incidents usually reported on the admin noticeboard? ElfmanWriter (talk) 22:17, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

@ElfmanWriter: If you're going to accuse someone of personal attacking you, at least specify who did it. Otherwise, this section will be closed. Magic facewall (talk) 00:57, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

This sort of comment is not helpful. 331dot (talk) 00:59, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

This is presumably referring to List of association football venues in the Republic of Ireland and these two edit summaries. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 01:00, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

@45dogs: These are hardly personal attacks, to be honest. They don't strictly fit the critera for a personal attack. It's more likely that ElfmanWriter has a sensitive ego more than anything.

^{Previous shortcut was misleading, fixed.} Magic facewall (talk) 01:38, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

How do they not fit the criteria? Also, are you involved in this dispute?^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 01:19, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Diff 2 is the third bullet point in the policy you linked, WP:ADHOM.^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 01:24, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

@Magic facewall Diff 1 is an accusation of incompetence if that clears things up a bit. nhals8 (rats in the house of the dead // in solidarity with the WWU) 01:21, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

@.nhals8: That makes the section a bit more reasonable, then. Magic facewall (talk) 01:24, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

It is not a good ideä to call someöne's ego sensitive, @Magic facewall. toby ^{in solidarity} 01:31, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

@Magic facewall: Please stop closing this discussion. Thanks. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 01:03, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Under NPA, There is no rule that is objective and not open to interpretation on what constitutes a personal attack as opposed to constructive discussion. neanderthals8 (talk // in solidarity) 01:41, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

I fear I messed up my first DYK nomination...?

I saw that other editors wrote and resurrected Gwen (singer) but Launchballer, who didn't write much of the prose or re-create the page, was the one who did the DYK nomination. It was approved.
I thought of doing the same with Gian Bernardino's page. I am not the primary editor, but I've contributed a bit. I proposed some DYK hooks, but now I'm scared I bungled it all up. Does this look alright and if not, how do I fix things?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Gian_Bernardino
The invisible text (not visible unless you try to edit the nomination) does state that I am the nominator. I changed the visible text below so it wouldn't say I was the one who brought it to Good Article status. Is everything in order? I'm so sorry. Handsome Ellis (talk) 23:26, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm sorry I couldn't help more with your problem: perhaps I could review your work ASAP - all I am able to suggest right now is "try not to fear" because 1. Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers is a rule, 2. "fear is the mind killer" (which is advice given by a famous Bene Gesserit priestess). Cattenion (talk) 02:25, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Thinking about taking a break

So i want to take a break from Wikipedia. How do i do that and make people know? Monathephantom (talk) 23:46, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Not like announcing it publicly like putting it on my profile, is it best if i put it on both user and talk pages? Monathephantom (talk) 23:48, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

How you take a break, Monathephantom: For a time, you stop editing Wikipedia. (Or even stop reading it.) How anyone might not announce it publicly via their "profile", yet put it on their "user page": I haven't a clue, because I don't know what a "profile" means in this context, other than "user page". So how do you make people know? Simply by not editing. Editors wondering about unresponsiveness will probably look at your list of "contributions". My own most recent extended absence was for a month or so in 2023: I saw no reason to announce this, didn't announce it, and as far as I remember received no messages from editors mystified, let alone annoyed, by non-response. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 00:22, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

@Monathephantom: See WP:Wikibreak. It has a template for if you would like to announce your break. You can put it on your user page, talk page, or both. Like Hoary said, announcing it is not required or necessary, so it's entirely up to you. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 01:07, 15 June 2026 (UTC)