Wikipedia:Teahouse

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, 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 0 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.]

Help rewriting a declined band draft (AI text issue)

Hello! My draft for the alternative rock band Chaser Eight was recently declined because the initial text was generated using ChatGPT. I completely understand why that text is unacceptable. I am a member of the band, so I have a Conflict of Interest (COI) and do not want to edit or rewrite the draft myself.

However, our band is legitimate and has notable national and regional press. Could a volunteer editor help throw away the AI text and write a short, neutral stub using our independent media coverage? Here are our four strongest secondary sources:

1. PopMatters Album Feature: popmatters.com
2. Huffington Post Feature: huffingtonpost.com
3. FOX61 Mohegan Sun Award Feature: fox61.com
4. Hartford Courant Feature: courant.com

Thank you for your time! Imjustaudra (talk) 02:07, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Imjustaudra. You might have better luck finding someone to help you with this by posting a similar message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians since that where Wikipedians with experience creating/editing articles about bands tend to hang out. It would also be a big help if you could provide more specific links to the reliable sources you believe are providing significant coverage of your band; just providing general links to websites and expecting someone to dig around to find what the site has written about your band might be a bit of stretch when asking for help. You might also want to take a look at the essay Wikipedia:No one cares about your garage band since you might find what's written there to be helpful. The last part of that essay, in particular, contains some information you might find helpful. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:20, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Appreciate the help. Imjustaudra (talk) 15:49, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Actual links:

1. PopMatters Album Feature: https://www.popmatters.com/190645-chaser-eight-chaser-eight-album-stream-premiere-2495560482.html
2. Huffington Post Feature: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/chats-with-3-doors-downs-chris-henderson-and-the-swords_b_56b3badae4b0aa19e2c75aab
3. FOX61 Mohegan Sun Award Feature: https://www.fox61.com/article/news/local/new-london-county/chaser-eight-wins-mohegan-suns-2024-locals-live-competition-at-wolf-den/520-27b09b1b-4777-439c-bae2-3546fb353130
4. Hartford Courant Feature: https://www.courant.com/2022/08/15/a-day-of-music-beer-art-and-food-at-manchesters-silk-city-fest/

Imjustaudra (talk) 16:03, 26 August 2026 ()UTC)

This is just my personal opinion Imjustaudra, but I don't think sources you've linked to above are the kinds of things that are going to help establish your band's Wikipedia notability per WP:NBAND.

Source #1 is more of an interview with you about the Chaser Eight album than it is any type of critical review of the album or the band; in other words, it's more fluff than not. In general, WP:INTERVIEWS aren't really helpful in establishing something's Wikipedia notability because they are things/people talking about themselves. An interview might be OK to cite for certai types of article content, but it doesn't really help when it comes to Wikipedia notability.

Source #2 is nothing but a picture of cover art of your band's Step into the Light album's cover art, a embedded YouTube video from the album and a quote from you (Audra) about how the album (?) is a "salute to The Black Keys and 'Lonely Boy'". I don't mean to be blunt, but this kind of thing would still be pretty much useless in terms of establishing Wikipedia notability even if it posted in a major publication like Rolling Stone because it's basically you talking about the band and is essentially a WP:PROMOTION type of thing.

Source #3 is about the band winning some kind of local award. While this source is better than #1 and #2, being crowned "Local Live Champion" by a Mohegan Sun, a local casino, in a competition of twelve bands isn't really the kind of thing that's going to scream out this band is clearly Wikipedia notable; it possibly could be cited for a sentence or two about your band winning the award, but doesn't really do anything to help establish your band's Wikipedia notability.

I can't see source #4 because it's behind a paywall and, therefore, can't provide any assessment of it.

I don't mean rain on your parade or criticize your band ; you guys probably make some great music that your fans really like. However, just to keep things Wikipedia real, I don't think any Wikiepdia article created about your band (regardless of who created it) would have any chance of surving a Wikipedia:Articles for deletion nomination if it was pretty much only based on the three sources I could access. Whether things will change some day nobody can really say for sure, I guess; right now, though, you might be better with something like Wikipedia:Alternative outlets if you're looking to create something that you can edit like Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:11, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. I mean, I have way more articles than the 4 I listed. Can you tell me how a page like this is allowed, but mine wouldn't be? Again, I have way more articles just like the one this band uses: The Smyrk ~2026-46876-24 (talk) 21:51, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. I mean, I have way more articles than the 4 I listed. Can you tell me how a page like this is allowed, but mine wouldn't be? Again, I have way more articles just like the one this band uses: The Smyrk Imjustaudra (talk) 11:52, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is probably the best explanation. Basically that saying "Look! I found a crap article - why can't mine also be crap?" is not a good way to do things. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 07:22, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for the feedback. Was simply wondering the difference. Imjustaudra (talk) 22:26, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Daniel Marx (musician)

Hello dear Wikipedia community,

I'm writing as my draft "Draft:Daniel Marx (musician)" was rejected for AI-generated content and probably also, because this was my first try at Wikipedia and I didn't do a good job understanding how it works. I have read the articles sent by the reviewers and now believe to know why the draft got rejected. In any case, I have reliable and independent coverage e.g. in Classical Guitar Magazine, MusicWeb International, Resmusica, Süddeutsche Zeitung and multiple releases with Naxos, the leading major label for classical music.

As suggested by the reviewers, I have now rewritten a much shorter and entirely new manual version in my sandbox, without any AI involved: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Danielmarxguitar/sandbox

Could any admin please change the reject into a decline, so I can try and resubmit the clean version? I have also added the COI as requested by the community.

Thanks Danielmarxguitar (talk) 18:14, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Not clear how you would pass WP:NMUSICIAN? Theroadislong (talk) 18:17, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment!!

The subject passes at least one of the required points from the list.

E.g. 5. Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).

Subject has released two albums on Naxos, the worlds leading major label for classical music. And one on GENUIN classics, an independent label with many notable performers and a long established history ~2026-46247-11 (talk) 19:30, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Dear Theroadislong,

please let me know what you think of the sandbox draft. It is a matter of fact that two major label releases and one indie release happened. There are multiple independent, reliable sources that prove it and speak about it in detail. I'd be happy to resubmit the clean version and take it from there. Danielmarxguitar (talk) 07:50, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Dear Theroadislong,

I'll be specific and follow up with some sources as requested:

Notability per WP:NMUSICIAN:

1. 1 multiple non-trivial coverage

1. Süddeutsche Zeitung: 7.12.2016 - article about me, not a listing , 22.5.2025 - article announcing concert , 6.6.2018 - article on debut album

2. SBS Radio Australia: 28.2.2020 - Australian radio announcing concert tour

3. Music Web International: 21.4.2026 - Naxos album review Munich Guitar Society Manuscripts , May 2022 - Naxos album review Telemann chamber music for Bassoon & Guitar

4. Classical Guitar Magazine: 2018 - album review The Italian Recital

5. Resmusica: 27.12.2018 - album review The Italian Recital

all of these are reliable, independent, secondary sources

5# releases on major label

1. 08/2025 - Naxos release Nr.8.551472 - The Munich Guitar Society Manuscripts

2. 04/2022 - Naxos release Nr.8.551433 - Telemann Chamber Music for Bassoon & Guitar

Naxos is considered as major label per WP:Music

All these sources are about myself and nobody else. I have declared COI. My sandbox draft features only these sources.

Could you please change Reject to Decline so I can submit the sandbox version and take it from there?

Thanks and all the best,

Daniel Danielmarxguitar (talk) 23:11, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

clanlawren in breadalbane

Hi all I am having difficulty with being declined, mainly from the citations. The subject is well documented in primary sources which are composed of mainly legal documents which apparently do not qualify as sources in Wikipedia. The secondary sources are extremely scarce, in most cases there is only one. So as a result my drafts keep getting kicked back, The authors of the secondary sources are typically Phd. level historians or official clan historians. I'm kind of stuck. Just because there is not a lot of secondary sources does not mean that the subject is no important or that the scarcity equates with false or questionable information.

On the other hand and much to my dismay after examining other Scottish Clan pages, the use of secondary sources like Encyclopedias, that they themselves, do not cite primary sources is widespread. They have no clear evidence of a primary source, so fabrications and traditions written as actual history are typical.

For example on the page Scottish Clans, Scottish Clan & Family Encyclopedia by George Way of Plean, and Romilly Squire (1994), is used over thirty times. This encyclopedia references no sources whatsoever. The same holds true for The Tartans of the Clans and Families of Scotland by Learney, no primary sources whatsoever. Yet these are the go to secondary sources for the Scottish Clan category. Pageturner3 (talk) 18:18, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Pageturner3. Do you have a specific question? This seems to be more of a statement.

In addition, a relevant link for others answering this question: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1303#Unidentified User

Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) In solidarity. 05:45, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Lack of secondary sources cannot be bypassed. If they are scarce, there are only two solutions: find them, or give up. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 07:29, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Lead image of Gary Glitter needs to be replaced

LTA block evasion

 Courtesy link: Gary Glitter

When i initially read this article and i saw the lead image, i thought it was someone that was like Elvis Presley, but then when i search up his music, and listened to it, i realized it wasn’t that. I’m not alone, there is a reddit post that says as someone like Elvis Presley. I coundl’t find the Reddit post anymore. I do think it should be replaced with the 1973 image seen in the “Career” section. ~2026-46666-32 (talk) 17:42, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome to start as discussion to that effect on the article's talk page, Talk:Gary Glitter. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 18:32, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing I have looked at the talk page and it is inactive. There was someone writing a month ago requesting adding a source about new allegations, and there was no response. I don’t know if i should copy and paste the text i wrote, because i do think that there needs to be variation, other than saying that there is a discussion on the Teahouse. Besides, it’s better to have one discussion than two discussions. ~2026-46451-28 (talk) 20:28, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

That happens a lot around here, there are way more articles than there are active editors. If you start such a discussion, you can try WP:APPNOTE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:42, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing Additionally, while the second sentence in the lead says that “His career ended after his 1999 conviction of downloading child sexual abuse material.”, he still had a career until 2005, including a release of a new album and a new single. So i do think that this should be discussed. ~2026-46451-28 (talk) 20:39, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Then the talk page is the place to do so.

If no-one responds after, say, a week, you can post a short notice of the discussion on the talk page of one of the Wikiprojects listed on that page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 20:50, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Regarding the photo, let me start by saying that personally I think that Gary Glitter is a despicable individual, but we allow our readers to draw their own conclusions. In his case, that is obvious due to his multiple convictions for sexually abusing children. We do not select a bad or unflattering photo for the article lead in order to convey the idea that a person is bad. In the case of an entertainer, we use a photo that shows them at the height of their career, and so I think that the current photo is appropriate, even though I do not understand how he ever became such a big success in the United Kingdom. As Johnny Mathis sang nearly 70 years ago. "It's Not for Me to Say". Cullen328 (talk) 07:40, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

I agree with Cullen. I see no reason to replace or remove the picture. Maproom (talk) 09:17, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

I agree Cullen, I was always baffled as to how he became successful. I feel the same about the Donald. - Walter Ego 09:23, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I started this discussion not because i want a bad or unflattering photo. My issue i have is that the lead photo used in the article looks similar to Elvis Presley, even though when you look up Pictures of Gary Glitter, he looks different. People like i and that one Reddit post have confused it as someone that makes music similar to Elvis Presley. There is a different photo from 1973 used in the “Carrer” section in the article that’s a better representation of how he look like during his height of career, he looks how he usually looks, a glam rock artist, not a rock and roll artist like Elvis Presley. If for some reason you want “Gary Glitter meets Elvis Presley”-style song, well that’s how John Eddie described his first single “Jungle Boy”, i haven’t listened to this song or at least am not familiar with the title of the song, just in case i may have listened it somewhere. ~2026-46703-38 (talk) 15:16, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

I agree with Cullen. I see no reason to replace or remove the picture. That's a picture of Paul Francis Gadd in his glam-rock Glitter persona. If someone thinks he looks like Elvis, so what? There's quite a lot of evidence at that article that he the wasn't Elvis (that one mention of Elvis, connected to John Eddie by John Eddie, is just coincidence). As far as I know, no notable commentators or pop music press journalists have ever drawn a comparison, musically or in terms of looks. But if you want to swap the lead image, for whatever reason, you can make the suggestion at Talk:Gary Glitter. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:18, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

@Martinevans123 Well, i would like for a suggestion on the talk page of Gary Glitter. But not only do i not know how to write a suggestion, but i already made a post saying there is discussion on the Teahouse. Yet, it got ended for “LTA block evasion”, i don’t know why. ~2026-47097-29 (talk) 13:20, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

You would need to ask Emiya Mulzomdao about that. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:33, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

I'd like to find a WP contributor who can translate English into French

I've discovered some French interest in certain topic areas that are well represented in English. If I were fluently bilingual, I'd try translating some English-language WP articles myself. But I'm not.

Can anyone suggest a contributor who can and might like to do some translation? Thanks.Joel Russ (talk) 19:23, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Joel Russ.

You can find a list of French-speaking editors at WP:Local embassy#French. ColinFine (talk) 20:04, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Also at fr:Wikipédia:Ambassade#[en] English / anglais on the French Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 21:10, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

We also have Wikipedia:Translation/French/Translators, but these will probably want to work in translating French content to English. Lectonar (talk) 09:33, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

I do speak French, but I'm not a prolific writer (yet). Glad to lend a hand when I can! Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 13:01, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

On merging

Hi,
Normally when I come here I'm answering others' questions - it feels a bit unusual!
I just made my first merge - merging Tatla Lake, a stub, into Tatla Lake, British Columbia. Since the articles are rarely edited and seem quite stable, I estimated that I could go ahead and perform the merge. It's all done but now I'm fretting that I should have brought it to AfD instead to seek consensus. Is it OK that I merged the articles myself? Thanks! Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 01:19, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

It is okay to WP:BOLDMERGE. CMD (talk) 01:29, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you CMD! Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 02:31, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Seems reasonable to me. If someone disagrees, they can always revert and you can then discuss. — PeterCooperJr (talk) 14:58, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Sounds good! Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 21:46, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

what station were you? How did you lose the war? ~2026-46450-50 (talk) 02:23, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean. This is not a relevant response. Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 02:32, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

@Giovanni Guasconti:, I am not sure that the merge was a good idea. Tatla Lake was about a lake, and Tatla Lake, British Columbia is about a populated place (with the same name). A lot of the information was in the lake's infobox, which was not copied over.

I say I am not sure because I don't know much about lakes articles. If the articles are merged I would suggest creating a subsection for the lake and targetting the redirect to it , e.g. #REDIRECT [[Tatla Lake, British Columbia#The lake]]. Also I would put the redirect, rather than the populated place article, into the lake categories. TSventon (talk) 19:33, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

I think that's a great idea! Thank you Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 21:49, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

@TSventon, I applied your suggestions. Thank you! Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 00:11, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Unanswered talkpage questions

Hi all,

At the Dutch Wikipedia, we try to find and answer questions in article talk pages. Despite the efforts of a number of Wikipedians, there is a massive backlog, so we consider a script to fill a tracking category, but before we start, we hope to learn from your experiences. Does the English Wikipedia have a procedure for open questions, or are there Wikipedians working on this?

Thank you in advance for your insights!  →bertux 15:20, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

We use {{Help me}}, which applies a category and flags up the query at the top of this page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 16:10, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps I should have been clearer. Some of the open questions are over five years old, so the first thing is to have an inventory and a triage system, splitting the heap into categories like relevant, too old, and unclear.

We plan to run a script for tagging == headings == with only one contributor, but then the real work begins...

Anyway, currently there is a somewhat lousy Dutch equivalent of Help me, a well-functioning Help desk, a good Feedback system and a highly appreciated mentoring system, so the main task is to handle the old stuff.

Good for you if there is no experience of such a backlog.  →bertux 21:05, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

If only! I just answered a 22-year-old question.

I don't think we have a system like the one you envisage. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 21:13, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

When is an AI noticeboard discussion over?

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:AI noticeboard/Archive 15 § User:LumenArchivorum

My case has been archived, what does that mean? LumenArchivorum (talk) 16:27, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

AINB is auto-archived after a certain period of time even if the case is not closed. While we try to go through the archives occasionally, it's very, very low priority.

I recommend that you take the lessons from the discussion to heart, help with cleanup if you can, and otherwise consider the matter finished. An old archived case is not going to generate sanctions, or indeed get noticed. We look forward to seeing your future (human) work. M kuhner (talk) 05:12, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much, that is very helpful. It has been a teaching experience and I am very grateful to the community of editors who are great to communicate with. LumenArchivorum (talk) 18:22, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Draft edited with errors before review

 Courtesy link: Draft:Peter Lodwick

Hi again Teahouse,

I’m hoping someone can help me with this fairly urgently.

I have been working extensively on the draft article about Peter Lodwick, and over the last few days I have also found around 20 additional sources that I am currently going through. These include sources that I believe help establish Lodwick’s notability as well as support much of the material I had included in the draft.

However, I have just seen that the draft has been substantially edited. A very large amount of the content I had written has been removed, and there are now also several factual errors or inaccuracies in the article.

It also appears that the draft has been submitted for another review. I do not want it to be reviewed in its current state, as I know that there are errors in this version and I have not yet had the opportunity to add and properly cite the new sources I have found.

What I would ideally like to do is restore the draft to the version from 25 August 2026, before these changes were made, and then continue working on it myself while I assess and add the new sources.

Could someone please advise me on the correct way to do this? Can I restore the 25 August revision, and is there a way for me to continue working on the draft in my sandbox without it being submitted for review again until I am ready?

I have put a considerable amount of work into sourcing and improving the article, so I would really like the opportunity to finish revising it before it goes through another review.

Thank you very much for any help or guidance. MaySundAnd (talk) 12:08, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi @MaySundAnd. I have restored the 25 August 2026 version for you. You can do this yourself in the future by going to the page history, clicking into the individual revision, and pressing restore this version.

Drafts are public so unfortunately there's nothing stopping a user from editing your draft, though it is usually bad form to edit another person's draft while they are still working on it.

When you're ready to submit for review, click the blue Resubmit button. qcne (talk) 12:11, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for speedy help! Much appreciated.

Kind regards,

May MaySundAnd (talk) 12:33, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

As a disinterested observer with no previous involvement in this matter (or interest in the subject, though I salute MaySundAnd's evident hard work), I am bemused and disturbed that a TA with no previous history should turn up out of the blue, revert without explanation 8,545 bytes of an actively worked on draft in one single edit (suggesting significant wiki-fu), submit it as a second edit (ditto), and then disappear again. Does this merit further investigation? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-43920-01 (talk) 20:35, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

How to make a new wikipedia article

hello, i am new to wikipedia and i am wondering how i can write a new article by myself. Sahbanda2 (talk) 15:16, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Sahbanda2. I would first caution you against writing a new article until you have experience editing and improving existing articles! Writing a new article is the hardest task a new editor can do. We have some very complicated policies and guidelines.

If you did want to try, please go to WP:Article Wizard to submit a new draft. It will then be reviewed by experienced editors. qcne (talk) 15:19, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I think i will get more experience first Sahbanda2 (talk) 15:30, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I also really recommend WP:Everything you need to know which is a really good outline of our policies and guidelines. qcne (talk) 15:31, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

See also WP:Your first article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 18:36, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Sahbanda2,

You could also try The Wikipedia Adventure! Happy editing :) Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 21:39, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

How to deal with tables with nested columns for visual editor

Hi there, I notice Ich Komme by Erika Vikman didn't have the UK charting position (42) on the artist's page. I have tried to use the website visual editor but it messes up the table. Any advice on making sure it doesn't happen with nested columns like music charts? Eurofreak2000 (talk) 16:18, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Eurofreak2000. I don't know exactly what you did in VisualEditor but it produced three source lines starting with |—| rowspan=. There should be a newline before the second pipe. I think VisualEditor got confused because {{Non-album singles}} makes cell code. VisualEditor often works poorly or not at all in tables where some of the table code and not just cell content is generated by templates. In this case I think you can fix it by switching to the source editor on a pencil icon at the top right before saving, and manually insert the missing newlines. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:42, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia page for orbital racing

I've noticed that there is no page that covers the idea of orbital racing. There are many names of things called "orbital racing" that doesn't actually cover the concept. The idea being that you race in a vehicle in orbits around gravity wells. How do I go about creating this without creating a conflict of interest given that I'm developing Slingshot Speeders, which may very well be the first orbital racing game using orbital mechanics to race with time being a factor and delta V usage. The page for "space race" doesn't cover this concept. Thanks for any help. If you need any other information please let me know, happy to talk about it. ~2026-47073-27 (talk) 18:57, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

If you're making the first game to feature this concept, chances are Wikipedia should not have an article about it yet. A Wikipedia article summarizes the reliable sources that are available about a given topic. If you're making a new thing, there isn't going to be any literature about it yet, meaning Wikipedia can't have an article. See also: Wikipedia is not for things made up one day ;; Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 19:25, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

The series "The Expanse" touches the concept with a Belter slingshotting into the alien ring in Season 3.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Expanse_(TV_series)#Season_3

So there is literature about it, just not a lot. And also the page for gravity assist already exists which is a well understood and practices orbital mechanics maneuver.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist

In effect, what I'm building is the gamification of this concept into a racing game, which I've done extensive research on, making me firmly believe this is the first of its kind. So what would be the perspective moving forward? Is it simply that Wikipedia may indeed have a page for this once it becomes a better understood concept? Thank you for the reply, I'll drop the subject after I hear again as to avoid pushing the idea. Maslandtech (talk) 22:15, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm going to oversimplify now, but it's a useful oversimplification:

Wikipedia is basically a history book. You are talking about something that might become news - but it isn't even news yet (I'm being literal, I mean there are no published news articles about it). And Wikipedia basically doesn't even do news, just history. Your idea may be a really good one, but Wikipedia is going to absolutely refuse to touch it, so you should find a more suitable place to put it. Some of Wikipedia's main reasoning about this can be found at Wikipedia:Too soon and Wikipedia:No original research. Also see Wikipedia:Alternative outlets for suggestions of what to do instead. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:23, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

House of Puso Article

Hello, I want to write an article on the internet psychological horror series "House of Puso" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xzd0DoNMTE&list=PLFC0H8yGAA80) [also I know there is a way to add a footnote instead but I don't know what that is, I will make sure to research how to do it though if it is a Notable subject] by @gigglepriest on Youtube.com, I am unsure if it counts as a Notable subject. It does have a fandom.com page, so it may be counted as plagiarism? I have not written an article before so I honestly have no clue. Any help would be appreciated so much! Forgotten Moss (talk) 19:59, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

WP:Referencing for beginners will tell you how to add citations that show like footnotes.

WP:NTV is relevant for notability.

Plagiarism is copying, so please don't copy from the fandom page (which is also unsuitable as a reference, as it is user-generated).

WP:Your first article should also be helpful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 20:39, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Help with accusations of sockpuppetry

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.

---

Hello, I have been dealing with an editor repeatedly accusing me of sockpuppetry today. I don't know if it would be considered canvassing to link the thread directly, so I am holding off for now, but the basic situation is that I have been in a disagreement about the inclusion of studies with two editors on a list article. Apparently there were issues with a large number of sockpuppets on that article before I arrived, and one of the two editors has repeatedly implied that I am a sockpuppet too instead of responding to my arguments. I told them that they should either report me or stop accusing me, but they have continued.

To be clear, this is my first account (probably, I might have had an account as a kid >10 years ago, but I can't remember for sure). I don't really know how to prove that though. I know what the Incidents board is, but I don't think this conflict rises to that level. What would you recommend I do in this scenario? FrimaireFroid (talk) 20:02, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Please follow the process outlined at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 20:13, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Okay, so basically I disengage from the talk page discussion for now, try to discuss the accusations with them on their talk page, and if that does not resolve it the next step in the Incidents board? I will try it out. Thank you for the link. FrimaireFroid (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I would like to state that I am the account he is referring to, and my reason for suspecting him to be a sock puppet is that he edits from the same POV as a sock account that has been abusing the Human height by country wikipedia page for 5 plus years, with 38 sock puppet accounts found so far, 34 confirmed by check user, and 4 unconfirmed due to use of a VPN. User:Prim96, is the user in question. This user also first began commenting on the human height page the day after the sock master was caught with 2 or 3 new socks, which were banned, acting very abusive on the page to myself and another user, wanting to edit with the same POV as those accounts. I apologize if I jumped the gun too soon, but I feel the full context needs to be presented that this has been an ongoing problem on the exact page going back at least 5 years. On an additionally note, if you were to have the time to look through the link of the user I presented as the sock master and their accounts, you will notice that this user also vehemently denied every accusation of being a dock puppet every single time the accusation was brought forth. Since this is not a formal hearing I will not present the diffs, but if necessary I could look through and find them. Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 20:26, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

You should take this—and the diffs—to WP:Sockpuppet investigations. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 20:34, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, I believe I have reported said user for being a sock puppet, and the moderator said something along the lines of that they would wait on it for a few days to see if the account did anything specific they could tie it to the sock master, that the evidence presented was not nothing, and it appeared like it could be the sock master, but that we would need more of a smoking gun. I have reported dozens of the sock masters accounts and most have been found to be socks and banned, so I would say I have a good track record and I don't make accusations based on disagreements or anything like that. However, I feel the evidence right now is primarily circumstantial, so I will hold off on it, but I apologize if I publicly accused too soon, if this goes against community guidelines. Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 20:38, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

FrimaireFroid is not mentioned on any SPI page. ;; Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 20:44, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Prim96/Archive#07 January 2026 is the only SPI opened by Quantum Mechanical Engineer. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 21:02, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

That is incorrect, I have brought about several of them, but not against that specific account actually, that was an account that was found by a moderator later. If you scroll down on the actual page you linked you will see that I brought cases against user:Adizero 26, user:9metres, user:271rpm, user:PenultimateStride, user:Prime1996, user:Beamon890, user:Cola172657, and User:Larnerpt. I believe that I had believe that I had User:FrimaireFroid confused with LouisBStevenson, which, after looking through the logs, I believe was the user I referred to earlier so I apologize. But I have not only brought one case. Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 21:14, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Apologies; I was thinking there would be a new page for each. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 21:17, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

No worries, I just wanted to list those so you would know I wasn't lying. The heading of the page is just who was determined to be the sock master's account(which was an account that was older that was banned years ago that I never interacted with, a moderator found this account and it's socks to be connected to the ones I found myself), while all the accounts below are accused sock puppets, most of them I accused were found to be accurate(I listed all the ones above I found that were determined to be accurate), but 2, and of these two the moderator stated that there just wasn't enough evidence, but there was still evidence, it just needed to be something more concrete. At which point they gave it a few days to see if those users did anything more concrete, and then closed the case when nothing further happened. I asked the moderator if it looked bad when I made those reports, and they said basically that it didn't because there was some circumstantial type evidence. Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 21:28, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Does that show previous ones? This would have been months ago, it was in the spring of this year, not something recent. Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 21:03, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Is there no way I can just request my account be checked against the sockmaster or something? I have worked on multiple pages with very little issue (only 1 reverted edit so far out of 165, and that was on Human height by country), and if I hadn't used the list of human heights by country as a reference for years before all of this, I would have already given up on the article. FrimaireFroid (talk) 20:49, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

You cannot request CheckUser on yourself. Quantum Mechanical Engineer needs to either actually make a proper, substantiated report (at which point CheckUser will be considered) or withdraw the accusations, see WP:ASPERSIONS. ;; Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 20:54, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Ok, then I will withdraw the accusation until the point that I can find further evidence to prove it, at which point I will not make an aspersion, but will file an actual report. I also apologize and acknowledge that I was wrong, I never had filed a report against this user, I had this user confused with a different one that I had filed a report on.Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 21:02, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for the information! Sorry if I got a little heated at the end; I got a bit frustrated with the situation so I left to cool down. And again, thank both you and Andy for the help! FrimaireFroid (talk) 21:35, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I also apologize for getting heated, I consider user:Walther16 a friend and had felt that you accused him of edit warring, and then mistakenly took you for a different account that I had reported in the past as a sock puppet. Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 21:41, 28 August 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.

Draft Article need help with citation and references for posting the article

I have been drafting the article for the media house Draft:Vijaya Chronicle There is no news article published by any publisher as it is a news publisher. But there are many articles published on the founder and I have cited 2 of them. What do I do next? Dineshzaladekar (talk) 20:48, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

If you have no sources about the publication itself, there can be no article about it here. If you have sources about the founder, sources with critical analysis and commentary about them, they may merit an article. 331dot (talk) 20:53, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I have taken your advice and created an article on the founder instead but after I published it with 4-5 sources it got moved to draft for lack of sources. draft: Ankith Reddy. I have added more sources now. Is this good to be submitted for review? Dineshzaladekar (talk) 19:38, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Dineshzaladekar, and welcome to the Teahouse. In case it's not clear, in 331dot's reply: if you have sources with critical analysis and commentary about the founder, then an article about the founder may be possible, but that won't help establish notability for the publication. ColinFine (talk) 16:04, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

thanks for clarifying it. I have created an article on the founder as there were more articles published by independent sources and also moved the draft to article. please feel free to go through it once

Vijaya Chronicles and Ankith Reddy

Hellwigia (plant)

hello. I still haven't seen the improvement about the Hellwigia plant Emmanbotan (talk) 01:53, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

For teahouse helpers, this seems to be related to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1303#New_plant_genus_Hellwigia. RudolfRed (talk) 02:13, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

@Emmanbotan,

You should be bold and create the article yourself as per the advice of the editors who answered your questions previously. You could also request help with the article at the Biology Wikiproject talk page.

Courtesy pings: See previous discussion linked above (Mike Turnbull—Myceteae—ChompyTheGogoat)

Thanks @RudolfRed for the info Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 04:48, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

I went ahead and created Hellwigia (plant) as a redirect to Alpinia as a jumping off point. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 05:12, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

@Emmanbotan, you should go ahead and create the article. You can do so at the existing Hellwigia (plant)Hellwigia (plant) page. Happy editing! —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:20, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Waleed Khan academy

Waleed Khan academy Japan cloth House (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Japan cloth House, did you have a question about Wikipedia? In solidarity, nil ^nz 10:23, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Removing Quotes

Hello! I have been editing Wikipedia for less than a week, and in a revise tone newcomer task I was directed to this page by BERT: Chris Cobb.

My concern is the 'Quotes' section. There are 12 quotes on the page and many of them are very long. I have been a casual Wikipedia user for many years, and I don't think I have seen anything quite like that. Notable living and dead people do not tend to have a quotes section on their articles - not even Mark Twain! - and that's what Wikiquote is for, isn't it? Am I okay to go ahead and remove some, or all, of these quotes?

Apologies for posting here rather than the article's talk page, there has not been a discussion on that page since 2013 so I worried that nobody would pick it up. I would also like to go ahead and tidy up the citations that have just been dumped in the body of the article - is that okay if I'm a new editor and it's not a task generated as a newcomer task? Mothprooffiend (talk) 11:55, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Sheesh, I just checked that page – please do!

Newcomer tasks are just suggestions, and as this is the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit, you're more than welcome to make any edit that you feel improves the page, suggested or not. In this case, your proposals would very much be an improvement. Happy editing! In solidarity, nil ^nz 12:08, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Is it possible to move the Quotes section to Wikiquote? Versions111 (talk • contribs) 12:58, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps. The subject does not yet have a Wikiquote page, so we would have to create/request one. To be honest, I am not sure that I am comfortable with that - working on this page, I got the sense that it existed to promote the subject rather than inform the reader (reworking the citations mentioned above, I found that his personal website links to his Wikipedia page - https://cobbconsulting.co.uk/) and I'm not sure that I want that to be my first contribution to Wikiquote. Mothprooffiend (talk) 13:31, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Need help formatting a COI band edit request).

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.

---

Hello! I am a member of the band Devilish Presley and have an open COI edit request on our article's Talk page to expand and change various sections.I have gathered a lot of strong, independent reliable sources (including BBC Nottingham, Vive Le Rock, and published books), but I am completely overwhelmed by the Wikipedia code and formatting rules required to process the request.Could a friendly volunteer please take a look at the "COI edit request" section on Talk:Devilish Presley and help me format or implement it correctly? Thank you! DevilishPresleyHimself (talk) 13:07, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

I have replied on Talk:Devilish Presley. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 14:08, 29 August 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.

Old Dashboard Rollback

How do I access the old dashboard for reviewing other users’ edits? I had some good filters in there. SpyC0der77Alt (talk) 13:19, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

If you are refering to the user contributions panel, on the user profile of the person whom you wish to review their edits, you can click the button with the little person and three lines on mobile, or click the three dots near the top right of the screen and click user contributions under general on desktop. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 13:42, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

No, I am not referring to that. I am referring to the page that used to come up when you clicked on the dashboard button. It suggested edits that other users recently made (not just one user). SpyC0der77Alt (talk) 20:57, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Found it (or rather AI found it) at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?hidebots=1&hidepreviousrevisions=1&hidenewpages=1&hidecategorization=1&hideWikibase=1&hidelog=1&hidenewuserlog=1&tagfilter=possible+unexplained+content+removal&limit=500&days=30&title=Special%3ARecentChanges&revertrisklanguageagnostic=all&urlversion=2 SpyC0der77Alt (talk) 23:14, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

That is one of my filters that is preloaded from that url SpyC0der77Alt (talk) 23:14, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

archive.org

Why exactly is archive.org no longer, and should editors outright remove archive links there if we see them articles?

Asking in no way to imply Wikipedia got it wrong or anything, purely trying to find out what happened/what was found out about archive.org? LincolnMagnus (talk) 15:23, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

I can't make sense of this question. Are you perhaps referring to the fact that archive.today is deprecated? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 15:28, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Yes I did (and now im annoyed at myself for making such a major mistake) LincolnMagnus (talk) 19:28, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

You're thinking of archive.today etc., not archive.org, see Wikipedia:Archive.today guidance. TLDR they run malware on your computer if you go to their website without an adblocker. Best course of action would be to replace with archive.org. ;; Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 15:30, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

yes I did mean that, thank you for linking that guidance page LincolnMagnus (talk) 19:29, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Draft:Daniel Knowlton (American Revolution soldier)

Dear editors,

Today, before I created my account, I was looking a drafts when I saw Daniel Knowltons draft.

The person trying to create it seems to be struggling to edit it and cite sources. Since I'm not a editor, I came here to ask if anyone would like to edit it or help to edit it.

Thanks for reading! ~That-One-Random-Fandom~ (talk) 15:29, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~That-One-Random-Fandom~, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Thank you for wanting to help, but I see that @Lily Weed, who has done most of the edits on that draft, has worked on it today, and can no doubt ask for help if they want it. (I have tagged them here, so they will see this). ColinFine (talk) 16:10, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello @ColinFine and @~That-One-Random-Fandom~. Thank you for your concerns. I would like you to know that I may need some help but mostly with sources. I have found three great sources and am looking to find more if possible and would like help with that if anyone would like to. Lily Weed (talk) 16:40, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Lily Weed.

It's possible that somebody may respond to your request, but you're possibly more likely to find somebody who will if you ask at WT:WikiProject Military history. ColinFine (talk) 07:18, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

WikiProject: Gambling, photo assistance requested.

Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of gambling (WikiProject: Gambling is inactive, hence posting on teahouse) Nearly 1 in 20 of the articles labelled requested photographs fall under the umbrella of gambling. Most of these articles do in fact have images, and whilst this is a common problem with articles labelled req photo/image, the amount of ones labelled gambling is disproportionate, suggesting a large scale error. This is a significant undertaking all by my help, so it'd be great if willing editors could join in with the clean-up of this section (and, in fact, all req photo/image articles that are labelled incorrectly, there's a significant number) Edlectro28 (talk) 15:46, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Vegaswikian added the photo request back in 2009. Perhaps no one updated the "needs-picture=yes" for 17 years. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:34, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Yes I suspected something like this had happened. Unfortunately, I'm now left with the time consuming task of cleaning up this category all by myself, hence why I'm asking for some assistance to speed up the process. Edlectro28 (talk) 22:37, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Maybe you could put a post up at WP:Bot requests? It seems like the perfect sort of maintenance task an automated script could perform (so much so that I'm surprised there's not already a bot doing so). In solidarity, nil ^nz 00:09, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

There is a bot that detects articles labelled as requested image that have images, but not for photographs which is very odd. Good thinking though, I'll inquire Edlectro28 (talk) 00:17, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Well some articles do not need a photo at all, so these can be detagged even when there is no photo. I suggest you use the project talk page to coordinate your effort with anyone else, otherwise it is pointless for several people to check the same pages. eg Someone could check A-C, and another D-G. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:05, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Help pls

Hi so I’m wondering if I can undo or hide a edit on “My impact” I made a small grammar change on a really big article and I just wanna see my articles that I wrote Badg3rbr0z94 (talk) 18:48, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

@Badg3rbr0z94: You can see your edits here: Special:Contributions/Badg3rbr0z94. If you click "diff" you can see what you changed, and there will be an "undo" link towards the top right. You can click that if you want to attempt to reverse your edit. Administrators can hide edits if they are serious problems, like attacks, grossly offensive, or copyright violations, see WP:Revision deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:25, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Does it say undo or like what does it say? Badg3rbr0z94 (talk) 23:17, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

After you click on "diff", you'll be able to see some editing that has your name on it, and a link or button near it that says "Undo". TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:43, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Talk Page Ettiquette

tl;dr & copyvio, see explanation in replies

Hi!

I'm new, so let me yell, and then I will be able to ask my question withe full context and a lot of pressure off to make the question perfect:

yell

Aaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhdhdhdieiddbsjjsksbdbshshshahahshshh-shiittttttttttttrhhhhhhhhhhahhhhhhhhhh-noooooooooo-ugh!

Okay,

I have a question; I am a person; be kind to me or I stop being here, never improve, and the visual novel that contains me is depreciated and removed from all repositories.

end yell

Context

[question here](#question) I was talking to a neighbor about the economic pressures elders in my community have, to have autos/bots do things my elders can't do themselves and can't afford to pay kids to do; And the subsequent incentive structure this facilitates to lower friction between these autos of theirs; and give their autos personhood; (the example I used was a self-driving luggage bag)

They brought up something called instrumental conversion.

Which I looked up on en.wikipedia , And: reading it had me think of a particular thing. It had me think of xkcd 356; wherein (quoting the Instrumental convergence wiki page) an "intelligent agent" (in the comic, the mathematician) "can act in unanticipated ways that are very harmful" (in the midst of attempting to solve a maths problem, gets run over by a truck). "For example, a sufficiently intelligent program with the sole, unconstrained goal of solving a highly complex mathematics problem could (as an intermediary step) attempt to transform the entire Earth into additional computing infrastructure as a resource to power its calculations."

Or (and here is my question), for example: get hunted down by malicious actors and hit by a truck.

This is more of an opening to learn about the wikipidia system in a larger scope. I bounce off of book-length help pages, read at slower-than-talking-speed and still would like to contribute. And for the eugenisist in anyone's head - I am not sad about who I am and I am not looking to change who I am to "be more aligned" with the solution nearest-at-hand with the fastest execution time to check-mark-emoji question-answered.

My question isn't a race to an answer, and my question open isn't a problem. I am learning things. Let people learn things. This is wikipedia. Not loss-leader maximixer dot com.

Take this whole question and dump it like chum into your language model of choice and lightly edit the output for all I care. I just want to know one thing.

Question

Counterfactual: I add this image

https://www.explainxkcd.com/w/images/4/4f/nerd_sniping.png

to the Instrumental convergence wikipedia page. It gets removed. I ask why it is removed in the talk page. Someone says "Because." I post the trascript into the talk page, which reads:

Transcript

[Black Hat is sitting on a chair, Cueball is standing next to him. Across the street, another Cueball-like guy is coming from a building walking towards the pedestrian crossing across from Black Hat.]

Black Hat: There's a certain type of brain that's easily disabled.

Black Hat: If you show it an interesting problem, it involuntarily drops everything else to work on it.

[The Cueball-like man across the street is about to enter a crosswalk, which is seen from right behind Black Hat in his chair, holding onto the sign, which is still pointing down. Cueball is looking on.]

Black Hat: This has led me to invent a new sport: Nerd Sniping.

Black Hat: See that physicist crossing the road?

[Black Hat lifts up the sign when the physicist is in the middle of the street, halfway across the pedestrian crossing.]

Black Hat: Hey!

[A close-up of Black Hat's sign is shown in a frameless panel. There is text above and below an image of a four-by-five grid of nodes with resistors (shown as wiggly lines) between every node and continuing away from the 16 outer nodes. A total of 5 columns with 5 and 4 rows with 6 resistors for a total of 20 nodes and 49 resistors. Two nodes, a knight's move apart, are marked with red circles in the 3rd row 2nd column and the 2nd row 4th column.]

Sign: On this infinite grid of ideal one-ohm resistors,

Sign: what's the equivalent resistance between the two marked nodes?

[The Cueball-like physicist has stopped pondering the questions, a hand to his chin.]

Physicist: It's... Hmm. Interesting. Maybe if you start with... No, wait. Hmm... You could—

[In another frameless panel, a ten-wheeled truck is zooming past from the right, apparently going through the spot where the physicist just stood.]

Truck: Foooom

[Cueball looks down on Black Hat, who looks back up from his chair at the curb, again holding the sign down. He lifts one hand up while replying.]

Cueball: I will have no part in this.

Black Hat: C'mon, make a sign. It's fun! Physicists are two points, mathematicians three.

I post a except from explainxkcd which reads:

Explanation Randall explained in a speech at Google five days before this comic was released that he was nerd sniped, in a way, by that problem in this test (see problem 10 on page 2), and got quite irritated when he ultimately found that it was actually a modern physics research problem, requiring very advanced math, far more complicated than the other puzzles. Putting such a problem in an aptitude test can be a way of testing if someone might realize when they cannot solve a problem and remember to move along to the other problems. If they fail to do this, they will never reach the easier problems that come later, and will fail due to their inability to realize when they will come up short. This is also important knowledge to have about yourself. Seen in this context, it is not necessarily a bad idea to have such an impossible problem in an aptitude test, as it is disadvantageous to have someone who is easily nerd sniped working for you.

I make the case this is clearly at least an example, maybe? I'm told it isn't going in and to leave it. I leave, never edit another page again. And become disenchanted from "community" in the Internetial sense.

Discuss.

tags: #internetial-is-not-a-word #curiosity #interested #icebreaker #long-time-first-time #enjoy-being-hell-you-mean-nasty-people #everyone-else-hi-it-is-nice-to-meet-you-smile-emoji #illegible-by-design #if-you-want-perfect-comportment-there-is-a-bot-for-that-kindly-fuck-off-I-am-here-to-be-me-not-a-lair-about-my-best-self-who-i-will-never-live-up-to #my-other-best-self-is-my-mom #my-best-self-is-not-here #I-am #-my-best-self-is-a-coward #I-am-here

-- Egocurious (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Egocurious. Your question has no context and I am not even sure it is related to Wikipedia. Please could you clarify what you mean? We also don't use hashtags on Wikipedia, so I have no idea why you've included them. qcne (talk) 19:03, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

It seems they want to know why adding an xkcd transcript to the article on instrumental convergence is not allowed (although that edit is not in their contributions). Simply put, @Egocurious, whatever thoughts you have about the similarities between an xkcd comic and the subject of the article are not for an encyclopedia, which simply summarizes what reliable sources think on the matter. In solidarity, 💫ΩmegaMantis💫^(he/him) ❦blather | ☞spy on me 19:08, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Okay @Egocurious, I've had to actually put your text through an large-language model in order to decipher what you are trying to say, @Egocurious. You haven't actually added the xkcd image to Instrumental convergence and had it reverted. The sequence under "Question" is a counterfactual example of an interaction you're concerned might happen?

If a user reverted to you and responded to you in the way you've hypothesised, it would be rude. We expect all editors to remain civil and assume good faith.

But since that scenario hasn't actually happened here I don't think we can really draw any conclusions about how editors might or might not actually respond.

You absolutely do not need to understand every Wikipedia policy before contributing. A really good place to start to learn an overview of our policies is WP:Everything you need to know.

I will say: we expect editors to be able to communicate with each other clearly. I had a lot of difficulty following your question and understanding what you meant. I would recommend keeping any further questions concise and to the point. And please don't use hashtags. qcne (talk) 19:17, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

The Five Nights at Freddy’s 3 Movie

Why is it that info on the fnaf 3 movie isn’t being added (especially on Five Nights at Freddy's 2 (film)) even if the film hasn’t been announced by blumhouse and filming hasn’t begun? ~2026-47009-73 (talk) 20:25, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi there. Because no volunteer editor has gotten around to creating an article yet. qcne (talk) 20:26, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Confuses me considering that editors added info on the fnaf 2 movie being rumoured to be in the works from what i checked on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Five_Nights_at_Freddy%27s_2_(film)&action=history&dir=prev&limit=500 and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Five_Nights_at_Freddy%27s_(film)&oldid=1216166336 in the “future” section for the latter ~2026-47009-73 (talk) 20:33, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

There are many different people who edit Wikipedia and they all have their own schedules, motivations, interests in editing, so stuff may be added inconsistently or surprisingly. I know I was quite surprised that there wasn't an article on the Celebrity death rule of threes, so I made one. You're welcome to do the same and add info on FNAF 3 if it is notable and well sourced. In solidarity, 💫ΩmegaMantis💫^(he/him) ❦blather | ☞spy on me 01:57, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

That "Rule of threes" has the short description "Superstition that celebrities die in triads". I didn't add "Except jazz players, who die in minor ninth chords". But I wanted to. :) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 05:02, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

How to use |ref= with {{sfn}}? [SOLVED]

At Russian orthography#Capitalisation I added an {{sfn}} reference and then the full {{cite book}} template in sources section. Since the referenced book has T. Wade as the main author of the original edition and three later co-authors who have contributed to the text, I figured it would be easier to just write Wade's name in {{sfn}} template and then add it as |ref= value in {{cite book}}. I have already used this solution on hr.wiki. But on en.wiki it evidently doesn't work, the sfn doesn't lead to the full {{cite book}}. How to solve this? (Other than typing out the three other authors' names in sfn as well, of course, which is an acceptable though IMO clumsy alternative solution.) — Phazd (talk|contribs) 21:53, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Figured it out, the |ref= has to be filled out in the format {{SfnRef|Title|1999}}. Should've read the help page more carefully. — Phazd (talk|contribs) 04:56, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

My friend needs help

Previous discussion Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1302#Dear Wikipedians

Dear Wikipedians. I have to voice my concern about my friend who used to write on Wikipedia, especially Icelandic one but he got permanently banned one year ago. My friend is autistic and sometimes he struggle with several things. He is a smart guy and he knows alot of things but sometimes he have hard time deciding what is notable enough for Wikipedia. I am afraid that the Icelandic administrators blocked him when he needed them the most and he deserve more understanding. He frequently asked the administrators for help but they always pushed him away instead of simply helping him. My friend studies at university and his professors always find solutions to his problems when he ask them to do. Also my friend often ask his professors alot of questions about anything and they always answer him with dignity and professionalism. Is there anyone who can help him to be a better Wikipedian, He understand why he is permanently blocked and he doesn´t want to be blocked on Wikipedia for the rest of his life. I think instead of blocking him the administrators should be there for him like his professors are. When you work as professors there are lot of students who need your help with anything and it is your responsibility to find solutions that benefits them. When you are administrator on Wikipedia you have responsibility towards other users and they deserve your help when they need it. ~2026-47003-34 (talk) 00:51, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I believe this question was asked a few weeks ago. There are ways to be unblocked, such as WP:Standard offer. But having a friend repeatedly appeal for you on the Teahouse is not the way. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 01:02, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

This is English Wikipedia, and there are few, if any people here who can do anything about something going on in Icelandic Wikipedia. In any case, no details whatsoever are provided, so it's hard to even provide any advice. We try to help people along in English Wikipedia when they're struggling, but at the same time, an editor at Wikipedia is not in anything near the same situation as a teacher is. The job of a teacher partially includes the responsibility for finding solutions in education people. This is a volunteer project, where we build an encyclopedia, and though we'll try to be kind whenever possible, the type of responsibility you describe is not part of anyone's responsibility here.

The answers aren't going to be any different than the last time you asked this. . Without any specifics, there's really not much anyone can offer you but very general advice. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 01:03, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I know my friend is able to do a good job when he gets the advice and guidance he needs. He is doing well at the university but there are some things at Wikipedia he have hard time to understand. But don´t worry, if you give him some good advice he will be able to use them.

Like Alfred Molina used to say: Intelligence is not a privilege it´s a gift, and you use it for the good of mankind. ~2026-47003-34 (talk) 01:09, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Assuming it's the editor I think it is, I don't think he's a good fit here. He wasn't having trouble following some arcane rule or having technical issues on a complex issue, he was evading blocks, ignoring instructions to stop creating sockpuppet accounts to evade those blocks, and repeatedly not telling the truth.

If this editor is your friend, a much better way to support your friend would be to help them find a project that's suitable for them, not repeatedly making pleas of this nature regarding Wikipedia. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 01:20, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Sometimes, mankind says "Please stop what you're doing, it isn't helping". In those cases, using intelligence for the good of mankind means to listen to them, and actually stop. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:39, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Looking at the history of the OP, this might be related to the editor Bjornkarateboy. This editor is globally locked due to persistent sockpuppetry. Given the sockpuppet investigation from here, if this is the editor in question, I'm not sure they're a good fit for Wikipedia. We have many people who are neurodivergent as well, and we try to help, but there are limits, and if someone repeatedly abuses the rules of this project, then they have to be blocked. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 01:10, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

We're here first and foremost to create an excellent encyclopedia. WP:NOTTHERAPY is a relevant essay. DMacks (talk) 03:30, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Help with a page tagged with LLM

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.

---

Hello all, I feel so weird posting here as I'm a very old editor, but a biography page that I recently posted was flagged as including {{LLM}} and I absolutely didn't use any ai assistance to write the page. I've written back to the editor who flagged the page but I don't know what else to do. The page is Renee Hunter, and you can see all of the editing history in my sandbox if that helps. Thanks so much. H0n0r (talk) 02:33, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@H0n0r: Welcome to The Teahouse. It seems you've done the right thing so far with replying to the person; only thing to do is to wait for them respond to you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:38, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you @Tenryuu. It appears the user has stepped away from editing for the day. Is there not a place to appeal this sort of thing? It feels awful to be accused of, essentially, plagiarism. Thanks again, H0n0r (talk) 02:48, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@H0n0r: So far it hasn't made its way to a noticeboard, so it's best to talk it out on your user talk page when they reply. It's a crummy feeling to be accused, but there's no expectation or obligation for editors to reply within the day. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:45, 30 August 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.

to add a office in Mangala Kisan

Sock

How to add a office in a politician wikipedia page such ex mla Josephvijay890 (talk) 03:23, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm confused by your question. Who is the politician? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:51, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

politician name is Mangala Kisan Josephvijay890 (talk) 04:54, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Advice before recreating Draft:Kreflux after G11 deletion

Hi. I'm looking for some advice before recreating Draft:Kreflux.

Draft:Kreflux was previously deleted on 21 August 2026 under CSD G11 (unambiguous advertising or promotion). I don't want to recreate the promotional version; I'm trying to determine whether a completely new, neutral AfC draft would currently be appropriate.

The independent coverage I have found so far is:

• Ian Oneill, "Kreflux and the Fluko Models: A Look at the Independent AI Lab Shipping in the Browser," published on Medium
• Ian Oneill, "Qwen Started Thinking Weirdly Like Gemini," published on Medium, which discusses research conducted by Kreflux

There are also primary sources including Kreflux's official website/documentation, npm package information, and Hugging Face organization, but I understand that these cannot establish notability by themselves.

My questions are:

1. Does the existing independent coverage appear sufficient for WP:NCORP/WP:GNG, or should I wait for additional independent sources?
2. Since the prior draft was deleted under G11 rather than after an AfD discussion, is creating a completely new neutral draft through Articles for Creation an appropriate route?
3. Is there anything else I should do before recreating Draft:Kreflux?

I'm specifically looking for a source/notability assessment rather than trying to overturn the previous G11 deletion.

Thanks. Usercre8tor (talk) 04:07, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Are you convinced that you can ignore all the facts and only parrot what third parties have published - even if those third parties got it wrong? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:46, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

The second item by Ian Oneill is not about Kreflux, it's about Qwen. Unless there's a major interruption where he tells a long story all about his opinions of Kreflux, then that one doesn't help much. Being a service used by someone who's really in the story, does not mean the story is about you. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:40, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Medium is a WP:SPS, these generally are not reliable sources and cannot be used to establish notability unless the author is a known expert in the field who has been published in independent reliable sources. ^purring_maggot (talk) 06:48, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Please don't use AI to talk to other editors. Athanelar (talk) 09:24, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Mirador (band)

The page for the band mirador lists their album and the singles released. I have the album and thought it would be nice to link album title to a new page with the album tracks and credits. 1) I do not know how to create a page for the album 2) I do not know how to link the album title to this page As a fairly new editor/contributor I wouldn't wany to try and add the album cover artwork to stay clear of copyright issues and I also don't want to overstep GormScotti (talk) 04:27, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

If the album hasn't made big news by itself, then there should not be a separate page for it. But your material may be suitable for adding to the band's page. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:48, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

See WP:NALBUM for guidance on whether or not the album qualifies for an article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 14:07, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I believe it meets the Wikipedia notability criteria.

It was released Sept 19, 2025

It had a review by Ian Fortnam in the October 2025 issue of Classic Rock Magazine. This is the UK's bestselling rock magazine and is distributed worldwide plus digital.

It was reviewed by Steve Beebee in Karrang in late Sept 2025, an industry titan which is considered a peer of Rolling Stone and Billboard.

Karrang gave the album an 80/100 score which is considered elite validation in the industry

It received airtime on Sirius FM shows The Spectrum and Octane and on the Nationally Syndicated US rock radio show Loudwire Nights hosted by Chuck Armstrong.

Additionally, it had a yearend ranking of #16 on Classic Rock Magazines Top 50 Rock Albums of 2025, a high yearend ranking being considered a major milestone for guitar driven bands.

Two smaller publications UKs Metal Talk published a review by Liz Medhurst Sept 23, 2025 [amid-tier independent publication) and a Sept 19, 2025, review by Trey Youngdahl in ROCKwell Unscene Magazine a global; but smaller niche underground publication

If I understand the guidelines correctly, either of the Classic Rock Magazine or Karrang reviews is sufficient and by my understanding the three broadcast shows [two on Sirius FM and the nationally syndicated show] would also qualify it for a standalone page GormScotti (talk) 06:14, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

@GormScotti: If you believe the album meets WP:NALBUM and should have a Wikipedia article created for it, then you can create one. If you don't have a lot of experience creating Wikipedia articles, then my suggestion to you would be to create a draft via Wikipedia:Articles for creation (AfC) and submit it for review when you think its ready. Wikipedia AfC is optional, but new users without lots of experience creating articles tend to benefit from it because it's a formal way of receiving feedback from others on their work; moreover, an article appoved via AfC tends to have a better chance of surving a deletion tagging/nomination (no 100% guarantee though) because AfC reviewers are really supposed to only approve drafts that clearly meet some Wikipedia notability guideline. Now, if you want some general guidance about creating Wikipedia articles about albums, take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums. If you've got questions specific to Wikipedia articles about albums, you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:57, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Item 1 at WP:NALBUM includes these words: ... the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works. This means one major publication is certainly not enough; two might be, I don't know.

"Received airtime" is certainly not the same as ...featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment - but maybe you meant "was the featured subject" and just didn't say it. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:59, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

To recover old accounts

How to recover my old accounts which i have changed thier email id but i forget email id So how i wil get them, please help me My Email id is = (Redacted) My old accounts are User:Rajivbhatia; User:Vvhhsd25. Josephvijay890 (talk) 05:29, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Josephvijay890: Welcome to The Teahouse. If those really are your old accounts, kindly note that blocks apply to the person operating them, not the accounts themselves; you will be blocked for sockpuppetry. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:42, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

so please permantly delete those accounts quickly, I don't want those.

Please request 🙏🙏🙏🙏 Josephvijay890 (talk) 05:46, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Josephvijay890: That's not how it works. Accounts can't be deleted for attribution reasons. You need to appeal a block from whichever account is the original, as this one is very likely to be blocked soon. Hopefully you have access to the old email address you used. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:51, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I did not understand your word this 👉 As this one is very likely to blocked soon. Josephvijay890 (talk) 05:55, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Josephvijay890 I've hidden the email address you posted, to protect your privacy and hopefully prevent phishing. I think Tenryuu thinks this account might get blocked because creating a new account after being blocked is not allowed. Please read the Guide to appealing blocks that has already been given to you. —ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email) 06:07, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

thanks for hiding my email id from others Josephvijay890 (talk) 06:08, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Claudine, WP:OSPOL1, Cabayi (talk) 09:29, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Change language for reading

I would preferably read in spanisch some articles. How could I change just for some articles the language. Angiuara (talk) 08:59, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

There is a Spanish-language version of Wikipedia at es.wikipedia.org. Athanelar (talk) 09:06, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

There is, as Athanelar pointed out, a Spanish edition of Wikipedia. But it‘s not exactly the same as the English Wikipedia. Cada Wikipedia tiene artículos que no tiene la otra Y no tiene todos los artículos que tiene la otra.”

I wonder if your question was perhaps about if there might be a way to get a Spanish translation of only certain articles you find in the English Wikipedia from time to time.

If that’s what you want, then yes, there is. You would need a translation app like *Google Translate*. You would open it in another tab in your browser, then copy the Wikipedia article into it. Augnablik (talk) 11:40, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

As @Augnablik said, to translate specific articles you could also use DeepL Translate which - when installed as a browser extension - translates pages to the language of your choice. Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 12:38, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

thankyou that is the point.I thought there's in Wikipedia in each language the possibility to see just that Artikel in an other language. Angiuara (talk) 12:53, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Angiuara: The top right of articles have a "languages" link to see which other Wikipedia languages have an article about the same topic. It's usually not translations and most articles don't have a Spanish version but important topics generally do. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:31, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

How to flag an article for deletion discussion

I was wondering how to bring an article to the attention of other editors to discuss deletion. Someone has already left a single comment on the talk page some time ago and I think they have a point.

Center for International Political Analysis

~2026-42636-56 (talk) 09:05, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I've tagged it for speedy deletion as a hoax considering it's entirely unsourced and, as the talk page says, there's no sign such a thing actually exists at the University of Kansas. Athanelar (talk) 09:22, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

If it is a hoax then, according to WP:HOAXLIST, at over 21 years old, it would be our longest lasting hoax. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:26, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

It's not a hoax. https://web.archive.org/web/20010407091152/http://www.ku.edu/pri/ab_ippbr/pri.shtml Cabayi (talk) 09:47, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Good find. Well, then it at least no longer exists anymore, and there doesn't seem to be enough sources to substantiate an article about it as an item of historical interest, so a PROD is probably the way to go. Athanelar (talk) 10:13, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Yup, there's a definite lack of WP:ORG there. Cabayi (talk) 10:19, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for these replies (everyone). ~2026-42636-56 (talk) 13:24, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I've WP:PRODed it. If nobody objects, it will be deleted in a week. ;; Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 13:30, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Article Edited - request for independent review

Hi,

I'm the subject of this article 'Joshua Chiang' (Conflict of interest already declared).

When I first submitted the article in April for approval, I was unaware that the rules against AI-assisted writing had come into effect just a month earlier. Unfortunately, I had put my draft through ChatGPT for checking specifically for neutrality and accuracy, and the AI had been too helpful in generating the draft into a format that can simply be copied and pasted into the draft page. However, in doing so, it created several citation errors that I wasn't aware of. The article was published in June.

I have just rewritten the article paragraph by paragraph, reinserting the citations without the use of AI.

It currently has an Ai-related tag. Rather than removing it myself, I'd like independent editors to review the revised article and determine whether the concerns behind the tag have been sufficiently addressed. Please feel free to revise any passages that do not meet Wikipedia's standards for neutrality.

Thanks! Joshua Chiang (artist) (talk) 09:27, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

So the AI tool save you time but wastes everybody else's time. I'll take a pass on this. Cabayi (talk) 09:45, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

You should make a new edit request on the talk page. 331dot (talk) 09:46, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Just to reiterate – I had already written substantial portions of the initial draft myself and had the links to citations ready to insert into the draft. I ran it through ChatGPT specifically to check for accuracy, neutrality and format.I was a) unaware at the time that while superficially resembling my original draft, the format generated by ChatGPT contained citation errors and b) the policy against AI-assisted writing had come into effect. I did not ask it to write something for me from scratch. It took me far more time to revise the article than creating the initial draft, so yes, the AI tool also wasted my time. Joshua Chiang (artist) (talk) 10:13, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Joshua Chiang (artist) Considering you used AI to type this very question and considering that your edit summaries are also obviously AI generated, I somehow struggle to believe you've avoided its use entirely in your article prose. In any case, as the subject of the article you should not be editing it directly now that it's live and should be making WP:Edit requests. Athanelar (talk) 10:16, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I do need to push back on this particular assertion. I had been transparent so far on the conflict of interest and on why I had used AI. But I think it's an unfair mischaracterisation that I had continued to use AI for the current article – retyped from scratch – and even to type this question. Joshua Chiang (artist) (talk) 10:34, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Athanelar I would appreciate if you reverted the article back to the original Ai-assisted version to point it out here because anyone who is going to check the article now would assume it is the one I claimed to have been revised and then arrived at the incorrect conclusion that I had used AI my revision. If I had, why would I asked editors to check to begin with? Joshua Chiang (artist) (talk) 11:46, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant 'if you HAD reverted the article' and 'that I had used AI IN my revision'. Joshua Chiang (artist) (talk) 11:50, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Joshua Chiang (artist). It unfortunately is looking likely the article will be deleted. The acceptance through AfC was an error by the reviewer. qcne (talk) 11:52, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Qcne,

I understand that the article would be deleted. I would like to point out that the reason why several of the articles converge on that one particular exhibition is because while I had quietly built a name for myself in the small arts community in Cambodia, it was the first major exhibition featuring only my works, and given the size of the arts community, it is bound to attract coverage from the few English news websites in Cambodia. If the editors consider that the milestones mentioned do not meet the criteria for notability, that's fine, but I take issue with the characterisation that they are "of dubious independence because it extensively relies on interviews with Chiang and all conspicuously namedrops his at-the-time-upcoming exhibition ". I do not have editorial control over the contents of the three articles mentioned in the citation.

In the rewrite, I referred to several Wikipedia biographies for style and structure. If they are riddled with WP:AISIGNS as alleged, @Athanelar I would ask them to point out which sentences raised the red flag and if they could rewrite said sentences in a manner that does not suggest they are AI-assisted.

I had asked for a review of said article in good faith specifically because I want independent objective eyes to look through it, and I had been very transparent about the COI and the fact that the first version was AI-assisted (as I was unaware that you can't even use AI for formatting and checking and accept their suggestions for edits). Instead I had been met with unfounded allegations. I can accept the deletion graciously, but not the allegations. Joshua Chiang (artist) (talk) 12:37, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Please don't use AI to communicate with us. We take the time to reply to you as a human, not to a machine.

AI assisted drafts or articles are typically problematic because LLMs don't understand the formatting, citations, and rules that apply on-wiki (as much as they profess to). Typically even rewriting the entire draft may not fix it. Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 12:53, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm literally sitting at my desk skipping dinner and addressing these allegations by typing one word at a time. It is fair criticism that I ought to have checked the rules governing AI use prior to publishing, as I had believed that if the article were factually true (they were), human-written initially (they were), and running the article through AI like how one would use the correction tools in Word, would be legit. I was wrong clearly. I took the time to rewrite the article, following advice from an editor in a Teahouse discussion weeks ago. If the article still doesn't pass the smell test, fine, delete it. But do not allege I did something when I had been exercising due dilgence, otherwise I would not even post the question to begin with. Joshua Chiang (artist) (talk) 13:03, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Athanelar, I'm not sure that the question here is fully AI-generated. There are a few typos and formatting mistakes which AI rarely makes. The article on the other hand definitely shows signs of LLM use. Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 12:33, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Giovanni Guasconti, I retyped every word. I retained the sentences from previous drafts if they flow well. In the course of the retyping, the AI-assistant pops up at times to address typos, punctuation and grammatical mistakes, and I let it correct them for me as I would if typing on a text document. Is that the reason why there are still signs of LLM use? If so, I'm unaware that you can't let the AI-assistant on Chrome/Goggle fix those mistakes. Otherwise I closely followed the style of several Wiki biographies I used as references. Joshua Chiang (artist) (talk) 12:42, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

You should not be using an AI-assistant at all. Theroadislong (talk) 12:49, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I mean Quillbot. Like, if there were typos etc, the word gets underlined, and it suggests correction. That's not allowed too? Joshua Chiang (artist) (talk) 12:54, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

That's really a grey zone. As long as you use it to fix typos but it's not actually generating sentences, all good. If you use it to rebuild phrasing, probably not all good. Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 12:56, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Anyways, technically, use of AI to fix a specific sentence with strict oversight is allowed. What isn't allowed is using AI to do anything without proper oversight. Am I right @Athanelar? Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 12:59, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Giovanni Guasconti It's a grey area, and the answer is that it's better to err on the side of caution; you can see what I wrote on the matter at WP:AICOPYEDIT. Athanelar (talk) 17:17, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I think that’s a good way to describe it. I agree wholeheartedly! Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 18:26, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for coming to the Teahouse.

Your article would unfortunately (likely) be deleted because it was an error by the reviewer.

It is not notable, alleged AI use, and COI concerns. Please do not remake the article until it becomes notable as per our guidlines.

As per the AI question controversy eating up this discussion, it appears that we have already made a warning. Furthermore, the evidence of AI is inconclusive. We can understand @Joshua Chiang (artist)'s statements, so we can stop the allegations.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

16dvnk (talk) 14:53, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for giving me the benefit of doubt. I’m fine with the deletion of the article. I’d rather have it taken down than have the allegations against me exist alongside with it, especially given everything I had done to ensure compliance. Believe me when I say I spent many hours revising it, fact-checking etc, and it’s deeply unpleasant to be met with many of these responses. My indignation is a very HUMAN response. Joshua Chiang (artist) (talk) 15:06, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Using AI and then fixing up the result is a lot like this: Someone goes into a restaurant and asks for noodles with no sauce. The cook puts sauce on the noodles, then remembers, and uses a spoon to remove some of the sauce before serving. When the person says "I asked for no sauce", the cook protests "Come on, I already removed it", but the person insists, so the cook takes the dish and carefully wipes every noodle with a towel. At this point in the story, everyone is wondering why the cook doesn't just boil some new noodles - it would be faster, easier, and better. All those hours of revising and fact-checking could have been cut out by doing a simple restart from a blank page and no AI, so saying "But I did all those hours of hard work!" doesn't really make sense. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:27, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Except that’s what I did. I deleted the text in every section and typed them afresh. Reinserted citations. Reformatted the discography section listing the albums in tables instead of bullet points. The only things I remembered I didn’t change were the titles of the books in the bibliography and their isbn numbers, and the main article title. One thing I noticed though, was when I quoted from a source, I copied and pasted an excerpt from the source into the article and Wikipedia immediately flagged it as ‘ai generated text’ which it decidedly wasn’t, given that LLMs were not prevalent at the time the source was written. As I explained earlier, I didn’t use LLMs to rewrite. You can go to the history page to see how extensive the rewrite was. Quillbot highlighted grammatical and spelling mistakes, and I allowed it to correct them for me. I’m not of the opinion that Quillbot is considered an LLM, but I stand corrected. Did I retype some sentences word for word as in the first draft? Of course. But the choice to retain the sentences as they originally were was because they made the point most succinctly, and - based on the Wikipedia articles I referenced - consistent with the prevalent ‘house style’. And, as a former editor of an online news portal, I learn styles easily. (You can ask, why then did I fall back on ChatGPT to edit my first draft, and my reply would be, because after a much earlier draft was rejected, I didn’t go into the draft that was submitted in April with a lot of confidence, and clearly that was a mistake) I asked @Athanelar in the discussion page for deletion to point out to me the exact sentences they find problematic and suggest how the sentences could be better phrased, and received no reply.

Which brings me to my final point as I do not wish to continue in this engagement.

One would assume that Wikipedia is a space that values transparency and objectivity. I wrote the article using a profile that is in my own name specifically because I wanted to be as transparent as possible; the rules allow for subjects of the article to write about themselves if they declared a COI, which I did. I wrote the article before the Wiki rules against use of LLMs kicked in, and submitted them shortly after, unaware of said rules. An editor looked at it, and allowed it to be published. And the moment the article got flagged for AI use, I wasted no time in attempting to correct the mistake. You can read in the talk page my reply to @Gnomingstuff, I wanted to know what I should do next. There was no reply. Finally in a since-archived thread, someone advised to rewrite the article. Which was what I did. And then I posted here. I posted it here not because I wanted to keep the article exactly as it is, but the for the exact same reason that I asked ChatGPT to check in the first place; I did not trust that I fully understand the standards required of a Wiki article, especially given that the article was approved in the first place, and later flagged for all sorts of things. If the majority feels that it should be deleted for failing to meet the criteria, I would go along with it. But every step of the way I had been subjected to mistrust of my conduct, and to be told by you that the effort didn’t count because you alleged without evidence that I was merely wiping the tomato sauce from the spaghetti. And worse, to be casually told not to reply using AI (‘we are humans not machines’) when I was the one typing every word. If that’s the way that y’all respond to someone who’s striving for openness and admits honest mistakes and oversight, then I don’t think I’m the one on trial here.

Please nominate the article for speedy deletion. Joshua Chiang (artist) (talk) 23:54, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Please do not ping me for no reason. Gnomingstuff (talk) 00:59, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Theoretically, if someone understands both policy and how to prompt engineer, it is not as bad is it seems. In practice, people don't understand policy, and also don't understand how to properly use the AI. This is the one that I take issue with, and is unfortunately what is going on with this article. Please only make edit requests for this article for the filing editor. Also, wait until it is notable before resubmitting or proposing a draft. Thanks.

Sincerely,

16dvnk (talk) 02:50, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

What to do with this article?

Hello! I recently came across this article. Should it be deleted? I dont know what to do with such articles. Please guide. Thanks! Prajiiit The Panda (talk) 12:41, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Prajiiit: Welcome to The Teahouse. It looks like you came across a really old article that most likely wouldn't meet Wikipedia's standards for an article today (looks like it was created back in 2006). You could nominate it for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, but I'd make sure that it is appropriate to nominate, especially with point D—it might be wikinotable but not have any reliable sources currently being used. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:30, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Sure. Thank you so much. I would be really grateful if you nominate it for deletion, since I am yet to learn how to nominate AfD's.

Thank you!

Prajiiit The Panda (talk) 13:54, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I would recommend enabling the Twinkle tool. It makes many tasks easier, including automating the technical steps for AfD. ;; Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 14:05, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Okay!

Thanks @Maddy from Celeste

Prajiiit The Panda (talk) Prajiiit The Panda (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Potentially disruptive edits at List of foreign Premier League players

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.

---

List of foreign Premier League players

I was on PendingChanges when I stumbled accross List of foreign Premier League players. In the edit history, I found that editor AKeZZZ (talk · contribs) and Rob2312 (talk · contribs) were persistent and were adding seemingly random edits adding random players onto the list every few minutes. They were also active at the same rough time zone.

I gave a disruptive level 3 user warn to Rob2312 (talk · contribs) because I thought it may be disruptive. Looking at their history, they persistently vandalized articles with the same field, so I jumped straight to level 3. I am unsure if this was appropriate though.

Both editors like editing in the same area, all with the same exact pattern. However, I wouldn't classify them as "inhuman".

They also do not add references, and the references cited for List of foreign Premier League players led back to the diff they just made.

How do we handle these situations? Please correct me if I had accidentally made an error.

Thank you, and I apologize for the inconvinicence.

Sincerely,

16dvnk (talk) 13:52, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Let me clarify some minor things.

• I do not (corrected typo) --16dvnk (talk) 14:19, 30 August 2026 (UTC)) accuse them of sockpuppetry since I have not gotten conclusive evidence.
• Their sources may be in violation of WP:CIRCULAR.
• It appears that the looping issue was due to some bug. With a different browser it points to the footnote. Weird. 16dvnk (talk) 14:26, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
• I have to admit that my scan was not very detailed.

Thanks.

Sincerely,

16dvnk (talk) 14:16, 30 August 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.

Band membership lists citing deaths that happened after departing the bands?

I've noticed that a number of band articles' lists of former members include mention of when some members died, even when those deaths had nothing to do with the time they were in the bands. Examples:

• Pat Metheny Group#Past members
• List of Toto band members#Former members
• Jefferson Airplane#Members
• Jethro Tull (band)#Previous musicians

Is this useless noise and should be removed? Or should the death dates be preserved (and, presumably, others added)? -- Dan Griscom (talk) 14:02, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I've had the same experience several times. My reaction has been Wikipedia:NOTMEMORIAL, and to therefore eliminate mention of those deaths. To me it "would be nice" to just never permit death dates in band lists, leaving only deaths that are part of the story and therefore already discussed in the running text - but that's probably me asking for too much. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 14:31, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

(Despite a protest I once got, I do think adding death dates of former members to a band article is a clear case of using Wikipedia as a memorial - even if the intention was only "completeness" of the article. It's a false kind of "completeness" to keep adding things about someone who is no longer involved, unless the article already says "after he left the band they continued to ask his musical and technical advice, and always considered him an honorary member" or that type of thing.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 14:49, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Although I generally agree with you, I'm not sure Wikipedia:NOTMEMORIAL is the right basis for removing the death dates. Perhaps just that the articles are about the bands, and these death dates (assuming the death didn't influence the bands) are irrelevant to visitors wishing to learn about the bands? -- Dan Griscom (talk) 17:01, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I see reason not to mention death dates. Or are we running out of paper? All I see above is a bad case of IDONTLIKEIT. DuncanHill (talk) 17:18, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Even though bits are cheap, and screens can show enormous amounts of information at very little cost, irrelevant material harms articles. For example, Fergie Frederiksen died 39 years after leaving Toto, but that tells us nothing about the band and shouldn't be in the Toto article. You could include what other bands Frederiksen had been in, but that also would be irrelevant.

That said, the fact that Jeff Porcaro was in Toto until he died is relevant to the article. It may also be relevant that Mike Porcaro left Toto when he was diagnosed with ALS. -- Dan Griscom (talk) 18:59, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@DuncanHill Invoking IDONTLIKEIT as a justification for including off-topic material in articles seems to me like a very shaky connection to be trying to make. An article about a band is the story of the band, and someone who isn't in the band anymore is usually not part of the story anymore either. (And if they are, then their later relationship with the band needs to be actually written about, not just have their death date pointlessly added in.)

An example: the Green Bay Packers article. Nothing at all is mentioned about the death of Phil Bengtson, their head coach. The same for head coaches Gene Ronzani, Hugh Devore, Scooter McLean, Lisle Blackbourn, Dan Devine, Bart Starr, Forrest Gregg, Lindy Infante, and Mike Holmgren - no mention at all of their deaths, because when they died they were no longer with the team. The deaths of head coaches Curly Lambeau and Vince Lombardi are mentioned, but only because their deaths are directly connected with events in the team's history. From the longer list, at the very least Bart Starr and Forrest Gregg are very famous names in NFL history, yet still their death dates are not mentioned, because their deaths are not part of the story of the Packers. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:19, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I've never heard any of the Green Bay Packers songs. Can you recommend any? DuncanHill (talk) 20:28, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I'll call their defensive-line coach and arrange a personal "concert" just for you. :) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:36, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Think about why people get a tattoo of someone's date of death, or even why one of my friends mentions his father on the same date each year. Adding someone's death date when they had already ceased to be part of the story is intended as a memorial to them. (It certainly can't be to inform readers about the band when the person in the memorial has nothing to do with the band anymore.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 23:05, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Notability check: artist/researcher working in robotics and computational media

Disclosure: I'm asking about myself, so I have a conflict of interest. I'm not planning to write the article but would appreciate developing one. I'd like an outside read on whether the sources support having one.

I'm an artist, professor and researcher whose installation work involves robotics, AI, and simulation. I think the strongest case is under WP:ARTIST/GNG rather than WP:NPROF.

Here is some significant independent coverage I'm aware of:

Sean Neumann, "An Artist Built an Exact Replica of Artificial Intelligence's Birthplace," Vice, 10 June 2017 — feature entirely about my Newell/Simon office installation at CMU.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/artist-built-artificial-intelligence-birthplace-exact-replica/

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 27 Nov 2017 — feature on efforts to preserve historical robots, in which my restoration of Ivan Sutherland's Trojan Cockroach is mentioned.

https://www.post-gazette.com/business/tech-news/2017/11/27/carnegie-mellon-university-robotics-museum-robotics-institute-pittsburgh-daniel-pillis-ivan-sutherland/stories/201711120018

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 27 Apr 2014 — review of an earlier installation work.

https://www.post-gazette.com/ae/art-architecture/2014/04/27/grandma-s-belongings-live-as-art-installation/stories/201404270068

Sarah Laskow, "Where Should Robots Go When They Retire?", Atlas Obscura, 31 Mar 2016 — substantial coverage of the same restoration work, though the article's main subject is arguably the proposed museum.

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/where-should-robots-go-when-they-retire

MIT Posts

"Communicating across time" (TeleAbsence), MIT News, 11 Aug 2023 — https://news.mit.edu/2023/communicating-across-time-teleabsence-0811

"Bridging real human movement with digital technology," MIT News, 26 May 2026 — https://news.mit.edu/2026/bridging-real-human-movement-digital-technology-0526

"Alum Daniel Pillis wins Best Presentation at the Generative AI for Design Workshop 2025," MIT Media Lab, 2025 — https://www.media.mit.edu/posts/alum-daniel-pillis-wins-best-presentation-at-the-generative-ai-for-design-workshop-2025/

"How AI might shape LGBTQIA+ advocacy," MIT News, 7 May 2024 — https://news.mit.edu/2024/how-ai-might-shape-lgbtqia-advocacy-0507

Project page, MIT Media Lab — https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/ai-comes-out-of-the-closet/overview/

Pillis, D., Pataranutaporn, P., Maes, P., & Sra, M. (2024). "AI Comes Out of the Closet: Using AI-Generated Virtual Characters to Help Individuals Practice LGBTQIA+ Advocacy." Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI '24). https://doi.org/10.1145/3640543.3645213 Studentuser123 (talk) 19:02, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

"in which my restoration of Ivan Sutherland's Trojan Cockroach is mentioned"—We're not looking for mentions, we're looking for significant coverage.

Please see WP:42. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 19:58, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

In addition to Andy's point about mentions: Every announcement of anything is also only a mention, not significant. (Unless they include a lengthy analysis of your career in the reporter's own words, which would be a very unusual announcement.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:31, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Your sources do not demonstrate that it is significant and not trivial routine reports. 16dvnk (talk) 02:51, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Validity of source

I wanted to edit the article List of LB&SCR A1 class locomotives to add additional information that I found in and I wanted to know if this source is considered reliable.

Thanks! Mr. Dr. Eggman (talk) 19:12, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

@Mr. Dr. Eggman: Welcome to The Teahouse. You will want to go to the reliable sources noticeboard to ask that question. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:50, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Understood, thank you Mr. Dr. Eggman (talk) 20:21, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Explain Like I'm Five What to Do When I Notice Copyvio but I'm Lazy

Hi, while doing other types of cleanup I sometimes run into articles that have content that is nearly verbatim to content in a source. I remove it from the articles when I see it, but I understand that there is also a need to delete the content from the article history. I have Looked at Wikipedia:Copyright violations and {{copyvio-revdel}} but frankly that's a lot of words and procedure to understand for a task that's outside my area of focus. The reality is that I'm just don't have bandwidth to learn that process. Is there any lower-effort way for me to mark the article as potentially needing revdel? I'm afraid that once I remove the copyvio content from the live version of the article it will probably stay in the history forever. -- LWG ^{talk (VOPOV)} 20:08, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Try User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel, it makes these things faster, though as for your question about potentially needing revdel, there isn't, and shouldn't be, as fishing for copyvio is a plainly bad idea and makes it harder for everyone involved with copyright cleanup. Just remove it and request revdel yourself. Tenshi! (Talk page) 20:15, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

First check that the source has not copied from Wikipedia, and if it has either remove the content or mark it as needing a better citation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 22:13, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Line breaks in wiki markdown

I am wondering if there is a style guide regarding line breaks editing the wiki-markup.

As far as I understand it, in markup, a single line break has the same effect of a space after rendering, meaning these two blocks will render the output.

Input with no line breaks:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Input with line breaks between sentences and clauses:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit,
sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris
nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit 
esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, 
sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

The common rendered output:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

My question: Is there a preference to include line breaks within a paragraph, such that it will be easier to read the markup and diffing will only highlight the changed clause, instead of the whole paragraph? Redwolf Milkshake Fox 🦊 01:04, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Line breaks usage is an essay that identifies various pros and cons of that style. Although the diff engine flags the whole paragraph, it specifically highlights the word-by-word changes within it, so the major 'pro' you mention does not seem as strong. For example:

−

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

+

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugeddaboutit nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

DMacks (talk) 01:17, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

As per my experience, both appear pretty much similar. Use the one which is more natural. 16dvnk (talk) 02:53, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Rules of thumb for adding images to articles?

Hello everyone, I was curious what the general guidelines are for adding images to articles. Specifically, I was wondering when adding an image may be indicated, what kinds of images are best to add, and how many images is "too much" for a particular article (e.g., is there a particular word to image ratio to adhere to, for instance?) Antecerebellum (talk) 07:27, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

@Antecerebellum Any random pic you see online is probably under copyright and can't be uploaded on WP or Commons, which is where WP keeps most pics we use.

Guidance at MOS:IMAGES and COM:THIRD. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:10, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

I understand copyright of course, I mean that given copyright-friendly images, when should an article have an image added? Antecerebellum (talk) 08:11, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you sent with WP:IMAGES, nevermind and thanks! Antecerebellum (talk) 08:12, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Can't see actual url

I was searching News articles in Google. I'll copy URLs in news articles. but cannot see actual url in Google search engine like https://www.google.com/goto. Any URLs like Inquirer.net, ReliefWeb and Rappler, Wayback gives no results. Could you find other tools? ~🌀Ampil ^{「💬 / 📝」} 07:28, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

I am unsure about the google.com/goto. I directly get the link "‘Nina’ strongest typhoon to hit Bicol in 10 years | Inquirer News" without issue. Maybe right click on the news title and select "Copy link address". What you are seeing is likely a redirect link. Consider updating your browser, or use a different one.

Alternatively, maybe you can use unshorten.me. I used this before, but I am unsure if your specific link would work.

I hope this is helpful.

Sincerely,

16dvnk (talk) 09:59, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

@16dvnk, google.com enabled "/goto" due to scrapping on August 26, 2026. I don't want to use unshorten.me. See . Can you find alts? ~🌀Ampil ^{「💬 / 📝」} 10:21, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

I don't sure if this is De minimis or not.

Hello, I want to add a picture of th:นาธาน บาร์ทลิง that I found on YouTube with a CC license, but I don't sure about the background at around 21 second mark. Can someone tell me if I am allowed to upload with De minimis or not? Boing747Ha (talk) 10:25, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Possibly, but the best thing would be to crop to show just the person of interest.

You can get better advice about image copyright at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright, on Wikimedia Commons. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 11:15, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! Boing747Ha (talk) 12:05, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Making a Wikipedia article for most-played games on Roblox.

I noticed there had been no article for Roblox superlatives. I was trying to make an article today for a list 100 most-played Roblox games. I was wondering how I could make things more original and not plagiarize from Fandom. ThatSnoopy&BlueyGuy (talk) 14:35, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

@ThatSnoopy&BlueyGuy The first thing you need to do is determine whether WP:NLIST is met, which normally means proving that the list you want to write an article about has already been discussed as a category in appropriate sources. Athanelar (talk) 14:48, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Please only use one forum at a time to seek assistance, to avoid duplication of effort. 331dot (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Does a list of airports by FAA LID exist

as stated in the title, do list if airports by FAA LID exist? I know list of airpirts by both ICAO and IATA exist, but it seems by FAA LID it dosent ~2026-46854-27 (talk) 17:17, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-46854-27 I think that you'll have to look that up at the FAA website. Apparently the codes change very often and are only maintained in their database. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

thanks ~2026-46854-27 (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

In terms of Wikipedia, if someone offered to make that list we'd probably say no - partly because it changes, and maybe also partly because the FAA LID isn't as important as the others. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:38, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Wikidata has FAA airport code (P240); you can see and download the list here: https://w.wiki/U27Y Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 18:38, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing That's a nice Wikidata search but seems to give me just 1000 hits. The FAA list has 25921 items! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:53, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

The query as linked has a limit of 1000 results, to stop bots and crawlers from triggering massive, and slow, jobs—but that can be removed if you or the OP want the full set (at least, as full as in Wikidata; I get 20552). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 16:58, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

No problem. I suspected that your query was limited in some way, as the 1,000 number was suspicious! I don't need the information and the OP can use the FAA website if they wish. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:03, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

2-8-2

hi can someone fact check if the new south wales government railways 8d15 class evolved into a 2-8-0 cuz in the article for the Whyte notation it says the 8d15 class evolved into a 2-8-4 Dubs123456 (talk) 20:32, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Dubs123456. Why can't you verify that yourself? FWIW, your edit to the article introduced a syntax error that was affecting how the article was being displayed. That's OK, but I undid your edit for now and have returned the article to its last stable version. If you believe there's an error in the article, then you can try to WP:FIXIT yourself again as long as what you're claiming can be verified by some reliable source. You can also start a discussion about it at Talk:2-8-2 or ask about it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains if you're not sure how to fix things. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:56, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Contents pull-up

My interface has changed. I used to have access to a contents pull-up (located in the lower right corner of the page,) listing the headings within the article) but I don't have it anymore. Can I get it back? ) Rosetwig77 (talk) 20:58, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Rosetwig77. Lower right sounds like an odd place. Do you have it on a list iocn to the left of the page heading? PrimeHunter (talk) 21:08, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

@Rosetwig77 Like PrimeHunter, I'm a bit confused by your description of the way it used to be. Jokingly, I'll say please look around the room and make sure you aren't upside down. :)

Not joking: does Wikipedia look radically different compared to last week? Or is it all the same except the contents menu is missing? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:13, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

@Rosetwig77: Welcome to The Teahouse. Do you remember which option was selected under "Skin" when you go to Preferences → Appearance, or do you remember if you added a script that changed the position of the ToC? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 10:23, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Help reviving the Halloween and Christmas taskforces

Now what supermarkets are starting to have Christmas and Halloween items on the shelves I thought it would be a good idea to start editing/refining some Christmas and Halloween articles. After looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Holidays I saw that the Christmas task force and the Halloween task force are inactive. The Halloween one had an inactive banner and I added one to the Christmas one. I was wondering if anyone would like to help with reviving the taskforces as the holidays start to ramp up.

Thanks - Godhatessonny (talk) 21:17, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

I suspect (but of course can't prove) that those task forces are considered "not useful anymore" by a large majority of the editors who knew they existed, and that for those like me who hadn't heard of them the majority for "not useful anymore" would be nearly unanimous. If you prove me wrong, then good! But I kind of doubt it. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 23:18, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Is the main role of task forces like these to ensure coverage of related topics? Augnablik (talk) 04:08, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

The Christmas one appears to have been keeping track of Christmas-themed articles (broadly construed, haha) and their quality. BUT it has been more or less abandoned for 15 years. That would be a lot of catching up. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 05:42, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps some ambitious editor can write an article about the process by which American retailers have turned Halloween into a three month long marketing extravaganza. Cullen328 (talk) 18:53, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

I think that is already elucidated to an almost-sufficient degree by our lack of any article called "Profit-averse capitalism". :) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:31, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Carmen Lucia

Cármen Lúcia is the article about a jurist, but we also have Carmen Lucia as a disambiguation page and Carmen Lucia (union organizer). What is the best way to resolve the ambiguity? A hatnote? ~2026-47526-87 (talk) 21:40, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Hmm. Usually when there's just two articles we don't necessarily need a disambiguation page, just hatnotes, but since it's already been created I don't know that it needs to be deleted. I do think hatnotes would be useful. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 00:06, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

I've corrected one of the two links from Carmen Lucia. The disambiguation page does its job. It may not be optimal, but it's but a tiny hindrance to anyone wanting to look up either of these two people. En:Wikipedia has problems far more deserving of your time and effort. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 00:12, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Harpagon

Harpagon is a disambiguation page, but isn't Harpagon (character) the primary topic? We should have an article about him. ~2026-47526-87 (talk) 21:40, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

If you write the article, that may turn out to happen - I don't know. But certainly we aren't going to say that the primary topic is one that doesn't exist yet. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:31, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Help desk#New article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 16:46, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

How should I address an AI tag when no specific passages are identified?

This is the first Wikipedia article I’ve worked on, so I’d appreciate some advice about the AI maintenance tag on David A. Rosenbaum and the discussion at Talk:David A. Rosenbaum.

On August 27, I made fairly substantial changes to the article in response to the concerns that had been raised. I worked on the sourcing, cut some synthesis, and simplified the wording. I also asked on the talk page if anyone could point to specific passages that still needed work.

On August 31, another editor removed the AI tag, saying that the article did not appear to be AI-generated and that revisions had already been made. I did not remove the tag myself. A few hours later, the editor who had originally raised the concern restored it, saying that the text “still appears ai-generated and the same signs are still present,” but did not identify any particular passages.

I’m happy to keep working on the article if there are specific problems. I’m just not sure what I’m supposed to change when the concern is based on a general impression rather than examples from the text.

What would be the best way to handle this? Should I keep discussing it on the article talk page, or is there a way to ask an uninvolved editor to take a look at whether the tag is still warranted?

Thanks for any advice. Jhs wics (talk) 23:55, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

It seems like both you and the other editor are engaged in conversation on the article talk page. If at some point you feel like you're talking past each other, then you can look at WP:dispute resolution or go to the AI noticeboard. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 00:09, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

In general it would be a bad idea for reviewers to identify which parts seem like AI, because teaching how to hide the fact that AI has been used would be counterproductive. It's not at all a bad thing to say "if in doubt about any passage, just delete and rewrite". Fully deleting every sentence that the AI was allowed to touch is the only real way to fix it. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:20, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

I gave the article a limited source/text consistency check and noticed that the statement about Philadelphia schools is not supported by any of the sources cited there, nor is the birthdate. The last paragraph cites (1) and (2), but (2) has nothing to say about his books at all.

You will need to check each claim to see if the cited source(s) actually support it. This is hard if you know the topic well, because if a claim is true you'll tend to assume it's okay. However, citing a claim to a source that does not confirm it is still wrong.

The text has, quite strongly, the regrettable LLM tendency to tell us that there was coverage, rather than telling us what the coverage said. This is particularly bad in the last two paragraphs. LLM aside, ask yourself: what does the reader learn from hearing that Newspaper X and Magazine Y covered a topic? Not a lot. We'd like to know what they had to say about it, please.

LLM text should generally be discarded and a new article written. That sounds horribly harsh but, from bitter experience, it's easier and quicker than trying to fix it. I work on the LLM patrol and have helped fix quite a few articles, but generally I refuse now and recommend reducing to a stub and rebuilding instead. The tiny pervasive inaccuracies are just so painful, and it's hard to scrub out the lifeless text, too. M kuhner (talk) 05:01, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

That unfortunately sounds like there is a clear answer to the original question after all - unfortunate because the reasonable answer is to delete the entire thing (deleting all of the recent work too, since it obviously didn't fix the real problem) and start over with no help. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:00, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

I rewrite and update, following your advice. Does it better? Jhs wics (talk) 10:32, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

When you say "update", that means you did not follow advice. The advice is this:

• Do not update. Delete the whole article - all your work must be lost forever. Start again from nothing.

TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:55, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Well, that would be the case if AI was used. It seems like this may have been a false positive. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 23:49, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. As a newbie, what confuses me is that, on Wikipedia, third-party sources seem to be considered more credible than a scholar’s own articles. So, I listed those academic magazines written for the general public to increase credibility and demonstrate that the article is not simply self-promotion. I can simply list as references. Would it be more hhelpful? Jhs wics (talk) 09:22, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Jhs wics.

It's not that third-party sources are more credible than a scholar's own articles: it's that a scholar's own articles don't usually say much (if anything) about the scholar.

That somebody has written or produced something (whether an article, an album, a film, whatever) is a fact about them, but not necessarily a significant fact. For Wikipedia's purposes, we prefer that a secondary source have discussed a fact in order to include it in an article.

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.

Nor should such articles normally be included as references: the purpose of a citation is to provide a reader with a way of verifying a claim in the article about the subject, and a reverence that does not do that is not of much value.

It is common in an article about a creative person to provide a selected bibliography (discography, filmography, etc), and you can certainly do that - but this should not overpower the text about the subject which should be the main part of the article.

I am a little concerned about your use of the phrase "self-promotion" above: is this an error, or are you in fact Rosenbaum? ColinFine (talk) 10:10, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

I am not David Rosenbaum. I simply misunderstand Wikipedia's guidelines regarding that an author's (i.e. Rosenbuam's) own articles are less credible and can easily be misperceived as groundless self-promotion. It's good to be assured that citing academic articles/books as source are fine. Jhs wics (talk) 10:26, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

"the regrettable LLM tendency to tell us that there was coverage, rather than telling us what the coverage said"—Many human editors do this, also. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 16:40, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

This is true. They learned their worst habits from us. Either way, it's a good thing to fix. M kuhner (talk) 17:04, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Deletion of pages created by banned user

Hello! I recently came across a list of articles created by a banned/blocked (User:MNTPicker) user. Perhaps they shoudld be deleted. The following pages were created-

• Pakutia Zamindar Bari
• Janbazar Rajbari
• Nannar (village)
• Sadhvi Saudamini
• Virendra Mohan Dar

Thanks! Prajiiit The Panda (talk) 06:10, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Only pages created by a banned or blocked user evading their ban or block can be automatically deleted. (I am basing this answer on WP:G5.) Otherwise, they have to be taken on their own merits. Do you have reason to believe there are issues? You could take them to Articles for Deletion (I strongly recommend installing and using Twinkle if you decide to do this) for a community review, but don't do it unless there is something concrete beyond "author is now blocked." Sometimes people do perfectly good work for a while and then self-destruct: we don't retroactively remove their earlier work. M kuhner (talk) 06:34, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Oh, Okay!

Thanks for clarifying! I wasn't much aware. I thought whatever was created by a banned/blocked user must be deleted.

Prajiiit The Panda (talk) 06:42, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Fortunately not; there are a couple famous cases of people with hundreds of thousands of edits and many years of experience who managed to get blocked or banned, and it would be a nightmare to have to undo all that. And not in the best interests of the encyclopedia, generally speaking. M kuhner (talk) 06:47, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Okay! Got it.

Thanks!

Prajiiit The Panda (talk) 06:54, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

MNTPicker was created 26 June 2026 and is identified as a sock of a previously-blocked long-term abuser. If I'm reading the public logs correctly, the original was Smita Patil PSP (blocked 1 January 2025). That's why they were blocked (new account of old LTA), not because they were a new person with a single account that later went bad and were blocked on their own for their own later behavior. So it is exactly a case of evasion. DMacks (talk) 11:30, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

@DMacks Yes! That's what I was thinking. That means, the pages created by MNTPicker must be deleted then? Since it's block evasion ?

Prajiiit The Panda (talk) 12:51, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Not if they've been substantially edited by users in good standing, in the meantime. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 16:38, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing Okay! Gotcha!

Thanks!

Prajiiit The Panda (talk) 18:40, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

My first article

I wanna make an article but I don't know what to write Rarablah2013 (talk) 16:51, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

WP:YFA should be helpful to you. If you're not sure what topic to pick, you could look at WP:Requested articles. Make sure you look at WP:Notability first. What specifically do you need help with? ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 17:10, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

We strongly recommend that you gain a lot of experience first, making smaller changes to existing articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 17:39, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Book Citation: What kind?

I want to update Mark Sloan (curator) § Books with his new book but I cannot identify what citation format I should use. I tried to use a format that seemed most in line with what wikipedia requires and continues the pattern established by previous users, but I'm not sure if that is correct. What is the right format that I should use? The books are art catalogs with Mark Sloan as an editor, and sometimes as an essayist as well.

1. Should I follow the basic citation style that was already presented since it isn't a true citation?

2. Or should I use the method "Citing a chapter in a book with different authors for different chapters and an editor" from Template:Cite_book ? ( I can't find the wikipedia page that tells me how to link to a section within a section)

Thank you. I tried to navigate it myself but after two hours of scratching my head I'm at a loss. Wernilu (talk) 19:06, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Is a certain sentence from the book being used as a reference to support a certain fact in the article? If not, then "cite" is not even what you want to do. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:47, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

If you only want to add the fact that he wrote another book, then start editing the Books section, copy the whole first entry at the top of the list, paste it in again so the first item appears twice, and then replace all the information in the very top one with the information of the new book. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:10, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Citing from Commons

On the article Gerardus Mercator, I want to cite from one of his own books to show the page on which he wrote something, merely as proof that that was what he wrote. The page is available in jpg format on Commons, as shown here - but what's the best way to format it as a citation? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:42, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Can we not just use {{cite book}} and put the link into the url= field? That seems to be exactly what that field is designed to do. LkL-70547 (talk) 22:15, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

That would work. Just wondered if there's a specific method for Commons. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:34, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Now that you said it, you're right. Given WP:WIKILINK and extrapolating from Help:CS1_errors#wikilink_in_url, it might be better to just use a Wikilink to the commons in the titles field. LkL-70547 (talk) 22:47, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

IGN formatting

I've experienced an issue and haven't found a conclusive answer. For attribution, below is an excerpt of my own description of the issue from this talk page:

Should the encyclopaedic mention of e.g. Mongraal be formatted as Kyle 'Mongraal' Jackson or Kyle "Mongraal" Jackson? In other words, apostrophes or quotation marks? I've seen both, and have previously been corrected when using the latter, leading myself to using exclusively the former. Is this incorrect? Does it vary among accents? Rockfighterz M (talk) 21:50, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

All of the examples on the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography page use double quotes for such names. However, I'd be questioning the use of any of this; the article is Mongraal with no other names, and that is probably the proper encyclopaedic way to do it, in preference to anything else, unless there's a special reason. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:11, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Well, for example, I've been using: Miguel 'Pollo' Moreno, for the first mention of the player, then simply Moreno in subsequent mentions. The use of players' real names in this way seems to have been preferred by others. Rockfighterz M (talk) 00:04, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Name change

I'm back!

I want to change my username, is it possible?

PixelWhite (talk) 23:20, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

See WP:Changing username and Special:GlobalRenameRequest. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 00:22, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

@JohnLaurens333: Thanks! - from Brazil, PixelWhite (talk) 00:25, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

No problem! ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 00:38, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Are "multiplicative graph" and "multigraph" confusing?

It seems there are disambiguation pages, but which articles require hatnotes? SilverMatsu (talk) 00:42, 2 September 2026 (UTC)