Wikipedia:Help desk

Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)

• For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• If your question is about a Wikipedia article, draft article, or other page on Wikipedia, tell us what it is!
• Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).

Ask a question

September 10

WP:SIGCOV Question

I'm trying to make sure I'm understanding WP:SIGCOV. I'm talking with an editor on Rosemary's Baby (franchise), while we've found sources that mention a franchise, they talk about the films/tv shows and other items individually after. Does SIGCOV mean it has to discuss the topic as a whole? Because that's my understanding. and I want to make sure i'm not getting it wrong for another editor and bickering over nothing. Please ping me if you reply, I'll subscribe either way, but it helps me out.Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:27, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Andrzejbanas, as I see it, if a reliable source mentions a show business franchise, and then goes on to discuss the various components of the franchise, like a movie, a novel, a TV show, comic books, or other related items, then that is significant coverage of the franchise. That is what a show business franchise is after all: an assemblage of various closely related entertainment components. Cullen328 (talk) 06:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

While I gather that seems well and good, but what's the point of the article? It feels like it just reiterates what the other items are. Is that really following SIGCOV? because I can't seem to seperate it unless it's talking about the topic at large more specifically. If only talks about ehe elements of it, I feel like it's kind of falling apart in that sense. Andrzejbanas (talk) 08:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Alan E. Cober

I went to add Alan E. Cober as illustrator of The Dark is Rising it wouldn't link when the brackets were added. There's a page for him! DMc75771 (talk) 03:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @DMc75771: ! I think the issue might have been the spacing between the name. If the text is kept on one line, that seemed to have fixed your problem. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:58, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Is this vandalism?

I saw a user make these edits to the Wikipedia page for Fireman Sam. Page Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fireman_Sam&oldid=1244991118 Is this vandalism? You can see the history, because there are more edits like this... Cooldudeseven7 (Discuss over a cup of tea?) 12:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Cooldudeseven7 Our definition of vandalism is all about editing....deliberately intended to disrupt I looked at the IP's contribution history and it seems they made a similar silly edit on another article (also now reverted), which leads me to suspect they were deliberately doing what they were doing, rather than just being incompetent. As they have stopped for the moment, no other action is needed at present. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Cooldudeseven7 (Discuss over a cup of tea?) 15:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

i have publish my edit of biography but dont know how to move it into the live space

i have publish my edit of biography but dont know how to move it into the live space Ahmad87861 (talk) 16:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Ahmad87861. I have added a header to User:Ahmad87861/sandbox that will allow you to submit it for review when it is ready.

Unfortunately, it is nowhere near ready for review, and has no chance at all of being accepted in its current form.

A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what reliable independent sources have published about a subject: nothing less, and very little more.

Consequently writing an article begins with finding suitable sources - because it you can't find any, you will know that the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and not to spend any more time on it.

Please read WP:YFA carefully.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Please remove the fake sources. Theroadislong (talk) 14:54, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia mobile app question

I just installed the Android Wikipedia mobile app on my phone. I logged in, poked around, then wanted to log out but I didn't see any way to do that. I finally disconnected from Wi-Fi and powered off my phone. How do I log out? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't think you can: see m:Wikimedia Apps/Android FAQ. But why do you want to? ColinFine (talk) 17:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't have any apps on my phone that I can log out from, other than by closing the app. 331dot (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Bbb23 Go to the App info from your Android device settings. Then click Clear Storage. That'll reset the app to default settings and log you out. Qcne (talk) 17:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Multiple replies. I didn't see anything on the FAQ (and the link you provided doesn't work). I normally edit on a PC and sometimes edit on a tablet; in both cases I log out; feels better. How do I "close" the app? I don't want to "reset the app".--Bbb23 (talk) 17:29, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Bbb23 You can navigate to the app list and swipe away to pause the process. This won't log you out though. Qcne (talk) 17:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

This is just an update on what has happened at my end. I powered back on my phone. I opened the Wikipedia app. I was still logged in, which, for me at least, was a surprise. However, this time, I went to the app's Settings and there was a place to log off. It warned me that it would log off on "all devices", and when I clicked it, it logged me off the phone and here on my PC. Anyway, although I still have a few unrelated questions about the app, I'm gonna stop here. TBH, I don't really want to use my phone to look at or edit Wikipedia. The screen is just too small. I'll probably leave it installed, just not use it.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

The Jemez Language page.

The Jemez Language (Towa) is to not be written as it is against traditional ruling. I hope you will take it down as it is not allowed by Pueblo officials. People not from the Pubelo of Jemez are to not learn the Jemez Language. 208.77.76.246 (talk) 16:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

See WP:NOTCENSORED, specifically "Some organizations' rules or traditions call for secrecy with regard to certain information about them. Such restrictions do not apply to Wikipedia, because Wikipedia is not a member of those organizations; thus, Wikipedia will not remove such information from articles if it is otherwise encyclopedic.". Wikipedia is not bound by restrictions on what Pueblo people can learn. If they are not permitted to learn the language, they should stay away from that article. 331dot (talk) 16:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I think you are a bit mistaken; the proscription is not against the Jemez people but against people who are not members of the Jemez pueblo.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you; I understand that, but my overall point remains the same- Wikipedia isn't bound by rules like that. 331dot (talk) 17:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

https://jemezenterprises.com/history-2/ says: "Jemez is the only culture that speaks this language, and our traditional law forbids our language from being translated into writing in order to prevent exploitation by outside cultures." Insiders are apparently also disallowed to write the language. I don't know whether outsiders are disallowed to learn the language by listening. Either way, Wikipedia doesn't adhere to such rules, at least not the English Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

If I make a rule, I cannot tell you to follow it. You cannot do that to me either. TooManyFingers (talk) 07:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Unable to create account

I'm trying to create an account, but it tells me: "Visitors to Wikipedia using your IP address have created 6 accounts in the last 24 hours, which is the maximum allowed in this time period. As a result, visitors using this IP address cannot create any more accounts at the moment. If you would like to request an account be created for you, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Request an account."

I have a dynamic IP address from a major ISP, Telefonica, and I tried getting a new IP address half a dozen times, but it keeps telling me that error. I feel like something is wrong with it. How could every IP address I get have been used already to create so many accounts? It takes about ten minutes for me to restart my router and get a new IP, so I can't keep trying indefinitely.

I also looked at the "Request an account" page, but it says I'm required to provide a proper e-mail address, i.e. not a throwaway one like yopmail, that I usually use. I don't want to link my real address, and I don't know how else to get an address, because I don't use gmail or things like that, where they require you to provide your phone number.

Thanks for any assistance. 78.55.110.54 (talk) 23:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

You can wait 24 hours and try again. ‹hamster717🐉› ^{(discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠)} 23:27, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

My IP address changes more often than 24 hours. Whenever I get a new one, it always says that I've already made six accounts. Thanks. 77.191.173.8 (talk) 01:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Where does it say you cannot use a throwaway email address? I don't see that at WP:ACC, but maybe I missed it. 331dot (talk) 23:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

If you click through the questions until you get to the actual "request an account" page at https://accounts.wmflabs.org it says "The first thing we need is a username, and secondly, a valid email address that we can send your password to (please don't use temporary inboxes, or email aliasing, as this may cause your request to be rejected)." 77.191.173.8 (talk) 01:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

You can create an account at a friend or family members location. 331dot (talk) 00:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't have a lot of friends :( and don't plan to be visiting anytime soon. But I'll keep that in mind, thanks. 77.191.173.8 (talk) 01:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

You must be able to read emails during the requested account process but it's not required after that, and you are free to delete the email address at Special:Preferences when the account has been created. Note however that without a working email address stored in your account, you cannot gain access to the account if you forget the password. Some users have claimed their password stopped working but I suspect they just forgot it. Maybe you can create the account from another IP address when you have access, e.g. using a smartphone at a Wi-Fi hotspot somewhere. It's optional to give an email address if you create an account on your own. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Maybe I'll try using a yopmail disposable address anyway, even though it says "please don't use temporary inboxes". I don't really trust WiFi hotspots, so I don't use them. I do have a smartphone with Internet, so I could try turning off WiFi and using the cellular data with that. Thanks for the suggestions. 77.191.173.8 (talk) 01:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

To whom can I report a malfunction in the account creation page?

I'm still unable to create an account. See my question from September 10. I keep getting the error message that "Visitors to Wikipedia using your IP address have created 6 accounts in the last 24 hours", but it's not true. I left the computer on overnight, and still have the same IP address for more than 24 hours. It seems to me like it's broken. I know I could maybe go somewhere else to create it, but I feel like I want to help report and fix this, so other people won't have the same problem. 77.191.173.8 (talk) 23:56, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Well, you don't have the same IP address as you did yesterday. Keeping your computer on doesn't change that your IP can change any time. Either way, IP addresses can be used by several people, which is likely the case here. Unfortunately, this is intentional and doesn't need to be fixed, we don't want people to create tons and tons of accounts. Do you have a friend or family member that could "lend" you their email address? They could send you the credentials when they receive it by email, and you can unlink the email later. Regards, win8x (talking | spying) 00:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Win8x: I actually do have the same IP address as I did yesterday. See my replies at 01:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC). Keeping my computer on does prevent the address from changing, with my ISP here in Germany. So no, my IP address can't have been used by several people in the past 24 hours (though I guess technically I still have to wait another hour). And as I said, I would like to report this malfunction to someone in charge of it, rather than jump through hoops trying to "borrow" someone else's e-mail address or something like that. I'm pretty sure it is something that needs to be fixed, or at least clarified.. Thanks for your input, anyway. 77.191.173.8 (talk) 00:59, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Oops, didn’t look properly. Apologies. Guess I’ll have to go educate myself on dynamic IPs. Hope another editor can help you out. Best of luck, win8x (talking | spying) 01:42, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Drmies: Is a CheckUser allowed to say whether multiple accounts have really been created in the last day by people assigned the IP address 77.191.173.8? PrimeHunter (talk) 06:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

PrimeHunter, CU never publicly links IP addresses to accounts. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:41, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

User:Primefac, can you provide some technical assistance here? I don't see anything in the block log. Drmies (talk) 14:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I am not seeing anything immediately obvious. It could be a global lockout issue that I'm not able to see locally, but it could also be a cache issue (i.e. the original issue was from account spamming, but the system hasn't reset itself). Clearing the browser cache (or even trying on a different device) may help. Otherwise using your real email temporarily to get an account may be the way to go (as stated, it can be removed once you have access and there is no long-term, stored, or otherwise permanent record of it being on the account). Primefac (talk) 15:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at this. I haven't been able to retain an IP address for much more than 24 hours so far. Every time I get a new one, I get the same error message. I can get a new IP address by power-cycling my router. I've tried that 15 or 20 times, but it always says the same thing. What are the chances that every IP address in this pool has been used to create multiple Wikipedia accounts in the past 24 hours? It's from O2/Telefonica, and covers most of north-eastern Germany, so a huge number of people. Usually I will keep the same address all day, it's not like it's changing every hour or something.

I tried clearing my browser cache, using different browsers (Firefox, Vivaldi, Safari), and creating a fresh browser profile in Firefox, with default settings and no extensions. I tried using the browser on my phone, with WiFi. Then I turned off the WiFi on the phone, and tried with cellular data (also on O2/Telefonica, but the mobile address pool), and it still happens. I disconnected the router, and connected to the phone as a hotspot from the computer, so that I'm using cellular data (which I'm doing at the moment). Tried again, with different browsers, cleared the cache, etc., but still always seeing the already "created six accounts" message.

So I have the feeling that something is broken, and it's not my equipment, and that it may be affecting many other people too. Let me know if you have any more ideas, thanks. If it can't be resolved in the next while, I guess eventually I'll try to figure out an e-mail address I can use for the "request an account" form. 176.0.145.237 (talk) 10:29, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Primefac: just doing this so you get a notification of the above, not sure if the "reply" button does that - sorry if you get two! 176.0.145.237 (talk) 10:33, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

September 11

Wikidata getQualifierValue

By using the information from Module:Wikidata, I managed to fetch some information. On a page about a species (like this one), I can get the taxon name (property P225) using {{#invoke:Wikidata|getValue|P225|FETCH_WIKIDATA}}. However, I'd also like to get the taxon author (qualifier P405) and taxon year of publication (qualifier P574). The Module page says I should use getQualifierValue or getRawQualifierValue, but doesn't give an example on how to write the code to get that. How should I do that? Thanks! Mateussf (talk) 00:39, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Mateussf: Module:Wikidata says:

The other modules have more documentation. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh, you're right, thanks, I'd missed that!

Now I tried with Module:WikidataIB but I don't know what to put in pval=. For other properties, there's a Q item for each one. However, for P405 there's no Q item, just a string of text.

I tried this: {{#invoke:WikidataIB |getQualifierValue |qid=Q15381155|P105 |pval= |qual=P405 |name=xyz |fetchwikidata=ALL }}, and I tried with other things in pval=, but it didn't work.

Fortunately, with Module:Wd it worked just fine! {{#invoke:wd|qualifier|P225|P405}}, {{#invoke:wd|qualifier|P225|P574}} returns just what I want! Thanks!

Mateussf (talk) 01:13, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Death date of Ernest de Munck

Hello, I was working on a draft for Ernest de Munck (Belgian cellist and composer), and was confused with some contradicting information about his death date. This source lists his death date as February 6, 1915, but I found an obituary where I think it says February 5 (My eyesight is somewhat lacking, so maybe it does say February 6 and there is no contradiction.) The obituary was published on February 6, and given that it's 1915 it seems likely that De Munck died on the 5th, but I'm a bit unsure. On the draft I listed it as February 5; is that okay, or is there some sort of note I should put? Thank you, AsYouWish13 (talk) 03:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Also, the obituary says he was 75 at the time of his death, but his birth date based on the first source would make him 74. AsYouWish13 (talk) 03:50, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I would try to focus on how reliable the sources are. If good (and more-or-less equally reliable) sources disagree, it is OK to say "February 5 or 6, 1915" and cite both. TooManyFingers (talk) 07:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I think the obituary is more reliable. Thank you for your reply. AsYouWish13 (talk) 15:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps there is some confusion because of time zones? Depending on the time of his death, it could have occurred on Feb 5 in one time zone and on Feb 6 in another. CodeTalker (talk) 17:58, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@CodeTalker, the date of events is always given as that in their current time zone - so if a baby were born here in Australia right now, its birthday would be the 12th, even though many other countries are still in the 11th. It's much more likely that there was an error in publishing the obituary, or perhaps even on his death certificate. StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's a sensible convention, but I wonder if the New York Tribune followed that convention in 1915 when it published the obituary. However I agree that an error in one of the documents is more likely. CodeTalker (talk) 03:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@AsYouWish13: We can't always know the answer. A search of Wikipedia for "Sources differ" (with quotes) will find many similar examples, and various ways of dealing with the issue. Another alternative is to refer to primary su9rces such as an inquest or death register. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:57, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing Would the engraving on his tombstone count as a primary source? I found an image of it on Commons, and it is now in the infobox. At the bottom of the writing it lists January 19, 1915 as the death date. (If this could be used as a source, how would I cite it?) AsYouWish13 (talk) 23:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I think it would be a primary source, and not a very good one. As far as I am aware, whoever purchases a tombstone can have anything they want engraved on it. There is no fact checking of the inscription. CodeTalker (talk) 04:03, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

How would I go about finding a good primary source? (If there isn't any, I think putting a "Sources differ" note like Andy mentioned would be best.) AsYouWish13 06:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Infobox(s) for same events in different years?

I'm currently working on a draft article for the Faber House explosions, which were two explosions between 1985-6 targeting Faber House in Singapore. For the infobox, do I put both events in the same infobox or do I make separate inboxes for each event? Thank you! User:Imbluey2 Please '@' my username so that I get notified of your response (talk) 09:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that preceding your username with "@" does anything. Let's try it: @Imbluey2 . (Perhaps you're thinking of Template:Ping.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary I think you got to type it as "{{reply to | Message text}}" for source (as shown in Template:Ping) or just use the 'find user' function for visual editor. Imbluey2. Please ping me so that I get notified of your response 12:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Re:Infobox(s) for same events in different years

Hello, I have previously asked a question on this page (Infobox(s) for same events in different years, September 11) and the only response I got wasn't even related to the question itself. Anyways, to summarise, I am working on a draft article for Faber House explosions, which were two explosions that occured in 1985 and 1986 at the same building. For the infobox, do I make separate infoboxes or just one infobox condensing the information for both explosions. Imbluey2. Please ping me so that I get notified of your response 12:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Imbluey2: I would say it depends on the size and structure of the article. Only use one or no infobox in the lead. If there are significant sections about each explosion and important differences between the events then each section could have an infobox but then I wouldn't place an infobox in the lead unless the article is quite large. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Template Talk?

I've just seen a template displaying this text (on Henry V (play)):

This section possibly contains original research. Relevant discussion may be found on Template talk:Original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (September 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

I've intentionally not substituted nor wikilinked it here so you can see the text as it appears. My question is to do with the suggestion that discussion is to be found at Template talk:Original research. I wonder is the template malformed or broken in some way - i.e. should it not direct to a discussion at the article's talk page? AndyJones (talk) 12:35, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

AndyJones The code is {{Original research|section|discuss=Template talk:Original research#discuss parameter|date=September 2024}}. The discuss link was the example from {{Original research}} so I have changed it to Talk:Henry_V_(play)#Film. TSventon (talk) 12:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I see what you've done. Much better, thank you. AndyJones (talk) 12:58, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

A search found five other articles with the irrelevant example code. I have removed it. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:04, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Error on issue date for the page "The Second Wave, a magazine of the new feminism."

 Courtesy link: The Second Wave: A Magazine of The New Feminism

On the page of the Second Wave, a magazine of the new feminism, there is a box displaying a cover of the magazine that shows the date of issue as Spring 1971. However, the text below states the date as Spring 1981.

I would like to correct this but not sure how to do it.

Thank you very much. Liberationfemale (talk) 14:51, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Liberationfemale Welcome to Wikipedia! Check out Help:Editing and WP:Tutorial ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I read that page but still not sure how to edit what's in a box. Liberationfemale (talk) 14:59, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Liberationfemale: Fixed; I also left some links to guidance, on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Adding reference citations

I have been editing “Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the telehealth industry” and published some of the edits. Unfortunately, I had read the editing materials but not all of them and not very carefully. I added the references from journals in the actual text in parentheses and not in the citations of references. I have tried to go back and fix them by deleting the references from journals in the actual text in parentheses and add them in the citations a few times but have been unsuccessful. I tried to put in the references using the “cite” and “” but I get a message “There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).” I am writing on the help desk to try to get help and suggestions from someone more experiences. The page in question is page 1 in the first paragraph of “Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the telehealth industry”. Thank you. Chas ICU ChasICU (talk) 17:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I checked your edits and see the potential confusion. On Wikipedia, citations are typically done using Cite templates, in which, in between the <ref> and </ref> tags, a template (often {{cite web}}, {{cite news}}, or, in your case, {{cite journal}}) is used instead of typing and formatting everything. Consider checking out the documentation for Template:Cite journal and re-submitting your edits through that.

What may seem to be empty citations to the naked eye may be a named reference, in which the markup of <ref name= "example" /> is used instead of manually reusing the citation. This is used where one source is cited for multiple claims on different parts of the same page as Wikipedia prefers not reusing citations in the manual sense.

Also, I noticed in one of your later edits that you added <ref></ref> to the top of the article; this is what likely caused the error. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 18:00, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

References

I've messed up listing an article for deletion

I have tried to list Lakana as an article for deletion. I did not notice that it had previously been listed for deletion (when the article referred to a completely different subject) and do not seem to be able to sort out the mess I have made of it. I suspect that the more goes I have at fixing this, the worse it will get. So I will come back to this another time – but I still need to undo what I have done wrong and get the article listed.

This is not a matter of whether or not the article should be deleted (yes, there should be a discussion, but that is subject matter-related), I just seem to have got the mechanics of the listing wrong. ThoughtIdRetired _TIR 21:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

If there's already been one AfD for the same title, you should use {{subst:afdx|2nd}} rather than {{subst:afd}}. After that, the template will give some instructions; start by clicking on the Preloaded debate link. Instead of this process, you can use Twinkle, or make a request at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:07, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I've had another go at this and got as far as [1], but this does not appear on [2]. Does something need to run in the background that takes a while, or is something still wrong? I have purged the cache on the deletion log page. ThoughtIdRetired _TIR 13:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@ThoughtIdRetired:, you need to follow the manual process at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to nominate a single page for deletion (or use Twinkle). I believe I have fixed the nomination by adding it to todays AfD page and adding a header with the normal links to the nomination. TSventon (talk) 14:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. It seems that I did not read the instructions to the end – a family trait illustrated with a story involving a WW2 recipe to cook something that was rationed and therefore had to be eaten regardless. I am suitably embarrassed. ThoughtIdRetired _TIR 20:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Dominicans Page moved by someone who used my account without my permission

i am trying hard to undo it but am not able to Nohorizonss (talk) 21:19, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Nohorizonss Presumably all the edits on your account from 20:44, 11 September 2024 to 21:13, 11 September 2024 need to be reversed as discussed at User talk:Nohorizonss#Page redirects for Dominican articles. TSventon (talk) 21:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

yes exactly Nohorizonss (talk) 21:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Nohorizonss: Please read Wikipedia:Personal security practices and take steps to make sure you and only you are able to access your account. You as the account holder are going to be considered responsible for all edit made with your account regardless of who makes them. If other feel that your account has been compromised or is otherwise being shared among multiple users, there's a good chance an administrator will block your account from editing until it's clear that only you're using it. If someone in your family wants to also edit Wikipedia, tell them they will need to create their own account and need to stop using yours. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:46, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

yes I've told them , it's a one time incident , I've made sure only I am able to use it, I don't want to get banned for it Nohorizonss (talk) 10:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering:, I see you have deleted Dominicanss and Dominicans (disambiguationn). The editor has requested that all their edits from 20:44, 11 September 2024 to 21:13, 11 September 2024 be reversed. Could you help, or is there a better place to ask? TSventon (talk) 17:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

not all ive reversed them, just the dominicans (people) needs to be moved back and then it can be decided with consensus Nohorizonss (talk) 17:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Nohorizonss, you should be able to move it back to the correct page yourself. -- asilvering (talk) 17:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

its was already created years ago so its not going back Nohorizonss (talk) 17:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm happy to help with whatever you need, but you do need to clearly explain what needs to be done. -- asilvering (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

thank you, the page dominicans(people) needs to be moved back to people of the dominican republic Nohorizonss (talk) 19:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Nohorizonss, it's been relocated. Please take care when linking and moving pages to ensure that you've got spaces and capitalization in the correct places. -- asilvering (talk) 20:03, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

it* Nohorizonss (talk) 17:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

What counts as an acceptable source

Hi! Sir Morton Smart was my great uncle. I have a copy of his eulogy in my home (which, interestingly, was delivered by Louis Mountbatten, King Charles “honorary grandfather”). Some of the information in the eulogy is not listed on his page. I was wondering if it’s possible to add this missing information, provided it’s relevant? I’ve never edited anything for Wikipedia before, so I’m not sure if this is an acceptable source or not. Thx in advance :) Lc44lyf (talk) 23:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Lc44lyf. The eulogy in and of itself is most likely going to be considered a WP:PRIMARY source for Wikipedia's purposes, which means there are restrictions on how its content may be used. If, however, reputable reliable secondry sources (as defined by Wikipedia) have discussed the eulogy and its contents, then perhaps what they've said about it could be incorporated into the article. Given that your a relative of the deceased, you should take a look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest first before trying add anything about the eulogy to the article. In particular, you should make clear your connection to the your great uncle in accordance with WP:DECLARECOI. Once you've done that, you can suggest that content related to the eulogy or found in the eulogy be added to the article by making an edit request at Talk:Morton Smart. It's going to be very important, however, that the eulogy be published and accessible so that others can verify its content; otherwise, it's going to be considered original research and not considered acceptable as a source. So, if a copy of the eulogy can be found online published on a reputable website or in some previously published print publication which allows not only its contents but also its authenticity to be verified, please add such information to your edit request. If, on the other hand, you possess the only copy or it's found on some user-generated blog/website without a established history for reliability, it's going to be too hard to verify or otherwise be of questionable value as a source. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

September 12

TP topic stuck in limbo between "Publish" and "Leave Page" at Viking Arms and Armour

Hi, I edited the article, with bad formatting. Explained the edits, refs and formats on the TP, but no matter how often, nor how hard, I hit the 'publish' button, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Viking_Age_arms_and_armour doesn't publish. 'Elp! T 2A02:FE1:E16B:CC00:A8CF:DB8B:4D5D:FD8F (talk) 01:34, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I see no recent changes to the formatting of Viking Age arms and armour. What user name or IP address did you have when you made those changes? Maproom (talk) 06:43, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, it's not the article, it's the talk page. Didn't change formatting, just tried to post a topic, which seemingly didn't make it on to the talk page. When I open the page, my new section ("Foreign origins II") is stuck in draft mode. Dunno about any IP, Wiki gives me that string you see after the T, which is me. T 2A02:FE1:E16B:CC00:A8CF:DB8B:4D5D:FD8F (talk) 10:23, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

If you made external links then try placing them in <nowiki>...</nowiki> in source mode to deactivate them. You can also try to cancel the edit and start over by copy-pasting from the old attempt. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:54, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, thx, that was it, <nowiki>worked! Problem solved. Thx agn. T 2A02:FE1:E16B:CC00:A8CF:DB8B:4D5D:FD8F (talk) 11:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Bromyard

Is reference 67 done correctly ? - I am unsure - I'm sorry to have to ask, but I still am unsure at times after all these years. Sorry. 175.38.37.197 (talk) 03:18, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

The format looks fine, but I doubt how reliable a personal website can be. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 03:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

What I don't understand is how your addition, however well referenced it might be, of a pile of material about Luptons -- "Lupton's children, William Darnton Lupton (1909-1915) and Joan (1911-1981) were the half-brother and sister of Sir Reginald Anthony Hungerford 7th Baronet (1920-2010)" -- benefits an article that's ostensibly about a town. -- Hoary (talk) 22:30, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Signatures

Bit of a less relevant question, but I want to ask how to customise the signatures? I've seen the setting itself, but is there a list of wikimarkup code or something that I can use to customise it? Thanks! Henry (talk) 05:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Henry Herrmann-Friedrich: Wikipedia:CUSTOMSIG has what you want, and it accepts any wiki markup as far as I can tell. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

do you allow ai generated content

say i ask chatgpt or another app to write about a specific topic that passes notability criteria. is this allowed in English wikipedia? i am interested in legal [cipyright] perspective and also the local policies in this wiki. thanks in advance. Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 11:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

It's only classified as an essay but see Wikipedia:Large language models which has many contributors. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:03, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida Wikipedia articles are always based on published sources, which we as editors have to summarise in our own words. The problem with LLM is that they hallucinate, i.e. they write stuff that looks plausible but which often has entirely fictitious sources. All these models were trained on Wikipedia's corpus, which makes them even more dangerous as they "know" what an article here looks like. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

i can find sources and ask LLM to summarise them. would this be allowed? i could note in edit summary i used an LLM, and do it from my account. Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 19:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

They can still add hallucinations or warp the meaning. At this point, it's probably less effort to just summarise it yourself. Cremastra (talk) 20:16, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

How to request a review for the article in sandbox?

I mean, is there a way to ask someone to have a look at this one and tell how to proceed with the approval for publishing? User:ThePhoenix4/sandbox ThePhoenix4 (talk) 11:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Tag it with {{subst:submit}}. First edit it though, in first paragraph note why is this topic notable, it helps to have that question answered. WP:Notability. you can also ask a question here. Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 11:34, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I suspect that the company that now owns Thomas Cook is notable. But you sandbox content does not establish this. Some of the references aren't independent; most of them simply state that eSky has bought Thomas Cook, without significant discussion of eSky. Its language is somewhat promotional. Even the caption of the (very poor) picture of the CEO repeats the statement of the takeover. The impression given is that the Cook takeover is eSky's only claim to notability. I would recommend that you start again from the beginning, by finding three or four reliable independent (not based on press releases or on what an eSky spokesperson has said) sources with in-depth discussion of eSky. At least two of them should be about eSky itself, not the takeover. Then base your draft in what thoose sources say. Maproom (talk) 12:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom, Hi, thanks for sharing your thoughts on in — really appreciate your help! There are some other sources, but since those are mostly in Polish, I'm afraid these wouldn't be enough to meet the independency terms. I have only found up-to-date and reliable information about eSky - not coming from their website - with the takeover of Thomas Cook topic. If I can cite Polish-language sources, then perhaps I can diversify the references. Looking forward to your advise ThePhoenix4 (talk) 12:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

ThePhoenix4: you can establish notability by citing Polish-language sources, if no English equivalent is available. Maproom (talk) 13:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

There is a pl Wikipedia article at pl:eSky.pl, which has 46 references. Content translated from another Wikipedia should be acknowledged in an edit summary as explained at Help:Translation. TSventon (talk) 13:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Wow, had no idea, but fixed that already :) Would you check please when you have a minute? The fact is that I didn't translate the Polish article, but fully adapted the English version to an English reader, leaving only English source to make it available for everyone to understand. ThePhoenix4 (talk) 14:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

So how much impact would it have if, let's assume, half of the cases were Polish sources? ThePhoenix4 (talk) 14:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, you only need to say you translated a Polish article if you actually translated a Polish article. I was informing you in case you wanted to translate material in the future. Also {{Translated page}} would go on the talk page, not the article page.

If necessary you can use 100% foreign language sources, but it is helpful to readers to include English language sources where available. TSventon (talk) 14:42, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

reliable source for WP

Can the NEWS link below be considered a reliable Source available on WP? www.skynews.com.au/

References

That source is listed at WP:RSPS as being one to use very cautiously: see also Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_448#Sky News Australia_and_the_Women's_boxing_controversy. As always, it depends somewhat on how you want to use the source. We have a specific place to ask these sorts of questions: see WP:RS/N. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Would somebody please help me edit?

 Courtesy link: Draft:Henrique Gabriel

Hi all! I'm new at editing on wikipedia and my first task is to help a friends whose father was a portuguese arist and died 1 year ago.

I do speak english german and portuguese fluently and have studied some techniques but i'm struggling with the templates. I'm kindly asking for some help on my draft on Henrique Gabriel.

Kindest regards CatPer9 (talk) 14:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I have tidied it up a little bit, you will need to show how they pass the criteria at WP:NARTIST. Theroadislong (talk) 14:47, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, CatPer9. I'm sorry to be negative, but "to help a friend" associated with the subject is a bad reason to edit Wikipedia. It sounds as if you think that an article about somebody is for that person's benefit (or their family's), but it is not, except incidentally. (See an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing).

Suppose in your researches you found some sources that were extremely critical of Gabriel. As a friend, you might want to ignore these, but as a Wikipedia editor, it would be your duty to consider them, and quite possibly to report what they said in the article - which might not please your friend.

In fact, looking at your draft, I see very little about what others have said about him. But that is what a Wikipedia article should be about, not just a list of things they have done. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 17:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

LINOLEIC ACID

what is Linoleic Acid Bonardyfam (talk) 20:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Have you read the article Linoleic acid ? - Arjayay (talk) 20:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

pronunciation keys

Many, many Wiki articles have a pronunciation key in International Phonetic Alphabet, which is super, but...when one clicks on this key it is tough to remember the entire original set of symbols. It would be SUPER if the key popped up as a new small window so one could readily use it. Thanks. 24.240.34.222 (talk) 21:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

As I view it, the article Kamala Harris starts "Kamala Devi Harris^[b]". When I place my cursor over the "^[b]", I'm told "Pronounced /ˈkɑːmələ ˈdeɪvi/". When I place the cursor over the "eɪ" within that, a tooltip tells me that it's pronounced like the "a" in "face". Do you not see this? Or, if you do, how is it ineffective or unhelpful? Or if it seems OK to you, are you saying that it, or something like it, isn't implemented on enough articles? -- Hoary (talk) 22:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary: Tooltips aren't visible on mobile devices. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:09, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

September 13

Sir Edmund Lechmere, 3rd Baronet

Please fix reference number 5 - I cant work out what I did wrong. Thanks 115.70.23.77 (talk) 01:46, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

You claim to have accessed this in the year 20244. Easily fixed. But what's this: Through his second son, Anthony Hungerford Lechmere (1868-1954), Edmund was the father-in-law of Cecily Mary Bridges (1884-1964) whose first husband, William George Lupton (1871-1911) of The Green Estate, Bromyard was, like Edmund, "a strong Conservative and took a keen interest in local (Worcester) politics" and fox hunting. Like his father, Anthony Hungerford Lechmere also enjoyed fox hunting. Anthony and Cecily were the parents of Sir Reginald Anthony Hungerford Lechmere, 7th Baronet (1920-2010) whose grandfather was Sir Edmund Lechmere, 3rd Baronet.? Why do we need to know about the the first husband of the subject's daughter in law? (Is it just that everything that can possibly be said about anybody named Lupton is automatically of encyclopedic significance?) -- Hoary (talk) 01:58, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Hoary, opinions evidently differ on whether everything that can possibly be said about anybody named Lupton is of encyclopedic significance. TSventon (talk) 02:27, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

TSventon, most delicately expressed! -- Hoary (talk) 07:40, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

"Success stories" of draft namespace

In German Wikipedia, a vote is in preparation to introduce draft namespace. For this I am looking for "success stories" of English draft namespace, i.e.: Featured articles that have started as a draft, and to which multiple (at least several) users have contributed relevant content before it was moved into main namespace already in good shape. What are good examples, please? --KnightMove (talk) 03:33, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

KnightMove, I'm sure that the draft system benefits en:Wikipedia and find it hard to believe that it or something similar would not also benefit de:Wikipedia. So I'd like to help you. However.... You're asking about a draft, to which (while it was still a draft), several users added relevant content before it was promoted to full article status. Hmm, I've never seen such a thing, and can hardly believe that it would occur. Imagine a draft that's clearly about a notable subject but is also defective. (As an example, because it's written as an act of devotion to its subject. Or because half or more of it is referenced to junk sources.) Would a responsible editor who'd like to see it as an article start by adding more "relevant content" to it, or by fixing the problems of what's already there? Either, but I think the latter is more likely. Would several responsible editors all, uninterruptedly, instead do the former? And if so, would none of these be a reviewer who'd remember that "Article submissions that are likely to survive an AfD nomination should be accepted and moved to mainspace"? I think not. If this sequence of events ever occurs, I'm sure that it does so far less frequently than does cooperation between one creator and one established editor, with minor input from a second and perhaps even third and fourth established editor. -- Hoary (talk) 04:33, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh, just have a look at the existing drafts - especially for the special case of film projects which, by consensus, become notable only when principal photpgraphy has started, like Draft:Blade (2025 film). Multiple users (a high two-digit number) have contributed to it, and it is already in remarkable good shape. Once filming starts, a good article will be born. There are several Marvellous drafts like this. I am hopeful that there are like examples (be it with only two users contributing much content) which have ended in featured articles (or be that only good and popular articles with a high number of views).

I am aware that this scenario must be rarer than the case "one creator plus formalizing helpers and minor contributors". However such articles would provide a stronger argument for draft namespace (as compared to drafts in user namespace). That's why I would be grateful for having examples. --KnightMove (talk) 04:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Not sure if it entirely fits the bill, but there is the Lizzy Rose article, which I assisted the creator with while it was in draft space and eventually moved it to mainspace. Mjroots (talk) 05:35, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Last time I created an article, I asked for help, here on this Help desk. Others edited the draft; one of them added a key reference that I'd been unaware of. I doubt it would ever have made it to mainspace without their help. (I wonder how Germans manage without this possibility.) Maproom (talk) 06:53, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

de Wikipedia has their version of Wikipedia:User pages, so they can have user space drafts. The exact rules are likely to be slightly different. TSventon (talk) 08:48, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Right. But drafts in user spaces are rather hidden from other users, so it's hard to establish cooperation there. A draft space would come in handy. --KnightMove (talk) 10:48, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Request rolback

While I was editing on the Italy Davis Cup team page, a problem occurred: I was forced to delete my first edit as there was a problem with the images, but not having rollback rights I made the situation worse. I kindly request a complete rollback.
This is the first time this has happened to me. JacktheBrown (talk) 04:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Rollback to which version? Whichever it is, open it in your browser. Then opt to edit it. You'll get a warning message. Don't edit it; simply save it. Done! -- Hoary (talk) 04:36, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary: delete all my edits, so the version is the last one before my changes. JacktheBrown (talk) 04:40, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

You can open the last version before your changes, and either save that anew, or begin editing again from there. CMD (talk) 04:43, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: I can't paste the whole text, a normal rollback would be preferable. JacktheBrown (talk) 04:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

I have reverted all your edits. It doesn't require rollback rights but you use the mobile version and I don't know whether it's possible to revert to an old version there. You can click "Desktop" at the bottom of a page to switch to the desktop version where it works as described. Click "Mobile view" to switch back. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:03, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: thank you. JacktheBrown (talk) 05:59, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

User interactions

Is there some way to find all the times a given user has ever posted on another user's talk page? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:26, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Baseball Bugs Like [3]? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:33, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Baseball Bugs The amount of information you can get straight from the "Edit count" link at the bottom of any user's Special:Contributions page is truly amazing. It includes a section detailing the number of edits they have made to any other editor's Talk Page, sorted high-to-low. Wikipedia is watching you! Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:47, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Thank you! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:13, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

How do I write a new page?

Article about a record label that is referenced 100 times in Wikipedia but has no page FreewheelinFrenchy (talk) 09:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

A page about one of the most important indie labels of the 1970z, 80s, 90s. Still running today FreewheelinFrenchy (talk) 09:56, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Writing a new article is the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia. If you have independent reliable sources that discuss the importance of this label as they see it(not as the label itself sees itself) and can show how it is a notable company as Wikipedia defines it, you may use the article wizard to draft and submit an article. I would suggest using the new user tutorial first, and also reading Referencing for Beginners. 331dot (talk) 10:01, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.

If you try creating an article without this grounding, you are likely to have a frustrating experience, and quite possibly put a lot of work into a project which cannot possibly come to fruition. ColinFine (talk) 15:57, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Sydney Martineau

 Courtesy link: Sydney Martineau

Ref. number 2 is not quite right (?) and also please make the letters MBE. - Order of British Empire - smaller, like they are on other pages. Please repair if you are able and thanks 175.38.37.197 (talk) 10:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

I think you used the wrong citation template, though I'm not sure which one is better. 331dot (talk) 10:14, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

I used "Journal" - which I think is correct - but it is still in RED Please help. Thanks 175.38.37.197 (talk) 12:01, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

•  Done only citation part.
• I don't understand what do you mean by MBE of Order of British Empire.

kemel49^{(connect)(contri)} 13:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Possibly they want "Frederick Alan Martineau M.B.E.", in the Early life and family section, to be styled with {{Post-nominals}}. 57.140.16.35 (talk) 13:58, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Parameter syntax

Hi all, I wonder if someone could explain what the ! in brackets does, please? It was added by RussBot.

{{For|other uses|Linn (disambiguation){{!}}Linn}}

Cheers, MinorProphet (talk) 11:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

The edit was [4]. See Template:! for documentation (even though it's not a template call). It can make a pipe inside a parameter value instead of starting a new parameter so it's like making a single parameter with value Linn (disambiguation)|Linn. {{for}} places the parameter in link brackets so it becomes a piped link [[Linn (disambiguation)|Linn]]. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks very much for another of your clear explanations. >MinorProphet (talk) 13:22, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

New page

Liance is my sponsor but I can’t find the button (editing help) mentioned to get direct help: on the right corner, there’s no such button. Secondly, yes, the label I want to write a page for is well worth it: as it is, Wikipedia refers to that label at least 35 times that I have seen, as many as 100 times according to others. This label , remember an indie label that has never had a major label’s help, racked up 2 Gold albums and 1 silver, 1 gold single and 2 silver, discovered many bands and artists in various genres and has been trading since 1979, 45 years as a 3 people organisation! Today, many musicians and other labels say it is a legendary, groundbreaking label that has been at the forefront of indie music from day 1! Surely, that label is worthy of a few lines on Wikipedia rather than being referenced in red (no page yet) in your own pages!! FreewheelinFrenchy (talk) 14:39, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

You may be looking for Help:Editing. Notability is based on coverage by secondary sources, and references in other articles may be a good indicator of that, however secondary sources still need to exist. If you can find enough sources to get a few sentences about the topic down, you can use the WP:Article wizard to set up a draft where others can contribute to the page before it gets moved to article space. Also, I see you're taking plenty of time justifying notability while not linking to the record article. If you can point volunteer editors towards the name of this article, they can contribute to the aforementioned draft article, if you choose to create one. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 14:44, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

If you know the mentor's name, you may go to their user talk page directly to communicate with them. User talk:Liance.

The presence of links may be an indicator, but is not a guarantee that an article should be created. It depends on showing coverage in independent reliable sources that the label meets WP:ORG. 331dot (talk) 14:44, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@FreewheelinFrenchy: Where is the mention of the button you can't find? If Liance is your mentor then there should be a link at Special:Homepage. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:45, 13 September 2024 (UTC)